Brill's New Pauly Encyclopaedia of the Ancient World (Sas-Syl) [13] 9789004142183, 9789004122598

Citation preview

OULU

Brill’s Encyclopaedia of the Anctent World

Na

ANTIQUITY

SAS-SYL

Pauly

ig

»

UEY WISCAH OV FR

UNIVERSITY

HAMPSHIRE

of NEW

LIBRARY

EDMUND G. MILLER

LIBRARY

FUND

Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2022 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation

https://archive.org/details/brillsnewpaulyen0013unse

Brill’s New Pauly

ANTIQUITY VOLUME 13

SAS-SYL

Brill’s New Pauly SUBJECT

EDITORS

Dr. Andreas Bendlin, Toronto

History of Religion Prof. Dr. Gerhard Binder, Bochum

History of Civilization Prof. Dr. Rudolf Brandle, Basle

Christianity

Prof. Dr. Johannes Niehoff, Berlin Judaism, Eastern Christianity, Byzantine Civilization Prof. Dr. Hans Jorg Nissen, Berlin Oriental Studies Prof. Dr. Vivian Nutton, London Medicine; Tradition: Medicine

Executive Editor

Prof. Dr. Eckart Olshausen, Stuttgart Historical Geography

Prof. Dr. Walter Eder, Bochum Ancient History

Prof. Dr. Filippo Ranieri, Saarbriicken European Legal History

Prof. Dr. Paolo Eleuteri, Venice Textual Criticism, Palaeography and Codicology

Prof. Dr. Johannes Renger, Berlin

Prof. Dr. Hubert Cancik, Tubingen

Oriental Studies; Tradition: Ancient Orient

Dr. Karl-Ludwig Elvers, Bochum

Prof. Dr. Volker Riedel, Jena

Ancient History

Tradition: Education, Countries (II)

Prof. Dr. Bernhard Forssman, Erlangen Linguistics; Tradition: Linguistics

Prof. Dr. Jorg Riipke, Erfurt Latin Philology, Rhetoric

Prof. Dr. Fritz Graf, Columbus (Ohio)

Prof. Dr. Gottfried Schiemann, Tubingen Law

Religion and Mythology; Tradition: Religion PD Dr. Hans Christian Gunther, Freiburg Textual Criticism Prof. Dr. Max Haas, Basle Music; Tradition: Music Prof. Dr. Berthold Hinz, Kassel Tradition: Art and Architecture

Dr. Christoph Hocker, Zurich Archaeology Prof. Dr. Christian Hiinemérder, Hamburg Natural Sciences Prof. Dr. Lutz Kappel, Kiel Mythology Dr. Margarita Kranz, Berlin

Tradition: Philosophy

Prof. Dr. Helmuth Schneider, Kassel

Executive Editor; Social and Economic History,

Military Affairs, History of Classical Scholarship Prof. Dr. Dietrich Willers, Berne

Classical Archaeology (Material Culture and History of Art) Dr. Frieder Zaminer, Berlin Music

Prof Dr. Bernhard Zimmermann, Freiburg Tradition: Countries (I)

ASSISTANT EDITORS (GERMAN EDITION) Brigitte Egger

Prof. Dr. André Laks, Lille

Jochen Derlien

Philosophy

Susanne Fischer

Prof. Dr. Manfred Landfester, Giessen Executive Editor: Classical Tradition; Tradition:

Dietrich Frauer

History of Classical Scholarship and History of Civilization

Ingrid Hitz

Prof. Dr. Maria Moog-Griinewald, Tubingen Comparative Literature Prof. Dr. Dr. Glenn W. Most, Pisa

Heike Kunz Vera Sauer

Christiane Schmidt

Greek Philology Prof. Dr. Beat Naf, Zurich

Tradition: Political Theory and Politics

Dorothea Sigel Anne-Maria Wittke

Brill’s Encyclopaedia of the Ancient World

New Pauly Edited by

)

Hubert Cancik and Helmuth Schneider

English Edition Editor-in-chief

Christine F. Salazar

Assistant Editors Cordula Bachmann, Kim Barkowski, Tina Chronopoulos, David van Eijndhoven,

Annette Imbhausen, Sebastiaan R. van der Mije, Michiel Op de Coul, Antonia Ruppel, Ernest Suyver and Barbara Vetter

ANTIQUITY VOLUME13

SAS-SYL

LEIDEN 2008

- BOSTON

© Copyright 2008 by Koninklijke Brill Nv, Leiden, The Netherlands

ISBN (volume) 978 90 04 14218 3 ISBN (set) 978 90 04 12259 8

Koninklijke Brill Nv incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, roc Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and vsp.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be

Originally published in German as DER NEUE PAULY. Enzyklopadie der Antike. Herausgegeben von Hubert Cancik und Helmuth Schneider. Copyright © J.B. Metzlersche Verlagsbuchhandlung und Carl Ernst Poeschel Verlag GmbH 1996ff./r9g9o9ff. Stuttgart/Weimar Cover design: TopicA (Antoinette Hanekuyk) Front: Delphi, temple area Spine: Tabula Peutingeriana

reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill nv provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.

Fees are subject to change.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

Data structuring and typesetting: pagina GmbH, Tubingen, Germany

PRINTED

IN THE

NETHERLANDS

Table of Contents Notes to the User . List of Transliterations List of Abbreviations .

List of Illustrations and Maps List of Authors List of Translators Entries

qi2

Notes to the User Arrangement of Entries

Abbreviations

The entries are arranged alphabetically and, if applicable, placed in chronological order. In the case of alternative forms or sub-entries, cross-references will lead to the respective main entry. Composite entries can be found in more than one place (e.g. a commentariis re-

All abbreviations can be found in the ‘List of Abbreviations’. Collections of inscriptions, coins and papyri are listed under their sigla.

fers to commentariis, a).

Bibliographies

Identical entries are differentiated by numbering. Identical Greek and Oriental names are arranged chronologically without consideration of people’s nicknames. Roman names are ordered alphabetically, first according to the gentilicium or nomen (family name), then the cognomen (literally ‘additional name’ or nickname) and finally the praenomen or ‘fore-name’ (e.g. M. Aemilius Scaurus is found under Aemilius, not Scau-

Most entries have bibliographies, consisting of numbered and/or alphabetically organized references. References within the text to the numbered bibliographic items are in square brackets (e.g. [ 1.5 n.23] refers to the first title of the bibliography, page 5, note 23). The abbreviations within the bibliographies follow the rules of the ‘List of Abbreviations’.

rus).

However, well-known classical authors are lemmatized according to their conventional names in English; this

Maps

group of persons is not found under the family name, but under their cognomen (e.g. Cicero, not Tullius). In large entries the Republic and the Imperial period are treated separately.

Texts and maps are closely linked and complementary, but some maps also treat problems outside the text. The authors of the maps are listed in the ‘List of Maps’.

Spelling of Entries

Cross-references

Greek words and names are as a rule latinized, follow-

Articles are linked through a system of cross-references with an arrow > before the entry that is being referred to. Cross-references to related entries are given at the end of an article, generally before the bibliographic notes. If reference is made to a homonymous entry, the respective number is also added. Cross-references to entries in the Classical Tradition volumes are added in small capitals. It can occur that in a cross-reference a name is spelled differently from the surrounding text: e.g., a cross-reference to Mark Antony has to be to Marcus + Antonius, as his name will be found in a list of other names containing the component ‘Antonius’.

ing the predominant practice of reference works in the English language, with the notable exception of technical terms. Institutions and places (cities, rivers, islands, countries etc.) often have their conventional Eng-

lish names (e.g. Rome not Roma). The latinized versions of Greek names and words are generally followed by the Greek and the literal transliteration in brackets, e.g. Aeschylus (Aioyvdoc; Aischylos). Oriental proper names are usually spelled according to the ‘Tubinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients’ (TAVO), but again conventional names in English are also used. In the maps, the names of cities, rivers, islands, countries etc. follow ancient spelling and are transliterated fully to allow for differences in time, e.g. both Kanmadoxa and Cappadocia can be found. The transliteration of non-Latin scripts can be found in the ‘List of Transliterations’. Latin and transliterated Greek words are italicized in the article text. However, where Greek transliterations do not follow immediately upon a word written in Greek, they will generally appear in italics, but without accents or makra.

: ~

=

—

ied ah ovaa}t > cajun) 1 wena

pani i

Dugas

“wie

»

ee.

o,

agioel!

hee

Dy

rey

er

= fue

A

©

ye

Gane

ality pepnitiy,

py )erigwt

chaigatagielle! teem

Big ee

:

6

«lh:

)

sey

al

Oye ae).

fi ia

ean

o>

ta

oe

ol

Dae eau

do ty deur

4

Tre

Oia a i

|

Gaae

eMart ar

ult)

waar!

:

Os

Ae epee

e viene

yeoatal é ine” Saheck

aeartgle brates

os)

‘gavel

7 signs

@ amigo) sleae wie

@ eee(ewD6 al;

«ty tlie! of camer Tamainaperees Wadd on git

ome Aieaah calrme ania orydeer HH ab beededhath ew Serle wie) i thet rimed aM Pemevtigas SRD 4 eh. PPO taal

—_*

rer

bio

nd a eet

vm dove

Sor

TR iia:

ele

oe ‘beam amwofinn”

“mete?

land

0 Cat cat ities lepers pecomment

SN MT Aye

Gig.

4pcom!

‘ iPeiocmmes We

ee

~~

phar

ieee, 4

od a6 ey og Nhs cient

s)

etter + Oe

sain

.

Colt ie

0 baly

=

|

wras

gat comer diset ane

be) Gli’ ello

.

oemmle

a oS) tee

0.0.11 40)

rhe £4) Cen

Feed

:

i

Ps

wa

aie

Ye

Pras b

“(>

gquell) pit

Gn

4 ies

tay fae

~

De

Sy

i

in)

@f

1

4

the

ar re |

7

7

Weyarste

@a Fa

eer

y

ie

A

8

io’

G

(bc

To

Renews,

,

\(9

Ma a calieatige

wal a

List of Transliterations Transliteration of ancient Greek

Transliteration of Hebrew

a a au B Y é € el

x 3) i 3 7 } Tt n

a b g d h w Z h

a al au b g d e el

alpha

beta gamma; y before y, x, , y: n delta epsilon

alef bet gimel dalet he vav zayin khet

ev

eu

v

t

tet

C

Zz

z(d)eta

’

y

yod

n nu 8 U x r u Vv is ro) ou ov I Q 6,¢ T Vv

e éu th

eta

3 v) 0

i

iota

]

k

kappa

fe)

k | m n s : p/f S q r $ § t

kaf lamed mem nun samek ayin pe tsade qof resh sin shin tav

theta

la(m)bda

y

m n x Oo oi ou

mu nu xi omicron

5 x ? =

p

pi

v 7) n

r

rho

S

sigma

t y

tau upsilon

>

ph

phi

x y wo ; a

ch ps a) h al

chi psi omega spiritus asper iota subscriptum (similarly y, w)

Pronunciation of Turkish

Turkish uses Latin script since 1928. Pronunciation and spelling generally follow the same rules as European languages. Phonology according to G. Lewis, Turkish Grammar, 2000. French a in avoir

b jin jam ch in church d French é in étre f

In transliterated Greek the accents are retained (acute ’,

grave’, and circumflex ~). Long vowels with the circumflex accent have no separate indication of vowel length (makron).

g in gate or in angular lengthens preceding vowel h in have 1in cousin

French i in si

French j c in cat or in cure

>o.oo ost 2S St ee ey Sao) an tena melichelichs re beatae ery ail taao aaa

lin list or in wool m

LIST

OF

TRANSLITERATIONS

Transliteration of other languages

N

n

n

O

oO

French o in note

O

6

German 6

Akkadian (Assyrian-Babylonian), Hittite and Sumerian

P

P

P

R S

r s

r s in sit

are transliterated according to the rules of RLA and TAVO. For Egyptian the rules of the Lexikon der Agyptologie are used. The transliteration of Indo-European follows Rix, HGG. The transliteration of Old Indian is after M. MAYRHOFER, Etymologisches Worterbuch des Altindoarischen, 1992ff. Avestian is done according to

$

S

sh in shape

aly

t

fe

U

u

u in put

U

ii

German ii

V

Vv

Vv

Y

y

y in yet

Old Persian, *1953

Whe

Z

Z

Aufsatze zur Indoiranistik vol. 2, 1976, 622ff.); other

K. HoremMann, B. ForssmMan, Avestische Laut- und Flexionslehre, 1996. Old Persian follows R.G. KENT,

(additions from K. HOFFMANN,

Iranian languages are after R. SCHMITT, Compendium Transliteration Turkish

of Arabic,

sil Ye

, b

2 b

hamza, alif ba

P

P

pe tas

oral b

Y

Persian,

o

t

t

t

S

t

s

s

ta’

c

g

g

g

gim

a

~

c

é

cim

c

h

h

h

hb

ba

5

d

d

d

dal

3

d

z

z

dal

) 5

r Zz

r Zi

r Zz

ra’ zay

5 bie oo

s §

Z s §

Z S §

sin Sin

w

s

s

sad

é

a

bh

bh

a

s

er

ha’

ze

4

t

c

c

ta’

4

z

z

z

za’

é

‘

‘

‘

a

gory

‘ain

re

ger

Gain fa

&

f

f

f

G

q

q

qk — qaf

Hi}

k l

k g |

k,g,fA

Ss J

g, fl |

kaf gaf lam

¢

m

m

m

mim

o °

n h

n h

n h

nun ha

¢

w,u

Vv

Vv

waw

yi

sy

y

ya

and

Ottoman

linguarum Iranicarum, 1989, and after D.N. MacKENziE, A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary, +1990. For Armenian the rules of R. ScHmitTT, Grammatik des KlassischArmenischen, 1981, and of the Revue des études arméniennes, apply. The languages of Asia Minor are

transliterated according to HbdOr. For Mycenean, Cyprian see HEUBECK and Masson; for Italic scripts and Etruscan see VETTER and ET.

List of Abbreviations 1. Special Characters =>

see (cross-reference)

1,u

consonantal i, u

< >

originated from (ling.) evolved into (ling.)

m,n UR

vocalized m, n vocalized |, r

Vv

root

|

syllable end

©

born/reconstructed form (ling.) married short vowel

# es IF

word end transliteration phonemic representation

long vowel deceased

[ ]

apocryphal

col. conc. Cologne, RGM comm.

column acta concilii Cologne, Romisch Germanisches Museum commentary

Congr. contd. Copenhagen, NCG Copenhagen, NM Copenhagen, ™ cos. cos. des. cos. ord. cos. suff. cur. De Dee d. dat. decret. diss. ed. edd. epist. ik fem. fig(s). fla. Florence, MA Florence, UF

Congrss, Congrés, Congresso continued Copenhagen, Ny Carlsberg Glyptothek

a a +

2. List of General Abbreviations

Common

abbreviations (e.g., etc.) are not included in

the list of general abbreviations. ia\. a.u.c. abl. acc. aed. cur. aed. pl. Ap(p). Athens,AM Athens,BM Athens,NM_ Athens, NUM b. Baltimore, WAG Basle, AM Berlin, PM Berlin, SM bk(s). Bonn, RL Boston, MFA Bull. C. G Cambridge, FM carm. Gat: cent. ch. Cn. Cod.

Aulus ab urbe condita ablative accusative aedilis curulis aedilis plebi Appius Athens, Acropolis Museum Athens, Benaki Museum

Athens, National Museum Athens, Numismatic Museum

born Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery Basle, Antikenmuseum Berlin, Pergamonmuseum Berlin, Staatliche Museen book(s) Bonn, Rheinisches Landesmuseum Boston, Museum of Fine Arts Bulletin, Bullettino

Gaius circa Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum carmen, Carmina Catalogue, Catalogo century chapter Gnaeus Codex, Codices, Codizes

Copenhagen, National Museum Copenhagen, Thorvaldsen Museum

consul consul designatus consul ordinarius consul suffectus curator Decimus died dative

decretum, decreta dissertation edidit, editio, editor, edited (by) ediderunt epistulae falsa lectio feminine figure(s) flamen Florence, Museo Archeologico Florence, Uffizi

GENERAL

XI

ABBREVIATIONS

fee Frankfurt, Ie gen. Geneva,

fragment

NT

Frankfurt, Liebighaus

Op.

Opus, Opera

opt.

optative

genitive Geneva, Musée d’Art et d’Histoire

MAH Ger.

German Greek

Gk. Hamburg, MKG

Hamburg, Museum fiir Kunst und Gewerbe

Hanover,

Hanover, Kestner-Museum

KM HS ill(s). Imp.

sesterces

inventory

inventory number

no. Istanbul, AM

Istanbul, Archaeological Museum

itin. Kassel, SK

illustration(s) Imperator

itineraria

Kassel, Staatliche Kunstsammlungen lex line Lucius

Moscow,

PM MS(S) Munich, GL Munich, SA

OT Old Testament Oxford, Oxford, Ashmolean Museum AM p. page le Papyrus P3 Publius Palermo, Palermo, Museo Archeologico Nazionale MAN Paris, BN _ Paris, Bibliothéque Nationale Paris, CM Paris, Cabinet des Médailles Paris, LV

pl. plur. pon. max. pr(aef) praef procos. procur. propr. Ps.-

Latin

:

recto

leges liber, libri linguistic(ally) locative London, British Museum

rev.

revised

Rome, MC

Rome, Museo Capitolino

Rome, MN Rome, MV

Rome, Museo Nazionale Rome, Museo Vaticano

Rome, VA Rome, VG_ St

Rome, Villa Albani Rome, Villa Giulia Sextus

Ser.

Serie, Series, Série, Seria

S.V. SC sc. schol.

sub voce senatus consultum scilicet scholion, scholia

Marcus Madrid, Prado

Malibu, Getty Museum masculinum, masculine Moscow, Pushkin Museum manuscript(s)

Munich, Glyptothek Munich, Staatliche Antikensammlung Munich, Staatliche Miinzsammlung

Servius

sermo singular Society, Societé, Societa Spurius

St:

Saint

St. Petersburg, Hermitage

Museum, Musée, Museo

Numerius

ah

no date Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale

The Hague,

New York, MMA no. nom. N.S.

New York, Metropolitan Museum of Arts number nominative Neue Serie, New Series, Nouvelle Série, Nuova Seria

quaestor

serm. s(in)g. Soc. Sp.

N. n.d.

neutrum, neuter, neutral

Quintus

Ser.

Mus.

Naples, MAN neutr.

plate plural _ pontifex maximus praefatio praefectus proconsul procurator propraetor Pseudo

Q. qu.

St. Petersburg, HR Stud.

Munich, SM

Paris, Louvre

loco citato

Manius

M. Madrid, PR Malibu, GM masc.

New Testament

Studia, Studien, Studies, Studi Titus

The Hague, Muntenkabinet

MK

Thessaloniki, National Museum Thessaloniki, NM Aes, Toy. Tiberius

tit. transl. tr. mil. tr. pl.

titulus translation, translated (by) tribunus militum tribunus plebis

XI

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

ABBREVIATIONS

tate

terminus technicus

Univ.

Universitat, University, Universite, Universita

v.

verse

¥ Vienna,KM

verso Vienna, Kunsthistorisches Museum

vir clar. vir ill.

vir clarissimus vir illustris

ABSA Annual of the British School at Athens AC L’Antiquité Classique

vir spect. vol(s).

vir spectabilis volume(s)

Acta Acta conventus neo-latini Lovaniensis, 1973

ABr P. ARNDT, F. BRUCKMANN (ed.), Griechische und r6mische Portrats, 1891 - 1912; E. Lippo.p (ed.), Text vol., 1958

AD Archaiologikon Deltion

3. Bibliographic Abbreviations

ADAIK

Abhandlungen des Deutschen Archdologischen InA&A Antike und Abendland A&R Atene e Roma

AA Archaologischer Anzeiger AAA Annals of Archaeology and Anthropology AAAlg S. GsExL, Atlas archéologique de l’Algérie. Edition spéciale des cartes au 200.000 du Service Géographique de I’ Armée, r9rt, repr. 1973 AAHG Anzeiger fiir die Altertumswissenschaften, publication of the Osterreichische Humanistische Gesellschaft AArch Acta archeologica AASO The Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research AATun o50 E. BaBELON,

R. CAGNAT, S. REINACH

(ed.), Atlas

stituts Kairo Adam J.P. ApaM, La construction romaine. Matériaux et techniques, 1984 ADAW Abhandlungen der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Klasse fiir Sprachen, Literatur und Kunst ADB

Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie AdI Annaili dell’Istituto di Corrispondenza Archeologica AE

L’Année épigraphique AEA

Archivo Espanol de Arqueologia AEM

Archaologisch-epigraphische Mitteilungen aus Osterreich AfO Archiv fiir Orientforschung AGD Antike Gemmen in deutschen Sammlungen 4 vols.,

archéologique de la Tunisie (1 : 50.000), 1893 AATun 100 R. Cacnat, A. MERLIN (ed.), Atlas archéologique de la Tunisie (1: 100.000), 1914 AAWG Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Gottingen. Philologisch-historische Klasse

1968-75 AGM Archiv fiir Geschichte der Medizin

AAWM

AGPh

Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur in Mainz. Geistes- und sozialwissenschaftliche Klasse AAWW Anzeiger der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien. Philosophisch-historische Klasse ABAW Abhandlungen der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse Abel F.-M.ABEL,GéographiedelaPalestinezvols.,193 3-38 ABG, Archiv fiir Begriffsgeschichte: Bausteine zu einem historischen W6rterbuch der Philosophie

Archiv fiir Geschichte der Philosophie AGR Akten der Gesellschaft fiir griechische und hellenistische Rechtsgeschichte AHAW Abhandlungen der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-historische Klasse

Agora

The Athenian Agora. Results of the Excavations by the American School of Classical Studies of Athens,

1953

ff.

AHES

Archive for History of Exact Sciences AIHS Archives internationales d’histoire des sciences AION Annali del Seminario di Studi del Mondo Classico, Sezione di Archeologia e Storia antica

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XIV

ABBREVIATIONS

AJ

AMI

The Archaeological Journal of the Royal Archaeological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland AJA American Journal of Archaeology AJAH American Journal of Ancient History AJBA Australian Journal of Biblical Archaeology AJN American Journal of Numismatics AJPh American Journal of Philology AK Antike Kunst AKG Archiv fiir Kulturgeschichte AKL G. MEISSNER (ed.), Allgemeines Kiinsterlexikon: Die bildenden Kistler aller Zeiten und Volker, *1991 ff. AKM Abhandlungen fiir die Kunde des Morgenlandes Albrecht M. v. ALBRECHT, Geschichte der romischen Literatur, *1994

Alessio G. ALEssIo, Lexicon etymologicum. Supplemento ai Dizionari etimologici latini e romanzi, 1976 Alexander M.C. ALEXANDER, Trials in the Late Roman Republic: 149 BC to 50 BC (Phoenix Suppl. Vol. 26), 1990 Alfoldi A. ALFOLDI, Die monarchische Reprasentation im romischen Kaiserreiche, 1970, repr. >1980 Alfoldy, FH G. ALFéLpy, Fasti Hispanienses. Senatorische Reichsbeamte und Offiziere in den spanischen Provinzen des romischen Reiches von Augustus bis Diokletian, 1969 Alféldy, Konsulat G. ALFOLDy, Konsulat und Senatorenstand unter den Antoninen. Prosopographische Untersuchungen zur senatorischen Fuhrungsschicht (Antiquitas 1,

27), 1977 Alfoldy, RG G. ALFOLDy, Die rémische Gesellschaft. Ausgewahlte Beitrage, 1986 Alféldy, RH G. ALFOLDy, Romische Heeresgeschichte, 1987 Alfoldy, RS G. ALFOLDy, Romische Sozialgeschichte, 31984 ALLG Archiv fiir lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik Altaner B. ALTANER, Patrologie. Leben, Schriften und Lehre der Kirchenvater, ’1980

Archaologische Mitteilungen aus Iran Amyx, Addenda

C.W. Neert, Addenda et Corrigenda to D.A. Amyx, Corinthian Vase-Painting, 1991 Amyx, CVP

D.A. Amyx, Corinthian Vase-Painting of the Archaic Period 3 vols., 1988 Anadolu Anadolu (Anatolia) Anatolica Anatolica AncSoc Ancient Society Anderson J.G. ANDERSON, A Journey of Exploration in Pontus (Studia pontica 1), 1903 Anderson Cumont/Grégoire J.G. ANDERSON, F. Cumonrt, H. GrecorreE, Recueil

des inscriptions grecques et latines du Pont et de l’Arménie (Studia pontica 3), 1910 André, botan.

J. ANpR&, Lexique des termes de botanique en latin, 1956

André, oiseaux J. ANDRE£, Les noms d’oiseaux en latin, 1967

André, plantes J. ANDRE, Les noms de plantes dans la Rome antique, 1985 Andrews K. ANDREws, The Castles of Morea, 1953 ANET J.B. PrrrcHarD, Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relat-

ing to the Old Testament, +1969, repr. 1992 AnnSAAt

Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene ANRW

H. TEMpoRINI, W. Haase (ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der romischen Welt, 1972 ff. ANSMusN Museum Notes. American Numismatic Society

AntAfr Antiquités africaines AntChr Antike und Christentum AntPI Antike Plastik AO Der Alte Orient AOAT Alter Orient und Altes Testament APF

Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung und verwandte Gebiete

APh

L’Année philologique Arangio-Ruiz V. ARANGIO-Rulz, Storia del diritto romano, °19 53

XV

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

Arcadia Arcadia. Zeitschrift fiir vergleichende Literaturwissenschaft ArchCl Archeologia Classica ArchE Archaiologike ephemeris ArcheologijaSof Archeologija. Organ na Archeologiceskija institut i muzej pri B’lgarskata akademija na naukite ArchHom Archaeologia Homerica, 1967ff. ArtAntMod Arte antica e moderna ARW Archiv fiir Religionswissenschaft AS Anatolian Studies ASAA Annuario della Scuola Archeologica di Atene e delle Missioni italiane in Oriente ASL Archiv fiir das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen ASNP

Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, Classe di Lettere e Filosofia ASpr Die Alten Sprachen ASR B. ANDREAE (ed.), Die antiken Sarkophagreliefs, 1952 ff. Athenaeum Athenaeum ATL B.D. Meritt, H.T. WApE-GEry, M.F. MCGRECOR,

Athenian Tribute Lists 4 vols., 1939-53

AU Der altsprachliche Unterricht Aulock H.v. AuLockx, Minzen und Stadte Pisidiens (MDAI(Ist) Suppl. 8) 2 vols., 1977-79 Austin C. AUSTIN (ed.), Comicorum graecorum fragmenta in papyris reperta, 1973 BA Bolletino d’Arte del Ministero della Publica Istruzione BAB Bulletin de l’Académie Royale de Belgique. Classe des Lettres BABesch Bulletin antieke beschaving. Annual Papers on Classical Archaeology Badian, Clientelae E. BaDIAN, Foreign Clientelae, 1958 Badian, Imperialism E. BADIAN, Roman Imperialism in the Late Republic, 1967

ABBREVIATIONS

BaF

Baghdader Forschungen Bagnall R.S. BAGNALL et al., Consuls of the Later Roman Empire (Philological Monographs of the American Philological Association 36), 1987 BalkE Balkansko ezikoznanie BalkSt Balkan Studies BaM

Baghdader Mitteilungen Bardenhewer, GAL O. BARDENHEWER, Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur, Vols. 1-2, *1913 f.; Vols. 3-5, 1912-32; repr. Vols. 1-5, 1962 Bardenhewer, Patr. O. BARDENHEWER, Patrologie, *1910 Bardon H. Barpbon, La littérature latine inconnue 2 vols., 1952-56 Baron

W. Baron (ed.), Beitrage zur Methode der Wissenschaftsgeschichte, 1967

BASO Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research Bauer/Aland W. Bauer, K. ALAND

(ed.), Griechisch-deutsches Worterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testamentes und der friihchristlichen Literatur, °r988 Baumann, LRRP

R.A. BauMAN, Lawyers in Roman Republican Politics. A study of the Roman Jurists in their Political Setting, 316-82 BC (Miinchener Beitrage zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte), 1983 Baumann, LRTP R.A. BAUMAN, Lawyers in Roman Transitional Politics. A Study of the Roman Jurists in their Political Setting in the Late Republic and Triumvirate (Munchener Beitrage zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte), 1985 BB Bezzenbergers Beitrage zur Kunde der indogermanischen Sprachen BCAR Bollettino della Commissione Archeologica Comunale di Roma BCH Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique BE Bulletin épigraphique Beazley, ABV J.D. Beaziry, Attic Black-figure Vase-Painters, 1956

Beazley, Addenda* TH.H. Carpenter (ed.), Beazley Addenda, 71989 Beazley, ARV* J.D. BEAZLEY, Attic Red-figure Vase-Painters, *1963

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XVI

ABBREVIATIONS

Beazley, EVP J.D. BEAZLEY, Etruscan Vase Painting, 1947

Beazley, Paralipomena J.D. Beaziey, Paralipomena. Additions to Attic Black-figure Vase-Painters and to Attic Red-figure Vase-Painters, *1971 Bechtel, Dial."

F. BECHTEL, 1921-24

Die griechischen

Dialekte

3 vols.,

BibIH&R

Bibliothéque d’Humanisme et Renaissance BiblLing Bibliographie linguistique / Linguistic Bibliography BIBR

Bulletin de I’Institut Belge de Rome Bickerman

Bechtel, Dial.*

F. BEcHTEL,

BIAO Bulletin de l’Institut frangais d’Archéologie Orientale

Die griechischen

Dialekte

3 vols.,

41963

Bechtel, HPN F. BECHTEL, Die historischen Personennamen des Griechischen bis zur Kaiserzeit, 1917 Belke K. BELKE, Galatien und Lykaonien (Denkschriften der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 172; TIB 4), 1984

Belke/Mersich K. Berke, N. Mersicu,

Phrygien

und Pisidien

(Denkschriften der Osterreichischen Akademie der

Wissenschaften,

Philosophisch-Historische

Klasse

211; IIB 7), 1990

Bell K.E. BELL, Place-Names in Classical Mythology, Greece, 1989 Beloch, Bevolkerung K.J. BELocu, Die Bevolkerung der griechisch-r6mischen Welt, 1886 Beloch, GG K.J. BeLocH, Griechische Geschichte 4 vols., *1912-27, repr. 1967

Beloch, RG

K.J. BELOcH, ROmische Geschichte bis zum Beginn der Punischen Kriege, 1926 Bengtson H. BENGTSON, Die Strategie in der hellenistischen Zeit. Ein Beitrag zum antiken Staatsrecht (Minchener Beitrage zur Papyrusforschung und antiken Rechtsgeschichte 26, 32, 36) 3 vols., 1937-52, ed. repr. 1964-67

Berger E.H.

BerGer, Geschichte der wissenschaftlichen Erdkunde der Griechen, *1903 Berve H. Berve, Das Alexanderreich auf prosopographischer Grundlage, 1926 Beyen H. G. BeYEN, Die pompejanische Wanddekoration vom zweiten bis zum vierten Stil 2 vols., 1938-60 BFC

Bolletino di filologia classica BGU Agyptische (Griechische) Urkunden aus den Kaiserlichen (from Vol. 6 on Staatlichen) Museen zu Berlin 13 vols., 1895-1976 BHM

Bulletin of the History of Medicine

E. BICKERMANN, Chronologie (Einleitung in die Altertumswissenschaft III 5), 1933 BICS Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies of the University of London BIES The Bulletin of the Israel Exploration Society BiogJahr Biographisches Jahrbuch fiir Altertumskunde Birley A.R. Brrvey, The Fasti of Roman Britain, 1981

BJ Bonner Jahrbiicher des Rheinischen Landesmuseums in Bonn und des Vereins von Altertumsfreunden im Rheinlande BKT

Berliner Klassikertexte 8 vols., 1904-39 BKV

Bibliothek der Kirchenvater (Kempten ed.) 63 vols., *I91I-31

Blansdorf J. BLANsDorE (ed.), Theater und Gesellschaft im Imperium Romanum, 1990

Blass F.

Brass,

Die

attische

Beredsamkeit,

3

vols.,

31887-98, repr. 1979

Blass/Debrunner/Rehkopf F. Biass, A. DEBRUNNER, F. REHKOPF, Grammatik des neutestamentlichen Griechisch, 1979 Bliimner, PrAlt. H.

BLUMNER,

Die

romischen

Privataltertiimer

(HdbA IV 2, 2), 3r94r1 Blumner, Techn.

H. BLUmMner, Technologie und Terminologie der Gewerbe und Kiinste bei Griechen und Romern, Vol. 1, *1912; Vols. 2-4, 1875-87, repr. 1969 BMC, Gr

A Catalogue of the Greek Coins in the British Museum 29 vols., 1873-1965 BMCByz W. Wrotu (ed.), Catalogue of the Imperial Byzantine Coins in the British Museum 2 vols., 1908, repr. 1966

BMCIR

Bryn Mawr Classical Review BMCRE H. Martrinc ty (ed.), Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum 6 vols., 1962-76

XVII

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

BMCRR

Bruun

H.A. GRUEBER (ed.), Coins of the Roman Republic in the British Museum 3 vols., 1970

BN Beitrage zur Namensforschung Bolgar, Culture 1 R. Botear, Classical Influences on European Culture A.D. 500 - 1500, 1971

Bolgar, Culture 2 R. Bouear, Classical Influences on European Culture A.D. 1500-1700, 1974 Bolgar, Thought R. Bowcar, Classical Influences on Western Thought A.D. 1650-1870, 1977 Bon

A. Bon, La Morée franque 2 vols., 1969 Bonner S.F. BONNER, Education in Ancient Rome, 1977 Bopearachchi O. BOPEARACHCHI, Monnaies gréco-bactriennes et indo-grecques. Catalogue raisonné, 1991

Borinski K. Borinsk1, Die Antike in Poetik und Kunsttheorie vom Ausgang des klassischen Altertums bis auf Goethe und Wilhelm von Humboldt 2 vols., 1914-24, repr.

1965

Borza

E.N. Borza, In the shadow of Olympus. The emergence of Macedon, 1990 Bouché-Leclerq A. BouCcHE-LECLERQ, Histoire de la divination dans Pantiquité 3 vols., 1879-82, repr. 1978 in 4 vols.

BPhC Bibliotheca Philologica Classica BrBr H. Brunn, F. BRUCKMANN, Denkmiler griechischer und rémischer Skulpturen, 1888-1947 BRGK

Bericht der R6misch-Germanischen Kommission des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts Briggs/Calder W.W. Brices, W.M. CALper III, Classical Scholarship. A Biographical Encyclopedia, 1990 Bruchmann C.F.H. BRUCHMANN, Epitheta deorum quae apud poetas graecos leguntur, 1893 Brugmann/Delbriick K. BRUGMANN, B. DELBRUCK, Grundrif§ der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen, Vols. 1-2, 1897-1916; Vols. 3-5, 1893-1900 Brugmann /Thumb K. BRUGMANN, A. THUMB (ed.), Griechische Grammatik, 41913 Brunhdlzl F. BRUNHOLZL, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters 2 vols., 1975-92 Brunt P.A. BRUNT, Italian Manpower 222 B. C.—A.D. 14, 1971

ABBREVIATIONS

C. Bruun, The Water Supply of Ancient Rome. A Study of Imperial Administration (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 93), 1991

Bryer/Winfield A. BRYER, D. WINFIELD, The Byzantine Monuments

and Topography of Pontus Studies 20) 2 vols., 1985

(Dumbarton

Oaks

BSABR

Bulletin de Liaison de la Société des Amis de la Bibliothéque Salomon Reinach BSL Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris BSO(A)S Bulletin of the School of Oriental (from Vol. ro ff. and African) Studies

BTCGI G. NeEncr (ed.), Bibliografia topografica della colonizzazione greca in Italia e nelle isole tirreniche, 1980 ff. Buck A. Buck (ed.), Die Rezeption der Antike, 1981 Burkert W. Burkert, Griechische Religion der archaischen und klassischen Epoche, 1977 Busolt/Swoboda G. Busott, H. Swospopa, Griechische Staatskunde (HdbA IV 1, r) 2 vols., 31920-26, repr. 1972-79 BWG Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte BWPr

Winckelmanns-Programm der Archaologischen Gesellschaft zu Berlin Byzantion Byzantion. Revue internationale des études byzantines ByzF Byzantinische Forschungen. Internationale Zeitschrift fir Byzantinistik ByzZ Byzantinische Zeitschrift Caballos A. CABALLOS, Los senadores hispanoromanos y la romanizacion de Hispania (Siglos I al III p.C.), Vol. 1: Prosopografia (Monografias del Departamento de Historia Antigua de la Universidad de Sevilla 5), 1990 CAF T. Kock (ed.), Comicorum Atticorum Fragmenta, 3 vols., 1880-88 CAG Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 18 vols., 1885-1909

CAH The Cambridge Ancient History 12 text- and 5 ill. vols., 1924-39 (Vol. 1 as 2nd ed.), vols. 1-2, 31970-75; vols. 3,1 and 3,3 ff., *1982 ff.; vol. 3,2, "T99I

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XVIII

ABBREVIATIONS

Carney

T.F. Carney, Bureaucracy in Traditional Society. Romano-Byzantine Bureaucracies Viewed from Within, 1971 Cartledge/Millett/Todd P. CaRTLEDGE, P. MILLETT, S. TODD (ed.), Nomos,

Christ, RGW K. Curist,

Romische Geschichte und Wissenschaftsgeschichte 3 vols., 1982-83 Christ/Momigliano K. Curist, A. MoMIGLIANO, Die Antike im 19. Jahrhundert in Italien und Deutschland, 1988

Essays in Athenian Law, Politics and Society, 1990 Cary M. Cary, The Geographical Background of Greek

CIA

and Roman History, 1949 Casson, Ships L. Casson, Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World, 1971

CE

A. KircHHorF et al. (ed.), Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum, 1873; Suppl.: 1877-91 Corpus Iuris Canonici 2 vols., 1879-81, repr. 1959 CID

Corpus des inscriptions de Delphes 3 vols., 1977-92 CIE C. Pautt (ed.), Corpus Inscriptionum Etruscarum,

Casson, Trade L. Casson, Ancient Trade and Society, 1984

CAT

Vol. 1-2, 1893-1921; Vol. 3,1 ff., 1982 ff.

Catalogus Tragicorum et Tragoediarum (in TrGF Vol. x) CatLitPap H.J.M. MILne (ed.), Catalogue of the Literary Papyri in the British Museum, 1927

CCAG F. Cumonr

et al. (ed.), Catalogus

trologorum Graecorum

Codicum

CIG Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum 4 vols., 1828-77 lis

Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, 1863 ff. CIL If Add. M. SaseEt-Kos, Inscriptiones latinae in Graecia re-

pertae. Additamenta ad CIL III (Epigrafia e antichita

As-

5), 1979

12 vols. in 20 parts, 1898-

1940

CIRB

Corpus Inscriptionum regni Bosporani, 1965

CoV

Corpus Christianorum. Series Latina, 1954 ff.

CIS

CE

Corpus Inscriptionum Semiticarum 5 parts, 1881-

Cronache Ercolanesi CEG P.A. HANSEN (ed.), Carmina epigraphica Graeca (Texts and Commentary 12; 15), 1983 ff. CeM Classica et Mediaevalia CGF G. KarBEt (ed.), Comicorum Graecorum Fragmenta, *1958

CGL G. G6Tz (ed.), Corpus glossariorum Latinorum, 7

vols., 1888-1923, repr. 1965 Chantraine P. CHANTRAINE, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque 4 vols., 1968-80 CHCL-G E.J. KENNEY (ed.), The Cambridge History of Classical Literature. Greek Literature, 1985 ff. CHCL-L E.J. KENNEY (ed.), The Cambridge History of Classical Literature. Latin Literature, 1982 ff. Chiron Chiron. Mitteilungen der Kommission fiir alte Geschichte und Epigraphik des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts Christ K. CuristT, Geschichte der romischen Kaiserzeit von

Augustus bis zu Konstantin, 1988 Christ, RGG

K. CHrist, Romische Geschichte und deutsche Geschichtswissenschaft, 1982

1951

CJ Classical Journal

GE Cultura Neolatina Clairmont C.W. CLarIRMONT, vols., 1993

Attic Classical Tombstones

7

Clauss M. Crauss, Der magister officiorum in der Spatantike (4.-6. Jahrhundert). Das Amt und sein Einfluf auf die kaiserliche Politik (Vestigia 32), 1981 CLE F. BUCHELER, E. LOMMATZSCH

(ed.), Carmina La-

tina Epigraphica

latina

(Anthologia

2) 3 vols.,

1895-1926

CM Clio Medica. Acta Academiae historiae medicinae CMA Cahiers de |’Institut du Moyen Age grec et latin CMB

W.M. Carper III, D.J. Kramer, An Introductory

Bibliography to the History of Classical Scholarship, Chiefly in the XIXth and XXth Centuries, r992 CMG Corpus Medicorum Graecorum, 1908 ff. CMIK J. Cuapwick, Corpus of Mycenaean Inscriptions from Knossos (Incunabula Graeca 88), 1986 ff. CML Corpus Medicorum Latinorum, rors ff.

XIX

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

CMS

ABBREVIATIONS

Curtius

F. Marz et al. (ed.), Corpus der minoischen und

mykenischen Siegel, 1964 ff. CodMan Codices manuscripti. Zeitschrift fiir Handschriftenkunde Coing

E.R. Curtius, Europaische Literatur und lateinisches Mittelalter, ''1993 CVA Corpus Vasorum Antiquorum, 1923 ff. CW The Classical World

H. Coinc, Europaisches Privatrecht 2 vols., 1985-

D’ Arms

89

J.H. D’ArMs, Commerce and Social Standing in Ancient Rome, 1981 D’Arms/Kopff J.H. D’ Arms, E.C. Koprr (ed.), The Seaborne Commerce of Ancient Rome: Studies in Archaeology and History (Memoirs of the American Academy in

CollAlex I.U. Powet (ed.), Collectanea Alexandrina, 1925 CollRau J. v. UNGERN-STERNBERG

(ed.), Colloquia Raurica, 1988 ff. Conway/Johnson /Whatmough R.S. Conway, S.E. JOHNSON, J. WHATMOUGH, The Prae-Italic dialects of Italy 3 vols., 1933, repr. 1968 Conze A. ConzE, Die attischen Grabreliefs 4 vols., 18931922 Courtney E. CourTNEY, The Fragmentary Latin Poets, 1993 CPF

F. ADoRNO (ed.), Corpus dei Papiri Filosofici greci e latini, 19869 ff. CPG M. GEERARD (Vols. 1-5), F. GLORIE, (Vol. 5), Clavis

patrum graecorum 5 vols., 1974-87 CPh Classical Philology Gris E. DeEKKERS,

A. GAAR,

Clavis patrum

BC, 1971 DB

F. Vicourovux (ed.), Dictionnaire de la Bible, 1881

ff. DCPP E. LipiNski et al. (ed.), Dictionnaire de la Civilisation Phénicienne et Punique, 1992

Degrassi, FCap. Latinorum Paravianum), 1954

latinorum

Classical Quarterly

CR Classical Review CRAI Comptes rendus des séances de |’Académie des inscriptions et belles-lettres Romanorum

Frag-

menta, 1871, repr. 1962

CSGiIE Columbia Studies in the Classical Tradition CSE Corpus Speculorum Etruscorum, 1990 ff. CSEL Corpus

Scriptorum ecclesiasticorum Latinorum, 1866 ff. SCIR Corpus Signorum Imperii Romani, 1963 ff. Cumont, Pont F. Cumont, E. CuMonrt, Voyage d’exploration archéologique dans le Pont et la Petite Arménie (Studia pontica 2), 1906

Cumont, Religions F. Cumont, Les Religions orientales dans le paganisme romain, #1929, repr. 1981

J.K. Davirs, Athenian Propertied Families 600-300

Degrassi, FCIR A. DecrassI, I Fasti consolari dell’Impero Romano,

CQ

(ed.), Comicorum

Dacia. Revue d’archéologie et d’histoire ancienne Davies

A. Decrassi, Fasti Capitolini (Corpus scriptorum

(CCL), *1995

CRF O. RipBEcK

Rome 36), 1980

Dacia

1952 Deichgraber K. DEICHGRABER, Die griechische Empirikerschule, 1930 Delmaire R. DELMarrReE, Les responsables des finances impériales au Bas-Empire romain (IV‘-VI° s). Etudes prosopographiques (Collection Latomus 203), 1989 Demandt A. DEMANDT, Der Fall Roms: die Auflosung des r6mischen Reiches im Urteil der Nachwelt, 1984 Demougin S. DEMOUGIN, Prosopographie des Chevaliers romains Julio-Claudiens (43 av.J -C.-70 ap.J.-C.) (Collection de l’Ecole Francaise de Rome 153), 1992 Deubner L. DEUBNER, Attische Feste, 1932 Develin R. DEvELIN, Athenian Officials 684-321 B.C. 1949 Devijver H. DeEvijver, Prosopographia militiarum equestrium quae fuerunt ab Augusto ad Gallienum (Symbolae Facultatis Litterarum et Philosophiae Lovaniensis Ser. A 3) 3 vols., 1976-80; 2 Suppl. Vols.:

1987-93 DHA Dialogues d’histoire ancienne

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XX

ABBREVIATIONS

Dulckeit /Schwarz /Waldstein

DHGE A. BAUDRILLART,

R. AUBERT

(ed.), Dictionnaire

d’Histoire et de Géographie Ecclésiastiques 1912 ff. DID Didascaliae Tragicae/Ludorum Tragicorum (in TrGF Vol. 1) Diels, DG H. Diets, Doxographi Graeci, 1879

Diels/Kranz H. Diets, W. Kranz (ed.), Fragmente der Vorsokratiker 3 vols., 91951 f., repr. Vol.1, 1992; Vol. 2,

1985; Vol. 3, 1993 Dierauer U. Dierauer, Tier und Mensch im Denken der Antike, 1977 Dietz K. Dietz, Senatus contra principem. Untersuchungen zur senatorischen Opposition gegen Kaiser Maximinus Thrax (Vestigia 29), 1980

Dihle A. Dine, Die griechische und lateinische Literatur der Kaiserzeit: von Augustus bis Justinian, 1989 DiskAB Diskussionen zur archaologischen Bauforschung, 1974 ff. Dixon

S. Dixon, The Roman Family, 1992 DJD Discoveries in the Judaean Desert, 1955 ff. DEZ Deutsche Literaturzeitung fiir Kritik der internationalen Wissenschaft DMA J.R. STRAYER et al. (ed.), Dictionary of the Middle

Ages 13 vols., 1982-89 Dmic F. Aura JorRro, Diccionario Micenico, 1985

Dorrie/Baltes H. Dorrig, M. Bates (ed.), Der Platonismus in der Antike, 1987 ff. Domaszewski A.V. DomaszeEwskl, Aufsatze zur romischen Heeresgeschichte, 1972 Domaszewski /Dobson A.V. DoMASzEwskKI, B. Dopson, Die Rangordnung des romischen Heeres, *1967 Domergue C. DOMERGUE, Les mines de la péninsule Iberique dans |’Antiquité Romaine, 1990 Drumann /Groebe W. DRUMANN, P. GROEBE (ed.), Geschichte Roms in seinem Ubergange von der republikanischen zur monarchischen Verfassung 6 vols., 1899-1929,

G. DuméziL, La religion romaine archaique, suivi

d’un appendice sur la religion des Etrusques, 1974 Duncan-Jones, Economy

R. DuNcAN-JONES, The Economy of the Roman Empire. Quantitative Studies, 1974 Duncan-Jones, Structure R. DuNcAN-JONES, Structure and Scale in the Roman Economy, 1990 DVjs Deutsche Vierteljahrsschrift fiir Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte EA Epigraphica Anatolica. Zeitschrift fiir Epigraphik und historische Geographie Anatoliens EAA R. BIANCHI BANDINELLI (ed.), Enciclopedia dell’arte antica classica e orientale, 1958 ff. EB G. Camps, Encyclopédie Berbére 1984 ff. Ebert F, EBerT, Fachausdriicke des griechischen Bauhandwerks, Vol. 1: Der Tempel, 1910 EG Essays in Criticism Eck W. Eck, Die Statthalter der germanischen Provinzen vom 1.—3. Jahrhundert (Epigraphische Studien 14), 1985

Eckstein F.A. Eckstein, Nomenclator philologorum, 1871 Edelstein, AM L. EDELSTEIN, Ancient medicine, 1967 Edelstein, Asclepius E.J. and L. EpestTein, Asclepius. A Collection and Interpretation of the Testimonies, 1945 Eder, Demokratie W. Eber (ed.), Die athenische Demokratie im 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr. Vollendung oder Verfall einer Verfassungsform? Akten eines Symposiums, 3. — 7. August 1992, 1995 Eder, Staat W. Eber (ed.), Staat und Staatlichkeit in der friithen romischen Republik: Akten eines Symposiums, 12. — 15. Juli 1988, 1990 EDM K. Ranke, W. BREDNICH (ed.), Enzyklopadie des Marchens. Handworterbuch zur historischen und vergleichenden Erzahlforschung, 1977 ff. EDRL

repr. 1964

DS C. DAREMBERG,

G. DutcxeiT, F. ScHwaRz, W. WALDSTEIN, Romi-

sche Rechtsgeschichte. Ein Studienbuch (Juristische Kurz Lehrbiicher), 1995 Dumézil

E. SAGLIO (ed.), Dictionnaire des

antiquités grecques et romaines d’aprés les textes et les monuments 6 vols., 1877-1919, repr. 1969

A. BERGER, Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law (TAPhA N.S. 43,2), 1953, repr. 1968 EEpigr Ephemeris Epigraphica

XX]

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

EI

Encyclopaedia of Islam, 1960 ff. Eissfeldt O. ErssFELDT (ed.), Handbuch zum Alten Testament, 31964 ff. Emerita Emerita. Revista de linguistica y filologia clasica Enclr E. YARSHATER (ed.), Encyclopaedia Iranica, 1985 Entretiens Entretiens sur l’antiquité classique (Fondation Hardt)

EOS Atti del Colloquio Internazionale AIEGL su Epigrafia e Ordine Senatorio: Roma, 14-20 maggio 1981, 2 vols., 1982 EpGF M. Davies, Epicorum graecorum fragmenta, 1988 EpGr G. KaIBEL (ed.), Epigrammata Graeca ex lapidibus conlecta, 1878 Epicurea H. UsEner (ed.), Epicurea, 1887, repr. 1963

EPRO Etudes préliminaires aux religions orientales dans Empire Romain, 1961 ff.

Euph. Euphorion EV F, DeLta Corte et al. (ed.), Enciclopedia Virgiliana 5 vols. in 6 parts, 1984-91 Evans

D.E. Evans, Gaulish Personal names. A study of some continental Celtic formations, 1967 F&F Forschungen und Fortschritte Farnell, Cults L.R. FARNELL, The Cults of the Greek States 5 vols., 1896-1909 Farnell, GHC

L.R. FARNELL, Greek Hero Cults and Ideas of Immortality, 1921 FCG A. MEINEKE

Errington

R.M. ERRINGTON, Geschichte Makedoniens. Von den Anfangen bis zum Untergang des Konigreiches, 1986

ESAR T. FRANK

(ed.), An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome 6 vols., 1933-40 Espérandieu, Inscr. E. EspERANDIEU, Inscriptions latines de Gaule 2 vols., 1929-36 Espérandieu, Rec. E. EspERANDIEU, Recueil général des bas-reliefs, statues et bustes de la Gaule Romaine 16 vols., 190781

ET H. Rix (ed.), Etruskische Texte (ScriptOralia 23, 24, Reihe A 6,7) 2 vols., 1991 ETAM Erganzungsbande zu den Tituli Asiae minoris, 1966

ff.

(ed.), Fragmenta Comicorum

Graeco-

rum 5 vols., 1839-57, repr. 1970 FCS Fifteenth-Century Studies FdD

Fouilles de Delphes, 1902 ff. FGE D.L. Pace, Further Greek Epigrams, 1981 FGrH

F, Jacosy, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker, 3 parts in 14 vols., 1923-58, Part 1: *1957

Eranos

Eranos. Acta Philologica Suecana Er-Jb Eranos-Jahrbuch Erasmus Erasmus. Speculum Scientiarum. Internationales Literaturblatt der Geisteswissenschaften Eretz Israel Eretz-Israel, Archaeological, Historical and Geographical Studies Ernout/Meillet A. Ernout, A. MEILLET, Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine, 41959

ABBREVIATIONS

FHG C. MULLER (ed.), Fragmenta Historicorum Graeco-

rum 5 vols., 1841-1970 Fick/Bechtel A. Fick, F. BECHTEL, Die griechischen Personennamen, *1894

FiE

Forschungen in Ephesos, 1906 ff. Filologia La Filologia Greca e Latina nel secolo XX, 1989 Finley, Ancient Economy M.I. FINLEY, The Ancient Economy, *1984

Finley, Ancient Slavery M.I. Finuey, Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology, 1980

Finley, Economy M.I. FINLEY, B.D. SHAaw, R.P. SALLER (ed.), Econo-

my and Society in Ancient Greece, 1981 Finley, Property M.I. FINLEY (ed.), Studies in Roman Property, 1976 FIRA

S. RiccoBono, J. BAviERA (ed.), Fontes iuris Romani anteiustiniani 3 vols., *1968 FIRBruns K.G. Bruns, TH. MoMMSEN, O. GRADENWITZ (ed.), Fontes iuris Romani antiqui, 1909, repr. 1969 Fittschen/Zanker K. FitrscHEN, P. ZANKER, Katalog der r6mischen

Portrats in den capitolinischen Museen und den anderen kommunalen Museen der Stadt Rom, 1983 ff.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXII

ABBREVIATIONS

Flach D. FLacu, Roémische Agrargeschichte (HdbA III 9), 1990 Flashar H. FLasHar, Inszenierung der Antike. Das griechische Drama auf der Buhne der Neuzeit, 1991 Flashar, Medizin H. FLAsHar (ed.), Antike Medizin, 1971 FMS

Friihmittelalterliche Studien, Jahrbuch des Instituts fiir Frihmittelalter-Forschung der Universitat Munster Fossey J.M. Fossey, Topography and Population of Ancient Boiotia, Vol. 1, 1988 FOst L. VIDMANN, Fasti Ostienses, 1982

Fowler W.W. FowLer, The Roman Festivals of the Period

of the Republic. An Introduction to the Study of the Religion of the Romans, 1899

FPD I. Prso, Fasti Provinciae Daciae, Vol. 1: Die senato-

rischen Amtstrager (Antiquitas 1,43), 1993

FPL

der Steinschneidekunst im klassischen Altertum 3 vols., 1900 Furtwangler/Reichhold A. FURTWANGLER, K. REICHHOLD, Griechische Va-

senmalerie 3 vols., 1904-32 Fushdller D. FUSHOLLER, Tunesien und Ostalgerien in der Romerzeit, 1979 G&R

Greece and Rome

GA A.S.F. Gow, D.L. Pace, The Greek Anthology, Vol.

1: Hellenistic Epigrams, 1965; Vol. 2: The Garland of Philip, 1968 Gardner P. Garpner, A History of Ancient Coinage, 700300 B.C., 1918 Gardthausen V. GARDTHAUSEN, Augustus und Seine Zeit, 2 parts in 6 vols., 1891-1904 Garnsey P. GaRNSEY, Famine and Food Supply in the GraecoRoman World. Responses to Risk and Crisis, 1988 Garnsey/Hopkins/Whittaker P. Garnsey, K. Hopkins, C.R. WHITTAKER

W. Moret, C. BUCHNER (ed.), Fragmenta Poetarum Latinorum epicorum et lyricorum, *1982

FPR A. BAHRENS

(ed.), Fragmenta

Poetarum

Romano-

rum, 1886

Frazer

J.G. Frazer, The Golden Bough. A Study in Magic and Religion, 8 parts in 12 vols., Vols. 1-3, 5-9, 37911-14; Vols. 4, 10-12, I9TI-15 Frenzel E. FRENZEL, Stoffe der Weltliteratur, ®r992 Friedlander L. FRIEDLANDER, G. Wissowa (ed.), Darstellungen aus der Sittengeschichte Roms 4 vols., '°1921-23 Frier, Landlords B.W. Frier, Landlords and Tenants in Imperial Rome, 1980

Frier, PontMax

B.W. Frrer, Libri annales pontificum maximorum. The origins of the Annalistic Tradition (Papers and Monographs of the American Academy in Rome

27), 1979 Frisk H. Frisk, Griechisches etymologisches Wo6rterbuch

(Indogermanische

Bibliothek:

Reihe

2) 3

vols.,

1960-72

FRLANT Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testaments Fuchs/Floren W. Fucus, J. FLOREN, Die Griechische Plastik, Vol. 1: Die geometrische und archaische Plastik, 1987 Furtwangler A. FURTWANGLER, Die antiken Gemmen. Geschichte

(ed.),

Trade in the Ancient Economy, 1983 Garnsey/Saller P. GaRNSEY, R. SALLER, The Roman Empire, Economy, Society and Culture, 1987 GCS Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte, 1897 ff. Gehrke H.-J. GEHRKE, Jenseits von Athen und Sparta. Das Dritte Griechenland und seine Staatenwelt, 1986 Gentili/Prato B. GENTILI, C. Prato (ed.), Poetarum elegiacorum testimonia et fragmenta, Vol. 1, 71988; Vol. 2, 1985 Georges K.E. Georces, Ausfihrliches lateinisch-deutsches Handwéorterbuch 2 vols., 1912-18, repr. 1992 Gérard-Rousseau M. GéRARD-RoussEAU, Les mentions religieuses dans les tablettes mycéniennes, 1968 Germania Germania. Anzeiger der Romisch-Germanischen Kommission des Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts

Gernet L. GERNET, Droit et société dans la Gréce ancienne (Institut de droit romain, Publication 13), 1955, repr. 1964

Geus

K. Geus, Prosopographie der literarisch bezeugten Karthager (Studia Phoenicia 13 Orientalia Lovaniensia analecta 59), 1994 GGA Gottingische Gelehrte Anzeigen

XXIII

GGM C. MULLER (ed.), Geographi Graeci Minores 2 vols.,

Tabulae, 1855-61 GGPh" F. Uperwec (ed.), Grundrif§ der Geschichte der Philosophie; K. PRACHTER, Teil 1: Die Philosophie des Altertums, **1926, repr. 1953

GGPh7* W. Orro, U. HAusMANN (ed.), Grundrifg der Geschichte der Philosophie; H. FLAsHAR (ed.), vol. 3: Die Philosophie der Antike, 1983, vol. 4: Die hellenistische Philosophie, 1994 GHW 1 H. BeNctTson, V. Mitojcic et al., Grofer Histo-

rischer Weltatlas des Bayrischen Schulbuchverlages 1. Vorgeschichte und Altertum, °1978 GHW 2 J. ENGEL, W. Macer, A. BirkEN et al., Grofer Historischer Weltatlas des Bayrischen Schulbuchverlages 2. Mittelalter, *1979 GIBM C.T. Newron et al. (ed.), The Collection of Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum 4 vols., 1874-1916

Gillispie C.C. GILuspre (ed.), Dictionary of scientific biography 14 vols. and index, 1970-80, repr. 19813 2

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

ABBREVIATIONS

Grenier

A. GRENIER, Manuel d’archéologie gallo-romaine 4 vols., 193 1-60; vols. 1 and 2, repr. 1985 GRF

H. FuNAIOLI

(ed.), Grammaticae

Romanae

Frag-

menta, 1907 GRF(add) A. MazzarIno, Grammaticae Romanae Fragmenta aetatis Caesareae (accedunt volumini Funaioliano

addenda), 1955 GRLMA Grundrifs der romanischen Literaturen des Mittelalters Gruen, Last Gen.

E.S. GRUEN, The Last Generation of the Roman Re-

public, 1974 Gruen, Rome

E.S. GRUEN, The Hellenistic World and the Coming of Rome, 1984, repr. 1986

Gruppe

O. Gruppe, Geschichte der klassischen Mythologie und Religionsgeschichte wahrend des Mittelalters im Abendland und wahrend der Neuzeit, 1921 Gundel W. and H-G. GunbEL, Astrologumena. Die astrologische Literatur in der Antike und ihre Geschichte, 1966

Suppl. Vols., 1978-90

Guthrie W.K.C. Guturig, A History of Greek Philosophy 6

H. Ket (ed.), Grammatici Latini 7 vols., 1855-80

vols., 1962-81 GVI W. PEEK (ed.), Griechische Vers-Inschriften, Vol. I,

GL GLM A. Rise (ed.), Geographi Latini Minores, 1878

Glotta Glotta. Zeitschrift fir griechische und lateinische Sprache GMth F. ZAMINER

1955 Gymnasium

Gymnasium. Zeitschrift fiir Kultur der Antike und humanistische Bildung

(ed.), Geschichte der Musiktheorie, 1984 ff. Gnomon Gnomon. Kritische Zeitschrift fiir die gesamte klassische Altertumswissenschaft Gobl R. G6sBL, Antike Numismatik 2 vols., 1978 Golenis¢ev I.N. GoLenrtscEv-Kutuzov, I] Rinascimento italiano e le letterature slave dei secoli XV e XVI, 1973 Gordon A.E. Gorpon, Album of Dated Latin Inscriptions 4 vols., 1958-65 Goulet R. Gou tet (ed.), Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques, 1989 ff. Graf F. Graf, Nordionische Kulte. Religionsgeschichtliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen zu den Kulten von Chios, Erythrai, Klazomenai und Phokaia,

HABES

1985 GRBS

Hansen, Democracy

Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies

Heidelberger althistorische Beitrage und epigraphische Studien, 1986 ff. Habicht C. Hasicnt, Athen. Die Geschichte der Stadt in hellenistischer Zeit, 1995 Hakkert A.M. HaxkertT (ed.), Lexicon of Greek and Roman Cities and Place-Names in Antiquity c. 1500 B.C. — c. A.D. 500, 1990 ff. Halfmann H. HALFMANN, Die Senatoren aus dem Ostlichen Teil des Imperium Romanum bis zum Ende des 2. Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Hypomnemata 58), 1979 Hamburger K. HamBurcGeER, Von Sophokles zu Sartre. Griechische Dramenfiguren antik und modern, 1962 Hannestad N. HANNESTAD, Roman Art and Imperial Policy, 1986

M.H. Hansen, The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes. Structure, Principles and Ideology,

T1991, repr. 1993

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXIV

ABBREVIATIONS

Hild

Harris

W.V. Harris, War and Imperialism in Republican Rome 327-70 B.C., 1979

Hasebroek J. HASEBROEK, Griechische Wirtschafts- und Gesellschaftsgeschichte bis zur Perserzeit, 1931 HbdOr B. SPULER (ed.), Handbuch der Orientalistik, 1952 ff. HbdrA J. MarQquarpT, TH. MomMsen, Handbuch der r6mischen Alterthiimer, vols. 1-3, 31887 f.; vols. 4-7, “1881-86

HBr

P. HERRMANN, R. Hersic, (ed.), Denkmaler Malerei des Altertums 2 vols., 1904-50 HDA H. BACHTOLD-STAUBLI

der

et al. (ed.), Handworter-

buch des deutschen Aberglaubens ro vols., 1927-42,

F. Hixp, Kilikien und Isaurien (Denkschriften der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 215; TIB 5) 2 vols., 1990 Hild/Restle F. Hitp, M. RestLe, Kappadokien (Kappadokia, Charsianon, Sebasteia und Lykandos) (Denkschrif-

ten der Osterreichischen 2), 1981

Historia

Historia. Zeitschrift fiir Alte Geschichte HJb Historisches Jahrbuch HLav

Humanistica Lavanensia

HdArch W. Otro, U. Hausmann (ed.), Handbuch der Archaologie. Im Rahmen des HdbA 7 vols., 1969-90

HLL

HdbA

HM

I. v. MULLER, H. BENGTSON (ed.), Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, 1977 ff. Heckel W. HEcKEL, Marshals of Alexander’s Empire, 1978 Heinemann K. HEINEMANN, Die tragischen Gestalten der Griechen in der Weltliteratur, 1920 Helbig W. HELsic, Fuhrer durch die 6ffentlichen Sammlungen klassischer Altertimer in Rom 4 vols., +1963-72 Hephaistos

Hephaistos. Kritische Zeitschrift zu Theorie und Praxis der Archadologie, Kunstwissenschaft und angrenzender Gebiete Hermes

Hermes. Zeitschrift fiir klassische Philologie Herrscherbild Das romische Herrscherbild, 1939 ff. Herzog, Staatsverfassung E. v. Herzoc, Geschichte und System der romi1884-91, repr. 1965

Hesperia

Hesperia. Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens Heubeck A. HEuBECK, Schrift (Archaeologia Homerica Chapter X Vol. 3), 1979 Heumann/Seckel H.G. HEuMANN, E. SECKEL (ed.), Handlexikon zu den Quellen des rémischen Rechts, "1971 Highet G. HiGuet, The Classical Tradition: Greek and Roman Influences on Western literature, 41968, repr. 1985

der Wissen-

Hirschfeld O. HirscHFELp, Die kaiserlichen Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Diocletian, *1905

repr. 1987

schen Staatsverfassung 2 vols.,

Akademie

schaften: Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 149; TIB

R. Herzoc, P.L. Scumript (ed.), Handbuch der la-

teinischen Literatur der Antike, 1989 ff. A History of Macedonia, Vol. 1: N.G.L. HAMMOND,

Historical geography and prehistory, 1972; Vol. 2: N.G.L. HAMMonpD, G.T. GRIFFITH, 550-336 BC, 1979; Vol. 3: N.G.L. HAMMOND, F.W. WALBANK, 336-167 BC, 1988 HmT

H.H. EGGEBRECHT, Handworterbuch der musikalischen Terminologie, 1972 ff.

HN B.V. Heap, Historia numorum. A manual of Greek numismatics, “1911

Hodge T.A. Hopce, Roman Aqueducts and Water Supply, 1992 Holbl G. HOLBL, Geschichte des Ptolemaerreiches. Politik, Ideologie und religidse Kultur von Alexander den Grofen bis zur romischen Eroberung, 1994 Holkeskamp K.-J. H6LKEskamp, Die Entstehung der Nobilitat. Studien zur sozialen und politischen Geschichte der Romischen Republik im 4.Jh. v. Chr., 1987 Hoffmann D. Hormann, Das spatromische Bewegungsheer und die Notitia dignitatum (Epigraphische Studien 7) 2 vols., 1969 f. = (Diss.), 1958 Holder A. Ho .per, Alt-celtischer Sprachschatz 3 vols., 1896-1913, repr. 1961 f. Honsell H. HOonsett, Romisches Recht (Springer-Lehrbuch), ?1994 Hopfner T. Hopener, Griechisch-agyptischer Offenbarungszauber 2 vols. in 3 parts, 1921-24, repr. 1974-90

XXV

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

Hopkins, Conquerors K. Hopxins, Conquerors and Slaves. Sociological Studies in Roman History, Vol. 1, 1978 Hopkins, Death K. Hopxins, Death and Renewal. Sociological Studies in Roman History, Vol. 2, 1983 HR History of Religions HRR H.

Perer

(ed.), Historicorum

Romanorum

IEG

M. L. West (ed.), lambi et elegi Graeci ante Alexandrum cantati 2 vols., 1989-92

IEJ Israel Exploration Journal IER Illustrierte Enzyklopadie der Renaissance IEry H. ENGELMANN

(ed.), Die Inschriften von Erythrai und Klazomenai 2 vols., 1972 f.

Reli-

quiae, Vol. 1, 1914; Vol. 2, 1906, repr. 1967 HrwG H. Cancik, B. GLapicow, M. LauBsCHER (from Vol. 2: K.-H. Kon) (ed.), Handbuch religionswis-

senschaftlicher Grundbegriffe, 1988 ff.

Hs Historische Sprachforschung HSM Histoire des sciences médicales HSPh Harvard Studies in Classical Philology Hiilser K. HULsER, Die Fragmente zur Dialektik der Stoiker. Neue Sammlung der Texte mit deutscher Ubersetzung und Kommentaren 4 vols., 1987 f. Humphrey J.H.

Humpurey, Roman Circuses. Arenas for Chariot Racing, 1986 Hunger, Literatur H. Huncer, Die hochsprachliche profane Literatur der Byzantiner (HdbA 12, 5) 2 vols., 1978 Hunger, Mythologie

ABBREVIATIONS

IF

Indogermanische Forschungen

IG Inscriptiones Graecae, 1873

ff.

IGA H. Roent (ed.), Inscriptiones Graecae antiquissimae praeter Atticas in Attica repertas, 1882, repr. 1977

IGBulg G. MrnalLov (ed.), Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae 5 vols., 1956-1996 IGLS Inscriptions grecques et latines de la Syrie, 1929 ff. IGR

R. Caenat et al. (ed.), Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes 4 vols., 1906-27

IGUR L. Morett1, Inscriptiones Graecae urbis Romae 4 vols., 1968-90

Ken

International Journal of the Classical Tradition IJsewijn

H. Huncer (ed.), Lexikon der griechischen und r6-

J. IJs—Ewijn,

mischen Mythologie, °1969

*1990 ff.

Huss W. Huss, Geschichte der Karthager (HdbA III 8), 1985

Ik

HWdPh

LEG;

Companion

to

Neo

Latin

Studies,

Die Inschriften griechischer Stadte aus Kleinasien, 1972 ff. E. Drent (ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres orientis 3 vols., 1925-31, repr. 1961;J.MoREAU, H.I. Marrou (ed.), Suppl., 1967

J. Ritrer, K. GRUNDER (ed.), Historisches Worterbuch der Philosophie, 1971 ff.

HWdR G. UEpING (ed.), Historisches Worterbuch der Rhetorik, 1992 ff.

ILLRP

Historische Zeitschrift

ILS

A. Decrassi (ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae liberae rei

publicae 2 vols., 1957-63, repr. 1972

HZ IA

H. Dessau

Iranica Antiqua IconRel T.P. v. BAAREN 1970 ff.

vols. in 5 parts, 1892-1916, repr. 41974

(ed.), Iconography

of Religions,

(ed.), Didyma,

IMagn. O. KERN (ed.), Die Inschriften von Magnesia am

Maander, 1900, repr. 1967

ICUR A. Ferrua, G.B. DE Rossi, Inscriptiones christianae urbis Romae, 1922ff. IDélos Inscriptions de Délos, 1926 ff. [Didyma A. REHM 1958

(ed.), Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae 3

Vol. 2: Die Inschriften,

IMU

Italia medioevale e umanistica Index

Index. Quaderni camerti di studi romanistici InserIt A. Decrassi (ed.), Inscriptiones Italiae, 1931 ff.

IOSPE V. LatyscHeEw (ed.), Inscriptiones antiquae orae septentrionalis ponti Euxini Graecae et Latinae 3

vols., 1885-1901, repr. 1965

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXVI

ABBREVIATIONS

IPNB M. MayruHoerr, R. Scumitr (ed.), Iranisches Personennamenbuch, 1979 ff.

IPQ

International Philosophical Quaterly IPriene F. HILLER VON GARTRINGEN, Inschriften von Priene, 1906

Irmscher J. IRMSCHER (ed.), Renaissance und Humanismus in Mittel- und Osteuropa, 1962 Isager/Skydsgaard S. ISAGER, J.E. SkYDSGAARD, Ancient Greek Agriculture, An Introduction, 1992 Isis Isis IstForsch Istanbuler Forschungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts lura IURA, Rivista internazionale di diritto romano e antico IvOl W. DITTENBERGER, K. PURGOLD, Inschriften von Olympia, 1896, repr. 1966 Jaffe P. JAFFE, Regesta pontificum Romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum 1198 2 vols., *1985-88

JBAA

The Journal of the British Archaeological Association

JbAC Jahrbuch fiir Antike und Christentum JCS Journal of Cuneiform Studies JDAI Jahrbuch des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts

JEA

The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology Jenkyns, DaD R. JENKyNsS, Dignity and Decadence: Classicism and the Victorians, 1992 Jenkyns, Legacy R. JENKyNS, The Legacy of Rome: A New Appraisal, 1992

JHAS

Journal for the History of Arabic Science JHB Journal of the History of Biology

JHM

Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences

JHPh

Journal of the History of Philosophy

JHS

Journal of Hellenic Studies

JLw

Jahrbuch fiir Liturgiewissenschaft

JMRS Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies JNES Journal of Near Eastern Studies

JNG

Jahrbuch fiir Numismatik und Geldgeschichte JOAI Jahreshefte des Osterreichischen Archaologischen Instituts Jones, Cities

A.H.M. Jones, The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces, *1971

Jones, Economy

A.H.M. Jones, The Roman Economy. Studies in Ancient Economic and Administrative History,

1974 Jones, LRE A.H.M. Jones, The Later Roman Empire 284-602. A Social, Economic and Administrative Survey, 1964

Jones, RGL A.H.M. Jones, Studies in Roman Government and Law, 1968 Jost

M. Jost, Sanctuaires et cultes d’Arcadie, 1985 JPh Journal of Philosophy

JRGZ

Jahrbuch des Roémisch-Germanischen seums

Zentralmu-

JRS

Journal of Roman Studies Justi

F. Just1, Iranisches Namenbuch, 1895

JWG

Jahrbuch fiir Wirtschaftsgeschichte

JWI

Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes Kadmos Kadmos. Zeitschrift fiir vor- und frihgriechische Epigraphik KAI

H. Donner, W. ROLLIG, Kanaanaeische und aramaeische Inschriften 3 vols., 31971-1976 Kajanto, Cognomina I. Kayanto, The Latin Cognomina, 1965 Kajanto, Supernomina I. Kayanto, Supernomina. A study in Latin epigraphy (Commentationes humanarum litterarum 40, I), 1966

Kamptz H. v.

Kamptz, Homerische Personennamen. Sprachwissenschaftliche und historische Klassifikation, 1982 =H. v. Kamptz, Sprachwissenschaftliche und historische Klassifikation der homerischen Personennamen (Diss.), 1958

Karlowa O. KarLtowa, Romische Rechtsgeschichte 2 vols., 1885-1901

XXVII

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

Kaser, AJ

M. Kaser, Das altrémische Jus. Studien zur Rechtsvorstellung und Rechtsgeschichte der Romer, 1949 Kaser, RPR M. Kaser,

Das romische Privatrecht (Rechtsgeschichte des Altertums Part 3, Vol. 3; HbdA ro, 3, 3)

2 vols., 31971-75 Kaser, RZ

M. Kaser, Das romische Zivilprozessrecht (Rechtsgeschichte des Altertums Part 3, Vol. 4; HbdA 10, 3, 4), 1966 Kearns

E. Kearns, The Heroes of Attica, 1989 (BICS Suppl.

57) Keller O. KELLER, Die antike Tierwelt 2 vols., 1909-20, repr.

1963

Kelnhofer F. KELNHOFER, Die topographische Bezugsgrundlage der Tabula Imperii Byzantini (Denkschriften der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften: Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 125 Beih.; TIB 1, Beih.), 1976 Kienast

D. KiENAST, ROmische Kaisertabelle. Grundziige einer romischen Kaiserchronologie, 1990 Kindler W. JENS (ed.), Kindlers Neues Literatur Lexikon 20 vols., 1988-92 Kinkel G. KINKEL, (ed.), Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta,

1877 Kirsten /Kraiker E. Kirsten, W. KRaArkKER, Griechenlandkunde. Ein Fiihrer zu klassischen Statten, 51967 Kleberg T. KLEBERG, HOtels, restaurants et cabarets dans lantiquité Romaine. Etudes historiques et philolo-

Kraft K. Krart, Gesammelte Aufsatze zur antiken Geschichte und Militargeschichte, 1973 Kromayer/Veith J. Kromayer, G. VEITH, Heerwesen und Kriegfiihrung der Griechen und Rémer, 1928, repr. 1963 Krumbacher K. KRUMBACHER, Geschichte der byzantinischen Litteratur von Justinian bis zum Ende des ostrémischen Reiches (527-1453) (HdbA 9, 1), *1897, repr. 1970 KSd J. Frrepricu (ed.), Kleinasiatische Sprachdenkmaler (Kleine Texte fiir Vorlesungen und Ubungen 163), 1932 KUB

Keilschrifturkunden von Boghazkoi Kihner/Blass R. Kuuner, F. Brass, Ausfiihrliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache. Teil 1: Elementar- und Formenlehre 2 vols., 31890-92 Kuhner/Gerth R. KUHNER, B. GerTH, Ausfiihrliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache. Teil 2: Satzlehre 2 vols., 31898-1904; W. M. Carper III, Index locorum, 1965

Kihner/Holzweifig R. KUuner, F. Hoizwetssic, Ausfithrliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache. Teil I: Elementar-, Formen- und Wortlehre, *1912 Kuhner/Stegmann R. KUHNER, C. STEGMANN, Ausfihrliche Grammatik der lateinischen Sprache. Teil 2: Satzlehre, 2 vols., 41962 (revised by A. THIERFELDER); G.S. SCHWARZ, R. L. Wertis, Index locorum, 1980 Kullmann/Atlhoff W. KULLMANN, J. ALTHOFF (ed.), Vermittlung und Tradierung von Wissen in der griechischen Kultur,

1993

giques, 1957 Klio Klio. Beitrage zur Alten Geschichte KIP

K. ZIEGLER (ed.), Der Kleine Pauly. Lexikon der Antike 5 vols., 1964-75, repr. 1979 Knobloch J. KNoBxLoch et al. (ed.), Sprachwissenschaftliches Worterbuch (Indogermanische Bibliothek 2), 1986 ff (xst installment 196r) Koch/Sichtermann G. Kocu, H. SICHTERMANN, Romische Sarkophage, 1982

Koder J. Koper, Der Lebensraum der Byzantiner. Historisch-geographischer Abrif$ ihres mittelalterlichen Staates im 6stlichen Mittelmeerraum, 1984 Koder/Hild J. Koper, F. Hip, Hellas und Thessalia (Denkschriften der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 125; TIB 1), 1976

ABBREVIATIONS

Kunkel W. KunxeL, Herkunft und soziale Stellung der r6mischen Juristen, *1967

KWdH H.H. Scumirtrt (ed.), Kleines Wo6rterbuch des Hel-

lenismus, *1993 Lacey

W.K. Lacey, The Family in Classical Greece, 1968

LA

W. HEtcx et al. (ed.), Lexikon der Agyptologie 7 vols., 1975-92 (1st installment 1972) LAK H. BRUNNER,

K. FLEsseL, F. HILLER et al. (ed.), Lexikon Alte Kulturen 3 vols., 1990-93 Lanciani R. LANCIANI, Forma urbis Romae, 1893-1901

Lange C.C.L. LANGE, ROmische *1876-79; Vol. 3, 1876

Altertiimer,

Vols.

1-2,

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXVIII

ABBREVIATIONS

Langosch K. Lancoscu, Mittellatein und Europa, 1990

LIMC

J. BoarpMaw et al. (ed.), Lexicon Iconographicum Mythologiae Classicae, 1981 ff. Lippold

Latomus Latomus. Revue d’études latines Latte

G. Lirppo.p, Die griechische Plastik (HdArch III),

K. Latre, Romische Religionsgeschichte (HdbA 5,

1950 Lipsius

4), 1960, repr. 1992

Lauffer, BL

S. LAUFFER, Die Bergwerkssklaven von Laureion,

J.H. Lirsrus, Das attische Recht und Rechtsverfahren. Mit Benutzung des Attischen Processes 3 vols., 1905-15, repr. 1984

*1979 Lauffer, Griechenland S. LAUFFER (ed.), Griechenland. Lexikon der historischen Statten von den Anfangen bis zur Gegen-

Lloyd-Jones H. LLtoyp-Jones, Blood for the Ghosts — Classical Influences in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries, 1982

wart, 1989

Lausberg H. Lausperc, Handbuch der literarischen Rhetorik. Eine Grundlegung der Literaturwissenschaft, *1990 LAW

C. ANDRESEN et al. (ed.), Lexikon der Alten Welt, 1965, repr. 1990

LMA R.-H. Bautier, R. Autry (ed.), Lexikon des Mittelalters 7 vols., 1980-93 (1st installment 1977), 3rd vol. repr. 1995 Lobel/Page E. Lose, D. Pace (ed.), Poetarum lesbiorum fragmenta, 1955, repr. 1968

wen

Lexikon der christlichen Ikonographie LdA J. IRMSCHER (ed.), Lexikon der Antike, '°1990 Le Bohec Y. Le BoHEc, L’armée romaine. Sous le Haut-Em-

pire, 1989 Leitner

H. Lerrner, Zoologische Terminologie beim Alte-

Loewy E. Loewy (ed.), Inschriften griechischer Bildhauer, 1885, repr. 1965

LPh T. SCHNEIDER, Lexikon der Pharaonen. Die altagyptischen K6nige von der Frihzeit bis zur Romerherrschaft, 1994 LRKA

Friedrich Liibkers Reallexikon des Klassischen Altertums, *1914

ren Plinius (Diss.), 1972 Leo

F. Leo, Geschichte der r6mischen Literatur. I. Die

archaische Literatur, 1913, repr. 1958 Lesky A. Lesxy, Geschichte der griechischen Literatur,

LSAG

L.H. JEFFERY, The Local Scripts of Archaic Greece. A Study of the Origin of the Greek Alphabet and its Development from the Eighth to the Fifth Centuries BiG

31971, repr. 1993

Leumann M. LeuMANN, Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre (HdbA II 2, 1), 1977 Leunissen P.M.M. LeuNISSEN, Konsuln und Konsulare in der

Zeit von Commodus bis zu Alexander Severus (180-235 n. Chr.) (Dutch Monographs in Ancient History and Archaeology 6), 1989 Lewis/Short C.T. Lewis, C. SHort, A Latin Dictionary, *1980 LFE

B. SNELL (ed.), Lexikon des friihgriechischen Epos, 1979 ff. (rst installment 1955)

F. SokoLowski,

LSCG F. SoKOLOWSKI,

LTUR

Geschichte

der

Alten

Kirche,

Lois sacrées des cités grecques,

LSCG, Suppl F. SOKOLOWSKI, Lois sacrées des cités grecques, Supplément, 1962 LSJ H.G. Lippe Lt, R. Scott, H.S. Jones et al. (ed.), A Greek-English Lexicon, °1940; Suppl.: 1968, repr. 1992

Lietzmann

LigtzMANnn,

de |’Asie mineure,

1969

LThK*

“51975

Lois sacrées

1955

LGPN P.M. Fraser et al. (ed.), A Lexicon of Greek Personal Names, 1987 ff. Liebenam W. LIEBENAM, Stadteverwaltung im rémischen Kaiserreich, 1900 H.

1990

LSAM

J. HOFer, K. RAHNER (ed.), Lexikon fiir Theologie und Kirche 14 vols., *1957—86

LThK* W. Kasper et al. (ed.), Lexikon fiir Theologie und

Kirche, '1993 ff. E.M. STernsy (ed.), Lexicon Topographicum Urbis Romae, 1993 ff.

XXIX

LUA Lunds Universitets Arsskrift / Acta Universitatis Lundensis Lugli, Fontes G. Luc. (ed.), Fontes ad topographiam veteris urbis Romae pertinentes, 6 of 8 vols. partially appeared, 1952-62

Lugli, Monumenti G. Lue ut, IMonumenti antichi di Roma e suburbio, 3 vols., 1930-38; Suppl.: 1940 Lustrum Lustrum. Internationale Forschungsberichte aus dem Bereich des klassischen Altertums M&H Mediaevalia et Humanistica. Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Society MacDonald G. MACDONALD, Catalogue of Greek Coins in the Hunterian Collection, University of Glasgow 3 vols.,

1899-1905 MacDowell D. M. MacpoweELL, The law in Classical Athens (Aspects of Greek and Roman life), 1978 MaAev. Medium Aevum Magie D. Macig, Roman Rule in Asia Minor to the End of

the Third Century after Christ, 1950, repr. 1975 MAII

Mosaici Antichi in Italia, 1967 ff MAMA Monumenta Asiae minoris Antiqua, 1927ff. Manitius M. Manirtius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters (HdbA 9, 2) 3 vols., 1911-31, repr.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

ABBREVIATIONS

Matz/Duhn F. Matz, F. v. DuHN (ed.), Antike Bildwerke in Rom mit Ausschluf der groferen Sammlungen 3 vols., 1881 f. MAVORS M.P. SpEIDEL (ed.), Roman Army Researches 1984 ff. MDAI(A) Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts, Athenische Abteilung MDAI(Dam)

Damaszener Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts

MDAI(Ist)

Istanbuler Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archaologischen Instituts MDAI(K) Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts (Abteilung Kairo) MDAI(R) Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archdologischen Instituts, Romische Abteilung MDOG Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin MededRom Mededelingen van het Nederlands Historisch Instituut te Rome Mediaevalia Mediaevalia Mediaevistik Mediaevistik. Internationale Zeitschrift fiir interdisziplinare Mittelalterforschung MEFRA

Mélanges d’Archéologie et d’Histoire Frangaise de Rome. Antiquité

1973-76

de l’Ecole

MarbWPr Marburger-Winckelmann-Programm Marganne M.H. MarGanng, Inventaire analytique des papyrus grecs de médecine, 1981

Meiggs R. MeiaGcGs, Trees and Timber in the Ancient Medi-

Marrou

siodea, 1967 Mette

H.-I. Marrou, Geschichte der Erziehung im klassischen Altertum (translation of Histoire de l’éducation dans l’antiquité), *1977 Martinelli M. MartTINELLI (ed.), La ceramica degli Etruschi, 1987 Martino, SCR

F. DE MarTINo, Storia della costituzione romana 5 vols., *1972-75; Indici 1990 Martino, WG

F. DE Martino, Wirtschaftsgeschichte des alten Rom, *1991 Masson

O. Masson, Les inscriptions chypriotes syllabiques. Recueil critique et commenté (Etudes chypriotes 1),

*1983

terranean World, 1982 Merkelbach/West R. MERKELBACH, M.L. West (ed.), Fragmenta He-

H.J. Metre, Urkunden dramatischer Auffiihrungen in Griechenland, 1977

MG Monuments Grecs

MGG" F. BLuMg (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Allgemeine Enzyklopadie der Musik 17 vols., 1949-86, repr. 1989

MGG* L. FINSCHER (ed.), Die Musik in Geschichte und Gegenwart 20 vols., *1994 ff. MGH Monumenta Germaniae Historica inde ab anno Christi quingentesimo usque ad annum millesimum et quingentesimum, 1826 ff.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXX

ABBREVIATIONS

MGH AA Monumenta quissim1

Mnemosyne Germaniae

Historica: Auctores Anti-

MGH DD Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Diplomata MGH Epp

tinavereins

MNW H. Meter et al. (ed.), Kulturwissenschaftliche Bi-

Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Epistulae

MGH PL Monumenta medii aevi MGH SS

Mnemosyne. Bibliotheca Classica Batava MNVP Mitteilungen und Nachrichten des Deutschen Palas-

bliographie Germaniae

Historica:

Poetae

Latini

Nachleben

der Antike

2 vols.,

Mollard-Besques S. MOLLARD-BESQUES, Musée National du Louvre.

Catalogue raisonné des figurines et reliefs en terre-

Monumenta Germaniae Historica: Scriptores MGrecs

cuite grecs, étrusques et romains 4 vols., 1954-86

Monuments Grecs publiés par |’Association pour Encouragement des Etudes grecques en France 2 vols., 1872-97 MH Museum Helveticum MiB Musikgeschichte in Bildern Millar, Emperor F.G.B. MiLiar, The Emperor in the Roman World,

1977 Millar, Near East F.G.B. MILLar, The Roman Near East, 1993 K. MILLER, Itineraria Romana. ROmische Reisewe-

ge an der Hand der Tabula Peutingeriana,

Momigliano A. MomIGLIANo, Contributi alla storia degli studi

classici, 1955 ff. Mommsen, Schriften TH. MomMseNn, Gesammelte

Schriften

8 vols.,

1904-13, repr. 1965

Mommeen, Staatsrecht

TH. Momsen, Romisches Staatsrecht 3 vols., Vol. 1, 71887; Vol. 2 f., 1887 f. Mommsen Strafrecht TH. Mommsen, Romisches Strafrecht, 1899, repr.

1955

Miller 1916,

repr. 1988

Millett P. Mitietr, Lending and Borrowing Athens, 1991 Minos

zum

1931-38

in Ancient

Minos

MIO Mitteilungen des Instituts fiir Orientforschung MIR Moneta Imperii Romani. Osterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften. Ver6ffentlichungen der Numismatischen Kommission Mitchell S. MITCHELL, Anatolia. Land, Men and Gods in Asia Minor 2 vols., 1993 Mitteis L. Mirreis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht in den 6st-

lichen Provinzen des rémischen Kaiserreichs. Mit Beitragen zur Kenntnis des griechischen Rechts und der spatromischen Rechtsentwicklung, 1891, repr. 1984

Mitteis/Wilcken L. Mitreis, U. WILCKEN, Grundziige und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde, 1912, repr. 1978

ML R. Meices, D. Lewis (ed.), A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth Century B.C., *1988 MLatJb Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch. Internationale Zeitschrift fiir Mediavistik

Mon.Ant.ined. Monumenti Antichi inediti Moos P. v. Moos, Geschichte als Topik, 1988 Moraux P. Moraux, Der Aristotelismus bei den Griechen von Andronikos bis Alexander von Aphrodisias (Peripatoi 5 und 6) 2 vols., 1973-84 Moreau J. Moreau, Dictionnaire de géographie historique de la Gaule et de la France, 1972; Suppl.: 1983 Moretti L. Moretti (ed.), Iscrizioni storiche ellenistiche 2 vols., 1967-76 MP Modern Philology MPalerne Mémoires du Centre Jean Palerne MRR

T.R.S. BROUGHTON, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic 2 vols., 1951-52; Suppl.: 1986 MSG C. JAN (ed.), Musici scriptores Graeci, 1895; Suppl: 1899, repr. 1962

Miller D. MULLER, Topographischer Bildkommentar zu den Historien Herodots: Griechenland im Umfang des heutigen griechischen Staatsgebiets, 1987 Miiller-Wiener W. MULLER-WIENER, Bildlexikon zur Topographie Istanbuls, 1977 Miunzer’ F. MUNzER, ROmische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien, 1920

XXXI

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

Miunzer*

F, MUNzER, R6mische Adelsparteien und Adelsfamilien, *1963 Murray/Price O. Murray, S. Price (ed.), The Greek City: From Homer to Alexander, 1990 Muséon

Muséon Revue d’Etudes Orientales MVAG Mitteilungen der Vorderasiatischen (Agyptischen) Gesellschaft MVPhW Mitteilungen des Vereins klassischer Philologen in Wien

MythGr Mythographi

ABBREVIATIONS

Nock A.D. Nock, Essays on Religion and the Ancient World, 1972 Noethlichs K.L. NoeTHLICcHs, Beamtentum und Dienstvergehen. Zur Staatsverwaltung in der Spatantike, 1981 Norden, Kunstprosa E. Norpben, Die antike Kunstprosa vom 6. Jh. v. Chr. bis in die Zeit der Renaissance, °1961 Norden, Literatur E. Norpen, Die rémische Literatur, °1961 NSA Notizie degli scavi di antichita NTM

Schriftenreihe fiir Geschichte der NaturwissenschafGraeci 3 vols., 1894-1902; Vol. 1,

*1926

Nash E. Nasu, Bildlexikon zur Topographie des antiken Rom, 1961 f. NC Numismatic Chronicle NClio La Nouvelle Clio NDB Neue Deutsche Biographie, 19 53 ff.; Vols. 1-6, repr. 1971 NEAEHL E. STERN (ed.), The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 4 vols., 1993 Neoph. Neophilologus Newald R. NEWALD, Nachleben des antiken Geistes im Abendland bis zum Beginn des Humanismus, 1960 NGrove The New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, ®t980 NGrovelnst The New Grove Dictionary of Musical Instruments,

1994 NHCod Nag Hammadi Codex NHS Nag Hammadi Studies Nicolet C. Nicotet, L’ Ordre équestre a l’€poque républicaine 312-43 av. J.-C. 2 vols., 1966-74

Nilsson, Feste M.P. Niisson, Griechische Feste von religiéser Bedeutung mit Ausschluss der attischen, 1906 Nilsson, GGR, M.P. Nitsson, Geschichte der griechischen Religion (HdbA 5, 2), Vol. 1, >1967, repr. 1992; Vol. 2, 41988 Nilsson, MMR M.P. Nitsson, The Minoan-Mycenaean Religion and its Survival in Greek Religion, *1950 Nissen H. Nissen, Italische Landeskunde 2 vols., 18831902

ten, Technik und Medizin Nutton

V. Nutton, From Democedes to Harvey. Studies in the History of Medicine (Collected Studies Series 277), 1988

NZ Numismatische Zeitschrift

OA J.G. Barrer, H. Saupre (ed.), Oratores Attici 3 vols.,

1839-43 OBO Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis OCD N.G. HamMMonp,

H.H. ScuLiarp (ed.), The Oxford Classical Dictionary, *1970, +1996 ODB A.P. KAzHDAN et al. (ed.), The Oxford Dictionary of Byzantium, rg9g9r ff. OF O. KERN (ed.), Orphicorum Fragmenta, 31972 OGIS W. DITTENBERGER (ed.), Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae 2 vols., 1903-05, repr. 1960 OLD

P.G.W. Gare (ed.), Oxford Latin Dictionary, 1982 (rst installment 1968)

OIF Olympische Forschungen, 1941 ff. Oliver J.H. OLiver, Greek Constitutions of Early Roman Emperors from Inscriptions and Papyri, 1989 Olivieri D. Outvier!, Dizionario di toponomastica lombarda. Nomi di comuni, frazioni, casali, monti, corsi d’acqua, ecc. della regione lombarda, studiati in rapporto alle loro origine, *1961 Olshausen/Biller/Wagner E. OLSHAUSEN, J. BILLER, J. WAGNER, Historischgeographische Aspekte der Geschichte des Pontischen und Armenischen Reiches. Untersuchungen Zur historischen Geographie von Pontos unter den Mithradatiden (TAVO 29), Vol.1, 1984 OLZ

Orientalistische Literaturzeitung

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXXIl

ABBREVIATIONS

OpAth Opuscula Atheniensia, 1953 ff. OpRom Opuscula Romana ORF E. Matcovatl1, Oratorum Romanorum Fragmenta (Corpus scriptorum Latinorum Paravianum 56-5 8);

vols., 1930 Orientalia Orientalia, Neue Folge Osborne R. OsBorneE, Classical Landscape with Figures: The Ancient Greek City and its Countryside, 1987 Overbeck J. OverBeck, Die antiken Schriftquellen zur Geschichte der bildenden Kiinste bei den Griechen,

Pfeiffer KPI R. PFEIFFER, Die Klassische Philologie von Petrarca bis Mommsen, 1982 Pfiffig A.J. PriFFIG, Religio Etrusca, 1975 Pflaum H.G.PFLauM, Les carriéres procuratoriennes équestres sous le Haut-Empire Romain 3 vols. and figs., 1960 f.; Suppl.: 1982 Pfuhl E. Prunt, Malerei und Zeichnung der Griechen, 1923 Pfuhi/Mobius E. Prunt, H. Mosius, Die ostgriechischen Grabreliefs 2 vols., 1977-79

PG J.P. Micne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus, series Graeca 161 vols., 1857-1866; Conspectus auc-

1868, repr. 1959

PA

torum: 1882; Indices 2 vols.: 1912-32

J. Kircuner, Prosopographia Attica 2 vols., 1g0103, repr. 1966

Pack R.A. Pack (ed.), The Greek and Latin Literary Texts

PGM K. PREISENDANZ, A. HENRICHS

*1973 f. (1928-31)

from Greco-Roman Egypt, *1965

Philippson /Kirsten

Panofsky E. PaNorsky, Renaissance Western Art, 1960

and

Renaissances

A. Puitiprson, A. LEHMANN, E. KirsTEN (ed.), Die

in

Pape/Benseler W. Pare, G.E. BENSELER, Worterbuch der griechischen Eigennamen 2 vols., 1863-1870 PAPhS Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society Parke H.W. Parke, Festivals of the Athenians, 1977 Parke/Wormell H.W. Parke, D.E.W. WorMELL, The Delphic Oracle, 1956 PBSR Papers of the British School at Rome PCA Proceedings of die Classical Association. London PCG R. KasseEt, C. AusTIN

(ed.), Poetae comici graeci,

1983 ff. PCPhS Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society PdP

La Parola del Passato PE

R. STILLWELL et al. (ed.), The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites, 1976

griechischen Landschaften. Eine Landeskunde vols., 1950-59 Philologus Philologus. Zeitschrift fiir klassische Philologie PhQ Philological Quarterly Phronesis Phronesis PhU Philologische Untersuchungen Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift Picard CH. Picarp, Manuel d’archéologie grecque. sculpture, 1935 ff. Pickard-Cambridge/Gould/Lewis

J. GOULD, D.M. LEwis, The Dramatic Festivals of Athens, *1988 Pickard-Cambridge/Webster A.W. PICKARD-CAMBRIDGE, T.B.L. WEBSTER, Dithyramb, Tragedy and Comedy, 71962 Pigler, I A. PIGLER, Barockthermen. Eine Auswahl von Verzeichnissen zur Ikonographie des 17. Und 1 8. Jahrhunderts. 2 vols., *1974; Ill. Vol.: 1974

PEGI

Pi

Pfeiffer, KPI

R. PFEIFFER, Geschichte der Klassischen Philologie. Von den Anfangen bis zum Ende des Hellenismus,

La

A.W. PICKARD-CAMBRIDGE,

PIR

A. BERNABE (ed.), Poetae epici graeci. Testimonia et fragmenta. Pars I, 1987

4

Phw

Peacock D.P.S. PEAcocK, Pottery in the Roman World: An Ethnoarchaeological Approach, 1982

1978

(ed.), Papyri Grae-

cae Magicae. Die griechischen Zauberpapyri 2 vols.,

Prosopographia imperii Romani saeculi, Vol. I-III, Broa uite J.P. Micne (ed.), Patrologiae cursus completus, se-

ries Latina 221 vols., 1844-65 partly repr. 5 Suppl. Vols., 1958-74; Index: 1965 PLM Ar. BAEHRENS (ed.), Poetae Latini Minores 5 vols.,

1879-83

XXXIll

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

PLRE A.H.M. Jones, J.R. MARTINDALE, J. Morris (ed.),

The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire 3 vols. in 4 parts, 1971-1992 PMG D.L. PaGE, Poetae melici graeci, 1962

PMGF M. Davies (ed.), Poetarum melicorum Graecorum fragmenta, 1991 PMGTr H.D. Betz (ed.), The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, Including the Demotic Spells, *1992 Poccetti

D. PoccetT1, Nuovi documenti italici a complemento del manuale di E. Vetter (Orientamenti linguistici

8), 1979 Pokel W. PoxeL, Philologisches 1882, repr. *1974 Poetica

Schriftstellerlexikon,

Poetica. Zeitschrift fiir Sprach- und Literaturwissenschaft Pokorny J. Pokorny, Indogermanisches etymologisches Worterbuch 2 vols., *1989 Poulsen F. PouLsen, Catalogue of Ancient Sculpture in the Ny Carlsberg Glyptotek, 1951 PP W. PEREMANS (ed.), Prosopographia Ptolemaica (Studia hellenistica) 9 vols., 1950-81, repr. Vol. 1-3,

1977 PPM

Pompei, Pitture e Mosaici, 1990 ff. Praktika Tleaxtixa tys ev AOjvatc agxaroroyixrs etaigeiac

Preaux C. Préaux, L’€conomie royale des Lagides, 1939, repr. 1980

Preller/Robert L. PRELLER, C. RoBERT, Griechische Mythologie, 51964 ff. Pritchett K. PriTcHETT, Studies in Ancient Greek Topography (University of California Publications, Classical Studies) 8 vols., 1969-92 PropKg K. BitreEL et al. (ed.), Propylaen Kunstgeschichte 22 vols., 1966-80, repr. 1985 Prosdocimi A.L. Prospocimi, M. CrisToFANt, Lingue dialetti dell’Italia antica, 1978; A. MARINETTI, Aggiornamenti ed Indici, 1984 PrZ Prahistorische Zeitschrift PSI

G. ViTELLI, M. Norsa, V. BARTOLETTI et al. (ed.), Papiri greci e latini (Pubblicazione della Soc. Italiana per la ricerca dei pap. grecie latini in Egitto), 1912 ff.

ABBREVIATIONS

QSt Quellen und Studien zur Geschichte und Kultur des Altertums und des Mittelalters Quasten J. QuASTEN, Patrology 2 vols., 1950-53 RA Revue Archéologique RAC T. Kiauser, E. DassMANN (ed.), Reallexikon fur Antike und Christentum. Sachworterbuch zur Auseinandersetzung des Christentums mit der antiken Welt, 1950 ff. (rst installment 1941) RACr Rivista di Archeologia Cristiana Radermacher L. RADERMACHER, Artium Scriptores. Reste der voraristotelischen Rhetorik, 1951 Radke G. RapkE, Die Gotter Altitaliens, *1979 Raepsaet-Charlier M-T. RAEPSAET-CHARLIER, Prosopographie des femmes de l’ordre sénatorial (I. — II. siécles) (Fonds René Draguet 4) 2 vols., 1987 RARG H. Bonnet, Reallexikon der agyptischen Religionsgeschichte, *1971 RAL Rendiconti della Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche dell’ Academia dei Lincei Ramsay W.M. Ramsay, The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia 2 vols., 1895-97 RAssyr Revue d’assyriologie et d’archéologie orientale Rawson, Culture E. Rawson, Roman Culture and Society. Collected Papers, 1991 Rawson, Family B. Rawson (ed.), The Family in Ancient Rome. New Perspectives, 1986 RB P. WirTH (ed.), Reallexikon der Byzantinistik, 1968 ff. RBA Revue Belge d’archéologie et d’histoire de l’art RBi

Revue biblique RBK K. WessEL, M. RESTLE (ed.), Reallexikon zur byzantinischen Kunst, 1966 ff. (1st installment 1963) RBN

Revue Belge de numismatique RBPh

Revue Belge de philologie et d’histoire RDAC Report of the Department of Antiquities, Cyprus RDK

O. ScHmirTrt (ed.), Reallexikon zur deutschen Kunstgeschichte, 1937ff.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXXIV

ABBREVIATIONS

RE G. Wissowa et al., (ed.), Paulys Real-Encyclopadie der classischen

Altertumswissenschaft,

Neue

arbeitung, 1893-1980 REA Revue des études anciennes REByz Revue des études byzantines REG Revue des études grecques Rehm W. REHM, Griechentum und Goethezeit,

Be-

Rhodes P.J. Ropes, A commentary on the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia, *1993 RHPhR Revue d’histoire et de philosophie religieuses RHR Revue de histoire des religions RHS Revue historique des Sciences et leurs applications RIA

Rivista dell’Istituto nazionale d’archeologia e storia dell’arte

*1952,

47968

Reinach, RP S. REINACH, Répertoire de peintures grecques er romaines, 1922 Reinach, RR

S. REINACH, Répertoire de reliefs grecs et romains 3 vols., 1909-12 Reinach RSt S. REINACH, Répertoire de la statuaire greque et romaine 6 vols., 1897-1930, repr. 1965-69

REL Revue des études latines Rer.nat.scr.Gr.min O. KELLER (ed.), Rerum naturalium scriptores Gra-

RIC H. MartrTinc_y, E.A. SYDENHAM,

Im-

Richter, Furniture

G.M.A. RicHTEeR, The Furniture of the Greeks, Etruscans and Romans, 1969 Richter, Korai G.M.A. RicuTER, Korai, Archaic Greek Maidens, 1968

Richter, Kouroi G.M.A. Ricuter, Kouroi, Archaic Greek Youths, 31970

eci minores, 1877

Reynolds L.D. ReEyYNOLDs (ed.), Texts and Transmission: A Survey of the Latin Classics, 1983 Reynolds/Wilson L.D. REYNOLDs, N.G. WILSON, Scribes and Scholars. A Guide to the Transmission of Greek and Latin

Richter, Portraits

G.M.A. RIcHTER, The Portraits of the Greeks 3 vols. and suppl., 1965-72 RIDA

Revue internationale des droits de l’antiquité RIG

P-M. Duvat (ed.), Recueil des inscriptions gauloi-

Literature, 1991

RFIC Rivista di filologia e di istruzione classica RG W.H. WADDINGTON,

The Roman

perial Coinage ro vols., 1923-94 Richardson L. RICHARDSON (Jr.), A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome, 1992

E. BABELON, Recueil général

des monnaies grecques d’ Asie mineure (Subsidia epigraphica 5) 2 vols., 1908-1925, repr. 1976 RGA H. Beck et al. (ed.), Reallexikon der germanischen Altertumskunde, *1973 ff. (1st installment 1968);

Suppl: 1986 ff. RGG K. GaLuinG (ed.), Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart. Handworterbuch fiir Theologie und Religionswissenschaft 7 vols., 31957-65, repr. 1980 RGRW Religion in the Graeco-Roman World RGVV Religionsgeschichtliche Versuche und Vorarbeiten RH Revue historique RHA Revue hittite et asianique RhM Rheinisches Museum fiir Philologie

ses, 1985 ff. RIL Rendiconti dell’Istituto Lombardo, classe di lettere, scienze morali e storiche Rivet

A.L.F. River, Gallia Narbonensis with a Chapter on Alpes Maritimae. Southern France in Roman Times, 1988

Rivet/Smith A.L.F. Rivet, C. SmitrH, The Place-Names of Roman Britain, 1979

RLA E. EBELING et al. (ed.), Reallexikon der Assyriologie und vorderasiatischen Archaologie, 1928 ff. RLV

M. Eperr (ed.), Reallexikon der Vorgeschichte 15

vols., 1924-32 RMD M.M. Roxan, Roman military diplomas (Occasional Publications of the Institute of Archaeology of the University of London 2 and 9), Vol. 1, (1954-77),

1978; Vol. 2, (1978-84), 1985; Vol. 3, (1985-94),

1994

RN Revue numismatique

XXXV

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

ABBREVIATIONS

Robert, OMS L. ROBERT, Opera minora selecta 7 vols., 1969-90 Robert, Villes

Samuel A.E. SAMUEL, Greek and Roman Chronology. Ca-

L. Rosert, Villes d’Asie Mineure. Etudes de géographie ancienne, *1902 Robertson A.S. ROBERTSON, Roman Imperial Coins in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, University of Glasgow 5 vols.,

1972 Sandys J.E. Sanpys, A History of Classical Scholarship 3 vols., *1906—-21, repr. 1964 SAWW Sitzungsberichte der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien SB Sammelbuch griechischer Urkunden aus Agypten (Inschriften und Papyri), Vols. 1-2: F. PREISIGKE (ed.), 1913-22; Vols. 3-5: F. BILABEL (ed.), 1926-34 SBAW Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften SCCGF J. DEMIANCZUK (ed.), Supplementum comicum comoediae Graecae fragmenta, 1912 Schachter ; A. SCHACHTER, The Cults of Boiotia 4 vols., 1981-

1962-82

Rohde E. Roupg, Psyche. Seelenkult und Unsterblichkeitsglaube der Griechen, *1898, repr. 1991 Roscher W.H. RoscuHer, Ausfiihrliches Lexikon der griechischen und romischen Mythologie 6 vols., 31884-1937, repr. 1992 f.; 4 Suppl. Vols.: 18931921 Rostovtzeff, Hellenistic World M.I. RosrovrzerF, The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, *1953 Rostovtzeff, Roman Empire M.I. RostovrzeFF, The Social and Economic History of the Roman Empire, *1957 Rotondi G. Rotonpl, Leges publicae populi Romani. Elenco cronologico con una introduzione sull’ attivita legislativa dei comizi romani, 1912, repr. 1990 RPAA

Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia di Archeologia REC A. BuRNETT, M. AMANDRY, P.P. RIPOLLEs (ed.), Ro-

man Provincial Coinage, 1992 ff. RPh

Revue de philologie

RQ Renaissance Quarterly

RQA

R6mische Quartalsschrift fiir christliche Altertumskunde und fiir Kirchengeschichte RRC

M. CRAWFORD, Roman Republican Coinage, 1974,

repr. 1991 RSC Rivista di Studi Classici Rubin B. Rusin, Das Zeitalter Iustinians, 1960 Ruggiero

E. De RuGaiErRO, Dizionario epigrafico di antichita romana, 1895 ff., Vols. 1-3: repr. 1961 f. Saeculum Saeculum. Jahrbuch fiir Universalgeschichte Saller R. SALLER, Personal Patronage Under the Early Empire, 1982 Salomies O. SALomIES, Die romischen Vornamen. Studien zur romischen Namengebung (Commentationes humanarum litterarum 82), 1987

lendars and Years in Classical Antiquity (HdbA I 7),

94 Schafer A. SCHAFER, Demosthenes und seine Zeit 3 vols., *1 885-87, repr. 1967

Schanz/Hosius M. ScHANz, C. Hosius, G. KRUGER, Geschichte der romischen Literatur bis zum Gesetzgebungswerk des Kaisers Justinian (HdbA 8), Vol. 1, 41927, repr. 1979; Vol. 2, 41935, repr. 1980; Vol. 3, 31922, repr. 1969; Vol. 4,1, *1914, repr. 1970; Vol. 4,2, 1920, repr. 1971 Scheid, Collége J. ScueEmp, Le collége des fréres arvales. Etude prosopographique du recrutement (69 —304) (Saggi di storia antica 1), 1990 Scheid, Recrutement J. ScHEID, Les fréres arvales. Recrutement et origine sociale sous les empereurs julio-claudiens (Bibliothéque de l’Ecole des Hautes Etudes, Section des Sciences Religieuses 77), 1975 Schlesier R. SCHLESIER, Kulte, Mythen und Gelehrte — Anthropologie der Antike seit 1800, 1994 Schmid/Stahlin I W. Scumip, O. STAHLIN, Geschichte der griechischen Literatur. Erster Theil: Die klassische Periode der griechische Literatur VII 1) 5 vols., 1929-48, repr. 1961-80

Schmid/Stahlin II W. Curist, W. ScHmip, O. STAHLIN, Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur bis auf die Zeit Justinians. Zweiter Theil: Die nachklassische Periode der griechischen Litteratur (HdbA VII 2) 2 vols., 6t920-24, repr. 1961-81 Schmidt K.H. Scumipt, Die Komposition in gallischen Personennamen in: Zeitschrift fiir celtische Philologie

26, 1957, 33-301 = (Diss.), 1954

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXXVI

ABBREVIATIONS

Schonfeld M. SCHONFELD, W6rterbuch der altgermanischen Personen- und Vélkernamen (Germanische Bibliothek Abt. 1, Reihe 4, 2), r911, repr. *1965) Scholiall H. Ersse (ed.), Scholia Graeca in Homeri Iliadem

(Scholia vetera) 7 vols., 1969-88 SChr Sources Chrétiennes, 1942 ff. Schrotter F. v. SCHROTTER (ed.), W6rterbuch der Miinzkunde,

Sezgin F. Sezcin, Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, Vol.3: Medizin, Pharmazie, Zoologie, Tierheilkunde bis ca. 430 H., 1970 SGAW Sitzungsberichte der Géttinger Akademie der Wissenschaften SGDI H. Co itz et al. (ed.), Sammlung der griechischen Dialekt-Inschriften 4 vols., 1884-1915 SGLG K. Avpers, H. Erspse, A. KLEINLOGEL (ed.), Samm-

*1970

Schiirer E. SCHURER, G. VERMES, The history of the Jewish people in the age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C. — A.D.

135) 3 vols., 1973-87 Schulten, Landeskunde A. SCHULTEN, Iberische Landeskunde. Geographie

des antiken Spanien 2 vols., 195 5—57 (translation of the Spanish edition of 1952) Schulz F. ScHuLz, Geschichte der romischen Rechtswissenschaft, 1961, repr. 1975 Schulze W. ScHuize, Zur Geschichte lateinischer Eigennamen, 1904 Schwyzer, Dial.

lung griechischer und lateinischer Grammatiker 7 vols., 1974-88

SH H. LLtoyp-Jongs, P. Parsons (ed.), Supplementum Hellenisticum, 1983 SHAW Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften Sherk R.K. SHERK, Roman

gister, 1971

Scullard H. H. ScuLLarp, Festivals and Ceremonies of the

Roman Republic, 1981 SDAW Sitzungsberichte der Deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin SDHI Studia et documenta historiae et iuris SE Studi Etruschi Seeck O. SEECK, Regesten der Kaiser und Papste fir die Jahre 311 bis 470 n. Chr. Vorarbeiten zu einer Prosopographie der christlichen Kaiserzeit, 1919, repr. 1964

SEG Supplementum epigraphicum Graecum, 1923 ff. Seltman C. SELTMAN, Greek Coins. A History of Metallic Currency and Coinage down to the Fall of the Hellenistic Kingdoms, *1905

from the Greek

Augustus, 1969 SicA Sicilia archeologica SIFC

Studi italiani di filologia classica

E. ScHWyYZER (ed.), Dialectorum Graecarum exem-

pla epigraphica potiora, +1923 Schwyzer, Gramm. E. ScHwyZzeER, Griechische Grammatik, Vol. 1: Allgemeiner Teil. Lautlehre Wortbildung, Flexion (HdbA II 1, 1), 1939 Schwyzer/Debrunner E. ScHwyzeErR, A. DEBRUNNER, Griechische Grammatik, Vol. 2: Syntax und syntaktische Stilistik (HdbA II 1,2), 1950; D. J. GEorGacas, Register zu beiden Banden, 1953; F. Rapt, S. Rant, Stellenre-

Documents

East: Senatus Consulta and Epistulae to the Age of

SiH

Studies in the Humanities Simon, GG

E. Simon, Die Gotter der Griechen, +1992 Simon, GR

E. SIMON, 1 Die Gétter der R6mer, 1990 SLG D. Pace (ed.), Supplementum lyricis graecis, 1974 SM Schweizer Minzblatter SMEA

Studi Micenei ed Egeo-Anatolici Smith W.D. Smitu, The Hippocratic tradition (Cornell publications in the history of science), 1979 SMSR Studi e materiali di storia delle religioni SMV Studi mediolatini e volgari SNG Sylloge Nummorum Graecorum SNR

Schweizerische Numismatische Rundschau Solin/Salomies H. Sorin, O. SALomies, Repertorium nominum gentilium et cognominum Latinorum (Alpha Omega: Reihe A 80), *1994 Sommer

F. SOMMER, Handbuch der lateinischen Laut- und Formenlehre. Eine Einfithrung in das sprachwissenschaftliche Studium des Latein (Indogermanische Bibliothek 1, 1, 3, 1), 31914

XXXVII

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

Soustal, Nikopolis P. Soustrat, Nikopolis und Kephallenia (Denkschriften der Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse I 50; TIB 3), 1981 Soustal, Thrakien P. SoustaL, Thrakien. Thrake, Rodope und Haimimontos (Denkschriften der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 221; TIB 6), r991 Sovoronos J.N. Sovoronos, Das Athener Nationalmuseum 3 vols., 1908-37 Spec. Speculum Spengel L. SPENGEL, (ed.), Rhetores Graeci 3 vols., 1853-56, repr.

1966

SPrAW

Sitzungsberichte

der PreufSischen

Akademie

der

Wissenschaften

SSAC Studi storici per l’antichita classica SSR G. GIANNANTONI (ed.), Socratis et Socraticorum Reliquiae 4 vols., 1990 Staden

H. v. StapDEN, Herophilus, The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria, 1989 Stein, Prafekten A. STEIN, Die Prafekten von Agypten in der rémischen Kaiserzeit (Dissertationes Bernenses Series 1, I), 1950

Stein, Spatrom.R. E. Stein, Geschichte des spatr6mischen Reiches, Vol. 1, 1928; French version, 1959; Vol. 2, French

only, 1949 Stewart

A. STEWART, Greek sculpture. An exploration 2 vols., 1990 StM Studi Medievali Strong/Brown D. StroNG, D. BROWN (ed.), Roman Crafts, 1976 Stv Die Staatsvertrage des Altertums, Vol. 2: H. BENcTSON, R. WERNER (ed.), Die Vertrage der griechischromischen Welt von 700 bis 338, *1975; Vol. 3: H.H. ScHmittT (ed.), Die Vertrage der griechisch-rémischen Welt 338 bis 200 v. Chr., 1969 SVF J. v. ARNIM (ed.), Stoicorum veterum fragmenta 3 vols., 1903-05; Index: 1924, repr. 1964 Syll.* W. DITTENBERGER, Sylloge inscriptionum Graecarum 3 vols., *1898-1909 Syll.3 F. HILLER VON GAERTRINGEN et al. (ed.), Sylloge inscriptionum Graecarum 4 vols., +1915-24, repr. 1960

ABBREVIATIONS

Syme, AA R. Syme, The Augustan Aristocracy, 1986 Syme, RP E. BapIAN (Vols. 1,2), A.R. BIRLEY (Vols. 3-7) (ed.) R. Syme, Roman Papers 7 vols., 1979-91 Syme, RR K. SyME, The Roman Revolution, 1939 Syme, Tacitus R. SyME, Tacitus 2 vols., 1958 Symposion Symposion, Akten der Gesellschaft fiir Griechische und Hellenistische Rechtsgeschichte Syria Syria. Revue d’art oriental et d’archéologie TAM Tituli Asiae minoris, 1901 ff. TAPhA Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association Taubenschlag R. TAUBENSCHLAG, The law of Greco-Roman Egypt in the light of the Papyri: 332 B. C. - 640 A. D.,

“L955 TAVO H. BruNNER, W. ROLLIG (ed.), Tiibinger Atlas des Vorderen Orients, Beihefte, Teil B: Geschichte, 1969 ff. TeherF Teheraner Forschungen IGE

A. Naucx (ed.), Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta,

*1889, 2nd repr. 1983 ThGL H. STEPHANUS, C. B. Hasge, W. UND L. DINDORE et

al. (ed.), Thesaurus graecae linguae, 1831 ff., repr.

1954 ThIL Thesaurus linguae Latinae, 1900 ff. ThIL, Onom.

Thesaurus linguae Latinae, Supplementum onomasticon. Nomina propria Latina, Vol. 2 (C—Cyzistra), 1907-1913; Vol. 3 (D - Donusa), 1918-1923 ThLZ

Theologische Literaturzeitung Monatsschrift fiir das gesamte Gebiet der Theologie und Religionswissenschaft Thomasson B.E. THomasson, Laterculi Praesidum 3 vols. in 5 parts, 1972-1990 Thumb/Kieckers A. THums, E. Krecxers, Handbuch der griechischen Dialekte (Indogermanische Bibliothek 1, 1, 1)

>

SEQ 32

Thumb/Scherer A. THumB, A. SCHERER, Handbuch der griechischen Dialekte (Indogermanische Bibliothek, 1, 1, 2) >

*1959 ThWAT G.J. BoOTTERWECK, H.-J. Fasry (ed.), Theologisches Worterbuch zum Alten Testament, 1973 ff.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XXX VIII

ABBREVIATIONS

ThWB G. KitreL, G. FRIEDRICH (ed.), Theologisches Wor-

terbuch zum Neuen Testament 11 vols., 1933-79, repr. 1990 TIB

H. Huncer (ed.). Tabula Imperii Byzantini 7 vols.,

1976-1990 Timm

S. Timm, Das christlich-koptische Agypten in ara-

Trendall, Paestum A.D. TRENDALL, The Red-figured Vases of Paestum, 1987

Trendall/Cambitoglou A.D. TRENDALL, The Red-figured Vases of Apulia 2 vols., 1978-82 TRE O. Rippeck (ed.), Tragicorum Romanorum Fragmenta, *1871, repr. 1962

bischer Zeit. Eine Sammlung christlicher Statten in Agypten in arabischer Zeit, unter Ausschluf von

TRG Tijdschrift voor rechtsgeschiedenis

Alexandria, Kairo, des Apa-Mena-Klosters (Der Abu Mina), des Sketis (Wadi n-Natrun) und der Sinai-Region (TAVO 41) 6 parts, 1984-92

TrGF B. SNELL, R. KANNICHT, S. RapT (ed.), Tragicorum

TIR Tabula Imperii Romani, 1934 ff. TIR/IP

Y. TsarFRirR, L. D1 SEGNI, J. GREEN, Tabula Imperii Romani. Iudaea — Palaestina. Eretz Israel in the Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Periods, 1994 Tod M.N. Top (ed.), A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions to the End of the Fifth Century BC, Vol. 1: *T951, repr. 1985; Vol. 2: *1950

Tovar A. Tovar, Iberische Landeskunde 2: Die Volker und Stadte des antiken Hispanien, Vol. 1 Baetica, 1974; Vol. 2: Lusitanien, 1976; Vol. 3: Tarraconensis, 1989 Toynbee, Hannibal A.J. ToyNBEE, Hannibal’s legacy. The Hannibalic

war’s effects on Roman life 2 vols., 1965 Toynbee, Tierwelt J.M.C. ToynBEE, Tierwelt der Antike, 1983 TPhS Transactions of the Philological Society Oxford Traill, Attica

J. S. TratLi, The Political Organization of Attica,

1975

graecorum

fragmenta,

Vol.

1, *1986; Vols. 2-4,

1977-85 Trombley F.R. TROMBLEY, Hellenic Religion and Christianization c. 370-529 (Religions in the Graeco-Roman World 115) 2 vols., 1993 f. TU Texte und Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur TUAT O. Kalser (ed.), Texte aus der Umwelt des Alten Testaments, 1985 ff. (rst installment 1982) TurkAD

Tirk arkeoloji dergisi Ullmann M. ULLMANN, Die Medizin im Islam, 1970

UPZ U. Witcken (ed.), Urkunden der Ptolemaerzeit (Altere Funde) 2 vols., 1927-57 v. Haehling R. v. HAEHLING, Die Religionszugehorigkeit der hohen Amtstrager des R6mischen Reiches seit Constantins I. Alleinherrschaft bis zum Ende der Theodosianischen Dynastie (324-450 bzw. 455 n. Chr.) (Antiquitas 3, 23), 1978

Traill, PAA

VDI

J. S. TRAILL, Persons of Ancient Athens, 1994 ff. Travlos, Athen J. Travios, Bildlexikon zur Topographie des antiken Athen, 1971 Travlos, Attika J. Travios, Bildlexikon zur Topographie des antiken Attika, 1988

Vestnik Drevnej Istorii Ventris/Chadwick M. VENTRIS, J. CHADWICK, Documents in Mycene-

an Greek, *1973 Vetter

TRE

E. VeTTER, Handbuch der italischen Dialekte, 1953 VIR Vocabularium iurisprudentiae Romanae 5 vols.,

G. Krause, G. MULLER (ed.), Theologische Realenzyklopadie, 1977 ff. (1st installment 1976) Treggiari S. TREGGIARI, Roman Marriage. Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian, 1991 Treitinger O. TREITINGER, Die Ostr6mische Kaiser- und Reichsidee nach ihrer Gestaltung im héfischen Zeremoniell, 1938, repr. 1969 Trendall, Lucania A.D. TRENDALL, The Red-figured Vases of Lucania, Campania and Sicily, 1967

VisRel Visible Religion Vittinghoff F. ViTTINGHOFF (ed.), Europdische Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeschichte in der r6mischen Kaiserzeit, 1990 VL W. STAMMLER, K. LANGoscH, K. RuUH et al. (ed.), Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters. Verfasserslexikon, *1978 ff. Vogel-Weidemann U. VoGEL-WEIDEMANN, Die Statthalter von Africa

1903-39

XXXIX

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

und Asia in den Jahren 14-68 n.Chr. Eine Untersuchung zum Verhaltnis von Princeps und Senat (Anti-

Wieacker, PGN F. WigACKER,

quitas 1, 31), 1982

*1967 Wieacker, RRG

VT Vetus Testamentum. Quarterly Published by the International Organization of Old Testament Scholars Wacher R. WACHER (ed.), The Roman World 2 vols., 1987 Walde/Hofmann A. WALDE, J.B. HOFMANN, Lateinisches etymologisches Worterbuch 3 vols., 3193 8-56 Walde/Pokorny A. WALDE, J. Pokorny (ed.), Vergleichendes W6rterbuch der indogermanischen Sprachen 3 vols., 1927-32, repr. 1973 Walz C. Wauz (ed.), Rhetores Graeci 9 vols., 1832-36,

F. WIEACKER,

2), 1953 Wernicke I. WeRNICKE, Die Kelten in Italien. Die Einwanderung und die friihen Handelsbeziehungen zu den Etruskern (Diss.), 1989 = (Palingenesia), 1991 Whatmough J. WHaTMouGH, The dialects of Ancient Gaul. Prolegomena and records of the dialects 5 vols., 194951, repr. in 1 vol., 1970 White, Farming K.D. WuiTe, Roman Farming, 1970 White, Technology K.D. Wuire, Greek and Roman Technology, 1983, repr. 1986

Whitehead D. WHITEHEAD, The demes of Attica, 1986 Whittaker C.R. WHITTAKER (ed.), Pastoral Economies in Classical Antiquity, 1988 Wide S. Wipe, Lakonische Kulte, 1893

Privatrechtsgeschichte der Neuzeit,

Romische Rechtsgeschichte, Vol. 1,

1988

Wilamowitz U. v. WILAMOWITZ-MOELLENDORFF, Der Glaube der Hellenen 2 vols., *1955, repr. 1994 Will E. WILL, Histoire politique du monde hellénistique (323-30 av. J. C.) 2 vols., *1979-82 Winter R. KEKULE (ed.), Die antiken Terrakotten, III 1, 2: F. WINTER, Die Typen der figirlichen Terrakotten, 1903

WIA

Wurzburger Jahrbiicher fiir die Altertumswissenschaft

repr. 1968

WbMyth H.W. Haussic (ed.), Worterbuch der Mythologie, Teil 1: Die alten Kulturvolker, 1965 ff. Weber W. WeBER, Biographisches Lexikon zur Geschichtswissenschaft in Deutschland, Osterreich und der Schweiz, *1987 Wehrli, Erbe F. WEHRLI (ed.), Das Erbe der Antike, 1963 Wehrli, Schule F. WEHRLI (ed.), Die Schule des Aristoteles ro vols., 1967-69; 2 Suppl. Vols.: 1974-78 Welles C.B. WeLLEs, Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period: A Study in Greek Epigraphy, 1934 Wenger L. WENGER, Die Quellen des romischen Rechts (Denkschriften der Osterreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Philosophisch-Historische Klasse

ABBREVIATIONS

WMT

L.I. ConraD et al., The Western medical tradition. 800 BC to A.D. 1800, 1995

WO Die Welt des Orients. Wissenschaftliche Beitrage zur Kunde des Morgenlandes Wolff H.J. Woirr, Das Recht der griechischen Papyri Agyptens in der Zeit der Ptolemaeer und des Prinzipats (Rechtsgeschichte des Altertums Part 5; HbdA

10, 5), 1978 WS Wiener Studien, Zeitschrift fiir klassische Philologie und Patristik WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament WVDOG Wissenschaftliche Ver6ffentlichungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft WZKM

Wiener Zeitschrift fiir die Kunde des Morgenlandes GIS Yale Classical Studies ZA Zeitschrift fiir Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archdaologie

ZAS Zeitschrift fiir agyptische Sprache und Altertumskunde ZATW Zeitschrift fiir die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft Zazoff, AG P. ZazorF, Die antiken Gemmen, 1983 Zazoff, GuG P. Zazorr, H. ZazorF, Gemmensammler

und Gemmenforscher. Von einer noblen Passion zur Wissenschaft, 1983 ZDMG Zeitschrift der Deutschen Morgenlandischen Gesellschaft

BIBLIOGRAPHIC

XL

ABBREVIATIONS

ZDP Zeitschrift fiir deutsche Philologie Zeller E, ZELLER, Die Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung 4 vols., 1844-52, repr. 1963

Zeller/Mondolfo E. ZELLER, R. MONDOLFO, La filosofia dei Greci nel suo sviluppo storico, Vol. 3, 1961 ZEN Zeitschrift fiir Numismatik Zgusta L. Zcusta, Kleinasiatische Ortsnamen, 1984 Zimmer G. ZIMMER, Romische Berufsdarstellungen, 1982

Aesop. Aet.

Aeth. Alc. Alc. Avit.

Alex. Aphr. Alci. Alcm. Alex. Polyh.

Ambr. Epist. EXC, oat.

Obit. Theod. Obit. Valent. Off. Paenit. Amm. Marc.

ZNTW

Anac. Anaxag. Anaximand. Anaximen. And. Anecd. Bekk. Anecd. Par. Anon. De rebus bell. Anth. Gr. Anth. Lat.

ZPE

Zeitschrift fir Papyrologie und Epigraphik ZKG

Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung fiir Rechtsgeschichte. Romanistische Abteilung ZRGG Zeitschrift fiir Religions- und Geistesgeschichte ZVRW Zeitschrift fiir vergleichende Rechtswissenschaft ZVS

Zeitschrift fiir Vergleichende Sprachforschung

4. Ancient Authors and Titles of Works

Anth. Pal. Anth. Plan. Antiph. Antisth. Apc Apoll. Rhod. Apollod. App. B Civ. Celt.

Abd

Abdias

Hann. Hisp.

Acc.

Accius

Ill.

Ach. Tat. Act. Arv. Act. lud. saec.

Achilles Tatius Acta fratrum Arvalium Acta ludorum saecularium

Acts Ael. Ep. NA VH

Acts of the Apostles Aelianus, Epistulae De natura animalium Varia historia

Aen. Tact.

Aeneas Tacticus

Aesch. Ag. Cho. Eum.

Aeschylus, Agamemnon Choephori Eumenides

Pers.

Persae

PV

Prometheus

Sept. Supp. Aeschin. In Ctes. Leg. In Tim.

Septem adversus Thebas Supplices Aeschines, In Ctesiphontem De falsa legatione In Timarchum

Alexander of Aphrodisias Alciphron Alcman

Alexander Polyhistor Amos

Am

ZKG, Zeitschrift fiir Kirchengeschichte Zeitschrift fiir die Neutestamentfiche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der alteren Kirche ZpalV Zeitschrift des Deutschen Palastina-Vereins

Aesopus Aetius Aetheriae peregrinatio Alcaeus Alcimus Ecdicius Avitus

Syr. App. Verg.

Apul. Apol. Flor. Met. Arat. Archil. Archim. Archyt.

Ambrosius, Epistulae De excessu Fratris (Satyri)

De obitu Theodosii De obitu Valentiniani (iunioris) De officiis ministrorum De paenitentia Ammianus Marcellinus Anacreon Anaxagoras Anaximander Anaximenes Andocides Anecdota Graeca ed. I. Bekker Anecdota Graeca ed. J.A. Cramer Anonymus de rebus bellicis (Ireland

1984) Anthologia Graeca Anthologia Latina (Riese *1894/1906) Anthologia Palatina Anthologia Planudea Antiphon Antisthenes Apocalypse Apollonius Rhodius Apollodorus, Library Appianus, Bella civilia Celtica Hannibalica Iberica Illyrica Italica Libyca Macedonica Mithridatius Numidica Regia Samnitica Sicula Syriaca Appendix Vergiliana Apuleius, Apologia Florida Metamorphoses Aratus Archilochus Archimedes Archytas

XLI

ANCIENT

Arist. Quint. Aristaen. Aristid. Aristob. Aristoph. Ach.

Aristides Quintilianus Aristaenetus Aelius Aristides Aristoboulus Aristophanes, Acharnenses

Artem. Ascon.

Athan. ad Const.

Aves

Fuga

Eccl. Equ. Lys.

Ecclesiazusae Equites Lysistrata Nubes

Hist. Ar.

Vesp. Aristot. An.

An. post. An. pr.

Ath. pol. Aud.

Cael. Cat:

Col. Div. Eth. Eud.

Eth. Nic. Gen. an. Gen. corr. Hist. an.

Mag. mor.

Metaph. Mete.

Mir. Mot. an. Mund.

Oec. Part. an.

Phgn. Ph. Poet. Pol. Pr.

Rh. Rh. Al. Sens. Somn.

Soph. el. Spir. Top. Aristox. Harm.

Arnob. Arr. Anab. Cyn. Ind.

Peripl. p. eux. Succ. Tact.

Pax

Plutus Ranae

Thesmophoriazusae Vespae Aristotle, De anima (Bekker 183 1-

70) Analytica posteriora Analytica priora Athenaion Politeia De audibilibus De caelo Categoriae

De coloribus De divinatione Ethica Eudemia Ethica Nicomachea De generatione animalium De generatione et corruptione Historia animalium Magna moralia Metaphysica Meteorologica Mirabilia De motu animalium De mundo Oeconomica De partibus animalium Physiognomica Physica Poetica Politica Problemata Rhetorica Rhetorica ad Alexandrum De sensu

De somno et vigilia Sophistici elenchi De spiritu Topica Aristoxenus, Harmonica Arnobius, Adversus nationes Arrianus, Anabasis Cynegeticus Indica

Periplus ponti Euxini Historia successorum Alexandri Tactica

AND

TITLES

OF WORKS

Artemidorus Asconius (Stang] Vol. 2, 1912) Athanasius, Apologia ad Constantium

c. Ar.

Av.

Nub. Pax Plut. Ran. Thesm.

AUTHORS

Ath.

Aug. Civ. Conf. Doctr. christ. Epist.

Apologia contra Arianos Apologia de fuga sua Historia Arianorum ad monachos Athenaeus (Casaubon 1597) (List of books, pages, letters) Augustinus, De civitate dei Confessiones De doctrina christiana Epistulae

Retract. Serm.

Retractationes Sermones

Solilog.

Soliloquia

Trin. Aur. Vict. Auson. Mos.

Urb. Avell. Avien. Babr.

Bacchyl. Bar Bas. Basil. Batr. Bell. Afr.

Bell. Alex.

Bell. Hisp. Boeth. Caes. B Civ. B Gall.

Callim. Epigr. fr. H. Calp. Ecl. Cass. Dio Cassian.

Cassiod. Inst. Var.

Cato Agr. Orig. Catull. Celsus, Med. Celsus, Dig. Censorinus, DN

Chalcid. Charisius, Gramm.

m Chr, 2 Chr

Chron. pasch. Chron. min. Cic. Acad. 1 Acad. 2

De trinitate Aurelius Victor Ausonius, Mosella (Peiper 1976) Ordo nobilium urbium

Collectio Avellana Avienus

Babrius Bacchylides Baruch Basilicorum libri LX (Heimbach) Basilius Batrachomyomachia Bellum Africum Bellum Alexandrinum Bellum Hispaniense Boethius Caesar, De bello civili De bello Gallico Callimachus, Epigrammata Fragmentum (Pfeiffer) Hymni Calpurnius Siculus, Eclogae Cassius Dio

Iohannes Cassianus Cassiodorus, Institutiones Variae

Cato, De agri cultura Origines (HRR) Catullus, Carmina Cornelius Celsus, De medicina Iuventius Celsus, Digesta Censorinus, De die natali

Chalcidius Charisius, Ars grammatica (Barwick 1964) Chronicle Chronicon paschale Chronica minora Cicero, Academicorum posteriorum liber 1 Lucullus sive Academicorum priorum liber 2

ANCIENT

AUTHORS

AND

TITLES

OF

XLII

WORKS

Ad Q. Fr.

Epistulae ad Quintum fratrem

Tusc.

Arat.

Aratea (Soubiran 1972)

Vatin.

Arch. Att. Balb.

Pro Archia poeta Epistulae ad Atticum Pro L. Balbo

Brut.

Brutus Pro A. Caecina

Wert tee Claud. Carm.

Rapt. Pros. Clem. Al.

Tusculanae disputationes In P. Vatinium testem interrogatio In Verrem actio prima, secunda Claudius Claudianus, Carmina

(Hall 1985) De raptu Proserpinae Clemens Alexandrinus Codex Gregorianus Codex Hermogenianus Corpus Turis Civilis, Codex Iustini-

Caecin. Cael. Gar Cato Clu.

Pro M. Caelio In Catilinam Cato maior de senectute Pro A. Cluentio

De or.

De oratore

Deiot.

Cod. Theod. Col Coll.

Flac.

Pro rege Deiotaro De divinatione Divinatio in Q. Caecilium De domo sua Epistulae ad familiares De fato De finibus bonorum et malorum Pro L. Valerio Flacco

Font.

Pro M. Fonteio

Har. resp.

De haruspicum responso

Const. Tm Cory2) Cor

Inv.

De inventione

Coripp.

Lael. Leg. Leg. agr. Lig. Leg. Man.

Laelius de amicitia De legibus De lege agraria Pro Q. Ligario

Curt:

Curtius Rufus, Historiae Alexandri Magni

Cypr. Dan

Pro lege Manilia (de imperio Cn.

Demad. Democr.

Orat.

Pompei) Pro M. Marcello Pro T. Annio Milone Pro L. Murena De natura deorum De officiis De optimo genere oratorum Orator

P. Red. Quir. P. Red. Sen. Parad.

Oratio post reditum ad Quirites Oratio post reditum in senatu Paradoxa

Diom.

Part. or.

Phil.

Partitiones oratoriae In M. Antonium orationes Phi-

Philo.

lippicae Libri philosophici

Pis.

In L. Pisonem

Planc.

Pro Cn. Plancio

Prov. cons.

De provinciis consularibus Pro Q. Roscio comoedo Pro P. Quinctio Pro C. Rabirio perduellionis reo Pro C. Rabirio Postumo De re publica

Cyprianus Daniel Demades Democritus Demosthenes, Orationes Corpus luris Civilis, Digesta (Mommsen 1905, author presented where applicable) Dinarchus Diodorus Siculus Diogenes Laertius Diomedes, Ars grammatica Dion Chrysostomus Dionysius Halicarnasseus, Antiquitates Romanae De compositione verborum Ars rhetorica Dionysius Periegeta Dionysius Thrax Diels /Kranz (preceded by fragment number) Donatus grammaticus Dracontius Deuteronomy = 5. Moses Edictum perpetuum in Dig. Etymologicum magnum Empedocles Ennius, Annales (Skutsch 1985) Saturae (Vahlen *1928) Fragmenta scaenica (Vahlen *1928) Ennodius Letter to the Ephesians

Div.

Div. Caec. Dom. Fam. Fat. Fin.

Marcell. Mil. Mur. Nate:

Off. Opt. gen.

Q. Rose. Quinct.

Rab. perd. Rab. Post. Rep. Rosc. Am. Scaur. Sest. Sull. Tim. Top. Tull.

Pro Sex. Roscio Amerino Pro M. Aemilio Scauro Pro P. Sestio Pro P. Sulla Timaeus Topica Pro M. Tullio

Cod. Greg. Cod. Herm. Cod. lust.

anus (Krueger 1900)

Colum. Comm. Cons.

Dem. Or. Dig.

Din.

Diod. Sic. Diog. Laert. Dion. Chrys. Dion. Hal. Ant.

Comp.

Rhet. Dionys. Per.

Dion. Thrax DK Donat. Drac.

Dt

Edict. praet. dig. EM Emp. Enn. Ann.

Sat. Scaen.

Ennod.

Eph

Codex Theodosianus Letter to the Colossians Mosaicarum et Romanarum legum collatio Columella Commodianus Consultatio veteris cuiusdam iurisconsulti Constitutio Sirmondiana Letters to the Corinthians Corippus

XLII

Ephor. Epict. Eratosth. Esr Est Et. Gen.

Et. Gud. Euc.

Eunap. VS Eur. Alc. Andr. Bacch. Beller. Cyc. EI. Hec.

Hel. Heracl. HF Hipp. Hyps. Ion

IA i Med. Oz

Phoen. Rhes. Supp. Tro.

Euseb. Chron. Dem. evang. Hist. eccl. On.

ANCIENT

Ephorus of Cyme

(FGrH

70)

Epictetus

Eratosthenes Esra Esther Etymologicum genuinum Etymologicum Gudianum Euclides, Elementa Eunapius, Vitae sophistarum Euripides, Alcestis Andromache Bacchae Bellerophon Cyclops Electra Hecuba Helena Heraclidae Hercules Furens Hippolytus Hypsipyle Ion Iphigenia Aulidensis Iphigenia Taurica Medea Orestes Phoenissae Rhesus Supplices Troades Eusebius Chronicon Demonstratio Evangelica Historia Ecclesiastica Onomasticon (Klostermann

1904) Praep. evang. Eust. Eutr. Ev. Ver. Ex Ez

Praeparatio Evangelica Eustathius Eutropius Evangelium Veritatis Exodus = 2. Moses Ezechiel

Fast. Fest.

Fasti

Firm. Mat.

Firmicus Maternus

Flor. Epit.

Florus, Epitoma de Tito Livio Florentinus Frontinus, De aquae ductu urbis Romae Strategemata Fulgentius Afer Fulgentius Ruspensis

Florent.

Frontin. Aq. Str. Fulg. Fulg. Rusp. Gai. Inst. Gal Gal. Gell. NA Geogr. Rav

Festus (Lindsay 1913)

TITLES

OF WORKS

Geoponica

Greg. M. Dial.

Gregorius Magnus, Dialogi (de miraculis patrum Italicorum) Epistulae Regula pastoralis Gregorius Nazianzenus, Epistulae Orationes Gregorius Nyssenus Gregorius of Tours, Historia Francorum De virtutibus Martini

Epist. Past.

Greg. Naz. Epist. Or. Greg. Nyss. Greg. Tur. Franc. Mart. Vit. patr.

Genesis = 1. Moses

Gorgias

De vita patrum

Hab

Habakkuk

Hagg

Haggai Harpocration

Harpocr.

Hdt. Hebr Hegesipp. Hecat. Hell. Oxy. Hen Heph.

Herodotus Letter to the Hebrews Hegesippus (= Flavius Josephus) Hecataeus ~ Hellennica Oxyrhynchia Henoch Hephaestio grammaticus (Alexandrinus)

Heracl. Heraclid. Pont. Here..O: Herm.

Herm. Mand. Sim. Vis.

Hermog. Hdn. Hes: Cat:

Op. Se

Heraclitus Heraclides Ponticus Hercules Oetaeus Hermes Trismegistus Hermas, Mandata Similitudines Visiones Hermogenes

Herodianus Hesiodus, Catalogus feminarum (Merkelbach /West 1967) Opera et dies Scutum (Merkelbach /West1967)

Theog. Hil. Hippoc. H. Hom. Hom. Il.

Od. Hor. Ars P. Carm. Carm. saec.

Epist.

Epod. Sat. Hos

Letter to the Galatians Galenus

Hsch. Hyg. Astr.

Gellius, Noctes Atticae

1940)

AND

Gp. Gn Gorg.

Gaius, Institutiones

Geographus Ravennas (Schnetz

AUTHORS

Theogonia Hilarius Hippocrates Hymni Homerici Homerus, Ilias Odyssea Horatius, Ars poetica Carmina Carmen saeculare Epistulae Epodi Satirae (sermones) Hosea Hesychius Hyginus, Astronomica (Le Beeuffle

1983) Fab. Hyp.

Iambl. Myst.

Fabulae Hypereides Iamblichus, De mysteriis

ANCIENT

AUTHORS

AND

TITLES

XLIV

OF WORKS

Lactantius, Divinae institutiones

Protrepticus in philosophiam De vita Pythagorica lavolenus Priscus Corpus Juris Civilis, Institutiones (Krueger 1905) Iohannes Chrysostomus, Epistulae Homiliae in ... Johannes Malalas, Chronographia Iordanes, De origine actibusque Getarum

Lactant. Div. inst. Ira De mort. pers.

Iren.

Irenaeus (Rousseau/Doutreleau

Lex Urson.

De ira dei De mortibus persecutorum De opificio dei Lamentations Lex Irnitana Lex municipii Malacitani Lex Rubria de Gallia cisalpina Lex municipii Salpensani Lex coloniae Iuliae Genetivae Ur-

Is Isid. Nat.

Isaiah

Lex Visig. Lex XII tab. Lib. Ep.

Leges Visigothorum Lex duodecim tabularum Libanius, Epistulae

Or. Liv. Per.

Orationes Livius, Ab urbe condita Periochae Luke Lucanus, Bellum civile Lucianus, Alexander Anacharsis Calumniae non temere credendum

Protr.

VP lav.

Inst. Iust.

Toh. Chrys. Epist. Hom. ... Toh. Mal.

lord. Get.

Opif. Lam Lex Irnit. Lex Malac.

Lex Rubr.

Lex Salpens.

sonensis

1965-82)

Orig. Isoc. Or.

It. Ant.

Aug. Burd. Plac. Tul. Vict. Rhet. luvenc.

Jac

Jdg Jdt len

Jer. Chron. Comm. in Ez. Ep: On.

Isidorus, De natura rerum Origines Isocrates, Orationes Itinerarium, Antonini Augusti

Burdigalense vel Hierosolymitanum Placentini C. Iulius Victor, Ars rhetorica Iuvencus, Evangelia (Huemer 1891)

Letter of James Judges Judith Jeremiah Jerome, Chronicon Commentaria in Ezechielem (PL

25) Epistulae

Mis.

Or. Symp. Just. Epit.

Justin. Apol. Dial. Juv. 1 Kg, 2 Kg

KH KN

Luc.

Lucian. Alex. Anach.

Gal:

Catapl.

Cataplus

Demon. Dial. D. Dial. meret. Dial. mort. Her. Hermot. Hist. conscr.

Demonax

De viris illustribus rst — 3rd letters of John John Jona

Josephus, Antiquitates Iudaicae Bellum Iudaicum Contra Apionem De sua vita Joshua Letter of Judas Julianus, Epistulae In Galilaeos Misopogon Orationes Symposium Justinus, Epitoma historiarum Philippicarum Justinus Martyr, Apologia Dialogus cum Tryphone Juvenalis, Saturae 1, 2 Kings Khania (place where Linear B tables were discovered) Knossos (place where Linear B tables were discovered)

Dialogi deorum Dialogi meretricium Dialogi mortuorum Herodotus Hermotimus

Quomodo historia conscribenda sit

Onomasticon (Klostermann

1904) Vir. ill. 1-3 Jo Jo Jon Jos. Ant. Iud. BI Ap. Vit. Jos Jud Julian. Ep. In Gal.

Lk

Ind. Iupp. trag. Luct.

Lv LXX Lycoph. Lycurg. Lydus, Mag. Mens. Lys. M. Aur.

Adversus indoctum Iuppiter tragoedus De luctu Macrobii Nigrinus Philopseudes Pseudologista De saltatione Somnium Symposium De Syria dea Tragodopodagra Verae historiae, 1, 2 Vitarum auctio Lucilius, Saturae (Marx 1904) Lucretius, De rerum natura Leviticus = 3. Moses Septuaginta Lycophron Lycurgus Lydus, De magistratibus De mensibus Lysias Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augus-

Macrob. Sat.

Macrobius, Saturnalia

Macr. Nigr.

Philops. Pseudol. Salt. Somn. Symp. Syr. D. Trag. Ver. hist. Vit. auct.

Lucil. Lucr.

tus

XLV In Somn.

ANCIENT

Commentarii in Ciceronis somnium Scipionis

t Macc, 2 Macc Mal Manil.

Maccabees Malachi Manilius, Astronomica (Goold

Mar. Vict. Mart. Mart. Cap. Max. Tyr. Mela Melanipp. Men. Dys. Epit. fr.

Marius Victorinus

Ov. Am. Ars am.

1985) Martialis Martianus Capella Maximus Tyrius (Trapp 1994) Pomponius Mela Melanippides Menander, Dyskolos Epitrepontes

P Abinn.

Fragmentum (Korte)

Perikeiromene Samia Micha Mimnermus Minucius Felix, Octavius (Kytzler

Naev.

Nah Neh

Nahum Nehemia

Nemes.

Nemesianus

Nep. Att.

Cornelius Nepos, Atticus Hannibal Nicander, Alexipharmaca Theriaca Nicomachus Numbers = 4. Moses Nonius Marcellus (L. Mueller

Hann. Nic. Alex. Ther. Nicom. Nm Non.

FPL)

PGZ

P Hercul. P Lond.

P Mich

Obseq. Opp. Hal. Cyn. Or. Sib. Orib. Orig. OrMan Oros.

Orph. A. fr. H.

Fragmentum (Kern)

Hymni

OF

WORKS

Ovidius, Amores Ars amatoria

Epistulae (Heroides) Fasti Ibis Medicamina faciei femineae Metamorphoses Epistulae ex Ponto Remedia amoris Tristia Papyrus editions according to E.G. TuRNER, Greek Papyri. An Introduction, 159-178 Papyrus editions according to H.I. BELL et al. (ed.), The Abinnaeus Archive papers of a Roman officer in the reign of Constantius II, Papyrus editions according to V. Papyrus Bodmer 19 5 4ff. Papyrus editions according to C.C. EpGar (ed.), Zenon Papyri (Catalogue général des Antiquités €gyptiennes du Musée du Caire) 4 vols., 192 5ff. Papyrus editions according to Papyri aus Herculaneum Papyrus editions according to F.G. KENYON et al. (ed.), Greek Papyri in the British Museum 7 vols., 1893-1974 Papyrus editions according to C.C. Epear, A.E.R. BoaK, J.G. WIN-

TER et al. (ed.), Papyri in the

P Oxy.

University of Michigan Collection 13 vols., 1931-1977 Papyrus editions according to B.P. GRENFELL, A.S. Hunr et al.

Pelag. Peripl. m. eux. Peripl. m.m. Peripl. m.r.

(ed.), The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, 1898 ff. Palladius, Opus agriculturae Historia Lausiaca Panegyrici Latini Aemilius Papinianus Paroemiographi Graeci Passiones martyrum Paulus Diaconus, Epitoma Festi Paulinus Nolanus Julius Paulus, Sententiae Pausanias Pelagius Periplus maris Euxini Periplus maris magni Periplus maris rubri

Perst

Persius, Saturae

1 Petr, 2 Petr Petron. Sat.

Letters of Peter

Nonnus, Dionysiaca

Notitia dignitatum occidentis Notitia dignitatum orientis Notitia dignitatum et episcoporum Corpus luris Civilis, Leges Novellae (Schoell/Kroll 1904) Julius Obsequens, Prodigia (Rossbach 1910) Oppianus, Halieutica Cynegetica Oracula Sibyllina Oribasius Origenes Prayer to Manasseh Orosius Orpheus, Argonautica

TITLES

MarrTIn, R. KassE1 et al. (ed.),

1888) Nonnus Dion. Not. Dign. Occ. Not. Dign. Or. Not. Episc. Nov.

AND

1962

P Bodmer

1982,°1992)

Mark Herennius Modestinus Moschus Matthew Mycenae (place where Linear B tables were discovered) Naevius (carmina according to

AUTHORS

Pall. Agric. Laus. Pans leat:

Papin. Paroemiogr. Pass. mart.

Paul. Fest. Paul. Nol. Paulus, Sent. Paus.

Petronius, Satyrica (Miller 1961)

ANCIENT

AUTHORS

Phaedr. Phil

Phil. Philarg. Verg. ecl. Philod. Philostr. VA Imag. VS

Phlp. Phm Phot.

Phryn. Pind. fr. Isthm. Nem. Ol. Rae:

Pyth. Pl. Alc. 1 Alc. 2 Ap. Ax.

Chrm. Clit. Grate Crit. Criti.

Def. Demod. Epin. Ep. Erast.

Eryx. Euthd. Euthphr. Grg.

Hipparch. Hp. mai. Hp. mi. Ion

AND

TITLES

OF

XLVI

WORKS

Phaedrus, Fabulae (Guaglianone 1969) Letter to the Philippians Philo Philargyrius grammaticus, Explanatio in eclogas Vergilii Philodemus Philostratus, Vita Apollonii Imagines Vitae sophistarum Philoponus Letter to Philemon Photius (Bekker 1824) Phrynichus Pindar, Fragments (Snell/Maehler) Isthmian Odes Nemean Odes Olympian Odes Paeanes Pythian Odes Plato, Alcibiades 1 (Stephanus) Alcibiades 2 Apologia Axiochus Charmides Clitopho Cratylus Crito Critias Definitiones Demodocus Epinomis Epistulae Erastae Eryxias Euthydemus Euthyphro Gorgias Hipparchus Hippias maior Hippias minor Ion Laches Leges Lysis Menon Minos Menexenus Parmenides Phaedo Phaedrus Philebus Politicus Protagoras Res publica Sisyphus Sophista Symposium

Thg.

Bult: ais Plaut. Amph.

Theages Theaetetus Timaeus Plautus, Amphitruo (fr.according to Leo 1895 f.)

Asin. Aul. Bacch.

Capt. Cass Cist. Gure:

Epid. Men. Merc.

Mil. Mostell. Poen.

Pseud. Rud. Stich. Trin.

Truc. Vid. Plin. HN

Plin. Ep. Pan.

Plot. Plut. Amat.

Asinaria

Aulularia Bacchides Captivi Casina

Cistellaria Curculio Epidicus Menaechmi Mercator Miles gloriosus Mostellaria Poenulus Pseudolus Rudens Stichus Trinummus Truculentus Vidularia Plinius maior, Naturalis historia

Plinius minor, Epistulae Panegyricus Plotinus Plutarchus, Vitae parallelae (with the respective name) Amatorius (chapter and page numbers)

De def. or. De E

De Pyth. or. De sera De Is. et Os. Mor.

Quaest. Graec. Quaest. Rom. Symp.

Pol. Pol. Silv. Poll. Polyaenus, Strat. Polyc. Pompon. Pomp. Trog.

Porph. Porph. Hor. comm. Posidon.

De defectu oraculorum De E apud Delphos De Pythiae oraculis De sera numinis vindicta De Iside et Osiride (with chapter and page numbers) Moralia (apart from the separately mentioned works; with p. numbers) Quaestiones Graecae (with chapter numbers) Quaestiones Romanae (with ch. numbers) Quaestiones convivales (book, chapter, page number) Polybius Polemius Silvius Pollux Polyaenus, Strategemata Polycarpus, Letter Sextus Pomponius Pompeius Trogus Porphyrius Porphyrio, Commentum in Horatii carmina Posidonius

XLVII

Priap. Prisc.

Prob.

Procop. Aed. Goth. Pers. Vand. Arc.

Procl. Prop. Prosp. Prov

Prudent. Ps (Pss) Ps.-Acro Ps.-Aristot. Lin. insec. Mech.

Ps.-Sall. In Tull. Rep.

Ptol. Alm. Geog. Harm. Tetr.

Paya

4 Q Flor 4 Q Patr

t Q pHab

4 Q pNah 4 t 1 t t t

Q test QH QM QS QSa QSb

Quint. Decl. Inst. Quint. Smyrn.

R. Gest. div. Aug. Rhet. Her. Rom Rt

Rufin. Rut. Namat.

S. Sol. Sext. Emp. Sach Sall. Catil. Hist. lug.

Salv. Gub. 1 Sam, 2 Sam

ANCIENT

Priapea Priscianus

Pseudo-Probian writings Procopius, De aedificiis Bellum Gothicum Bellum Persicum Bellum Vandalicum Historia arcana

Proclus Propertius, Elegiae Prosper Tiro Proverbs Prudentius Psalm(s) Ps.-Acro in Horatium Pseudo-Aristotle, De lineis inseca-

bilibus Mechanica Pseudo-Sallustius, In M.Tullium Ciceronem invectiva Epistulae ad Caesarem senem de re publica Ptolemy, Almagest Geographia Harmonica

Tetrabiblos Pylos (place where Linear B tablets were discovered) Florilegium, Cave 4 Patriarch’s blessing, Cave 4 Habakuk-Midrash, Cave 1 Nahum-Midrash, Cave 4 Testimonia, Cave 4 Songs of Praise, Cave 1 War list, Cave 1 Communal rule, Cave x Community rule, Cave 1 Blessings, Cave 1 Quintilianus, Declamationes minores (Shackleton Bailey 1989) Institutio oratoria

Quintus Smyrnaeus

Res gestae divi Augusti Rhetorica ad C. Herennium Letter to the Romans Ruth Tyrannius Rufinus Rutilius Claudius Namatianus, De reditu suo Song of Solomon Sextus Empiricus Sacharia Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae Historiae De bello Iugurthino Salvianus, De gubernatione dei Samuel

Schol. (before an author’s

AUTHORS

AND

TITLES

OF

WORKS

Scholia to the author in question

name)

Scyl. Scymn. Sedul. Sen. Controv.

Suas. Sen. Ag.

Apocol. Ben.

Clem. Dial. Ep. Herc. f. Med. Q Nat. Oed. Phaedr. Phoen. Thy. Tranq. Tro. Serv. auct. Serv. Aen.

Ecl. Georg.

Sext. Emp. SHA Ael. Alb. Alex. Sev. Aur.

Aurel. Avid. Cass.

Gar G@arac Clod. Comm. Diad. Did. Tul. Gall. Gord. Hadr.

Heliogab.

Scylax, Periplus Scymnus, Periegesis Sedulius Seneca maior, Controversiae Suasoriae Seneca minor, Agamemno

Divi Claudii apocolocyntosis De beneficiis De clementia (Hosius *1914)

Dialogi Epistulae morales ad Lucilium Hercules furens Medea Naturales quaestiones Oedipus Phaedra Phoenissae

Thyestes ~ De tranquillitate animi Troades Servius auctus Danielis Servius, Commentarius in Vergilii Aeneida Commentarius in Vergilii eclogas Commentarius in Vergilii georgica Sextus Empiricus Scriptores Historiae Augustae, Aelius Clodius Albinus Alexander Severus M. Aurelius Aurelianus Avidius Cassius Carus et Carinus et Numerianus

Antoninus Caracalla Claudius Commodus Diadumenus Antoninus Didius Iulianus Gallieni duo Gordiani tres Hadrianus

Opil.

Heliogabalus Maximus et Balbus Opilius Macrinus

Pert. Pesc. Nig. Pius

Helvius Pertinax Pescennius Niger Antoninus Pius

Max. Balb.

Quadr. tyr.

Quadraginta tyranni

Sev. Tac.

Severus Tacitus

Tyr. Trig. Valer.

Sid. Apoll. Carm. Epist.

Triginta Tyranni Valeriani duo Apollinaris Sidonius, Carmina Epistulae

ANCIENT

AUTHORS

AND

TITLES

XLVI

OF WORKS

Silius Italicus, Punica Simonides

TH

Simpl.

Simplicius

Sir Socr.

Jesus Sirach Socrates, Historia ecclesiastica Solon Solinus

Them. Or. Theoc. Epigr. Id. Theod. Epist. Greatt Cure Hist. eccl. Theopomp. Theophr. Caus.

Sil. Pun. Simon.

Sol. Solin.

Soph. Aj. Ant.

El. Ichn. OC © Tl: Phil.

Sophocles, Ajax Antigone Electra Ichneutae Oedipus Coloneus Oedipus Tyrannus Philoctetes

Thebes (place where Linear B tables were discovered) Themistius, Orationes Theocritus Epigrammata Idyllia Theodoretus, Epistulae Graecarum affectionum curatio Historia ecclesiastica Theopompus Theophrastus, De causis plantarum Characteres Historia plantarum Letters to the Thessalonians Theognis Thucydides Tiryns (place where Linear B tablets

Trachiniae Soranus, Gynaecia

Hist. pl. 1 Thess, 2 Thess Thgn. Thue.

Sozomenus, Historia ecclesiastica

TI

Statius, Achilleis Silvae Thebais

Tib.

Steph. Byz. Stesich. Stob.

Stephanus Byzantius Stesichorus Stobaeus

Tob

Tibullus, Elegiae Letters to Timothy Letter to Titus Tobit

Tzetz. Anteh.

Tzetzes, Antehomerica

Str.

Strabo (books, chapters)

Suda Suet. Aug.

Suda = Suidas Suetonius, Divus Augustus ([hm

Trach.

Sor. Gyn. Sozom. Hist. eccl. Stat. Achil. Silv. Theb.

Calig. Claud. Dom. Gram.

Iul. Tib. Tit. Vesp. Vit.

Sulp. Sev. Symmachus, Ep. Or. Relat.

Synes. epist. Sync. Tab. Peut. Tac. Agr. Ann. Dial. Germ. Hist. Ter. Maur. Ter, Ad. An.

were discovered)

1907) Caligula Divus Claudius Domitianus De grammaticis (Kaster 1995) Divus Iulius

t Tim, 2 Tim Tit

Chil. Posth.

Ulp. Val. Fl. Val. Max. Varro Ling. Rust. Sat. Men.

1985)

Divus Tiberius

Vat.

Divus Titus

Veg. Mil. Vell. Pat.

Divus Vespasianus Vitellius Sulpicius Severus Symmachus, Epistulae Orationes Relationes

Synesius, Epistulae Syncellus Tabula Peutingeriana Tacitus, Agricola Annales Dialogus de oratoribus Germania Historiae

Terentianus Maurus

Terentius, Adelphoe Andria Eunuchus H(e)autontimorumenos

Hecyra Phormio

Tertullianus, Apologeticum Ad nationes (Borleffs 1954)

Chiliades Posthomerica Ulpianus (Ulpiani regulae) Valerius Flaccus, Argonautica Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta memorabilia Varro, De lingua Latina Res rusticae Saturae Menippeae (Astbury

Ven. Fort.

Verg. Aen. Catal. Ecl. G. Vir. ill. Vitr. De arch. Vulg. Wisd Xen. Ages. An. Ap.

Ath. pol. Cyn.

Fragmenta Vaticana Vegetius, Epitoma rei militaris Velleius Paterculus, Historiae Romanae Venantius Fortunatus Vergilius, Aeneis

Catalepton Eclogae Georgica De viris illustribus Vitruvius, De architectura Vulgate Wisdom Xenophon, Agesilaus Anabasis Apologia Athenaion politeia Cynegeticus Cyropaedia De equitandi ratione De equitum magistro Hellenica Hiero Respublica Lacedaemoniorum Memorabilia

XLIX Oec.

Symp. Vect.

Xenoph.

ANCIENT

Oeconomicus Symposium

De vectigalibus Xenophanes

Zen.

Zeno

Zenob.

Zenobius

AUTHORS

Zenod.

Zenodotus

Zeph

Zephania

Zon.

Zonaras Zosimus

Zos.

AND

TITLES

OF WORKS

List of Illustrations and Maps Illustrations are found in the corresponding entries. ND means redrawing following the instructions of the author or after the listed materials. RP means reproduction with minor changes.

Sella curulis Sella curulis; schematic structure ND after TH. SCHAFER, Imperii Insignia, 1989, 47, fig. 2

Some of the maps serve to visualize the subject matter and to complement the articles. In such cases, there will be a reference to the corresponding entry. Only literature that was used exclusively for the maps is listed.

Semitic languages Sub-classification of the Semitic languages ND after an original by CH. MULLER-KESSLER Sempronius

Sassanids The Sassanid Empire (to c. 300 AD) ND

J. WIesEHOFER,

after

E.KETTENHOFFEN,

TAVO B VI 3, © Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag, Wiesbaden

Sculpting, technique of Schematic representation of hollow-casting in bronze: clay model and clay investment mould. Reproduction (with slight modifications) after: W.Fucus, J.FLoREN, Die griechische Plastik I, HdArch, 1987, 18 fig. 2. Scythae The Scythians: culture and finds (7th -— 4th/3rd cents. BC)

ND R. Rolle, after: Archeologija Ukrainskoj SSR, vol. 2, 1986, 62f. with additions. Seals Sealing a papyrus document ND after an original by D. BERGES Séha The dynasty of the kings of Séha (c. 13 50-1200 BC) ND: F. STARKE

Seleucids The Seleucids and their dynastic connections ND: W.EDER Selinus

Selinus: overall plan Temples of Selinus (ground-plans) ND after M.I. Fintey, Atlas of Classical Archaeo-

logy, 1977, 86 D.MERTENS, Griechen und Perser. Selinunt nach 409 v. Chr., in: MDAI(R) 104, 1997, fig. 1.

The Sempronii Gracchi and their family connections in the 3rd and 2nd cents. BC The members of the Gracchian agrarian commission ND K.-L. ELvers

Severan dynasty The Severan house ND after an original by W.EDER Shipbuilding Schematic representation of shipbuilding ND after O. H6ckmann, Antike Seefahrt, 1985, 53, fig. 38-40 Sail-freighter. Mahdia ship, 80-70 BC (reconstruction).

ND after

O. HOCKMANN, Das Wrack. Der antike Schiffsfund von Mahdia, 1994, 58, fig. 4.

Shoes Greek shoes ND after H. BLanck, Einfiihrung in das Privatleben der Griechen und Romer, 1976, 57, fig. 13 Roman shoes ND after H.R.Goetre, Mulleus, Embas, Calceus. Ikonographische Studien zu romischem Schuhwerk. In: JDAI 103, 1988, 402, fig. 1; 451, fig. 35 A.L.Buscu, Die romerzeitlichen Schuh- und Lederfunde der Kastelle Saalburg, Zugmantel und Kleiner Feldberg, in: Saalburg-Jahrbuch 22, 1965, 174, fig. 6 H. BLanck, Einfiihrung in das Privatleben der Griechen und Romer, 1976, 69, fig. 16 H. Ktune1, Bildworterbuch der Kleidung und Riistung, 1992, 82f. Sicilia

The Roman province of Sicilia (c. 241 BC-AD 535) ND EpITorIAL TEAM TUBINGEN

LIST

OF

ILLUSTRATIONS

AND

Li

MAPS

Siegecraft

ND EpiroriAL TEAM TUBINGEN, after C. M.STIB-

‘Ram-tortoise’

based ona

(testudo arietaria);

BE, Das andere Sparta, 1996, fig. 3.

reconstruction

relief on the Arch of Septimius Severus in

Rome.

ND after: O.LENDLE, Texte und Untersuchungen zum technischen Bereich der antiken Poliorketik (Palingenesia 19), 1983, 191, fig. 58. Posidonius’ helepolis. ND after: O. LENDLE, Texte und Untersuchungen zum technischen Bereich der antiken Poliorketik (Palingenesia 19), 1983, 57, fig. 18.

Shelter (vinea); section of a covered corridor, based on Vegetius. ND after: O. LENDLE, Texte und Untersuchungen

zum technischen Bereich der antiken Poliorketik (Palingenesia 19), 1983, 140, fig. 40. Attack on a city wall, using a movable tower (turris ambulatoria) with drawbridge. ND after an original by D. BaatTz Constructing a siege ramp out of wood, stones and earth, using a ditch-filling tortoise. ND after an original by D. Baatz Skeuotheke Piraeus: Skeuotheke of Philo (c. 330 BC; hypothe-

Spartocids The dynasty of the Spartocids ND I. von BREDOW Sperlonga Sperlonga. So-called Villa of Tiberius, ground-plan. ND after Cu. Kunze, Zur Datierund des Laokoon und der Skyllagruppe aus Sperlonga, in: JDAI 111, 1996, fig. 5 Stadion

Ancient

Social wars Social War (91-89/82 BC) W.EDER/EDITORIAL TEAM TUBINGEN

Bibliogr.: H.GALSTERER, Herrschaft und Verwaltung im republikanischen Italien, 1976 E. GaBBA, Rome and Italy: The Social War, in: CAH 9, *1994, 104-128.

Socii (Roman confederation)

Italy under Roman rule: the military confederacy (338-89/82 BC) H. GALSTERER/W.EDER/EDITORIAL TEAM TUBINGEN Bibliogr.: A. J.ToyNBEE, Hannibal’s Legacy, 1965 H.GaLsTERER, Herrschaft und Verwaltung im republikanischen Italien, 1976 Tu. Hantos, Das romische Bundesgenossensystem in Italien, 1983.

Sparta

Sparta/Lakedaimon/Lakonike: settlement and/or political territory of the Spartiatai/Lakedaimonioi and the Perioikoi ND EpiroriaL TEAM TUBINGEN Reconstruction of Sparte/Lakedaimon acc. to the descriptions of Pausanias, bk. 3 (c. AD 160), and acc. to archaeological evidence

complexes

(schematic

develop-

Steelyard Ancient steelyards ND after N.FRANKEN, Zur Typologie antiker Schnellwaagen, in: BJ 193, 1993, 79, fig.4; 85, fig. 8; 91, fig. 11. Stoa

Greek stoai from the Archaic to the Hellenistic Periods (schematic ground-plans) ND after J.J.CouLtToN, The Architectural Development of the Greek Stoa, 1976, 193-198

tical reconstruction).

ND after: K. JEpPESEN, Paradeigmata. Three MidFourth Century Main Works of Hellenistic Architecture Reconsidered, 1958, ror, fig. 68 W. HOEFENER, E.-L. SCHWANDNER, Haus und Stadt im klassischen Griechenland, 21994, 44f.

stadium

ment) ND EpiTorRIAL TEAM TUBINGEN

Sun

The sequence of the planets (= Earth) according to Plato ND after an original by A. Jor The Ptolemaic system ND after an original by A. Jor

from

the centre

Surgical instruments Medizinische Instrumente aus rémischer Zeit ND after an original by E.KGNZL.

List of Authors Aigner-Foresti, Luciana, Vienna

Albiani, Maria Grazia, Bologna Algra, Keimpe, Utrecht Alonso-Niiiez, José Miguel, Madrid Ambihl, Annemarie, Groningen Ameling, Walter, Jena Andreau, Jean, Paris Antoni, Silke, Kiel Arrighetti, Graziano, Pisa Baatz, Dietwulf, Bad Homburg Babler, Balbina, Gottingen Badian, Ernst, Cambridge, MA Baltes, Matthias, Minster Barcelo, Pedro, Potsdam Bartels, Jens, Bonn Baumbach, Manuel, Zurich Beck, Hans, Cologne Beck, Jan-Wilhelm, Regensburg Becker, Andrea, Berlin Berger, Albrecht, Munich Binder, Carsten, Kiel Birley, A.R., Dusseldorf Bleckmann, Bruno, Bern Bloch, René, Berne Blédorn, Heide, Mainz Bloedhorn, Hanswulf, Jerusalem Borm, Henning, Kiel Bove, Annalisa, Pisa Bowie, Ewen, Oxford Brandt, Hartwin, Bamberg Braun-Holzinger, Eva Andrea, Mainz Braund, Susanna, New Haven von Bredow, Iris, Stuttgart Brehmer, Bernhard, Tubingen Bremmer, Jan N., Groningen

Brentjes, Burchard, Berlin Briese, Christoph, Randers

Bringmann, Klaus, Frankfurt/Main Brock, Sebastian P., Oxford Biichli, Jorg, Ziirich Burian, Jan, Prague

Cabanes, Pierre, Clermont-Ferrand Calboli, Gualtiero, Bologna Caldelli, Elisabetta, Cassino Campbell, J. Brian, Belfast Cancik-Kirschbaum, Eva, Berlin Cartledge, Paul A., Cambridge Cavallo, Guglielmo, Rome Cavigneaux, Antoine, Geneva Chantraine, Heinrich, Mannheim Christes, Johannes, Berlin

L.A.-F. M.G.A. K. AL. J.M.A.-N. A.A. W.A. J. A. SLA. GR. A. D.BA. B.BA. E.B. M.BA. P.B. J.BA. M.B. HA. BE. J.-W.B. AN. BE. AL.B. CA.BI. A.B. B.BL. R.B. HE. BL. H.BL. HE.B. A.BO. E.BO. lel Ie. E.B.-H. SU.B. I.v.B.

B.BR. J.B. B.B. CEiee: K.BR. S.BR. J. BU. J.BU. PI. CA. GaG. E.CA. yaGA: E.C.-K. PAG: GUAGE: AN.CA. HEA, JsGe

Cobet, Justus, Essen Corbier, Mireille, Paris Cuomo, Valentina Isabella, Bari Damschen, Gregor, Halle/Saale Daverio Rocchi, Giovanna, Milan de Libero, Loretana, Hamburg de Vido, Stefania, Venice

Decker, Wolfgang, Cologne Demarolle, Jeanne-Marie, Nancy Di Marco, Massimo, Fondi (Latina) Dietz, Karlheinz, Wirzburg

Dingel, Joachim, Hamburg Distelrath, Gotz, Constance Docter, Roald Frithjof, Gent Donohue, Alice A., Bryn Mawr Dorandi, Tiziano, Paris Doring, Klaus, Bamberg Drager, Paul, Trier Dyck, Andrew, Los Angeles Ebner, Constanze, Innsbruck

Eck, Werner, Cologne Eder, Walter, Berlin Ego, Beate, Osnabriick Eiben, Susanne, Kiel Eigler, Ulrich, Zurich Eleuteri, Paolo, Venice Elvers, Karl-Ludwig, Bochum Errington, Robert Malcolm, Marburg/Lahn Euskirchen, Marion, Bonn

Falco, Giulia, Athens Felber, Heinz, Leipzig Fell, Martin, Miinster Fellmeth, Ulrich, Stuttgart Folkerts, Menso, Munich Forgo, Nikolaus, Vienna Fornaro, Sotera, Sassari

Fértsch, Reinhard, Cologne

Frahm, Eckart, Heidelberg Franke, Thomas, Bochum Frateantonio, Christa, GiefSen-Erfurt Frede, Michael, Oxford Freitag, Klaus, Miinster Freyburger, Gérard, Mulhouse Freydank, Helmut, Potsdam Findling, Jorg, Bonn Furley, William D., Heidelberg Fusillo, Massimo, L’Aquila Galsterer, Hartmut, Bonn Gargini, Michela, Pisa Gartner, Hans Armin, Heidelberg Gatti, Paolo, Triento

J.CO. MI.CO. VuG. GR.DA. G.D.R. iivdD. Sidi V. W.D. J.-M. DE. M.D.MA. K.DI. i. G.DI. R.D. A.A.D. sibs K.D. P.D. ASDM C.E. W.E. W.ED. B.E. SU. EI. U.E. P.E. Kelok. MA.ER. M.E. GLF. HE. FE. M.FE. UL.FE. M.F. N.F. S.FO. R.F. E.FRA. T.E. C.F. M.ER. K.F. GIF. H.ER. JO.F. W.D.F. M.FU. H.GA. M.G. H.A.G. P.G.

LIST

OF

LIV

AUTHORS

Gehrke, Hans-Joachim, Freiburg Giaro, Tomasz, Frankfurt/Main

H.-J.G. VG:

Gizewski, Christian, Berlin GG: Glock, Andreas, Jena AN. GL. Gottschalk, Hans, Leeds H.G. Goulet-Cazé, Marie-Odile, Antony M.G.-C. Grafsl, Herbert, Salzburg H.GR. Grofs +, Walter Hatto, Hamburg W.H.GR. Grof-Albenhausen, Kirsten, Frankfurt/Main K.G.-A.

Gruber, Joachim, Munich Gulletta, Maria Ida, Pisa Giinther, Linda-Marie, Bochum Gutsfeld, Andreas, Minster Haas, Volkert, Berlin Hadot, Pierre, Limours

Hahn, Johannes, Minster Hailer, Ulf, Tubingen Harder, Ruth Elisabeth, Ziirich Harmon, Daniel P., Seattle Harmon, Roger, Basle Hartmann, Elke, Berlin Heckel, Hartwig, Bochum Heider, Ulrich, Cologne Heinrichs, Johannes, Bonn Heinze, Theodor, Geneva Herz, Peter, Regensburg Hidber, Thomas, Gottingen Hild, Friedrich, Vienna Hitzl, Konrad, Tubingen Hocker, Christoph, Ziirich Hoesch, Nicola, Munich Hoffmann, Philippe, Paris Hofmann, Heinz, Tubingen Holzhausen, Jens, Bamberg Hubner, Wolfgang, Miinster Hiinemérder, Christian, Hamburg Hurschmann, Rolf, Hamburg Huff, Werner, Munich Inwood, Brad, Toronto Isler, Hans-Peter, Zurich Jameson, Michael, Stanford Jansen-Winkeln, Karl, Berlin Kaletsch, Hans, Regensburg Karttunen, Klaus, Helsinki Kaster, Robert A., Princeton

Kehne, Peter, Hannover Kessler, Karlheinz, Emskirchen Kierdorf, Wilhelm, Cologne

JGR: IMaISG: L.-M.G. A.G. VE. P.HA. Jakt U.HA. R.HA. DaPert RO.HA. E.HA. lebiat U.HE. JO.H. 1a Palle inletly F.H. K.H.

G.HO. N.H. PH. H.HO. J.HO. W.H. C. HU. Reid. W.HU. Bele Fae

MI.JA K.J.-W. H.KA. K.K. R.A.K.

Pak. K.KE. W.K

King, Helen, Reading Klodt, Claudia, Hamburg Klose, Dietrich, Munich Knell, Heiner, Darmstadt Koch, Heidemarie, Marburg/Lahn

H.K Glak DEK H.KN. H.KO.

Kohler, Christoph, Bad Krozingen Kolb, Anne, Ziirich Kolb, Frank, Tubingen

G@KO: A.K. F.K.

Konen, Heinrich, Regensburg Kramolisch, Herwig, Eppelheim

H.KON. HE. KR.

Krapinger, Gernot, Graz Krauter, Stefan, Tubingen Kruschwitz, Peter, Berlin

G.K. ST.KR. P.KR.

Kuchenbuch, Ludolf, Hagen

LU. KU.

Kiihne, Hartmut, Berlin

H.KU.

Kuhnen, Hans-Peter, Trier

H.KU.

Kiilzer, Andreas, Vienna Kundert, Lukas, Basle Kunz, Heike, Tubingen

Kiinzl, Ernst, Mainz Lafond, Yves, Bochum Le Bohec, Yann, Lyon Lehmann, Gustav Adolf, Gottingen

A.KU. LUK. KU. HE. K.

E.KU. male. Ele ep GyASe

Leppin, Hartmut, Frankfurt/Main Lesky, Michael, Tubingen Letsch-Brunner, Silvia, Zurich Lezzi-Hafter, Adrienne, Kilchberg Lienau, Cay, Munster von Lieven, Alexandra, Berlin Link, Stefan, Paderborn Liwak, Riidiger, Berlin Lohmann, Hans, Bochum

HSE. MI. LE. S.L.-B. A.L.-H. GH. Aurel. Se Reile H.LO.

Lohr, Winrich Alfried, Cambridge

W.LO.

Lombardo, Mario, Lecce Losemann, Volker, Marburg/Lahn

M.L. Viale.

Liitkenhaus, Werner, Marl

WE. LU.

Manganaro, Giacomo, Sant’ Agata li Battiata GI. MA. Manthe, Ulrich, Passau U.M. Marek, Christian, Ziirich C.MA. Markschies, Christoph, Berlin C.M. Martini, Wolfram, GieSen W.MA. Mastrocinque, Attilio, Verona Matthaios, Stephanos, Nikosia

Mehl, Andreas, Halle/Saale

Meier, Mischa, Tiibingen Meissel, Franz-Stefan, Vienna Meister, Klaus, Berlin Meloni, Piero, Cagliari Menci, Giovanna, Florence Mennella, Giovanni, Genoa Meyer, Doris, Strafburg Michel, Simone, Hamburg Miller, Martin, Berlin Mommssen, Heide, Stuttgart Morciano, Maria Milvia, Florence

A.MAS. ST.MA.

A. ME.

M. MEI. F. ME. K. MEI. P.M. G.M. G. ME. DO. ME. S. MI. M.M. H.M. M.M.MO.

Muggia, Anna, Pavia

A. MU.

Miiller, Christian, Bochum

C.MU.

Miller-Kessler, Christa, Emskirchen Narcy, Michel, Paris Nesselrath, Heinz-Ginther, Gottingen Neudecker, Richard, Rome Neumann, Hans, Berlin

Niehoff, Johannes, Berlin Niemeyer +, Hans Georg, Hamburg Nissen, Hans Jorg, Berlin Niinlist, René, Providence, RI Nutton, Vivian, London Olshausen, Eckart, Stuttgart

Gk MI. NA. H.-G. NE. R.N. H.N.

J.N. H.G.N. H.J.N. RE.N. V.N. E.O.

LV

LIST

Onken, Bjorn, Kassel

BJ.O. Osborne, Robin, Oxford REO: Pack, Edgar, Cologne BPs Pahlitzsch, Johannes, Berlin jee: Panayides, Aliki Maria, Bern AL. PA. Paulus, Christoph Georg, Berlin Gre Pekridou-Gorecki, Anastasia, Frankfurt/Main A.P.-G. Pelling, C.B.R., Oxford GaBsR Peter, Ulrike, Berlin Wee Petzl, Georg, Cologne G. PE. Phillips, C. Robert III., Bethlehem, PA GoRabe Pingel, Volker, Bochum VaR, Plath, Robert, Erlangen R.P. Plontke-Liining, Annegret, Jena A.P.-L. Polfer, Michel, Luxemburg MI.PO. Portmann, Werner, Berlin Wales Prayon, Friedhelm, Tibingen F.PR. Quack, Joachim, Berlin JOLOUs Raber, Fritz, Innsbruck FR.R. von Reden, Sitta, Augsburg Saves Reitz, Christiane, Rostock GEIGRS Renaud, Francois, Moncton, NB F.R. Renger, Johannes, Berlin J.RE. Rhodes, Peter J., Durham Pajares Richter, Thomas, Frankfurt/Main ERI Riederer, Josef, Berlin JORRe Riedweg, Christoph, Ziirich C.RI. Rist, Josef, Wurzburg J.RI. Rix, Helmut, Freiburg H.R. Robbins, Emmet, Toronto Bake Rollig, Wolfgang, Tubingen W.R. Ruffing, Kai, Marburg/Lahn K.RU. Runia, David T., Melbourne Dee Re Sallaberger, Walther, Leipzig WA. SA. Sallmann, Klaus, Mainz KL.SA. Salomone Gaggero, Eleonora, Genoa EE S:G, Sartori, Antonio, Milan A.SA. Sauer, Vera, Stuttgart WES: Sauer, Werner, Graz W.SA. Sawvidis, Kyriakos, Bochum K.SA. Schanbacher, Dietmar, Dresden DESCH: Scheibler, Ingeborg, Krefeld PeSs Schenke, Hans-Martin, Berlin H.-M.SCHE. Scherf, Johannes, Tibingen HOSS: Schiemann, Gottfried, Tubingen G.S. Schindler, Alfred, Heidelberg ASCE Schmidt, Peter Lebrecht, Constance Palas: Schmitt, Tassilo, Bielefeld TA.S. Schmitt-Pantel, Pauline, Paris P.S.-P. Schmitz, Winfried, Bielefeld W.S. Schneider, Helmuth, Kassel H.SCHN. Schon, Franz, Regensburg BSGH:

Schonig, Hanne, Halle/Saale Schottky, Martin, Pretzfeld Schulzki, Heinz-Joachim, Freudenstadt Schwertheim, Elmar, Miinster Schwind, Johannes, Trier Sehlmeyer, Markus, Rostock

H.SCHO. M.SCH. H.-J.S. ESSGEE sSCHe M.SE.

Seidlmayer, Stephan Johannes, Berlin Senff, Reinhard, Bochum

Sharples, Robert, London Siebert, Anne Viola, Hannover Simons, Roswitha, Diisseldorf

Speyer, Wolfgang, Salzburg Spickermann, Wolfgang, Bochum Stanzel, Karl-Heinz, Tiibingen Starke, Frank, Tubingen Stein-Holkeskamp, Elke, Cologne Steinbauer, Dieter, Regensburg Stenger, Jan, Kiel Stoevesandt, Magdalene, Basle Strauch, Daniel, Berlin Streck, Michael P., Munich Strobel, Karl, Klagenfurt Stumpf, Gerd, Munich Suerbaum, Werner, Munich

Takacs, Sarolta A., New Brunswick, NJ Thur, Gerhard, Graz Tinnefeld, Franz, Munich Todd, Malcolm, Exeter Tomaschitz, Kurt, Vienna Toral-Niehoff, Isabel, Freiburg

Tosi, Renzo, Bologna Touwaide, Alain, Madrid Uggeri, Giovanni, Florence

OF

AUTHORS

Sas: R:SE. RES: ARVES: R.SI. WO.SP. W.SP. K.-H.S. E.S. E.S.-H. DESik J2STE: MA.ST. DES: M.S. Kesike GE.S. W.SU. S.TA. Gal. Reda M.TO. Kea I.T.-N. Reale A.TO. GU;

von Ungern-Sternberg, Jiirgen, Basle

JavaUiss:

Untermann, Jiirgen, Pulheim Vassis, Ioannis, Athens

Jel LW DalaVe A.VO. J. WA. C.W. G.H.W. K. WA. M. WA. U. WAL. I. WA. R.W. P.W. M.W. RA. WI. J.W. CH. WI. DI. WI. E.W. M.Z. BeZe Kiely MA. ZI. WabAl

Vessey, David T., Huntingdon Volkl, Artur, Innsbruck Wagner, Jorg, Tubingen Walde, Christine, Mainz Waldherr, Gerhard H., Regensburg Waldner, Katharina, Erfurt Wallraff, Martin, Bonn Walter, Uwe, Bielefeld Wandrey, Irina, Berlin Wartke, Ralf-B., Berlin WeifS, Peter, Kiel WeifSenberger, Michael, Greifswald Wiegels, Rainer, Osnabriick Wiesehofer, Josef, Kiel Wildberg, Christian, Princeton Willers, Dietrich, Bern Wirbelauer, Eckhard, Freiburg Zahrnt, Michael, Kiel Zimmermann, Bernhard, Freiburg Zimmermann, Klaus, Jena Zimmermann, Martin, Munich Zinsmaier, Thomas, Tubingen

List of Translators Simon Buck

Michael Chase Dorothy Duncan Karoline Kraus David Levinson

Charlotte Pattenden Dieter Prankel David Richardson

Antonia Ruppel Maria Schoenhammer Duncan A. Smart

Barbara Souter Diana Theohari Suzanne Walters

S

CONTINUATION

Saserna. The two Sasernae, who were probably members of the gens Hostilia and are described in Columella as pater et filius (Columella 1,1,12), were the authors of a Latin work on agriculture published between 146 and 57 BC; they were considered the earliest Latin agrarian writers after Cato [x] (Columella 1,1,12; Plin. HN 17,199). Columella and Plinius [1] rated their work highly (Columella 1 praef. 32; 1,1,4: “non spernendus

Sassanids. In the narrower sense, the term S. designates the members of the Iranian dynasty of the descendants of Sasan; in the broader sense, it designates the inhabitants of the Sassanid Empire or its political elite (3rd—7th

auctor rei rusticae Saserna”; 1,1,12; Plin. HN 17,199:

cents. AD).

‘peritissim?’). From mentions in Varro, Columella and Pliny it is possible to reconstruct the rudiments of individual themes of the lost text: In addition to agriculture proper it also deals with the use of raw materials (clay)

I. EvipenceE

occurring in the country (Varro Rust. 1,2,22-28); there

I. EVIDENCE Among the written sources (discussion and literature in [25. 153-164, 283-287]; cf. also [1; 6; 27]), the contemporary indigenous evidence should have priority, esp.: a) the inscriptions, some multilingual, of kings and dignitaries (of the 3rd cent. AD) of > Persis, the ancestral homeland of the S. [4; 9; 14; 15]; b) the Middle Persian inscriptions on seal stones and bullae (analysis in [11]); c) the Middle Persian papyri and parchments from Egypt (period of Sassanid rule under Husrau II (+ Chosroes [6]) [24]); d) the Late Sassanid ostraka from excavations in Iran [24]; e) the Middle Persian law books (analysis in [18]). A foreign (sometimes topical and ‘ideological’) or oppositional view of the S. is presented by a) ancient authors of the West; b) Christian martyr acts, chronicles and church histories; c) literature from the Manichaean church history, e.g. the Cologne Mani-Codex (CMC); d) Armenian historians (with specific problems of transmission). Middle Persian texts emerged in the Late Sassanid period or even as late as the Islamic period, either intended as commentaries on the Avesta or belonging to a courtly context (epic form or sung poetry). By the end of the reign of Husrau II (AD 590-628), there was an ‘Iranian national history’ in the form of the Hwaday-namag (Book of Lords), an official history of Iran from the first World King Gayomart to the regency of Husrau II. This compilation, which only survives in Arabic and New Persian editions, was an instrument of literary entertainment and of social education [28]. Some of the other (non-religious) Middle Persian literature was later translated, but most is lost. Persian-Arabic historiography owes its knowledge of Sassanid Iran to the Late Sassanid Middle Persian tradition, but the transmission has been partly distorted to fit the Islamic perspective of salvation history [23]. Notable among the archaeological evidence (overview in [22]) are: a) the 3rd/4th cent. and 7th cent. AD reliefs of S. kings (some specified by inscriptions) and of Kirdir; b) silver vessels and bowls with depictions of rulers; c) the colossi of Sapar I (+ Sapor [1]) and Husrau II; d) the urban sites (e.g. Ardasirhurra, Bisapir,

are also records of comments on the duties of the administrator of an estate (> vilicus) and on leasing (Varro Rust. 1,16,5; Columella 1,7,4); viticulture was also one of the themes (Columella 3,12,5; 3,17,4; 4,11,1). The two S. were the first to try to derive a formula for the number of people and animals needed for working a given area of land (one person to eight iugera: Varro Rust. 1,18,2; two teams of oxen to 200

iugera: Varro Rust. 1,19,1; cf. Columella 2,12,7); Varro

remarks critically that in this the S. did not take regional differences sufficiently into account (Varro Rust. 1,18,6). It is remarkable that the S. assumed a fundamental change of climate in the Mediterranean (Columella 1,1,4). — Agrarian writers; > Agriculture FRAGMENTS:

F,.SPERANZA

(ed.), Scriptorum

Romano-

rum de re rustica reliquiae, 1974, 33-45. BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1 N.Bortuzzo,

Osservazioni

su

alcuni frammenti del trattato agronomico di S. pater et filius, in: RIL 128, 1994, 187-214 2J.KoLENDO, Le traité d’agronomie des S., 1973 3 R. MarTIN, Recherches sur les agronomes latins, 1971, 81-85 4 F.MUnzer, s. v. Hostilius (22 ff.), RE 8, 2512-2513 5 E.Rawson, Intellectual Life in the Late Roman Republic, 1985,136 6K.D. Wuire, Roman Agricultural Writers I: Varro and His Predecessors, in: ANRW

439-497, here 459-460

1.4, 1973,

7 WHITE, Farming, 20-21.

K.RU.

Saspeires (Zcometgec/Sdspeires: Hdt. 1,104; 1103 3,94; 4,373 403 7,79; nameoes/Sapeires: Apoll. Rhod. 2,395; “Eonegttal/Hesperitai: Xen. An. 7,8,25; Str. 14,1,393 Latin Sapires: Amm. Marc. 22,8,21). East Kartvelian

tribe, according to Herodotus between the Colchians and the Medes, and belonging to the eighteenth satrapy together with the Matienians and the Alarodians (3,18); documented probably from the 3rd century BC onward; on the upper reaches of the - Acampsis/Coruh, it can be identified with the city of Sper (in the modern district of Ispir in northeastern Turkey). In antiquity, the political alignment of the region alternated between — Iberia [x] and > Armenia [2. 3217°].

1 O. LorDKIPANIDZE, Das alte Georgien in Strabons Geo-

graphie,1996,75 2 C.TOUMANOFF, Studies in Christian Caucasian History, 1963. APL.

II. POLITICAL HISTORY

II]. KINGDOM,

SOCIETY, ECONOMY, ARMY AND

CULTURE

So Puemey5 de

:

-

aas

saden3ue| JayjO ul

aweu Wapolw JO/ pur Ja}e7

134}0 U! skeM

peoy

WOP3uly JUal|> UBWOY

Gy ‘wad pig ‘wnueWoYy wnvadus| au} YyyiM Japsog

UMO} URIPZOS juRYOdU|

QV ‘Ua Up ‘auidw3 UeWoY

WHx00S

peqeseA

iin

OOF

fe)

Fs

OOF

SOM “b JYOW 'E

yeAisued z

us 2-0

auidw3 ueysn> ay} JO UMO} jURLOdUY|

(Bay)

(av ‘ua pig a4 0} dn) (s) uondudsu) ueiues|

ajppiw queyoduu! yo yods pul

0072

(ajdwa} ay

pig ‘yeyideo [BIDUIADId

/sastg [eAOY) 31ND 2y2}S

jue.

(p/€67 AV

jeyideo jeuaduy|

\ wisiesiey e~

ee

(OLZ GV 2 ‘jua}xe 4s98Je|) asidwy piuesses

‘ sodes /andeys jo uondudsu! 4} UO paseq) aUIAOIdg

-dussul ayy ‘027-797 AW 2

1067 - 08Z GV 2 ‘4!P4Iy JO SUC}

/ Y2SJEN JO UO} ‘SaSJEN -duosu ay} Ul UoQUaW UO JO

av

auapisay

‘pouad ay} 10} pajusuNdop aweN

ajPpIW

SUIOD JO /Puke seas UO pajuaunsop aweu uelUe| a|PPIW

uelUe,|

fe re!

ak J

uod

RL

es ‘Se

——

Lyne

BISOY

ee

=

aod

\puaspze, 2A-2, ol |gee

SIREN

'L “3921 oe OAEy poe rms uohhes

Nee pey- ur’ a

hoy) 5 snaey

peqriewiey

peqeiggey

of gefey 3sen
Pér6z [1] twice suffered devastating defeat and reduction to tributary status at their hands (465/484). Subsequent famines brought the Sassanid Empire to the verge of internal collapse. There were popular uprisings which, influenced by the ethnically and religiously motivated claims of > Mazdak for equal distribution of possessions, were directed esp. at the landowning nobility, to whom much of the non-urban population was obliged to give service and taxes. After the initial support of King Kavad I (> Cavades [1], 488-496 and 499-531), the revolutionary uprisings were then violently suppressed by that same king and his son Husrau | (+ Chosroes [5], 531-579). Both rulers exploited the weakness of the nobility to impose fundamental social, economic and military reforms [2; 3; 21]: land ownership was recorded, a fixed land tax replaced a fluctuating tax on crops, and the capitation was reset following a census. The empire was divided into four army regions, and special units took over responsibilities for controlling and securing the frontiers. It was in the king’s interest to create a new courtly and bureaucratic elite, which owed its privileges solely to royal favour and not to name and lineage, as was the promotion of the lower, landowning nobility. On the basis of domestic peace and stability, Husrau I turned to an active foreign policy. In 5 40, he broke the treaty of ‘eternal peace’ with the Eastern Roman Emperor Justinian (— Justinianus[1]). By the new agreement with Byzantium in 562, the tribute payment of 532 was raised again. He also indirectly weakened the position of his western opponent by his conquest of southern Arabia and the expulsion of the Axumite allies of Byzantium (Ethiopians; - Axum). In the east, he even succeeded in annihilating the Hephthalite kingdom with the help of the Goktiirks in 560. The reign of Husrau (Chosroes) I was also the cultural zenith of the history of the Sassanid Empire: under this ruler, whose interests were diverse, Iran became a hub of knowledge exchange between east and west.

buildings (e.g. the fire temple of Taht-e Sulaiman; + Sis), bridges and dams; e) the evidence of silk and textile manufacture, gold jewellery, cameos, glasses and examples of Sassanid stucco decoration; f) the seal stones and bullae (see above). Coins [19] generally show a particular king (with

individual crown and legend) on the obverse, on the reverse a fire altar with attendants. Gold and copper coins were only rarely in circulation. Most pieces were minted in (thin) silver. The main denomination was the drachma with a weight of 4 g; mass minting (enlistment of mercenaries?) began under Sapir (Sapor) II (309379), and the indication of years became canonical from Kavad I (> Cavades [1]; 499-531) onwards. The dating of the issues of the Sassanid governors of the former Kisan Empire (> Kushan, Kushanians; ‘Kushano-Sassanid coins’) is disputed.

II. POLITICAL HISTORY Cf. also > Parthian and Persian wars [5; 7; 8; 10; 12; 13; 16; 17; 22; 27]. As with the > Parthians, information regarding the foreign policy objectives and endeayours of the S. is very limited. Extant evidence mostly concerns the western frontier. During the reign of the founder of the kingdom, > Ardashir [1] (224-239/402), all regions of the former Parthian Empire except Armenia came into Sassanid hands. The aggressive policy towards Rome is already perceptible under his rule. However, Sapur (Sapor) I (240-271/2) was even more

successful than his father: his campaigns not only affected Armenia, but shook the Roman Empire to its very foundations. His armies reached —> Antioch [1] and Cappadocia, and in the person of > Valerianus, a Roman Emperor fell into enemy hands for the first time. In spite of all subsequent reverses (e.g. against > Odaenathus[2] of Palmyra), Sapar’s dominion still stretched from Mesopotamia in the west to Peshawar in the east. Succession disputes and the aggressive politics of > Diocletianus led to the loss of Armenia and the regions east of the Tigris for several decades at the end of the 3rd cent.: not until the reign of Sapir (Sapor [2]) II was the ‘shameful peace of Nisibis’ (298) lived down.

SASSANIDS

Sapir II succeeded, after long struggles, not only in

Under the son of Husrau I, Hormizd IV (> Hormis-

holding Julian (— Iulianus [11] I) at bay before Ctesi-

das [6], from 579), however, new disputes emerged be-

phon, but also in wresting back large parts of the lost regions from Julian’s successor — Jovianus (363) by military and diplomatic means. In connection with these wars, the Christians in the Sassanid Empire suffered severe persecution. Not yet being separated by christology from their fellow believers in the west, they had been regarded by the Emperor at Rome as his protégés since the conversion of Constantine, while the S. authorities considered them to be Roman partisans. In 387, the eastern part of Armenia was also brought back to the Sassanid fold. More than the Romans, with whom an agreement satisfactory to both sides was reached in 408/9, it was the > Hephthalites, or ‘White Huns’, who troubled the

tween king and aristocracy. Bitter fighting with the Turks further exacerbated the situation. The tide seemed to turn both domestically and abroad when Hormizd’s son, Husrau II (+ Chosroes [6]) put down the rebellion of the pretender Vahram Cobin with Eastern Roman help, and — then fighting against Byzantium — managed to advance to Egypt (619) and the gates of Constantinople (626). The Holy Cross was taken from Jerusalem to > Ctesiphon [2] in 614. However, the counterstrike of the Eastern Roman Emperor > Heraclius [7] compelled the S. to relinquish the regions they had conquered. Husrau II himself was deposed in an aristocratic revolt and was murdered (628). After a pe-

riod of anarchy, with a rapid succession of regencies,

SASSANIDS

i

» Yazdgird III was put on the throne by the noble party of Rostam. This last S. king was not in a position to raise his kingdom, which had been weakened by wars and particularist interests, to assert itself against the Islamic armies invading from Arabia. Following defeats at al-Qadisiya (636) in Iraq and > Nihawand in Media (642), Yazdgird retreated to eastern Iran, where he was murdered at Marv. The Sassanid kingdom was absorbed into the Caliphate (+ Caliph). III. KINGDOM, SOCIETY, ECONOMY, ARMY AND CULTURE A. KINGDOM B. SOCIALSTRUCTURE C. ADMINISTRATION AND ECONOMY D.ARMyY E. RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS F. ART AND CULTURE

A. KINGDOM The Sassanid Empire ({1]; kings and subjects: [25] 165-182, 287-291] was from the outset linked with Iran: As ‘King of Kings of Iran’, Ardasir put himself above all other dynasts of Erangabr, and his son Sapur (Sapor [1]) even included the newly conquered regions (Anéran = ‘Non-Iran’) and their princes (e.g. [15. SKZ 1/1/1]). The S. represented themselves as kings with divine qualities (Middle Persian bayan) and as descendants and instruments of the gods (yazdan)

(e.g. [r5. SKZ 1/1/x]; [26]); in gratitude for their favour, they took over care of the Zoroastrian cult (+ Zoroastrianism), accorded benefits on the priesthood and endowed fires (cf. [15. SKZ 22/17/38]). Fires were also installed as ‘royal fires’ and for the salvation of the souls of living and dead members of the royal dynasty [15. SKZ 22 ff./17 ff./ 39 ff.]. As well as their lineage, > rulers drew their legitimacy from the ‘royal charisma’ (Middle Persian hwarrah), previously known from the > Achaemenids and > Parthians, and from their personal efforts in war and hunting. The dynasty as a whole drew its legitimacy from references to the early clan chiefs and the historical kings (or mythical primeval kings?) of Iran, not known to the S. by name, whom they called their ‘forefathers’ (Greek pappoi) or ‘ancestors’ (Greek progonoi) [15. SKZ 21/16/35]. In the ‘Iranian national history’, which they decisively influenced (see above under I), the Sassanid kings were portrayed as the Iranian rulers par excellence.

B. SOCIAL STRUCTURE The S., like the Parthians, had, at least initially, an

aristocratic ‘King’s Council’, composed of the chiefs of the old Parthian and new Persian clans and responsible for confirming the succession [4. NPi33/29 f., 36 £./33 f., 37/34]. Particular veneration of the founder of the kingdom is documented as well [4. NPi 31 f./28 f.]. The royal inscriptions from the Early period distinguish four types of aristocrats [4. NPi 2 f./2 f.]). For some time, the rank of a Parthian or Persian noble was independent of royal favour. Along with its external marks, it was held by virtue of name and

lineage, and was a sign of special political and economic (cf. Amm. Marc. 18,5,6; [4. KKZ 4/KNRm 9 £./KSM 5]; Procop. Pers. 1,6,13; 13,16). In the Late period, after the reforms of Husrau (Chosroes) I, the status of the ruler in relation to the aristocracy was (at least for a short time) fundamentally redefined by a new order of court, nobility and army (service aristocracy, expanded ruler titles, more elaborate court ceremonial; cf. Theophylact Simocatta 1,9; 3,8; Procop. Pers. 1,17,26-28; Tabari 1,990,16 f. DE Gorje; Dinawari 85,6 f. GuirG.). Particular respect and attention are paid to the female members of the royal family as early as in the Iranian testimonies of the 3rd cent. (e.g. [15. SKZ 23/18/39, 25/20/46 f., 29/23/56]). Religious dignitaries (mdbadan, hérbedan) were experts in questions of belief and tradition, but also in matters of administration and law. Only from the 4th cent. did an explicit official hierarchy modelled on monarchical power develop among them. The ‘middle classes’ included the lower state functionaries on a local level, craftsmen (some of whom were Christian deportees from Syria) and traders in the cities, as well as specialists such as healers, astronomers, scholars and singers, and the specialist service personnel at the royal court and on noble estates. The Iranian masses consisted of the agrarian population, among whom the peasants, dependents (of the nobility) for centuries, were status

raised by the reforms of Husrau to the status of free tillers of their own soil. Although they were legally classified as ‘objects’, slaves were also regarded as human beings, which protected them from excessive cruelty. From the Late Sassanid law books [18] (prob. 6th cent. AD), information about household and family matters of the time can be gained. Members of a household were interlinked by a plethora of regulations and obligations, control of which was the prerogative of the kadag-hwaday (‘head of the household’). Detailed provisions also characterized the laws of marriage, inheritance, property and obligations. C. ADMINISTRATION AND ECONOMY The epigraphical evidence [10; 25. 183 ff., 291 ff.] records a plethora of dignitaries and functionaries (> satrap). Many officials, bearers of titles, and dignitaries are attested at the royal court. In the early Sassanid period, parts of the empire were subject to direct royal rule. In others, which were in the possession of the aristocracy, royal control could only be exercised indirectly. The attenuation of the nobility in the course of the popular uprisings of the late sth cent. enabled the kings to accomplish the transformation from an aristocratic to a royal administration of the country. The fiscal reforms of Husrau (Chosroes) I led, albeit only temporarily, to a further increase in royal power and to domestic stability, increasing the king’s scope for action both at home and abroad [2. 12 ff.; 21; 25. 189-191, 292 f.]. The S. maintained trading relations with Rome/ Byzantium, India and China (sometimes in competition with Byzantium).

Io

SASURA

D. ARMy The S. derived the equipment and tactics of their troops (interplay of heavily-armoured cavalry and light

where by the Muslims (on Sassanid culture: [25. 216-

cavalry archers) from the Parthian model (Amm. Marc. 23,6,83; 24,6,8; Procop. Pers. 1,14,24; 44.52; Tabari

denzeit, 2000 2 F.ALTHEIM, R.STIEHL, Ein asiatischer Staat,1954 3 Id., Finanzgeschichte der Spatantike, 1957 4M.Back, Die sasanidischen Staatsinschriften, 1978

1,964,9 f. DE GOEJE; Dinawari 74,15 f. GuirG.). However, they also became experts (imitating the Roman model) in > siegecraft (Amm. Marc. 19,5f; 20,6f; 11).

The armoured cavalry met their master in the lightlyarmed, mobile cavalry of the Islamic armies [25. 194-

197, 293 f.]. E. RELIGIOUS CONDITIONS Among the religious communities (on religion and religious politics: [25.199-216, 294-298]), the Zoroastrians (written record of the Avesta in the Middle Sassanid period; > Zoroastrianism) were very prominent, but so were Christians, Jews, Manichaeans (> Mani) and Mazdakites (+ Mazdak) (> Religion V). After the end of the politically-motivated persecutions of the Christians, and in the course of the christological disputes in the Roman Empire, the Sassanid Empire became a refuge for Christians from the Roman east (+ Monophysitism; > Nestorius, Nestorianism) from the 5th cent.; Christians were in the service of the kings, their educational institutions (> Nisibis, > Gundeshapur) were supported by the rulers and the Nestorian mission to the east set out from Iran. The Jews, with their ancient centres in Mesopotamia, were (apart from

few occasions) spared persecution as loyal subjects of the king. In the great Rabbinical schools of Mesopotamia the comments and interpretations of the Mishnah were created (— Rabbinical literature), which finally culminated in the edition of the Babylonian > Talmud [20] in the late 6th/early 7th cent. After the death of their prophet in Sassanid custody (AD 277), the Manichaeans (who were seen as heretics by the Zoroastrians) moved into eastern Roman territories, Arabia and esp.

farther to the east. The Mazdakites were persecuted for their attack on Zoroastrian social doctrines and ethics. In dealings with minorities, governmental and religious authorities did not always act in unison — the image of an alliance of ‘Throne and Altar’ is a construct from a much later (Islamic?) period. There was never a Zoroastrian ‘State Church’. F. ART AND CULTURE With their architecture of domes and iwan (barrel vaults, > Liwan), and their ornamental decor, Sassanid

architects provided powerful impulses in the Byzantine, Armenian and Islamic Orient. Iranian toreutics and textile arts were renowned as far afield as China and Western Europe. Through Sassanid agency, literature (e.g. medical, astronomical and agriculture-related texts) passed from west to east and vice versa (e.g. the Indian Pancatantra fable collection). Greek and Roman knowledge in philosophy, medicine, law, geography and agriculture was conveyed through the universities of the Empire, and later avidly absorbed there and else-

221, 298-300]). 1 M. Apkal-Kuavakrl, Das Bild des K6nigs in der Sasani-

5R.C. BLocktey, East Roman Foreign Policy, 1992 6 C.G. CEreTI, Primary Sources for the History of Inner and Outer Iran in the Sasanian Period, in: Archivum Eurasiae Medii Aevi 9, 1997, 17-71 7 M.H. DopGEon, S.N.C. Lieu (ed.), The Roman Eastern Frontier and the

Persian Wars, AD 226-363, 1991 History of Ancient Iran, 1984

8R.N. Frye, The 9 PH. GIGNoux,

Les

quatre inscriptions du mage Kirdir, 1991 10 G.GREATREX, Rome and Persia at War, 502-532, 1998 11 R. GysELEN, La géographie administrative de l’empire Sassanide, 1989 12 J.HowaRpb-JoHNsTON, The Two Great Powers in Late Antiquity: A Comparison, in: A. CaMERON (ed.), The Byzantine and Early Islamic Near East, Vol. 3, 1995, 157-226 13 J.HowarD-JOHNSTON, Heraclius’ Persian Campaigns and the Revival of the East Roman

Empire, 622-630, in: War in History 6, 1999,

1-44 14H.Humsacu, P.O.Skj£Rv6O, The Sassanian Inscription of Paikuli, 3 vols., 1978-1983 15 Pu.

Huyse, Die dreisprachige Inschrift Sabuhrs I. an der Kaba-i Zardust (SKZ), 2 vols., 1999 16 E. KETTENHOFEN, Tirdad und die Inschrift von Paikuli, 1995 17A.D. Lee, Information and Frontiers, 1993

18 M. Macucu, Rechtskasuistik und Gerichtspraxis zu Beginn des siebenten Jahrhunderts in Iran, 1993 19 H.D. Ma tek, A Survey of Research on Sasanian Numismatics, in: Numismatic Chronicle 153, 1993, 227-269

20 J.NEUSNER, Israel’s Politics in Sasanian Iran, 1986 21 Z.RuBIN, The Reforms of Khusro Anshirwan, in: see [12], 227-296 22 K.SCHIPPMANN, Grundziige der Geschichte des sasanidischen Reiches, 1990 23 M.SPRINGBERG-HINSEN, Die Zeit vor dem Islam in arabischen Universalgeschichten des 9. bis 12. Jahrhunderts, 1989 24D.Weser, Ostraca, Papyri und Pergamente (Corpus inscriptionum Iranicarum 3,4/5), 1992 25 J.WIESEHOFER, Ancient Persia, 1996 26 A.PANAINO, The bayan of the Fratarakas: Gods or ‘Divine’ Kings?, in: C. G. Cereti, M. Maggi and E. Provasi (ed.), Religious themes and texts of pre-Islamic Iran and Central Asia: Studies in honour of Prof. Gherardo Gnoli on the occasion

of his 65th birthday on 6th December 2002 (Beitrage zur Iranistik 24), 2003, 265-88 27 B.DicGNnas, E. WINTER, Rome and Persia in Late Antiquity, 2007 28 E. YARSHATER, Iranian National History, in: I.GErSHEVITCH (ed.), The Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3/1,

1983, 359-477. Maps: E. KETrENHOFEN, Das Sasanidenreich (TAVO B VI

3), 1993.

J.W.

Sasura. Place in Africa proconsularis, from the time of Diocletianus in the province of Byzacena (> Diocletianus, with map), some 18 km to the north of > Thysdrus, modern Henchir el-Ksour (Bell. Afr. 75,3; 76,1:

oppidum Sarsura; Ptol. 4,3,36: Lacotea/Sasotira; Tab. Peut. 6,3: Sassura vicus). > Caesar attacked the Pompeians under Caecilius [I 32] and Iuba [1] there in 46 BC and conquered S.

Il

12

AATun 050, p. 73, no. 12; J.-B. CHABOT (ed.), Recueil des inscriptions libyques, 1940/1, Nr. 43-45. W.HU.

murderer (Jo 8,44). The Anti-Christ, non-Christians

SASURA

Sasychis (Saovyxic; Sdsychis). According to Diod. Sic. 1,94,3 one of the great legislators of Egypt. The name has been variously connected with Egyptian proper names. It is most likely a variant of Asychis, who is recorded in Hdt. 2,136 as a follower of > Mycerinus and whose name corresponds to Egyptian ‘s-ih.t. Interpretations as Shoshenq (— Sesonchosis) are phonetically problematic. 1 A.Burton, Diodorus Siculus, Book I. A Commentary, 1972,273 2A.B.LLoyp, Herodotus Book II. Commentary 99-182, 1988, 88-90.

L.I. RapinowiTz,

s.v. S., Encyclopaedia

Judaica

14,

1971, 902-905; G.VON Rap, W.FOERSTER, s. V. dvaPdrdAw, SuaBoroc, ThWB 2, 1935, 69-80. LUK.KU.

JO.QU.

Satala (ta or f Ldataha [ta or hé Sdtala]; Cass. Dio 68,19,2; Procop. Pers. 1,15,9 f.). Important communi-

cations node in Armenia Minor riod and hence a long-standing In the Christian period it was a Sadag). A fragment (face) of an ture was found here.

and heretics are his servants. According to Lk 10,18 Jesus sees S. fall from Heaven (> Lucifer [1]). The removal of S. from heavenly power, however, contradicts the idea that his rule over the cosmos is unbroken (S. as ‘ruler of this world’, cf. Jn 12,31; 14,30; 16,11). The New Testament presentation of S. (particularly in Apoc 2 f. and 12,9) is the basis of the legends formed around this figure in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages. + Devil

during the Imperial PeRoman garrison town. see (remains at modern Anahita-Artemis sculp-

B.N. ARAKELJAN, Ocerki po istorii iskusstva Armenii (VI v. do n.E. - Ill v. n.E.), 1976.

drevnej BB.

Sataspes (Latdonns; Satdspés). According to Hdt. 4,43 a maternal nephew of > Darius [1] I, who was to be impaled for the violation of the daughter of > Zopyrus. He was released upon the intercession of his mother, and as atonement he was given the task of circumnavigating Libya (Africa). He started from Egypt and left the Mediterranean through the ‘Pillars of Heracles’ (i.e. the Straits of Gibraltar), but turned back without having fulfilled his task; as a result > Xerxes I had the originally imposed punishment carried out. F.Co.in, Le récit de Sataspés s’inspire-t-il de sources égyptiennes?, in: ZPE 82, 1990, 287-296.

Satan (from Hebrew satan, ‘treat with hostility, be hostile’; cf. also sitna, ‘hostility’) in its basic sense describes an ‘adversary, enemy, political opponent’, and persons who by their inimical behaviour set out to prevent an undertaking. From the variant satam there is a noun mastema, ‘hostility’ (Hos 9,7 f.), which is the origin of Mastema, the name of a mythical S. figure in the Book of Jubilees. A S. character proper has been documented

for the first time c. 520 BC. He is part of the heavenly assembly, is subordinate to the will of God and is described as an ‘adversary’ (Job 1,6; Zach 3,1). He puts

the pious on trial before God and seeks power over them. If God delivers a person to him, S. inflicts misery on that person. It is not until x Chr 21,1 that S. becomes a proper name, describing a mythical figure who tempts people. This figure takes on a function of God, who is supposed to remain far from all evil (cf. r Chr 21,1 with 2 Sam 24,1). Post-Biblical interpretations of the sacrificing of Isaac (Gn 22,1-19) confirm this trend, with the

temptation of Abraham being instigated on the accusation of Mastema or S. (Jubilees 17, 4Q Pesharim on Jubilees). In Jubilees and the testaments of the twelve Patriarchs (> Testamentary literature) this dualism between God and S. intensifies. In imitation of Gn 6,1-4, disobe-

dient angels become Satanic spirits that interfere with the covenant between God and humans. Later S. himself becomes a fallen angel (Vita Adae 12-16). The New Testament (oatavac/satands, 6iGfodoc/didbolos, Beduao/beliar, BeekCeBovW/beelzeboul; Latin Beelzebub) combines such motifs. There S. is accuser, tempter (Mt 4,I-11 par. and elsewhere), enemy, sinner, liar and

JW.

Satem languages. In > phonetics and phonology, the term satem (Avest. satam, ‘hundred’) is employed to characterize those Indo-European languages which — unlike > centum languages — preserve the Proto-IndoEuropean (PIE) series of palatal stops k, @, &” as independent phonemes. The change of palatal tectals (> Gutturals) into affricates (such as ¢, é) or fricatives is a common phenomenon in the history of languages. Not all languages did necessarily take the same path in the development from PIE *kmtd- to Avestan satom, Sanskrit satdm, Lithuanian simtas or Old Church Slavonic stto. To differentiate between sub-branches of the SLs (> Albanian, > Armenian, > Baltic languages, -» Indo-Aryan languages, - Iranian languages, > Slavonic languages), other criteria are employed. In IndoIranian and Balto-Slavic, it is clear which sounds continue the PIE series of k, @, ”, e.g. Sanskrit §, j, h; Avestan s, z, z; Lithuanian §, Z, Z. In the case of Albanian and Armenian, however, numerous phonetically conditioned sound changes (- Phonetics and phonology) and the small number of established cognates prevent us from giving a straightforward account. The delabialization and possible defricativization of the PIE labiovelars k“, g”, g”” into k, g, g” (PIE * -k“e > Sanskrit ca ~, Latin —que) or even the conditioned change of PIE s in the SL should not be put at the same level as ‘satemization’. + Gutturals; + Indo-European languages (with map);

~» Phonetics and phonology

14

13 BRUGMANN/DELBRUCK 1.1, 556-569; W.CowGILL, M.MayruHorer, Indogermanische Grammatik 1.1/2, 1986, 102-109.

D.ST.

Satibarzanes (SatiPaetavys; Satibarzanés). [1] ‘Eunuch’/chamberlain in the entourage of > Artaxerxes [1]I (Plut. Artaxerxes 12,4. Plut. Mor. 1736; Ktes. FGrH 688 F 30). [2] Persian satrap of > Areia [1], fought in the battle of + Gaugamela on the left flank (Arr. Anab. 3,8,4), fol-

lower of > Bessus and one of the assassins of > Darius [3] II (Arr. Anab. 3,21,9 f.). He surrendered in 330 to > Alexander [4] the Great (Arr. Anab. 3,25,1 f.; Curt. 6,6,13), but rebelled at the moment the latter continued his march (Arr. Anab. 3,25,5 ff.; 28,2; Diod. Sic. 17,78,1 ff.; 81,3; Curt. 6,6,20 ff.; 7,3,2) and fell in 329 in a duel with > Erigyius (Arr. Anab. 3,28,3; Diod. Sic. 7 S83 4uties Cuttazs 453 3rtt.) BERVE 2, Nr. 697 (on [2]); BRIANT, s.v. (on [1-2]).

— J-W.

Saticula. Fortified city in Samnium (> Samnites), prob-

ably near modern Sant’ Agata dei Goti on the right bank of the Isclero, a left-hand tributary of the > Volturnus. Bitterly fought over during the 2nd Samnite War, S. was conquered by the Romans in 315 BC (Liv. 9,21 f.; Diod. Sic. 19,72,4: Datixdda/Satikola) and in 313 secured by the establishment of a colony (Liv. 27,10; Vell. Pat. 1,14,4; Plin. HN 3,107; Fest. 340). Twokm from Sant’Agata dei Goti, a necropolis with numerous redfigured vases was dug up, some of them imports from Attica (rst half of 4th cent. BC) and some probably from Greek workshops in Campania or from local production (2nd half of 4th cent. BC). M.NapPOLt, s. v. S., EAA 7, 1966, 66 f.; L.RICHARDSON, s. v. S., PE, 810; E. DE Jutiis, Magna Grecia, L’Italia mer-

idionale dalle origini leggendarie alla conquista romana, 1996, 371.

M.G.

Saties. Important Etruscan gens, known from the Tomba Francois in > Volci/Vulci, 4th/3rd cent. BC. Several family members are named in inscriptions there,

the founder of the tomb, Vel S., is depicted richly robed. An

Avele

Sataiies,

dedicator

of an

Attic

vase

of

unknown provenance in Heidelberg (end of the 6th cent. BC), and a Fasti S., mentioned by name on an Hellenistic urn from Clusium (modern Chiusi), were

SATIRE

ture or art: “the playfully critical distortion of the familiar” (Feinberg). In antiquity, the term denoted the Roman literary genre of satura as discussed by Quintilian (Inst. 10,1,93) and known to us through the works of Horace, Persius and Juvenal. The genre must be distinguished from other works which feature satirical passages, including Aristophanes [3], Herodas, Plautus, Lucretius, Horace’s Epodes and Seneca’s Epistles. Quintilian’s statement “satire is entirely our own” (“satura quidem tota nostra est”) claims Roman superiority and, probably, Roman originality for the genre: it is clear that no Greek original of Roman verse satire survives. Satire undoubtedly has some affinities with Greek iambus (> Iambographers) as written by Archilochus, Hipponax and Callimachus [3] and it shares aspects of outlook and material with Roman epigram as developed by Catullus and Martial, but is distinctive in its use of the hexameter, after an early period of metrical experimentation. For Roman prose satire, exemplified in the lost satires of Varro and in the Apocolocyntosis of Seneca [2] and inspired by the Greek diatribes of Bion, see > Prosimetrum.

Il. SATURA The meaning of the term satura was not known in antiquity. Diomedes [4], following Varro, offers four explanations (GL 1,485). Most convincing are the explanations which link the genre with the ~ lanxsatura, the ‘mixed dish’ offered to the gods, and with a sausage made from many ingredients: both emphasize fullness and variety and the second connects with the prominent theme of food in Roman satire. The derivation which links satura with > satyrs is now rejected, although the persistence of this idea from antiquity onwards suggests that the link expresses a significant feature of the genre, namely, a greater tendency than most forms of ancient literature to accommodate the bodily and sensual aspects of life. The connection with Greek = satyr plays converges with Livy’s mention of dramatic satura, a musical stageshow with no organized plot, in his account of the development of Roman drama (7,2,4-10). However unreliable this information, it points to the performative aspect of Roman satire and may explain the links drawn by the satirists between satire and Greek Old > Comedy (Hor. Sat. I,4,1-5,

I,10,16; Pers. 1,123-4 with Diom. GL

1,485 []).

probably members of the same gens. F. BURANELLI

(ed.), La Tomba

Francois di Vulci, 1987,

£4A7—161.

F.PR.

Satire I. Genre

II. Satura

IV. CHARACTERISTICS

III]. INVENTION V.RECEPTION

I. GENRE As a modern concept, satire denotes a witty and critical approach which can be found in any type of litera-

Ill. INVENTION ~ Ennius [1] wrote four books of Saturae in a variety of metres. The 31 lines that survive attest the miscellaneous subject-matter: criticism, fable, autobiography, personifications, word-play. It is > Lucilius [I 6] who is hailed by later satirists as the inventor of the genre (Hor. Sat. 1,10,48). In his thirty books of Satires he initially used a variety of metres (iambo-trochaic metres of drama and elegiac couplet) but soon settled upon the hexameter, the > metre of epic, a decision which made satire’s continuing engagement with epic inevitable.

SATIRE

15

This novel combination of elevated form with mundane content and critical tone was perhaps influenced by Alexandrian poetic experiments with traditional forms and material [2]. From the surviving 1300 fragments it is possible to glimpse the main characteristics of the new genre: use of monologue, dialogue and letter forms; fierce abuse of the eminent and the lowly for their faults; criticism of features of Roman life including feasts; questions of morality, philosophy, religion and literature; autobiographical mode of presentation combined with adoption of a variety of personae; generally informal,

unelevated

diction

(gracilis

according

to

Varro, quoted by Gell. NA 6.14.6) which includes repetitions, obscenity and Greek words but also accommodates occasional epic parody. Lucilius forges the genre into a vigorous and versatile articulation of Roman ideology from the perspective of a member of the elite: as a friend of Cornelius [I 70] Scipio Aemilianus, Lucilius makes satire highly political. IV. CHARACTERISTICS The continuity of the genre from this prototype in the works of Horace, Persius and Juvenal is clear. Horace’s (~ Horatius

[7]) satirical output comprises two

books of Satires and (arguably) his Epistles and socalled Ars Poetica (collectively styled “Bioneis sermonibus et sale nigro”, Epist. 2,2,60); > Persius [2] wrote

one unfinished but acclaimed book of Satires headed by a prologue in choliambics; and Juvenal (— Iuvenalis) produced five books of Satires, of which the last is unfinished. All three satirists acknowledge Lucilius as the founder of the genre: Hor. Sat. 1,4; 1,10; 2,1; Pers. 1,114-15; Juv. 1,19-20 and 165-7. Accordingly, central features in Roman verse satire include: (a) setting in Rome and criticism of city life, with country life as a foil (Hor. Sat. 2,6; Epist. 1,10;

1,14; Juv. 3); (b) the system of patronage (— Amicitia; ~» Cliens; > Patronus) with its uneven power relationships (Hor. Sat. 1,5; 1,6; 2,6; Hor. Epist. 1,7; 1,17; 1,18; Juv. 13 33 43 53 73 93 12); (c) corporeal and materialistic appetites, desires and preferences, including food and feasts (Hor. Sat. 2,2; 2.4; 2,6; 2,8; Epist. 1,5; Juv. 5, 11), greed (Hor. Sat. 1,1; 2,5; Pers. 6; Juv. 14), sex and sexuality (Hor. Sat. 1,2; Pers. 4; Juv. 2, 6); (d) systems of thought including attacks on intellectuals (Hor. Sat. 2533 2a7 vk piste,Teel 63.0.

1

Osbers43.15) UV Os Os 13)

(e) literary theory and literary criticism (Hor. Sat. 1,4; TOs 2aLe Ors E piste Lee 2s bakes 222 CATS be Pero Ts Juv. 1); (f) intertextuality (including parody) with epic and other literary forms (Hor. Sat. 1,9; 2,3; 2,53 Juv. 33

43 12). While each of the satirists conforms to the ‘rules’ of the genre as established by Lucilius, a clear development is discernible. Horace self-consciously modernizes, polishes and moderates Lucilius’ rough, aggressive style of satire to meet the tastes and reflect the ideology of his sophisticated elite audience, which included Maecenas, Octavian (> Augustus [1]) and Virgil (— Vergilius [4]) [3; 4]. Virtually every phrase in Persius is a

16

reworking of Horace but from an elitist Stoic point of view [5]. Juvenal develops Persius’ experiment into the apogee of indignant satire, crafting a new declamatory idiom influenced by rhetorical theory and practice and reviving the relationship between satire and epic [6-8]. He uses this ‘grand style’ to demonstrate both the power and the faults of anger, then in his later satires adopts a calmer stance of ironic cynicism and detachment [9]. V. RECEPTION It is Juvenal’s “savage indignation” (“saeva indignatio”, SCALIGER) that exercized the strongest influence on subsequent satire. Satire viewed as the angry unmasking of faults and vices was acceptable to Christian ideology and Latin satire is well represented in the Middle Ages. Gradually the hexameter form was abandoned and ‘satire’ came to include poetry with a satiric tone in a variety of forms. The same applies to satire composed in other languages: ‘satire’ in European literature of the Renaissance and afterwards has widened from the narrow framework of Roman hexameter satire to denote essentially a fiercely critical tone of voice. + Horatius [7]; — Iambographers; — Iuvenalis, D. Tunius; + Parody C.; — Persius [2]; — Prosimetrum; — SATIRE 1 K.FREUDENBURG, The Walking Muse. Horace on the Theory of S., 1993 2M.PurtMa-Prwonka, Lucilius und Kallimachos, 1949 3G.C. Fiske, Lucilius and Horace, 1920

4N.Rupp, The Satires of Horace, 1966

5 J.C. BRAMBLE, Persius and the Programmatic S., 1974 6J.De DecKeER, Juvenalis Declamans, 1913 TAG: Scorr, The Grand Style in the Satires of Juvenal, 1927 8 E.J. Kenney, Juvenal: Satirist or Rhetorician?, in: Latomus 22, 1963, 704-720 9S.H. BRAUND, Beyond Anger: A Study of Juvenal’s Third Book of Satires, 1988 10 C.J. CLassEn, S. — The Elusive Genre, in: Symbolae Osloenses 63, 1988, 95-121 11 C.WITKE, Latin Satire: The Structure of Persuasion, 1970 12 E.S. RAMAGE et al., Roman Satirists and Their S.,1974 13 W.S. ANDERSON, Essays on Romans Satire, 1982 14 J. ADAMIETZ (ed.), Die rémische S., 1986 15. N.Ruppb, Themes in Roman S., 1986 16 M.CorFey, Roman S., *1989

17 A. Ricuuin, The Garden of Priapus. Sexuality and Aggression in Roman Humor, Roman Verse Satire, 1992.

Satirical

(mocking)

poems

*1992

18 S.H. BRAUND,

SUB.

see

> Iambographers;

~ Invective; > Parody Satis (Zatic/Sdtis, Egyptian St.t), Anuket and Chnum (+ Chnubis [r]) are the three chief deities of the island of + Elephantine. The temple of S. on Elephantine is archeologically attested as early as the Early Dynastic Period (from c. 2800 BC) [1]. S. is depicted as a woman wearing a crown with horns. Because of the phonological similarity of S. and > Sothis, the two goddesses were identified with one another in the Late Period (713-332 BC) [2]. This connection is reinforced by the association of Sothis with the flooding of the Nile, since the source of the + Nile was assumed to be located at Elephantine

17

18

among other places. S. and Anuket appear in astronomical depictions as guarantors of the vitally important flooding.

RO ilies OrP eines TEIN Eee ADROE arbiter (a judge with administrative discretion) (Dig. 2,8,9 and ro pr). It was also a fundamental requirement that the bondsman was of the same legal status as the party furnishing security. Cases in which a satisdatio could be arranged by the ~ praetor or where it was even prescribed ipso jure — e.g. in the case of someone litigating on behalf of someone else (Gai. Inst. 4,101) —, were listed in his edict

under the heading de satisdando; all share the ambition in reference to the formula procedure (> formula) of

ensuring the continuation of proceedings. Should the satisdatio obligation not be obeyed, either the reneging party was treated as an indefensus (one presenting no defence to an action) or the object in question was permitted to be removed for placing in escrow (Dig. Din Bx752s) = M.Kaser,

K.Hacx1t,

*1996, 279, 430.

Das

rémische

Zivilprozefsrecht,

C.PA

Satnioeis (Latvidetc; Satnideis). River in Troas (Hom. Il. 6,343 14,445; 21,87), modern Tuzla Cayi, rises on the southwestern slopes of the Ida [2], near Gargara. It was on the S. that Homer’s city of Pedasus [3] is supposed to have been (cf. Str. 13,1,50). At Assus the S. is only about 2 km from the sea; it then proceeds west and reaches the sea between Hamaxitus and Larisa [5] near Gilpinar. L. BURCHNER, s. v. S, RE 2 A 1, 79 f.; W. Lear, Strabo on the Troad, 1923, 250-253; J. M. Cook, The Troad, 1973,

245 f.

While the ro attested rst-3rd century AD examples begin with ROTAS, those from late antiquity and the Byzantine period (some also in Greek letters) and from mediaeval and modern times start with SATOR. Finds are distributed over the whole of the Roman empire (Cirencester, Manchester, Aquincum, Dura-Europus, Rome); the earliest inscriptions from Pompeii (CIL IV

8123, 8623) originated soon after the middle of the rst century. AREPO has posed particular difficulties, which scholars have tried to explain as originating from various other languages (e.g. Egyptian, Greek, Celtic; cf. ThIL II 506,47) or as a proper name. A line-by-line (stoichédon) reading

- “SATOR AREPO TENET OP-

ERA ROTAS”, “the sower Arepo holds the works, the wheels” or “holds the wheels with effort [OPERA as

ablative]” or “the sower holds the plough [AREPO, ‘plough’], the works, the wheels” — is often favoured but makes little sense. A zigzag reading (boustrophedon) — “SATOR OPERA TENET - TENET OPERA SATOR”, “the creator obtains his works — he obtains his works, the creator” (double reading of the middle word TENET) - contains a proposition central to ancient theology, particularly the theory of providentia (‘providence’, > Predestination, theory of) in > Stoicism, which can be found with a similar wording in Cicero’s summary of Stoic theology in Nat. D. 2,73-86. There have been attempts to obtain different interpretations by breaking up the Sator square (anagram), as well as speculations on the numerical values of its letters (isopsephia), but the results of these approaches have led themselves ad absurdum. [1] discovered that the following figure can also be formed from the letters of the Sator square, which had a lasting impact:

E.SCH.

Saton (oatov/sdton, Latin satum; sa) is a Hebrew ca-

pacity measure for liquids and dry goods. Its volume varies in time and place between 20 and 24 loghim (> Log; Hin; — Sextarius) and corresponds to roughly 9.1-13.1 litres. During the Roman period the s. was equated with r */2 Italic modii (> Modius [3}) (Jos. Ant. Iud. 9,85; less often 1 */4 modii). H.-JS.

AmMHrv ~}

AGRESAGIS EERSIN OFS ie eR”

Sator square. Latin graffito of 5 rows of 5 letters, which can be read as a > palindrome from all four sides and in all four directions:

PMHMO O Fig. 2

©

19

20

Pater noster is the Latin translation of the beginning

true life. An incorporeal saviour Christ, appearing in human form, rescues the truly living from the angels, the wicked people and the demons. The Satornilians practised sexual asceticism and abstained entirely from eating food that had a soul (meat).

SATOR

SQUARE

of the Lord’s Prayer (Mt 6:9), attested as a form of ad-

dress from Homer (Il. 8,3 1 et passim) onwards, though in pagan Antiquity it was always connected with the name of the deity appealed to. At the time of the Pompeian graffiti, neither the Gospels had been written nor the Book of Revelation, which (1:8; 21:6; 22:13) are the first record of the Christian symbolism of alpha and omega, nor did a Latin Christian liturgy or cross symbolism exist (T cross, TENET cross, Paternoster cross).

Hence all Christian interpretations of the Sator square (e.g. as a secret sign of recognition at the time of the persecution of Christians) are just as mistaken as the assumption that the Paternoster cross was consciously incorporated into its composition. Derivations from Jewish, gnostic or Mithraic traditions can also be excluded, as well as relations to the > Tabula Iliaca [5]. A connection with the neo-Pythagorean speculations of + Nigidius Figulus, however, does seem possible [2]. In mediaeval and modern times, the Sator square had a conspicuous influence as a magical amulet for the Copts and Ethiopians, or as the names of the youths in the fiery furnace, of the shepherds of Bethlehem, of the wise men of the East or the martyrs of Sebaste in Cappadocian cave churches. In manuscripts, it occasionally appears together with — technopaegnia and magic number squares [3; 5]. In addition, it was used as an amulet and magic formula against all possible diseases, troubles and dangers. In music, Anton WEBERN was inspired to write forms of twelve-tone composition, and in graphic art Josua REICHERT designed multiple composition; in literature, as a visual text it influenced representatives of concrete poetry; it was used by Herbert ROSENDORFER as a Starting motif for his novel Der Ruinenbaumeister (1969; English The architect of ruins, 1992), and it inspired a fictional tale of its creation

in c. 200 BC, written by the Brazilian author Osman Lins in his novel Avalovara (1973; English 1980). 1 F. Grosser, Ein neuer Vorschlag zur Deutung der SatorFormel, in: ARW 24, 1926, 165-169 2H.HOMMEL,s.v. Satorformel, LAW, 2705 3 H.Hormann, Das Satorquadrat, 1977. +4 Id., s.v. Satorquadrat, RE Supplement

15, 1978, 477-565 I99I, 429-459.

5 U.ERNsT, Carmen

figuratum, HHO.

Satorninus (Zatoevetioc/Satorneilos, Latoevivoc/ Satorninos, Latin Saturninus). Christian teacher at the

time of the emperor Hadrian (first half of the 2nd century AD) in Antioch [1] (Euseb. Hist. eccl. 4,7,3; cf. also Hippolytus, Refutatio omnium haeresium 7,28), who was

considered

a heretic (> Heresy; -» Gnosis). Ac-

cording to > Eirenaeus [2] of Lyon, Adversus haereses 1,24,1-2, his doctrine presented as the supreme princi-

ple the unknown Father, creator of the angels. According to S., Man, as the ‘image’ of the transcendent idea of the superior power, was originally a creation of the seven world-creating angels (Gn 1,27) and incapabe of life. Only the spark of life (cf. Gn 2,7) sent as the soul by the superior power imparted to him upright gait, limbs and

A.HILGENFELD,

Die

Ketzergeschichte

des Urchristen-

tums, 1884 (repr. 1966), 190-195; S. PETREMENT, Le Dieu séparé. Les origines du gnosticisme, 1984, 449-458;

Index; A.PouRKIER,

L’hérésiologie chez Epiphane de

Salamine, 1992, 167-204.

W.LO.

Satrae (Xcatoat; Sdtrai). Thracian tribe on the northern coast of the Aigaion Pelagos (Aegaean) between Nestus and Strymon on the northeastern slopes of the > Pangaeum, whose ore deposits they exploited (Hdt. 7,112; possibly also meant by Lateoxévta/Satrokéntai in Hecat. FGrH 1 F 181). The > Edones are recorded as being there from 475 BC onwards (Hdt. 9,75). 1 J.N. JuruKova, Monetite na trakijskite plemena i vladeteli (Monetni sakrovista ot balgarskite zemi), 1992, 16 2 I. von BrEDOw, Stammesnamen und Stammeswirklich-

keit, in: Orbis Terrarum 5, 1999, 3-13.

Lv.B.

Satrap (Old Persian /sagapadvan-, ‘protector of the kingdom/dynasty’, Elamic Sd-ak-Sd-ba-ma, Akkadian ahsadrapanu, Imperial Aramaic hsatrapan, Greek usually cateannc/satrapés [9]; Latin satrapa, -es, satraps). Title of a Persian-Achaemenid (seminal: [3]), later also Seleucid, Parthian and Sassanid provincial governor (Parthian hstrp /hsahrapl; Middle Persian strp /Sahrap/). The title appears first in the > Bisutin inscription of > Darius [1] I [11. DB III 14.56], where it denotes two appointees of the new king in Bactria and Arachosia. In textual records, satraps are sometimes also referred to by terms (such as Latin praefectus, Greek éxiteonoc/epitropos, txaexocd/hyparchos, Akka-

dian pihatu) which can elsewhere refer to functionaries of lower ranks; on the other hand, the term satrap itself does not always address a precise function, but occasionally also denotes a title owed to royal favour or a particular social status (Str. 15,3,18; Polyaenus, Strat. 7,10). A region within which a satrap is mentioned, i.e. the official jurisdiction of a satrap, is referred to by scholars as a ‘satrapy’ (Greek oateaseia/satrapeia, Latin satrapia, e.g. Plin. HN 6,78; the term is not used very often in the sources). Conversely, it is also believed that satraps (without the title) can be identified where their

names are mentioned in connection with these regions — circular reasoning is not impossible here. Furthermore, given that satrapy registers are only preserved from the early Hellenistic period onward [7], that Herodotus’ vouoUnomoi and deyai/archai (3,89-94) and the dahyava (lands/peoples) of the Old Persian inscriptions certainly do not reflect the Achaemenid satrapies and that functional changes must be assumed to have ensued after the reforms of Darius I, it is hardly surprising that radically different lists of Achaemenid satrapies are discussed among scholars [cf. 4. 77 f.; 6; 7; 8].

22

22

On the provincial level, the satrap, whose ‘court’ or commissariat was a replica of the royal court, was responsible for the land-related levying and collection of tribute (and, where necessary, for its exchange into precious metals). Part of the duties paid here remained in the province (> Taxes). In case of war, the satrap commanded the contingents of his subjects, while the garrisons (peoveai/phrourai), whose supply was his responsibility (as was that ofthe king on his travels), were answerable to royal commanders. The satraps, who were sometimes summoned to gather at the royal court, and who were monitored by royal functionaries and instructed by royal letters, also had diplomatic and judicial functions (and partly also the right to mint coins). Almost all Achaemenid satraps came from the senior Iranian nobility. Sometimes, by royal consent, the office of satrap in a province was handed down within a family. We know of numerous risings of satraps against the central authority of the Great King (— Satrap revolt). However, rivalries among the satraps as well as royal countermeasures meant that none of them succeeded. ~ Alexander [II 4] the Great took over Persian provincial organization and the title of satrapés for his governors, and appointed both Macedonians/Greeks and Iranians alike as satraps (but eventually, after negative experiences with the latter, almost exclusively Macedonians). Military powers seem to have been withheld from Iranian satraps; instead, these were transferred to Macedonian/Greek otgatnyoi/stratégoi or éxionomov episkopoi [2]. A core of formerly Persian satrapies also continued to exist in the early times of the Diadochi, but in peripheral areas particularly large satrapies seem to have been created, while old satrapies in Mesopotamia and Media appear to have been split [7]. The imperial territory of the > Seleucids was also generally divided into satrapies (in 281 BC c. 20-25; in the 3rd/2nd cents. BC some were split and therefore considerably reduced in size). Their subdivisions were called merides, hyparchiai or toparchiai. The satraps had wide-ranging powers, similar to those of the stratégoiin the provinces of Asia Minor. The latter were to all probability temporarily introduced across the entire kingdom by > Antiochus [5] III (stronger emphasis on the military sphere?). Regions in the west and east (Asia Minor and the &vw oateanetav/ano satrapeiai, ‘higher satrapies’) were headed by governors-general or viceroys, the heir to the throne often being attested as 6 éxi tOv &vw oateanev/ho epi tin ano satrapeion (‘chief of the higher satrapies’) [1. rff., esp. 78 ff., 143 ff.]. In the Parthian kingdom (-— Parthians), the ‘vassal kingdoms’ adjoined areas under direct central rule, which were administered by satraps (or stratégoi), e.g. in Mesopotamia; Tac. Ann. 6,42; 11,8 speaks of praefecturae, Isidore of Charax in his Stathmoi Parthikoi lists the provinces by name. Satraps are also know from ~» Nisa [2] and Bisutun (e.g. the satrap Kofzat, who is attested at both places). In the latter place, GotarzesI (later rival for the throne of > Mithridates [13] II) was still called ‘satrap of the satraps’ (catedmns tov

The function of the office of Sabrap, epigraphically attested for the Sassanid period as head of a province (Middle Persian Sahr) established on royal land, cannot be precisely determined [5. 28 f.].

oatoandv/satrapés ton satrapon) [10. 197].

SATRAP

REVOLT

1 H. Benctson, Die Strategie in der hellenistischen Zeit, vol. 2,*1964 2 BERVE, vol. 1, esp. 253-283 3 BRIANT, Index s.v. 4 P.BRIANT, Bulletin d’histoire achéménide

(BHAch) I, in: Topoi Suppl. I, 1997, 5-127 5 R.GysELEN, La géographie administrative de |’empire sassanide, 1989 6B.Jacoss, Die Satrapienverwaltung im Perserreich zur Zeit Darius’ IIl., 1994 7 H.Kurnxorr, Die Satrapienregister der Alexander- und Diadochenzeit, 2000 8 Tu. PeTiT, Satrapes et satrapies dans l’empire achéménide de Cyrus le Grand a Xerxes I", 1990 =9R.ScumiTT, Der Titel “S.”, in: A.MORPURGO Davies, W.MeEIp (ed.), Studies in Greek, Italic and IndoEuropean Linguistics, FS L. R. Palmer, 1976, 373-390

10 Id., Parthische Sprach- und Nameniberlierferung aus arsakidischer Zeit, in: J.WIESEHOFER (ed.), Das Parther-

reich und seine Zeugnisse, 1998, 163-204 11Id., The Bisitun Inscriptions of Darius the Great. Old Persian Text, 1991. ; JW.

Satrap Revolt. Several risings of Persian — satraps against the central authority of the Great Kings are documented, esp. in the late 5th and 4th cents. BC (e.g. ~» Megabyzus [2], > Pissuthnes, Amorges, > Cyrus [3] the Younger), but the term SR usually refers to the main phase (late 360s, called ‘Great’ by Diod. Sic. 15,90 ff, esp. 93,1) of the revolts against > Artaxerxes [2] II (3708-3 50s). According to this source, it was character-

ized by joint action (koinopragia) satraps (and peoples) of Asia Minor, the Egyptian > Tachos and by the spread of unrest into Syria and

among numerous support of these by Spartans, and the Phoenicia (other

sources: Nep. Datames; Xen. Ages. 2,26 f.; Polyaenus,

Strat. 8,21,3; Just. Epit. prolog ro et al.; coins). There is debate in recent scholarship about the extent and importance of the revolts (which can hardly have been jointly planned or even coordinated) (cf. [1; 4] against [3]; intermediate position: [2]). They can be subdivided into various phases (or rebellions): The uprising of > Datames with its centre in Cappadocia; the rebellion of > Ariobarzanes [1] in Hellespontic Phrygia, with Athenian and Spartan support (put down by ~» Maussolus and > Autophradates [1] of Lydia, loyal to the king); unrests involving > Orontes [2] O. I (ex-

pedition to Syria), Datames (crossing of the Euphrates) and Tachos (expedition to Phoenicia with support of — Agesilaus [2] and > Chabrias). In the end, Orontes surrendered, Datames was murdered and Tachos fled to the Great King after a rout against crown prince Ochus and because of a rebellion in Egypt. The rising of > Artabazus [4] against > Artaxerxes [3] A. III (from 352) may be regarded as the final phase of the SR. The revolts should not be seen as signs of a fundamental weakness in the central Persian power, but as symptoms of temporary regional instability. Their failure was a consequence of rivalries among the satraps (and within the Egyptian ruling house) as much as of the

SATRAP

REVOLT

military and diplomatic countermeasures of Artaxerxes Il. 1 BRIANT, 675-694, 1018-1024 2 S.HORNBLOWER, Persia. Political History, 400-336 B. C., in: CAH’, vol. 6, 1994, 45-96, esp. 84 ff. 3 R.Moysey, Diodoros, the

Satraps and the Decline of the Persian Empire, in: Ancient History Bull. 5, 1991, 113-122

4 M. WeisKoprF, The

So-Called ‘Great Satraps’ Revolt’, 366-360 B. C., 1989. Jw.

Satrapes [1] (Persian-Achaemenid title) see > Satrap [2] (Sateamyc/Satrapés; Ladedannyo/Sadrapés). Graecized name of the Canaanite god Sadrapa’, worshipped from North Africa to Babylonia esp. in the HellenisticRoman period. The Greek form of the name, probably chosen in allusion to the Old Persian title hsa@ra (‘protector of the land’), is known from two inscriptions of Ma‘ad near Byblus (dated 8 BC and the 3rd/4th cent. AD respectively), and is also mentioned in Paus. 6,25,5 (statue in Elis).

The Canaanite god, whose name means ’Sed, the healer’, and who is generally depicted, like > Asclepius, as youthful with the Asclepian rod and lions (e.g. on a relief from Hierapolis Bambyce), was a > healing deity, like + ESmin. He protected esp. against harm from small animals. He first appears in a Phoenician context at ‘Amrit (stele Paris, LV AO. 22247 [5. 336 f.]) in the 7th/6th cent. BC, then in Sarepta [4. 100 f.] in the 5th/4th cent. An altar was consecrated to him at > Carthage (KAI 77). He was probably invoked as a chthonic god in Sicily (Grotta Regina, north of Palermo, sth—3rd cents. BC), and appeared in the same function alongside Horon in Antas on Sardinia, where he is mentioned in a consecration to Sid/Sardus Pater, who was worshipped there [1. pl. 28/1, 37/1]. In North Africa, S. was, along with Milk‘aStart, among the ‘Lords of the city of + Leptis Magna’ (KAI 119, rst cent. AD), and also appeared as Liber Pater (— Liber, Liberalia), a Punic

equivalent to Dionysus in a Punic-Latin bilingual inscription (KAI 127). S. is also attested at > Palmyra from the rst-3rd cents. AD, perhaps through Phoenician influence. There, like most gods, he is depicted wearing armour, but his rod of Asclepius and a scorpion identify him as a god of healing and fertility [6. 83 ff. fig. 6, cf. fig. 8 from the Hauran]. He is depicted similarly in Babylonia on a Jewish-Aramaic magical bowl of the 5th cent. AD from Nippur [3. no. 25,5]. — Healing deities, healing cults 1 M.H. Fantar, Richerche puniche ad Antas (Studi Semitici30),1969 2 E.LipiNski, Dieux et déesses de l’univers phénicien et punique (Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 64),1995

24

23

3J.A. MonTGomeErRY, Aramaic Incantation

Texts from Nippur, 1913. 4.J.B. PRITCHARD, Sarepta, 1975 5 E.PueEcu, Les inscriptions phéniciennes d’Amrit, in: Syria 63, 1986, 327-342 6H.SeEyRIc, Antiquités syriennes 89, in: Syria 47, 1970, 77-112, esp. 83-85.

WR.

Satricum. City in Latium on the road from > Antium to — Velitrae, near modern Borgo Montello to the northeast of Anzio. Traces of settlement from the roth century BC on. In the 7th/é6th century BC an Etruscan foundation. In the sth/4th century BC S. was a settlement of the > Volsci, who participated in the battle of > Lacus Regillus on the side of the > Latini (Dion. Hal. ant. 5,61,3). S. was destroyed twice in the course of the Roman-Latin conflicts — in 377 (Liv. 6,32,4-33,5; only the Temple of + Mater Matuta was spared from the conflagration) and, after being rebuilt by colonists from Antium, in 346 (Liv. 7,27,2-8). The Temple of Mater Matuta remained for a long time the destination of pilgrims (struck by lightning in 206 BC: Liv. 28,11,2). In the time of Plinius [1] the Elder (HN 4,68) S. no longer existed (deserted). Two different phases of building of the Temple can be discerned (in 640/625 BC and 500/480 BC; in its foundations there is an inscription in archaic Latin [1; 2], cf. > Lapis Satricanus). There are necropoleis from the Archaic period to the northwest and southwest of the city. 1C.M.

1980

Strppe,

M.PALLoTriNo,

Lapis

Satricanus

...,

2P.S. Lutor, R.R.KNoop, S.: tempels en daken,

1998.

M. MAASKANT-KLEIBRINK, Settlement Excavations at Borgo Le Ferriere “S.”, 2 vols., 1987/1992; J. W. Bouma,

W.PRUMMEL, Religio votiva. The Archaeology of Latial Votive

Religion,

Diss.

1996;

R.R.

KNoop,

S., 1987;

B. HELDRING, S., 1984 und 1998; C. M. STIBBE, S., 1984— 1991;

D.J. WAARSENBURG,

S., 1996; P.S. LULoF,

S.,

1998; C.M. Str1pBE (ed.), S.: Reports and Studies of the S. Project, 1987 ff. M.M.MO.

Satrius. Italian, presumably a family name from Etruria (SCHULZE 80; 225). Cf. also > Satyrius. I. REPUBLICAN

PERIOD

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {1 1] S., M. As the son of L. Minucius Basilus’s sister, he

was adopted by him, but was bypassed by means of a forged will (Cic. Off. 3,73 f.; > Minucius [I 4]). In 44/43 BC he is recorded as patron of the Picentes and Sabines and a follower of M. Antonius [I 9] (Cic. Off. 3574; Cic. Phil. 2,107). He cannot be identified with the legate of C. + Trebonius in Cicero (Ad Brut. 1,6,3). J.BA. Il. IMPERIAL PERIOD {Il 1] S. Rufus. Senator in the reign of Domitian, pos-

sibly also of Trajan, known only from Plinius [2] (Ep. 1,5,11 and 9,13,17). Under + Domitianus, he and Plinius pleaded together in a lawsuit; in 97 AD, he advocated a compromise with the followers of Domitian in the Senate. {I 2] S$. Secundus. Connected with — Aelius [II 19] Seianus. In AD 25, he accused > Cremutius Cordus of lése majeste (+ Maiestas; Tac. Ann. 4,34,1; 6,8,5). Since he appeared as an accuser of Seianus in 31, it seems that, despite his connection with the overthrown

25

26

Praetorian prefect, he himself evaded conviction (Tac. Ann. 6,47,2). WE.

of retrieving the corn stored under the ground after harvesting; here the Saturnalia marked the potential risk to the reserves. This reconstruction appears to be entirely plausible, even though from the 3rd century BC at the latest it became secondary. Liv. 22,1,19 reports that in the year 217 BC, on the occasion of obtaining portents, in addition to a sacrifice and a — lectisternium at the Temple of Saturn, a celebration was organized which was to be maintained in future years. This date can be seen as a radical and far-reaching change in terms of a + Hellenization in the history of the Saturnalia [3. 205 f.], which is a powerful but not undisputed point of view. The assumption that rites which had long been practised in Rome were now for the first time recorded and fixed by ritual has a number of points in its favour [5. 141 f.]. Elements of the cult and the associated private celebrations of proverbial exuberance designate the Saturnalia as a festival in which, for a specific period at the end of the year, the normal social order seems to have been set aside ([5. 146-163]; interpretation as a New Year ritual in [6. 25 f.]); regulations such as court recesses, or the closing of schools in the Imperial period enabled a large portion of the population to participate. The sacrifice to Saturn was performed Graeco rity, i.e. with head uncovered (Cato Orat. fr. 77 MALCOVATI;

Satureius. Tr. pl. in 133 BC, ina fight was the first to hit Ti. Sempronius [I 16] Gracchus with a chair leg (Plut. Ti. Gracchus 19,10).

K.-LE.

Saturius Firmus. Senator, cos. suff. in 148 AD (FO? 51). His father (or grandfather) of the same name, probably mentioned in Plin. Ep. 4,15,3, was married to a daughter of the senator Asinius Rufus (cf. [1]) and this eased his rise to senatorial status. 1 SyME, RP 7, 604.

WE.

Saturnalia. Roman festival of > Saturnus on December 17. In the Republican Fasti Antiates maiores, the day of the Saturnalia was qualified as EN, whereas in the Augustan Fasti Amiterni it was marked NP and was therefore designated as > feriae (‘holidays’; > Fasti). It seems plausible to see this change in the context of — Caesar’s calendar reform as an acknowledgement of the significance of the festival, which had been rising from the end of the 3rd cent. BC onwards (> Calendar B.4.). Concerning the duration of the Saturnalia, various levels can be distinguished: calendar annotations show that the public cult, which involved priests, was limited to a single day, but the celebrations occasioned by the extremely popular Saturnalia did not have this limit. Cicero assumes a three-day festival period at least (Cic. Att. 13,57); Macrobius cites evidence of a seven-

day festival period (of which there is at the time, in the

Imperial period, much documentation) for as early as the rst century BC (Macrob. Sat. 1,10,3). Augustus extended the court recess to three days (ibid. 1,10,4; 23), Caligula added a further day (Suet. Calig. 17,2), and, finally, Claudius a fifth (Cass. Dio 60,25,8). By the Republican period, the Saturnalia were celebrated not only in Rome itself, but also in the army (Cic. Att. 5,20,5; Plut. Pompeius 34,2). Already in antiquity, the origin and significance of the Saturnalia gave rise to diverse speculations. Macrobius alone mentions three aitia, each of which refers to

the period before the founding of Rome (Macrob. Sat. 1,7,18 f.; [1]); the origin of the festival is also dated to the Roman kingdom and the early Republic. Livius connects the institution of the Saturnalia with the dedication of the Temple of Saturn in 497 BC (Liv. 2,21,2; cf. Dion. Hal. 6,1,4). The attribution of the Saturnalia to Numa’s calendar of festivals, the concept of Saturn in myth as a bringer of culture and ancient — albeit problematical — etymology (Varro Ling. 5,64; Fest. 432,20 L.) have lead to the interpretation of the Saturnalia as originally a farmers’ festival: [2. 202] interprets it as a festival of the end of work in the fields, [3. 204; 4. 8492] as a festival at the time of sowing. [5. 164-190] interprets the Saturnalia in connection with the Roman ~+ Consualia (on December 15) and Opalia festivals (on December 19) as part of a ritual sequence on the theme

SATURNALIA

Fest. 432,1 L.); the temple statue’s wool bandages, with which its legs were bound during the year, were removed on the day of the festival (Macrob. Sat. 1,8,5; Stat. Silv. 1,6,4; Arnob. 4,24). Characteristic of private banquets were excessive bouts of drinking and eating and recitals of mocking verses and riddles/puzzles. ~» Macrobius’ Saturnalia are evidence that certain ‘refinements’ developed especially in aristocratic houses, with the festal period being used for a scholarly discussion of poetry and particularly of the origin and significance of cults and other institutions [7]. Instead of togas, citizens wore more comfortable clothing and covered their heads, which in everyday life were bare, with a > pilleus, a felt cap worn by freed slaves and considered a symbol of freedom (Sen. Ep. 18,2 f.; Mart. 6,24; 14,1,1 f.); the normally forbidden game of > dice was permitted (Suet. Aug. 71,1; Mart. 4,14,7; 5,84); and gifts, mainly candles and clay figures (sigilla), were exchanged (Macrob. Sat. 1,11,49). Particularly noteworthy is the temporary setting aside of the social distinction between masters and slaves. This manifested itself particularly in banquets, in which slaves dined either with their masters (Acc. fr. 3 Moke; Just. Epit. 43,1,2 f.; Sen. Ep. 47,14; Macrob. Sat. 1,11,1) or before them (Macrob. Sat. 1,24,23). The Saturnalia were considered nothing less than a festival of slaves (InscrIt 13,2,275; Auson. Eclogae 14,16,15 f. GREEN), who were granted particular liberties during this period (Macrob. Sat. 1,7, 26). This temporary suspension was sometimes interpreted as a reflex of the Golden Age of Saturn (— Period, Era). The Saturnalia were celebrated, now merged with the Brumalia, until well into late Antiquity.

SATURNALIA

28

27

1 F.Grar, R6mische Aitia und ihre Riten: Das Beispiel

[5] C. Caelius $. Dogmatius. Praef. praet., presumably

von Saturnalia und Parilia, in: MH 49, 1992, 13-25 2 M.P. Nitsson, s. v. S., RE 2 A.1, 201-221 3 G. Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Romer, *1912

under Constantine (~ Constantinus [1] I,), from a nonsenatorial family. Under Constantius [1] I and Constantine, he held altogether 17 offices in the west of the Empire (in court service, in central financial and terri-

4 G.Rapke, Zur Entwicklung der Gottesvorstellung und der Gottesverehrung in Rom, 1987 5H.S. VERSNEL, Inconsistencies in Greek and Roman Religion, vol. 2, 1993, 136-227 6 F.GrRar, Der Lauf des rollenden Jahres, 1997. 7S.D6pp, Saturnalien und lateinische Literatur, in: Id. (ed.), Karnevaleske Phanomene in antiken und nachantiken Literaturen, 1993, 145-177. G.DI.

Saturnia. A small town, nowadays insignificant, on the River Albegna in the hinterland of — Volci/Vulci. According to Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1,20 and Plin. HN 3,52, S. was called Aurinia in the Etruscan Period; with the institution of a Roman military prefecture after 280 BC its name was changed to S. In the 6th cent. BC, after the decline of - Marsiliana d’Albegna (perhaps Caletra), the agrarian settlement, which had existed since the Bronze Age, was the capital of + Ager Caletranus; from the sth cent. until the 3rd, however, it was barely settled. The still visible remains of the ancient

city are for the most part from the Roman Period. The city wall in polygonal masonry with its four gates must probably be dated to the 3rd cent. BC. The road street system was orthogonal. From the Etruscan Period the + Villanova Culture necropoleis with pozzetto and fossa graves and the 6th-cent. BC walled chamber graves under tumuli (> Tumulus) have been studied. + Funerary architecture III. C. L.Donati, Le tombe di S. nel Museo Archeologico di Firenze, 1989; M.MicHELuccl, s.v. S., EAA 2. Suppl., vol. 5, 1997, 180-181; A. MINTO, S. etrusca e romana, in:

Monumenti Antichi 30, 1925, 585-709.

M.M.

torial administrations). Constantine appointed S. + comes after AD 324 and saw to his admission to the Senate in Rome (CIL VI 1704 = ILS 1214). His long career climaxed in a Praetorian prefectship (CIL VI 1705 =ILS 1215) which he held probably between 324 and 337 either in Gaul or Italy. $. was the father of C. Flavius Caelius Urbanus. R. HansLik, s. v. Caelius (38), RE Suppl. 12, 1970, 134; PLRE 1, 806, no. 9.

AG.

[6] Flavius S$. High-ranking officer in the second half of the 4th cent. AD. In about 350, he introduced the philosopher > Themistius to the court in Constantinople (Them. Or. 16, 200a-b); possibly identical to the page S. who was exiled in 361 by the Commission of Chalcedon (Amm. Marc. 22,3,7). In 373 S. was comes rei militaris (Basil. Epist. 132), in 377/8 as > mag. equitum, he took part in the battles with the Visigoths and survived the battle of — Hadrianopolis [3] (Amm. Marc. 31,8,13). 382-383 he was mag. militum in Thrace; in 383 he was given a consulship, because in 382 he had been able to negotiate a > foedus with the Visigoths. Themistius gave the official address during the consulship celebrations on 1 January 383 (Them. Or. 16). In legal proceedings against the mag. militum Timasius, he achieved the latter’s banishment in 396 (Zos. 5,9,3-5). Four years later he was banished by > Gainas (Zos. 5,18,7-9; Socr. 6,6,9). S. was a Christian (Greg. Naz.

Epist. 132; 181; Basil. Epist. 132). PLRE 1, 807 (no. IO). [7] See > Satorninus.

Saturninus [1-2] See > Ap(p)uleius [I ro-r1]. [3] Was elevated to emperor by the army at the time of + Gallienus, but killed by the soldiers a short time afterwards because of his severity (SHA Tyr. Trig. 23; cf. SHA Firmus 11,1; SHA Gall. 9,1).

W.P.

Saturnus A. NAME

AND CHARACTERISTICS

B. MYTHOLOGY

CORT UAT

A. NAME AND CHARACTERISTICS

KIENAST*, 230; PLRE 1, 805 no. r.

[4] Imperator Caesar C. Iulius $. Augustus of Moorish extraction, followed a military career (Zos. 1,66,1; SHA Quatt. tyr. 9,5; Zon. 12,29), until > Aurelianus

The Roman god S. or Saeturnus (ILLRP 255; Fest. 432f. L.), whose name is formed like > Juturna and — Manturna, is etymologically connected with sator

[3] appointed him dux limitis Orientalis (SHA Quatt. tyr. 7,2). As governor of Syria, he was proclaimed em-

(‘sower’) by various ancient authors (Varro, Ling. 5,64; Aug. Civ. 6,8; 7,13,19; Tert. Ad nat. 2,12; Arnob. 4,9; Fest. 432 L.; Macrob. Sat. 1,10,20) and some modern

peror in AD 281 (Jer. Chron. 224 HELM; RIC V/2, 591;

scholars, although his festival did not fall in the sowing

[1.256], contra

season.

[2.241]), but soon afterwards was

killed by his own troops in Apamea during a siege by Probus [1]. He is not identical to S. [3] (SHA Quatt. tyr. 11,1; SHA

Probus

18,4; Eutr. 9,17,1; Oros. 7,24,3;

Aur. Vict. Caes. 37,3). 1 KreNAST*

2H.HALFMANN, Itinera principum, 1986.

PIR* 1 546; PLRE 1, 808 no. 12;

M. PEACHIN, Roman Im-

perial Titulature and Chronology: A. D. 235-284, 1990, 48.

TF.

The derivation

from saturare

(Cic. Nat. D.

2,64; 3,62) stemmed from the fact that his feast day was the 17th December, when the yearly cycle ‘was completed’ (— Saturnalia), as well as from parallels with + Kronos = Chronos, the god of time. The derivation from satur nus (‘fulfilled spirit’; Aug. De consensu evangelistarum 1,23,35) is formed in analogy to Kronos = koros nus (Pl. Crat. 396b); the derivation from o40n/ sathé (‘penis’) is connected with the myth of > Uranus’ emasculation.

30

29

According to Varro, Ling. 5,74, S. had a Sabine origin. His Etruscan equivalent, Satre, is mentioned in the

pars hostilis of the bronze liver of Piacenza (see fig. in + haruspices). Roman myths about S. often tell of human sacrifices in his honour. The > planet Saturn was said to have a nocendi facultas (‘ability to harm’) (Serv. Aen. 2,116). S.” companion is > Lua (Varro, Ling. 8,36; Gell. NA 13,23,2), with whom he shared the orbandi potestas (‘power to devastate’; Serv. Aen.

3,139). His cult was tied in with that of the > Dis Pater near the Comitium in Rome; hence S. was a chthonic

SATURNUS

C. RITUAL In the Archaic period, an altar to S. was erected at the foot of the Capitoline Hill near the Comitium (Fest. 430 L.). Here, Hercules was said to have introduced the gift of candles and statuettes during the > Saturnalia as a substitute for the original > human sacrifices (Macrob. Sat. 1,7,31f.; 11,48f.). In 497 BC, a temple was built near the altar (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 6,1,4; Liv. 2,21,2; Macrob. Sat. 1,8,1), which legend ascribed to Tullus + Hostilius [4] (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 3,32,4; Macrob. Sat. 1,8,1). The temple became an archive for laws and

god (Plut. Quaest. Rom. 34), connected with the world of the dead. In the Imperial period, S. was identified with deities of the realm of the dead, such as > Serapis

contracts (Plut. Quaest. Rom. 42; Cass. Dio 45,17,3;

(Macrob. Sat. 1,7,14-15), — Osiris and —> Anubis (Rufin. Historia ecclesiastica 2,26). Yet S. was also the

cola 12 inter alia), who in December organised gladiatorial games from these funds. In the temple stood a statue of the god, showing an old man (Verg. Aen. 7,180) with a covered head (Serv. Aen. 3,407; in order to hide himself, according to Aug. De consensu evangelistarum 1,34) and a scythe in his hand (Fest. 202 L.; 432 L.; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 42; Serv. Georg. 2,406; Ov. Fast. 1,234; Macrob. Sat. 1,7,24); his feet were bound by chains made of wool, which were only loosened during his festival, the Saturnalia, (Stat. Silv. 1,6,4; Macrob. Sat. 1,8,5; Arnob. 4,24; Min. Fel. 22,5). During the second Punic war his cult gained greatly in significance when => lectisternia and the Saturnalia (Liv. 2,1,19) were added to it, possibly to placate the Punic ~ Baal, whom > Hannibal [4] worshipped and who was identified with S. The Roman colony —> Saturnia, situated in the vicinity of a large thermal spring, acquired its name from S.; he was also worshipped by the mouth of the river Timavus, not far from the thermal springs. In Italy his cult was rare, with the exception of the Rhaetian region. In the Trentino and in South Tyrol S’. cult was spread most widely and most significantly, surely as a result of an — interpretatio Etrusca and Romana of an indigenous deity. Christian apologists opposed S.’ cult and myth vehemently (Min. Fel. 21,7; 30,3; Tert. Apol. 9,2-4; 10,6ff.; Tert. Ad nat. 2,2,15; Lactant. Div. inst. 1,21 etc.). In Brixia, a city with Cenomannic traditions, S. became identified with a local deity, Alus, (CIL V 41974198). In the Imperial period, Roman North Africa was the region where S.’ cult was most prominent. Here, he was the principal deity of the pantheon, a result of his identification with the Punic and indigenous Baal, dating back at least to the Hellenistic period.

god of wealth and field crops, the father of agriculture (Fest. 432 L.; Macrob. Sat. 1,7,24), and, as such, he was said to have > Ops [3] as his wife and to carry the horn of plenty. His festival period came at the end of the work in the fields and celebrated the mythical primeval anarchy, when labour still had no need of rigid social hierarchy (— Saturnalia). S. was also equated with Jahwe (Tac. Hist. 5,4,7) or with Ialdabaoth (= the Gnostic Jahwe: Orig. C. Celsum 6,31); S.’ feast day was celebrated on the Sabbath. B. MYTHOLOGY S.’ identification with + Kronos is probably very old; in any case it allows for the idea that the Capitoline Hill was consecrated to S. (e.g. Varro, Ling. 5,41-42; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1,34; Verg. Aen. 8,358), before he was replaced by > Jupiter. S. was considered to be one of the first kings of Latium, to where he fleed after being deposed by his son Jupiter (Varro, Ling. 5,42; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1,34,1; Verg. Aen. 8,320-323; Ov. Fast. 1,238; Aug. De consensu evangelistarum 1,34) and where he rules in the ‘Golden’ Age (cf. > Period, Era), which was celebrated in Augustan propaganda (Verg. Ecl. 4,6; Verg. Aen. 8,3 19-325). Italy itself was called Saturnia tellus (‘Saturnian earth’; Varro, Ling. 5,42; Verg. G. 2,173; Verg. Aen. 8,329), because

S. brought civilisation by introducing agriculture (Fest. 202 L.; Serv. Aen. 8,319; Macrob. Sat. 1,7,21; 24-25;

10,19; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 42), cultivation (Macrob. Sat. 1,7,25; Aug. Civ. 18,15), laws (Verg. Aen. 8,322;

cf. Plut. Quaest.Rom. 12), writing tablets and coinage (Tert. Apol. 10,8). The religiosity of the Imperial period turned S. into a salutary god, one who was orientated towards the afterlife. On many sarcophagi he is depicted asleep, symbolizing the blissful fate of the dead. S. became the god of time (like Kronos = Chronos), who brings everything into being and destroys everything (Cic. Nat. D. 2,64; Mart. Cap. 1,70; Macrob. Sat. 1,8,6-11; Procl. in Pl. Crat. 369b-c; Aug. Civ. 4,10-11), and was sometimes

accorded a special iconography (Mythographi Vaticani 35150):

Serv. Aen. 8,322) and the seat of the Roman treasury (> aerarium), administered by quaestors (Plut. Publi-

J. ALBRECHT, S., 1943; A. BRELICH, Tre variazioni romane sul tema delle origini, *1976, 83-95; M. Corsigr, L’aerarium Saturni et l’aerarium militare, 1974; CH. GuiT-

TARD, Recherches sur la nature de Saturne des origines a la réforme de 217 avant J.C., in: R.BLocH etal. (ed.), Recherches sur les religions de |’Italie antique, 1976, 4371; B.H. Krause, Iuppiter Optimus Maximus S., 1984; M. Leciay, Saturne africain, 1961-1966; A. MASTROCINQUE, Il culto di Saturno nell’ Italia settentrionale romana, in: id. (ed.), Culti pagani nell’Italia settentrionale, 1994, 97-117; P.PENSABENE, Tempio di Saturno, 1984; C. PréAvx, Saturne a l’ouroboros, in: Hommages a W. Deonna (Coll. Latomus 28), 1957, 394-410. A.MAS.

31

32

Satyr (Zdatveoc/Sdtyros, pl. LatveovSatyroi, Latin Satur, Satyrus), also Silenus (2t-, DevAnvoc/Si-, Seilénds, pl. Xi-, Lewdnvoi/Si-, Seilénoi, Doric Lavoc/Silanos, Latin Silenus, Silanus).

the satyrs were regarded as the creators of culture (wine, lyre, flute) — one can observe their progressive humanization. However, it was left to the semantic objectives of the iconography bent upon effects to emphasize the antithetical ideas of animality and humanity, thereby seeking to reinforce the impression that the Silenoi/satyrs represented a corroborative counter-image to the values of the citizens of the polis [11; 13], or that they served the mythical superelevation of the — banquet (symposion) and + komos. Apart from a few classical exceptions the Silenoi/satyrs took on goatlike characteristics only in the Hellenistic period, possibly influenced by > Pan and the paniskoi (‘the young Pans’); in Italy they were therefore equated, (albeit rarely), with fauns (> Faunus). Already the Frangois Vase itemized their typical hallmarks which signify the quintessential Dionysian experience: The wineskin (askos) associated them with all aspects of wine, from cultivation to consumption, the flute (au/és) with music and ~ dancing; the > nymphs (later also the > maenads) in Dionysus’ mythical entourage formed the female counterpart of the Silenoi/satyrs though the balance between the sexes was far from symmetrical. The nymphs drew attention to the satyrs’ excessive, self-indulgent sexuality which was therefore independent of the female figures ({[12]; however, the sexual relationship with nymphs/maenads, which was increasingly aggressive, was seldom depicted as consummated: see [14; 6; I5.100-139]). At cultic events people dressed up as satyr/Silenus — as in the theatre — by wearing masks, fur leotards and loin cloths (perizoma), to which were attached a tail and a > phallus (especially at the > Anthesteria: [5]; in the procession of Ptolemy II. Philadelphus in Alexandria: [16]; in Rome: Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 7,72). This practice was still being banned in AD 692 in Constantinople (Theodorus Balsamon, canon law 42, PG 137,727 [17-6 with note 12]). The presence of Silenoi/satyrs in the Dionysian > mysteries, which were oriented towards the other world (Pl. Leg. 815c; wall painting in the Villa dei Misteri, Pompeii, cf. [2.80-81]), and in the funerary art of the Roman Imperial period, pointed to the idea of including the initiated person or the deceased in the entourage of the god. + Dionysus; -» Maenads; > Mysteries B.4.; Satyr play; > Silenus

SATYR

I. MYTHOLOGY, ART AND CULT

JJ. FEATURES OF

THE ICONOGRAPHY I.MYTHOLOGY, ART AND CULT

A satyr/Silenus was a member of a group of demons who, since their relatively late emergence at the end of the 7th/beginning of the 6th cent. BC, have formed part of the mythical entourage of the god > Dionysus; — Silens, as a more or less distinctive and independent figure, emerged from that retinue. Like the older > centaurs, the satyrs and Silenoi belong to the hybrids, creatures with combined human and animal characteristics visualized by the Greeks: Mostly snub-nosed, bald, ithyphallic and naked, the anthropomorphic figures were frequently endowed with theriomorphic extremities. The pictorial depictions (see below II.) show no awareness of any difference between Silenoi and satyrs, though the names of the two species are documented disparately. The first, and, until the introduction of the > satyr play, the only instance of the name sdtyros is in Hes. Cat. fr. roabe MERKELBACH/WesT?: As well as the mountain nymphs and > Curetes, the ‘race of satyrs who fool about and are good for nothing’ is traced back to + Dorus and > Phoroneus (possibly already via Hermes as their father: cf. Nonnus, Dion. 14,105-19; [3. 49-513; 4. 78-79]; for the so far unresolved etymology cf. [20. 203-04]: odtuegos (sdtyros) < *saro-, ‘the female sex’, and *turo-, ‘grasp, take hold of’; cf. yo1o0du/choirothlips and Dionysus’ Sicyonian epithet yowowddac/choiropsdlas, ‘the swine, who is groping the female sex’ [19.208 No. 172]). Seilénds (etym. unresolved) is to be found first of all in Hom. H. 5,26263 (the Silenoi and Hermes make love to mountain nymphs in caves) in an Ionic context, as well as on the Frangois Vase (570/560 BC) which was exported to Etruria and is now in Florence; it is the only extant vase which names the Silenoi collectively. These names hardly denoted locally different groups, but they were probably merely differing terms which were made interchangeable through the emergence of the satyr play in which Silenus was confronted with a choir of satyrs. (PI. Symp. 215b-216d; Xen. Symp. 4,19; also Latin: [8]), even if the findings on inscriptions show a preference for the name Silénds (on this problem: [1; 9.32-37; 17.5-16; 8]).

In archaic pictorial art Silenoi/satyrs were frequently shown with equine characteristics, then, in imitation of

Dionysus’ mount, mostly with the features of a donkey. At first they figured in a limited number of myths (return of > Hephaestus to Mount Olympus, > gigantomachy), but this number increased considerably under the influence of the satyr play, which exploited in particular their relationship with > Heracles [1]; [ro]. Likewise, under the influence of the satyr play, — where

1 F.BROMMER, I94I,

222-228

otdnvoi und odtugot, in: Philologus 94, 2 W.BurKERT,

Antike

Mysterien,

31994 3 TH.H. Carpenter, Dionysian Imagery in FifthCentury Athens, 1997 4 Id., Dionysian Imagery in Archaic Greek Art, 1986 5 R.HaMILTON, Choes and Anthesteria. Athenian Iconography and Ritual, 1992 6 G. HEDREEN, Silens, Nymphs, and Maenads, in: JHS 114, 1994, 47-69 71d., Silens in Attic Black-Figure Vase-Painting. Myth and Performance, 1992 8 A. Kossatz-DEISSMANN, s. v. Silenos, LIMC 7.1, 762

9 A.Lesxy, Die tragische Dichtung der Hellenen, 1972 10 F. LissaRAGUE, Héraclés et les satyres, in: Modi e funzioni del racconto mitico nella ceramica greca, italiota ed etrusca dal VI al IV secolo a.C., 1995, 171-199 11 Id..,

33

34

On

the Wildness

of Satyrs,

in: TH.H.

CARPENTER,

Cu. A. FARAONE (eds.), Masks of Dionysus, 1993, 207— 220 121d., Dela sexualité des satyres, in: Métis 2, 1987, 63-90 (English in: D.M. Ha.perin, J.J. WINKLER, F.I.Ze1TLIN (eds.), Before Sexuality, 1990, 53-81)

13 Id., Pourquoi les satyres sont-ils bons 4 montrer, in: Cahiers du groupe interdisciplinaire du théatre antique 3, 1987, 93-106 (English in: J.J. WINKLER, F.I. ZEITLIN (eds.), Nothing to Do with Dionysos?, 1990, 228-236) 14S. McNa_ty, The Maenad in Early Greek Art, in: Are-

thusa 11, 1978, 101-136 (repr. in: J.PERADOTTO, J.P. SULLIVAN (eds.), Women in the Ancient World, 1984, 107I4t) 15 $.Moraw, Die Manade in der attischen Vasenmalerei des 6. und 5. Jahrhunderts v. Chr.,1998 16E.E. Rice, The Grand Procession of Ptolemy Philadelphus, 1983 17R.SEAFORD (ed.), Euripides, Cyclops, 1984 18 E.Simon,

s.v. Silenoi, LIMC

8.1, rro8-1133;

8.2,

746-783 19 A.TREPP, Die Fragmente der griechischen Kultschriftsteller, 1914 20 A.J.vAN WINDEKENS, Dictionnaire étymologique complémentaire de la langue grecque, 1986.

SATYR

PLAY

furnish the villas of the Roman-Italic upper classes imposingly. They were also on Dionysian > sarcophagi which, with over 380 copies, form the largest thematic group of relief sarcophagi in Rome and are documented until Late Antiquity. 1P.E. Arras, s..v. Satiri e Sileni, EAA 7, 1966, 67-73 2 P.GERCKE, Satyrn des Praxiteles, 1968 3 D. GRasSINGER, R6mische Marmorkratere, 1991

4 F. HOtscuer, Die Bedeutung archaischer Tierkampfbilder, 1972 5 B.HuNDSALZ, Das dionysische Schmuckrelief, 1987 6I1.JucKER, Der Gestus des Aposkopein, 1956 7 Y.KorsHAKk, Frontal Faces in Attic Vase Painting of the Archaic Period, 1987, 5-11, 45-54 8 F.LissARAGUE, Les satyres et le monde animal, in: J. CHRISTIANSEN, T. MELANDER (eds.), Ancient Greek and Related Pottery, 1988, 335-351 9R.NEUDECKER, Die Skulpturenausstattung rémischer Villen in Italien, 1988 10 E.Stmon, s. v. Silenoi, LIMC 8.1, 1997, 1108-1133 11 A. STAHLI, Die Verweigerung der Liste, 1999. B.BA.

RH:

Satyr play (catveindy SeGua, satyrikon drama). II]. FEATURES OF THE ICONOGRAPHY Satyrs were half human and half beast [8], and, together with the > maenads and Silenoi (— Silens) they were part of the > thiasos of Dionysus. They were depicted with ears, tail and- more rarely — with the feet and coat of a horse; in Attic art satyrs were mostly snubnosed and had human feet, they took part in the + komos or were behaving lewdly with the maenads [10. 1132f.; 6. 26f., 46]. Depictions began to appear in the first third of the 6th cent. BC with vase painting on Thasos, Crete and in Attica; a satyr’s head as a gargoyle from the temple of Apollo in Thermos originates also from this period (Athens, NM 13341); it can perhaps be seen as serving an apotropaic function, just like satyr masks in tombs or the satyr relief of the lion tomb of Xanthus which originated in the 460s BC but still owed a lot to archaism in terms of shape and form [4.27-29]. Two types are predominant in sculpture from the 4th cent. BC onwards: The satyrs of > Praxiteles are boyishly slim (cf. [2]) — the Wine-Pouring Satyr around 360 BC and somewhat later the Resting Satyr [1o. No. 212, 213]. On the other hand, the bearded satyr, carrying the child Dionysus in his arms, is sinewy and muscular (school of > Lysippus [2], around 300/280 BC; Paris, LV 922); beardless, but likewise an adult, the Sleeping Satyr (> Barberini Faun, Munich, GL 218) dates from the late 3rd cent. BC. The existence of innumerable satyrs, dancing or enjoying themselves with manaeds, ~ nymphs or > hermaphrodites, as well as of little boy satyrs playing with water or masks reveals the popularity of the Dionysian themes in Hellenistic society (cf. now especially [11]). In Roman times these sculptures were very popular in villas and peristyle gardens, where they emphasized the otium, the carefree enjoyment of the spacious gardens surrounding the luxurious villas in the suburbs of Rome [9]. In the period of the Roman Empire, these types of statues also appeared on ornamentation reliefs, fountain reliefs and marble craters (punchbowls) [7.37-48; 3], which likewise served to

A. OrIGINS

B. TEXTS, ARCHAEOLOGICAL

TESTIMONIES C. CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES D. 4TH/3RD CENT. BC, RECEPTION A. ORIGINS

As in the case of Greek > tragedy, the debate on the origins of the SP also starts with an observation in Aristotle’s Poetics. According to Aristot. Poet. 1449a 19 ff., tragedy had initially dealt with minor topics in a humorous language and only later acquired its appropriate solemnity, because it had developed from the satyresque (éx oatveixod, ek satyrikoi) and its original nature had been more that of a dance (dexnotixwtéea,

orchéstikotéra). Aristotle thus did not claim in any way that tragedy had developed from the SP itself, but from a light-hearted satyresque form. It isno contradiction to the statement in the Poetics that ancient tradition regarded > Pratinas of Phlius as the ‘inventor’ of SP; it probably means that Pratinas had been the first known author who was credited with writing such plays. SPs seem have become part of the programme of the Great > Dionysia in Athens between 520 and 510 BC; the terminus ante quem is set by an Attic red-figure volute krater, created between 510 and 500 BC (Padula, Museo Archeologico della Lucania [6. Plate 7]) with a scene from a satyr play (— Satyr). According to + Chamaeleon’s (fr. 38 WEHRLI) explanation of the proverb ovdév mQd¢ tov AtlOvucov/oudeén pros ton Dionyson (“That has nothing to do with > Dionysus!”), the introduction of the SP is to be seen as a concession to the conservative taste of the Athenian audience; its addition restored the Dionysian character of the Great Dionysia, as the SPs to some extent served to integrate the rural or Lesser Dionysia into the festival programme. It is possible (but impossible to prove) that the introduction of the SPs was politically motivated [8]. While — Aeschylus’ [1] SPs are closely associated in content with the preceding three tragedies as part of a ~ tetralogy, this does not apply either to > Sophocles

SATYR PLAY

35

or to Euripides [1]. In the latter half of the 5th cent., it had even become an option to replace the SP with a tragedy (Euripides, Alcestis, 438 BC). The dwindling significance of the SP was further underlined in the 530s BC by the introduction of an agon at the > Lenaea just for tragedies without SPs. From 341/40, the programme of the Great Dionysia only included a single SP in contrast with the previous custom of three plays by three tragic poets.

B. TEXTS, ARCHAEOLOGICAL TESTIMONIES Of the numerous Greek SPs, only one is completely extant: > Euripides’ [1] Cyclops [9]. In addition, there are papyrus finds, some of them sizeable, particularly of ~» Sophocles’ [1] Ichneutai (‘Trackers’) and > Aeschylus’ Diktyoulkoi (‘Net fishers’). The titles and in some instances fragments of about 75 SP authors are known, while in 25 further instances their classification as SPs is controversial. A very important source are the depictions of scenes from SPs on vases. These can only be taken as reflections of an actual performance, however, if the reference to the theatre is confirmed by props such as the loin-cloth or mask worn by the > satyrs, and the depiction of flute players [6. 47 ff.]. C. CHARACTERISTIC FEATURES The central feature of the SP is the > chorus, which is always made up from satyrs; for that reason, the

genre is also at times simply referred to as ot odtvgot (hoi sdtyroi, ‘the satyrs’) in addition to oatugimov deaua (satyrikon drama). It is likely that the chorus initially consisted of 12, later 15 choreutai, in line with tragedy. The satyrs wore a beard, had snub noses and horse’s ears, a bald head, a horse’s tail and a > phallus attached to a loin cloth. They were wild and tended to break out in exuberant dances; their typical dance was called Sikinnis. Their father was Silenus (or Papposilenus; — Silens), who had a white beard and wore a coat made from animal skins. Over time, the role of Silenus

changed from that of the leader of the chorus of satyrs to that of an actor in the play [4]. A typical motif of the SP [6. 28 ff.] was the captivity of the satyrs and their separation from — Dionysus until they were finally freed from the grasp of the fiend (e.g. Polyphemus, Busiris, Sciron) by a brave hero (e.g. Hercules, Odysseus, Theseus). Other standard motifs included swindles and cunning trickery, riddles as well as erotic topics and motifs. The particular attraction of the SP arose from its inherent clash between two different worlds and attitudes to life. The world of tragedy, represented by the tragic heroes and gods, met with the world of the Dionysian hybrid creatures who were totally unrestrained and often cowardly. Particularly in the tetralogy of plays around a common mythological subject as favoured by Aeschylus, the SP provided a light-hearted, even comical interpretation of the tragic myth, presenting the human side of heroes and gods [6. 37]. This is most appropriately reflected in > Demetrius’ [41] description of SP as a teaywdia maifovca

36

(tragdidia paizousa, ‘tragedy at play’) (De elocutione 169).

D. 4TH/3RD CENT. BC, RECEPTION

After an early decline probably from as early as the mid—s5th cent. BC, the SP experienced a second bloom in 3rd cent. BC, probably for historical-philological reasons. Attempts were made to open the genre to other forms: — Sositheus included bucolic elements, > Lycophron [5] in his Menédémos copied the personal mockery (Ovouaoti xmuMdetv, Onomasti kOmodidein) typical of Old —~ Comedy. Neither Aristotle nor the Alexandrian philologists were greatly interested in SP. Only one treatise by > Chamaeleon is known, entitled Ilegi Latvewv (Peri Satyron, ‘On SP’). Hor. Ars P. 220-250

is likely to reflect the Hellenistic theory on SPs [1]. It was only during the Italian Renaissance that the SP shifted back into focus, because of its bucolic character and its hybrid tragicomical form [1o. 5]. Modern research sets in with Isaac Casaubonus [2] (1605), the first finally to dismiss the equation of the SP with the Roman — satire [2]. After F. G. Welcker [12] in particular had studied the SP in the rgth cent., the genre became a topic of research for classical philology in the zoth cent. in the wake of the papyrus finds [6. 39 f.]. In contrast with Greek tragedy, the SP inspired few poets to engage with the genre (one of the exceptions is Thornton Wilder with his ‘Alcestiad’, followed by the SP ‘The Drunken Sisters’, 1955; [11. 197—203]); new productions of the ancient plays are also rare [5. 395 ff.]. — Satyr; > Tragedy 1 C.O. Brink, Horace on Poetry. vol. 2: The ‘Ars Poetica’, 1971, 273-295 2J.CasauBONUus, De satyrica Graecorum poesi et Romanorum satira, Paris 1605 (summary in

[x0], 13-17)

3N.CH. CHURMUZIADES, Satyrikd, *1984

4 G.ConraD, Der Silen, 1997. 5 H. FLASHAR, Inszenierung der Antike, 1991 6 R.KRUMEICH, N.PECHSTEIN,

B. SEIDENSTICKER (eds.), Das griechische Satyrspiel, 1999 7 N. PECHSTEIN, Euripides Satyrographos, 1998 8 L.E. Rossi, Das attische Satyrspiel. Form, Erfolg und Funktion einer antiken literarischen Gattung, in [ro], 222-251 (abstract from: Il dramma satiresco attico. Forma, fortuna e funzione di un genere letterario antico, in: Dialoghi di Archeologia 6, 1972, 248-301) 9 R. SEAFORD (ed.), Euripides, Cyclops, 1984 10 B. SEIDENSTICKER (ed.), Satyrspiel, 1989 11 D.F. Surron, The Greek Satyr Play, 1980 12F.G. Weicxer, Nachtrag zu der Schrift uber die Aeschyleische Tragédie nebst einer Abhandlung iiber das Satyrspiel, 1826 (summary in [ro], 22-28).

B.Z.

Satyrion (Latveiwv/Satyrion). Poet of New Comedy (3rd century BC), known only from an epigraphic mention in the list of victors at the Dionysia, in which S. appears with one victory [r]. 1 PCG VU, 1989, 590.

T.HI.

Satyrius (Latvevoc; Satyrios). Epigrammatist of uncertain identity, perhaps identifiable with > Satyrus [9]: the only surviving poem, Anth. Pal. 6,11, is attributed

SATYRUS

37

38

by the Anthologia Planudea to one S. (name rarely at-

[4] Greek comic actor of the 4th cent. BC. He apparently preferred to play slave roles (Aeschin. Leg. 156), and won at least six victories at the > Lenaea [1]. When, on the occasion of his conquest of Olynthus in 348 BC, Philip Il (> Philippus [I 4]) arranged stage performances at > Dion [II 2], and richly rewarded all victorious participants, S. requested nothing for himself, but only freedom for two daughters of a house guest (Diod. Sic. 16,5 5,3). The latter had been killed in an attempt on the life of the king’s brother, according to the report of + Demosthenes [2] (Or. 19,194 f.), who contrasts S. to the hated > Aeschines [2]. According to Plut. Demosthenes 7, S. was a friend of the orator in his youth. He had him declaim Euripides and Sophocles, teaching him in this way techniques of speaking and the art of delivery. The anecdote seems to imply that there was a tragic actor of the same name (similarly Lucian, Iupp. trag. 41; Lucian, Necyomantia 16), but it may equally be

tested), but by the Authologia Palatina to a Satrius, not

recorded elsewhere (possibly the Italic gens name Satrius? cf. [2]). Content: dedication to Pan by a hunter, a bird catcher and a fisherman (theme of 14 further epigrams from the 3rd cent. BC until the 6th cent. AD, parodied by Lucianus, perhaps > Lucillius, Anth. Pal. 6,17); the style suggests the period from the rst cent. BC until the first half of the rst cent. AD. 2 P. WaLtz, Anthologie Grecque, vol. 3, 3 A. CAMERON, The Greek Anthology from Meleager to Planudes, 1993, 42 n. 37. M.G.A. 1 FGE 87-89

*1960, I9I

Satyrus (Zatveos/Satyros). {1] S. I. King of the > regnum Bosporanum from 43 3/2 to 389/8 BC. Son of > Spartocus I. S.’ co-regent may have been (until 393/2) his brother > Seleucus [1]. S. directed his attention at the Asiatic coast of the Cimmerian Bosporus (> Bosporus [2]). He restored the Sindian King Hecataeus following a revolt, and allied with him through a dynastic marriage. S.’s divorced wife then sent the King of the Ixomates against him (Polyaenus, Strat. 8,55). S. died during the siege of > Theodosia. V.F. GaypuxeEvic¢, Das Bosporanische Reich, 1971, 70 f.; 80 f. Lv.B.

[2] Greek architect and sculptor of the late Classical period, son of Isotimus of Paros. He designed the ~ Mausoleum at Halicarnassus together with — Pytheus, and both architects wrote a description of it (Vitr. De arch. 7 praef. 12). Stylistic evaluation of structural elements attributes to him the leading part in the work on this funerary monument [1]. Also preserved is a record of the transportation, effected by S., of a particularly large — obelisk to Alexandria (Plin. HN 36,67—68), but this may equally have been another engineer of the same name. As a sculptor, he is named in a signature inscription on a statue base found on Delos [2] for the bronze statues (sculpted c. 435 BC) of +Idrieus and — Ada, siblings and successors of -» Maussolus. Repeated attempts to link other sculptures with S. have not been convincing [3].

fictitious [2]. 1 Mette, 179

=0©2 M. Bonari; s. v. S. (13a), RE Suppl.

10, 875 I.E. STEFANIS, Dionysiakoi technitai, 1988, Nr. 2235 and

2241.

[5] Leader

HBL.

of an elephant-hunting

expedition

and

founder of the city of Philotera (cf. > Philotera) on the Red Sea (Str. 16,4,5 p. 769). He is mentioned as a dioikétes in 263 BC in [1. 36,11; 37,11]. 1B.P. GRENFELL et al., Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphos, 1896.

65-70.

[6] Son of Eumenes, 203/2 BC eponymous priest of Alexander (PP III/IX 5263). Probably not to be identified with the renowned aulete of Samos (PP VI 17048). WA. [7] S. of Callatis on the Black Sea (=. 6 xadAa[tiavdc/S. ho kalla[tianos, PHercul. 558), Greek biographer, also called ‘the Peripatetic’ (xegutatntxdc/peripatétikos, Ath. 12,544c), perhaps because the term denotes scholars active in the fields of literature and biography (cf. [6. 118], contra [9. 282]). A firme terminus ante quem for his activity is the epitome of his biographical work by > Heraclides [19] Lembos (Diog. Laert. 8,40; 53) from the reign of King Ptolemy VI Philometor (— Ptolemaeus [I 9], 180-145 BC). A more precise chronological placement would be available if the treatise ‘On the Demes of Alexandria’ (Ilegi Snuwv “AdeEavdoéwv/ Peri demon Alexandréon) could also be ascribed to S.; it was composed under King Ptolemy IV Philopator (> Pto-

H.Svenson-Evers, Die griechischen Architekten archaischer und klassischer Zeit, 1996, s. v.S., 116-150. H.KN.

lemaeus [I 7], 221-204 BC; Suda n 462s. v. Hoaxreidyc = 2,581,25-29 ADLER). This attribution, however, is

1H.Drerup,

Pytheos und Satyros, in: JDAI 69, 1954,

1-31 2 J.MaRcapg&, Recueil des signatures de sculpteurs grecs, vol. 1, 1953, 93, ill. 17,1 3 R.KaBus-JAHN, Studien zu Frauenfiguren des 4. Jahrhunderts v. Chr., 1962,

disputed [10. 103-106; 6. 118; 2. 229; 8. 119; 9. 279—

[3] Influential Athenian oligarch. As a member of the

287; 5. 339-343].

council, he took a leading part in the overthrow and conviction of + Cleophon [1] (Lys. 30,10-14). During the rule of the Thirty Tyrants (— triakonta), he was one of the Eleven (+ hendeka), and he played a prominent role in the execution of Theramenes (Xen. Hell. 2,3,5456). He seems subsequently to have been made one of the Thirty himself (Lys. 30,12). WSS.

S. was one of Antiquity’s most renowned authors of biographies (Jer. Vir. ill., praef.). Numerous references to S.’ works (Biov/Bioi ‘Lives’) are preserved, esp. in Diogenes Laertius and Athenaeus. He wrote of philosophers (the Seven Sages, i.e. > Bias [2], Chilon, Pythagoras and the Pythagoreans, the Cynic > Diogenes [14]

SATYRUS

of Sinope, Anaxarchus, and Stilpo), poets (Sophocles, Euripides), statesmen and kings (- Alcibiades [3],

> Dionysius

40

39

2 A.CamgEROoN, The Greek Anthology 1 FGE 89-93 M.G.A. from Meleager to Planudes, 1993, 42 n. 37.

[2] II of Syracuse, Philip of Macedon

(> Philippus [I 4])) and orators (+ Demosthenes [2]). A work ‘On Characters’ (Iegi yagaxthowv/ Peri charakte-

ron) is also attributed to S., as is one on mythological subjects (disputed: [3. 23 5]). According to Diog. Laert. 6,80, S. wrote of the Cynic Diogenes “in the fourth book of his Lives” (év t@ tetaotw tOv Biwv/en tdi tetartoi ton bion), and the subscriptio of POxy. 1176 (fragment 39 col. 33) attested that the sixth book contained the vitae of the three great tragedians, Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides. It can therefore be assumed that the work was divided into pentads. The first contained lives of the philosophers, the second those of poets, and the others those of monarchs and statesmen. The publication of POxy. 1176 (vita of Euripides) has called into question the seriousness of S. as a biographer, because of its great profusion of anecdotes, the light, discursive tone of its narrative, its lack of any indication of sources apart from the tragedies of Euripides themselves and the comedies of Aristophanes (with highly improbable interpretations) and its reliance on unspecified tradition [2. 230; 8. 119; 9. 282]. However, if one locates this type of literary, historical and biographical survey more precisely in the tradition which had begun with Aristotle’s (> Aristoteles [6]) dialogue ‘On Poets’ (IMegi nout@v/Peri Poiétén), which drew heavily on literary sources (the ‘Method of -» Chamaeleon [r]’), one arrives at a more balanced assessment of S. [7. 366-370; I. 161-190]. Lit.: 1G. Arrighetti, Poeti, eruditi e biografi 1987, 161190 2A.GUDEMAN, +s. Vv. S. (16), RE 2 A.1, 228-234 3Id.,s.v. S. (19), RE 2 A1,235 4F.Jacosy, FGrH, p. 5 M.R. LerKowirTZz, Satyrus the Histo498, on 20 F r

rian, in: Atti del XVII Congresso Internazionale di Papirologia, vol. 2, 1984, 339-343 6 F.LEOo, Die griechischromische Biographie nach ihrer litterarischen Form, "rgor (repr. 1990), 118-124 7 F.LEO, Blog Eveutidov, in: E. FRAENKEL (Ed.), F. Leo, Ausgewahlte Kleine Schrif-

ten, vol. 2, 365-383, 1960 8 E.G. TuRNER, The Oxyrhynchi Papyri 27, 1962, 118-133 9S. West, Satyrus: Peripatetic or Alexandrian?, in: GRBS 15, 1974, 279-287 10 U.voN WILAMOWITZ-MOELLENDOREF, Lesefriichte, in: KS 4, 1962, 103-106. Ep.: G. ARRIGHETTI, Satiro. Vita di Euripide (Studi classici ed orientali 13), 1964; POxy. 9, 1912, 124-182; C.F.

KuMANIECKI, De Satyro Peripatetico (Archiwum Filologiczne 8), 1929; FHG III, 159-166.

GR.A.

[8] Epigrammatist, five of whose poems survive (further attributions, cf. > Satyrius), giving variations on a wide range of themes with a certain elegance: the return of spring (Anth. Pal. 10,6: cf. > Leonidas [3] of Tarentum, ibid. 10,1 etc.), a consecration by a hunter and a birdcatcher (10,11; cf. Leonidas, ibid. 9,337), a spring (ibid. 10,13, cf. + Anyte, ibid. 9,313 f., etc.), Echo (ibid. 16,153, cf. Archias, ibid. 9,27, etc.) and Eros enchained (16,195, cf. Alcaeus of Messene, ibid. 16,196, etc.). The style of S. might point to the 2nd cent. BC (cf. also [2]).

[9] Greek physician, c. AD 150, pupil of > Quintus [2] (Gal. 2,217 K.) and teacher of + Galen at Pergamum (Gal. 2,224; 19,58 K.). He treated Aelius > Aristides

[3] with a poultice which supposedly only made the patient’s chest pains worse (Aristid. Or. 49,8-11). In his teaching, S. relied closely on Quintus’ exegesis of Hippocrates, and he shared his interest in anatomy and pharmacology. Galen gave a precis of S$.’ commentary on Hippocrates, but he does not say to what extent he was indebted to him (Gal. CMG 5,10,2,2, p. 412-413). VN.

Sauconna. Name of the river usually called > Arar, modern Sa6ne, literarily attested only since Late Antiquity (cf. Amm. Marc. 15,11,17: Ararim quem Sauconnam appellant, ‘Arar which is called S.’; Avitus, Epist. 83 = MGH AA 6,2). The name had been recorded ear-

lier, however, e.g. as a term for dea Souconna in Chalon-sur-Saone (ILS 9516). E.O. Saufeius. Italic nomen gentile. The family was from the ancient local aristocracy of Praeneste (CIL I* 279-290; 1467-1471; 2439) and is attested in Rome itself and as traders on Delos from the end of the 2nd cent. BC onwards (RRC 204). 1 SCHULZE, 239

2 SYME, RP 2, 600.

K.-LE.

[1] S., L. Appears in Cicero’s letters 67-44 BC as an Epicurean (Cic. Att. 7,2,4) and a friend of > Pomponius [I 5] Atticus (Cic. Att. 7,1,1). In 43 the latter

rescued S., who had been proscribed because of his wealth (Nep. Att. 12,3).

[2] S., M. Leader of Annius [I 14] Milo’s followers in the killing of > Clodius [I 4] on 18 January 52 BC. Although, in contrast to Milo, he was a direct participant in the murder, unlike the latter he was acquitted in two prosecutions (Ascon. 54 f. C). J.BA. Saumacus. Killer of > Paerisades [6] V, who surren-

dered the > Regnum Bosporanum to > Mithridates [6] VI. According to the decree honouring Diophantus [2] (IOSPE 1* no. 352, 34-35), S. had begun a rebellion with the > Scythae, which gripped the European part of the empire. He was captured by Diophantus and handed over to Mithridates. This rebellion was evidently directed against the new political leadership. The view that S. was a slave is based on a wrong translation. A. GAVRILOV, Skify Savmaka — vosstanie ili vtorZenie?, in:

Etjudy po anti¢noj istorii i kuliture Severnogo Priéernomorija, 1992, 61-72; S. JU. SAPRYKIN, Pontijskoe carstvo, 1996, 141-147.

Lv.B.

Sauromaces. A pro-Roman king of > Iberia [1] who was expelled in AD 368/9 by > Sapor [2] II (Amm. Marc. 27,12,4). In 370, > Valens [2] had S. brought back by > Terentius [II 1], and Aspacures, S.” pro-Per-

42

41

sian cousin, arranged for the territory along the Cyrus [5] to be divided between them, so S. received only the part bordering on Armenia and the > Lazi(Amm. Marc. 27,12,16 f.). This arrangement was approved by the emperor but aroused the anger of the great king, who wanted to maintain the rule of his protégé over the whole of Iberia (Amm. Marc. 27,12,18; 30,2,2—-4). Hence in 377/8 Sapor had his commander-in-chief ~ Surén attack S.” Roman imperial bodyguard (Amm. Marc. 30,2,7); this probably entailed renewed expulsion for the king, since Valens was prevented from intervening by the Gothic War (Amm. Marc. 30,2,8). PLRE I, 809.

T.P. Budcz, Die Topographie von S., 1967; O.SoszTaRITS, Topographische Forschungen im siidlichen Teil von S., in: La Pannonia

e l’Impero Romano

(Atti del Con-

vegno, Roma 1984), 1995, 233-241.

Savincates. Celtic tribe in the > Alpes tioned on the Augustus Arch in Segusio and at the Mausoleum of Escoyéres en XII 80). It can therefore presumably be region to the southeast of Briangon. G.BarruoL,

J.BU.

Cottiae, men(CIL V 7231) Queyras (CIL located in the

Les peuples préromains du sud-est de la

Gaule, 1969, 175-177, 356 f.

H.GR.

M.SCH.

Sauromates (Laveoudtns; Sauromdatés). Name of Bosporan kings; see also > Sarmatae. {1] King of the + Regnum Bosporanum, AD 93/4123/4, son of > Rhescuporis II; S. conducted successful wars against the > Scythae (IOSPE 27 26) and pirates in the area of the northern Pontos. Many new buildings in ~— Gorgippia and > Panticapaeum attest to the increase in prosperity under his rule. There was a column in honour of S. in Sinope (IOSPE 2” 40). (2] King of the Regnum Bosporanum AD 173/4-210/1, son of > Rhoemetalces [4]; in 193 S. conducted wars against the — Siraci and the Scythae and concluded a treaty with the Tauri (IOSPE 2* 423). He is often attested as builder of temples (e.g. IOSPE 2” 47). [3] Co-regent of Cotys [II 3] III in the > Regnum Bosporanum, known only from coins of AD 229/230231/2. As co-regent he was succeeded by > Rhescuporis [3] IV.

[4] Successor of > Rhescuporis [4] V, reigned in AD 275/6; known only from coins. V.F. Gaypukevi¢, Das Bosporanische Reich, 1971, 349 £5 353 £5 357 £5 470; P.J. KartSovsixyy, Iz istorii monetnoj spravi na Bospori v III st.n.e., in: Materialy po arheologii servernogo Pricernomorija 2, 1959; A.Zo-

GRAPH, Antic¢nye moneti, in: Materialy instituta arheologil 16, 1951, 208 f.

SAXANUS

Lv.B.

Savaria. Roman colony in > Pannonia superior, modern Szombathely in western Hungary. Its location on the Amber Road (route Aquileia - Carnuntum) and good road connections to Arrabona and via Sopianae to Sirmium enabled a swift economic growth. Under Claudius [III x] a colony was founded in S. (Colonia Divi Claudii S.: Plin. HN 3,146), tribus Claudia. Until AD 106 S. was the administrative centre of the province. As a centre of communications and administration it formed the scope of a statio of the publicum portorium Illyrici (toll station). S. was apparently romanised at an early stage (centre of the > ruler cult, base of the Ara Augusti provinciae Pannoniae or Pannoniae superioris). Important archaeological finds: capitolium, aqueduct, building remains, sanctuary of — Isis (reconstructed). Christianity in S.is widely attested (martyr death of Saint Quirinus, basilica). In Late Antiquity, the place was the seat of the praeses of Pannonia I.

Savus (Zcovoc; Sdouos). Right-hand tributary of the Danube in the south of > Pannonia (Plin. HN 3,128; 147 f.; Ptol. 2,16,1 f.; 3,9,15 Str. 4,6,10; Geogr. Rav. 4,20), modern Sava (Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia, Serbia).

In its middle and lower reaches it was navigable. On its banks there were important communications nodes (+ Neviodunum, = Siscia, — Sirmium, > Singidunum). S. was also worshipped as a river deity (CIL III,

4009). TIR L 33 Tergeste, 1961, 65; TIR L 34 Budapest, 1968,

I00.

J.BU.

Saxa Rubra. Statio on the right bank of the Tiberis at the ninth milestone of the > via Flaminia (14,4 km to the north of Rome; SHA Sev. 8,9; Tab. Peut. 5,5: ad rubras), at a junction of the via Tiberina and another

road in the direction of > Veii (Mart. 4,64,15). It was named after the red tuff rocks that come close to the river at this point. There was a small tavern (cauponula: Cic. Phil. 2,77) there. This is the place where > Maxentius was defeated by Constantinus [1] the Great in AD 312 (Aur. Vict. 40,23). Nearby, at > Prima Porta was Livia’s [2] Villa ad Gallinas Albas. G. MEssIngEo, A. CARBONARA, Via Flaminia, 1993.

M.M.MO.

Saxanus (Saxsanus, also Saxsetanus). Epithet, primarily of > Hercules. The name derives from Latin saxum, ‘rock, stone’; Hercules S. was worshipped in the context of individual Italic or provincial Roman quarrying regions. The beginning of the worship of Hercules S. dates back to before the second half of the rst century AD in central Italy (> Tibur: CIL XIV 3 543, the restoration of an older sanctuary in the Flavian period as a terminus ante quem), less likely in upper Italy (CIL V 5013). From Italy, the cult presumably came to Germany with some of the soldiers from lower Germany (e.g. to the Brohl valley), and also to Gaul (to Norroy near Pont-a-Mousson), where it is documented until the beginnings of the 2nd century AD. These dedications to Hercules S. are almost exclusively by military personnel, a civilian votive inscription, such as CIL XIII 3475, is the exception. Dedications, of civilian origin and con-

SAXANUS

44

43

tinuing until the 3rd century, for a S. from Noricum (e.g. AE 1936, 162: S. Augustus) without additional mention of a specific God, in contrast, are perhaps for + Silvanus. G. BAUCHHENSS, Hercules S., ein Gott der niedergermanischen Armee, in: Studien zu den Militargrenzen Roms II (13. Internationaler Limeskongref$ Aalen 1983 = BJ Beih. 20), 1986, 90-95; R. BEDON, Les carriéres et les carriers de la Gaule romaine, 1984, 184-193, 211-219 (in-

scriptional evidence).

AN.BE.

around 430, landings and colonisation by the S. in Britain took place to a greater extent; the traditionally assumed year of 449 — deduced from various pieces of information in Bede (> Beda Venerabilis) —is uncertain. From then on the S. spread far across the island. Particularly the former Roman urban centres and villas underwent a clear decline ([2. 425-256], but cf. also [3. 10o9-161]).

Apparently, the S. had no central authority; the nobility was dominant in each of their various territories. 1W.Lammers

Saxones (LdEoved/Sdxones, the Saxons). Association of Germanic tribes, first mentioned at Ptol. 2,11,11. Ac-

cording to him, they settled in Holstein to the northeast of the lower Elbe; in the west their territory bordered the sea (Ptol. 2,1 1,3 1: three Saxon islands). Presumably the S. originated from the > Reudigni and the > Aviones (Tac. Germ. 40,2) [1]. They may have become known to the Romans earlier, possibly in 5 AD when a fleet sailed to the Cimbrian peninsula, yet Tacitus does not mention them. In the course of the 3rd cent. AD the S., who were considered particularly warlike, expanded along the coast of the North Sea as far as the lower Rhine (cf. Zos. 3,6 f.). They absorbed several tribes, particularly the > Chauci. It was probably in the 4th cent. AD that some of the > Langobardi were incorporated. These eastern S. later expanded their territory farther to the south and, in 531 AD, also took part in the destruction of the kingdom of the > Thuringi by the ~ Franci, but then became tributary to them. From the end of the 3rd cent. the S., who were famous as daring seafarers, increasingly visited the coasts of Gaul and Britain on pillaging campaigns (> Carausius; generally Amm. Marc. 28,5,1; 30,7,8). An Ala I Saxonum (Not. Dign. Or. 32,37) may be traceable to a Roman victory in 370 AD, otherwise the S. are hardly ever found in the Roman army. Further incursions and expeditions to Gaul and Britain by the S. followed in the second half of the 4th century and in the sth, but there were also setbacks, as e.g. the defeat against Theodosius in 368 AD and against the Visigoths in 475 AD (Amm.

26,4,5; 27,8; 28,2,12-3,1;

5,1-73

30,7,7 f.; Symmachus, Ep. 2,46; Claud. Carm. 8,31 f.; 22,253; Pacatus, Panegyricus 12,5; Sid. Apoll. Epist. 8; Sid. Apoll. Carm. 7,363-3713 390); to some extent they were under Frankish sovereignty (Greg. Tur. Franc. Dan Outs)

From the beginning of the 5th century, the S. firmly established themselves on the northern and northwestern coasts of Gaul and on the coast of Britain in the area of the Litus Saxonicum (Not. Dign. Occ. 1,36; 5,132; 28,1; 28,12; 37 f.), initially not without the assent of the Roman authorities. In stages between 383 and 407 AD, Roman troops were withdrawn from ~ Britannia. A letter from Honorius to the civitates (t0Aetc/poleis) in 410 shows that there was no longer any central Roman administration (Zos. 6,10,2; cf. Procop. Vand. 1,2,38), but this did not mean an abrupt end to Roman influence [2. 274-301]. Presumably

(ed.), Entstehung

und

Verfassung

des

Sachsenstammes, 1967. 2R.G. COLLINGWOOD, J.N. L. Myres, Roman Britain and the English Settlements, *1937 (repr. 1975) 3 P.OTraway, Archaeology in British Towns, 1992. J. ExHvers, H.-J. HAssLer, s. v. Sachsen, LMA 7, 12231227; SH. FReRE, Britannia, +1988; A.GENRICH, Der Ursprung der Sachsen, in: Die Kunde N. F. 21, 1970, 66112; Id., Die Altsachsen, 1981; B. KRUGER et al., Die Germanen, 2 vols, 51988, s. Index; W. LAMMERS, Die Stam-

mesbildung bei den Sachsen. Eine Forschungsbilanz, in: Westfalische Forschungen 10, 1957, 25-57; B.RAPPAPoRT s. v. S., RE 2 A, 309-327;

R. WENSkuUsS, Stammes-

bildung und Verfassung, 71977, esp. 541-550.

RA.WL.

Scabris see > Salebro Scadinavia. Name of an island of enormous size (Mela

3,54: S. aconjectural reading for Codannovia; Plin. HN 4,96; 8,39: S., various MSS: Scati-), which became known to the Romans during a naval expedition involv-

ing circumnavigation of Jutland in AD 5 (R. Gest. div. Aug. 26; Vell. Pat. 2,106,3; Plin. HN 2,167). In addition, Plin. HN 4,104 (following unnamed informants) incorrectly locates the Scandiae Islands to the north of Britain (cf. Ptol. 2,11,33). These designate primarily southern Sweden and the Danish isles (cf. also Ptol. 2,11,34: Lxavdia/Skandiai with the main island Lxavdia/Skandia). The names are interpreted as ‘islands of harm’ [1; 2. esp. 51-56]. ‘Scandinavia’ is a modern transference. 1 J.SVENNUNG, Scandinavia und Scandia, 1963 Skandinavien bei Plinius und Ptolemaios, 1974.

21d.,

H. Ditren, Pomponius Mela, in: J.HERRMANN, Griechi-

sche und lateinische Quellen zur Friihgeschichte Mitteleuropas, vol. 1, 1988, 548 f.; Id., Plinius der Altere., in: ibid., 572; M.SCHONFELD s.v. S., RE 2 A, 340-342. RA.WI.

Scaeae

(Xxaai/Skaiai sc. mbdavpylai).

The ‘Scaean

Gate’ in > Troy (Hom. Il. 3,145; 3,149 et passim; with-

out pylai: Hom. Il. 3,263; Str. 13,1,21; in the singular: Quint. Smyrn. 11,338), also called Dardaniai. Several explanations of the name are possible: the ‘left’ or ‘western gate’ or ‘gate of misfortune’ (derived from oxatog [2]), ‘crooked gate’ or named after its builder Scaeus (schol. Hom. Il. 3,145; 9,354; 11,170 BEKKER; Hsch. s. v. Zxarfjou wbAgow) or after the Scaei [1] people.

46

45 1 L. BURCHNER, s. v. Skaiisches Tor, RE 3 A, 424

2LSJ,

1603, S. V. OXQLOG.

SLA.

Scaeva. Probably originally a Roman personal name, recorded as a cognomen (‘left-handed’) e.g. in the Iunii Bruti (— Iunius [I 17]) family. 1 KaJANTO, Cognomina, 17; 105; 243

2 SCHULZE, 419. K.-L.E.

Scaevola. Probably originally a Roman family name, recorded as a cognomen (‘left-handed’), in the Republican period in the Mucii family (+ Mucius [I 2; 4-10; II 2]); for the legend of origin see Mucius [I 2]. 1 KajJANTO, Cognomina, 105; 243

2SCHULZE, 419. K--LE.

[1] Q. Cervidius §. Roman lawyer, who under Marcus [2] Aurelius (AD 161-180) was a member of his consilium (SHA Aur. 11,10) and from AD 175 was praef. vigilum (CIL XIV 4502); he also remained active under Commodus and Septimius Severus (until c. AD 200) [5. 113 f.]. As a respondent with a practical bent he wrote > Digesta (40 books), the last work of Roman jurisprudence with this title, and > Responsa (‘Legal opinions’, 6 books). These works contain verbatim enquiries to which S. gave laconical answers and thus permit a glimpse of legal practice, particularly of the Hellenistic Orient [5.115 f.]. Ouaestiones (‘Questions’, 20 books) are records of S.’s teaching activities [3. 2124-216; 5. 115]. The transmission of his other works, Regulae (‘Legal rules’, 4 books), Notae (‘Notes’) on the Digesta of Salvius > Iulianus [1] and on those of + Ulpius Marcellus and of his ‘individual volumes’ Ouaestiones publicae tractatae (‘Publicly discussed legal questions’) [4; 5. 116 f.] and De quaestione familiae (‘On questioning the slaves of a family’) is extremely fragmentary [1]. S. was the teacher of — Iulius [IV 16] Paulus and > Tryphoninus. The former annotated his Responsa, the latter his Responsa and Digesta [2. 219-233]. > Modestinus (Dig. 27,1,13,2) rates S. on a par with Paulus and > Ulpianus among the koryphaioi of jurisprudence [5. 116]. 10.LENEL,

Palingenesia

iuris civilis, vol.

2, 215 ff.

2 H.T. Kami, Wie schlecht hat ein Klassiker schreiben

kénnen?, in: Studi A. Biscardi, vol. 4, 1983, 215-237 3 P.FREzzA, “Responsa” e “Quaestiones”, in: SDHI 43,

1977, 203-262 Cervidius S., 1987 1997, 113-117.

4D.JOHNSTON, On a Singular Book of 5 D.Lress, Jurisprudenz, in: HLL 4, LG:

Scala see — Stairs; Stairways

SCALES

(modern Cambrai) and Turnacum (modern Tournai) and separates the civitates of the > Atrebates [1] and

the > Menapii on its left bank from that of the > Nervii on its right bank. In the region near its mouth (Plin. loc. cit.), which was settled by Germanic tribes (e.g. the Texuandri), the S. branches into a delta, in which in the ancient period (Caes. loc. cit.) the main branch reached the Mare Germanicum (North Sea) indirectly by way of the + Mosa [1]. Cremation pits are found there [r] from the Roman period up until the late Middle Ages, and from AD 525 row grave [2] structures, which are typical of the > Merovingian period. + Scaldis Pons 1 A.vAN

DoorsELAER,

Continuité d’un rite

7, 1991, 113-120. F. Baptiste, Habitat et activité économique dans la vallée de l’Escaut ..., 1975/6.

Scaldis Pons. Roman cum road at a bridge formed the boundary Nervii (It. Ant. 376,8;

F.SCH.

station on the Turnacum-Bagaover the river > Scaldis, which between the Menapii and the Tab. Peut. 2,3). Cf. the modern

place name Escau(t)pont (in the département du Nord).

F.SCH. Scales. In Antiquity only beam (or balance) scales (ota0udc/stathmos, tadavtov/tdlanton; Latin libra, also statera, trutina) were known; they are first documented

for Egypt (Old Kingdom, 5th dynasty) and were used in Greece in the Archaic period. Black Figure vase pictures (Arcesilas Bowl, Paris, CM; amphora by the Taleides Painter, New York, MMA, cf. BEAzLEy, ABV, 174,1) show equal-armed beam scales with two bowls for the goods being weighed and for graded weights. Already in Homer’s epic poems scales are used as a symbol (scales of fate: Hom. Il. 8,69-74). From the late rst century BC the > steelyard increasingly spread, but did not replace the equal-armed scales, which continued to be used in the Early Principate in trade and crafts; they are depicted on numerous Roman funerary reliefs. Scales had great significance in the history of Greek science, because Aristotle [6] managed to explain the function of a lever, using the characteristics of scales, and so to formulate the lever principle (Aristot. Mechanica 848a 11-850b 10; cf. also Hero, Mechanica 2,7; — Mechanics). > Steelyard (with ill.) 1 J. CHARBONNEAVX et al., Das archaische Griechenland,

1969, ills. 84;89

Scaldis. River in Gallia > Belgica (Caes. B Gall. 6,33; Plin. HN 4,98; 105; Geogr. Rav. 263,6: Scaldea; Ptol. 2,9,3; 9: TaBovdAha/Taboulla), modern Schelde (in French Escaut). It rises on Mont

M.RoGGE,

funéraire, in: Les Etudes Classiques 53, 1985, 153-170 2Ead., Spatromische und vélkerwanderungszeitliche handgefertigte Keramik, in: Studien zur Sachsenforschung

Saint Martin

near

Augusta Viromanduorum (modern Saint Quentin in the department of Oise), flows through Camaracum

2E.MarTIN-ParDEy, s. v. Waage, LA

6, 1081-1086 3E.MicHoNn, s. v. Libra, DS 3, 12221231 4A.Murz, Romische Waagen und Gewichte aus Augst und Kaiseraugst, 1983 5 H.SCHNEIDER, Das griechische Technikverstandnis, 1989, 238-245 6 ZIMMER, No. 1; 14; 18; 121; 124 f.; 139.

SCAMANDER

48

47

Scamander (Zxduavdeoc/Skamandros, Latin Scamander). River in Troas, modern River Menderes, which rises below the highest peak of the Ida [2]. Together with the > Simoeis it forms the Plain of Troy (cf. Hom. Il. 5,77). Below Scepsis and Cebren a road leads along its bank into the interior of Asia Minor. In the Iliad the S. appears as a god; it is named S. only by humans, the gods call it Xanthus (Hom. Il. 20,73). As a son of Zeus (ibid. 14,434) and Idaea it is the father of > Teucer and hence an ancestor of > Priamus. It took part in the Olympic assembly of the gods (ibid. 20,73) and had its own priest in Troy (ibid. 5,77), who sacrificed bulls and horses to it. A city recorded in Troas until the Byzantine period (5th century BC ceramics; cf. the sympoliteia treaty with Ilium/> Troy of roo BC [1]) was named after S.; it was probably near modern Akkoy, 6 km to the north of Ezine on the S. 1 P. Friscu, Die Inschriften von Ilion (IK 3), 1975, No. 63. W.Lear, Strabo on the Troad, 1923, 158-164, 199-202; J.M. Cook, The Troad, 1973, bes. 293-295; J. V. Luce, Die Landschaften Homers, 1999, s. v. S. E.SCH.

Scamandrius (Zxapudvde.oc; Skamandrios). [1] See > Astyanax. [2] Trojan, son of — Strophius;

skilled

huntsman,

taught by Artemis personally, but this did not save him from death at the hands of Menelaus (Hom. Il. 5,4958). P. WATHELET, Dictionnaire des Troyens de I’Iliade, 1988, No. 308.

MA.ST.

Scambonidae (ZxapPovidar; Skambonidai). Attic asty deme of the Leontis phyle, from 126/7 AD of the Hadrianis phyle, with three (four) bouleutai, in the northwest of Athens. The Lex Sacra IG DP 244 of the S.

deme records a démarchos [3], an evithynos (+ Euthynai), > métotkoi, an agora and participation in the synotkia festival in Athens, possibly also a + tamias.

175, esp. 152 f.; R. Hope Simpson, A Gazetteer and Atlas of Mycenian Sites (BICS Suppl. 16), 1965, 56; H.KaLETSCH, Ss. v. Kastri, in: LAUFFER, Griechenland, 311.

AKU.

Scapegoat rituals. ‘SR’ take their name from an ancient Israelite ritual sequence described in Lv 16,5-10 and 20-22, in which every year at Yom Kippur a ram was sacrificed to Yahweh and a second, on to which all the guilt of the people of Israel had been transferred, was driven into the wilderness “to take away divine anger“(‘dza’zel: [1. 159-162]). Post-Exile and, later, Jewish Rabbinic tradition explain Azazel as a demon or fallen angel, whereas early Christian theology interprets the ram as an allegory for Christ, who by his death is supposed to have taken human guilt upon himself [2]. English scapegoat and French bouc émissaire linguistically maintain the ancient connotation of a ‘ram sent out’? (LXX: apopompaios; Vulgate: emissarius); in contrast, the German Siindenbock (lit. ‘sinram’), a usage established in the 17th century, emphasises the sacrificial role of the innocent animal. Without this modern background, R.Grrarp’s theory of the role of religion in consecrating and mastering violence is unthinkable: the ritual expulsion and killing of a scapegoat in the sacrifice enables social control of violence; the ‘scapegoat mechanism’ here becomes an ostensibly universal human compensation mechanism

[3]. Only giving up the modern concepts of scapegoat and SR permits a more precise understanding of the ritual sequence described in Leviticus: it is part of the tradition of northwest Syrian (— Ebla, 2400/2300 BC: [4; 5]) and Hittite/southern Anatolian [znd millennium BC: 1. 134-144] — purification rituals, which were performed periodically or in crisis situations, and at whose centre was the ritual elimination and expiation of an impurity in the broadest sense. Their goal was the pacification of divine anger; the carriers on to which impurities were loaded normally were animals — a ram can be found as early as in the Eblaite ritual texts — but sometimes also people (ANET 355; [6. 69]). Like the

112 Nr. 127, Tab. 4, 15; H.LO.

ram at Yom Kippur, these carriers were chased away, not killed or sacrificed. In this the nature of the ritual

Scandea (Zxdvdea/Skandeia). Port settlement, 10 stadia to the east of the city of Cythera (Paus. 3,23,1) in the southeast of the island of > Cythera, modern Kastri on the bay of Avlemonas. Settlement from the Early Helladic on; first mentioned in Hom. Il. 10,268. Ona steep rock above S., there was an acropolis with a temple of Aphrodite Ourania. In 424 BC the Athenians conquered S., which had been occupied by the Spartans shortly before (Thuc. 4,54). Secured by a castle in the 6th century AD, S. was inhabited until the 7th century. SEG 22, 300.

differs from that of the related ’substitution’ ritual, in which a non-living object or a living creature was destroyed in place of a person or a community, after their ‘impurity’ had been transferred to it ([7]; cf. [6. 69]). Expelling, rather than killing, a human ‘scapegoat’ with the purpose of purification (kdtharsis) of a community and aversion of divine anger can also be found in the pharmakos rituals of Athens and several Ionian cities. These were initiated periodically or in times of crisis (evidence: cf. + Pharmakos [2]; + Thargeélia); this ancient oriental type of ritual was probably imported into Greece via Asia Minor in the Archaic period. S.W. MANNHARDT’s and J.G. FRAZER’s (outdated) interpretations of SR as rituals ofvegetation and renewal (cf. [8. vols 6 and 9]) made scholars aware of this

TRAILL, Attica, 18, 44, 59, 62, 68, WHITEHEAD, Index s. v. S.

PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN

3, 516;

H. WATERHOUSE,

R. HOPE

Simpson, Prehistoric Laconia 3, in: ABSA 56, 1961,

114—

49

SCARAB

so

early on; by now, scholars use ‘SR’ in a generalised sense to describe entirely different rituals of expiation and sacrifice. In the interests of terminological and factual precision, however, it would be advantageous if the criteria which can be established from the finds sketched above were made a standard for defining this special type of ritual. In this narrower sense, the type of ritual known as ‘SR’ is also recorded as an exceptional rite in Roman religion (Obseq. 44a; ror BC); the term is also applied — despite a change in form — e.g. to the Roman rite of — devotio [6. 63 f.]. The Roman crisis ritual of burying Greeks and Gauls alive in the Forum Boarium, recorded repeatedly since 228 BC (cf. Cass. Dio. 12,50; Plut. Marcellus 3,3 f.; Zon. 8,19 f.; Oros. 4,13,33 Liv. 22,57,6; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 83), also follows the same type: The literature does often contain the interpretation as > human sacrifice (a view which has been traced to Antiquity), but the people in question were expelled, while still alive, from their communities (for other examples see — expiatory rites), which by means of the ritual reconstituted themselves as exculpated before the gods. — Expiatory rites; > Pharmakos; > Purification; > Ritual; — Sacrifice 1 B.JANowsk1, G. WILHELM, Der Bock, der die Siinden hinaustragt, in: Eid., K. Kocu (ed.), Religionsgeschichtliche Beziehungen zwischen Kleinasien, Nordsyrien und dem Alten Testaent, 1993, 109-169 2L.L.GraBBE, The Scapegoat Tradition, in: Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period 18, 1987, 152-167 3R.GrRaRD, The Scapegoat, 1989 (French 1982) 4P.XeLxa, Il “capro espiatorio” a Ebla, in: SMSR 62, 1996, 677-684 51.ZATELLI, The Origin of the Biblical Scapegoat Ritual, in: VT 48, 1998, 254-264 6 W. BurKERT, Structure and History in Greek Mythology and Ritual, 1979, 59-77. 7 P. TaRacuHa, Ersetzen und Entsuhnen, 2000 8 FRAZER. AN.BE.

Scapsa (Zxdwa; Skapsa). The Scapsaei, who feature in the Athenian tribute lists (ATL 1, 408 f.) from 452/1 BC onwards, may be identified with the inhabitants of the city of Campsa, located by Hdt. 7,123,2 in > Crusis, to the northwest of modern Nea Iraklia. In 432 they seceded from Athens, but were won back and there is evi-

dence of their being members of the Delian League in 415/4. In the middle of the 4th century S. was a member of the Chalcidian League, before the city was conquered by Philippus [4] IL. M. ZAHRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 231-233.

MZ.

Scaptius [1] S., M. Praef. of Ap. Claudius [I 24] Pulcher who had five members of the council of Salamis in Cyprus starve when he was to enforce a loan repayment for M. Junius {I ro] Brutus. In 51 BC Cicero put an end to this and in 50 achieved repayment at an annual interest rate of 12 %, but S. rejected this and insisted on an annual rate of 48 % (Cic. Att. 5,21,10 ff.; 6,1,5 ff.; 6,2,7 f.).

[2] S., M. In 50 BC agent for M. Iunius [I ro] Brutus’

loans to king Ariobarzanes [5] (Cic. Att. 6,1,4; 3,5). W. WILL, Julius Caesar, 1992, 228-232.

J.BA.

Scar(a)bantia. City in > Pannonia on the Amber Road, modern Sopron (in Hungary). A late Celtic hill-

top settlement, it was used as a place of relocation of veterans in the early rst cent. AD (Plin. HN 3,146);

from the time of Domitianus (AD 81-96) municipium Flavium S. (Ptol. 2,14,4). Destroyed in the war against the Marcomanni (AD 167-182), it was fortified and had a Christian congregation from the beginning of the 4th cent. AD. The forum, castle wall, amphitheatre and necropoleis have been investigated. J. G6MOrI, Recent Archaeological Finds Concerning the Topography of Scarbantia, in: G. HaJNOczy (ed.), La Pannonia e l’Impero Romano, 1995, 251-261. H.GR.

Scarab (possibly a corruption of x&eaPoc; Latin scarabaeus, cf. Plin. HN 30,30). Finds of dried beetles and (initially undecorated) replicas in stone, Egyptian faience and other materials show that the scarab (Scarabaeus sacer L.) and related beetles were used as amulets

in Egypt from the late Predynastic Period (beginning of the 3rd millennium BC) onwards. The beetle’s practice of rolling large balls of dung was a metaphor for the motion of the sun; the scarab (Egyptian /prr) was considered a manifestation of the morning, i.e. rising, + Sun god (hprj, also pr come into being, change’). In the First Intermediate Period (c. 2190-1990 BC), replica scarabs were placed on an oval plate and this was decorated with geometric patterns, hieroglyphic symbols and representations of plants, animals and humans. From the end of the 11th dynasty (c. 1938 BC), scarabs were used as > seals; hieroglyphic inscriptions include personal names, and from the 12th dynasty onwards also the names of kings and later various spells. Scarabs became the typical seal amulets of Egypt. From the early Middle Kingdom (c. 1990-1630 BC) onwards, scarabs were exported to Crete and the western Near East, where jasper and steatite were produced locally beginning no later than the middle Bronze Age II B (first quarter of the 2nd millennium BC). In the rst millennium there were scarab factories in Israel and Phoenicia, and to some extent with purely Egyptian motifs also in the Phoenician-Punic West (+ Tharrus, end of the 6th cent. BC to the beginning of the 3rd). After the interruption of the Dark Centuries, Egyptian scarab imports again began to arrive in Cyprus in the Cypro-Geometric II Period (c. 950-850 BC); from the gth/8th cent. also in the Greek and Italian territories. These had an influence on the Aegaean production of faience scarabs (with hieroglyphic decoration) in the late 8th and 7th cents., which was followed by the spread of the Naucratis scarabs from the end of the 7th cent. until the middle of the 6th cent.

SCARAB

51

§2

Scarabs were used as amulets for female fertility and the protection of small children (the finds originate from the graves of women and children and from votive deposits for female deities; according to Plin. HN 30,138, children wore the horns of real scarabs as amu-

(Paus. 7,15,3 f.; cf. Lycoph. Alexandra 1147; Liv. 36,19,5; Paus. 10,1,2; Plin. HN 4,17; inscriptions: IG IX 1,314-3173 Syll.3 908; coins: HN 337).

lets). Archaic-Greek

and

Etruscan

scarabs

without

Egyptian motifs constitute independent branches of art. Christ is described in Ambr. Expositio evangelii secundum Lucam 10,113 (1528D) as the “Good Scarab”. + Amulet;

Io), 1998, 316-328.

G.D.R.

> Seals

A.F. Gorton, Egyptian and Egyptianizing Scarabs, 1996; B. JAEGER, Essai de classification et datation des scarabées Menkhéperré, 1982; O. KEEL, Corpus der StempelsiegelAmulette aus Palastina/Israel, 1995 ff.; G.T. Martin, Scarabs, Cylinder Seals and Other Egyptian Seals. A

Checklist of Publications, 1985; E.STAEHELIN, Agyptens heilige Pillendreher, 1982; W.A. Warp, O.TUFNELL, Studies on Scarab Seals, Vol. 1-2, 1978-1984.

Scardona (=xdedwv/Skdrdon). City of the > Liburni (Str. 7,5,5: AtBvevh moAtc, cf. Plin. HN 3,141; Ptol. 2,17,33 Procop. Goth. 1,7) on the right bank of the river Titius (also Titus, Tityus, Catarbates, modern Krka), about 20 km from the sea in the hinterland of Sibenik, modern Skradin (Croatia). The river was navigable as far as there.

PRITCHETT 4, 166 f.; S.L. AGER, Interstate Arbitrations in the Greek World, 1996, 370-372, 482-490; G. DAVERIO Roccut, La sismicita della Focide orientale e della Locride, in: E. OLSHAUSEN, H. SONNABEND (eds.), Naturkatastrophen in der antiken Welt (Geographica Historica

A Roman soldier, whose grave (ILS 2258)

provides us with evidence of his being in S., probably belonged to an outpost of + Burnum, where the /egio XI Claudia was stationed. There is also evidence of a conventus Scardonitanus of the > Iapodes and the Liburni (Plin. HN 3,139). From Flavian times on, S. was a> municipium, tribus Sergia (CIL III 2809 f.; end of the rst century AD). Before AD 31 a statue with inscriptions was erected by the civitates Liburniae to Nero, the son of Germanicus [2] (ILS 7156), probably in connexion with the organisation of a > ruler cult in S. (ara Augusti Liburniae, CIL Ill 2802, ILS 7157). The families of the upper class descended from unions of immigrants from other cities of the province with indigenous families: thus T. Turranius was a > decurio [1] and a duumvir, a priest of the ruler cult (ILS 7157), and T. Turranius Verus was an aedile in S. (CIL I 2805, ILS 4105). J.J. Wirkes, Dalmatia,

1969, 218; A. MAYER, Die Sprache

der alten Illyrier, 1957, 310 f.

PL.CA.

Scarponna. Roman bridge station, modern Scarponne near Dieulouard in the département of Meurthe et Meuse, on a route from the Rhodanus (Rhone) to the Rhenus (Rhine) between Divodurum (modern Metz) and Tullum (modern Toul), where the Roman road crossed the four branches of the Mosella on bridges (It. Ant. 365,5; Tab. Peut. 3,1; Geogr. Rav. 4,26: Scarbonna; CIL XIII 9050). The beginning of the GalloRoman vicus of the civitas of the > Mediomatrici (no traces of pre-Roman settlement) can be viewed in the context of the extension of the traffic network at the beginning of the rst century AD. From the rst century until the 4th the civilian settlement was between three branches of the Moselle (about ro ha). Inscriptions CIL XIII 4569-4622 and EspERANDIEU, Rec. 4604-4624,

e.g., indicate trade and crafts; the necropolis lies along the road and to the west of the vicus (“Vieux Paquis”). In 366 AD Iovinus [1] defeated the > Alamanni at S. (Amm. 27,2). With the building (presumably in the last third of the 4th century) of a castellum — probably less a fortification than a garrison (about 1 ha) — surrounded

by the Mosella, S. acquired a strategical character. In 451 S. was besieged by the > Hunni (Paulus Diaconus, MGH SS 2,262). In the Merovingian-Carolingian period (7th—gth centuries) S. was the site of a mint, capital of the Pagus Scarponensis (Fredegar, MGH Scriptores rerum Merovingicarum, Chronicae 4,52). J.-L.Massy, M. MancIn

Dieulouard-Scarponne,

in:

J.-P. Perit,

(ed.), Atlas des agglomérations secondaires

de la Gaule Belgique et des Germanies, 1994, 178 f. No.177; J.-L.Massy, Dieulouard-Scarponne, in: id., Agglomérations secondaires de la Lorraine romaine,

1997, 107-141.

F.SCH.

Scaurus. Roman cognomen (‘with prominent ankles’),

in the Republican period in the Aemilii (+ Aemilius {1 37-38]) and Aurelii (> Aurelius [17—18]) families.

Scarphea (ZxdQdeio/Skarpheia).

City in Locris Epi-

cnemidia (Hom. Il. 2,532; cf. Str. 9,4,4; Tab. Peut. 8,1; Geogr. Rav. 375,6), near modern Molo in a seismically active zone, seriously affected by tsunamis in 426 BC (Demetrius of Callatis FGrH 85 F 6; Thuc. 2,32) and

AD 551 (Procop. Goth. 4,25,16-23). Initially in rivalry with Thronium for dominance in the region (cf. the conflict over the number of Delphic > hieromnémones and border conflicts: FdD vol. 3, 38,3; 42,7), in Late Antiquity S. became the capital of the region and from the 4th century a bishop’s see. At S. the Romans were victorious over troops of the Achaean League in 146 BC

KaJANTO, Cognomina, 242.

K-LE.

Scedasus (=xéSaococ; Skédasos). Hero of > Leuctra to whom the Thebans sacrificed a white foal before waging battle. S.’ daughters (and those of Leuctrus/Leucter, Diod. Sic. 15,54) are violated by Spartans passing through; in vain S. demands justice in Sparta and takes his own life (as his daughters had already done), after cursing the homeland of the perpetrators and prophesying a defeat for its army. S. is said to have appeared to + Pelopidas before the battle of 371 BC against the

53

54

Spartans; there was a memorial to the daughters near the battle field (Xen. Hell. 6,4,7, without names). There were many versions of the story (e.g. Paus. 9,13,5; Plut. Pelopidas 20-23; Ps.-Plut. Amatoriae narrationes 773b-774d), the traditional core was quickly embroidered further. HE.B.

(periactoi) or as painted drapes between the doors or columns of the now-elevated stone stage wall. The Late Republican Roman wooden theatre adopts the Greek system; Claudius Pulcher had the first interchangeable pinax backcloths made in 99 BC (Plin. HN 35,23). An echo of the Greek illusionistic architectural decorations can be found in Roman Campanian > wall paintings of the Second Style; the nature of the dependence, however, is debatable [zo].

Scelmis see > Celmis Scenography (Greek oxnvoyeadia/skénographia, Latin scaenographia). There is controversial criticism of the development and appearance of this genre, surviving only in ancient literature and in pictorial secondary sources (cf. also > Painting), and they remain unclear, despite various synopses of the results of different branches of study of the form and development of Greek ~» theatre and its performing places. Changes in architecture and forms of staging also moulded the character of scenography. In contemporary philosophical discourse, the term oxynvoyeadia generally becomes a synonym for illusionism, and from the Hellenistic period onwards also for — perspective in — optics and — architectural theory. In the late 6th/early 5th cent. BC, in Athens people performed with simple situational props on an open ‘natural stage’ [5. 104ff.]; sometimes red animal skins which could be rolled up and were stretched over transportable wooden frames were used for ‘scenery/backdrop’ (CGF 148,3). Occasionally, a parascenia stage with a backdrop in the form of a royal tent can be deduced from texts, already before > Aeschylus’ Oresteia (458 BC) [6. 57ff.]. Vitruvius (7 praef. 11) names — Agatharchus as the originator of scenography, who is supposed to have designed a stage for a tragedy by Aeschylus and also to have composed a written work on the subject; this probably refers to the illusionistically painted back wall of the wooden stage construction, visualizing places mentioned in the play (house, temple, palace). Vitruvius (1,2,2) defines scaenographia in the technical sense as the perspective drawing of the facade and sides of a structure in an architectural plan. A — probably incorrect —statement in Aristotle (Poet. 1449a 18), according to which > Sophocles introduced scenography [contra 2], does, however, permit inferences about the relevance of advances in the development of —> perspective for scenography and therefore for theatrical practice in the 5th cent. BC. Agatharchus’ guide to techniques in painting influenced > Anaxagoras and > Democritus in their theories of optics. A fragment of a red-figured crater in Wiurzburg (mid—4th cent.) with a columned building rendered in perspective probably shows genuine or painted theatre architecture [4. 71ff]. According to Vitruvius (5,6,8f.), the necessary scenery was palace architecture for tragedies, street scenes for comedies and landscape for satyr plays, a typification which happened in the Hellenistic period. Apart from the painted wooden stage there was also scenography in the form of interchangeable panel pictures on revolving stands

SCEPTICISM

1H.Biume,

1991, 60-66

Einfiihrung

in das antike

Theaterwesen,

2A.BRown, Three and Scene-Painting

Sophocles, in: PCPhS 210, 1984, 1-17.

3 L.GIGANTE, A

Study of Perspective from the Representations of Architectural Forms in Greek Classical and Hellenistic Painting, 1987,1-52 4S.Gocos, Bihnenarchitektur und antike Biihnenmalerei, in: JOAI 54, 1983, 59-86

5 H.KENNER,

Zur Architektur des Dionysostheaters in Athen, in: JOAI 57, 1986/87, 55-91

6S.MELCHINGER, Das Theater der

Tragédie, 1974, 31-36, 162-164 7A.Poscu, Skenographie und Parthenon, in: AK 37, 1994, 21-30 8 A.ROUVERET, Histoire et imaginaire de la peinture ancienne, 1989, 65-123

9 I. SCHEIBLER, Griechische

Malerei der Antike, 1994,

149-152

10 R. TyBour,

Aedificiorum Figurae, 1989, 189-198.

N.H.

Scepsis (Lxjwuc/Sképsis, Dxdrc/Skapsis). Aeolian set-

tlement in the Troad, modern Kursunlu Tepe, on the upper Scamander, according to Str. 13,1,52 founded by Hector’s son > Scamandrius. In the 5th cent. BC S. was probably colonised by Milesian settlers. By Antigonus [x] it was incorporated into Alexandria [2] Troas, and by Lysimachus [2] made independent again (Str. 13,1,52). Allegedly the libraries of Theophrastus and Aristoteles [6] were buried there as protection from the Attalids (Str. 13,1,54). The settlement existed until the Byzantine period. W.Lear, Strabo on the Troad, 1923, 268-275; J.M. Cook, The Troad, 1973, 345-347; N. EHRHARDT, Milet und seine Kolonien, *1988, 29 f. E.SCH.

Scepticism I. DEFINITION II. SCHOOLS OF ANCIENT ScEPTICISM III. ACADEMIC SCEPTICISM IV. PyYRRHONIAN SKEPTICISM

I. DEFINITION The modern term ‘sceptic’ normally refers to someone who believes that in general, we know nothing with any degree of certainty or in any case nothing about the — world beyond our own consciousness. There were sceptics in this sense already in Antiquity: > Metrodorus [1] of Chios (4th cent. BC), a > Democritean, maintained that we know nothing at all, not even whether or not we know anything, or what knowledge (eidévat/ eidénai) is, or whether anything exists at all (7o B x DK). The ~ Cyrenaics were of the opinion that although we are aware of our own impressions and emotions, we know nothing about the external reality underlying them (Sext. Emp. Outlines of Pyrrhonism 1,115, end of 2nd cent. AD).

SCEPTICISM

The ancient term ‘Sceptic’ (oxentixdc/skeptikos, from oxénteoOavsképtesthai, ‘to investigate, examine’) initially referred to someone who thought that we had no notion or opinion that was so well-founded or justified as not to require further ‘examination’ (oxéwic/ sképsis); this applies in particular to all questions of philosophy as well as all individual scientific disciplines (see Sext. Emp. Outlines 1,13). All of these questions, it was held, turn out to have no definitive answer — unless one is contented with mere > opinion. They were called Sceptics (i.e. ‘examiners’), because they examined all of the obvious answers and opinions, or, alternatively, ‘researchers’ (Cntntxoi/zététikoi), because they investigated how to answer the questions (Sext. Emp. Outlines E73

In the eyes of the Sceptics, the philosophers - whom they derogatorily referred to as ‘Dogmatics’ (Soyuatixoi/dogmatikoi)

56

55

(Sext. Emp. Outlines

1,1) -

searched for answers to questions about life and the world which they deemed urgent by rashly subscribing to opinions which could not be taken as definitive. Sceptics, by contrast, never ceased to examine and did

not settle for an ultimately unjustifiable opinion, a dogma, but would refrain from judgement or approval (énoyt/> epoche; Sext. Emp. Outlines 1,1-4). Thus this school of philosophy was also known as ephektiké (&pextinn) or aporetike (aogntixnh; cf. > Aporia) (Sext.

original Academic position, but became the dominant view in the Academy only at the turn of the rst cent. BC under > Philo [I 9] of Larisa (c. 150-83 BC). III. ACADEMIC SCEPTICISM It seems that > Arcesilaus [5] tried to follow the model of > Socrates [2]. He stated about himself (in reference to the latter) that he knew nothing, and that he was indeed prepared to go one step further than Socrates and admit that he did not even know that for certain (Cic. Acad 1,44 f.; 2,74; Cic. Fin. 2,2). He attempted to disprove all philosophical theses, making use of the practice of dialectic > elenchus as employed in the Academy in the tradition of Socrates. Arcesilaus’ refutations focused on Stoic theses, predominantly those used by the Stoics (> Stoicism) to prove the possibility of knowledge. In particular, he rejected the Stoic assumption that there was such a thing as a cognitive impression (xatadnxtxt pavtacia/kataleptike phantasia; cf. > Phantasia) which by its very nature guaranteed the > truth of the corresponding perceptual content. The question whether such impressions existed remained the main contentious issue between Academics and Stoics. Arcesilaus rejected their existence, arguing that nothing was known, indeed that one could not even form an opinion, as there were as many reasons in favour of an assumption as there were against it

Emp. Outlines 1,7).

(iooo8eveia/isostheneia, balance of pros and cons). Hence, it was necessary in all cases to abstain from

II. SCHOOLS OF ANCIENT SCEPTICISM Two schools of Sceptics in the sense mentioned in I were known in Antiquity: (1) the Academics, i.e. > Arcesilaus [5] (c. 315-240 BC) and his successors in Plato’s [1] > Academy, and (2) the Pyrrhonians (cf. > Pyrrho), namely — Aenesidemus (1st half of the rst cent. BC) and his successors, including > Sextus [I 2]

judgement or assent (Cic. Acad. 1,45).

Empiricus (c. AD 200), our main witness for ancient

Scepticism. Traditionally, the difference between Academic and

Pyrrhonian Scepticism was defined as follows: the Pyrrhonians favoured a life without any opinions whatsoever, while the Academics took the more moderate line that forming an opinion on any matter was permitted as long as such opinion was not mistaken for knowledge. This view seemed to be confirmed by influential members of the Academy, who even conceded to philosophers the right to have opinions on philosophical questions. Thus in — Cicero’s Academica (Cic. Acad. 2,148), Catulus makes the positive claim that nothing could be known. It was with such Academics in mind that Sextus Empiricus attempted to draw a distinction between Academics and Pyrrhonians by ascribing firm opinions to the former (predominantly the opinion that nothing could be known), while the latter refrain from any judgement even on the question whether or not we know anything. For this reason, Sextus Empiricus saw the Academics not as genuine Sceptics, but rather as Dogmatic philosophers in a wider sense. According to ancient sources (including Sextus), this was not the

After Arcesilaus,

the most

important

Academic

Sceptic was > Carneades [1] (214-129 BC). Reports

about him only mention his view that an objection could be found to any assumption. He also allegedly stated that even a wise man would form an opinion every now and then (Cic. Acad. 2,67). Three pupils of Carneades — > Cleitomachus [1] (until 110 BC) on the one hand, > Metrodorus [6] (the former’s younger contemporary) and — Philo [I 9] of Larisa on the other — argued about the interpretation of this second statement by Carneades: was it purely dialectic, i.e. voiced just for the sake of the argument, or was it to be taken literally? Cleitomachus argued — probably correctly — that a distinction should be drawn between two kinds of assent (ovyxatéOeoudsynkatathesis) and consequently also of opinion: first, consent in the sense that one forms an opinion which one considers true or at least probable, because there are more reasons in its favour than against it; and second, consent in the sense that things simply compellingly present themselves to the examiner in such a way that he has to accept as plausible (m@avov/pithanon, lat. probabile), whether or not he wants to see them that way. The fact that something appears to be plausible does not yet mean that one considers it true or even only probable. Cleitomachus maintained that Carneadeas had permitted consent and thus opinion, if at all, only in the latter sense and not in the former (Cic. Acad. 2,104).

7

58

According to Metrodorus and Philo, though, the distinction is to be drawn between consent in the sense that one believes to know something and thus considers it to be definitely true, and consent in the sense that one considers something to be at least probable, because it is supported by the better arguments, thus justifying agreement. Consent in the former sense would be unacceptable to the Sceptic, but the same does not apply to the latter sense. Consequently, it was well possible to hold philosophical or scientific opinions, as long as they were not mistaken for knowledge. In Philo, we find three different positions: (x) Initially, he shared Cleitomachus’ view; (2) as Head of the Academy, he maintained for many years the view just outlined, i.e. permitting philosophical opinions; (3) towards the end of his life, though, he declared that by their nature things can be known or perceived, but that we have no knowledge of them because we do not possess a Stoic criterion for truth (> Stoicism). This, in his opinion, had been the essential issue from the very beginning (Sext. Emp. Outlines of Pyrrhonism 1,235). The impact of Philo’s teachings can hardly be overestimated. One of his pupils, > Antiochus [20] of Ascalon, broke away from Academic Scepticism in reaction to Philo changing his position yet again (Cic. Acad. 2,12) and tried to return to Plato’s teachings and those of the old pre-Sceptic academy, interpreting them, however, in a way strongly coloured by > Stoicism (Sext. Emp. Outlines 1,235). In doing so, he inaugurated ~ Middle Platonism. Particularly influential, though, was Philo’s second position: a detailed, positive, mainly Stoic philosophical doctrine (with the one proviso that it was not concerned with knowledge, because — contrary to the Stoic view — it was impossible to know anything). Academic Scepticism was thus reduced to what we today understand as Scepticism. > Cicero as a pupil of Philo maintained this same form of Scepticism, which is also the form that is represented in his Academica. It was this same philosophical form of Scepticism that > Augustine, using Cicero as his source, attacked in his work Contra Academicos. Thus, due to the influence of Cicero and Augustine, the only form of Scepticism known in western Europe for long periods was this reduced Philonian one. However, a further consequence of the Philonian position was that it prompted some Academic Sceptics to protest against this reduction.

troversial. There was no Pyrrhonian tradition that Aenesidemus could have joined (cf. Diog. Laert. 9,115). Pyrrho had left no written records, his teachings were mainly disseminated by > Timon [2] (c. 320-230 BC). What seems certain is that Pyrrho maintained the moral indifference of the things of the world — they were neither good nor bad, or rather neither more good than bad nor vice versa (Cic. Acad. 2,130; Fin. 2,43; 4,43). Timon interpreted this position as follows: Either the things are by their very nature neither good nor bad, or they are good or bad, but in that case we are not able to determine which they are; this does not just apply to ‘good’ or ‘bad’, but to all predicates (Aristocles in Eus. Praep. evang. 14,18,1~-5; cf. also Ascanasius of Abdera in Diog. Laert. 9,61). At any rate, Aenesidemus and the Pyrrhonians employed some of the terminology used by Timon. A problem that Arcesilaus had already been confronted with (e.g. by > Colotes [2]; cf. Plut. Adversus Colotem 26), was the question how a Sceptic could live without opinions by refraining from judgement, even though life without opinions was impossible. This was a central problem that all Sceptical philosophers had to deal with (with the exception of the Philonian school). Whether they succeeded is still a matter of controversy. Much depends on what is meant by ‘opinion’. In line with all other schools of thought, Sceptics distinguish between something’s appearing a certain way (datvouevov/phaindmenon, Latin: visum), and one’s considering it to be true. Thus they could state — as did Timon (Diog. Laert. 9,105) and frequently the Pyrrhonians (Sext. Emp. P. H. 1,22) — that in their lives they took things as they appeared to them, without considering them to be true. They could say — as did Arcesilaus or Carneades — that in their lives they followed what appeared to them reasonable (e’Aoyov/edlogon) or plausible (m8avov/pithan6n), without considering it to be true (Sext. Emp. Adv. math. 7,158 and 166). They were, finally, able to distinguish — as did Cleitomachus, Philo and Sextus Empiricus (Sext. Emp. Outlines of Pyrrhonism 1,13 and 19) — between various kind of agreement; an opinion was to be rejected only if it implied agreement of the wrong kind. With the exception of the Philonian Academics, the main aim of the Sceptics was to refrain from basing anything in their lives on any theoretically based assumptions. ~ Epistemology; > Carneades; + Opinion; - Philo [I

IV. PyRRHONIAN SKEPTICISM — Aenesidemus, originally himself an Academic, criticized the dogmatism of his school (i.e. probably that of > Philo [I 9] and his followers), which claimed that nothing could be known, but nonetheless upheld Stoic teachings (Phot. Bibliotheke 212,169b-170A Pyrrho himself is unclear and con-

SCEPTICISM

9]; — Pyrrho; — Scepticism

— Sextus

[12]

Empiricus;

—> Truth;

J. ALLEN, Academic Probabilism and Stoic Epistemology, in: CQ 44, 1994, 85-113; J. BARNES, The Toils of Scepticism, 1990; CH. BRITTAIN, Philo of Larissa, 2001; V. BRO-

CHARD, Les sceptiques grecs, 1887; J.BRUNSCHWIG, scepticisme et ses variétés, in: M.CANTO-SPERBER

Le

(ed.),

Philosophie grecque, 1997, 563-591; M.BuRNYEAT, M.FrReEDE, The Original Sceptics, 1997; M.Dat Pra, Lo scetticismo greco, *1975; A.GOEDECKEMEYER, Die Geschichte des griechischen Skeptizismus, 1905; R.J. HANKINSON, The Sceptics, 1995; P. NATorP, Forschungen zur Geschichte des Erkenntnissproblems im Alter-

SCEPTICISM

thum, 1884; L.Rosin, Pyrrhon et le scepticisme grec, 1944; K.M. Vocrt, Skepsis und Lebenspraxis, 1998. MER.

Scerdilaedas (Sxeodiiatdac; Skerdilaidas). Chieftain of the > Labeates of Illyria, brother-in-law of > Agron [3], chieftain of the Sardiaei [1. 45 f.]. In 229 BCS. supported + Teuta against the city of Phoenice in Epirus (Pol. 2,5,6-6,7), consolidated his rule over southern IIlyrian tribes after the first Illyrian War (229/8) and continued his raids south of the border with > Lissus (Pol. 4,16,6), especially in 220 as an ally of the Aetolians, before he changed sides to join > Philippus [7] V (Pol. 4,29,2-7). Yet, by the time of what is known as the Second Illyrian War, in 219/8 S. advanced against Macedonia as the rival of Demetrius of Pharos [1. 74, 80], calling on the Romans for help in 216 and as their friend joining the Aetolian-Roman alliance in 212 with his son > Pleuratus [1] (Pol. 5,3,33; 4,33 95,1-43; 110,83 [1. 144-146]). S. probably died in 206. 1D. VoLLMER, Symploke, 1990.

L.-M.G.

Scetic desert. Region beyond the western edge of the Egyptian delta, esp. in the area which today is referred to as Wadi n-Natrun. Christian monks retreated there beginning in the 4th cent. AD, four monasteries are still occupied today. A. Copy, in: A.S. Atrya (ed.), The Coptic Encyclopedia,

vol. 7, 1991, 2102-2106.

AvL.

Scheda (schida, scida) has various meanings in Latin

authors: (1) a sheet or piece of papyrus or parchment (> Pugillares) for notes or short messages (Cic. Att. 1,20,7; Quint. Inst. 1,8,19; Mart. 4,89,4; CGL IV 422,52; V 243,10 and 482,57; cf. [1. 497°]). (2) In Late

Antiquity s./schedula is the term for a ‘rough draft’ of a literary work; cf. Isid. Etym. 6,14,8 “scheda est quod adhuc emendatur, et necdum in libris redactum est” (“scheda describes a text which still has to be corrected and is not yet finished”; the interpretation in [2] is incorrect) and particularly Rufinus Adv. Hieronymum 2,48,22-24 “schedulae imperfectae inemendatae”, (“unfinished and uncorrected sheets”; cf. also ibid. 2,43,15-17). Rufinus (c. AD 345-411) is referring to a draft of the Latin translation of Origenes’ [2] Iegi Gexav (Peri archén, ‘On Principles’) on which he was working. (3) In Plin. HN 13,77 schida describes the

strips of > papyrus plant which are stuck together at right angles in two layers to make the individual sheets of a papyrus role [3]. 1N.Lewis,

60

59

Papyrus

in

Classical

Antiquity,

1974

2 T.Doranp1, Den Autoren uber die Schulter geschaut, in: ZPE 87, 1991, 20-30,note121 3 U. WILCKEN, Recto oder verso?, in: Hermes 22, 1887, 488. TD.

Schedia see > Toll

Schedius (Xyedioc; Schedios). [1] Son of king Iphitus and grandson of Naubolus; born in Panopeus (Paus. 10,4,2). Leader of the Phocians, he initially woos > Helena [1] (Apollod. 3,129) and then sets off with his brother Epistrophus and 40 ships for the Trojan War (Hom. Il. 2,517—526). In the battle for the body of Patroclus he is killed by > Hector (Hom. Il. 17,305-311). His remains are taken to Anticyra in Phocia (Paus. 10,36,10) or to Daphnus (Str. 9,4,17). According to another version the brothers survive and found Temesa (schol. Lycophr. 1067). [2] Phocian prince, son of Perimedes, slain by Hector at Troy (Hom. Il. 15,515 f.). [3] Suitor of + Penelope from Dulichium (Apollod. Epita7.27):

HE.B.

Schedographia. School exercises, of various content and levels of difficulty, compiled by significant Byzantine scholars and simple teachers, used for teaching Greek grammar, spelling and syntax. Particularly favoured in the middle-Byzantine Period (12th century AD), a oxé50¢/schédos consisted of intentionally itacized (+ Itacism) malformations and incorrect combinations of syllables, and was constructed around the homonymy of the antistoicha (e, o andi sounds). In this

word-puzzle, which as a rule had edifying stories, fables, gnomai, lives of saints, etc. as its subject, spelling and word division were to be reconstructed correctly by pupils. Over time schedographia became limited to detailed grammatical and lexical analysis of a short text, approximating — epimerism1. 1 Huncer, Literatur 2, 22-29

2 C.GaLLavorTtTi, Nota

sulla schedografia di Moscopulo e suoi precedenti fino a Teodoro Prodromo, in: Bollettino dei Classici ser. 3.4, 1983, 3-35 31. Vassis, Graeca sunt, non leguntur. Zu den schedographischen Spielereien des Theodoros Prodromos, in: ByzZ 86/7, 1993/4, I-19. LV.

Schera (Zyéo0a; Schéra). A city in western Sicily indicated by its ethnicon YyegtvoVScherinoi in the 5th decree of the people’s assembly of > Entella (Z. 21, cf. [2]) together with other cities that donated wheat and barley to the Synoikistoi (+ Synoikism6s) of Entella. S. was partially destroyed by the Carthaginians in the first of the > Punic Wars. 1 G. MANGANaARO, Metoikismos. Metaphora di poleis 4 Sicilia, in: ASNP 20, 1990, 391-408, esp. 400, n. 41 2 G.NEncI, I decreti di Entella I-V, in: ASNP 21, 1991,

137-145,esp.144

3 G.Bgjor, Citta di Sicilia nei decreti

di Entella, in: ASNP 12, 1982, 815-839, esp.834 4M.I. GULLETTA, S., in: Giornate Internazionali Studi area elima (1991), Atti, vol. 1, 1992, 379-394. GLMA.

Scheria (Zyeoin; Scherié). Land of the > Phaeaces, last stop on > Odysseus’s wanderings. As with almost all these stops, brains have been racked over the location of S. since Antiquity. Among the numerous proposed solutions + Corcyra [1] (Corfu) appears at a very early stage (Alc. fr. 441 VoicT: [1. 19]) and most frequently

61

62

[2. 294]. Similarly, for the ship of the Phaeaces, turned

However, the procedure on re-acceptance was in practice never consistently dependent on a definition of schism. Thus, according to Augustine, baptism correctly performed even, for instance, by Pelagians and Arians was regarded as valid. Among virtually all ancient Christian authors, the tendency to teach a close correlation, indeed an interdependence of schism and heresy is unmistakable. Every schism, over time, required justification, and by its very nature such a justification would be heretical

to stone on the return from Ithaca (Hom. Od. 13,161164), several rock formations off Corfu are plausible.

All of this has little to do with Homer. He attributes miraculously fast ships to the Phaeaces (ibid. 8,557563), has fruit grow all year round for them (ibid. 7,117-128) and locates them in a ‘Utopian’ fairy-tale world, like the > Laestrygones or the > Lotophagi (this line of reasoning already with Eratosthenes [1. 19—-20]). Whether S. should be visualised as an island is not entirely clear [1. 20]. 1 A.F. Garvie (ed.), Homer. Odyssey, Books 6-8, 1994 (with comm.) 2 A.HeEuBEcK et al., A Commentary on

Homer’s Odyssey, Books 5-8, 1988.

REN.

Schism (oyiopo/schisma, ‘split’). Through the course of the history of Christianity a usage has come to prevail which makes sense at first sight. > Heresy is a doctrinal view which differs from the orthodox. Schism, however, denotes a split (in the Church) which originates in personal, disciplinary, political or other differences that are not dogmatic (or doctrinal in the narrower sense). Heresy thus refers to a deviation from truth, schism from unity. On individual schisms, cf. - Damasus, — Donatus [1], > Felix [5] II, > Lucifer [2], > Melitius of Lycopolis, > Montanism, > Novatianus. In pre- and extra-Christian contexts, this terminology is almost never encountered (on Greek and Hebrew/Jewish equivalents, v. [1. 964]; Latin sc(h)isma is only attested in Christian contexts). The New Testament lacks a distinction between schism and heresy. Both terms denote splits, which need not be linked to doctrinal views (1 Cor 1,10; 11,18 f.). A clear terminological distinction can be discerned towards the end of the 2nd cent. AD in > Eirenaeus [2] of Lyons (Adversus Haereses, 4,33,7; 26,7 without the term schisma), in — Tertullianus (esp. De praescriptione 5; De baptisma 14,2; 17,3; De pudicitia 14,5; Adversus Marcionem 4,35,9) and in > Cyprianus [2] (Testimonia 3,86; otherwise he uses both terms synonymously). Irrespective of whether the distinction was objectively regarded as relevant or justified, it established itself in Christianity in the course of the 4th cent., and remained dominant. State legislation developed along similar lines: The two terms are interchangeable in > Constantinus [x] I (Euseb. Vita Const. 3,64 f.; Optatus, Contra Parmenianum, Appendix 10; Cod. Theod. 16,5,1; the unpolemical mention of the Novatianist schism in Cod. Theod. 16,5,2 is interesting). Theodosius I rejected the clear distinction (Cod. Theod. 16,6,4). The distinction is important — because it had practical consequences — with e.g. the Novatianists and Donatists. The sacraments performed by schismatics, esp. baptism, were regarded as valid and affording salvation on re-entry into the uma sancta (‘one holy {church]’). This was not so for those sacraments performed by heretics, e.g. Arians or Manichaeans (cf. the clear but unusual formulation in Optatus 1,10-12).

SCHOENEUS

(Jer. Comm. in Titum 3,10; Aug. Contra Cresconium 2,7/9, cf. here [2]). It was not always made explicit in

state legislation whether penalties for heretics also applied to schismatics, with the result that when the classification of a group as ‘schismatics’ was accepted, this promised greater tolerance than its condemnation as heretics [3].

Along with this lack of a precise definition of what schisma is went the use of other terms denoting Christian splits, e.g. dvyootaota/dichostasia (Latin dissensio, ‘discord’; Gal 5,20 and > Apostolic Fathers; on this [4]) or nagaovvaywyt/parasynagoge (‘counter-congregation’; on this — Basilius [1] of Caesarea, Epist. 188,r).

In the Old Church, the problems of the heresies and schisms could not be solved ‘ecumenically’ or pluralistically; they were perceived as portents of the End Times. This is how Jesus’ warning against false prophets was understood

(Mt 7,15; 24,5 and parallels) in

combination with an apocryphal utterance of Jesus according to which ‘there [would] be schisms and heresies’ in the last days (— Iustinus [6], Dialogue 3 5,3; on this [5]). — Christianity 1 C. MAURER, S.v. oxifw, oxiona, ThWB 7, 1964, 959-965

2 W.A. Lonr, s.v. S., TRE 30, 1999, 129-135 (bibliography) 3 A.ScHINDLER, Die Unterscheidung von S. und Haresie in Gesetzgebung und Polemik gegen den Donatismus, in: E.DASSMANN, K.S. FRANK (eds.), Pietas, FS B. Kotting (JoAC Suppl. 8), 1980, 228-236 4 BAUER/ ALAND, s.v. dtyootacia, Sp. 402 Haresie, Untersuchungen

zu 1Kor

5 H.PAUuLsEN, S. und 11, 18.19, in: Zeit-

schrift fiir Theologie und Kirche 79, 1982, 180-211.

AL.SCHI. Schoeneus (you ev Athamas and > Themisto, the daughter of ~ Hypseus; brother of > Leucon [1], Erythrius and Ptous/Ptoeus (Herodorus FGrH 31 F 38; Apollod. 1,84; Nonnus, Dion. 9,312-321; Tzetz. Ad Lykophr. 22, some with variant names). Father of both the Boeotian — Atalante and the Arcadian one (Hes. fr. 72,9 f.; 75,12-15; 76,9 M.-W.; Apollod. 1,68; 1,112; 3,109; Hyg. Fab. 173; 185; 244; Ov. Met. 10,609; 10,660 et passim) and of > Clymenus [6] (Hyg. Fab. 206; 238; 242; 246). Accordingly the eponym of the Boeotian city of Schoenus (schol. and Eust. Ad Hom. Il. 2,497) and the Arcadian city of + Schoenus [4] (Paus. 8,35,10;

63

64

Steph. Byz., s. v. Lxyowotc/Schoinous) and the Boeotian river Schoenus {1] (Herodian. De prosodia catholica

through sound change, the Egyptian jtrw assimilated with the word for (i.a.) ‘reed’ (j3rw).

SCHOENEUS

10, p. 241,22 f. LENTZ; Steph. Byz. loc. cit. = Tryphon, fr. 84 DE VELSEN). A. NERCESSIAN, Ss. v. S., LIMC 7.1, 703; J.ZWICKER, S. V. S. [rz], RE 2 A, 616.

1 A.B. LLoyp, Herodotus, Book Il, Commentary 1-98, 1976, 43-45 2 A.ScHwaB-ScHLoTT, Die Ausmafe Agyptens nach altagyptischen Texten, 1981, 101-136 3 F.Huttscu, Griechische und rémische Metrologie, *1882, 362-366.

[2] Son of Autonous and > Hippodamia [6], brother of Erodius, > Anthus, > Acanthis and Acanthus. After Anthus was mauled by his father’s wild mares, in com-

passion + Zeus and > Apollo turn the whole grieving family into birds. S. is turned into the (unknown) bird of the same name (Antoninus Liberalis 7; cf. Hesych. s. v. Lyoivixoc/Schoinikos). [3] Foster-father of > Orestes [1] (loannes Antiochenus BEG 4555s tta25): SLA.

Schoenus (Lxowot Saronikos Kolpos, not far to the west of modern Kalamakion; few ancient remains. PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN 3, 73.

A.KU.

[4] Locality in the Plain of Polos to the south of > Methydrium in northern Arcadia, exact location unknown. Sources: Paus. 8,35,10; Eust. Ad Hom. II. 265,20; Steph. Byz. s. v. =. E.Curtius, PAPACHATZIS,

Basis

Peloponnesos Ilavoaviov

1, 1851, 308 f., 340; N.D. EdAadog

Teoujynots 4, 1980,

H.LO.

Schoinos (oyoivoc/schoinos, ‘rush, reed’). Egyptian measure of length, which according to Hdt. 2,6 corresponds to 60 stadia (— Stadion [1]), but according to Str. 17,1,24 and 4, it varied (depending on geographic location) between 30 and 120 stadia. The Egyptian equivalent jtrw represents the distance over which a towing team was able to tow a boat. With local variations, the average is assumed to be 10.5 km. The name schoinos is based on an etymological misinterpretation:

KJ.-W.

Schola derived from the Greek scholé (oxohn; schole), earliest documented use in Lucil. 756; in general, it refers to > leisure, time spent not working (definition of the term in Fest. 470 L.) and is thus used to describe a) a learned treatise, debate or lecture (e.g. Cic. Tusc. 1,8), b) the place where teachers and pupils meet, i.e. the > school (Mart. 1,35,2) and c) the followers of a particular teacher or doctrine (as in Plin. HN 20,85). The aspect of leisure and relaxation is also to some extent retained in its use as a technical term in Roman architecture. [1] According to Vitr. De arch. 5,10,4, in > thermal baths the scholae (labri) were the apsidal recesses which served as places for the bathers to linger before or after their bath in the bathing pool. [2] As a special feature peculiar to > Pompeii, semicircular benches were described as scholae according to epigraphic records (CIL 10,831); they were mainly found along the Street of Tombs (Via delle Tombe), but also in sanctuaries (Forum Triangolare, the sanctuary of Liber Pater near S. Abbondio). A tomb of similar typology is found at the Porta Marina in Ostia [5. 167 with fig. 81]. The majority of these tombs, some designed as kenotaphia (> Kenotaphion), date back to the reigns of Augustus and Tiberius and served as municipally financed memorials to magistrates and their families. [3] According to Plin. HN 35,114 and 36,22, a room in the Porticus Octaviae described as a schola served as a public gallery for statues and paintings. It is probably identical with the curia Octaviae (Plin. HN 36,28), the assembly place of the Senate under Tiberius (Cass. Dio

55,8). [4] Clubhouses, mainly used for meetings of members and communal meals (- Associations). Though they were generally described as scholae (e.g. CIL 14,285; 11,2702; 8,2554; 6,10231), records show that other terms have also variously been used: > templum, aedes, statio, curia (> curiae), basilica or tetrastylum (CIL 6,647; 10,6483; AE 1940,62; CIL 5,5447; 6,102.95;

6,33885; for the terminology [1. 47]). On Italian soil — and predominantly in Campania, Rome and Ostia — scholae are archaeologically evident only from the rst cent. BC. In the Republican period, too, as indicated by records from the Imperial period (Suet. Claud. 33; Liv. 9,30,5 ff.; CIL 6,2086; 6,2104; graffiti from Pompeii point to the use of taverns as meeting places of the fullers/fullones, and booksellers/librarti [x. 161]), such meeting places will have included mainly the private residences of the patron and magistri (‘overseers’) alongside — tabernae on temporary hire or public-municipal buildings and temples; it was also common prac-

66

65

SCHOLA

([12;

extension of its port facilities [4. 55-121; 9; 2]. The 3rd

14. 639 ff.]; cf. the banqueting hall in the Villa of Mysteries in Pompeii). In Greece, clubhouses have been evident from the Hellenistic period onwards, mainly in form of peristyle buildings and often precursors to scholae of the Imperial period (for Hellenistic clubhouses in Pergamum [15]; for the House of the Poseidoniasts and the koind associated with Serapeum A and B in Delos [11. 196-213]; for the Hellenistic predecessor to the headquarters of the Iobacchi in Athens [13]). Commensurate with their multi-functionality, scholae developed in a wide range of spatial designs (for the typology [1. 58-122]), from simple tabernae (e.g. close to the amphitheatre in Puteoli) and hall buildings (scholae of the mensores frumentarii and Casa del Filosofo in Ostia) to lavish peristyle villas (schola of the fabri tignuarii in Ostia) and temple complexes (schola of the fabri navales, temple of the association of the fabri tignuarii in Ostia). The fixed as well as the movable functional equipment of these buildings can be reconstructed from inscriptions and archaeological findings: altars, niches and > aediculae (temples of the Augustales in Herculaneum and Ostia) or podium temples confirm the regular performance of sacrifices and other cultic acts including taking care of funerals (CIL 10,6483; 5,7906). Benches, seats, klinai or brick-built triclinia were used for banquets and commemorative meals (schola of the fabri tignuarii in Ostia; ‘Portico dei Triclini’, building with triclinia in the Contrada Murecine near Pompeii); lamps and candelabra as well as weights, measures and scales enabled lighting and the fair distribution of food and drink (CIL 6,832; 10237;

and 4th cent. AD already represent the late phase in such club building, which lost in importance in the wake of the economic crisis of the 3rd cent. The refurbished and newly built late-antique scholae of the 4th cent. are often noticeably influenced by contemporary residential building styles (schola of Trajan and college of the Augustales in Ostia) and thus difficult to distinguish from the latter. Providing archaeological evidence of scholae in > necropoleis as mentioned in a number of inscriptions (e.g. CIL 6,10237; 10294) has as yet only rarely been possible (e.g. in the > catacombs of S. Sebastiano: [6. 14-113]). Other club buildings on the outskirts of Rome (scholae of the > sodales Serrenses, the collegium Aesculapi et Hygieiae, of Silvanus: [1. 238 f., 248 ff., 266 ff.]) are now — in contrast with earlier research — taken as not exclusively used to take care of funerals, but also for communal meals and cultic observance.

tice

to

meet

in

member’s

houses

in turn

to,114). In addition, wells or water basins featured commonly (CIL 6,10237; scholae of the fabri tignuarii and the mensores frumentarii/Ostia), less often kitchens (CIL 3,7960) and latrines (scholae of the mensores frumentarii, of the fabri tignuarii, and of the stuppatores, schola of Trajan in Ostia), sometimes also tabernae for rent, lofts (Serapeum in Ostia) and club-owned baths ({2]; baths of the cisarii in Ostia [9. 157 ff.] and the — Arvales in Rome [14. 144 ff.]). The many images of emperors found in scholae point to the great significance of the > ruler cult in clubs and associations ([{1. 138-145]; AE 1940,62 on a schola in Ostia; the sanctuary of the Augustales in Misenum). Statues of deities could be decorative as well as serving a cultic purpose [13; 1. 145-152]. Honorary statues and inscriptions (medical schola in Velia), floor mosaics, marble incrustations and wall paintings (‘Portico dei Triclini’ at Pompeii) as well as lavish frontages (schola of Trajan, guild temple of the fabri tignuarii in Ostia) are evidence of the desire to impress and also the civic rivalry between various colleges and associations, whose houses were by preference built along the city’s main arteries and junctions (schola of the fabri tignuarii and the mensores frumentarii in Ostia). The heyday of these scholae lay in the rst and particularly the 2nd cent. AD, when in > Ostia a number of such clubhouses were built in conjunction with the

[5] According to Johannes Diaconus (vita Gregorii 2,6),

the schola cantorum had been set up as a choir school by Pope > Gregorius [II] [3] I. the Great [3] (in office from AD 590-604) and the choir boys accommodated in two houses close to the basilica of St. Peter and the Lateran palace [7. 285 f.]. During a service — at the bishop’s processional entry and during the hymns — the choir stood in the aisle running between the altar in the central nave and the apse (Ordo 1, 49; Ordo 4, 37; on the > liturgy in Rome and Ravenna [3. 120-139; 6]); sometimes this aisle would be screened off at the sides or marked by a special design in the floor mosaic (Lower Church of S. Clemente, $. Marco, S. Pietro in Vincoli, cf. [10. 73 f.]; on the Basilica Ursiana in Ravenna [3. 132 ff.]). For that reason, archaeologists also refer to this part of a basilica as schola (cantorum) in parallel with the Byzantine term ookéa/oohaia (soléa, solaia,

Theophanes Homologetes 681,18; Nicetas of Paphlagonia 536 D) [1o. Fig. 1]. > Basilica; + Collegium [1]; > Funerary architecture; ~ Scholae Palatinae; > School; > Associations 1

B.BoLLMANN, Romische Vereinshduser.

Untersuchun-

gen zu den S. der romischen Berufs-, Kult- und Augustalen-Kollegien in Italien, 1998 2 U.EGELHAAF-GAISER, Religionsasthetik und Raumordnung am Beispiel der Vereinsgebaude von Ostia, in: Ead., A. SCHAFER (ed.), Raum und Gruppe. Religidse Vereine in der rémischen Antike, 2002 (im Druck)

3 K.GampBer, Liturgie und Kirchen-

bau. Studien zur Geschichte der MefSfeier und des Gotteshauses in der Frihzeit, 1976 4 G.HERMANSEN, Ostia. Aspects of Roman City Life, 1981 5 H.voN HESBERG, Rémische Grabbauten, 1992, 164-170 6 E. JASTRZEBOWSKA, Untersuchungen zum christlichen Totenmahl aufgrund der Monumente des 3. und 4. Jahrhunderts unter der Basilika des Hl. Sebastian in Rom, 1981 7E.Jos1, Lectores, schola cantorum, clerici, in: Ephemerides liturgicae 44, 1930, 281-290 8 V.KocxkEL, Die Grabbauten vor dem Herkulaner Tor in Pompeji, 1983 9R.Mar, Santuarios e inversion inmobilaria en la urbanistica ostiense del siglo II, in: A. GaLLINA ZEVI, A. CLARIDGE (ed.), “Roman Ostia” Revisited. Gedenkschrift R. Meiggs, 1996, 115-164 10 TH.F.

67

68

Matuews, An Early Roman Channel Arrangement and

was no doubt due to bishop Cyrillus [2] of Alexandria, because to support his theological ideas the latter gave him large bribes, which are documented in S.’ estate. PLRE 2, 982, no. r. FT.

SCHOLA

Its Liturgical

Functions,

in: RACr

38, 1962,

73-95

11 H.B. McLean, The Place of Cult in Voluntary Associations and Christian Churches on Delos, in: J.S. KLopPENBORG, S.G. WILSON (ed.), Voluntary Associations in the Graeco-Roman World, 1996, 186-225 12 J.RUPKE,

Collegia

sacerdotum.

schicht, in: s. [2]

Religidse

Vereine

in der Ober-

13 A.SCHAFER, Raumnutzung

und

Raumwahrnehmung im Vereinslokal der Iobakchen von Athen, in: s. [2]

14 J.ScHErp, Romulus et ses fréres. Le

collége des Fréres Arvales, modéle du culte public dans la Rome des empereurs, 1990 15 H.SCHWARZER, Vereinslokale im hellenistischen und romimschen Pergamon, in: s. [2].

UL.EG.

Scholae Palatinae. Mounted guard troops in the service of the Roman emperor from the time of Constantine onwards, according to the > Notitia dignitatum five regiments in the West and seven in the East of the empire, each of 500 men, initially mostly of Germanic origin, which on the whole were not part of the imperial army but were subordinate to the > magister officiorum and were each commanded by a tribune [2]. However, by the time of the emperor > Zeno the SP were used only as parade troops in court ceremonial, and their role as a defensive guard for the emperor had in fact been taken over by the newly established guard of excubitores, which was smaller, comprising only 300 men, but more reliable. Iustinianus [1] I incorporated the SP into the imperial army, but they retained some of their privileges [2. 119-130]. From the late 6th century AD onwards they were under a > comes domesticorum, who had occasionally been mentioned in connection with them since the 4th century. The magister officiorum remained their chief superior [2. 142-150], however, until Constantinus [7] V, in the context of an army reform, turned them into a ‘tdgma’, a powerful field force at the emperor’s direct disposal, and placed them under a high-ranking general, the doméstikos ton schol6n, first mentioned in 767; the SP continued in this form until the late rrth century [3. 228-235; 4. 73-92]. 1 A.KaAzHDAN, s.v. S. P., ODB 3, 1851 f. 2R.I. FRANK, S.P.,1969 3J.F. HaLpon, Byzantine Praetorians, 1984 4H.-J.KUHN, Die byzantinische Armee im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert, 1991. ET.

Scholasticus (cyoAaotixdc/scholastikos). [1] In Roman procedural law of Late Antiquity a scholasticus (literally: someone ‘schooled’) is the advocate of a party, a late successor to the > causidicus, with a certain amount of knowledge of formal rhetoric and law. M.Kaser, *1996, 563.

K.Hacxt,

Das

rémische

Zivilprozefrecht, GS.

Schole (oyodt/scholé, of unknown etymology; Lat. otium). Leisure or free time in general. Specifically: leisure time activities, intellectual activities, lecture, lesson, therefore school as well (as early as in Alexis 163 PCG; cf. Diog. Laert. 3,28; used in inscriptions from c. 200 BC, SEG 1, 368), the Lat. transcription is > schola (int. al. in the sense of lecture, lesson, > school). Schole, usually regarded to be just as reprehensible as doyia (argia), idelness, laziness, is nevertheless “what humans love the most” (cf. Eur. Hipp. 384; Eur. Ion 634). The people of the > Golden Age enjoyed it along with the gods (Hes. Op. 118, cf. Dicaearchus in Porph. De abstinentia 4,2 = fr. 49 WEHRLI). Religious — festivals, in particular visits to Pan-hellenic sanctuaries (+ theoria [x]), made it possible to once again achieve this state. Socrates [2], Xenophon [2] (Xen. Mem. 3,9,9), Plato [x] (Pl. Resp. 2,370c 4-5; Pl. Leg. 7,807¢ 4-9 in comparison to 8,828d 7-8) and above all Aristotle [6] (who distinguishes relaxation from leisure; Aristot. Pol. 8,3,1337b 33-39) developed the philosophical! meaning of leisure: the state of being free from the tasks devoted to the necessities of life which allows you to engage in activities of high prestige, such as politics and studies (new meaning of > thedria [2]) — the only activities worthy of a free (éhevOeQoc/elevtheros, thev0éQuoc/ eleuthérios, cf. Lat. liberalis) and virtuous man. In Aristotle (esp. Eth. Nic. 10,7; earlier, cf. Pl. Tht. 173d-175e), God’s activity is the model and allegory for a ‘theoretical’ life (bios thedrétikos) which is superior to the ‘practical’ life of the politician (— Practical philosophy). This ideal of abundant free time is reserved to those who have the social, intellectual and moral option not to do the work of necessity — excluding farmers, above all — and who support the ethically desirable (Aristot. Pol. 3,5,1278a 9-11; 7,9,1328b 331329a 2) ‘well-measured’ life in the city (Aristot. Pol. 4,6,1292b 25-30). States such as democratic Athens which strove to compensate (u1006c/-> misthds) their citizens for their expenses related to political activities (even for plays) spoiled their citizens (Pl. Grg. s15e 5-7); they confused the leisure of labourers with the schole reserved for free citizens (distinction in Aristot. Pol. 8,3,1337b 33-1338a 30). Tyrants, on the other hand, do not even grant idleness and leisure activities (scholai) to their virtuous citizens (ibid., 5,11,1313a

40-b 5). The choice of dedicating oneself to the oyohaotixdc (scholastik6s) life — i.e. one dedicated to ‘studies under

[2] (in Latin sources Scholasticus or Scholasticius), a palace official in Constantinople, first recorded in AD 422. According to the Acts of the Council of Ephesus in 431, he was as kubikularios (> Cubicularius, ‘imperial chamberlain’) one of the court eunuchs; he died shortly after the Council. His reputation as a pious Christian

the auspices of a school’ (Chrysippos [2] in Plut. de Stoicorum Repugnantiis 1033c) was a topic of discussion: Should the contrast between a ‘practical’ and a ‘theoretical’ life (> Practical Philosophy C.1.) which apparently was heightened in Aristotle’s students Dicaearchus and Theophrastus [6] be resolved in a

69

7°

‘mixed’ life? (Demetrius [4] of Phalerum, fr. 72 f. WEHRLI according to Cic. Leg. 3,6,14; De off. 1,1,3; a concept which was discussed esp. in the Roman world of the late Republic under the influence of the middle Stoa (+ Stoicism). This debate gave rise to controversies between the > Epicurean School (“A wise man will not engage in politics,” Diog. Laert. 10,119, a rule which could have exceptions depending on circumstances or the nature of the individual) and > Stoicism (political life is one of the necessary tasks of a wise man, “unless something bars him from it,” Diog. Laert. 7,121, esp. the extreme corruption of the city, cf. Sen. De tranquillitate animi 4,8-5,5). The controversies were continued in Rome in the form of laments about the downfall of the Republic and of morals, in the reproach of ‘Greek idleness’ (otium Graecum, esp. of the philosophical schools, Cic. Orat. 108; De or. 3,57 ff.), then conversely in the defense of otium litteratum (of ‘educated leisure’; Cic. Tusc. 5,105; Cic. Leg. 3,14) and its value for society (on otium cum dignitate, ‘leisure with dignity’ cf. > leisure III.), as well as, more generally, in the consolidated Stoicism of the Imperial Period

text in the margins of medieval > manuscripts and attested since the 6th cent. AD. I. GREEK II. LaTIN

(— Seneca [2], De otio). To the end of Antiquity, the choice between an active or a theoretical (or ‘contem-

plative’) life remained one of the essential existential questions for the educated (e.g. Aug. Civ. 19,1,2-3; Synesius 41,294; Epist. 41,94).

With the notion of ‘leisure for God’ (Ignatius [1] of Antioch, Epist. ad Polycarpum 7,3), Christianity added the controversy between a life as a hermit or a life in the monastery to the question (cf. the fourth rule of the Council of Chalcedon, which determined in 451: “Withdraw, keep silent, act calmly”; > Monks). On the significance of schole as ‘philosophers’ school’ (in Greek also diateipi/diatribé, aigeoic/ hairesis; Lat. disciplina, secta) cf. > hairesis and > philosophical instruction. + Leisure; > Negotium; — Paideia; — Philosophical life; - Philosophical instruction A.; + Practical philosophy 1 J.-M. Anprg&, L’otium dans la vie intellectuelle et morale romaine, 1966 2 J.-M.ANpré et al. (ed.), Les loisirs et Phéritage de la culture classique (Actes du XIIIe Congrés de l’Association Guillaume Budé, Collection Latomus), 1996 3P.DEMONT, La cité grecque archaique et classique et lidéal de tranquillité, 1990 4 A.GRILLI, Il pro-

blema della vita contemplativa nel mondo greco-romano, 1953 5R.Joxy, Le théme philosophique des genres de vie dans l’antiquité classique, 1956 6 J. GLUCKER, Antiochus and the Late Academy (Hypomnemata 56), 1978 7 M. KRETSCHMAR, Otium, studia litterarum, Philosophie und Bioc Gewentixds im Leben und Denken Ciceros, 1938.

Scholia (ta oxdMa/ta scholia, Lat. scholia). The sg. (schdlion), a diminutive of oyodrn (schole, + Leisure), appears at first in the sense of ‘learned discussion’ (Cic. Att. 16,7,3); later ‘note’ to an author (Marinus, Vita Procli 27), then ‘marginal note’ (Anaoyoov

stasios Sinaites, Viae Dux 3,1,1-3; 24,13 4-136). Scho-

lia are thence exegetical comments, written beside the

SCHOLIA

I. GREEK A. GENERAL

TURE

B. ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL LITERA-

C. HELLENISTIC AND IMPERIAL LITERATURE

D. PROSPECTS

A. GENERAL Scholia survive on a number of Greek authors. They were excerpted from ancient commentaries (~ Commentary) which as a rule are no longer extant (though remnants of some commentaries survive on > papyrus; ~» Hypomnema); in modern editions they are printed as commentaries, with lemmata restored if necessary (keywords to which the respective explanations refer). The process of transfer from commentary to scholia is, with some exceptions, set in the 5th—6th cents. AD [1; 2. vol. 2, 5473 3- 96-97]. Scholia vary greatly in the quality of the textual traditions on which they are based and, accordingly, in their value to the modern scholar. They may, at their best, preserve ancient textual variants lost in the medieval tradition and remnants of ancient exegetical or critical lore; at their worst they may transmit false inferences that ancient scholars drew from the immediate context or from Homeric usage [4]. Glosses (> Glossography) are definitions that may be organized alphabetically (as in a lexicon) rather than according to the sequence of words in a given text; the boundary between scholium and gloss is fluid insofar as glosses may be excerpted also from glossaries and entered in the margin of texts. Editions of scholia which meet the highest standards, i.e., are based on a complete recensio and stemmatic analysis of surviving witnesses and classify the texts according to their probable sources, have been slow to appear. We still depend all too often on editions in which scholia are merely distinguished by the sigla of the manuscripts in which they occur, with no attempt made to analyze the separate strands of the tradition, so that remains of ancient hypomnemata rub shoulders with rhetorical analyses of Roman imperial date or elementary explanations intended for the Byzantine schoolroom [5]. What follows is a summary of the most important developments in scholia research since GUDEMAN [6] (1921). B. ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL LITERATURE The major achievement in this field has been the monumental edition (1969-1988) of the Iliadic scholia by H. Erxse [2] based upon a careful analysis of the complex tradition into its individual components. It has stimulated interest in the Homeric studies of various ancient philologists [7-11] and authors [12-14]. The D-Scholia and their forerunners, the so-called scholia minora, have been edited both from medieval manuscripts and from papyrus sources ([{15-17a]; a new edition of the Odyssean scholia remains a desideratum).

SCHOLIA

72

aL

To a more limited extent the Hesiodic scholia also give access to ancient traditions (including doctrines of Aristarchus [4]), those to the Works and Days being based in part on a hypomnema of Proclus [2] who will have derived learned matter from Plutarch [2]; the scholia to the Theogony are inferior, however. Italian scholars have provided critical editions of both sets of scholia {18, 19]. A new edition of John > Tzetzes’ scholia is still needed to replace [20]. Among the lyric poets the scholia to Pindar comprise the major corpus ([21] is now supplemented by [22]). Some progress can be registered in the study of scholia to the tragedians, above all the new editions of those on Aeschylus [23, 24]. The excellence of the Sophoclean scholia has long been recognized. This is particularly true of those on the Oedipus Coloneus [25], their quality due to the fact that > Didymus [1] Chalkenteros’ commentary was subject to less shortening here than elsewhere; cf. [26] for the sources and history of this collection, which proves to be an amalgam of commentaries by Didymus, Pius (2nd cent. AD) and Salustius (4th/sth cents. AD), with some admixture of matter from other sources: Herodian, Scholia minora and Diogenianus’ lexicon. Byzantine scholia on Oedipus Tyrannus: [27]. Recent years have seen publication of new material for Euripides, cf. notably [28. 108-110] (scho-

lia in the Jerusalem palimpsest). For the Byzantine triad [29] a set of anonymous metrical scholia has seen the light, as well as a study of the tradition of the Palaeologan scholia [30]. Finally, the exegetical scholia to Euripides’ Phoenissae (preserved in MSS Parma 154, mid-fourteenth cent., and Modena a«.U.9.22, mid-fifteenth cent.) have been published by [31], who finds elements of disparate origin (— Moschopoulos, Thomas Magistros, > Demetrius [43] Triclinius and others.) [43]. The scholia to Aristophanes form an unusually rich and important corpus. Since the > Suda has received a number of such scholia, the new edition of that lexicon by [32] has brought clarity to a part of the tradition [29]. In addition we now have scholia to several plays in the palaeographically detailed edition by [33], which carefully segregates Byzantine and earlier scholia. For the sources [34] remains fundamental. The scholia to Attic prose authors have made considerable strides since 1921, including new editions of the scholia to Thucydides, Plato [1], Demosthenes [2] and Aeschines [32-35]; the sources of the Demosthenic scholia have been clarified by [39]. For Isocrates, however, we still rely on [40]. C. HELLENISTIC AND IMPERIAL LITERATURE As the Hellenistic poets have generally risen in recent years in both interest and estimation, so the study of their scholia has marked a significant advance, largely thanks to the works of [41-44] (critical editions of the scholia to Theocritus and Apollonius Rhodius [2] as well as detailed studies of the transmission. [45] includes the meager scholiastic remains on Callimachus

[3]. For the scholia to Aratus: [46]; scholia to Nicander: [47; 48]; index to Tzetzes’ scholia to Lycophron in [49; 50]. As in the case of Homer, a better knowledge of the scholia to Alexandrian poetry has led to closer study of the ancient scholars whose doctrines are preserved in them; hence the new edition of the grammarian Theon of Alexandria (Augustan Period), albeit without attention to papyrus evidence [51]. GUDEMAN’s exclusion [6] of some collections of scholia as not pertaining to classical Greek belles lettres is hard to justify in a Realenzyklopddie. Those to Dionysius Thrax have been well edited [52] and contain valuable remnants of ancient linguistic theory [53. 19]. The scholia to Lucian are remarkable for the terms of abuse they apply to this author [5 4. 336]; their sources have been clarified by [55]. There are also extant scholia to Marcus [II 2] Aurelius [56], Aelius Aristides [57], Maximus [I 1] Tyrius [58], Pausanias [59], Oppian’s Halieutica [60-62], the rhetoricians Aphthonius [63] and Hermogenes [64], to Gregory [3] Nazianzen [65; 66], and Oribasius [67]. D. PROSPECTS

Although considerable progress has been made in the editing of scholiastic texts since 1921, much yet remains to be done. In some traditions (Aristophanes, Demosthenes) Renaissance explanations masquerading as medieval scholia have only quite recently been unmasked. In addition, research of ancient scholarship and other areas of philology is interdependent, with progress in lexicography and scholia-studies going hand in hand (see above on the Aristophanes scholia). Apart from new editions of texts and studies of sources, future research on scholia is likely to stress the impact of Alexandrian learning on Greek and Latin authors. Alexandrian scholars’ perceptions have influenced for instance Horace’s imitatio of Pindar [14. 280-281 = 158-160]. There is room for a good deal more work along such lines. — Commentary; + Glossography; -> Hypomnema; + Lexicography; -— Philology; — PHILOLOGICAL METHODS (Scholia = Sa.)

GENERAL: 1N.G. Witson, A Chapter in the History of Sa., in: CQ 61, 1967, 244-256 2H.ERBSE (ed.), Sa. Graeca in Homeri Iliadem (Sa. Vetera), 7 vols.,

1969-1988

3 K.Dover (ed.), Aristophanes, Frogs, 1993 4M.R. LeFKowi1rTz, The Influential Fictions in the Sa. to Pindar’s Pythian 8, in: CPh 70, 1975, 173-185 5.N.G. WILson, Scoliasti e commentatori, in: Studi classici ed orientali 33, 1983, 83-112 6A.GUDEMAN, s.v. Scholien, RE 2 A, 625-705.

SCHOLIA ON ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL LITERATURE:

7 M.ScumipT, Die Erklarungen zum Weltbild Homers und zur Kultur der Heroenzeit in den bT-Sch. zur Ilias,

1976 8K.Nickau, Untersuchungen zur textkritischen Methode des Zenodotos von Ephesos, 1977. 9 H.-L. BaRTH (ed.), Die Fragmente aus den Schriften des Grammatikers Kallistratos zu Homers Ilias und Odyssee, Diss. Bonn 1984 10 W.J. SLATER (ed.), Aristophanis Byzantii

73

SCHOLIA

74

Fragmenta, 1986 11 D.LUurs, Untersuchungen zu den Athetesen in der Ilias und zu ihrer Behandlung im Corpus der exegetischen Scholia, 1992 12 R.SCHLUNK, The Homeric Sa. and the Aeneid, 1974 13 T. SCHMIDTNEUERBURG, Vergils Aeneis und die antike Homerexegese, 1999 14M.R. LeFKowiTz, The Pindar Sa., in: AJPh 106, 1985, 269-282 1991, ch. 6) 15 V.pE Homeri Iliadem, vol. 1.1, minora zu Homer, in: ZPE

(=Ead., Marco 1946 7, 1971,

First-Person-Fictions, (ed.), Sa. Minora in 16 A. HENRICHS, Sa. 97-149, 229-260; 8,

maticam, 1901

Grammar:

53 D.L. BLANK, Ancient Philosophy and

the Syntax of Apollonius

Dyscolus,

1982

54 H.RaBe (ed.),Sa.inLucianum, 1906 55 C.HELM, De Luciani scholiorum fontibus, 1908 56 J.DALFEN, Scholien und Interlinearglossen in Marc Aurel-Hss., in: SIFC 50, 1978, 5-26 57 G.Dinporrius (ed.), Aelius Aristides, vol. 3, 1829 58 H.HoBEIN (ed.), Maximi Tyrii Philosophumena, 1910 (in app.) 59 F.Sprro, PausaniasScholien, in: Hermes 29, 1894, 143-149 60U.C. Bus-

SEMAKER

(ed.), Sa. et paraphrases

in Nicandrum

et

17S.Daris, Sa. minora al

Oppianum in: F. DUBNER (ed.), Sa. in Theocritum, 1849,

libro I dell’ Iliade (P. Palau Rib. inv. 147), in: Studia Papyrologica 13, 1974, 7-20 17a add. bibl.: editions of the D-scholia to the Iliad and Odyssey by (resp.) H. VAN THIEL and E.Nico1a and of the scholia minora by J.W.R. LUNDON are now available on internet 18 A. PERTUSI

260-364 61R.VARrI (ed.), Parerga Oppianea: I. Sa. in Oppiani Halieuticorum libros I-IV Ambrosiana, in: Egyetemes Philologiai Kozlony 33, 1909, 17-32, 116-125; II. Sa. in Oppiani Halieuticorum librum V ad fidem codicum

(ed.), Sa. vetera in Hesiodi Opera et dies, 1955 19L.p1 GreGorio (ed.), Sa. vetera in Hesiodi Theogoniam, 1975 20 TH. GAIsFoRD (ed.), Poetae Minores Graeci, vol. 2, 1823 21A.B. DRACHMANN, Sa. vetera in Pindari carmina, 3 vols., 1903-1927 22 A. TEssIER (ed.), Sa. metrica in Pindari carmina, 1989 23 O.L. SmiTH (ed.), Sa. Graeca in Aeschylum quae exstant omnia, 2 vols., 19761982 24C.J. HERINGTON (ed.), The Older Sa. on the Prometheus Bound, 1972 25 V.DE Marco (ed.), Sa. in Sophoclis Oedipum Coloneum, 1952 26 J.HAVEKOss,

rungsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zu den Halieutika des Oppian, 1969 63 WALZ, vol. 2, 1-68, 565-584

1971, I-12; 12,1972, 17-43;

recensita, in: Ibid., 125-131

64 WALZ, vol. 4; vol. 7, 697-1087 65 E.PICCOLOMINI (ed.), Scolii alle orazioni di Gregorio Nazianzeno ..., in:

Annali delle Universita Toscane, I: Scienze noologiche 16, 1879, 231 ff. 66 V.PUNTONI, Scolii alle orazioni di Gre-

gorio Nazianzeno ..., in: E.PICCOLOMINI (ed.), Studi di Filologia Greca 1, 1882, 133-180 and 207-246 67 I. RAEDER (ed.), Oribasii Collectionum medicarum reli-

quiae (= CMG VI 1,1), 4 vols., 1928-1933 (in app.).

A.DY.

Untersuchungen zu den Sophokles-Scholien, Diss. Hamburg 1961

27 O.Lonco (ed.), Sa. Byzantina in Sopho-

clisOedipumtyrannum, 1971 28 S.G. Dartz, The Sa. in the Jerusalem Palimpsest of Euripides, 1979 290.L. SMITH (ed.), Sa. metrica anonyma in Euripidis Hecubam Orestem

Phoenissas,

1977

30 H.-C. GUNTHER,

The

Manuscripts and the Transmission of the Palaeologan Sa. on the Euripidean Triad, 1995

31 B.SCHARTAU, Obser-

vations on the Commentary on Euripides’ Phoenissae in the MSS Parma 154 and Modena a. U.9.22, in: Illinois Classical Studies 6, 1981, 221-241 32 A.ADLER (ed.), Suidae Lexicon, 5 vols., 1928-1938 33 W.J.W. KOSTER et al. (eds.), Sa. in Aristophanem. Prolegomena de comoedia, 1969 ff. 34 G. STEIN (ed.), Sa. in Aristophanis Lysistratam, 1891 35 C. Hunk (ed.), Sa. in Thucydidem, 1927 (new edition by A.KLEINLOGEL in preparation) 36 G.C. GREENE (ed.), Sa. Platonica, 1938 37 M.R. Ditts (ed.), Sa. Demosthenica, 2 vols., 1983-1986 38 Id. (ed.), Sa. in Aeschinem, 1992 39 M. Lossau,

Untersuchungen zur antiken Demosthenesexegese, 1964 40 G. DinporFius (ed.), Sa. Graeca in Aeschinem et Isocratem, 1852.

SCHOLIA ON HELLENISTIC AND IMPERIAL LITERATURE: 41(C. WENDEL (ed.), Sa. in Theocritum vetera,

1914 421d., Uberliefering und Entstehung der TheokritScholien (AAWG 17.2), 1921 (repr. 1970) 43 Id. (ed.),

Sa. in Apollonium Rhodium vetera, 1935 44 Id., Die Uberlieferung der Scholien zu Apollonios von Rhodos (AAWG 3. Series, 1.), 1932 (repr.1972) 45 R.PFEIFFER (ed.), Callimachus, vol. 2, 1953, 41-79 46 J. MARTIN (ed.), Sa. in Aratum vetera,1974 47 A. CRUGNOLA (ed.),

Sa. in Nicandri Theriaca, 1971 48 M.GEyMonart Sa. in Nicandri Alexipharmaca cum glossis, 49 I. GUALANDRI, Index glossarum quae in scholiis ianis ad Lycophronem laudantur, 1965 50 Id., nominum propriorum quae in scholiis Tzetzianis ad phronem laudantur, 1962 51 C.Gunt (ed.), Die mente des Alexandrinischen Grammatikers Theon, 52 A. Hitearp (ed.), Sa. in Dionysii Thracis Artem

(ed.), 1974 TzetzIndex LycoFrag-

1969 gram-

62 F. Fajen, Uberliefe-

Il. LATIN

The same definition applies to Latin scholia as to Greek, with the qualification that nothing is preserved on papyrus. A terminological distinction is made between scholia vetera (‘ancient scholia’) and scholia recentiora (‘more recent’, i.e. ‘mediaeval scholia’), but ancient material is often a component of mediaeval compilations which abridge or expand upon it. Moreover, the corpora of scholia are also altered by > interpolations or by by the addition of questionable or false late attributions, or else they comprise an anonymous tradition, making the assignment to one of these types impossible or at best hypothetical in individual cases. Latin scholia of ancient origin survive on Terence (> Donatus [3]; [1]), Cicero (+ Asconius; scholia Bobiensia [2; 3]), Virgil (+ Servius [2]; [4]), Horace

(> Helenius Acron; [5]; > Pomponius Porphyrion; [6]), Ovid’s Ibis [7; 8], Germanicus’ Aratea [9; rol], — Lucanus [9; 11], the epics of > Statius [II 2] (> Fulgentius [1]; > Lactantius [2] Placidus, cf. [12]), > Persius [2] (cf. [13]) and > Iuvenalis). Through their antiquarian exegesis, scholia vetera provide information on the horizons of ancient scholarship and are both revealing documents of literary reception and significant for the transmission of ancient texts (main sources for otherwise lost texts and auxiliary sources for the texts discussed). In their analyses they are important, though refractory witnesses on Latin ~ philology. A central problem for scholars of scholia is therefore to analyse the layers of transmission. Other than the observations on clausulae and the communication of occasional credible pieces of information, however, there are scarcely any safe criteria for the identification of ancient material in these mashes of

SCHOLIA

ingredients fermented together for centuries. The state of research is above all marked by new editions [11-13]. Desiderata would include, for instance, research on the sources of the Virgil and Horace scholia [1. 149; 5. 255] and more editing work [6. 261]. An instructive account of the problems is given in [1. 148-154], taking the example of the Commentum Vergili of Aelius -» Donatus [3], which survives only in fragments and in reception in other works. + Commentary; > Emendation of texts; > Flavius [II 14] Caper; > Grammarians; > Text, corruption of the; + Vergilius [4] Maro The following titles supplement and update the bibliographies to the entries on single Latin authors. 1P.L. ScHMipT, Aelius Donatus, in: HLL 5, § 527 2 Tu. STANGL (ed.), Ciceronis orationum scholiastae, vol. 2, 1912 (repr.1964) 3 P.L.ScHmipT, Aelius Festus Asmonius (Aphthonius?), in: HLL 5,§ 526.1 4 1d.,in: HLL 6,

§ 612

76

ES

S5lId., Helenius Acron, in: HLL 4,§ 444

61d.,

Pomponius Porphyrion, in: HLL 4,§ 446 7F.W. Lenz (ed.), Ovidius, Ibis, repr. *1956 8 A.LA PENNA (ed.), Ovidius, Ibis, 1957 9 A.DELL’ERA, in: Atti della Aca-

demia Nazionale dei Lincei, Memorie, Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche 23, 1979, 301-379 10P.L. SCHMIDT, Scholia in Germanicum Basileensia, in: HLL 4,

§ 445.4 11H.SzexeEst (ed.), Adnotationes super Lucanum (forthcoming) 12 R.D. SwEENEy (ed.), Lactantius Placidus, In Statii Thebaida commentum, 2 vols., 199713 W.O. CLAUSEN, J.E.G. ZETZEL (ed.), Persius2000 Sch. (in preparation). AN.GL.

Scholia Bembina. Appr. 1500 marginal and interlinear -» scholia in the Terence MS (> Terentius) of the Codex Bembinus (4th/sth cent., Vat. lat. 3226), on all the com-

edies of Terence except Hecyra. The SB can be dated on palaeographical grounds to the 6th cent. and can be allocated to two scribes, who are separated by approximately half a cent. [1. 4]. They were probably not compiled directly from a detailed commentary on Terence, but go back to marginal notes in older Terence MSS ({z. 1147]: only one source; contra: [4. 343-347]). In terms of content, it is possible to establish, at least for parts of the SB (especially on Ter. Phorm. 1-59), a close

relationship with the commentary on Terence by > Donatus [3] (in a more detailed form than the one extant today, cf. [4. 347-3 53]), which may well have served as source [3]. EDITIONS: 1J.F. MOUNTFORD, 1934 (repr. 1969) 2 S. PRETE, 1970. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 3E.LOFSTEDT, Die Bembinusscholien und Donatus, in: Eranos 12, 1912, 43-63 4J.E.G. ZETZEL, On the History of Latin Scholia, in: HSPh 79,

19752 335—354-

B.BR.

School I. ANCIENT NEAR East

II. GReEcE

III. ROME

I. ANCIENT NEAR EAST

See > Scribes

le

II. GREECE A. TERMINOLOGY B. PROTOTYPES C. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL D. GRAMMAR SCHOOL E. EXTENT

OF SCHOOLEDUCATION

F. FURTHER EDUCATION

A. TERMINOLOGY The Greek language had no actual term for the school as educational institution. Although the English word ‘school’ is a loan-word from Greek, the word oyoht/—> scholé (s. addenda) at first meant ‘free time’, and only came to denote what we understand as a school by way of the Latin > schola. The expression didaskaleion denoted not the institution but the building in which children were taught (at first choral singing; Antiph. 6,11; Thuc. 7,29; Pl. Leg. 764c). “Going to school’: children ‘go to the teacher’ (poitav maea tov duSdaoxarov, phoitan para ton diddskalon) or ‘to the teacher’s [house] (poutav sic SiSaoxdAov, phoitan eis didaskdlou).

B. PROTOTYPES The primarily oral culture (cf. > Literacy/Orality) of the Archaic period had various forms of education (> Education; + Education/Culture) for the social elite [x]: instruction within the > family or with an older mentor, encounters with the mythic and religious tradition in the girls’ and boys’ choruses [2] and (genderspecific) social organizational forms (synousiai) which promoted paederastic relationships (- Paederasty), such as the symposium (> Banquet) or a particular type of — thiasos such as that of + Sappho. Gymnastiké (+ Sport VI.) and mousike (+ Music IV. E.), i.e. physical and musical education (singing and dancing), belonged to the essential constants of education (until the Hellenistic period). Musical tuition here conveyed central educative content through exposure to poetry. Originally, the teachers of this form of archaia paideia (‘old education’, Aristoph. Nub. 961-1023) were the kitharistes (cithara player) and the > paidotribes. C. ELEMENTARY SCHOOL From the adoption of > writing from the Phoenicians in the 8th cent. BC, it took almost two hundred years for the new medium to become fully integrated into the Greek educational system and for a regulated education in reading and writing to be developed. However, this was probably available only to boys (most important ancient evidence of school curriculum c. 400 BC: Pl. Prt. 325c-326c). The introduction of the ~ ostrakismos by Cleisthenes [2] and the numerous depictions of school education early in the 5th cent. BC [3. nos. 349-373] are reactions to this new development, but are in no way indicative of general schooling [4.96 f.]. The oldest evidence of attendance at school, the collapse of a building in 494 BC in which children were learning the grdmmata (i.e. reading and writing: Hdt. 6,27,2), comes from wealthy Ionian Chios. The historicity of state regulations for the introduction of schools

AG

78

in the 5th cent. BC is questionable (Thurii: Diod. Sic. 12,12,4; Troezen: Plut. Them. 10,3) [4. 57-59, 68; 5. 207 f.]. Sparta was a special case, cf. > agoge. Schooling was conducted in communal spaces in private houses (often the house of the teacher) or public buildings such as the gymndsion, which was primarily the venue for sporting training. The latter was mostly financed privately, i.e. by donations from wealthy citizens (cf. > Gymnasium II). Children were accompanied on their way to school by a house slave, the + paidagogos. They learned writing and reading (starting no earlier than the age of approx. 7) from the grammatistes by copying (PI. Prt. 326d) and reciting. Exercises ascended from individual letters by way of all theoretically conceivable combinations of letters to words and finally sentences. The use of scriptura continua (> Writing III.) considerably hampered recognition of individual words and thus reading (cf. > Writing exercises) [6. 139-152]. On everyday school life and corporal punishment, cf. > Herodas 3.

flects this (+ Education B. 4.). The view of Xenophon [2] (Oec. 4,3; cf. Aristot. Pol. 1278a 2 f.) that artisanal occupations softened body and mind indicates that artisans (or their children) generally lacked sufficient ~ schole (‘leisure’) to strengthen their bodies and minds in the gymnasium, and had instead to pursue their (sed-

D. GRAMMAR SCHOOL By the 3rd cent. BC, in larger poleis at least, several stages of education had established themselves [7]. The children of wealthy parents could now continue their studies of reading after elementary school under a grammatikos. The focus here was the reading of the most important poets (esp. Homer, later also Euripides and Menander), knowledge of whom had been imparted earlier in musical studies through repetition of what the teacher recited. Yet prose writers (historians and Attic orators), were also included. Lexicographical, grammatical and formal explanation (exégésis) culminated in an ethical interpretation (krisis), which was intended to assure the applicability of the content of the education. Texts were thus hardly evaluated as literary works of art. Proverbs (gnomai, cf. + gnomé) and didactic sayings (apophthégmata, cf. > apophthegma) were therefore extremely popular. Beyond the imparting of elementary essentials, tuition in the mathematical sciences (geometry, arithmetic, astronomy) played a subordinate role in the canon of school subjects [8. 16 f.]. E. EXTENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION As schooling in Greece remained a private affair until the Hellenistic period, and since teachers had to be paid by parents, most of the population (with certain regional differences and a clear urban-rural divide) received at best a rudimentary training in reading and writing, which enabled them to sign documents or scratch their own name on an > ostrakon (=> Scribes IJ. A.). Participation in the school curriculum up to the level of grammatical tuition, still complemented by gymnastic and musical tuition (now in the narrower sense), presupposed that children did not have to be withdrawn from the system very early in order to ensure subsistence. The sometimes highly derogatory use by ancient authors of the word for artisan, bdnausos, re-

SCHOOL

entary) occupation in the — o?kos (home), i.e. in the

sphere of life that was reserved for women. School tuition for girls outside the home is only attested for a few poleis (Pergamum, Teos) in the Hellenistic period. The reading and writing skills that were necessary for managing the o?kos were probably mostly taught at home

[9]. F. FURTHER EDUCATION From the late 5th cent., elements of further educa-

tion began to develop [ro. 353-407]. After the first phase of the as yet uninstitutionalized tuition of the ~» Sophists (esp. in rhetoric) there came, in the course of the 4th cent., the famous Athenian scholarly foundations of > Isocrates, Plato [x] (the > Academy) and Aristotle (Aristoteles [6]: the > Peripatos, cf. > Lyceum), which offered rhetorical and philosophical education, respectively. Towards the end of the 4th cent., they were joined by the > Epicurean school (the + Képos) and the Stoic school (> Stoicism). The Hellenistic kings founded new centres of education: Alexandria [1] with its -- Mouseion (C), Pergamum with its famed > library. From the late 2nd cent. BC, Rhodes developed into a centre of philosophical (cf. + Poseidonius [3]) and esp. rhetorical education (cf. + Menecles [4], > Apollonius [5], > Molon [2]), but overall the degree of institutionalization of this higher education seems to have been rather low. It remained, as in the time of the Sophists, essentially rooted in the individual, i.e. one did not attend a ‘school of rhetoric’, but went to study with a certain rhetor. However, a kind of structural framework for further studies was provided by the more developed Athenian ~ ephébeia from the 3rd cent. BC on. ~ Agoge; > Education; > Education/Culture; > Ephebeia; + Gymnasium; — Literacy/Orality; — Paideia; + Rhetoric; > Schola; > Scribes 1 M. GriFFiTH, ‘Public’ and ‘Private’ in Early Greek Institutions of Education, in: Y.L. Too (ed.), Education in Greek and Roman Antiquity, 2001, 23-84

2 C.CALAME,

Choruses

of Young Women

in Ancient

Greece, 1997. 3F.A. G. Beck, Album of Greek Education, 1975 4 W.V. Harris, Ancient Literacy, 1989 5 K. Ross, Literacy and Paideia in Ancient Greece, 1994 6 R. CriBioRE, Writing, Teachers, and Students in GraecoRoman Egypt, 1996 7M.P. Nitsson, Die hellenistische

Schule, 1955 8 1.MorGan, Literate Education in the Hellenistic and Roman Worlds, 1998 9S.G. COLE, Could Greek Women Read and Write?, in: H.P. FoLey (ed.), Reflections of Women in Antiquity, 1981, 219-245 10 MaRROU.

SCHOOL

Ill. ROME A. Lupus B. FORMS OF SCHOOLING C, SOCIETY, STATE AND SCHOOL D. END OF THE ROMAN SCHOOL

A. Lupus For Festus, the term /udus (‘pastime, leisure’) to describe school is a euphemism, ‘lest a strict term cause boys to abscond from their obligation’ (ne tristi aliquo nomine fugiant pueri suo fungi munere, Fest. p. 470 L.). It would be more accurate to say that /udus originally denoted a non-purposeful playful or exercising activity [x]. B. FORMS

80

Tis)

OF SCHOOLING

1. INTRODUCTION

2. ELEMENTARY

3. TUITION WITH THE GRAMMARIAN WITH THE RHETOR

TUITION

4. TUITION

1. INTRODUCTION Old Roman > education knew only the elementary school (from the Etruscans [2. 459 f.]). It is attested for the 5th and 4th cents. BC by Livy (— Livius [III 2}) (3,44,63 5,27; 6,25,9) — possibly a back-projection [3.34]; but it is also questionable whether the first schools only appeared around 240/230 (Plut. Quaest. Rom. 278e [4. 213]). The higher levels of Hellenistic schools were adopted no earlier than the 2nd half of the 3rd cent., and were adapted to Roman needs. 2. ELEMENTARY TUITION In elementary school (/udus litterarius), the ludi magister (also: litterator) taught children aged approx. 7-11 (Quint. 1,1,15) — boys and girls — reading, writing and arithmetic. The children of wealthier parents were accompanied by their paedagogus (> paidagogos) [3. 34-46]. Tuition took place in primitive booths offering little shelter (pergulae) or in stalls (tabernae), and was given in the mornings and afternoons. The school year began in March, and there were only few holidays. It is disputed whether there were school holidays from July to mid-October [4. 216; 5. 316 f.]. In the exercises in reading, writing (mostly on wax tablets, > cera; + Writing exercises) and arithmetic ([3. 165-188]; only rudiments, cf. Cic. Tusc. 1,5 and Hor. Ars. P. 325330, learnt with the fingers [5. 91 f.] and an > abacus), the prevailing climate was of unpaedagogical monotony and severe strictness, with chastisements being common (Liv. 6,25; Mart. 9,68; 12,57,4) [2. 498-504;

5.236 f., 312 f.]. Elementary schools were found in even the smallest settlements (Plin. HN 9,25; Suet. Cal. 45,2; Dig. 50,5,2,8; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 59,278e; ILS

57). 3. TUITION WITH THE GRAMMARIAN Higher > education, which began with the grammarian’s school (+ grammaticus), was bilingual [6] -a noticeable decline in Greek is only evident from the 3rd cent. AD [2. 478-484] — and reached only the leading social strata, whose children learned Greek and probably also reading and writing first in Greek (ILCV 742)

[2. 484]. The grammarian’s schools were attended by youths from the ages of 11/12 to 16/17. The first teachers — originally mostly prisoners of war [7] or Graecophone immigrants (peregrini) — taught in both languages (Suet. Gram. 1: —> Livius [III 1] Andronicus and + Ennius [1]). In the rst cent. BC, the grammaticus

Graecus was joined by the grammaticus Latinus [7. 1072], at first probably usually a house slave (verna)

[7 277): After imparting the fundamentals of grammar and metre, poetical readings followed. Latin tuition required suitable texts. > Naevius [I 1], > Ennius [x], + Plautus, — Terentius and even > Livius [III 1] Andronicus were on the syllabus as late as the Augustan period (Hor. Epist. 2,1,50-72; again recommended by Quint. Inst. 1,8,8—12 in the spirit of classicist revivalism). Conversely, the grammarian — Caecilius [III 3]

Epirota introduced advanced students to Virgil’s Bucolica and Georgica and the works of other new poets as early as the second half of the rst cent. BC (Suet. Gram. 16,3 [7- 63 f.]). New poets (P. > Vergilius Maro, Q. + Horatius [7] Flaccus, P. — Ovidius Naso, M. Annaeus

> Lucanus

[1] and

P. Papinius

~— Statius

[II 2]) then also found their way into regular tuition [2. 5ro-513] (limitations: [8.188 f.]). Virgil and Terence, along with the prose authors Sallust (— Sallustius [II 3]) and - Cicero became canonical (according to Quint. Inst. 2,5,1 actually the subject of rhetorical training). Teaching methods included the correct repetition (or writing down) of what the teacher recited, and

extremely detailed answers to grammatical, stylistic, metrical, antiquarian, mythological, historical, geographical and other questions [3. 189-249]. In other words, they aimed at erudition, not interpretation in a spirit of artistic sensitivity [2. 513-517]. At times, there were Over 20 grammarians’ schools in Rome. Grammatical tuition also spread into the provinces, probably first into > Gallia Cisalpina (Suet. Gram. 3,4.6). 4. TUITION WITH THE RHETOR The rhetor’s school (Greek in origin) built on that of the grammarian. It, too, acquired a Latin equivalent: the school of the first Latin rhetor, L. > Plotius [I x] Gallus, opened in 94 BC and admittedly closed down again in 92 BC by censorial edict (Suet. Gram. 25,1; Cic. de Or. 3,93 f.; on the background of this [2. 463 f.; 3. 71-74]). This intervention, however, could not stem the development of the Latin rhetors’ schools (Suet. Gram. 27-30). Many grammarians also taught rhetoric (e.g. M. > Antonius [I 12] Gnipho, Suet. Gram. 7). Cicero, who according to his own testimony (in Suet. Gram. 26,1) was not allowed to hear Plotius [I 1] Gallus speak, contributed to this development with the Latin reproduction of Greek > rhetoric through the publication of his speeches and the Latin rhetorical tuition he himself provided in his own home free of charge (Suet. Gram. 25,3; Cic. Orat. 140-148; [9. 148-150]).

Rhetorical tuition consisted in the imparting of the theoretical structure, in prose readings of esp. works of history and speeches, in easy preliminary exercises (so-

81

82

called + progymndsmata), depending upon a > chreia, a sentence (> gnome), a > fable or a mythical event unless, as is criticized in Quint. Inst. 2,1, these were left to the grammarians [3. 252] — and finally declamatory

Caesar had already promised Roman citizenship (> civitas) to tutors in the artes liberales (and physicians) who settled at Rome. At least from the reign of Vespasian (AD 69-79), teachers approved by the community (Dig. 27,1,6,4) enjoyed freedom from taxes (> atéleia; Dig. 50,4,18,30). Imperial school policies were limited to regulatory interventions in the internal administration of the communities: setting the number of teachers (e.g. 2nd cent. AD, Antoninus [1] Pius for cities of Asia Minor, probably to allow more secure administration and planning: Dig. 27, 1,6,2); setting of maximum salaries (Diocletian’s edict De pretiis rerum venalium of AD 301, CIL III p. 830 f.; for Gaul once more Gratian (Gratianus [2]) in 376, cf. Cod. Theod. 13,3,11); dependence of teaching authorization on approval from the town council and formal confirmation by the imperial authority (ordinance of Julian (Iulianus [x1]), cf. Cod. Theod. 13,3,5-7; imperial confirmation abolished again by Justinian (Iustinianus [1]), 6th cent. AD, Cod. Just. 10,53,7). Private tuition, however, also survived (Cod. Theod. 14,9,3). On the school policy of the emperor Julian, see [12]. Actual imperial initiatives were confined to the metropoleis of the empire. The foundation of public ~ libraries under Augustus (already planned by Caesar) created an important educational basis in Rome (Plin. HN 7,115; 35,9; Suet. Iul. 44; Suet. Aug. 29). Public halls were made available to teachers of higher education [2. 522]. Vespasian created a professorial chair at Rome for Greek rhetoric and another for Latin (Suet. Vesp. 17 f.; first incumbent of the latter was M. Fabius > Quintilianus [1]). Hadrian (AD 117-138) founded the Athenaeum Romanum as a School of Liberal Arts (ludus ingenuarum artium: SHA Hadr. 16,8— 11), probably a lecture hall. Marcus Aurelius financed four teaching posts for philosophy and one for rhetoric at Athens out of the > fiscus. By an edict of 27 February 425, Theodosius II (402-450) founded a city university at Constantinople. It claimed a monopoly: its professors of Latin and Greek grammar (ten each) and rhetoric (three and five respectively), of philosophy (one) and jurisprudence (two) were forbidden to give private tuition (Cod. Theod. 14,9,3 = Cod. lust. r1,19,1).

exercises (+ controversiae, i.e. fictitious trial speeches,

and — suasoriae, i.e. fictional consultations [3. 250—327]). The flourishing Latin rhetors’ schools of the Augustan period are documented in > Seneca [1] the Elder’s collection of controversiae and suasoriae (+ Rhetoric VI. B.). There were grammarians’ and rhetors’ schools even in small towns (studied for Africa in [10. 562-574]). However, the schools at Rome and the more important Italian cities such as Milan/Mediolanum [1] and Naples/Neapolis [2], Marseilles/Massalia, Autun/Augustodunum and Bordeaux/Burdigalia in Gaul, and Carthage in Africa, were of higher quality. Only few Romans studied > philosophy. There was never a school of philosophy at Rome [2. 465 f.]. Greek remained — excepting Cicero and Seneca — the professional language of philosophy. Even Roman philosophers (Q. > Sextius [I 1]; L. Annaeus > Cornutus [4];

~ Musonius [1]; + Marcus [2] Aurelius) thought and wrote in Greek. Any Roman wishing to attend a school of philosophy made his way to Athens. Jurisprudence (> iuris prudentia) was a genuinely Roman accomplishment. Legal tuition long remained connected with legal practice, and only from the 2nd cent. AD did public > law schools appear at Rome, and in the 3rd cent. the law school of > Berytus [2. 530533]. On the the subject of medical schools, cf. — training (medical). C. SOCIETY, STATE AND SCHOOL

According to the Roman view, education and culture were the domain of the > family (Cic. Rep. 4,3). The Roman school therefore originated as a private facility. Elementary teachers were little regarded — ethical training remained a family affair [2. 282] - and were poorly paid into Late Antiquity [2. 495 f.; 4. 233 f.]. According to Diocletian’s Price Edict (— Edictum [3] Diocletiani; CIL Ill p. 830 f.), they were paid a maximum of 50 denarii per pupil and month, while the — grammaticus received 200 and the teachers of rhetoric and philosophy no less than 250 denarii. Only with 30 students did the elementary teacher attain the income of a professional craftsman. He was also excluded from the tax privileges of teachers in the > artes liberales (Dig. 50,4,11,4). The private character of schools at first occasioned great variations in the origins and qualifications of teachers, as also in the level and regularity of their payment [2. 506 f.]. Only in the Imperial period did Roman communities follow the model of their Hellenistic forebears in taking responsibility for schools. Donations and endowments from better-off citizens supported the communities (cf. e.g. Plin. Epist. 4,13; CIL V 5262). In Late Antiquity, these provisions (— munus II.) became a pressing obligation. However, the interest of the emperor in developing a ruling elite also provided an impulse to an active imperial policy (fundamental: [rr]).

SCHOOL

D. END OF THE ROMAN SCHOOL

In the Romanized part of the Empire, the Roman school endured even after the victory of the Christians as a secular school (— Education/Culture D.). The Ger-

manic invasions, which gradually, over a process stretching from the sth to the 7th cents., affected all regions of the Empire from Britain through Gaul, Spain and Italy to Africa, initially brought an end to cultural development. Monastery schools, however, revived the ancient tradition from as early as the 9th cent. [2. 617—

634]. — Artes liberales;

> Education; > Education/Culture;

— Rhetoric; -+ CATHEDRAL SCHOOL; — FURSTENSCHULE; > HUMANIST GYMNASIUM; ~— JESUIT SCHOOLS; > LATIN SCHOOL; + MONASTERY SCHOOLS

SCHOOL

84

83

1 A. Yon, A propos du latin Ludus, in: Mél. de philol., de

Athens. Inscriptions: IG XII 8, 631-639; Coins: HN

littérature et d’histoire

313.

anciennes

offerts a A. Ernout,

1940, 389-395 2Marrou 35S.F. BONNER, Education in Ancient Rome, 1977. 4 V. WEBER, Elementar-Schulen in Rom und im Romischen Reich, in: Das Altertum 31, 1985, 213-220 5 K.-W. WEEBER, Alltag im Alten Rom, 1995 6R.Weis, in: C.W. MULLER, K.SreR et al. (ed.), Zum Umgang mit fremden Sprachen in der griechischromischen Antike, 1992, 137-142 7 J.CHRISTES, Sklaven und Freigelassene als Grammatiker und Philologen im antiken Rom, 1979 ~=8 R.A. KasTER (ed.), C. Suetonius Tranquillus: De grammaticis et rhetoribus, 1995 (with translation and commentary), 1995 9 J.CHRISTES, Bildung und Gesellschaft, 1975 10 K. VosstNc, Schule und Bildung im Nordafrika der R6mischen Kaiserzeit, 1997 11 C.BARBAGALLO, Lo stato e J’istruzione pubblica nel’impero Romano, 1911 12 R. KLEIN, Kaiser Julians Rhetoren- und Unterrichtsgesetz, in: RQ 76, 1981, 73-94. J.Carcopino,

Rom.

Leben

und Kultur der Kaiserzeit,

1977, 153-175 (French.: La vie quotidienne 4 Rome, 1963); J.CHRISTES, Gesellschaft, Staat und Schule in der griechisch-rémischen Antike, in: H. Kort

(ed.), Sozial-

mafSnahmen und Fiirsorge (Grazer Beitrage Suppl. 3), 1988, 55-74; M.J. CLarKE, Higher Education in the Ancient World, 1971; E.EyBEN, Restless Youth in Ancient Rome, 1993; I.Hapot, Geschichte der Bildung; Artes liberales, in: F.Grar, Einleitung in die lateinische Philologie, 1997, 17-34; H.-TH. JOHANN, Erziehung und Bildung in der heidnischen und christlichen Antike, 1976; M. Karras, J. WIESEHOFER, Kindheit und Jugend in der Antike: eine Bibliographie, 1981; M. KLE1J)wEGT, Ancient

Youth, 1991; A. QUACQUARELLI, Scuola e cultura dei primi secoli cristiani, 1974; A.M. REGGIANI, Educazione e scuola (Vita e costumi dei Romani antichi 10), 1990;

A.ROsGER, Der naturwissenschaftliche Unterricht in der romischen Antike, in: G.PRINZ zU HOHENZOLLERN, M.LieprKe (ed.), Naturwissenschaftlicher Unterricht und Wissensakkumulation (Schriftenreihe zum Bayerischen Schulmuseum Ichenhausen 7), 1988, 93-110; Id.,

Lehrer und Lehrerbildung im Imperium Romanun, in: Eid. (ed.), Schreiber, Magister, Lehrer (ibid. vol. 8), 1989, 119-130; U.SCHINDEL, s. v. Schulen, LAW, 2735-2740;

K. V6ssiNG, Schreiben lernen, ohne lesen zu k6nnen?, in: ZPE 123, 1998, 121-125; TH.E. J. WIEDEMANN, Adults and Children in the Roman Empire, 1989; E. ZIEBARTH, s. v. Schulen, RE 2, 758-768. TG,

Sciathos

(Sxia8oc/

northern

— Sporades (45 km’, length 11 km, maxi-

Skiathos).

Westernmost

of the

mum elevation 435 m; Hdt. 7,176,1; 179; 183,1 f.; 8,7,1; 92,1; Scyl. 58; Scymn. 580 ff.; Mela 2,106;

Plin. HN 4,72; Ptol. 3,13,47), today also S. The island was settled in the 8th cent. BC by settlers from Chalcis [x]; Palaesciathos was laid out at that time (not located, recorded until the sth/4th cent. BC). In the 6th/sth cents. BC, the polis of S. was founded on the east coast with a strategically important harbour (remains of walls survive). In 480 BC S. was a forward post against the Persian fleet, from 478/7 until 404 it was a member of the > Delian League, from 377 BC of the > Athenian League. Macedonian from 338 BC on, S. was devastated in 200 BC by Philippus [7] V who was fleeing from the Romans. In 42 BC Antonius [I 9] assigned S. to

PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN 4, 41-44; W. GUNTHER, Ss. V. S., in: LAUFFER, Griechenland, 621 f.; MULLER, 365-367;

KopER/HILD, 257.

AKU.

Science I. MEsopoTAMIA

II. Ecyrt

III. CLASSICAL AN-

TIQUITY

I. MESOPOTAMIA The framework for the emergence of science, i.e. of a socially organized, systematic search for discoveries and their transmission, existed in Mesopotamia from the early 3rd millennium BC. It included social differentiation and the development of a script (> Cuneiform script) which was soon applied outside administrative and economic contexts. The potential of numeracy and literacy, sustained by the professional group of > scribes, was developed beyond concrete, practical applications into realms of abstract science. It is not possible to determine the proportion of oral forms of the accumulation, acquisition and conveyance of knowledge in Mesopotamia, but it should not be underestimated. Systematic discovery of knowledge (such as the formation of series, comparison, organization, hierarchization, categorization and combination) form the foun-

dations of abstraction, generalization and model-building. Complex forms of scientific thought, such as the assumption of laws, the formation of hypotheses and theoretical

fictions, can

be demonstrated

in Meso-

potamian traditions. These methods (with differences of emphasis) are found in all fields of knowledge acquisition, e.g. in astronomy, — divination, grammar/linguistics (+ Grammarians I.), > mathematics, > medi-

cine, law (- Cuneiform, legal texts in), theology, etc.

The complex systems of general methodological conceptuality and respective technical language(s) are only partly researched as yet (in the field of linguistics, cf. [4]). It appears that no special theory of science has been put forward. A complex system of forms of depiction (radically abbreviated, such as — lists with their derivations, tables, sketches, but also the argumentative discourse, as e.g. in myth or disputation, cf. > wisdom literature), of aids (e.g. simple calculation operations recorded in the so-called table texts) and references (e.g. commentaries) developed over the course of time. These are the sources available for the study of scientific thinking on methodological and content-related levels. The institutionalization of science by society is shown primarily in the foundation of systematic instruction, even as early as the late 4th millennium BC. At the same time, the school and, in a wider sense, the transfer of knowledge, became the object of literary compositions (cf. + wisdom literature). A binding canon of knowledge emerged as early as the late 3rd millennium, differentiated according to degree of scholar-

85

86

liness. The > ruler regularly claimed participation in, and control of, science. The high degree of political influence enjoyed by scientists and scholars is evident

chus’: P Mag.LL. 18,7 [2. 225]). An individual author is only mentioned by name in one demotic astrological text of the Roman period. Just as unusual is the autobiographical inscription of the water-clock-maker and engineer Amenemhet of Thebes from the New Kingdom (c. 1500 BC), in which he tells of his research and inventions, specifically emphasizing the properties of novelty and improvement [3. vol. 2. 457-462]. Although empiricism (e.g. in remedies) certainly played a role, the importance of symbolism and speculation should not be underestimated. The use of onomatopoeia, by which an action or expression could be associated with a deeper symbolism, was typical. Along with ‘proper’ etymologies, this kind of linguistic science allowed intentionally content-related allusions and interpretations to be made among terms which are not related in modern understanding, e.g. the fruit isd was connected to Sdi, ‘to save’. Interpretations of observations, esp. in > divination, were strongly influenced by symbolic references. The interpretation of dreams (+ Dreams; Interpretation of dreams) is particularly well-attested. Based on their casuistic formulations, the respective corpora of texts must be considered scientific in the context of Egyptian culture. One typical means of transmitting knowledge was by — lists, which were often reduced to headings and sequences of terms arranged in thematic order. Later examples (rst—2nd cents. AD) also include information on synonym usage as well as specialist or phonetic glos-

from the records of the rst millennium BC, which in-

clude comprehensive correspondence of such individuals [17]. 1 J. Borreéro, Symptomes, signes, écritures, in: J.-P. VERNANT et al. (ed.), Divination et rationalité, 1974, 70-197 2 Id., Mésopotamie. L’écriture, la raison et les dieux, 1987 3 D. Brown, Mesopotamian Planetary Astronomy, 2000

4 A.CAVIGNEAUX, Die sumerischakkadischen Listen, 1977 SId., L’écriture et la réflexion linguistique en Mésopotamie, in: S. AuROvux (ed.), Histoire des idées lin-

guistiques, vol. 1: La naissance des métalangues en Orient et en Occident, 1989, 99-118 6 G.DEUTSCHER, Syntactic Change in Akkadian, 2000

~=—7 G. FarBER, Konkret,

Kollektiv, Abstrakt, in: Aula Orientalis 9, 1991, 81-90 8 J. Goopy, The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society, 1986

9Id., The Interface between the Written

and the Oral, 1987 10 U.JEyes, Divination as a Science in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: Jaarbericht van het VoorAziatisch-Egyptisch-Genootschap Ex Oriente Lux 32, 1991-92,

23-41

11 U.KocH-WESTENHOLZ,

Meso-

potamian Astrology, 1999 12 G.LANFRANCHI, Scholars and Scholarly Tradition in Neo-Assyrian Times: A Case Study, in: State Archives of Assyria Bull. 3, 1989, 99-114 13 M.T. Larsen, The Mesopotamian Lukewarm Mind. Reflections

on

Science,

F.ROCHBERG-HALTON

Divination

and

(ed.), Language,

History, FS E. Reiner, 1987, 203-225

Literacy,

in:

Literature and 14S.Maut, Das

Wort im Worte. Orthographie und Etymologie als hermeneutische Verfahren babylonischer Gelehrter, in: G. W. Most (ed.), Commentaries - Kommentare,

1999, 1-18

15 A.L. OPPENHEIM, The Position of the Intellectual in Mesopotamian Society, in: PAPhS 104/2, 1975, 37-46 16 Id., Man and Nature in Mesopotamian Civilization, in: Dictionary of Scientific Biography 15, 1978, 634-666 17 S.PARPOLA (ed.), Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars (State Archives of Assyria, vol. 10), 1993 18 Phoenix 35/2, 1989 19 F.ROCHBERG- HALTON, Be-

tween Observation and Theory in Babylonian Astronomical Texts, in: JNES 50, 1991, 107-120

20 G. VISICATO,

The Power and the Writing, 2000 ~=—-.21 F.WIGGERMAN, Mythological Foundations of Nature, in: D.J. W. MEIJER, Natural Phenomena, Their Meaning, Depiction and Description in the Ancient Near East, 1992, 279-306. BOCK

II. Egypt The modern categorization of science cannot be translated unconditionally to that of ancient Egypt, where different ideas of themes deserving research and transmission existed. In addition, modern science is dominated on the one hand by the concept of ever-new discovery and the falsification of old ideas, and on the other hand by the figure of the researcher (or work group) as a concrete individual entity. In Egypt, however, discoveries were mostly disseminated anony-

mously or ascribed to deities and idealized figures from the past (e.g. > Imuthes [2]; > Thot). Only occasional-

ly a medical or magical recipe was so much as attributed to one (anonymous) member of a group (e.g. ‘Asian of Byblos’: P Ebers 63,8 [11. 623]; ‘Physician of Oxyrhyn-

SCIENCE

ses. Medical texts (> Medicine II.) are mostly restricted

to concise indications of ingredients and preparation. There were also handbooks for diagnosis and some didactic treatises, e.g. on the vascular system. > Mathematics was dominated by rhetorically phrased problems. Commentary texts, like in the Late Period version of the ‘Book of > Nut’, a cosmographic religious work, indicate that apart from these dry, written compilations, a further tradition of interpretations and explanations was conveyed only verbally. In this tradition, information from various works of reference, e.g. on the embalming of the Apis bull, was to some extent drawn upon and compared. The venue for the transmission of knowledge was the institution of the pr-‘nh, which is generally translated as ‘house of life’, but may originally have meant ‘house of fascicles’ — the Egyptians themselves etymologized the term in the Late Period as ‘house of the living’. Such buildings, with staff, were usually attached to the royal palace or important temples. Our view of the standard and achievements of Egyptian science is strongly influenced by the contingencies of preservation and discovery, e.g. there is a gap in the record of documentation of mathematical MSS from c. 1500 BC to AD 300. Egyptian science was very highly regarded by Graeco-Roman authors, esp. in the field of ~> astronomy (e.g. Diod. Sic. 1,81; Macrob. In Somn. 1,19,2 and 1,21,11; Str. 17,1,29; Clem. Al. Strom. 1,16,74,2; Arnob. 2,69). However, it is consistent with the anonymous nature of the tradition that, with the

87

88

exception of Chonouphis and Sechnouphis, supposedly the.teachers of > Plato [1] and > Eudoxus [1] (Plut. De genio Socratis 7; Clem. Al. Strom. 1,15,69,1), no individual names survive. + Astronomy; — Lists; - Mathematics; + Medicine; + Scribes

tive assessments, a shift can be noticed in the nature of science in the later Hellenistic and the Imperial periods. Alongside the traditional practice of developing theories, collecting and ordering the knowledge of earlier generations of scholars attained an equal status; + commentaries, lexica (> Lexicography) and ~ etymologies (+ Philology; > Philosophy) were typical types of texts of this period. The science of Late Antiquity was continued, without a hiatus, in the Arabic, Byzantine and Latin Middle Ages through the transmission of knowledge by means of commentaries and compendia. The two eras of ancient science can be assigned to two geographical centres: + Athens [IV] with the Aegean as its periphery in the Classical phase, + Alexandria [x] with the littoral region of the eastern Mediterranean after c. 300 BC. At this time, Alexandria developed into a more important centre than Athens. Most Greek scientists of the early period used Athens during brief sojourns as a kind of stage, to present their research to the entire Greek world (e.g. > Anaxagoras, ~ Herodotus [1], > Aristoteles [6]). The Hellenistic scientists, on the other hand, seem often to have actually lived in the city of Alexandria itself (e.g. the mathematicians Euclid (> Euclides [3]) and Apollonius [13], the physicians > Herophilus [1] and > Erasistratus). The number of people active in the advanced forms of science was exceedingly small. At no time were more than roo people actively involved in any form of science. Their areas of activity were mainly concentrated in the eastern Mediterranean (cf. [8]). Only in the wake of Greek influences, science became an integral element of Roman learned culture. + Cicero and Apuleius

SCIENCE

1M.C. Betro, Erbari nell’ antico Egitto, in: Egitto e Vicino Oriente 11, 1988,71-110 2H.Berz, The Greek

Magical Papyri in Translation Including the Demotic Spells, 1986 3 M.Craccetr, Ancient Egyptian Science, vols. 1-3, 1989-99 4PH. DercHatn, Le papyrus Salt 825, 1965 5 A.H. GarpIner, Ancient Egyptian Onomastica, 1947 6 F.JUNGE, Zur Sprachwissenschaft der

Agypter, in: Studien zu Sprache und Religion Agyptens, FS W. Westendorf, vol. 1, 1984, 257-272 7 O. NEvGEBAUER, R.A.PARKER (ed.), Egyptian Astronomical Texts, vol. 1-3, 1960-69 8 J. OsiNG, Hieratische Papyri aus Tebtunis I (Carlsberg Papyri, vol. 2), 1998 9Id., La science sacerdotale, in: D. VALBELLE (ed.), Le décret de Memphis, 1999 +10 R.A. PARKER, Demotic Mathematical Papyri, 1972 11A.VOLTEN, Demotische Traumdeu-

tung, 1942 12 W. WesTeENDoRF, Handbuch agyptischen Medizin, 1999.

der AltJO.QU.

III]. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

A. CHRONOLOGICAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL ASPECTS B. CONCEPT AND STRUCTURE C. SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTICS AND INDIVIDUAL DISCIPLINES

A. CHRONOLOGICAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL

ASPECTS Greek authors report that their science (on the concept cf. B.) had begun very early with the works of + Pythagoras and > Thales and their contemporaries, and that the roots of this science stretched back to the civilizations of Egypt and Mesopotamia (cf. Hdt. 2,109; Aristot. Metaph. 981b 23-25). Modern scholarship (based esp. on [2]) treats this assertion with some scepticism. Science in the modern sense can only be demonstrated to a reasonable degree of reliability from the 2nd half of the sth cent. BC, with the development of medicine. Around 300 BC (during the transition from the Classical to the Hellenistic periods), scientific practice changed. The writings on the natural sciences from the Classical period (5th/4th cents. BC) were briefer, and their prime purpose was to provide argumentative surprise: cf. the lunes of > Hippocrates [5] of Chios (with fig.); > Quadrature of the circle II.) and the medical writings of the Corpus Hippocraticum (— Hippocrates [6]) [7]. In the Hellenistic period, more comprehensive scientific works were created, which did not aim solely at individual, spectacular proofs, but made some effort at structuring and systematization, e.g. + Herophilus in medicine [x1] or Apollonius [13] in + mathematics [3]. This development is rooted in the increasing use of writing (> Literacy) from the Hellenistic period onwards. The 3rd cent. BC seems to have been particularly productive. In the opinion of some modern scholars (cf. e.g. [6. 1]), science began to decline from around 200 BC. Irrespective of such subjec-

(+ Ap(p)uleius [III]) demonstrate a certain familiarity with Greek science, but they explicitly understood this as a manifestation of Greek culture. > Vitruvius [2], for instance, made no secret of the fact that he used exclusively Greek sources. The language of science remained Greek even in the west of the Roman Empire; Latin was felt to be not suitable for it (cf. e.g. the difficulties of + Lucretius [III 1] in reproducing Greek scientific terms in his didactic poem De Rerum Natura). As long as their readership was also conversant with Greek, Roman authors who wrote solely in Latin remained peripheral figures in the scientific world. Latin science only attained historical significance through the influence of e.g. + Boéthius and > Macrobius in the European Middle Ages.

B. CONCEPT AND STRUCTURE

‘Science’ is a modern term with a different meaning in the various European languages. The ancient term for ‘science’, émuothun (epistemeé, Latin scientia) cannot

be applied to any concrete method of the natural sciences, but is rooted in philosophical + epistemology (cf. Pl. Resp. 477b ff.). The modern concept of an exact science corresponds to the expression ta padhpata (ta mathemata, cf. [5. 197 f.]), attested since — Plato [1] and > Archytas [1] (perhaps also Philolaus [2] of Cro-

89

90

ton). Scientific practice was called téyvn/—> téchné (Latin ars; literally ‘art’; cf. e.g. the Hippocratic treatise Peri téchnés, Latin De arte). The transmission of scientific knowledge was described by matdeia (> paideia, Aristot. Pol. 13 38a 30; in the wider sense ‘education, training’). Beweia (> theoria, literally ‘viewing’, cf. Latin contemplatio) was the scientist’s state of knowledge (Erkenntnishaltung, a philosophical term with ethical and epistemic connotations of equally wide implication, cf. Aristot. Eth. Nic. 10,7). Irrespective of issues of terminology, the Greeks and Romans valued particular fields of knowledge, and had specialists for them. The ancient hierarchy of the various fields may appear surprising today: generally, ~ philosophy (in particular > natural philosophy, cf. ~ physics) was regarded as more valuable (and was much more widely taught) than any specialist natural science in the modern sense, as were some branches of the humanities in the modern sense. > Rhetoric, for example, is argued by > Isocrates in a disputation with Plato [1] to be superior to the mathemata (Isoc. Antidosis 261 ff.). According to > Polybius, history (> Historiography) was a suitable intellectual field for persons involved in politics, as it required only rudimentary knowledge of the mathemata (Pol. 9,12-20; 12,18). Even > Plato [1], a committed ancient advocate of > mathematics, describes it in his Politeia mostly asa useful preparation for philosophy. Interestingly, grammar did not hold an important status either in Greek or Roman science (unlike that in the other pre-modern cultures like Mesopotamia and India). + Medicine was the only specialized branch of the natural sciences to be consistently represented significantly in Graeco-Roman antiquity. Other specialist sciences were practised by individuals who cannot usually be ascribed to any ‘school’. In terms of method, such (non-medical) specialist sciences were governed by the model of mathematical proof. They do not correspond to our conception of exact sciences. Only the first signs of theoretical physics are found, e.g. in the works of -» Archimedes [1] (in statics and hydraulics). The interest of Greek mathematicians was focused on pure geometry. — Music had a central position in Greek applied mathematics (cf. [1]). Many authors, from Plato [1] (e.g. Resp., Ti., Phd.) by way of > Sextus, I Greek [2] S. Empiricus, Ptolemy (— Ptolemaeus [65]

C. SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTICS AND INDIVIDUAL DISCIPLINES In contrast to most other pre-modern scientific traditions, the outstanding characteristic of Greek and Roman natural sciences was the overwhelming importance of ‘persuasion’ (with blurred boundaries between persuading and convincing, cf. the sense of the Greek word mew0w/peitho). Even early medical texts of the Corpus Hippocraticum (most clearly the work De victu, cf. + Hippocrates [6]) uses the assumption of first, fundamental — principles to prove that the structures of the human body conclusively compel certain

(II. D.r.)) to Augustine (> Augustinus (D.)) and

> Bo-

éthius (D.) dedicated a significant portion of their works to the development, criticism and exegesis of mathematical theory of music. One of the main scientific projects of the > Peripatos was the musical theory of + Aristoxenus [1] of Tarentum, a combination of empirical and mathematical approaches. + Astronomy had a less important position in Graeco-Roman science than in most other pre-modern cultures (such as Mesopotamia, India, China, pre-Columbian Maya culture). It was often connected with ~ astrology (strict distinction of the two in Ptolemy (+ Ptolemaeus [65]), cf. Ptol. Tetrabiblos 1,1, mid 2nd cent. AD).

SCIENCE

treatment methods (criticism of this in the treatise De vetere medicina, which none the less also argues based on certain first principles). After such theoretical beginnings, scientific medicine was refined into a science by Hellenistic physicians (esp. > Herophilus [r]). Their arguments were based on anatomical and physiological investigations. The works of the physician and scholar + Galen of Pergamum consist of sequences of arguments supported by information gleaned from dissection and vivisection (the keystone of Galen’s argumentative system of thought is his treatise De usu partium). Excellent examples of the importance of persuasion in Greek and Roman science are found in > mathematics. Before and after Graeco-Roman antiquity, mathematics was organized in series of (mathematical)

problems with concrete numerical values. Mathematicians learned to solve them by long years of practice with examples [4]. Greek mathematicians aimed at certitude of knowledge through argumentative presentation. Instead of calculating examples, they developed proofs. Greek mathematical sciences aimed to avoid the use of numerical values entirely, and were characterized by geometry. While in other pre-modern cultures details of the calendar were the main feature of mathematical astronomy, early Greek — astronomy in particular focused on the geometry of the movements of the celestial bodies (cf. > Cosmology, D.2.). The work of + Eudoxus (4th cent. BC) is still largely characterized by this emphasis on geometry (cf. [10]). Greek mathematicians did not teach through the learning of concrete examples by rote, but developed their own form of discourse which strove for a seamlessly conclusive argument. They made a strict distinction between premises and conclusions. Conclusions were often drawn with the aid of mathematical diagrams, particular schematic drawings annotated with letters to denote unambiguously the terms under scrutiny. Mathematical discourse was thus highly technical, and repeatedly used the same terminology. The Greek mathematicians had thus invented the first scientific textual genre, and by virtue of its efficiency and precision, they were able to compose scientifically revisable texts which permitted conclusions beyond doubt. It is arguable that the deductive method was invented by this process [9]. This form of deductive argumentation was found as early as 300 BC in > Autolycus and Euclid (> Euclides [3]).

91

92

Although deductive discourse is found in all surviv-

1 A. Barker, Greek Musical Writings, 1989 2 W. Burkert, Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagorean-

SCIENCE

ing Greek mathematical writings, not everywhere is it

allotted the same high status. In > astronomy, it was inevitable that calculations with numerical values would over the course of time become ever more important. Thus, in Ptolemy’s (> Ptolemaeus [65]) Almagest, tables of numerical values are of key status. + Numbers also played an important part in Greek musical theory (+ Music IV.). Its interest was in the system of > proportions, which could be proven in deductive discourse. Although even in the Imperial period, Greek authors did involve themselves directly in arithmetical procedures (there is a form of algebra attested in > Diophantus, c. AD 250), it is indisputable that Greek mathematics regarded argumentation and proof as more important than arithmetic (on arithmetic cf. > Mathematics, MeArers) =

The mathematical sciences thus constituted a model for the most rigorous form of argumentation. Greek authors such as Plato (e.g. Pl. Men. 82a—85e; Pl. Resp. 509d-513e) and Galen (De usu partium) accorded them a special, and indeed to some extent even a paradigmatic status. Euclid’s (> Euclides [3]) Stoicheia (‘Elements’) began to be regarded as the ideal mathematical presentation (perhaps only in Late Antiquity, cf. commentary of > Proclus to bk. 1 of the Stoicheia). The special appreciation of mathematics was codified in the philosophy of the Platonic school (+ Academy). Although profound knowledge of highly-developed Greek geometry was hardly widespread, this led many readers of Plato from the 3rd cent. AD to further study of Greek mathematics. This esteem for mathematics subsequently influenced the science of the Arabic world, and later early modern Europe, where the rooting of physics on the foundations of mathematical deduction gave rise to the natural sciences in the form known today (> Natural sciences). The emphasis upon persuasion had wide-ranging historical consequences. Its origins, according to [7], lie in the highly politicized nature of the society of Classical Greece (> Polis), in which the constitutive form of communication was the public debate. From this arose a disposition towards debate of principles, in which essentially everything was open to question. After the loss of the fundamental political role of such public discourse in the Hellenistic period, the schooling of the argumentative faculties by means of the literary tradition became the focus of the education of the upper classes (> Education/culture; > Rhetoric). Against this background, the ability to persuade by argument attained the highest esteem. This was particularly true for a proof which could claim incontrovertibility, e.g. deductive mathematics. ~ Artes liberales; ~ Astrology; > Astronomy; — Biology; > Cosmology; > Education/culture; > Enkyklios paideia; + Mathematics; > Medicine; > Music; > Nature, Natural philosophy; — Physics; — Rhetoric; +» Techne; - Technical literature; > Music; > NatTuRAL SCIENCES

ism, 1962 (repr. 1972) 3 M.Friep, $. UNcuru, Apollonius of Perga’s Conica: Text, Context, Subtext, 2001

4 J. Hoyrup, Lengths, Widths, Surfaces: A Portrait of Old Babylonian Algebra and Its Kin, 2002 5 C. HUFFMAN, Philolaus of Croton, 1993 6 A.Jones (ed.), Pappus. Book 7 of the Collection, 1986 (with English transl. and comm.) 7G.E. R. LLtoyp, Magic, Reason and Experience, 1979 8 R.Nerz, Classical Mathematics in the Classical Mediterranean, in: Mediterranean Historical

Review 12, 1998,1-24 in Greek Mathematics,

9Id., The Shaping of Deduction 1999 10 O. NEUGEBAUER, A History of Ancient Mathematical Astronomy, 1975 11 H.von SrapeEN, Herophilus: The Art of Medicine, 1989 12M.FUHRMANN, Das systematische Lehrbuch, 1960.

Scilla see > Squill Scillus (XxAdotc/Skillotis). Town, settled from as early as the Mycenaean period, in Triphylia to the south of + Olympia and possibly to the west of modern Makrisia on the Agios Elias (not at modern Skilluntia, where there are remains probably of the Temple of Athena Skilluntia of Phellon: Str. 8,3,14). Being allied with Pisa (— Pisatis) (Paus. 5,6,4; 6,22,4), S. is said to have built the temple of Hera in Olympia (Paus. 5,16,1). After S. had been destroyed by Elis in about 570 BC (Paus. 5,6,4), it was rebuilt in about 400 by the Spartans; they assigned S. as a residence to > Xenophon, who had been banished from Athens; he built a temple there to Artemis of Ephesus (Xen. An. 5,3,7-13; Paus. 5,6,5; Diog. Laert. 2,52). After 371 the polis, which had been autonomous since 386 (Xen. Hell. 6,5,2), came under the sway of Elis again. Xenophon’s grave was still in S., which had probably been abandoned since the Hellenistic period, to be seen by Pausanias (5,6,6). J.Hopp,

s.v.

Skillus., LAUFFER,

Griechenland,

622 f.;

R.H. Simpson, Mycenaean Greece, 1981, 94 f.; E. DELEBEQUE, Un point de geographie xénophontique, in: Annales de la Faculté des Lettres d’Aix 29, 1955, 3-113; L. L’ALLIER, Le Domaine de Scillonte, in: Phoenix 52, 1998, 1-14.

Scilurus (Zxidoveod/Skilouros). King in the second half of the 2nd century BC of the Scythian-Taurian state in Crimea with capital Neapolis (modern Simferopol). His coins suggest a temporary protectorate over Olbia ({2]; contra [1. 146-148]). When S. devastated the chora of Chersonesus [2], its inhabitants called on Mithridates [6]. One of S.’ many sons, Palacus, fought Mithridates’ general Diophantus [2] without success (Str. 7,4,3 and 73 739173 Syll.3 709 = IOSPE 2, 3.52; SEG 39, 692). His

daughter Senamotis was married to a Bosporan Greek

([3]; SEG 37, 674). ~ Scythae II. 1 V.A. ANocuin, Die Miinzen der skythischen KGnige, in: Hamburger Beitrage zur Archeologie 18 (1991), 1996, 141-150 2N.A. Frotova, Monety skifskogo carja Skilura, in: Sovetskaja Archeologija 1964.1, 44-55 3]J.G. VINOGRADOV, Pontische Studien, 1997, 526-562. UP.

SCIRI

93

94

Scione (Sxudvy/Skione). City on the southern coast of

298) and his son L. Cornelius [I 65] Scipio (cos. 259), each consisting of a painted name followed by a chiseled poem in saturnian metre (most scholars date the eulogy to the father /ater than the one to the son; for a contemporaneous creation [7]). Other than that, only the funerary inscription and epigram for Cn. Cornelius [I 79] Hispanus (praet. 139) can be attributed with certainty (ILLRP 316). Mentioned as well are a son anda grandson (?) of L. Cornelius [I 72] Asiagenes (ILLRP 313-314) and Paulla Cornelia, wife (?) of Cn. Cornelius [I 78] Hispallus (cos. 176). The addressees of the two other poems in saturnian metre (ILLRP 311-312) and of ILLRP 315 are uncertain. Originating from the renewed use of the grave in the Imperial Period are the alcove inscriptions for Cornelia Gaetulica and M. Iunius Silanus, the daughter and the grandson of Cn. Cornelius [II 29] Lentulus Gaetulicus (cos. in AD 26). The inscriptions list the deceased person’s ancestry, his political offices and perhaps military accomplishments and emphasize their outstanding reputation among their fellow citizens. For the members who died young, the emphasis is placed on their personal — virtues (vir-

Pallene [4] between Nea Skioni and Agios Nikolaos. According to local tradition (Thuc. 4,120,1; cf. Konon FGrH 26 F 13; Polyaenus, Strat. 7,47) S. was founded after the Trojan War by Achaei from — Pellene. In the winter of 480/79 BC S. took part in the defence of ~+ Potidaea against the Persians (Hdt. 8,128). S. then appears consistently with six talents in the Athenian lists of tribute quotas (ATL 1, 410 f.). In the > Peloponnesian War S. seceded from Athens in 423 and for two years defied all attempts at reconquest (Thuc. 4,120 ff.; 129 ff.). At the will of Athens after the Peace of Nicias in 421 (Thuc. 5,18,7 f.), S. was occupied in the summer of 421, depopulated and handed over to refugees from —> Plataeae (Thuc. 5,32,1). After 404 S. was returned by Lysander [1] to its original inhabitants (Plut. Lysandros 14,4) and once more achieved a modest prosperity. From 349 S. was Macedonian. M.ZAuRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 234-236.

MZ.

Scipio. Roman cognomen (‘gnarled stick, staff’) in the Cornelii family (— Cornelii [I 65-85] Scipiones); a representation of a staff was also used as the family emblem. KaJANTO, Cognomina, 19 f.; 91; 345.

Scipionic circle. Modern term for a circle of friends (of debatable historicity) supposedly surrounding P. Cornelius [I 70] Scipio Aemilianus Africanus (cos. 147, 134 BC). Its members — including C. Laelius [I 2] (cos. 140), L. Furius [I 28] Philus (cos. 136), Sp. Mummius [I 4] and P. Rupilius [I 1] (cos. 132) — are supposed to have

been connected by a particular interest in Greek culture (> Philhellenism) and a more humane Roman foreign policy (influenced by Stoic teachings as transmitted by -» Panaetius [4]). The idea of a fixed group can be traced to + Cicero, who for the historical background to his dialogues De re publica and Laelius (fictional date: 129 BC) sketches a moderately conservative and highly aristocratic milieu (Cic. Lael. 69; 101; Rep. 1,18); the cultural and political attitudes of the circle are a modern construct. 1 H.SrraspurGER, Der Scipionenkreis, in: Hermes 94, 1966, 60-72 —=—-2.A.E. Astin, Scipio Aemilianus, 1967,

294-306 3J.E. G. Zerzet, Cicero and the Scipionic Circle, in: HSPh 76, 1972, 173-179 4G.PERL, Romischer Humanismus vor Auspragung des Humanitas-Begriffes, in: Philologus 117, 1973,49-65 5 J.-L. FERRARY, Philhellénisme et impérialisme, 1988, 589-602. K-LE.

Scipionic inscriptions. Term referring to the nine extant sarcophagus inscriptions of the so-called “Tomb of the Scipios’, the burial place of the Cornelii Scipiones from c. the mid 3rd cent. to the end of the 2nd cent. BC (CIL I* 6-16, ILLRP 309-317). The earliest texts are the eulogies for L. Cornelius [I 76] Scipio Barbatus (cos.

tutes) such as honos, fama, gloria, sapientia etc. The

inscriptions are therefore a very important record of the self-presentation, developing under Hellenistic influence, of Roman nobility (> nobiles) as well as of their social ethics in the 3rd and 2nd cents. BC. ~ Cornelius; > Funerary inscriptions 1 F.CoareLtl, Il sepolcro degli Scipioni, 1989 21d., Rom. Ein archdologischer Fihrer, 2000, 352-359 3 HOLKESKAMP, 225-227 4 G.RADKE, Beobachtungen zum Elogium auf L. Cornelius Scipio Barbatus, in: RhM 134, 1991, 69-79 5 /J.VAN SICKLE, The elogia of the Cornelii Scipiones and the Origin of the Epigram at Rome, in: AJPh 108, 1987, 41-55 61d., The First Hellenistic Epigrams at Rome, in: N. HorsFAtt (ed.), Vir bonus discendi peritus. FS O. Skutsch, 1988, 132-156 7 WACHTER, 301-342 9 F.Zevi,s. v. Sepulchrum (Corneliorum) Scipionum, in: LTUR 4, 1999, 281-285.

K-LE.

Sciras (=xigac/Skiras). Poet of ‘Italic comedy’ [r. test. x] from Tarentum, who ina late record [t. test. 2] is, along with the phlyakes poet > Rhinthon and the poet (of Menippian satire?) Blaesus named as a Pythagorean, which is not very credible. Of his work, only two iambic trimeters from the mythological play Meiéayooc (Meléagros) have survived, a parody of Eur. Hipp. 75f. Hardly any clues exist regarding S.’ biographical dates. He is usually associated with Rhinthon (c. 300 BC) 1 CGF 190.

H.-G.NE.

Sciri. Germanic tribe on the Vistula (Plin. HN 4,97), which in the 3rd cent. BC advanced as far as the Black Sea (Syll.3 495, Z. t00 from Olbia). From the 4th cent. AD the S. settled on the northern edge of the Carpathians, came to be dependent on the > Hunni and undertook incursions into the Roman Empire (Zos.

SCIRI

4,34,6; Sozom. Hist. eccl. 9,5,5; Sid. Apoll. Carm. 7,322). After the death of > Attila in AD 453 the S. were defeated by the Goti; some were accepted into Moesia (lord. Get. 265; -» Moesi), the rest moved with + Odoacer to Italy (Procop. Goth. 1,1,3; lohannes Antiochenus fr. 209,1). L.ScumipT, Die Ostgermanen, print 1969).

96

95

1941, 86-99 (1904; reH.GR.

Sciritae (Zxiottat; Skiritai). The S., perhaps ethnically Arcadian, came from the sub-region or district (ywoea/

chéra) of ~ Sciritis in the Peloponnese (Diod. Sic. 15,64,3; cf. Thuc. 5,33,1), of which the principal fortified place in the 2nd quarter of the fourth cent. BC was Oeum (Xen. Hell. 6,5,24f.). At the battle of > Mantinea in 418 BC, 600 S. fought on the side of the Spartans (Thuc. 5,67,1; 5,68,33 §,71,2). By then, they had won the right to occupy the extreme left of the Lacedaemonian > phalanx line (Thuc. 5,67,1; cf. Diod. Sic. 15,32,1); after 378, the S. took part in the battles in Boeotia (Xen. Hell. 5,2,24). Their political status was presumably akin to that of the > perioikoi, but Xenophon (Xen. Hell. 5,2,24; cf. Lac. 12,3; 13,6; Cyr. 4,2,1) carefully distinguishes the two groups. In 370/69 BC they joined the perioikoi in revolt from Sparta, and were incorporated in the city of Megalopolis (Xen. Hell. 6,5,24f.; cf. 7,4,21). In the 2nd cent., Sciritis was reallocated by arbitration to Sparta (Syll.3 665,315 35) and it remained within Sparta’s territorial control under the Principate. 1H.Beck, Polis und Koinon, 1997. =.2 G. SHIPLEY, The Other Lakedaimonians, in: M. H. Hansen (ed.), The Polis as an Urban Centre and as a Political Community, 1997, 189-281.

P.C,

Sciritis (Lxigitic; Skiritis). Northern border region of Laconia (Thuc. 5,33,2) between the eastern Arcadian

and Spartan basins, in the north about 13 km wide and in the south about 4 km, a slate region of the northwestern slopes of the northern > Parnon mountains without any larger settlements. It was originally counted as part of Arcadia (Steph. Byz. s. v. Zxigos). In the 5th cent. BC the — Sciritae had the status of Spartan ~ perioikoi. In 369 BC it was annexed to > Megale

hero and constructor of the Way (Paus. 1,44), with the blossoming of the Theseus legend he transformed into the well-known monster who forced travellers to wash his feet, then hurled them over the rocks into an abyss where a human-eating turtle lurked. Theseus defeats S. and flings him into the sea (+ Talion), where his bones become the famous crags (Diod. Sic. 4,59,43 Ov. Met. 7,443-47). From the end of the 6th/beginning of the 5th cent. BC, S. frequently appears in pictorial representations as part of the Theseus legend. Since S. was represented beside > Boreas on the Tower of the Winds in Athens (> Argestes), interpretation as a wind spirit is also possible. Scironides (=xiowvidyc; Skironidés). Athenian who, as strategos, together with - Phrynichus [2] and others led an offensive to reconquer > Miletus [2] in the summer of 412 BC. In spite of victory in the land battle, the offensive was broken off —contrary to the votes of S. i.a. — because of the superiority of the Spartan fleet (Thuc. 8,25-27). As commanders of the fleet at Samos, he and Phrynichus were dismissed at the beginning of 411 (Thue. 8,54,3). His attitude to the oligarchy of the Four Hundred (— Tetrak6siot) is unclear. D.Kacan, The Fall of the Athenian Empire, 1987; PA

12730.

U.WAL.

Scironides petrae (Zxeiwvides métea/Skeironides pétrai, ‘Scironic rocks’). Tall cliff on Mount > Gerania above the Saronic Gulf (Hdt. 8,71; Pol. 16,16,4; Str. 9,1,4) west of Megara [2], still referred to as Kaki Skala

(‘dangerous climb’) to the present day. The coastal pass from which — according to legend — > Sciron pushed travellers into the sea (cf. Diod. Sic. 4,59,4) was notoriously dangerous. It was widened for traffic by Hadrianus (in AD 117-138) (Paus. 1,44,6). PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN

1, 949; F.GEYER, s. v. Skironische

Felsen, RE 3 A, 546 f.; E.MEYER, s. v. Megara (2), RE 15,

152-205, here 167-169.

DO.ME.

F. GEYER, s. v.S., RE3 A, 536 f.; F. BOLTE, s. v. Sparta, RE 3 A, 1265-1582, esp. 1308 f.; PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN 3,

Scissors (1padic/psalis; Latin forfex, forpex, forficula). Scissors, made of iron or bronze, were used in sheep and goat shearing, for cutting cloth and metal, hair and beards, in cobbling and in agriculture, for chopping plants and fruits and separating grapes from the vine. Scissors seem to have come into use from the early 5th cent. BC in Greece, and in Italy (according to written

464.

sources) from around 300 BC (Varro, Rust. 2,11,9),

polisss (Xen Hellamés5.2 4th 754.215) 15,64,3 ff.; Syll.3 665,31 f. from 164 BC).

Diodas

Sic:

GIL.

Sciron (Sxigwv/Skiron, Zxeiowv/Skeiron). Either a son of > Henioche [4] and Canethus (Plut. Theseus 10,1-4;

25,4) or son of + Poseidon or son (or grandson) of ~ Pelops [1] (Apollod. Epit. 1,2). Eponym of the ‘Scironian Cliffs’ (> Scironides petrae) and the ‘Scironian Way’ to the > Gerania (Hdt. 8,71). Whereas S. was originally considered by the Megarians as a benevolent

though the plucking of fleeces was still common in sheep-shearing in the rst cent. AD (Plin. HN 8,191). Scissors varied in size: cloth scissors were found well in excess of 1 m in length. Two forms of ancient scissors are distinguished: spring shears had the two parallel blades linked by a C-shaped metal link, while pivoted blade or cross-bladed scissors functioned to the same principle as modern scissors.

98

OF W.Gairzscn, Romische Werkzeuge (British Archaeological Reports, International Ser. 78), 1980, 209-219; Id., Romische Scheren, in: Fundberichte aus Hessen 29-30 (1989-1990), 1995, 263-275. R.H.

Sclavinia

(ZxAaBynvie/Sklabéenia,

Latin Sclavinia). A

term, common since the 6th cent. AD in Greek and Lat-

in, derived from the demonym =xraBynvoi/Sklabenoior used to describe communities formed of Slav tribes inside and outside formerly Roman territories in the Balkan peninsula, Carinthia, Pannonia and Transsylvania. They were for the most part organised in warlike tribal associations without fixed territorial borders and also included members of non-Slavonic peoples; some were autonomous, others came under the dominion of the — Avares and the ~ Bulgari. Under the pressure of circumstances their existence was recognised or tolerated by the Byzantine emperors, and from Charlemagne onwards also by the Western emperors. The leaders of the S. bore the title zupan, later éxarchos or archon. In the 7th and 8th cents. the S. also encompassed the greater part of the Greek mainland, including the > Peloponnesus, until they were subjugated by Nicephorus [2] lin c. 810. Shortly afterwards the S. vanished due to baptism and to the Slav tribes settling down, as a result of which fixed structures of domination by an aristocracy developed. The term S. was last used in the roth

Sclavi (+ Slavs) and

cent. by Constantinus [9] VII in connection with Rus-

sia, in the general sense of a land inhabited by Slavs. + Slavs 1 J.FeRLuGA, Byzanz und die Bildung der friihesten siidslavischen Staaten, in: Id., Byzantium on the Balkans, 1976, 245-259 20O.PrRiTsak, The Slavs and the Avars, in: Settimane di Studio del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo 30, 1983, 353-424 3 J.REISINGER, G. Sowa, Das Ethnikon Sclavi in den lateinischen Quellen bis zum J. 900, 1990 ~=—-44 G. Wess, Das Ethnikon Sklabenoi, Sklaboi in den griechischen Quellen bis 1025, 1988 5 H. WoLrraM, Salzburg, Bayern, Osterreich, 1995, 15—

192.

ALB.

Sclerias (Zxdnoiac/Sklérias) or Sclerius (Zxdjevoc/ Sklérios), tragic poet cited by Stobaeus (TrGF I 213), dates unknown. It is unlikely that the Skolion (PMG

890) which only Stobaeus ascribes to S. (TrGFI 213 F 5) is in fact by him (testimonies in PMG 651). B.Z. Scodraa. Illyrian city (Liv. 44,31; Vibius Sequester 148; It. Ant. 339,4; Tab. Peut. 7,1 f.; Pol. 28,8,4: Zxd5e0/ Skédra; Ptol. 2,17,12; Hierocles, Synekdemos 656,4; Liv. 45,26: Scodrenses) southeast of Lacus Labeatis (modern Ligeni Shkodres), 17 Roman miles (c. 28 km; Plin. HN 3,144; Geogr. Rav. 5,14) from the coast of the > Ionios Kolpos, in the area of the mouths of the Drilon and the Barbanna (modern Bojanna), modern Shkodra (in Albania). Minting is documented from the middle of the 3rd century BC onwards (EKOAP(E)INQN, HN 316; as the residence city of + Genthius: BAZIAEQ=

SCOPADAE

TENOIOY, HN 316 f.). S. played a role in the context of Genthius’ and — Perseus’ [2] battles against the Romans in the third of the > Macedonian Wars (Pol. 28,8; Liv. 44,213 Plut. Aemilius Paullus 13; App. Ill. 9). After the division of the kingdom into three (Liv. 45,26,11-15) S. became the capital of the > Labeates region. In 40 BC the meridian of S. was fixed by the Treaty of Brundisium as the boundary between the spheres of power of the later > Augustus and of > Antonius [I 9] (App. Civ. 5,65). In the Roman Imperial Period S. was colonia Claudia Augusta with corresponding magistrates (ILS 7159) and was of economic and political significance as a communications hub. S.Istami, Le monnayage de S., Lissos et Genthios, in: Iliria 2, 1972, 379-408, here 384-386, 394f.; TIR K 34 Naissus, 1976, I12.

PICA.

Scolus (Zx@Ao0c; Skdlos). Settlement in Boeotia (Hom. Il. 2,498: kOmé), to the south of modern Neochorakion, to the north of Asopus [2] (Paus. 9,4,4; finds from the Mycenaean to the Roman periods [2; 4; 5; 6; 7], otherwise [1; 8]; relocated in 395 BC: [3]). S. was in the ter-

ritory of Thebae, but from time to time of Plataeae (Str. 9,2,23 f.; as polis only in Steph. Byz.s. v. Z.).S. was part of a region of the Boeotian League that depended on Thebae. Its population was evacuated to Thebae in 431 (Hell. Oxyrh. 19,3,387; 20,3,438-441). Pausanias (mid—2nd century AD) found S. in ruins; he mentions a cult of > Demeter and Kore [7]. 1 F. Geyer, s. v. S. (1), RE3 A, 567

2 Fossey, 119-126

3 M.H. Hansen (ed.), Introduction to an Inventory of Poleis, 1996, 103 f. 4E.Mever, s. v. S. (1), RE Suppl. 14,741 5S MULLER,577-579 6 PRITCHETT I, 107-109;

3, 289-294; 4, 97-993 5, 99-101 7 SCHACHTER I, 160 f.; 2, 132-137 8 P.M. WALLACE, Strabo’s Description of Boiotia, 1979, 88-90. M.FE.

Scombrus (Zxdufeoc; Skémbros). Heavily forested mountains with ore deposits in the west of Thrace (Thuc. 2,96,3; Scopius, Plin. HN 4,35), modern VitoSa south of Sofia. Aristot. Mete. 350b 16f. mistakenly locates the sources of the — Nestus [xz] and the ~— Hebrus there. Lv.B.

Scopadae (Zxonddo1; Skopddai). Noble family from + Crannon, which, beside the > Aleuadae, was one of the leading clans of Thessaly in the 6th century BC. On account of their wealth from cattle and pasturing (cf. Theoc. 16,36-39) the S. were from time to time at the lead of the Thessalian League (— Tagos). As in the case of Aleuas, constitutive measures in establishing the organisation of the Thessalian army are also ascribed to their mythical/historical founder, Scopas I, (cf. Xen. Hell. 6,1,19; Ath. 10,438C; Quint. Inst. r1,2,15). The courting of > Agariste [1] by the Scopad Diactorides shows their active relations with the higher aristocratic families (Hdt. 6,127,4). Simonides [2] seems also to have spent some time at their ‘court’, composed an epi-

SCOPADAE

nikion to Scopas II (PMG 37 P) and sung of the tragic end of the S., who were allegedly killed when a ceiling collapsed at a banquet in about 51o BC (Cic. De or. Daisy) H. Beck, Polis und Koinon, 1997; B. HELLY, L’état thessalien, 1995.

I0oOo

99

HA.BE.

Scopas (Zxdmac/Skopas). [1] Sculptor from Paros, active in the mid 4th cent. BC, working mostly in > marble and very occasionally in bronze. In the opinion of the ancient world, S. was one of the most important masters of Greek sculpture. Written records ascribe to him approximately 25-30 individual works and major projects, which should probably be allotted to several sculptors with the same name of different generations. The extant pediment sculptures from the temple of Athena Alea in > Tegea are generally taken as the point of departure for a reconstruction of his works following Paus. 8,45,5, though he considers S. to be the architect of the temple. The extent of S.’ collaboration on the sculptures, if any, is

therefore open to conjecture; they reveal the artist as a distinctive personality with a predilection for expressing pathos and restless movement. S. is also said to have contributed the eastern frieze to the - Mausoleum in Halicarnassus, which however cannot be reliably identified among the extant reliefs (Plin. HN 36,30; Vitr. 7 praef. 12). Of the 36 column-drums (columnae caelatae) of the Artemisium at Ephesus only one was made by S. (according to Plin. HN 36,95; only one is extant). What the many statues of gods S. is said to have created in Greece and Asia Minor looked like remains unknown; according to ancient sources they included a bronze Aphrodite in Elis, Hygieia in Gortys, Athena Pronaos and Artemis in Thebes, Dionysus and Athena in Cnidos, Hecate in Argos, Apollo in Chryse, Asclepius and Hygieia in Tegea, Heracles in Sicyon, Erinyes in Athens, in Megara the group of Eros, Himeros and Pothos, maybe a further Pothos in Samothrace and Leto with Ortygia and her children in Ortygia. None of these works has been positively identified. Some were later removed to Rome, including a naked Aphrodite, which according to Plin. HN 36,27 was preferable to that of > Praxiteles, and an Apollo Citharoedus in the temple of Apollo Palatinus of the Augustan Period; a reproduction of it on the so-called Sorrento Base gives only a vague impression of what it looked like. Even in antiquity it was uncertain whether the Niobids in the temple of Apollo Sosianus in Rome and a statue of Janus Pater, allegedly brought to Rome from Egypt, should be attributed to S. or to Praxiteles. As regards further sculptures in temples and collections in Rome, confusion of the sculptor with S. [2] cannot be ruled out. In view of the unreliability of written records and the difficulty in settling essential matters of style, S.’ work is unable to play a substantial role in the art history of antiquity, especially as no ancient characterisation of his style exists either.

[2] S., known as Minor. Sculptor of the 2nd cent. BC,

probably from Paros and perhaps father of the sculptor Aristandrus [2], who worked on Delos in the rst cent. BC. A note in Plin. HN 34,90, handed down in damaged form, probably refers to him and to the sculptor (S. [x]) with the same name of the 4th cent. BC. It can be proved that S. created the statue of Hercules Invictus Olivarius in Rome (CIL VI, 33936). OVvERBECK, Nr. 755, 766, 1149-1189 (S. [1]); Nr. 1159, 1175 (S. [2]); LipPOLD, 249-254; P.E. ARIAS, s.v. S. 1 (=S. [x]), EAA 7, 1966, 364-369; M. ZuFFA, s.v. S. 2 (=S. [2]), EAA 7, 1966, 369; F. COARELLI, Classe dirigente romana

e arti figurative, in: Dialoghi di archeologia 4/5, 1970/71, 241-265 (on S. [2]); P.MINGAZZINI, Sui quattro scultori di nome Scopas, in: RIA 18, 1971, 69-90; P. W. LEHMANN, S. in Samothrace, 1973; A.F. SrEwartT, S. of Paros, 1977; A. STEWART, S. in Malibu, 1982; L. Topisco, Scultura greca del IV secolo, 1993, 79-88; W. GEOMINY, s.v. S., EAA 2. Suppl. 5, 1997, 314-316; B.S. RipGway, Fourth-Century Styles in Greek Sculpture, 1997, 251258.

RN.

[3] Son of Sosandrus, from Trichonium. In 224/3 BC he was grammateus of the Aetolian League (— Aetolians),

in 220/19, as stratégos he planned and led the war against the Hellenic League, in 2412/1, again as strategos, he sought alliance with Rome against Philippus [7]. In 205/4, as stratégos with > Dorimachus, with whom he was closely associated throughout his career, S. was commissioned to enact laws in a debt crisis. The attempt failed and S. fled to Egypt, where he attained high military rank. In 202 or 201 he recruited and commanded an army consisting at least partially of Aetolians for Ptolemy [8] V. In the winter of 201/o he regained the regions that had fallen to Antiochus [5] III, but in 200 lost the battle of Paneion, was besieged in Sidon until mid 199, then once again enlisted Aetolians, but in 198 was taken to court in Alexandria [1] by Aristomenes [2]; after the trial he committed suicide or was poisoned (Pol. 18,53 f.). His image has been distorted by Polybius (e.g. 13,2; 18,55,1) and political misfortune. J.D. GraInceER, The League of the Aetolians, 1999, 583; Id., Aitolian Prosopographical Studies, 2000, 30 f.; 298 f.;

W.Huss, Agypten in hellenistischer Zeit, 2001, 489 f.; 502 f.

W.A.

[4] Gem cutter, signed a yellow zircon (now in Leipzig) with the portrait of a young Roman, whose ‘fluffy hair’ is taken as an indication of a dating of around the mid rst cent. BC. The inscription S. on a carneole in Florence (AM) is not a signature, but refers to the fact that the picture of the naked ephebe was cut after a statue by the sculptor > Scopas [2]. + Gem cutting ZAZOFF, AG, 285 note 109, table 79,9.

S.MI.

[5] Right-hand tributary of the > Sangarius (Plin. HN 5,149, MSS also Scopius), modern Aladag Cayi. On its lower reaches lay > Iuliupolis, which Justinian [1] had

Iolr

102

protected by means of hydraulic engineering (Procop.

Scorpion

Aed. 5,4,5 f.).

[1] see > Arachnids [2] (scorpio) s. > Catapult C.

BELKE, 226; W.RuGgE, s.v. S. (4), RE 3 A, 579.

K.ST.

Scopelianus (Zxomehavoc; Skopeliands). Sophist from ~» Clazomenae, active c. 80-115 AD. According to Philostr. VS 1,21,514, our only source, S. was taught by + Nicetes [2], presumably in Smyrna where S. too taught (his pupils included > Polemon) and declaimed. Renowned especially for subjects drawn from the ~ Persian Wars, S. had a vigorous style (apparent also in his epic Tvyavtia (Gigantia), criticised as ‘dithyrambic’. Like his ancestors he was high priest of the province of Asia (Gexegevc/archiereus). Often an envoy to emperors, c. 92 AD he successfully opposed Domitian’s edict halving Asia’s viticulture. Admired and rewarded by > Herodes [16] while visiting Athens (c. 315?) Before 117, S. was already too old to be Smyrna’ s envoy to the emperor Traianus (Philostr. VS 1,21, 514-521; 1,255,536).

— Philostratus [5-8]; > Second Sophistic.

E.BO.

SCREW

Scotti (Scoti, ‘Scots’). A Celtic people — wild and bellicose according to Roman reports — which originally settled

in the

north

of — Hibernia

(Ireland)

(Oros.

1,2,81 f.). In the late 4th cent. AD, groups of them ferried

across

to

> Britannia

(Amm.

18,2,3;

26,4,5;

27,8,1; 29,4,7). The S. had been Christianised before

AD 431 in Hibernia by the deacon Palladius (Prosp. 1301) and came to develop a very active monastery culture. G. and A. RitcuiE, Scotland, 1985.

Scotussa (Zxototooa/Skotoussa). City in Pelasgiotis in

Thessaly, about ern Skototssa. tested by finds, first period of population was

20 km to the west of > Pherae at mod(earlier Supli; - Cynoscephalae). Atremains and myth as very ancient, its prosperity came to an end when the massacred by Alexander [15] of Pherae

in 367 BC (Diod. 15,75,1; Paus. 6,5,2 f.). S. was not

Scopelus

(Zxdxeh0c;

Skdpelos).

Foothills

of the

insignificant under Macedonian rule (Pol. 18,20,2-6;

Amanus between Rhosus and Seleucia [2] Pieria (Ptol.

Liv. 33,6,8), and in the Thessalian League after 197 (Liv. 36,9,3). After a last mention in connection with

5,15,2) with the cape Ra’s al-Hinzir. It formed the natural boundary, and in Late Antiquity, also the political boundary between Syria and Cilicia; in the Middle Ages, there were Greek, Syrian, Armenian, and Latin

monasteries in this region. HILD/HELLENKEMPER, s. v. Ra’s al-Hinzir, s. v. Skopelos.

the Roman Civil War in 48 BC (Plut. Pompeius 68,3) Paus. loc.cit. describes S. as uninhabited. J.C. Decourt, La vallée de l’Enipeus en Thessalie, 1990, cf. Index; F.STAHLIN, s. v. S., RE 3 A, 613-617; Id., Das hellenische Thessalien, 1924, 109-111. HE.KR.

FH.

Scordisci. Celtic tribe with Illyrian and Thracian elements. They originally settled in the northern central Balkans (Str. 7,5,12) — the ‘Greater S.’ to the east of the — Noarus as far as the > Margus [1] (modern Morava),

and the ‘Lesser S.’ on the right bank of the latter. To the south the territory of the S. extended as far as the sources of the Margus. The precise boundaries of the tribal territory, however, are hard to ascertain; in the ist cent. BC its nucleus was at the confluence of the Savus and the Danube. About the beginning of the 3rd cent. BC the S. and other Celtic tribes invaded Greece (Iust. 32,3,6). From the middle of the 2nd cent. BC there were continual conflicts with the Romans; the S. were heavily defeated several times and finally in 88 BC almost completely wiped out (App. Ill. 13). The rest were exposed to pressure from the > Daci under > Byrebista. Ultimately the S. were subjugated in 15 BC (Eus. in Jer. Chron. 2,133). In the Imperial Period the S. settled in Pannonia inferior, Moesia superior and Dalmatia, namely in civitas Scordiscorum (in Pannonia), civitas Celegerorum (in Moesia) and civitas Dindarorum (in Dalmatia). G. ALFOLDY,

Bevélkerung der romischen Provinz Dal-

matien, 1965, 55 f.; J.WiLKes, The Illyrians, 1992, 201;

TIR L 34 Budapest, 1968, 100; TIR L 33,1961, 65.

J.BU.

Screw. The screw appears among the five simple mechanical instruments listed in the Mechanics of + Hero I of Alexandria (1st cent. AD), next to the rotating axle, lever, pulley and wedge (Hero, Méchanika 2,5). It is not mentioned either in the description of surgical instruments in Hippocrates (Hippoc. Peri agm6n 31) or in Aristotelian mechanics. Since there is no indication of the use of the screw before > Archimedes [1], it can be considered one of the most significant technical inventions of the Hellenistic period. It appears that the principle of the screw was first used for raising water; to this end, Archimedes constructed an apparatus consisting of a long round tree trunk around which willow rods were helically wound and fixed. By covering these with thin wooden panels and waterproofing them, chambers were created in which water could be raised by turning the screw, which would be installed at a low angle. Archimedean screws were initially employed in Egypt for irrigation, but their use soon spread; in the mines of Spain they were used for drainage (Diod. 1,34,2; 5,37,33 cf. Str. 32593 171,30).

The development of a screw as part of a new type of device seems to have occured in the late 3rd cent. BC; in his work on siege engines, > Biton describes a sambyké (drawbridge; — Siegecraft) constructed by Damius, in

SCREW

104

103

which a ladder is raised by means of a vertical screw in such a way that soldiers were able to climb the walls of the city under siege. Yet this construction exhibits such weaknesses that it was probably never deployed (Biton

II. SCRIBAE OF THE ROMAN STATE

For — agriculture — especially viticulture and olive oil production — the invention of the screw had outstanding significance, inasmuch as > presses could be significantly improved by incorporating a screw. There were two forms of screw press: in the first the screw was combined with a long press-beam; in the second type, turning the screw exerted pressure directly (Vitr. 6,6,3;

S. occupied the highest rank among the auxiliary personnel (— Apparitores) of Roman magistrates (+ Magistratus). The most respected and best paid were the s. quaestorii, who presumably also worked for praetores, consules and censores. No later than the Imperial Period s. proper were distinguished from s. librarii, who were assigned to simpler tasks. They were (each?) organized into three decuriae (decuriae minores: ILS 1896) presided over by sexprimi (Cic. Nat. D. 3,74; ILS 1886; 1888; 1889), of whom the princeps (ILS 1429) was probably senior in rank. Two s. were at-

Plin. HN 18,317; Hero, Méchanika 3,15; 3,19; 3,20).A

tached to each provincial quaestor (Cic. Verr. 2,3,181-

requirement for constructing such presses was the ability to make an internal thread; there is a detailed pres-

however, had the actual business of their office carried

57,1—- 61,1).

entation of the process in Hero (Méchanika 3,21). The

direct screw press was in use by urban craftsmen as a cloth press as early as the rst cent. AD. Whereas the screws of presses were made of wood, those of > surgical instruments (with illustration; vaginal specula) were bronze, with the thread probably being cut on a lathe. In Late Antiquity screws were also used as fasteners for precious pieces of jewellery, such as gold bracelets. Besides texts, illustrations (wall paintings in Pompeii; late antique mosaics), remains of de-

vices or completely preserved and functional instruments as well as pieces of jewellery are important evidence of screws in Antiquity. -» Hero I; > Mechanics; -> Presses 1A.G. DracHMANN, The Mechanical Technology of Greek and Roman Antiquity, 1963 2 F.KIECcHLE, Sklavenarbeit und technischer Fortschritt im romischen Reich, 1969, 20-44 3 O.LENDLE, Texte und Untersuchungen zum technischen Bereich der antiken Poliorketik, 1983,

107-113. 4E.W. Marspen, Greek and Roman Artillery, Technical Treatises, 1971, 61-103. 5 W.O. MoELLER, The Wool Trade of Ancient Pompeii, 1976, 23 f. 6 D.PLANCcK

(ed.), Die Schraube

zwischen

Pracht. Das Gewinde in der Antike, 1995.

Macht

und

H.SCHN.

Scriba. In Rome, scribae (plural) were professional literates with higher qualifications; they were thus not simple copiers (librarii) but secretaries and accoun-

tants, in the early period even authors (Fest. p. 446). Scribae worked in both private and public spheres. I. SCRIBAE IN PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS II. SCRIBAE OF THE ROMAN STATE III. SCRIBAE OF ROMAN CITIES IV. OTHER SCRIBAE

I. SCRIBAE IN PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS Slaves who assisted their masters in writing tasks were generally called (servi) librarii (Plin. HN 7,91; ILS 7398; 7401) or amanuenses (Suet. Nero 44,1; ILS 7395). The expression s. librarius is only rarely attested (CIL VI 8881). Secretaries entrusted with more de-

manding tasks were called e.g. a commentariis or ab epistulis (Tac. Ann. 15,3 5,2), as were the similar (free or

freed) officials in the imperial household (e.g. ILS 16661671;

~ Commentariis, a; > Epistulis, ab).

184), the remainder held positions in Rome. Some, out by proxies (vicarii; > Vicarius) [1. 602; 2. 112]. Next in rank were the s. of the curule > aediles (s.

aedilicti: e.g. Liv. 30,39,7; Cic. Clu. 126; ILS 1885; 6954); they were organized in a decuria (also divided in two). There were further s. for the people’s tribunes (> Tribunus; Liv. 38,51,12; ILS 1885), the — aediles plebeii and cereales (ILS 1893; 503), and for officials of the Vigintivirate (+ Vigintiviri; ILS 1900; 1901) and for the curatores aquarum (- Cura [2]; Frontin. Aq. 100,1 f.). State scribes were predominantly freeborn; freed slaves are found almost exclusively in the decuriae minores. Many s. quaestorii were Roman knights or acquired their rank by means of the status and income of the office. Former s. are found in the militiae equestres and as ~ procuratores (CIL XIV 5340; ILS 1429; AE 1934, 107). In the Republican Period they rose in individual cases to senatorial offices (the first was Cn.

Flavius [I 2]; others [1. 583 f.]); however, they are more frequently found in municipal offices [4. ror]. III. SCRIBAE OF ROMAN CITIES S. likewise operated among municipal apparitores: there were the (generally) higher-ranking s. duumvirales (or s. of the IWiri), responsible for the city ~> aerarium and the archive (e.g. ILS 140,58), and the s. aedilicii (ILS 6460; more in [3. 278 note 5]). The organisation of city s. is particularly well-known for ~ Urso (> Lex Ursonensis; [5. chapter 62]); a detailed oath of office can be found in the > Lex Irnitana (chapter 73). City s. sometimes (e.g. ILS 6498) rose to become municipal magistrates. IV. OTHER SCRIBAE In addition there were s. of the Roman - tribus (e.g. ILS 6057). S. were also active in the imperial fleets (ILS 2888-2889), whereas the army only employed librarii. Municipal constitutions gave the impetus for the existence of s. in many ~ associations (see > Collegium), occasionally as many as six (ILS 7225), but in smaller collegia routinely probably only one. — Scribes 1 E.Bapian, The s. of the Roman Republic, in: Klio 71, 1989, 582-603 2 W.KuNKEL, Staatsordnung und

105

106 Staatspraxis, 1995,

110-119

3 LIEBENAM

4 N.PurcELL, The apparitores: a Study in Social Mobility, in: PBSR 51, 1983, 125-173. 5 M.H. CrRAwForp (ed.), Roman Statutes, Nr. 25.

W.K.

Scribes I. Mesopotamia

II. Ecypr

SCRIBES

literary specialization of various families of scholars in Assyria and Uruk (cf. [15. 242]: scribes of astronomical and astrological texts). On contracts, the scribe of the document traditionally appeared as its first witness; amongst such witnesses from the Old Babylonian period (18th/1r7th cents. BC) are also female scribes [28].

III. GREECE AND

ROME I. MESOPOTAMIA

A. SCRIBES AND SCHOOLS B. SCRIBAL TRAINING C. SCHOOL LITERATURE D. SCHOOLS

A. SCRIBES AND SCHOOLS In the course of the long history of Mesopotamian cuneiform culture from about 3200 BC to the end of the rst millennium BC, scribes and schools undoubtedly underwent more changes than the continuity of terminology seems to indicate. At the beginning of the 3rd millennium, when cuneiform — writing had already been used for more than two centuries, the art of writing itself had not yet become a profession in its own rights. This is evident from texts dating back to the 27th cent. BC: the colophons name as the author the highest ranking administrator of a temple complex (sanga). The cuneiform sign for sanga also stands for the verb Sid (‘to count, to calculate’); on the one hand, this points to the main area of activity of a sanga, on the other hand, it indicates the close link of early Mesopotamian writing with accounting and numeracy. In addition to the names of the scribes, the colophons also list the names of other people whose involvement in the work or record is not clear, including an um.mi.a ‘technician’ (perhaps, as in later records, to be taken as a reference to learning and erudition). From about the middle of the 3rd millennium BC, probably in the course of increasing professional specialization, the term dub.sar appears, by then the standard reference to scribes [22], later adopted in > Akkadian as tupSsarru. In the 1st millennium BC, the logogram sanga/sid was used archaistically in place of the Akkadian tupsarru. At about the same time (from the 6th cent. BC), sepiru was used to denote the scribes of documents written in alphabetic script (mainly on leather). Images of scribes are found in the glyptics of the Late Uruk period (end of the 4th millennium BC) [17. 23 5245], and later on orthostat reliefs of the Neo-Assyrian period (7th cent. BC) [1. 36]. Scribes were a social group with a distinct class consciousness: in the 3rd millennium BC, the goddess Nisaba was their patron, later replaced by > Nabi [15.242]. Often, as e.g. in seal inscriptions from the 21st cent. BC, dub.sar, ‘scribe’, was not used to describe a profession, but a level of education (similar to ‘academic’ or ‘graduate’)[14. 62; 18. 229]. The seals with their information on filiation and profession make it possible to trace scribal careers within families over many generations. For the rst millennium BC, colophons enable us to trace family connections, interests or

B. SCRIBAL TRAINING Most information about the institution of schools is found in literary works of the Old Babylonian period. For the older periods, finds of vocabulary lists and exercises by scribes on small, often lentil shaped clay tablets (school tablets) indirectly confirm the existence of schools. The teacher would write a short text on one side of the tablet, which the pupil had to copy on the other side. In the schools, students were taught > cuneiform script and all the knowledge required by professional scribes. With > Sumerian as a spoken language increasingly replaced by > Akkadian from the early 2nd millennium BC onwards, the learning of Sumerian took on a special significance: “What kind of a scribe is a scribe who does not know Sumerian?” [19. 161]. As

Akkadian was written in syllabic spelling, a repertoire of about 80 signs was sufficient for normal purposes, thus also enabling people who were not professional scribes to write in Akkadian — e.g. the Assyrian merchants who maintained trade colonies in Anatolia in the 2oth/1 8th cents. BC (> Kanesh; cf. also [28]). Due to the special significance given to Sumerian in the training of scribes, at least a small part of Sumerian literature has survived — those examples which teachers selected for their curriculum according to their own criteria (moral, historical or religious values) and which

they had pupils copy. The aim of this education was not only to convey intellectual knowledge, but also moral values (nam.lu.u,,.lu = humanitas) [26. 25-27]. Because a large part of the teaching was oral and much material learnt by heart, much has been lost forever. Only those items included in the written part of the curriculum have survived. The most important evidence documenting scribal training are the lexical — lists [2], standardized even from very early on, which ordered characters/ words according to form and meaning; earliest such finds date back to the Late Uruk period (end of the 4th millennium BC) [8]. Some lists, whose compositional systematics remain unattainable, may have been based on canonical sample texts. This genre was particular wide-spread in the 2nd millennium BC; a very small number of these compositions are clearly identifiable as spelling books or didactic aids. Training tablets for learning the characters of the script consist of a list of simple syllabic signs along the lines of TU-TA-TI, etc.; in addition, there were also SumerianAkkadian primers (lists of words) to learn the Sumerian vocabulary [6. 1-3; 22. 2-5]. C. SCHOOL LITERATURE Despite the changes throughout Mesopotamian political and social history, school education remained

SCRIBES

107

surprisingly uniform. It is likely that in the course of the spread of cuneiform script from the mid—3rd millennium onwards, fundamental texts used in education and teaching methods also reached numerous regions outside of Mesopotamia, see [2; 13]; for example, the list of professions and official functions was known in -» Ebla (in northern Syria) as early as the 24th cent. BC, where it was excerpted as a kind of sign primer for use in elementary education. School as an institution (Sumerian é.dub.ba.a ‘house

of tablets’) can only be documented from the 21st cent. BC. Sulgi, a ruler of the Third Dynasty of Ur, claimed to have founded the school of > Nippur [10]. Mesopotamian schools created their own literature: a satirical story from the Old Babylonian period (18th cent. BC) [13] and dialogues between students provide an insight into daily life in an é.dub.ba.a (such as three days off a month plus three religious festivals) and the curriculum (writing and learning by heart; the order in which material was taught: lists of signs, Sumerian-Akkadian vocabulary lists, grammatical paradigms, proper names, numbers and metrological units, mathematical problem texts [11], model contracts and standard letters, etc. [15. 243]). Itis likely that the Old Babylonian pupil dialogues paint a somewhat idealized image of the Mesopotamian school. As indicated by the terminology, schools seem to have been structured on a family model: ad.da/dumu é.dub.ba.a, ‘father/ son of the é.dub.ba.a’ and Ses.gal ‘big brother’ (= assistant teacher) for more advanced pupils. There were moments of unruliness and rebellion in an é.dub.ba.a:: a Sumerian school satire [20] tells of a father desperately trying to convince his lazy son that learning the trade of a scribe was worthwhile. Parents belonging to the urban elite were keen to have their sons trained as scribes.

D. SCHOOLS Teaching took place in dedicated buildings, but it is rarely possible to identify schools as such from their archaeology. However, finds such as in > Ur [4. 420432, 482-486] or > Sippar [26. 6] suggest that many scribes were trained within the family or as apprentices in an official body, where they often only learned the basic minimum required for their profession. It is possible that the actual é.dub.ba.a was closely associated with the palace [26. ro]. + Writing; > Writing materials 1R.D.

Barnett,

2 G.BECKMAN,

Assyrische

Mesopotamians

Palastreliefs,

and

1959

Mesopotamian

Learning at HattusSa, in: JCS 35, 1983, 97-113 3 J.Botréro, Mesopotamie. L’écriture, la raison et les dieux, 1987, 75-130 4D.CuHarpi, Le clergé d’Ur, 1986, 420-432, 482-486 5M.Crivit, Sur les ‘livres d’écolier’ a l’@poque paléo-babylonienne, in: J.-M.DvuRAND (ed.), Miscellanea Babylonica. FS M. Birot, 1985, 67-78 61d., Bilingual Education, in: S$.Maut (ed.), tikip santakki. FS R. Borger, 1998, 1-7 7 J.-J. GLASSNER, L’écriture sumérienne: Invention et premiers usages, in:

Rey. européenne des sciences sociales 36, 1998, 33-45

108

8 J.Goopy, What’s in a List?, in: Id. (ed.), The Domestication of the Savage Mind, 1977, 74-111 9Id., The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society, 1986 10 W. W. Hao, Nippur Originals, in: H. BEHRENS et al.

(ed.), DUMU-E,-DUB-BA-A. FS A. Sjoberg, 1989, 237247. 11J.H@yrup, Mathematics and Early State Formation (Filosofi og Videnskabsteori pa Roskilde Universiteitscenter, 3rd series, no. 2), 1991

12 H. KLENGEL,

Zur Rezeption der mesopotamischen Keilschrift im hethitischen Anatolien, in: 34‘ International Assyriology Congress (Istanbul 1987), 1998, 333-339 13S.N. KraMER, Schooldays, in: Journ. of the American Oriental Soc. 69,1949, 199-215 14 P.MICHALOwSKI, Charisma and Control: On Continuity and Change in Early Mesopotamian Bureaucratic Systems, in: McG. GiBson,

R.D.Bices

(ed.), Power

and Propaganda.

Aspects of

Bureaucracy in the Ancient Near East, 1987, 55-68 15 A.L. OPPENHEIM, The Scribes, in: Id., Ancient Mesopotamia, *1977, 235-249 16 G. PETTINATO, Testi

Monolingui della Biblioteca L. 2796, 1981 17 H. Pirrmann, Pictures of an Administration: the Late Uruk Scribe at Work, in: M. FRANGIPANE (ed.), Between the Rivers and over the Mountains. FS A. Palmieri, 1993, 235-245 18 W.SALLABERGER, A. WESTENHOLZ, Mesopotamien. Akkad-Zeit und Ur II]I-Zeit, 1999 19 A.Sj6BERG, The Old Babylonian Eduba, in: Assyriological Stud. 20, 1976, 159-179 201d., Der Vater und sein mifSratener Sohn, in: JCS 25, 1973, 105-169 211d.,

CBS 11319+. An Old Babylonian Schooltext from Nippur, in: ZA 83, 1993, I-21, esp. 2-5

22 M.TAnrReT, Les

tablettes scholaires découvertes a Tell ed Dér, in: Akkadica 27,1982, 46-49 23 N. VELDHUIS, Sumerian Proverbs in Their Curricular Context, in: Journ. of the American Oriental Soc. 120, 2000, 383-399 24 G. VisicaTo, The

Power and the Writing. The Early Scribes of Mesopotamia, 2000 25 K. VoLK, Methoden altmesopotamischer Erziehung, in: Saeculum 47, 1996, 178-216 26 Id., Edubba’a und Edubba’a-Literatur, in: ZA 90, 2000, I-30

27 H.WaETzo_pT,

Das

Schreiberwesen

in Mesopota-

mien, Heidelberg 1974 (unpublished habilitation thesis)

28 C.WiLckeE, Wer las und schrieb in Babylonien und Assyrien?, 2000. AN.CA. I]. EGYPT

A. AREAS OF ACTIVITY

B. TRAINING

C. DIVINE

PATRONAGE

A. AREAS OF ACTIVITY Throughout all periods of Pharaonic history, scribes constituted the leading social group in society; access to this elite was exclusively defined by the ability to read and write. In their own view, scribes considered themselves as ‘supervisors’ of all other professions. While in the Early Period (around 3000 BC) they were still predominantly entrusted with providing written records of administrative processes, the duties of scribes expanded in the course of the Old Kingdom to include the writing of theological treatises (e.g. royal pyramid texts from the sth Dynasty onwards; > Funerary literature) as well as medical and magical treatises, and later from the Middle Kingdom onwards (around 2000 BC) also the writing of literary texts. Their main field of activity, however, remained the administration of the country.

109

110

In addition to its own central administration, the royal court maintained offices in all of the provinces, where document scribes oversaw the running and taxation of the state-owned estates. Legal cases also required certification in writing, and after the king, the vizier was the highest judge and head of the administration. There were no free lance scribes; all office holders were public servants. It is estimated that in the population as a whole the percentage of those able to read and write will not have exceeded 1% in the Old Kingdom, and is likely only to have been insignificantly higher in subsequent epochs [1; 2]. For the Ramesside period (13061070 BC), there is evidence of a small number of women who are able to read and write, but without any professionalization.

office of scribe also demanded knowledge of standardized letter forms and basic mathematics in order to document economic transactions. In the New Kingdom, knowledge of foreign languages such as > Cana-

B. TRAINING Pupils practiced mainly on freely available writing material such as ostraka (fragments of pottery or limestone; > ostrakon), and only after achieving a certain level of expertise were they allowed to write on the comparatively expensive > papyrus. In addition, wooden tablets were used, and also leather for those texts that were considered particularly precious. The earliest mention of a school in the stricter sense (Egyptian ‘t-sb3w, ‘class room’) is found in the autobiography of the provincial ruler Kheti of Assiut from the gth/roth Dynasty (22nd cent. BC). After that, inscriptions and/or archaeology confirm the existence of such an institution sporadically, mainly in temples. However, it remains unclear to what extent its attendance was obligatory to become a scribe. Lessons took place in the mornings, as indicated by a reference in the Teachings of Kheti from the 12th Dynasty (1991-1786). The famulus system, assumed to have applied even during the Old Kingdom, seems to have been the rule throughout: a father would teach his son to read and write; however, it is possible that the terms ‘father’ and ‘son’ in this context did not necessarily indicate a family relationship, but that they were used fictitiously to describe the relation between teacher and pupil. The office of scribe was hereditary. Between the Middle Kingdom and the New Kingdom, this succession was frequently referred to as the ‘staff of old age’. At times it was also possible for a scribe to train the son of a colleague and vice versa (Ramesside period). There is no evidence of professional teachers — training was more by the way of practical work experience, and a pupil was also his master’s assistant. The duration of the training is not known; references to ’4 years’may have applied to basic training (priest Bakenkhons r9th Dyn.; 1306-1186). It is likely that professional specialization may have required further years of intensive studies. Evidence of exams only dates back to the Hellenistic-Roman period, in which future ~ priests had to demonstrate their knowledge of > hieroglyphs and + Demotic in addition to the by then antiquated — Hieratic. Further to mastery of the Hieratic cursive (from the 7th cent. BC also of Demotic), the

SCRIBES

anite and > Akkadian (s. > Amarna Letters) was also required, in order to document foreign products, country and personal names in a syllabic spelling specially developed for that purpose. The study of Near Eastern geography and topography was important to scribes dealing with military affairs. Historiography mainly consisted of the chronological listing of the names of past kings and the composition of corresponding courtly narratives. The purpose of keeping annals was to archive names and events at court and did not seem to have been part of the standard curriculum. The whole-word method was at the centre of learning to write; lists of signs with information regarding their meaning are extant from the Roman period. These lists often have an almost alphabetical order, based on the very similar order of the > Ancient Southern Arabian (Minaean) alphabet [4; 5]. It is not known whether and to what extent they were used in the actual teaching of writing. The native language was taught with the aid of grammatical paradigms (such as personal suffixes and their order), which expanded in Demotic to systematic tables of prefix and suffix conjugations (with verbs in the infinitive and stative). From the New Kingdom on, ‘classical’ literary works from the Middle Kingdom became required reading and were copied as part of the educational canon. Furthermore, translations of Middle Egyptian texts into Late Egyptian or Demotic and their interpretation became part of the curriculum in the post-Ramesside period, particularly for priests. The mastery of the hieroglyphic monumental script and the production of the corresponding models on papyrus was probably restricted to a small group within the scribal profession. Lesson texts were written down as dictated by the teacher, from memory or directly copied from a model document. This was followed by supralinear or sublinear corrections; whether by the teacher or by the pupils themselves is impossible to determine. Learning by heart played an important role. Reading was always reading aloud. For exercises in literary writing, the daily quota in the Ramesside period (1306-1070 BC) was ‘a chapter a day’. Punishment for lack of diligence — such as beatings or arrest in the (foot)stocks — were commonplace. The ‘House of Life’ or scriptorium of the temples served as the workshop for theologians, mythologists, physicians, magicians, mathematicians, astronomers and > onomastics.

C. DIVINE PATRONAGE Patron god of scribes was > Thot, depicted either as a baboon, ibis or a hybrid, who held the scribal office in the world of the gods. He was responsible for mathematics and for calculating the phases of the moon. His female counterpart was Seshat, the goddess of writing. Quasi-divine status was bestowed on scribes in the serv-

SCRIBES

Te

ice of the king, such as Imhotep (— Imuthes [2]) from the 3rd Dynasty (2628-2575), in the Greek period equated to > Asclepius, or Amenophis, son of Hapu, the main royal architect of the 18th Dynasty (15061306); prayers were offered to them for assistance in professional matters and matters of everyday life. 1J.R. Barnes, Literacy and Ancient Egyptian Society, Man 18 no. 3, 1983, 572-599 21d., C.J. Eyre, Four Notes on Literacy, in: Gottinger Miszellen 61, 1983, 6596 3 H.BRuUNNER, Altagyptische Erziehung, *1991 4 J.F. Quack, Agyptisches und Siidarabisches Alphabet, in: Rev. d’Egyptologie 44, 1993, 141-151 5 Id., Notwendige Korrekturen, in: Rev. d’Egyptologie 45, 1994,

197.

6 A.SCHLOTT, Schrift und Schreiber im Alten Agyp-

ten, 1989, esp.ch. II 7 J. Tarr, Aspects of Demotic Education, in: B. KRAMER (ed.), Akten des 21. Internationalen Papyrologenkongresses (Berlin 1995), vol. 2, 1997, 931-

938. III. GREECE AND ROME

Professional scribes were required in three main areas: a) as self-employed service providers for illiterates; b) prior to the invention of the printing press as producers of books for the book trade; c) as secretaries in the private and public sector, with the scope of their duties frequently far exceeding mere recording in writing.

A. LITERACY AND PROFESSIONAL SCRIBES B. BOOK TRADE C. PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS D. PUBLIC SECTOR

A. LITERACY AND PROFESSIONAL SCRIBES In order to assess how frequently the services of professional scribes had been required in Graeco-Roman antiquity, it is essential to examine the degree of literacy in the society in question; however, this is controversial amongst scholars. While Harris [2] has a very low estimate for the percentage of the population in classical Athens who were able to write, the assessment of others

is far more positive. Images of writing and reading are found on vases from the sth cent. BC (e.g. on a bowl by Duris [2], c.f. [1. 24]). References in classical literature point to a thriving school system (e.g. Hdt. 6,27,2: collapse of an elementary school on Chios just when children were learning their letters — grémmata) and in the Old Comedy, illiteracy was a cause for derision. In Plato’s view, > paideia also included writing and reading (grammata), but the reading matter was also to be learned by heart, thus raising the question whether the main purpose of books might not have been that of an aide-mémoire (PI. Prt. 325c ff.). Even the wide spread of public inscriptions does not necessarily presuppose that everyone was able to read them ([5] points to the memorial-representative character of polis inscriptions). Similarly problematic is the interpretation of +> ostrakismOs (or > petalismos, its equivalent in Syracuse): if the presumption hitherto had been that the existence of such an institution presumed an at least rudimentary ability of citizens to write, this assumption has been considerably shaken by the realization that often a

Ii2

whole series of ostraka seem to have been written by the same hand — presumably as an act of favour. This is further supported by an anecdote (Ael. VH 13,38) of + Aristides [1] who was asked by a fellow citizen to inscribe his own name, i.e. Aristides, on an ostrakon. The situation in Hellenistic Egypt was different; its sophisticated > bureaucracy in itself presupposed an increase in the production of written records. People there were often explicitly described as agrémmatoi (illiterate) or bradéés graphontes (literally ‘slow writers’, 1.e. barely able to write). However, this refers to an inability to express themselves in writing; in some instances it could be proved that a person described as agrammatos had knowledge of Demotic script [6]. For Egypt, too, a large number of professional scribes can be assumed. They were probably trained in the gymnasia (such as Demetrius and Heliodorus, pTebtunis II 316), particularly as the written form increasingly became the norm for contracts (and their safe deposit in archives; + Documents; > Contract) in the private sector as well. However, there is no reason to assume that these ser-

vices were only used by illiterate people. This practice continued into the Byzantine period: cf. Nov. 73,9 on the problems of finding someone able to provide a signature in rural areas. B. BOOK TRADE An operational book trade (+ Book C.), requiring the work of professional scribes, has been assumed for Athens at latest by the 4th cent. BC (— Copy). The earliest documented use of the term bibliopolés (‘bookseller’) is by the comic poet > Theopompus [2] (fr. 77 Kock); Xen. An. 7,5,12 ff. mentions the export of books by sea. Payment was on the basis of the number of lines (hence the practice of > stichometry) and quality of script (the > Edictum [3] Diocletiani also specified the maximum price to be charged for these services). However, the making of private copies (as a commissioned work?) remained a normal form of book production for private use. From Rome, some publishers are known by name: their most famous names include > Pomponius [I 5] Atticus (whose publications included Cicero’s works) with his workshop on the Quirinalis full of copyists (/ibrarii) and editors (anagnostae), the Sosius brothers (publishers of Horace), Tryphon (publisher of Martial and Quintilian). Book retailers are mentioned by Pliny the Younger (-> Plinius [2]), who expresses his pleasure at a bibliopola in Lugdunum stocking his books (Plin. Ep. 9,11,2), > Martialis [1] M. Valerius M. (Atrectus and Secundus; Mart. 1,23 I,117), > Gellius [6] A.G. (Gell. NA 2,33 5,43 9,43 18,4) and > Athenaeus [3] [3] of Naucratis. However, + libraries did not purchase books from professional retailers, but generally had their own > scriptorium. An extant imperial decree by Valens of AD 372 stipulates the employment of Greek and Latin scribes for the imperial library in Constantinople (Cod. Theod. 14,9,2).

113

114

C. PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS From a modern perspective, it is a startling observation that even highly educated and literate people made use of professional readers (anagnostés, Latin also lec-

scribes working for him. The > stragégos as head of the provincial administration was assisted by a basilikos grammateus (royal scribe); subordinated to him was the epistatés t6n phylakitén (chief of police) who in turn had the use of a grammateus ton phylakit6n (official police scribe). In the same way, the toparchés was assisted by a topogrammateus and the > komdrchés by a komogrammateus. It seems, though, that their most important qualification was knowledge of the administration; of some notoriety is the case of the komogrammateus Petaus (2nd cent. AD) whose own ability to write was rudimentary and who judged it sufficient in the case of a colleague that he was able to provide a

tor, Nep. Att. 14,1; Cic. Att. 1,12,2) and scribes (mainly slaves or freedmen), and that writers often dictated their works (the German word dichten, ‘to write

poetry’, derived from the Latin dictare). Of > Euripides [1], for example, it is known that (in addition to an extensive private library) he also owned a slave by the name of Cephisophon who had been specially trained as ascribe, > Antigonus [2] Gonatas presented > Zeno [2] of Citium with a slave eis bibliographian (‘for writing books’, Diog. Laert. 7,36). Numerous references to the existence of full-time scribes in the households of the Roman elite are provided by Pliny the Younger. Ina letter to > Suetonius [2], he mentions that in future he would leave the recitation of his works to a slave (Plin. Ep. 9,34). However, Cicero remarks in his correspondence with Atticus that in contrast with his usual practice of writing private letters himself, he had dictated this particular one (Cic. Att. 2,23,1). It is known that both Caesar and - Origenes [2] (Euseb. Hist. eccl. 6,23,1) kept several stenographers (tachygraphoi or notarit) busy at the same time (> Tachygraphy), in addition to the bibliographoi who had to produce the final clean copies. D. PUBLIC SECTOR In the public sector, scribes were generally found in > chancelleries and archives (in contrast with modern practice, the two institutions cannot be clearly distinguished in Antiquity). Ancient Athens did not keep archives in the modern understanding; the closest to a central archive was the Metroon (a shrine to Cybele, which served asa state archive under the directorship of a public slave). The person in charge of the publication of decisions by both > boulé and > ekklésia was the grammateus, an annually elected secretary (or selected by lot; selection by lot presupposes an ability to write by all candidates). Terminology, however, was not consistent: grammateus was also used to describe a private secretary (Epicurus fr. 172) or copyist (Aristot. Rh. 1409a 20) (> grammateis). Public scribes (poinikastai, masters of the Phoenician technique) are mentioned for 500 BC, some of them even by name (honouring of a scribe by the name of Spensithius [9]), but there are no inscriptions of a type that would indicate wide-spread literacy (abecedaria, graffiti, etc.). Therefore, it is assumed that there was a professional guild of scribes with the exclusive ability to write. Ptolemaic Egypt with its highly developed bureaucracy naturally boasted a high number of specialized scribes. At the head of the royal chancellery was the epistolographos with responsibility for writing decrees, royal letters, etc., while the hypomnématographos was in charge of the ephémerides (official diaries / daily records) and dealt with submissions — in view of the considerable amount of work, it is assumed that he had

SCRIBONIA

signature.

In Rome, — scribae were used (scribes in private service or public administration); the book copyist, by

contrast, was known as librarius. Scribae as public scribes were in the top rank of > apparitores (as assistants to holders of public offices); the highest ranking amongst them were the scribes of the + aerarium, entrusted with cash management and bookkeeping. For the imperial chancelleries ever more new offices were created in the course of the Imperial period, and their work enjoyed increasing social standing: initially, the a > libellis (responsible for the processing of petitions) was a freedman, but after Hadrian, the position was exclusively reserved for equestrians; the regular office of the a > commentariis (minute secretary) has existed since the rule of > Claudius, III. Emperor [III 1], the ab ~ epistulis (in charge of the imperial correspondence) was still a slave under Augustus, but from Claudius (who had split the office into an ab epistulis Graecis and an ab epistulis Latinis)

a> freedman; however, starting

with Hadrian, the office was given to literary figures and equestrians. The requirement for holding such an office, though, went far beyond the mere ability to write; these were demanding administrative positions. + Communication; — Literacy/ Orality; — School; + Scriba; > Tabelliones 1 H. BLaNck, Das Buch in der Antike, 1992 2 W. Harris, Ancient Literacy, 1989

3 T.DoORANDI, Le

stylet et la tablette, 2001 4 H.HuNGer, Schreiben und Lesen in Byzanz, 1989 5 R.THOMAS, Literacy and Orality in Ancient Greece, 1992 6H.C. YourtiE, "“Ayeappatoc. An Aspect of Greek Society in Egypt, in: HSPh 75, 1971, 160-175 70O.MAZAL, Geschichte der Buchkultur, vol.1,1999 8 T.KLEBERG, Buchhandel und Verlagswesen in der Antike, 1967 9L.H. JEFFERY, A.Morpurco

Davies, Towmaotas and nowmdtewy, in:

Kadmos 9, 1970, 118-154.

VB.

Scribonia [1] Born c. 66 BC, daughter of L. Scribonius Libo, sister of L. Scribonius [I 7] Libo, cos. in 34. Her third marriage was to Octavianus (— Augustus; Tac. Ann. 2,27) in 40 BC, before that she was married to Cn. Cornelius {I 52] Lentulus Marcellinus, cos. 56, and P. Cornelius Scipio, the father of her son P. Cornelius Scipio (Suet. Aug. 62, but cf. the genealogy in [2], according to which S.’s second marriage was to P. Cornelius Scipio, cos.

SCRIBONIA

DES

116

suff. in 35, son of Lentulus). At the end of 39 Octavianus divorced S. — one day after she gave birth to their daughter Iulia [6] (Cass. Dio 48,34,3). When Augustus banished his daughter to the island of Pandateria in 2 BC, S. went with her (Cass. Dio 55,10; Vell. 2,100,5).

Sall. Hist. 3,48,10 M etal.). In the same year, he went to Macedonia where he remained until 73, conquering the region up to the lower Danube and earning a triumph

1 J. SCHEID, S. Caesaris et les Julio-Claudiens, in: MEFRA 87, 1975, 349-375 21d.,S. Caesaris et les Cornelii Lentuli, in: BCH 100, 1976, 485-491. CAH 10, 71996, Index s.v.; D. KrENAST, Augustus, 31999, Index s.v.; PIR § 220; VOGEL- WEIDEMANN, 157 0. 94, 238 n. 167.

[2] Daughter of M. Scribonius [II 4] Libo, granddaughter of Sex. Pompeius [I 5], wife of M. Licinius [II 9] Crassus Frugi, cos. in AD 27. Children of the marriage were M. Licinius [II 10] Crassus Frugi, cos. in 64, (L.) Licinius [I] rz] Crassus Scribonianus, L. Calpur-

nius [II 24] Piso Frugi Licinianus, born in AD 38 (Tac. Hist. 1,14), Licinia [9] Magna and another Licinia. PIR S 221; RAEPSAET-CHARLIER, 689.

ME.SCH.

Scribonianus. S. Camerinus belonged to the family of the Licinii, probably the son of Licinius [II 10] Crassus,

who was cos. in AD 64. S. was apparently killed along with his parents under Nero. Under Vitellius, a slave by the name of Geta claimed to be S. but was exposed and executed (Tac. Hist. 2,72). PIR* L 241.

W.E.

Scribonius. Name of a Roman plebeian family, probably from Caudium (CIL I* 1744 f.) and attested from the time of the 2nd Punic War. The branch of the Libones (S. [I 5-7; Il 4-7]) attained the consulship with S. [17] and was part of the Roman high nobility in the early Imperial period. The Curiones (S. [I 1-4]), prominent in the 2nd and rst cents. BC, disappeared with the Republic. I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD II. IMPERIAL PERIOD I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {I 1] S. Curio, C. As aedile in 196 BC, he built the Temple of Faunus on the Tiber Island. Praetor urbanus in 183 and the second plebeian to be elected > curio [2] maximus, in 174 (Liv. 41,21,9), winning this branch of the family its epithet. [I 2] S. Curio, C. Contemporary of C. Sempronius [I 11]

Gracchus, praetor c. 120 BC, renowned orator, defen-

ded Ser. Fulvius (=Ser. Fulvius [I 13] Flaccus?) against an accusation of incest (Rhet. Her. 1,80; Cic. Inv. 1,80; Cic. Brut. 124; Cic. De or. 2,98 et al.; ORF I* 173 f.) ina

speech which the rst cent. BC regarded as outmoded. [1 3] S. Curio, C. Son of S. [I 2], father of S. [I 4]. In spite of modest rhetorical talent, he began his career as a legal orator; tr. pl. in 90 BC. In 88 he went to war against Mithridates [6] VI with L. Cornelius [I 90] Sulla, enriching himself on his return through the > proscriptions (Cic. Att. 1,26,10). He was praetor by 80 at the latest and consul by 76. He opposed attempts to restore the rights of the people’s tribunate (Cic. Brut. 216-222;

(Sall. Hist. 2,80; 3,49-50 M; Liv. Per. 92; 95). In 66 he

supported the transfer of supreme command in the Mithridatic War to Pompey (Cic. Leg. Man. 68) and in 63 he demanded the harshest punishment for the Catilinarians

(Cic. Att. 12,21,1). Possibly censor in 61 (MRR 3,186), he surprisingly defended P. Clodius [I 4] in the Bona Dea scandal, provoking Cicero to a bout of invective (which was published without authorization) (In Clodium et Curionem: fr. 14,1-33 SCHOELL; Schol. Bobiensia 85-91 St.), authorship of which Cicero attempted to deny from exile (Cic. Att. 3,12,2; 3,15,3)-S. was reconciled with Cicero and, until his death in 53, he remained an opponent of Caesar’s, attacking him in an invective as late as 55 (Cic. Brut. 218 f.). ORF I* 297303. K-LE. [I 4] S. Curio, C. Born before 84 BC, the son of S. [I 3] was of the generation of barbatuli iuvenes (lit. ‘young men with foppish beards’, i.e. ‘fashionable youth’) [1; 4. 62 ff.]. In 61, as the leader of this group, he defended Clodius [I 4] (Cic. Att. 1,14,5) and became popular in 59 as an opponent of the triumviri (Cic. Att. 2,18,r). The attempt to neutralize S. through the — Vettius affair failed (Cic. Att. 2,24). Probably quaestor in Asia before 53 (Cic. Fam. 2,6,1; SEG 14,641), he thereafter honoured his late father with extravagant games for which he had two wooden theatres erected at Rome: pivotable on hinged points, they could either be turned away from each other or be linked into an amphitheatre (Plin. HN 36,116-120). In 52 S. married Clodius’ widow — Fulvia [2]; their son was murdered in 31 by Iulius Caesar Octavianus (> Augustus) (Cass. Dio 51,2,5). In

50 S.’ tribunate was primarily devoted to proposing anti-Pompeian, popular legislation (list: [1. 48 ff.]). Like Clodius before him (cf. [4]), S. sought in this way to build his own personal power base through the plebs and to force Pompey out of his alliance with Caesar. He therefore supported Caesar’s interests, working until the end of his term of office to prevent Caesar’s recall from Gaul and proposing instead a simultaneous renunciation of office. In December 50, he succeeded in eliciting a Senate decree to this effect (Plut. Pompeius 58; App. B Civ. 2,119), but the consul Claudius [I 8] Marcellus ignored it and assigned to Pompey the task of waging war on Caesar [2. 470-490; 3. 29 f.]. During the civil war, S. occupied Sicily on Caesar’s behalf, but, after early successes, was defeated in Africa by > Juba [x] and lost his life (Caes. B Civ. 2,23-43). Versatile and endowed with more political instinct than many of his contemporaries, S. was regarded by them as sinister, while those growing up later in the calm waters of the pax Augusta saw him as a fire-raiser and a hireling of Caesar’s (e.g. Vell. Pat. 2,48; Tac. Ann. 11,7; App. B Civ. 2,101 ff.). 1M.H. DeTTENHOFER, Perdita iuventus, 1992 2 GRUEN, Last Generation 3 K.RAaFLaus, Dignitatis contentio, 1974 4 W.W/ILL, Der romische Mob, rg99r.

J.BA.

LUZ

118

[I 5] Scribonius Libo, L. Praetor peregrinus in 204 BC. A command in Gaul at this time is not plausible (Liv. 29,11,11; 29,13,2; 30,1,7). The notion that he took up the case of the Romans captured at Cannae (see > Battlefields, Punic Wars) while people’s tribune in 216 is a mutation in the tradition and to be rejected (Liv. 22,61,7). In the same year, he was one of the > tresviri mensarii appointed because of the silver shortage (Liv. 23,21,6). His assignment and the duration of the office are unknown, as later anonymous evidence (Liv. 24,18,12; 26,36,8) cannot unreservedly be accepted as

referring to this collegium. + Punic Wars T.Scumirt, Hannibals Siegeszug, 1991, 256-269.

TAS.

[1 6] S. Libo, L. While people’s tribune in 149 BC, he ordered the repurchase of the Lusitanians enslaved by the praetor Ser. > Sulpicius [I ro] Galba and the latter’s punishment (Cic. Att. 12,5,3). K-LE. [I 7] S. Libo, L. Probably born in the 80s BC. In 56 (asa senator?) he agitated on behalf of Pompeius [I 3] (Cic. Fam. 1,1,3), and remained faithful to Pompeius’ family even in the civil wars. In 49 he was at first active in Italy (Florus 2,13,19; Cic. Att. 8,11B,2), then commanded a fleet in the Adriatic (Caes. B Civ. 3,5,3; 23,1-24,43 Cass. Dio 41,40,1 f.; 48,1-4). S. also had contacts on the opposing side, allowing him to work as a mediator (Caes. B Civ. 1,26; 3,15-17). By the end of 48, he was probably back at Rome where he devoted himself to literary work (Cic. Att. 13,30,2). In 44 he was again politically active, on behalf of his son-in-law Sex. Pompeius [I 5] (Cic. Att. 16,4,1). He was proscribed in 43 and fled to Pompeius [I 3]. Only when the latter began his war against Antonius [I 9] in Asia in 35 did he leave him. In Antonius’ retinue, S. was declared consul in 34 (CIL I? p. 66). He thereafter vanishes without trace. JBA.

Il. IMPERIAL PERIOD {fl 1] Usurper of unknown origin in the > regnum Bosporanum, probably a freedman. S. fomented unrest against Asander around 15 BC, driving him to commit suicide (Ps.-Lucian, Macr. 17). He pretended to be the grandson of Mithridates [6] VI and spread the rumour that > Augustus had made him ruler. He married + Dynamis, Asander’s widow (c. 14 BC). After Agrippa [1] had entrusted the Pontic King > Polemon [4] with S.’ removal, the Bosporans murdered him (Cass. Dio 54,24,2), probably with the help of Dynamis, to avoid war with Rome. V.F.

GaypuKevic,

Das

Bosporanische

Reich,

1971,

326 £.; S.Ju. SAPRYKIN, Pontijskoe carstvo, 1996, 314 f. Lv.B.

[fl 2] S. Aphrodisius. A freedman of Augustus’ second wife > Scribonia [1] and formerly slave of Horace’s [7] teacher — Orbilius. S. wrote on Latin orthography, attacking the work and character of his contemporary + Verrius Flaccus (Suet. Gram. 19).

SCRIBONIUS

R.A. KasTer (ed.), Suetonius, De Grammaticis et Rheto-

ribus, 1995, 203-205 (with transl. and comm.).

RAK.

[I 3] S. Largus. Author of Compositiones (book of recipes, AD 47/8), dedicated to the freedman C. Iulius [II 3,6] Callistus, secretary to the emperor Claudius [III 1]. Born around the time of Christ in North Africa or (more likely) Sicily, certainly bilingual (Latin and Greek), S. seems to have learned medicine from Sicilian physicians and —> Vettius Valens. Although S. was certainly present around the court of the Roman emperor, he was not his physician, although he did treat Callistus. The collection begins with remarks on pharmaceutical ethics, at a time when fakes were popular and when medicines composed of rare substances of all kinds were in circulation in large quantities. His 271 recipes are arranged in four groups: recipes arranged according to diseases, from head to toe (1-162); antidotes to vegetable and animal poisons, including preventative preparations (163-200); drugs used in surgery (201-242), and drugs against skin complaints (243, 247-254) and the ‘sacred fire’ (erysipelas; 246); malagmata (‘softening medicine’, 25 5-267) and acopa (‘soothing salves’, 268-271). The recipes arise both from the personal experience of S. and from various medical and non-medical sources. The pharmacological substances include 242 plants, 36 minerals and 27 animal substances, mostly from the Mediterranean region. — Galen cites recipes of S. in Greek, probably from another work which has not survived and which was known to him via Asclepiades [9] Pharmakion and Andromachus [5] the Younger. The Compositiones are the only Latin work of its kind until that of Marcellus [II 8] Empiricus, who adopted numerous recipes from it. The text was published in 1528 by Jean RUELLE from a MS which was later lost, but it has recently been possible to revise it thanks to the discovery of another MS. + Pharmacology B. BaLpwin, The Career and Works of S. L., in: RhM 135, 1992, 54-82; K.DEICHGRABER, Professio medici. Zum Vorwort des S.L., 1950; J.S. HAamiLton, S.L. on the Medical Profession, in: BHM 60, 1986, 209-216; F.E. KIND, s. v. S. (15) Largus, RE 2 A, 876-880; V. NuTTron, S.L., the Unknown Pharmacologist, in: Pharmaceutical Historian 25, 1995, 5-8; F.R1nNnE, Das Receptbuch des S. L., in: Kobert’s “Historische Studien” 5, 1896, 1-99;

W.ScHONACK, Die Rezepte des S. L., 1913; S.ScONoccHIA, Concordantiae Scribonianae, 1988. A.TO.

{i 4] L. (S.) Libo. Son of S. [I 7], the cos. of the same name of 34 BC. Married to Pompeia Magna, probably father of S. [II 5] and [II 6]. PIR? S. [II 5] L. S$. Libo. Probably son of S. [II 4]. Cos. ord. in AD 16. He may have been a brother of S. [II 6]. PIR? S. [II 6] M.S. Libo Drusus. Related to the house of the princeps via Scribonia [1], the sister of his grandfather S. [1 7] and second wife of Octavianus [1], and to Pompeius [I 3] via his mother (see S. [II 4]; Tac. Ann. 2,27,2).

SCRIBONIUS

119

Probably son of S. [II 4], presumably adopted by M. Livius [I 9] Drusus Libo (according to [1. 349 ff.] his son). While praetor in AD 16, S. was accused in the Senate by Fulcinius [II 4] Trio and Vibius Serenus of conspiring against > Tiberius and other principes civitatis. His connections with the most prominent families ensured the trial considerable political importance. On the second day of the trial (13 September AD 16: Sen. Ep. 70,10), S. committed suicide. The trial nonetheless continued. The accusers were rewarded with parts of S.’ estate and with the praetorship. Posthumous punishments were announced against him (Tac. Ann. 2,32; cf. [avez fn 4r-t91 89: 19m) 5PIRZS: 1 J.SCHEID, Scribonia Caesaris et les Julio-Claudiens, in: MEFRA 87, 1975, 349-375 F.FERNANDEZ, Das Senatus

2 W.Ecx, A.CABALLOS, consultum de Cn. Pisone

patre, 1996.

[II 7] (S.) Libo Frugi. Attested as a consular in AD 99 by Pliny (Epist. 3,9,33). Probably not a S., but more likely a Rupilius (cf. PIR* R p. 126). [II 8] S. Mathematicus i.e. the ‘Astrologer’. He prophesied to the infant > Tiberius that he would one day rule, but would bear no royal insignia (Suet. Tib. 14,2). {II 9] S. Proculus. Senator, killed in the curia by fellow

senators in AD 40 with the assent of Caligula (Cass. Dio

59,26,1-3). [fl 10] P. Sulpicius S. Proculus. Senator, probably son of S. {Il 9] and brother of S. [II 11]. In AD 58 he was sent to Puteoli with his brother to put down an urban revolt there with the support of a Praetorian cohort. After having been suffect consul either in 56 or only 60/1, he became commander of the army of Germania superior, while his brother commanded that of Germania inferior, probably until 66 or 67. Both were summoned to Greece by > Nerowhere they eventually committed suicide (Cass. Dio 63,17,3): supposedly, Paccius [1] Africanus had accused them (Tac. Hist. 4,41,3). Both brothers were famed for their concord and the similarity of

I20

archive or office (Plin. Ep. 7,27,14; 10,65,3) and, since

Diocletian (end of the 3rd cent. AD), specifically an office in the imperial court administration or in a civil administration or military authority outside the court with a large scope of files to manage in official correspondence. Oe II. BOOK CONTAINER The scrinium (or capsa) was a rectangular, though as a rule cylindrical, container, usually made of wood (beech: Plin. HN 16,229), with a lid, sometimes with a strap. It was used to transport and store documents and scrolls (to be distinguished from > armarium; cf. e.g. Jer. Commentaria in Mt. 3,21,21), for documents in public and private > archives (here, scrinium is often metonymic: Plin. Ep. 10,65,3; Gesta collationis Carthaginiensis anno 411 3,217; Fulg. Rusp. Ep. 15,18); in addition, it was part of the equipment of authors, who stored drafts and unpublished works in it (Mart. 1,3,2; 1,66,6; 4,3 3,1; Suet. Nero 47, etc.). The scrinium is thus closely associated with working as a writer, and appears in pictures and portraits of intellectuals and (in the Imperial era) government officials. In the age of papyrus scrolls, the scrinium in particular was the book container par excellence for storing scrolls in bookstores (Catull. 14,8; Stat. Silv. 4,9,21) and = libraries (Mart. 1,2,4; 6,64,10; 14,37, etc.). The transition from the > scroll to the - codex brought with it other types of storage paraphernalia (— arca, armarium, etc.); however, the term remained — at least, in refined usage — for any sort of book storage (cf. Historia Apollonii Regis Tyri 6, Red. A: “aperto scrinio codicum suorum”), for a book collection or a library (Luxorius, Anth. Lat. 289,2 R.; CLE r4r1,4).

+ Library; > Book; + Codex; > Scroll Tu. Birtu, Die Buchrolle in der Kunst, 1907, 248-255, 259-261; J.KOLLWITZ, s.v. Capsa, RAC 2, 891-893; A. Mau, s. v. Capsa, RE 3.2, 15533 E.SAGLIO, s. v. Capsa, in: DS I.2, 911-912; O. SEECK, s. v.S., RE2 A 1, 893-894.

their careers (Cass. Dio 63,17,3; Tac. Hist. 4,41,3). M.A. SPEIDEL, S. Proculus, in: ZPE 103, 1994, 209-214; Eck, Statthalter, 27; 125-128.

[II 11] P. Sulpicius S. Rufus. Brother of = S. [II ro] (see

him for further information). As legate of the army of Germania inferior, he had a large structure erected at + Colonia Agrippinensis (modern Cologne), perhaps the city wall. Eck, Statthalter,

125-128.

Scrinium I. MEANING

II. BOOK CONTAINER

III. CHANCEL-

LERY

I. MEANING

The etymology may be related to the Latin scribere, ‘to write’ [1; 2]: a closable Roman cupboard or a container for scrolls, letters, documents, etc., then also an

III. CHANCELLERY As administrative institutions, scrinia were primari-

ly offices in the imperial court chancellery (— magister officiorum) or the central fiscal authority (- comes sacrarum largitionum), but also large offices of the praefecture administration (— praefectus praetorio B.), the + magister militum or the > praefectus urbi; occasionally also in offices in lower levels of the Roman civil and military administration. The court chancellery (Not. Dign. Or. 19; Not. Dign. Occ. 17; Cod. Just. 12,19) had three offices which went back to the beginning of the Imperial era: the scrinium memoriae with 62 employees, the scrinium epistolarum with 34 and the scrinium libellorum with 34 (under the emperors Leo [4] and Iustinianus [1]; Cod. lust. 12,19,10); additionally in the east, a scrinium epistolarum Graecarum for Greek correspondence (Not. Dign. Or. 19) and sometimes a scrinium dispositionum for the more private dispositions of the emperor (Cod.

122

I21

lust. 12,19,1; 3; 4; 11), a scrinium actorum and a scri-

nium rei militaris (Cassiod. Var. 11,24). The high status of the employees is shown by considerable titular honours and privileges (Cod. Iust. 12,19). For the central fiscal administration (sacrae largitiones), 8 of 19 departments are expressly mentioned as scrinia (Cod. lust. 12,23,7), but all were probably considered scrinia. In the prefectures (e.g. for Africa at the time of Iustinianus: Cod. lust. 1,27,1), four numbered scrinia (primum to quartum) and 5 others with special assignments, each with 6-20 employees, are named. The allocation of tasks could follow ancient custom,

but frequently responded to special or changing requirements in government business; therefore, bureau names offer an indication, but not proof, of the areas of responsibility. The annual salaries of the scrinia employees ranged (e.g. in the prefecture administration) between 23 (once 46) solidi (> solidus) for the head of the bureau and 9 solidi for the lowest pay grade, and thus belonged in part to the “upper civil service”; however, they were far removed from the salaries of high dignitaries (e.g. — praefectus praetorio: 7,200

solidi).

~ Epistulis, ab; + Chancellery; > Libellis, a; > Memoriales 1 Lewis/SHorRT, s. v.s.

2 WALDE-HOFFMANN

2, 500.

Jones, LRE, 427 f., 459 f., 575-578; O. SEECK, s. v. S., RE II A, 893-903. C.G.

Scriptio continua see > Punctuation; > Orthography

Scriptio plena (‘full mode of writing’). Technical term for writing systems in which consonants and vowels both are represented by characters (as opposed to: scriptio defectiva, where only consonants are denoted). In Semitic linguistics in particular, plene writing refers to the writing of words with the inclusion of the usually omitted vowel letters, the so-called matres lectionis, while vowels otherwise were indicated only, if at all, by diacritical marks. In papyrology and codicology, scriptio plena refers to the unusual writing-out of normally abbreviated words. The term does not occur in epigraphy (despite the existence of identical phenomena). PKR. Scriptor see > Scribes; > Scriptorium Scriptores Historiae Augustae see — Historia Augusta

Scriptorium. The present-day use of the term scriptorium refers to the writing workshop for the production of books in the period prior to the invention of the printing press. For Antiquity, there is no evidence of the word scriptorium in this sense; the first record is Isid. Orig. 6,9,2 (in the sense of a writing stylus). However,

we know that ancient > libraries must have had such an establishment since the book supply for the library was

SCRIPTORIUM

not acquired from booksellers but was produced on site. In an anecdote transmitted by Galen, the state copy of the three great Greek tragedians had been lent to the + Mouseion in Alexandria for the production of a + copy in exchange for the exorbitant deposit of 15 talents. It was not returned, because keeping the original was preferred over receiving the refund (Gal. 17,1,607 KUHN). Furthermore, there is evidence in Eusebius (Vita Const. 4,36-57) that Constantine [1] I assigned calligraphers to produce MSS for the use in Christian liturgy upon the establishment of Constantinople as the imperial capital, and an edict by Valens governs the employment of — scribes for Greek and Latin texts at the imperial library there (AD 372; Cod. Theod. 14,9,2). In the Middle Ages, the connection between libraries and scriptoria remained intact. The main responsibility for book production, that is, the copying (and illustration) of > manuscripts (most often in the form of a ~ codex on > parchment) was held by the monasteries (beginning with + Cassiodorus’ Vivarium in Squillace, although no surviving MS can be traced to it securely) and thus by monastic scriptoria, who reached the height of their activities in the period between the 8th and the 12th cents. — the floor plan of St. Gall, for instance, shows a scriptorium on the ground floor with the library rooms directly above. Bishops’ sees also shared the responsibility (such as that of Hinkmar of Reims, 2nd half of the 9th cent.). Earlier centuries were less favourable for the production of copies and the transmission of texts: the largest part of the extant > palimpsests originated in the 7th and the early 8th cents., esp. from Luxeuil and Bobbio where, for instance, Cicero’s De re publica—an uncial codex from the 4th/5th cents. — was superscribed with texts by Augustine (Enarrationes in psalmos) (Cod. Vaticanus Lat. 5757). During the period of the Carolingian Renaissance (c. 780-late 9th cent.), a large number of codices were written in Caro-

lingian > minuscule (the earlier regional minuscule scripts such as the > Beneventana lost their significance). In the late Middle Ages, new writing centres emerged in towns and cities, esp. surrounding the cathedral schools, newly created universities and royal residences. The assignment of individual MSS to certain scriptoria based on characteristics in the script is an important component in the history of texts and their reception, and illuminates the paths of cultural exchange. In Byzantium, the connection between the library (such as that of the emperor or the patriarch) and the

scriptorium also remained untouched and is still documented for the period of > Constantine [9] VII Porphyrogennetos (mid—roth cent.). Here, extensive efforts were made to secure the literary heritage, esp. through the creation of epitomes. Monasteries, always founded with a library, were often in charge of book production in the Byzantine Empire as well, as in the example of Southern Italy. Particularly prominent was the Stoudios monastery in Constantinople itself (whose

SCRIPTORIUM

124

123

payment the lessee had to make for this particular trans-

abbot Theodore of Stoudios [759-826] went so far as to issue regulations regarding the scriptorium) and the Athos monasteries (e.g. Great Lavra). Secular literature, however, is rarely found there. While individual scribes such as Ephraim (mid-roth cent.) or Theophanes (Iviron monastery, early roth cent.) can be identified occasionally, the assignment of MSS is usually more difficult there compared to the West. This is due, on the one hand, to current research, and on the other hand, to the fact that the library holdings rarely remained in place, esp. after the conquest of Constantinople by the Turks and the final fall of the Byzantine Empire in 1453. Furthermore, we must assume that the work was occasionally carried out by teams gathered ad hoc so that we cannot always speak of an actual scriptorium with its own continuous writing tradition. In the 9th/roth cents., texts were re-written in > minuscule (developed from papyrus cursive) on a large scale; at first, the process was purely a matter of metacharakteérismos (transliteration) but soon it went hand in hand with philological revisions. Aside from the writing activities in libraries and monasteries, we also know of book production by intellectuals and philologists, usually for their own use; this activity has little to do with scriptoria. In contrast to the West, numerous autographs of authors are still extant for the Byzantine Empire, esp. of intellectuals and philologists such as the Homer commentator Eustathius [4] of Thessalonica, Demetrius [43] Triclinius or Maximos > Planudes. It is also worth mentioning that book production still continued in the scriptoria of Greek regions unoccupied by the Turks (e.g. Crete) even after the fall of Constantinople.

Scripulum (also scrupulum, ‘little stone’, from scrupus; Greek yoduna/grdmma, cf. English ‘scruple’). Roman unit of weight of "/24> uncia = */.88> libra [1] (‘pound’) = 1'137 g. The scripulum is probably the unit used for a number of central-Italian and Etruscan gold and silver coins. In Rome, the > quadrigatus, the gold oath-scene coins which accompanied it and the earliest > denarius with the associated Mars/eagle gold issue were based on the scripulum. The quadrigatus corresponded to 6 scripula, the denarius to 4, and the > sestertiusto 1 scripulum. Because of the popularity of this denomination and despite its only short period of minting, the latter became the unit of account. With the de facto devaluation of the denarius, which began already before 200 BC, the direct relationship between minted coins and the scripulum became lost. Nero’s denarius (of */9s of a Roman pound = 3 scripula), Diocletian’s argenteus which was derived from it and Constantine’s > solidus (of '/72 of aRoman pound = 4 scripula) were direct multiples of the scripulum, but these coins were not derived from the smaller scripulum, but from the larger pound. As a unit of area the scripulum (‘/.8s as; as = > iugerum) was equal to 8-76 m* = decempeda quadrata; as a unit of volume (as = > sextarius) 1-9 cm}; as a unit of length (Frontin. Aq. 22,3; 39-63) ‘/288 of the digitus (» Daktylos [1]) and of the quinaria (crosssection of a standard pipe).

+ Copy; > Book; > Library; + Manuscripts; > Philology; > Scribes; > Writing styles;

2 R. THOMSEN, 1K. REGLING, s. v. s., RE 2 A, 905-907 Early Roman Coinage, vol. 2, 1961, 272-277. DLK.

action, which was a kind of ‘allocation’ rather than a

private lease agreement. B. KUBLER, s. v. S., in: RE 2 A, 904 f.

Gs.

B. BiscHoFF, Palaographie des romischen Altertums und des abendlandischen MA, *1986. Engl. transl.: Latin palaeography: antiquity and the Middle Ages, D. 6 Croinin & D. Ganz, 1990.; L.REYNOLDS, N. WILSON, Scribes and Scholars, 71974; N. WILson, Medieval Greek Bookhands, 1973; H. HuNGeR, Schreiben und Lesen in Byzanz, 1989; G. CAVALLO (ed.), Libri e lettori nel mondo bizantino, 1982; Id. (ed.) Libri e lettori nel medioevo, *1983; D. HARLFINGER (ed.), Griechische Kodikologie und Text-

iiberlieferung, 1980; R. DEvREESSE, Introduction a l’étude des manuscrits grecs, 1954; J.IRIGOIN, Tradition et critique des textes grecs, 1997; J. DARROUZES, Littérature et histoire des textes byzantins, 1972. VB.

Scriptura (literally ‘that which is written down’), in the field of law, denoted all Roman > documents, and (as

literacy increased) from the Principate, but esp. in late antiquity, e.g. the > testament, the note of hand (> cheirographon), generally the > contract, but also a legal opinion or a legal ruling, provided that these were given in writing. In a narrower sense, probably arising from the fact that the Roman tax farmers (> publicant) ‘marked down’ transactions of relinquishment of public pasture to private (sub-)lessees, scriptura was the

Scroll (xbAwdeoc/kylindros, Lat. rotulus, volumen). Greek papyrus scrolls from Egypt, most in a fragmentary state, survive from as early as the late 4th cent. BC. It is uncertain to what extent the oldest scrolls were similar to the examples preserved from the Hellenistic period. Depictions on s5th-cent. BC vases show scrolls written parallel to the narrow side (Lat. technical term: transversa charta), thus differing from the standard type, in which the text was arranged parallel to the long side, along the entire length of the scroll, in columns (selis, Lat. pagina) succeeding each other at short distances; such scrolls do survive from the Hellenistic period. Since one can assume that the Egyptian scrolls of the Pharaonic period, technically highly developed, provided the model for Greek scrolls, the hypothesis gains credence that even in the 6th cent. BC, scrolls written in transversa charta (perhaps restricted to shorter texts) were just as much in use in Greece as longer scrolls with texts in successive columns; both types are well-attested in Pharaonic Egypt. The types of ancient volumina can be reconstructed, in spite of the sometimes highly fragmentary state of

E25

126

preservation, thanks to the great quantity of scrolls preserved from the 3rd cent. BC in the Graeco-Egyptian chora and in the so-called Villa dei Papiri at Herculaneum (> Herculanean papyri; in far lesser numbers also from other locations). Their manufacturing norms may have been set in an Alexandrian environment, in the context of a well-attested systematization of literary texts among publishers and librarians in Ptolemaic ~ Alexandria [1] (> library; > philology; > pinax [5]). The production characteristics of the oldest surviving Greek copies are largely the same as those of Pharaonic Egypt. However, the Greek scrolls are mostly much shorter (on the manufacture of papyrus scrolls, see + papyrus, with fig.). Only the side of the papyrus on which the fibres run horizontally was at first used for writing, which also is usually called recto, while verso generally denotes the side on which the fibres run vertically (> recto/verso). The flyleaf is called the protokollon. As the > scribe held his scroll on his knees and wrote on it, he let the written portion fall to the left-hand side. The name of the author, the title of the work and, for works of more than one book, the number of the book (sometimes also the volume number), were generally given at the end of the book scroll. In copies prepared by professional scribes, this was followed by a calculation of the line count (usually in Attic numerals) for the purposes of settlement ofthe bill. The copy was then rolled around a thin rod, the projecting end of which was called the omphalos (Lat. umbilicus). Sometimes, scrolls were tightly rolled around the top of the scroll itself, without any holder. The author and title of the text, hidden in the interior of the scroll, were repeated on a tag, the

of economy. Opisthographi in which writing continued on the verso side after the recto side was filled up are rarer (these were generally authors’ drafts or collections of materials). It may be assumed that the Latin book scroll at Rome did not differ in structure or technique from that of Greece. However, the mostly literary and iconographic evidence (> book; > codex; > papyrus) must be evaluated with caution; the original documents are too fragmentary for firm conclusions. Thanks to new finds, our knowledge of illustrated scrolls has increased. Greek materials (with close technical and functional correlation between text and illustration) has enabled researchers to reconstruct the beginnings of the illustrated book, to distinguish between various qualitative levels and to define precisely the structural elements of the arrangement of text and image in the scroll in relation to the actual reading text (> book illustration). On the basis of literary and iconographic evidence it can be shown how a scroll (with or without illustrations) was read (+ book). Only a few surviving scrolls have numbered ‘pages’ (kollemata; Lat. plagula, scheda, pagina) or individual columns. Generally, it seems that such aids were absent, for which reason it was probably an arduous task to return to a particular passage or to cite it directly. In place of papyrus, scrolls could also be made of + parchment. This was rare in antiquity, but usual from the early Middle Ages onwards (oldest example in the West: 7th cent.; in the East: 8th/9th cents.). Once the — codex finally displaced the scroll, the latter became confined to particular purposes (e.g. in liturgy), and was more common in the East than the West, usually

sillybos (Lat. titulus, index), and attached to the exterior (cf. e.g. Cic. Att. 4,8,2). Some of these ‘title tags’ of

written transversa charta (see above). With the exception of the so-called Rotulo di Giosué (Cod. Vaticanus

papyrus scrolls have survived. The norms introduced for scroll manufacture in the Hellenistic period remained essentially unchanged in the Roman period. They concerned esp. the length and size of the scroll, to which its format and height were presumably matched. The latter varied from 16-17 cm (exceptionally 12-13 cm) to 28-30 cm (rarely 34-35 cm or slightly more), while the length was seldom less than 2.5 m or greater than 12 m. This meant that an entire literary work — a play or a speech — could be contained in a single scroll of the customary size, that very short texts could be collected in a single scroll, and that particularly long texts were divided among several book scrolls. It is for the most part uncertain whether a scroll would contain just one book of an ancient author or a collection of his writings; how books were divided is also unclear. A normal book was a volumen written only on the

Palatinus Gr. 431, roth cent.), this was the type that remained in use in both the Greek and Roman Middle Ages, also for illustrated scrolls. For the storage of scrolls, see > papyrus. + Book; > Codex; > Papyrus; > Scribes; > Scrinium; + PAPYROLOGY

recto side. However, there are also scrolls that were also written on the verso side, so-called opisthographi (+ opisthographos): books made of reused material, where the reverse side of documents or other texts that had ceased to be of interest were written on for the sake

Aegyptus 63, 1983, 199-216; H.R. IMMERWAHR, Book Rolls on Attic Vases, in: CH. HENDERSON (ed.), Classical,

extended on to the adhesive strips (kolleseis). This side

SCROLL

M.L. BreRBRIER (ed.), Papyrus: Structure and Usage, 1986; A.BLANCHARD, Les papyrus littéraires grecs extraits

de cartonnages,

in: M.MaAntact,

P. MUNAFO

(ed.), Ancient and Medieval Book Materials and Techniques, 1993, 15-40; M. Capasso (ed.), Il rotolo librario: fabbricazione, restauro, organizzazione interna, 1994;

Id., Volumen. Aspetti della tipologia del rotolo librario antico, 1995; G. CAVALLO, Discorsi sul libro, in: G.CAMBIANO et al. (eds.), Lo spazio letterario della Grecia antica, vols. 3.1, 1994, 613-647; Id., Libri scritture scribi a Erco-

lano. Introduzione allo studio dei materiali greci, 1983; J.Cerny,

Paper

and

Books

in Ancient

Egypt,

1952;

N.HorsFa.t, The Origins of the Illustrated Book, in:

Medieval and Renaissance Studies in Honour of B. L. UIlmann, vol. 1, 1964, 17-48; W.A. JoHNsoNn, Column Layout in Oxyrhynchus Literary Papyri: Maas’s Law, Ruling and Alignment Dots, in: ZPE 96, 1993, 211-215;

SCROLL

naz,

N. Lewis, Papyrus in Classical Antiquity, 1974; M. ManFREDI, Opistografo, in: PdP 38, 1983, 44-54; I. C. SKEAT, The Length of Standard Papyrus Roll and the Cost-Advantage of the Codex, in: ZPE 37, 1980, 121-136; E.G. Turner, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World, *1987;

Id., Greek Papyri. An Introduction, *1980.

128 A.SpycketT, La statuaire du Proche-Orient Ancien, 1982;

J. BorKER-KLAnN, Altvorderasiatische Bildstelen und vergleichbare Felsreliefs, BaF 4, 1982; E.BRAUN-HOLZINGrER, Figiirliche Bronzen aus Mesopotamien, Prahistor. Bronzefunde, Abteilung I, Bd. 4, 1984. R.W.

GU.C. Il. GREECE AND

ROME

Sculpting, technique of

A. Basics

I. NEAR East

NIQUES, CONSERVATION

II. GREECE AND ROME

I. NEAR East The oldest examples of a developed sculptural technique in stone from the Ancient Near East are from the later 4th millennium BC (+ Uruk). The most important Clay investment mould Chaplets Clay core Armature

Gate system Wax funnel

Bronze funnel Vent

(2

B. MATERIALS

— relief (> stele, rock reliefs, > orthostats, > obelisks). The material was worked with metal tools and probably hard stone tools. Traces of tools are rarely preserved due to smoothing and polishing of the surface with abrasives. Surfaces could be shaped through the incision of details, > incrustation and coloured painting; the latter is especially demonstrated in the New Assyrian palace reliefs (— Architectural sculpture). Neo-Assyrian texts record the plating of free-standing stone sculpture with gold. ‘Sculptor’s models’ and certain forms of work organization (grid process, canon of proportions) are not definitely proven before the Achaemenid era, but must be assumed. Of the sculptural techniques in metal, a distinction must be made primarily between smithing, repoussé and casting techniques, which are known from the 4th millennium BC on. Early reliefs and free-standing sculptures were worked in sheet copper over a wooden core. Depictions on bronze reliefs were hammered from the reverse (repoussé), the details were chased from the front (> Balawat). Metal casting procedures were already extensively developed in the 2nd half of the 3rd millennium BC: casting in open forms, solid and hollow casting in lost mould or lost wax technique (cire perdue), where the size of the cast pieces presumes a major command of the material and technical experience (e.g. chaplets, core mounts and core ventilation). ~+ Bronze; > Gem cutting

TECH-

A. Basics

In Graeco-Roman > sculpture, the search for new techniques and their artistic possibilities have a varying cause and effect relationship. Therefore, the investigation of sculpting techniques is fundamental to the recognition of stylistic development and the understanding of individual works. Written records are few, pictorial depictions of tools and workshops are not technical enough. This leaves the investigation of the object with scientific methods and model experiments; progress is being made primarily in the research into workshops for bronze casting. B. MATERIALS 1. METAL 2.STONE

genres of monuments are free-standing sculpture and

C. MIXED

3. CLAY

4. WOOD, ivORY

1. METAL After early attempts with copper, the bronze casting of Geometric figurines, began in the 9th cent. BC with the addition of ten percent hardening tin. This took place using the lost wax process with “lost form”, where the wax model was surrounded by a clay shell, which was broken after the melting of the wax and filling with bronze. Larger works were created as sphyrelata, by hammering bronze sheets over wooden forms of individual parts and then riveting. In the rst half of the 7th cent. BC, solid cast figures reached a height of up to 50 cm; at the same time, Egyptian hollow casting was introduced in Samos. Originally only useful for figurines and protomes, it was developed for larger works by > Rhoecus and > Theodorus in the rst half of the 6th cent. BC, and was also common on the mainland in the later 6th cent. BC. In the place of the later bronze wall of the work, a layer of wax was laid over a clay form and in its turn encased with clay. Apart from the channels for wax and bronze and of ventilation tubes, spacers were placed between the core and the shell so that the hollow space for the future bronze wall remained after the wax had melted. Crucibles were used to pour the bronze into the still hot mould, which was sunk into a pit in the floor; casting directly from the furnace is not proven. Again, the outer shell had to be broken, the mould was lost. Beginning around 500 BC, casting became repeatable. For this, partial matrices were first taken from a finished clay model, coated with wax and, at the same time, assembled with the clay core. After the removal of the matrices, the wax skin was retouched and then, as with the ‘lost form’, further processed. Life-sized bronzes were created with cast

129

130

pieces, which were connected with brazing. This was then followed, as with every ancient bronze casting, by lengthy cold work (removal of casting channels, core mounts, small bubbles and flaws; details were finalized with chisel and burin and finally the bronze skin was smoothed with rasp and scraper and polished to a golden shine). The work was set ona base with lead cast into the soles of the feet. Gold and silver were used almost only for > appliqués and seldom cast, but were rather embossed. Beginning in the 2nd half of the 6th cent. BC, wooden > xdana were covered with gold foil. In the ~ gold-ivory technique, > ivory was used for the bare parts of the body. Beginning in the Classical era, colossal statues developed from the combination of metal parts with other materials (> Akrolithon). 2. STONE The monumentalization of Greek sculpture took place around the middle of the 7th cent. BC in marble coming from the deposits on > Naxos. While still in the quarry, a blank was created through the removal of layers, set up on a remaining base (plinth) at the site of its future installation or in the studio and worked with a steeply angled point chisel. Grooves for folds and undercuts were bored as a series of holes, which were connected with a chisel. Pieces sticking out of a block were attached with pins. Smoothing was done with sloping and grooved chisels and with emery stone. The marble was, in part, richly painted. The plinth was set in a base and filled with lead. + Architectural sculpture was placed immediately after the blank was shaped and then worked on the scaffolding, pedimental sculptures, on the other hand, were only placed before the final phase of work. ZeUAN. As one of the oldest sculptural materials, clay was still formed into figurines by hand in the Geometric period (— Terracottas). The matrix technique was introduced from the Orient around 700 BC. A male mould was created using modelling tools and fired; a matrix was formed by applying a clay shell to it, which was fired after retouching. In the Archaic era, only the front side was usually reproduced, later both sides by halving the shell. For the production of figurines, the matrix was completely filled with clay for very small pieces, and, due to the danger of cracks, incompletely for larger pieces, where holes were provided for the escape of steam from the hollow space which formed inside the figurine. Details were incised after the removal of the matrix. Colouring was provided by applying clay slips before firing or through later painting. 4. WOOD, IVORY These materials, which have been used from the earliest of times, were worked with carving techniques. The oldest cult images, in form often scarcely developed

mostly appeared only in mixed techniques, otherwise continuously in portable art, equipment with figured decorations and furniture. Ivory required an assembly technique in which small plates were glued. Painting and gilding were common.

from a beam or board, were xodna made of precious woods. Wooden figurines have been preserved in early votive deposits (Samos). In the 6th cent. BC, the Olympic — victor statues were still made predominantly of wood. Beginning in the Classical era, wood and ivory

SCULPTOR

C. MIXED TECHNIQUES,

CONSERVATION

Several sculptural techniques are used in almost every work of sculpture. Attributes and pieces of clothing were worked specially and from different materials. Colour effects were achieved through different materials, thus on bronzes, nipples, lips and physical injuries are made of copper inlays, teeth and clothing ornaments of silver, eyes are composed of glass, ivory and semi-precious stone. On marble statues, hair is applied in stucco or bronze, jewellery in precious metal. Ancient sculptural techniques presuppose models, especially for groups and pedimental sculptures, but also for draft models for clients. The Classical era was familiar with paradeigmata and proplasmata; in the Hellenistic era, typoi and clay models of works by popular artists circulated. Sculptural techniques also included conservation and restoration. Marble was protected by ganosis, a coating made of wax and oil, bronze by greasing and resin coating. Works placed in the open were protected against bird droppings by méniskoi. Wood and ivory require controlled humidity, which was created by basins ofwater or oil. Repairs to marble works are common. Pieces broken off were attached with dovetail clamps or with dowels and pins after smoothing of the broken spots, damage to surfaces was reworked. For intentional changes, such as in revised imperial portraits, surfaces were removed up to several millimetres, and hairpieces were sometimes attached. + Akrolithon; > Copies; > Corinthian alloy; > Goldivory technique; > Ivory carvings; > Marble, > Polychromy, > Sphyrelaton; > Terracottas; + Wood; S.ADAM, The Technique of Greek Sculpture, 1966; J.C. Bessac, L’outillage traditionnel du tailleur de pierre, 1986; C.BLUMEL, Griechische Bildhauer an der Arbeit, 1940; BLUMNER, Techn. 3-4, passim; G. M. E. C. vAN BOE-

KEL, Roman Terracotta Figurines and Masks from the Netherlands, 1987; P.C. Box, Antike Bronzetechnik, 1985; FUCHS/FLOREN, 5-24; D. Haynes, The Technique of Greek Bronze Statuary, 1992; C.C. MATTAuSCH,

Greek Bronze Statuary from the Beginnings through the Fifth Century Bronzes, 1996; statten, 1990.; betende Knabe

B.C., 1988; C.C. Matrauscu, Classical G. ZIMMER, Griechische BronzegufwerkG.ZImMMER, N.HACKLANDER (ed.), Der — Original und Experiment, 1997. RN.

Sculptor. In Graeco-Roman culture sculptors were less + artists than technicians, as were, in the early period at least, > architects and inventors. The ancient terms for them relate to the materials they use, e.g. lithourgés/ sculptor (for stone), chalkourgoés/aerarius (bronze), plastés or koroplathos/fictor (clay), ceroplastes (wax), and the social esteem of the product, e.g. lapidarius (stonecutter), agalmatopoids and andriantopoios (art-

SCULPTOR

131

ist of pictures of people and gods) and toreutés (maker of small bronzes). Signatures occasionally give information about social and economic status; for the most part they refer to the making with epoiésen. With the beginning of the art trade in the late Hellenistic period (> Art, interest in) ethnika are added when working far

from home and a signature is affixed to the statue itself, attesting to the business acumen of the workshops. On the basis of signatures and double signatures — mostly without the relevant works — archaeology has reconstructed genealogical trees that reveal families of sculptors in centres such as Rhodes and > Aphrodisias as well as the significance of these groups in the local economies. The literature on art from Late Antiquity also has elaborate genealogies of archaic and classical sculptors, but, owing to the numerous homonyms, these can be used only with caution. The internal structure of stone-cutting workshops is unknown, but, as with bronze foundries, it will probably have corresponded to working distinctions. The social standing of sculptors was shaped by their more manual work compared to that of > painters. Free citizens, metoikoi and — in the Roman period — freed slaves are therefore the rule. But since, for example, the sculptors of Roman sarcophagi remain anonymous, it can be presumed that there were non-autonomous company structures with slaves. In Greek areas, where the predominant number of sculptors were from, a sculptor of elevated social rank (as seen by official positions in the community) founded on earned wealth is sporadically found. What we know about fees derives from accounts (as in classical Athens), information on inscriptions (e.g. for the temple pediment at > Epidaurus) and literary reports (to some extent of exorbitant amounts). Since the number of employees, the hours of working, and the costs of transport and materials remain for the most part unknown, solid economic inferences can hardly be drawn from these data. In the case of official commissions the materials were separately delivered and monitored, and in Roman law they were also separate from the work. Only few workshops will have worked up a stock, e.g. those that specialised in copying. That these were at the same time active as art agencies and restoration businesses is shown, among other testimonies, by Cicero’s correspondence. + Architect; > Artists; > Sculpting, technique of P.C. Bot, Ant. Bronzetechnik, 1985; A. BURFORD, Kiinstler und Handwerker in Griechenland und Rom, 1985; I. CALABI LIMENTANI, Studi sulla societa romana. II lavoro artistico, 1958; FUCHS/FLOREN, 6; H. LauTer, Zur gesell-

schaftlichen Stellung des bildenden Kiinstlers in der griechischen Klassik, 1974; id., Zur wirtschaftlichen Position der Praxiteles-Familie im spatklassischen Athen, in: AA, 1980, 525-531; H. Puiwipp, Tektonon Daidala, 1968; id., Handwerker und bildende Kunstler in der Gesellschaft, in: H. Beck, P.C. Bor et al. (ed.), Polyklet. exhibition catalogue Frankfurt/Main, 1990, 79-110; A.STEWART,

Attika. Studies in Athenian Sculpture of the Hellenistic Age, 1979; ].M. C. TOYNBEE, Some Notes on Artists in the

Roman World, 1951.

RN.

Sculpture I. ANCIENT NEAR East ANTIQUITY

II. Ecypr

III. CLASsIcaL

I. ANCIENT NEAR EAST Stone figures and reliefs, in part large-sized, are authenticated in Palestine, Anatolia and Upper Mesopotamia as early as the Aceramic Neolithic Age (7th millennium BC), although in Mesopotamia not until the 6th millennium in the form of small idols. As the context of the finds suggests, they were part of cult buildings, and in the Levant also of a grave cult. The early Sumerian anthropomorphic stone sculpture from > Uruk (late 4th millennium) and the early Elamian sculpture from -~» Susa are connected with the temple cult, as are figures in a simplified design from northern Mesopotamia and Iran. The function of the exceedingly numerous, small animal figures was largely apotropaic. From the early Bronze Age (middle of the 3rd millennium) to the first millennium, there was an unbroken tradition in Mesopotamia, Syria and western Iran of human votive statuettes (rulers, officials and private individuals), idols (cult images are not extant), protective figures and animals (amulets, symbols of the gods, gatekeepers) made from stone, metal und carvings (in ivory and probably wood) in various sizes. Only in Syria is monumental sculpture authenticated as early as the third millennium. From the middle of the second millennium, the number of extant sculptures is scarce (only a few large-sized stone statues are preserved); ancient texts provide some information on the rich metal sculpture tradition. Some large-sized > terracottas were produced in Mesopotamia in the second millennium; in Syria a large number of small-sized bronzes have been preserved in temple hoards (votive offerings in the form of gods, people praying and animals; > Votive offerings). From the second millennium, temples, and later on also palaces, in northern Syria and Anatolia were adorned with > architectural sculpture, followed by Assyria and the Achaemenid Empire in the first millennium. Whilst the ancient near Eastern depiction of man scarcely varies and, in Mesopotamia, largely follows the traditional design of the third millennium, Mesopotamian animal images are often very realistic and full of variety. In the second and first millennia, the Syrian, Anatolian and Iranian sculpture showed a marked originality in contrast to the Mesopotamian sculpture; changing political conditions led to various interactions in aspects of iconography and style; Egyptian influence played a formative role in the Levant and Syria. K.ScHMIDT, Frithneolithische Tempel, in: MDOG 130, 1998, 25-43; A.SpycxeT, La statuaire du Proche-Orient ancien, 1981. E.B.-H.

Il. Ecypr Small-sized animal figures and idols made from ivory, clay or stone are known from the predynastic period (c. 4000 BC); they are found in settlements and graves. At the beginning of the Old Kingdom, around 2700 BC,

133

134

certain types of statues were established for gods, kings and ordinary people, which in many cases remained binding until Late Antiquity. In the private tombs of the Old Kingdom there were standing/striding figures, seated figures and standing figures of the deceased with his family, chiseled into the walls in high relief. Royal statues differed from private depictions of men and women due to a more restrictive iconography concerning the regalia. Sculptures of the sphinx (a zoomorphic figure with the body ofa lion anda human head) are only attested for the king. Some figures which at first were reserved for members of the royal family could be adopted for the private domain, e.g. the figure of the scribe. There are no such examples in reverse. Block statues, which are authenticated in temple and grave sculpture, seem to be exclusively private. Diversity in statues reached its peak during the New Kingdom. Priests and important officials were now also represented by votive figures in the areas of the temple accessible to the public. The officials were shown standing, sitting or as a squatting and kneeling figure, as donors or bearers of offerings in the form of figures of gods and of instruments specific to the cult of the god, as for example the sistrum for the goddess Hathor. Thus, through their statues, the officials took part in the distribution of offerings in the temple and played a part in the divinity of the devotional

be accounted for by the existence of preserved monuments, but also accords with the importance of sculpture in the ancient production of artistic works. Sculpture was responsible for the spread of iconographies and styles as well as for aesthetic education. The imparting and strengthening of ideas, values and sentiments that were primarily or secondarily influenced by religion was considered to be one task of sculpture in Antiquity. An important function of a work of sculpture lay in a qualitative enhancement of the particular subject matter depicted and of its surroundings. Ancient sculpture deals with representational (mainly figured and plant) motifs; even abstract decorative forms are mostly developed from plant examples. In freestanding sculpture the human likeness is of prime importance in comparison with all other motifs, whilst narrative and allegorical depictions predominate in relief sculpture. Basically, sculpture could be encountered in all areas of life and appeared in all feasible sizes and available materials, primarily however in > marble, > bronze and > terracotta. Certain forms and materials were preferred in a particular chronological and cultural framework. Sculptural works were always closely bound up with their surrounding context, which could be a landscape and garden, architecture or artifact, furniture and objects of practical use. Sculpture were used predomi-

image during the processions.

Egyptian freestanding sculpture is typically produced froma single block of stone. This rule was broken when other procedures were applied in the case of figures made out of wood and larger ones made from copper. Large sculptures were worked primarily from granite and diorite, calcite and sandstone. From the period of the Middle Kingdom copper was used to make both royal and private statues (first evidence for royal sculpture: end of the Old Kingdom). Bronze was found particularly frequently in small-sized deified figures from the Late Period (600-300 BC). Ivory, wood, semi-precious stones, glass, glazed earthenware (so-called — faience) or rocks with coloured glazes were used in small sculpture. Finally the statues were inscribed and painted. Their impact depended upon that and the ritual animation by a priest, so that they could do justice to their function in the temple cult and the cult of the afterlife. G. Rosins, The Art of Ancient Egypt, 1997; W.STEVENSON SMITH, W.K. Simpson, The Art and Architecture of Ancient Egypt, 31998. HE.BL.

III. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY A. INTRODUCTION B. ANCIENT TERMINOLOGY C. ANCIENT SOURCES AND VIEWS D. RESEARCH HISTORY: RENAISSANCE TO I8TH CENT. E. RESEARCH HISTORY: I9TH CENT. F. RESEARCH HISTORY: 20TH CENT. G. CURRENT TRENDS IN RESEARCH H. GENRES OF ANCIENT SCULPTURE

A. INTRODUCTION Most research into the history of Greek and Roman

art is based on the analysis of sculpture works. This can

SCULPTURE

nantly in the areas of — votive offerings (in — cults), in

honouring persons (burial cult, in public) and furnishing rooms. Under certain conditions, further aspects could be dominating in the perception of a sculpture, such as sensual enjoyment, technical finesse and admiration for the skill of the sculptor (~ Konnensbewuftsein).

B. ANCIENT TERMINOLOGY In order to describe its definition and genre classification, the term sculpture as a delimited part of ancient culture requires an examination both according to ancient criteria as well as the modern practices of historical research. Ancient terms for sculptural works and their creators refer mostly to the subject matter they depicted, their function or more rarely their material. In the case of individual works, the traditional practice was to give a title according to the subject matter (for instance deities), often with the addition of the genus in Greek, specifying the statue as andrids, > andthéma, + agalma, eikon, + sphyrélaton, > koloss6s, -> x6anon, and in Latin as statua (> statue), signum, simulacrum, imago, effigies. Terms referring to the outer form such as > herm, > clipeus [1] and — relief were rare; similarly, in architectural sculpture it was also uncommon to specify how a sculpture was fixed on pediments, friezes or metopes (— temples). Generic terminology of this kind was hardly used in Antiquity. Like the visual arts, which had no muse of their own, there was no ancient collective term for sculpture that would have been unambiguous. When Pliny describes the plastice as the “mother” of caelatura, of statuaria

SCULPTURE

135

and of scalptura (Plin. HN 35,156,6), he has in mind the creative process of imitation with art and skill, but not genres relating to materials. In a stricter sense koroplathikos/Latin ars figulina refers to terracotta sculpture, and toreutiké/Latin caelatura to metalwork. The

supposed restriction of ars statuaria and sculptura to bronze works remains contentious. Correspondingly, terms for sculptors and sculptors working with bronze are mostly related to materials, like Greek toreutés, plastés, koroplastés, Latin statuarius, sculptor, scalptor, fictor, gemmarius (gemstone cutter), or in poetry by

referring to a tool such as the chisel. The dominant feature was thus the designation of the craftsman. Other terms are based on criteria related to their content or function; so the anthropopoids or andriantopoids depicted statues of human beings, the agalmatopoios created images of gods. Only for a special achievement did the sculptor go beyond a craftsman in the general sense and achieve the reputation of an — artist, thereby belonging to the summi artifices or artifices insignes (“the most important artists”). The work of around 600 sculptors is known through their signatures, which is almost always referred to with the Greek éoinoe(v)/epoiése(n) or Latin fecit (“he made”), seldom with the Latin sculpsit (“he carved with a chisel”). The sculptor became a specialist through extraordinary artistic abilities relating to a motif, be it horses or women’s heads or hair, not however as a exponent of a specific formal genre such as > relief or > portraits. Therefore outstanding artists are not only recorded for their skills in sculpture but also for their merits in > painting, + toreutics or even technical inventions.

C. ANCIENT SOURCES AND VIEWS Written sources give no direct information on an-

cient views of sculpture in the arts and the commercial world of art. Specialist literature on the history of art is almost exclusively from the Hellenistic Period and is only preserved in quotations mostly concerning individual works, in which classifications of genre and general definitions do not appear. However, the extant titles of lost manuscripts reveal very differing categories; Antigonus of Carystus (cf. > Antigonus [6] and [7]) and — Menaechmus [4] wrote about bronze sculpture (De toreutice), > Heliodorus [2] about votive offerings in Athens (Atheniensium anathemata) and > Pasiteles about masterpieces (Mirabilia opera). Pliny, who used inter alia Apollodoros of Athens, > Polemon [2] of Skepsis, - Xenocrates [4], Duris and on a large scale — Varro, gives us the greatest number of quotes from such treatises ({1]); in his writings, Pliny classifies sculptures only on the basis of the materials used — i.e. metals, stones, colours. He suggests a theory of the origins of different genres, developing it, in terms of cultural history, from temple ornaments via cult statues to images in honour of esteemed persons (vol. 35). > Pausanias [8] is another vital source; being a > periegetes, he emphasises the context of the location as a criterion for the name ofa sculpture. All further sources on sculp-

136

ture — historiography as well as poetry, Christian apologetics and the -ekphrasis of artworks in the poetry anthologies — merely describe individual works without referring to a more abstract theoretical framework. As far as is apparent from the fragments of literary tradition, the criteria for the aesthetics of works of sculpture were the same as for other artistic genres; e.g., both painting and sculpture follow the same principle of veritas (a highly realistic representation). No special theory of art (+ Art, theory of) was developed for sculpture in relation to the artistic creative process or to functional aspects. Instead, theoretical criteria concentrated on artists, cultural contexts or how sculpture could be best employed. Classical statues of victors were regarded as sculptured portraits on the basis of the circumstances of their origin in the agonal sanctuaries such as > Olympia. On the one hand statues of deities functioned as a religious genre (> Cult image), but also sometimes belonged to the group of technical marvels. ~ Architectural sculpture, being secondary to > architecture, was seldom mentioned as a separate discipline; and if it was referred to, either an outstanding artist was named or the classification followed the respective subject from mythology or from the world of the gods, while the distinguishing genre features of architectural sculpture were not referred to. In the general account of sculptural work, there was an awareness in Antiquity for periods of decline and of flowering. As in Pliny’s famous remark “cessavit deinde ars” (“then this art disappeared”, viz. between 197 and 153 BC; Plin. HN 34,52,1) or the alleged decline of Roman portrait art, ancient explanations usually referred to cultural history and did not include a genre-related artistic development; for this reason, they do not agree with our knowledge and valuation of Hellenistic art or Roman portraits. At least in the Roman period there was a generally preponderant belief in the Greeks’ special sculptural achievements, a view which was equally held concerning other arts such as painting, literature or philosophy. The abrupt end of the production of ‘ideal sculpture’ (sculpture aside from sarcophagi, portraits and objets d’art, see below H.) in the third century AD and the slow decline of decorative and portrait sculpture in the 5th—6th cents. AD is reflected only indirectly in the sources of Late Antiquity; mainly amongst Christian authors, sculptural works were associated with magic and absurd explanations. Sculpture was in fact now perceived as an artistic genre, even if only as a reflex of a rejected pagan level ofcivilisation. Hence, both in its entirety and in individual genres, sculpture in Antiquity was always conceptualised according to criteria based on its immediate function, the subject matter it depicted and the technique applied. It was not, however, thought of as a systematic theory of art and subdivided according to those categories which were established in modern times, mainly the scientific age.

138

137

D. RESEARCH HISTORY: RENAISSANCE TO 18TH

CENT. The division of ancient sculpture into the genres established in archaeology today can be explained by the history of scholarship and is ultimately based on the view of art prevalent at the time. In the pre-scientific era, as in the Renaissance

and Baroque periods, a notion of sculpture was prevalent that did not pay tribute to the cultural context of a sculpture. It could serve as an aesthetic model or as an ennobling collectors’ item, or it could promote more antiquarian efforts to create a literary reception of Antiquity concentrated on names. A corollary of aristocratic collections of the 18th and early roth cents. was a distinction according to genres, for purely practical reasons: size was a decisive factor on account of the differing spatial context of a sculpture, and a free-standing statue sculpture was well distinguished from a relief sculpture. On the other hand small sculpture was restricted to valuable bronzes and was mostly grouped together with glyptic art (+ Gem cutting) in the display cabinets. The easily available sarcophagi were sawed into smaller sections, fitted in the remaining relief sculpture and were likewise intended for wall decoration; sarcophagi were therefore not perceived as a sepulchral genre. > Portraits, mainly Roman ones, were restricted to identifiable historical

persons, and therefore regarded as historical information, not as an art form. Galleries of emperors were set up for the same reason. Except for a few notable exceptions, there was little interest in > architectural sculp-

ture as a separate genre. In the formative period of archaeology influenced by J.J. WINCKELMANN, sculpture, particularly the freestanding statue, was given its own unique high status. It was regarded as Antiquity’s noblest art form, being a contrast to the painting of the Late Baroque period. Sculpture became the embodiment of character formation and good taste in a classicist spirit; it was almost exclusively figured sculpture that attracted attention. In the art history discussion of the time, aesthetic and moralising aspects received greater attention than research into the development of style; the identification of names and interpretation were crucial, bringing statuary sculpture into close contact with glyptics. E. RESEARCH HISTORY: 19TH CENT. The following period of scholarship is influenced by the positivism of the mid—rgth cent. Mostly during the last third of the century, the undertaking to compile large corpora of sculpture arose from the wish to take all monuments into account. Following the aesthetic principles and the taste of the rg9th-cent. art world, sculpture was separated from other categories of the plastic arts such as > painting and > medallion. The discussion whether ancient sculpture was coloured or not ultimately went back to the arbitrary separation of sculpture and painting. According to 19th cent. understanding, sculpture had to stand out through its lack of colour and remain white (+ Polychromy). The remains

SCULPTURE

of ancient sculpture were classified according to type, and gradually a fixed terminology was developed. Whilst previously relics monuments or artifacts were more or less synonymous, sculpture now became firmly established systematically as a term alongside vases and artifacts. As well as the plans for recording sculpture in its entirety [2; 3; 4; 5], corpora were published with the help of the newly created museums or old collections [6; 7; 8; 9; 10]; cast collections were treated in the same way [11].

A generic classification was introduced which followed the model of scientific and philological methods of organisation and served primarily to cope with the vast quantity of documents. It was based on earlier collections andthe scope of museum exhibitions and has remained binding to the present day. Formal criteria such as size, form and material were considered more

important than content. Free-standing sculptures were followed by portraits [12; 13; 14], reliefs [15] (with a separate category for sarcophagus reliefs [16]) and small-sized terracotta sculptures [17; 18]. The independent treatment of Etruscan sculpture corresponded to an already existing interest in collecting [19]. Intaglio collections had already been established as a specialist area, reflecting antiquarian and aristocratic interests of 18th cent. collectors [20; 21]. Written sources were organised in the same way as the monuments [22]. As a result of that, monuments named in written sources soon began to be identified and it became possible to reconstruct the sculptors’ oeuvres. A.FURTWANGLER’S Masterpieces of Greek Sculpture (1893), aiming at rec-

ognising the contemporary sculptor in the ancient sculptor, were the culmination of these efforts and at the same time marked the limits of such a project. F,. RESEARCH HISTORY: 20TH CENT. The following phase of archaeology from the late 19th cent. to the middle of the 2oth cent. was characterised by new contemporary art theories, such as A.RIEGL’s Kunstwollen as a guide to interpretation, or structuralist theories, or ethnological approaches of searching artistic landscapes; all these frameworks were an extrinsic influence on archaeology and no longer concerned sculpture alone. For this reason the established generic boundaries were frequently crossed. However, at the same time the corpora which had been started were continued with new emphasis. The concentration e.g. on mythical sarcophagi in the sarcophagus corpus corresponded to the latest interest in research into myths and religion. Psychology awakened an interest in the anonymous private portrait as an alternative to the portrait of the ruler. The modern requirement for middle-class house furnishings brought ancient terracotta sculptures to the fore, along with contemporary small porcelain ornaments and everyday objects. This also helped establish the category of socalled Alexandrian Kleinkunst, in conjunction with a new sociopolitical interest in racial and social outsiders. The same middle-class need for furnishings strength-

139

140

ened the distinction between copies and originals, which received the status of genres in their own right. Architectural sculpture was systematised according to strictly architectonic viewpoints, as it helped to meet the demand for neo-classical architectural decoration. Greek tomb reliefs were considered as a separate genre on the basis of a religious interest in death and the cemetery culture of the time. At the same time many kinds of Roman and also Late Hellenistic reliefs were studied as icons, though not as decorative genres. It was taken for granted that the artworks of the time accorded with ancient categories, which is why the socalled Meisterforschung, i.e. the reconstruction of an individual artist’s ceuvre, was regarded as a successful concept despite all uncertainties. Masterpieces (Opera nobilia) such as the Zeus of — Phidias were categorised as monumental sculpture, but not seen as technical marvels as in Antiquity. As in the case of the generic division, the spirit of this period is likewise reflected in the reception of ancient sculpture, as in the invention of an ‘ancient Rococo’, in the ‘classicism’ of the Doryphoros (— Polyclitus [1], III.) exploited alike politically by fascists and their opponents, or in the fears of the period before, during and between the World Wars, which were recognised in the expressive style and warlike theme of sculpture at the end of the second century AD and were regarded as the theme of the style change in Antonine times. After World War II, neopositivist approaches were

Sculpture could be seen as an ornamental element within its surroundings [3 6; 37; 38] or as the medium of a representational art in historical contexts [39], which led to approaches stressing the unity of culture; sculpture no longer plays a special role compared with other media and is finally understood as part of a social discourse [40; 41]. While traditional accounts of the history of sculpture favoured a chronological treatment of historical styles, new compilations of sculpture appeared which were orientated towards materials; thus bronze, marble or terracotta become generic concepts. These categories are usually referred to in archaeological publications and also in more general accounts of sculpture, which makes them a close parallel to Pliny’s system of sculpture, albeit unconsciously.

SCULPTURE

favoured, with a revival of, and a fresh look at, corpora

in the framework of the traditional genres [23; 24; 25]; this was a reaction to the previous, strongly interpretive understanding of ancient sculpture, which was now generally rejected. A new corpus covering all sculpture was organised according to countries of origin (most of them provinces), triggering new interpretative approaches that distanced themselves from the Meisterforschung and art aesthetics and were orientated more strongly towards reception and function [26]; a regional differentiation also started in smaller genres [27]. The survey of the portraits of Roman rulers, which had started in 1939, was continued and also expanded, now covering issues of reception and sources [28]. Late Hellenistic and Roman relief genres received new attention; they are defined by the purpose for which they were produced and so are likewise relevant to cultural history. They demand a still more precise generic differentiation, so corpora with their rather vague categories were increasingly being replaced by catalogues of the monument genre in question. The generic term of decorative sculpture included items as diverse as marble candelabra [29], ornamental reliefs [30], ornamental bases [31], marble vases [32] and also Early Christian table tops [33]. Altar tombs [34] and box tombstones [35] were grouped in the same category corresponding to the interest in a reappraisal of Roman sculpture. The sepulchral culture of Late Antiquity was taken into account with the ‘Repertorium of early Christian sarcophagi’ (published by BRANDENBURG).

G. CURRENT TRENDS IN RESEARCH

Present research on sculpture pursues various approaches and applies a variety of methods, so dealing with sources and resources has become less straightforward. Written tradition is still regarded as the primary source, though this raises the question to what extent these texts in their entirety actually correspond to the inventory of monuments and to what extent they can be valued as evidence. The texts were often written down several centuries after the time when the individual sculptures had been created, so they should rather, if anything, be seen as texts about their later reception. Alongside this, there is pictorial and epigraphic evidence available to supply information on sculpture. However, it is rare that the study of epigraphy provides more than names, and there are only a few informative ~ epigrams. In order to recover, name and locate lost ancient works, pictorial evidence has proved valuable, such as copies of statue types on document reliefs, historical reliefs or vase painting as well as coins. The ancient practice of copying (> Copies) has provided the most important research aid if the copies are reviewed critically, taking into consideration the time gap between the creation of an original work and the copy. The success of this method is dependent upon the availability of monuments, which is one reason why preparing corpora is of paramount importance. In this process, it is crucial to establish criteria for genre categories; the history of research into ancient sculpture demonstrates how genre boundaries can become permanent once they are defined and how the spectrum of questions can thereby be restricted. A compilation on electronic storage devices [42] can therefore offer more transparency as it allows various kinds of systemisation simultaneously. H. GENRES OF ANCIENT SCULPTURE The following overview of the entire spectrum of ancient sculpture is orientated towards the abovenamed established genres. Sculpture in the round is conceived of as freestanding and comprises statues and groups of statues with sizes as different as statuettes considerably smaller than life-sized and colossal sculp-

141

142

ture several times larger than life-sized. Groups of statues [43] not only comprise statues which were fashioned in poses touching one another and on one base, but also combinations of single statues, connected by their subject matter (family groups) or functions (votive statues commemorating victories). Within free-standing sculpture, the term ‘ideal’ is given to the depiction of the world of gods and heroes; since secure identification is often impossible, this category also includes statues of athletes. Ideal sculpture frequently overlaps with the categories of clothed statue, seated statue, as well as genre sculpture with motifs from the everyday world. Animal sculpture is perceived as a separate genre. Statues with portrait heads are regarded as portrait statues, which are always placed on perfect body types. Bronze works are divided into the subcategories of large bronzes [44], which covers life-sized bronzes and larger

tectural sculpture also includes ornamental parts, mostly decorated with plant motifs, like the capitals

ones, and statuettes, which are always small bronzes.

Lychnouchoi or lampadarii, statues of youths holding lamps or often also platters, form a thematic genre restricted to bronzes. Figures serving as architectural support (atlantes, > caryatids, telamones) are mostly of the free-standing type. As well as statuettes, small sculpture encompasses manifold parts of artifacts such as furniture appliqués (couch fulcra), mirror supports, weights. The largely fragmented preservation of Greek and Roman sculpture gave rise to the concept of the torso in which, as a rule, the head and the majority of the limbs are missing. Individually made heads and limbs are mostly parts of > akrolitha. The genres of + herms and — busts deviate from portraying the body in its entirety. As far as they are provided with portraits, they are classed as belonging to the genre of > portraits, just like — clipeus portraits. Portraits are divided up according to private portraits, which depict unidentifiable or historically irrelevant persons, portraits of mainly Greek philosophers and poets, as well as those of Hellenistic and Roman rulers, including the members of the respective families. In Antiquity, larger groups of them were arranged as galleries in which the herm galleries with the addition of ‘ideal’ heads again formed a special group. + Reliefs are classified into various subcategories depending on the type of relief background. Bases, altars and altar tombs are often taken together in a group, while urns and osteothekes are classified as sarcophagi [45], including the k/ine monuments. > Oscilla, > puteals, reliefs decorated with mythical figures and neoAttic reliefs can be dealt with collectively because they depict a similar subject matter and because they serve similar decorative purposes. The iconography of votive reliefs is close to that of document reliefs. Historical reliefs can in most cases be defined as depictions showing political or military scenes which are embedded in the architectural environment. -» Friezes, metopes and pediment sculptures as well as free-standing > akroteria are regarded as architectural sculpture. Stylopinakia, relief panels fixed onto pillars, are a rare form of architectural sculpture. Archi-

SCULPTURE

(+ Column) and simas (> Sima). Large-scale reliefs on

buildings are rare (> Ara Pacis Augustae; > PERGAMUM ALTAR). Marble furniture is classed as sculpture if it is decorated with reliefs; this includes > thrones, trapezophores and freestanding table supports, which in Late Antiquity were often decorated with many figures. In contrast to bronze, marble and other kinds of stone, terracotta sculpture is mostly considered a separate genre, covering sizes from the smallest statuettes to life-sized figures; it is frequently published together with terracotta reliefs. Separate genres are constituted by the so-called Campana reliefs (— Relief), wall coverings depicting figures or plants, which were named after a collector, as well as the entire repertoire of terracotta facings on Etruscan religious buildings in Central Italy, and the votive genres of the so-called Locrian and Melian reliefs. In its smallest form, relief sculpture can be found in glyptic art [46] (> Gem cutting), on jewellery (often as pendants in the round), as appliqués (crustae) on vessels

made of precious metal, and on a variety of furniture, artifacts or vehicles in the form of freestanding attachments or meanders bearing a relief. Relief sculpture on coins and medals can be of very high quality. Current research on sculpture within the framework of the various genres is still seen as the domain, albeit disputed, of the primarily German-speaking archaeology of art. Meisterforschung (‘the study of great masters’), is still carried on, e.g. regarding > Polyclitus [1]. ‘Schools’ of sculptors are being compiled, such as the ‘Polyclitus school’ or the ‘Pergamon school’. Studies tending closer to the reception of sculpture try to achieve a greater differentiation between copies, variants and reworkings of an archetype and strive to examine stylistic phenomena such as classicism, eclecticism or archaism. Since all stylistic analysis necessarily remains subjective, the best way of approaching this dilemma seems to be an archaeometric, i.e technical and scientific examination. Although the examination of ancient practices of casting and metal working, sculpting techniques and determining the origins of types of marble, as well as terracotta production processes, may become an end in itself, it can also add to an understanding of the creative processes in the artistic area. In a cultural and sociohistorical approach which is pursued simultaneously, ancient sculpture is viewed within its original context and its influencing factors. Important aspects include interpreting the political and social function of sculpture in the Classical period, explaining the official function of historical reliefs and of freestanding monuments in the Roman period, exploring the connections between historical mentality and ‘private’ sculpture in various genres of the Hellenistic and Imperial periods, as well as the sepulchral sphere. ~ Architectural sculpture; > Art, theory of; > Artists; + Copies; > Etrusci, Etruria II.C.2.;

> Minoan culture

143

144

and archaeology D.5.; -- Mycenaean culture and archaeology C.; — Phoenicians, Poeni IV.A.3.; > Portraits; > Pyrenean peninsula; > Relief; > Sarcophagus;

Scultenna. Right-hand tributary of the Padus (Po) in Aemilia, which flows down from the Apennines from

SCULPTURE

+ Statue;

> Cyprus;

— ANTIQUITIES,

COLLECTIONS

1 A. KALKMANN, Die Quellen der Kunstgesch. des Plinius, 1896 2BrBr 3P.ARNpT, W.AMELUNG, Photographische Einzelaufnahmen ant. Skulpturen, 1893-1941

Musée

RSt

5 REINACH,

RR

6 F.DE CLARAC,

de sculpture antique et moderne,

7Matz/DuHN

8HELBIG

1841-1853

9A.MICHAELIS,

Ancient

Marbles in Great Britain, 1882 10 ESPERANDIEU, Rec. 11 C. FRIEDERICHS, Bausteine zur Gesch. der griech.-r6m. P.,1868 12ABr 13 J.J. BERNOULLI, Rom. Ikonographie, 1882 14 Ders., Griech. Ikonographie, 1901 15 CONZE 16 C. RoBERT, Die ant. Sarkophag-Reliefs, 1890ff. 17 R.KeEkuLfé (Hrsg.), Die ant. Terrakotten, 1880-1911 18 P. JACOBSTHAL, Die melischen Reliefs, 1931 19H.Brunn, I rilievi delle urne etrusche, 1870 20 T. Caves, Impronte gemmarie, 1831-68 21 FURTWANGLER 22 OVERBECK 23CMS 24 AGD 25 CLAIRMONT 26 CSIR 27 PFUHL/MOBIus 28 HERRSCHERBILD

29H.U. Cain, R6m. Marmorkan-

delaber, 1985 30 H.FRONING, Marmor-Schmuckreliefs mit griech. Mythen im tr.Jh.v.Chr., 1981 31 O. DRAGER, Religionem significare, 1994 32 D.GRASSINGER, R6m. Marmorkratere, 1991 33 J.DRESKEN-WEILAND, Reliefierte Tischplatten aus theodosianischer Zeit, 1991

34 D.BoscHunc, Ant. Grabaltare aus den Nekropolen Roms, 1987 35 V.KockEL, Portratreliefs stadtrom. Grabbauten, 1993 36H. MANDERSCHEID, Die Skulpturenausstattung der kaiserzeitlichen Thermenanlagen, 1981 37M.Krees, Unt. zur figiirlichen Ausstattung delischer Privathaduser,

1988

Skulpturenausstattung

rém.

38 R. NEUDECKER,

Villen

in

It.

Die

1988

39 T.HOLSCHER, Staatsdenkmal und Publikum, 1984 40 G.P. R. Mérraux, Sculptors and Physicians in FifthCentury Greece, 1995

41 A.STEWaRT, Art, Desire, and

the Body in Ancient Greece, 1997 42 J.BERGEMANN, Datenbank klass. Grabreliefs des 5.-4. Jh.v.Chr., 1998 43 Hell. Gruppen. GS fir Andreas Linfert, 1999 44 K.Kiuce, K.LEHMANN-HARTLEBEN, Die ant. Grofbronzen, 1927.

45 KOCH/SICHTERMANN

46 ZAZOFF,

AG. J.OversBeck, Gesch. der griech. P., H.Brunn, Gesch. der griech. Kiinstler,

the region of > Mutina. In the valley of the S. sheep bred (particularly soft wool, cf. Str. 5,1,12: Lunovatavva/Skoultdnna). Today the river is called Scoltenna in the mountains, Panaro on the plain. GU. were

OF; > Cast; CAST COLLECTIONS; - MUSEUM

4 REINACH,

the territory of the Ligures Friniates (Liv. 41,12,18) into

1857-1858; 1857-1859;

Loewy; A.FURTWANGLER, Meisterwerke der griech. P., 1893; G. LiproLp, Kopien und Umbildungen griech. Statuen, 1923; PIcARD; LippoLp; G.M. A. RICHTER, The Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks, 1950; J. MARCADE, Recueil des signatures de sculpteurs grecs, 1953/1957; A.Rumpr, Arch., 2 Bde., 1953/56; W.H. SCHUCHHARDT (Hrsg.), Ant. P., 1962ff.; B.ScHWEITZER, Zur Kunst der

Ant., 1963; HdArch., Bd. 1: Allgemeine Grundlagen der Arch., 1969 (= HdbA 6); A.W. LawreNce, Greek and Roman Sculpture, 1972; P. ZANKER, Klassizistische Statuen, 1974; R. LuL.igs, Griech. P. Von den Anf. bis zum Beginn der rom. Kaiserzeit, 1979; F. COARELLI (Hrsg.), Artisti e artigiani in Grecia, 1980; FUCHS/FLOREN; STEwarT; D.E. E. Kieiner, Roman Sculpture, 1992; W. Fucus, Die Skulptur der Griechen, +1993; B.S. RrpG-

way, The Study of Classical Sculpture at the End of the zoth Century, in: AJA 98, 1994, 759-772; C. ROLLEY, La

sculpture grecque, Bd. 1: Des origines au milieu du V* siécle, 1994; C.C. Matruscu, Classical Bronzes. The Art and Craft of Greek and Roman Statuary, 1996. RN.

Scupi (ZxotsovSkoupoi, Lat. Scupi). I. LocaTION, ROMAN PERIOD II. BYZANTINE PE-

RIOD I. LOCATION, ROMAN

PERIOD

City of the Illyrian Dardani [4] on the Axius, on the road from Stobi to Naissus (Ptol. 3,9,6; 8,11,5; Scunis, Tab. Peut. 7,4; Hierocles, Synecdemos 655,8), 5 km northwest of present-day Skopje. S. was a Roman colonia beginning in the Flavian Period (AD 69-96; ILS 2461), fortified under Hadrianus (ILS 3860). As evidenced by veteran inscriptions, S. was apparently the camp of the legio VII Claudia, a diocesan town beginning in the 4th cent. In the mid 3rd cent., S. fell victim to barbaric invasions. Extant are the remnants of a city wall, theatre, baths, further buildings and a necropolis. B. DRAGOJEVIC-JOSIFOVSKA, Introduction historique: Scupi et son territoire, in: F. PAPAZOGLU (ed.), Inscriptions de la Mésie Supérieure, vol. 4, 1982, 16-37; I. MIKULCIC, Teritorija Skupa, in: Ziva antica 21, 1971, 461-484; TIR K 34 Naissus, 1976, 112 f.; J.WISEMAN, s.v. Scupi, PE, 815.

Lv.B.

II. ByZANTINE PERIOD The earthquake of AD 518 which, according to Marcellinus Comes 24, destroyed several castella in the province of Dardania (Hierocles, Synecdemos 65 5,8) is usually regarded as a break in the history of S. [1; 2], although the source explicitly states that the inhabitants of the “Scupus ... metropolis” fled from (non-specified) enemies and that the city suffered no loss of life in contrast to the neighbouring fortresses. Apparently, S. was already suffering from invasions of the > Slavs at that time. Procop. Aed. 4,4 mentions Zxovmov/Skoupion among the fortresses that were reinforced under the emperor lustinianus and as belonging to — Serdica. Besides the attacks by the Slavs (which were probably the reason for the building of fortresses in the surrounding area [3. 249]), the construction of the metropolis Iustiniana Prima (not identical to S. as was assumed earlier, rather to Caricin grad; cf. the discussion in [3. 53]) became another factor in the decline of S., despite the fact that settlement continued into the early 7th cent. After that, written documents were discontinued (the Xxdmuc/ SkOopis mentioned by Theophylactus Simocattes 7,2,2 is not S. [6. 141*7], pace [5]). The name S. was not used again until 1002 in the context of the Byzantine capture of the first Bulgarian kingdom (-> Bulgaria) (Iohannes Skylitzes 346,56 ff. THURN: Zxdmia/Sk6pia is already Slavic). In 1392, S. became Osmanic; the Albanization of its western regions probably occurred in the Late

145

146

MA. The thesis of Albanian scholars that the Albanian name Skup proves the continuity of the Illyrians/Albanians in Late Antiquity is unfounded ([5. 361]; PopoVIC in [3. 22677°].

Scyles (ZxbAno/Skylés). Scythian King around the mid 5th cent. BC, son of a Greek woman from Istros and of + Ariapeithes whose realm he inherited. However, due to his Greek way of life, S. was forced to flee to Sitalces [x] who turned him over to S.’ half-brother > Octamasades, who had S. put to death (Hdt. 4,78-80). The name of S. has been transmitted on a gold ring. Several bronze emissions from Niconia are attributed to S.

1 A. KazHDAN, s.v. Skopje, ODB 3, 1912 2 G. PRINZING, s.v. Skop(l)je, LMA 7, 1990 3 Villes et peuplement dans I’Ilyricum protobyzantin (Actes du colloque .... Rom 1982), 1986 4 L.WALDMULLER, Die ersten Begegnungen der Slawen mit dem Christentum und den christlichen V6lkern vom VI bis VIII Jh., 1976 5 G. SCHRAMM, Eroberer und Alteingesessene, 1981, 3 59362 6 W.POHL, Die Awaren. Ein Steppenvolk in Mitteleuropa 567-822 n. Chr., 1988, 141, n. 17. JN.

Scylax (Zxvira&; Skylax). [1] S. from Caryanda. Discoverer of shipping routes and geographer, in 519/512 BC [5. 78] in the service of Darius [1], he sailed down the Indus [x] from > Caspapyrus to the Indian coast, then — rounding the Arabian peninsula for the first time — through the > Erythra Thalatta [1] to modern Suez (Hdt. 4,44) in 30 months [t. vol. 1, 33, 52 f.; 1. vol. 2, 14 f.5 2. 622 £.]. S. wrote about Heraclides of Mylasa (Suda s.v. &.), and therefore died after 480 BC ([2. 634 f.]). Seven fragments on India (FGrH 709) are ascribed to his Periplous outside the Pillars of Heracles in the Ionic dialect; cf. [2. 627-631]. The Periplous of inhabited Europe, Asia and Libya (GGM 1, 15-96) under the name of S., which was finished before 338 BC [6. 487], is considered to be a compilation of> Hecataeus [3], > Herodotus [1], > Ephorus, ~ Theopompus and others [6. 6 f.]. However, it has been shown ([2. 645 f.]) that there are ancient accounts in it. [6. 485-504] even assumes (otherwise [4], critical [3]) a skipper’s manual written by S. to be its nucleus, to which heterogeneous accounts were later clumsily added.

— Periplous Fritz,

Griechische

V.A. ANOCHIN, Die Miinzen der skythischen Konige, in: Hamburger Beitrage zur Archaologie 18, 1991, 141-150 (esp. 142-144); F.Hartoc, The Mirror of Herodotus, 1988, 62-84; J.G. VINOGRADOY, Pontische Studien, 1997, 613-633; BE 1983, 278.

UP.

Scylla (ZxvAra/Skylla, Dubd/Skyllé, Lat. Scylla).

Scurra see > Entertainers

1K.von

SCYLLA

Geschichtsschreibung,

2

vols.,1967 2 F.GISINGER, s.v. Skylax (2), RE 5 A, 619646 3F.J. GONZALEZ Ponce, Revision de la opinion de

[1] Sea monster, daughter of + Crataeis or > Hecate and > Phorcys; originally a young woman, transformed by > Circe, > Amphitrite or + Poseidon into a monster (Hom. Od. 12,73-92; Anaxilas fr. 22,4 PCG 2; Verg. Ecl. 6,74-77; Verg. Aen. 3,426-432; Isid. Orig. 11,3,32; Them. Or. 22,279b-d compares the various depictions) out of jealousy when she was wooed by ~ Glaucus [1] (Ov. Met. 13,900-968; 14,1-74; Hyg. Fab. 199). S. lived in a cave opposite > Charybdis. Thanks to > Circe’s instructions > Odysseus escaped her (Hom. Od. 12,201-259). The > Argonauts escaped her with the help of > Thetis (Apoll. Rhod. 4,827-83 2; 4,922-955; Ov. Epist. 12,123 f.; Apollod. 1,136), — Aeneas [1] avoided her on the advice of Helenus [1] (Verg. Aen. 3,420-432). > Heracles [1] killed her because she ate some of the cattle he had stolen from ~ Geryoneus; but she was brought back to life by her father (Lycoph. 44-49; 651 with Schol.). According to Ov. Met. 14,72-74 she was ultimately turned into a dangerous rock. There were attempts at locating her even in antiquity (Thuc. 4,24,5: Straits of Messina) and clear rejection of the myth as a figment of the imagination (Pl. Resp. 9,588c; Lucr. 4,732-744; 5,890-898; Gie Nat] Daa 10837 Ova Mis 467.035) [uve is .ho—226

attempts at allegorical interpretation continued into the Middle Ages [r]). [2] Daughter of > Nisus [1]. She fell in love with King ~» Minos, who was besieging Megara, or was bribed by

A. Peretti sobre el origen cartografico del periplo del Ps.-

him (Aesch. Cho. 613-622), so she cut off the life-pre-

Escilax, in: Habis 22, 1991, 151-155 4D.Marcorrte, Le périple dit de Scylax, in: Bollettino dei Classici 7, 1986, 166-182 5 E,OLSHAUSEN, Einfihrung in die Historische Geographie der Alten Welt, 1991 6 A.PeReTTI, Il periplo di Scilace, 1979 (analysis, bibliography, edition of

serving lock of hair from her father while he was asleep (Verg. G. 1,404-409; Paus. 1,19,4) and took it to Minos. But Minos rejected S. and dragged her through

FABRICIUS 1878).

H.A.G.

[2] Imperial Period carver of an amethyst intaglio from (now in Saint Petersburg, Hermitage) bearing a portrait of the emperor Claudius (AD 41-54). — Gem cutting Panticapaeum

ZazorFF, AG, 321 n. 99, 339 n. 264, table 95, 3.

S.ML

the sea on the stern of his boat (Apollod. 3,210 f.; she

was transformed into a bird: Ps.-Verg. > Ciris; Ov. Met. 8,6-151). The myth was popular with tragedians (Ov. Tr. 2,393-395) and was also the subject of a mime (Lucianus de saltatione 41). S. [2] is sometimes conflated with S. [1] (Verg. Ecl. 6,74-77; Prop. 4,4,39 f.). 1 G.M. A. HAnrMann, The Scylla of Corvey and Her Ancestors, in: Dumbarton Oaks Papers 41, 1987, 249-260. F. CANCIANL, s. v. S. (2), LIMC 7.1, 793; LIMC 7.2, 569;

M.-O.JENTEL, s. v. S. (1), LIMC 7.1, 11; 37 f.; J.SCHMIDT, s. v. S. (1-2), RE 3 A, 647-658.

R.HA.

SCYLLAEUM

147

Scyllaeum (=xvddatov; Skyllaion). Promontory in the extreme east of Argolis between Hermione and Troezen

(Stt.

85,1;

Paus,

2,39,7;

Plm. HN

4,775

Ptol.

3,16,11: SxvAaov; Mela 2,49,50; Thuc. 5,53), modern

Cape Skyli. 3 km to the west at modern Phurkaria there is a Mycenaean and Hellenistic-Roman settlement. N. PHARAKLAS, Ancient Greek Cities, vol.. 10, 1972, app.

Py P¥

Scylletium

(ZxvAdkjuovw/Skylléetion, Uuvdddxov/Skyll-

akion, Latin Scolacium). City on the east coast of Brut-

tia on the gulf named after it (kdlpos Skyllétikos; [1. 63]; today still Golfo di Squillace); ground plan of the Roman city and building foundations from the rst/2znd cent. AD near modern Roccelletta di Borgia. In ancient tradition S. was seen as the northernmost place in Italia (Antiochos FGrH 555 F 5; Aristot. Pol. 1329b 13 f.; Str. 6,1,4). S. (founded in the second half of the 6th cent. BC) was at first dependent on Croton, then on Locri [2] (Str. 6,1,10). In 1423/2 BC C. Sempronius

{I rr] Gracchus established the colonia Scolacium Minervia at S. (Vell. Pat. 1,15,4), and the emperor

Nerva expanded it (CIL X 103). S. was abandoned at the end of the 6th/beginning of the 7th cent. AD. + Cassiodorus was from S. 1C.Turano,

Le conoscenze

geografiche

del Bruzio

nell’antichita classica, in: Klearchos 17, 1975, 29-95. R.SpapEA (ed.), Da S. a Scolacium, 1989.

A.MU.

Scymnus (Zxvbpvoc; Skymnos).

[1] Probably a son of Apelles from Chios, who in 18 5/4 BC became a Delphic proxenos (> Proxenia; Syll.4 585, 86) [1.661]. In conjunction with Hecataeus [3] [x. 671 f.] he wrote a periegesis (+ Periégétés) of Asia and of Europe with the Outer Sea in many books. The nine surviving fragments [1. 664-671] also show an interest in history, i.e. in the foundings of cities (fr. 3 and 8) and sanctuaries (fr. 1), in mythology (fr. 5) and vegetation (fr.9 on Britain after — Pytheas [4] [z. 670]). 1 F. GISINGER, s. v. S. (1), RE 5 A, 661-672.

[2] An anonymous Greek Periegesis ad Nicomedem regem (GGM 1, 196-237; probably dedicated to Nicomedes [4], cf. [1. 23-35]) in iambic verse, attributed to S. [1] by L. HOLSTEIN 1630 [2. 20 f.], by others

to Pausanias of Damascus (cf. Konstantinos Porphyrogennetos, De thematibus 1,2) ([3. 276-279], cf. {1. 24, 34 f.]), generally cited as ‘Pseudo-S.’. This instructive poem written c. 135 BC [1. 35] is geographically oriented e.g. on > Ephorus and ~ Theopompus [1] and appraises the > oikouméné after its degree of Hellenization [4. 80]. Descriptions of the coasts of Europe (V. 1-874) and Asia (V. 875-978) up to the River Sangarius (in [2] supplemented from the Periplus Ponti Euxini, GGM 1, 402-423) survive. 1 S. BIANCHETTI, Plota kai poreuta, 1990 (Analysis of the geogr. strands of tradition, bibl.) 2 A. DILLER, The Tra-

148 dition of the Minor Greek Geographers, 1952 (165-176: Text V. 722-1026) 3Jd., The Authors Named Pausanias, in: TAPhA 86, 1955, 268-279 4D.Meyer, Zur

Funktion geographischer Darstellungen (Antike Naturwissenschaft und ihre Rezeption 8), 1998, 61-81.

HAG.

Scyphates. A modern term derived from Greek oxboc/ skyphos, ‘cup’, for a late Byzantine dish-shaped coin. In the course of the rrth cent. AD — after initial mintings under Michael IV (1034-1041) — under Constantine IX (1042-105 5) Byzantine gold coins (histdmena) increasingly took on this form and towards the end of the rrth cent. gold coins were minted exclusively as scyphates [1; 2]. This type was retained well into the Palaeologan period (from mid 13th cent.) [3]. As well as those made of gold, there were also scyphates made of > elektron, silver and copper [1; 3]. Eastern Celtic tribes minted scyphates in silver and bronze [4] and the Kushano-Sasanid rulers minted them in gold in the 4th cent. AD [5]. + Money IV 1 C.Morrisson, Catalogue des monnaies byzantines de la Bibliothéque Nationale, vol. 2: De Philippus a Alexis III (711-1204), 1970, 618f. and pl. LXXXV 2M.F. HeEnpy, Coinage and Money in the Byzantine Empire 1081-1261, 1969, 29-31

3 PH. GRIERSON, Catalogue

of the Byzantine Coins in the Dumbarton Oaks Collection, vol. 5,2: Michael VIII to Constantine XI (12581453),1999 4M.KostIAL, Kelten im Osten. Gold und Silber der Kelten in Mittel- und Osteuropa, 1997, Nr.

564-579 5 R.G6BL, System und Chronologie Miinzpragung des KuSanreiches, 1984, pl. 62-69.

der

SCHROTTER, s. v. Scyphatus, 619.

GES.

Scyros (Zxdeoc; Skyros). Infertile island (limestone,

slate, the Breccia marble popular in the Roman Imperial period) with many bays, to the east of Euboea [1] (202 km’; Str. 2,5,213 9,5,16; Ptol. 3,13,47; Plin. HN 4,693 72), rising in the south to 792 m, surrounded by several islets. The island was settled from the Mesolithic onwards (e.g. finds on Achilli Bay), in the Neolithic it was a staging post for trade in > obsidian from Melos to the northern Aegaean (+ Aigaion Pelagos). The ancient polis of S., on the site of modern S., was settled from the Early Helladic period onwards (wall remains, 4th century BC). According to legend — Achilleus stayed in S.; > Theseus is supposed to have died there; after the conquest of S. by Cimon [2] in 476/5 BC Theseus’ bones were transferred to Athens (Thuc. 1,98,2; Diod. Sic. 11,60,2; Plut. Cimon 8; Plut. Theseus 36). From 404 BC S. was free, from 386 BC until the end of the 2nd century AD with intervals in the possession of Athens. Inscriptions: IG XII 8, 666-679; Suppl. 516526. P. GRAINDOR, Histoire de l’ile de Scyros, 1906; PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN 4, 53-60; W.GUNTHER, s. v. S., in: LAUFFER, Griechenland, 626 f.; E.V. GLyKos, H Kagvotia xat Y LKVEOS LEGA GTO YEOVO, 1998.

A.KU.

149

T5O

Scythae (Zxv0av/Skythai). I. ARCHAEOLOGY

AND CULTURE

II. History

SCYTHAE

6th cent. [26. 64]. As well as the good pasture land, it is probable that the prospects of direct contact with the Greek colonies on the northern Black Sea coast (> Co-

I. ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURE A. INTRODUCTION; HEARTLANDS B. ARCHAEOLOGY; MATERIAL CULTURE C. CULTURAL GROUPS AND CHRONOLOGY

A. INTRODUCTION; HEARTLANDS Economic systems with a strong nomadic element developed from Mongolia in the east to the Carpathian Alps in the west during the rst millennium BC. This led to the emergence of a characteristic material culture with defining features of striking similarity across great distances. As far as is known so far, armed warriors on

horseback can be assumed to have emerged in eastern Europe in the second quarter of the 2nd millennium BC, as is inferred from rare finds from the Sabatinovka culture. An increase in mobile populations of cattle farmers and an emphasis on horse breeding is estimated to have developed north of the Black Sea (northern Pontos) at the turn of the roth/9th cents. BC, but older roots are probable. In bronze technology, there is evidence for the development of the four-wheeled covered wagon, a significant precondition for the caravan nomadism of the early Iron Age. Archaeological evidence such as arrowheads, accessories for horse harnesses and individual pieces (e.g. decorative discs, pendants, belt buckles) in typical Scythian animal designs enable the filtering out of groups of materials which can be linked to north-south migrations and the cultural backflow from the Southwest Asian/Transcaucasian south, and which characterize the conclusion of this development in the archaeological material finds of the northern Black Sea region [17. 18 ff.]. From the 8th/7th cents., the S.’s successful military campaigns through Southwest Asia opened the way to cultural influences from the south via the land bridge of the Caucasus. Hence, classical Scythian culture developed in contact with and in response to the urban cultures of the Near East (Assyria, Media, Urartu, perh. also Egypt). The origin of the S. and the main developmental phases of their culture are the subject of wide-ranging discussions [21; 10. 381 ff.; 30]. Since the excavation of the Arzan kurgan at Tuva (southern Siberia) [13] and the inference of the Arzan-Cernogorovka phase for the 9th/7th cents., however, it can be assumed that early nomadic cultural complexes as far east as eastern Central Asia existed in contiguity and in close association with each other (see below II.). It seems from burials and individual finds that the homelands of the main Scythian tribes and the bases for their military actions at the time of the Southwest Asian campaigns were the Kuban region and large parts of northern Caucasia (see map). Large-scale anthropomorphic stone sculpture is widespread in this region, and is a characteristic of the cultural heartlands. The focus of Scythian rule shifted into the steppes and forest-steppe around the lower Dnieper in a great western migration around the mid

lonisation IV. with map and stemmata) and of control over important trading routes triggered this development. B. ARCHAEOLOGY; MATERIAL CULTURE 2.GRAVE GOODS 3. FORMS OF SETTLEMENT 1. BURIAL SITES

1. BURIAL SITES The concentration of burials in this region of the present-day CIS can so far only be roughly estimated. Thousands of tumuli (kurgans) often form large necropoleis (in which monoculturally and multiculturally structured concentrations of barrows can be distinguished) with special platforms of earth and (brush)wood for sacrificial purposes [20. 24 ff.]. The architects of princely and royal kurgans created tumuli extraordinarily precipitous in silhouette, attaining the height of modern five- or six-storeyed buildings on bases far exceeding 100 m in diameter [25. 36 ff.; 27, vol. 1. 34 ff.; 27, vol. 3. 21 ff.]. These were the result of organized community operations with clearly-conceived earthwork architecture, the basic structural elements of which consisted of brick-like sods of turf formed with damp soil by hitting and beating. Stone circles or high-piled walls surmounting the base like pedestals elevated the grave mounds above the surrounding steppe landscape. They were topped by (male) anthropomorphic stone figures, a first collation of which already revealed numbers well in excess of one hundred [23]. The tumuli were sometimes surrounded by large external facilities with ranks and circles of stones for subsequent ceremonies of sacrifice. Remains of horses and human skeletons have often been found in the immediate vicinity of the bases [27, vol. 1. 67 ff.]. The inner chambers of the grave mounds were not infrequently on very different levels, on the former ground level or above it, but often far below it. Types of funerary structures were different in the two major geographical zones (forest-steppe, steppe). In the foreststeppe, wooden chamber tombs were typical. They could be designed as coffins or chambers, sometimes also as ‘houses of the dead’. Insulating layers, textile decorations and furniture-type structures gave the tombs a homelike character. In the steppe, the typical structures are catacomb tombs, a ‘negative architecture’ achieved by dropping shafts into the substructure. The origins of this tradition and the conceptions of the afterlife associated with it are as yet unknown. In tombs of the social elite, the vertical shafts descend to a depth of up to 16 m below ground level. The side galleries branching off the shaft reach lengths of 10-20 m, and the tomb chambers themselves can form complex cave systems, with main chambers and side chambers, ‘kitchen niches’ and ‘places of concealment’ (tajnikt). This was where the embalmed corpses of the deceased were laid to rest.

STIOTEW

DAS

4IVIG

souraxng

soiuogd

g 21NZJNI BGO [IZ

-

~.

RD

fo s}ods puly

é

Bs

J.

gp

;

oN Ly,

:

ainyna aoysosk

{oye) ataJ0'8 odspug

pue|poom pure addajs

-4s9J0} usamyeg Auepunog

©

quawa|yes

SyJOMYYRA

U

sauoz/sdnos3/seinyjno

addajs-jsa10} pue -sse1d usamjag Arepunog

pul preoH

Jo Jua}xe ayeuixoiddy

Augjod 4225

eWweYreS

(s)uesIN>

s\jodos9aN

aweu Wapow

sijodeay

spulj pue ainyjnd :sueiyyAds aut

(Da “S}U99 PJE/YIP — YZ)

aweu juauy

ywy -A408p0d Apeszoyi py}

See ==

te oie Ses

=———

dnaud ueluyAos addaqs

Aino

=

fo vas aosy

sinyyne. oKOUYN ey

WMA eo

eZ, 151 SCYTHAE

(e21ue4s ele¥s./N)

oaouyrny *€

LE

‘OF onaeluls 87 youry [AUOAsaD

ysuelpsag *

BOHOIIS *

BYAOB,INS °

ex/eg elexOsIS °

* OUAQAIS

* yA) WOPAD

* ZADIY

AdsAWD *

BH/PQui| * JOAOJUOLY *

* OAgsJapayy ny”

° Zn3O

° BYDOIOS

*

a2S/POJOs aoxsUuaWe» *

° OAa2I °II Jojojoz

° AOUPPZ * Azaq * AOSIWIAIIY

Oud *

aoysnodes °

4RE2SO1> *

sep [Aupojoy> °

BYAOSOPOY> *

AOIJIWAZYIEL]

BOsE}S JO WEY UA¥DIYD *

bydidys

* OAO}OY>

* PINE

* PyUI}IUA!

eyAeluls *

BAO .UAS * eyaouezhy *

“py pyoasad

°7Z AOIIWAN

:dnous ueyopod }se3

ADUI.|I L

PDI/9SOAON) *€

BYAOULAAIS °G

Aauignye/ “9

juagnyng Jepar|V ueiaepjow

pyaouezidey *

BHAOINZ ° ujogez °

posoy -leljn5 °

BUIDSAOHPR/D *

* ADUIQSUD)

ADAOYIUBA| *

eysijdng °

* a45Nq aUeA| -

° Auegeseg PHAOIOSIIN *

° aashjesg :dnoid ueyopod ysa\\

pososzy “OL

ADNAQEWIOY 6

'€ OAOPRISOUIA

9 oAoueze!|>

8 juedoy adjeyw B2/AOURISNy *Z

aoupojoy *S

Aeliqiy vy

} a4} 4O s}ods pul4

* PHAIIWIIA\ ° 9O8./Og I>15 O54 82$/POJOS

:dnois Aal>

° eo1gog

I3elujsasag *

ByAvaxey -epng °

° PYIPAI|D

* AOHUA|

eyrieldasag * ArueNMas “ZL a0¥SIAISE * Jef AOURAI|Od “LL oyzeluzisC * P/ASOAON “OL * D2AOLIO PHAISIIAWV * * ujuoney BleyDana/qnuA -BxNT* * PHABDYEW PyAOUAIEY * * PYAOUIJUP}SUO

OUEDSAd *

BYAI2EASI/d *

'L *Z *€

*Z [Auz0Saq Aoy ADuiouwer

BYAOPIIAS “77

PNWARISOd “LZ

aQsIUIAe|d “61 Aouiynisyy “81

yonozelA IAjPW *LL BYAOUILSAT ‘OL

ipeda|y EL

BHAOSAUY “HL a0yxsul/od “ZL

PJD “LL

BqZOJO/ 8

“b Pyeaolg

4ysul/D “OL BYAOWISEIAD "6

AONOFJOA *L PIPNG P4I/9A °9

erighy eles.jOg 'S euziog '€ PDI “7 ‘| PyAOSeg :dnoug eins

‘BY ‘Ly

BYQPLUSeG *

oaojojsody *

/osizpy °

:dnoud ueiyyAos addays

Anuiqeayrha

dno

BIOD eulzny “| :aunyjno OAoUYaN au} 40 s}Ods pul4

OAOUI|EGeS 67

PISLL “SZ

BYAOZABYD “9Z

AUYD ‘LZ

PHAOIIIN *Z

uldasaD “7

Bya/AOWPl “EL eleaox/as ‘ZL BYSNWasaD ‘OL

PYAOIEWYD “LL

8

Aunys!> 6 PHAOYIIIAOISO

ueAesey “9

ujoqgniy “LZ

Ie8139g °G a2$IPOJOD ‘by ‘€ aouelpo,

:dnou8 sjauog addy

eyaojiueg eles. jog 7 PS JOWOD eles jog “| BIYINYD *

pyjeg e/PUsEZOd *

BYAOSOUOYING “pT PHAAQEUINS “EZ

Apessojlw *€

pyelpny °s

PHAOURTES 9 ADJ08POd “v

loqng‘.

pul4

pul4

deli pun jf 40 siajodo.pan * 7Z uediny ‘erjuezS eleyszope] °

p2juzi/g eles.jog *

3S) * eojueys eleyxsulgey* eleu.jJopzey pojue7zS ZLuesiny ‘e21Ue}5 eleySZIUOIOA * * UesINy MAD BOJURIS pleysuanezi/z seau suesiny * yosenaposeiey ° uesiny siayzOIg UAAAS ° uesuny Auezpsay *

uewi7-JNyND “1

sdnoiy

BULeYIES ‘y

oO

OS

ORNS

OR,

jo sjods

JO s}Ods

SUBY

“snseone> ay} 40 SIjlyJOoy Wa4ypOU ay} pue vale UeGN> 94} U! suRZIN

JOdosajuuts “| L

seg-2n El BION P/eAO}SAIy “ZL ao0yx2eZ/aN ‘OL

BxSOH *

-/!Z1 © BqOy -

:e14y}A9§

ZT ueBINY JAAe2/UeR}S Sauajay

P/BUIOSPOg BI/URTS * B2/Ue}S eleySUIO1}SO» * ° PIE}YSAOPJAAOD BI/UPZS * * * * * *

idnosd ZaUOIOA

-BN]

au}

a4} apisyno

ay} eojue}s eojuezS BleysAasOyreWy UO JO lI4SAaaUa/Sag SI|Odo.DAL\) sijodoi2aN eleyxsqnd sdizpiny eleysjny Auesiny afyseD ap

(eleyoanoxley

2OUN) Aueliisoy

dno

-Ad108pog

a0 x20sh

Apessoyiw saunyno

aouzeluy “|

saunqjno DO O

NOS OR

»

fot OO Wr A MM OSE SNE

y

SCYTHAE

154 T53

SCYTHAE 2. GRAVE GOODS Herodotus (4,71) describes the custom

155

of killing

companions and servants and burying them with the prince in his tomb, and this has been much documented in archaeology. Elements of costume, weapons and tools often allow inferences as to the individual’s social status or intended serving function. Likewise, there is evidence of the giving of a great variety of grave goods including horses (sometimes with grooms), weapons and reserves, wagon parts, rugs and other textiles, kitchen equipment and foodstuffs in large quantities — all this in spite of the plundering of almost all tumuli by tomb robbers. Particularly worthy of note are the large quantities of wine, sometimes in sealed amphorae, and the ‘places of concealment’, which always contained the most valuable objects in precious metals. The inventory clearly corresponds to expectations of the afterlife, the princely graves reflecting to a particularly high degree the style in which the rulers lived and the almost limitless willingness of the entire people to work and make sacrifice in the service of the cult of the dead [25; 2. 107 ff.; 37. 7]. The gold and silver objects salvaged from tombs, often bearing images of scenes, show dynamic animal style subjects or are products of the socalled Graeco-Scythian artistic style [7; 12; 19; 26; 31]. The Scythian-Siberian animal style, an encrypted symbolic language, has been dealt with to varying degrees of success in the research of the various cultural provinces of Eurasia. Its origin and mutual influences were very hotly disputed in the past. Recent finds [1] show an astonishing and hitherto unknown wealth of subtlety in Scythian artistic production. Archaeology has provided a corrective, as appropriate, to the ancient tradition (esp. Herodotus, see below, II.). At first, the focus was on the elements of the socalled ‘Scythian Triad’ (from triada, a term introduced

by B.N. Graxkov): similar forms of weapons brought along, horse harnesses and animal style. Of the greatest importance here are the many studies of the armament and protective equipment of warriors, which show that the linchpin of a Scythian army was its heavy, armoured cavalry (with sophisticated variants of protective equipment and remarkably rich creativity in technical execution) [7; 6]. Archaeological discoveries provide a more exact picture than written sources of the status of women and children. It is clearly evident from grave finds that the wagon was a female-dominated sphere of life. The diverse Amazon legends (~ Amazons) were also confirmed by archaeology with the discovery of a large group of female warrior graves, containing both attack weapons and, in many cases, elements of protective equipment. Aspects of the ‘Amazon life’ (severe wounds, burial with infants, lack of concentration of graves into groups, inclusion in burial complexes resembling family environments, etc.) have been observed.

156

3. FORMS OF SETTLEMENT Numerous pieces of archaeological data on settlements have enabled the study of town-like centres with wide-ranging production, and have allowed social structures to be more precisely defined. However, only rarely has the issue of where particular princes had their seats or residences so far been taken up as a theme. Ancient authors describe the nomadic S. as a people living on ox-drawn wagons (Hdt. 4,46; 4,69). These wagons served as the preferred residence of women and children, probably also of the old and sick. Caravan nomadism certainly does not exclude the possibility of fixed winter quarters and town-like centres — indeed a (partially) mobile way of life is likelier. Comprehensive recent field research on the fortification embankments (gorodisée) of the Scythian period (see map) in the Ukraine and southern Russia shows that it is likely that proto-urban structures were contained within them, with artisanal and trading facilities, and that these functioned as economic centres and residences even for the nomadic elite. Elizavetovskoe (in the Don delta; [3]) and Kamenskoe gorodisée (near Kamenka on the lower Dnieper; [25. 160 ff.]) are well-known examples. Such an interpretation is still being debated for the great system of fortification embankments at Belsk, enclosing an area of 4,000 ha, which may be the city of > Gelonus [2] known from the written sources (Hdt. 4,108). It was home to a mixed population speaking Greek and Scythian [33]. Modern excavations also suggest that this was a seasonal centre of government for the kings of the S. in the 7th/6th cents. [28]. Around 300 BC or shortly thereafter, classical Scythian culture came to an end. The reasons for this are sought e.g. in political and military or climatic/ecological circumstances [14]. One important factor is seen in the advance from the east of the militarily successful Sarmatians (— Sarmatae), who gradually penned the S. back into the southern, coastal regions and the Crimean peninsula. A Late Scythian kingdom was founded in the 3rd/2nd cents. BC on the Crimea. Its new capital was Neapolis Scythica (see below II. and map), on the Poter Kaya (‘Peter’s Rock’) at Simferopol, which superseded an older centre thought to have been in the more northerly Kamenskoe

gorodisée

(on

the

Dnieper)

[38;

34.125 ff.; 18]. King — Scilurus and his family were entombed in a mausoleum near the gates in the city walls. Among the 72 wealthy burials excavated here, one particularly splendid one stands out, which is thought to be that of Scilurus himself or his son Palacus. Military defeats of King Palacus (in 110 and 107 BC) by ~ Diophantus [2], a general of > Mithridates [6] VI of Pontus, led to the kingdom’s fall. Scythian culture survived on the Crimea until the 3rd cent. AD, when Neapolis was destroyed (possibly by the Ostrogoths). C. CULTURAL GROUPS AND CHRONOLOGY Only in a few cases is an ethnic interpretation of the archaeological cultural groups (cf. map) uncontrover-

158

L§7

SCYTHAE

sial. The group in the foothills of the northern Caucasus, the later-emerging group of steppe S. and the Kiev,

iranischen Tierstils, in: s. [rr], 24-86 20 A.LEsKov, Grabschatze der Adygeen, 1990 =.21: V.J. MurzIN, Pro-

eastern Podolian, Vorskla, Sula and northern Donets groups may at various times have constituted the most

ischozdenie skifov (Ethnogenesis of the Scythians; Rus-

important centres of ‘Pastoral’, ‘Royal’ and ‘Farming’ Scythian culture. The other groups, esp. the northern and north-western forest areas, were, to a greater or lesser extent, culturally more remote from the S., but may have been part of the spectrum of neighbouring tribes sketched by Herodotus (4,17 ff.) [11; 32; 34]. This is particularly likely in the case of the Voronez group, but is also strongly argued for the early Iron Age cultural groups in the Great Hungarian Plain (Vekerzug Culture; [4]) and Transylvania, where the Sigynni and the + Agathyrsi are pinpointed. Chronological subdivision generally proceeds on the basis of imported pottery or other traded goods (e.g. metal objects, parade weapons, costume elements) e.g. from Greece, the Near East and Thrace. For the Scythian and early Iron Age cultural groups, the preferred subdivision is into an Archaic (7th/6th cents. BC), a Middle (late 6th/s5th cents.) and a Late phase (late 5th— 4th/early 3rd cents.), with slight fluctuations in the different territorial zones. The subsequent late period on the Crimea is appended (see above). For a recent perspective on disputed issues of relative and absolute chronology, cf. [1o. 381 ff.]. 1J.Aruz et al., The Golden Deer of Eurasia. Catalogue Metropolitan Museum of Art,2000 2H.G. NIEMEYER, R. ROLLE (ed.), Beitrage zur Archaologie im nérdlichen Schwarzmeerraum (Hamburger Beitr. zur Arch. 18, 1991), 1996 31.B. Brasinsxi, K.K.Marcenko, Elizavetovskoje, 1984 4 J. CHOCHOROWSKI, Die Rolle der

Vekerzug-Kultur (VK) im Rahmen der skythischen Einfliisse in Mitteleuropa, in: PrZ 60, 1985, 204-271 5 Id. et al., Wielki kurhan Ryzanowski (The Big Ryzanovka-

sian),1990

22 A.A. NejcHaRDT, Skifskij rasskaz Gero-

dota v otecestvennoj istoriografii (Herodotus’ book on the Scythians in Soviet historiographie; Russian), 1982 23 V.S. OW’ cHovski, G.L. Evpokimov, Skifskie izvaja-

nija 7.-3. vv. do n. é. (Scythian Stone Idols of the 7th-3rd cents. BC; Russian), 1994

24D.S. Raevsxij, Model

mira skifskoj kultury (The World Model in Scythian Culture; Russ.), 1985 25 R.ROLLE, Totenkult der Skythen, vol. 1: Das Steppengebiet (Vorgesch. Forsch. 18.1-2), 1979 26Id. et al. (eds.), Gold der Steppe (Katalog des Archaologischen Landesmuseums Schleswig), 1991 271d. et al., Kénigskurgan Certomlyk, vol. 1 and 2/3 (Hamburger Forsch. zur Arch. 1), 1998

28 Id. et al., Das

Burgwallsystem von Belsk (Ukraine), in: s. [2], 57-84 29 B.A. RyBakov, Gerodotova Skifija (Herodotus’ Scythia; Russian), 1979

30H.SauTER, Studien zum Kim-

merierproblem, 2000 31 V.ScHILTz, Die Skythen und andere Steppenvolker, 1994 32 Skifo-sarmatskaja i antiénaja archeologija 2 (Skytho-Sarmatian and Classical Archeology; Russian; Archeologija Ukrainskoj SSR 2), 1986 33 B.A.SRAMKO, Bel’skoe gorodisée skifskoj eépochi: gorod Gelon (The Fortifications of Belsk from the Scythian

Period

- the city of Gelonos;

Russian),

1987

34 Stepi evropejskoj éasti SSSR v skifo-sarmatskoe vremja (The Steppes of the European Part of the USSR in the Scytho-Sarmatian

Period; Russian; Archeologija SSSR

10),

1989 35 Stepnaja polosa Aziatskoj éasti SSSR v skifosarmatskoe vremja (The Steppes of the Asian Part of the USSR in the Scytho-Sarmatian Period; Russian; Archeologija SSSR 11),1992 36 A.I. TERENOZKIN, Kimmerijcy (The Cimmerians; Russian),1976 37 Ders.,B.N.Mozo-

LEVSKIJ, Melitopolskij kurgan (The Melitopol-Kurgan; Russian), 1988

38 1.N. Vysockaja, Neapol — stolica

gosudarstva pozdnich skifov (Neapolis — The Capital of the Late Scythian Realm; Russian), 1979. Map: s. above [32], 62 f., with additions acc. to [11], 18 f.

Kurgan; Polish) (Exhibition catalogue), 1999

6 E. V. CERNENKO, Skifo-persidskaja vojna (The ScythianPersian War; Russian), 1984 7 Id., Die Schutzwaffen der Skythen (Prahistorische Bronzezeit-Funde Abteilung III, 2), 2006 8A.CoRCELLA et al. (ed.), Erodoto (Herodotos), Le storie, Libro IV: La Scizia e la Libia, 1993 (with

Italian translation and commentary, also on archeological finds) 9A.J. Dovatur et al., Narody naSej strany v ‘istorii’ Gerodota (Peoples of our country in Herodotus’ Histories; Russian), 1982 10S.FELD, Bestattungen mit Pferdegeschirr- und Waffenbeigabe des 8.-6. Jahrhunderts v. Chr. zwischen Dnestr und Dnepr, 1999 11 L. GaLantna, Die Kurgane von Kelermes, 1997 12 Id.

et al., Skythika (ABAW N. F. 98), 1987

13 M.P. Gryaz-

Nov, Der GroSkurgan von Arzan in Tuva, Sidsibirien, 1984 14 V.I. Guttaev, V.S. OLKHOvsKIY (eds.), Skify i sarmaty v VIIJ-III vv. do n.é. (Scythians and Sarmatians 7th- 3rd cents. BC; Russian with English abstract), 2000 15 F. Hanéar, Die Skythen als Forschungsproblem, in: G.BEHRENS (ed.), FS Paul Reinecke, 1950, 67-83 16 H. HEINEN (ed.), M.I. RostovtzerF, Skythien und der Bosporus, vol. 2 (Historia ES 93), 1993 17 V.A. IL’InskaJA, A.J. TERENOZKIN, Skifija VII-IV wv. do n. é. (Scy-

thia in the 7th—4th cents. BC; Russian), 1983 185.G. Ko.tucuovy, Ukreplenija Krymskoj Skifii (Fortifications of the Crimean Scythia; Russian with English abstract), 1999 19G.Kossacx, Von den Anfangen des skytho-

Il. History The Greek term Skythai (Latin S.) was an umbrella term including tribes of an originally mostly nomadic way of life who lived from the 7th cent. until Late Antiquity to the north and north-west of the > Pontos Euxeinos (Black Sea). It is not possible precisely to determine their northern frontiers between the rivers ~ Ister [1] (Danube), Tyras (Dniester), > Hypanis [1]

(Bug), Borysthenes (Dnieper) and Tanais (Don); the last of these was regarded as the eastern frontier until the 4th cent. BC. From the 4th cent. BC on, the S. also moved south across the Ister. Their neighbours to the east were the Sarmatians (— Sarmatae), those to the south west the Thracians (> Thraci, Thracia). There

were also various non-Scythian tribes in these regions, e.g. the Agathyrsi, > Neuri, > Tauri. The S. had attempted expeditions to the south-east in the 8th cent. BC (mentioned in Assyrian sources from + Sargon [3] II on) and had settled in the vicinity of Lake Urmia. They posed a constant threat to the kingdom of > Urartu (cf. SAA 4, nos. 66 and 71 [r]). ~» Asarhaddon gave one of his daughters to the Scythian King Bartatua (Ilgoto@\ns/Protothyés, Hadt.

SCYTHAE

159

1,103) as wife in order to prevent a Scythian coalition with Urartu (SAA 4, no. 20 [1]). In 630/620 BC, his son Madyes defeated the — Cimmerii (Str. 1,3,21) and

fought against the > Medi (Hdt. 1,103). The S. then began a campaign of conquest into Syria up to the Egyptian border, where > Psammetichus [1] I (664-610 BC) compelled their retreat (Hdt. 1,105). They then ruled for 28 years in Asia Minor, until the Medi drove them out (Hdt. 1,106). Trade between the Greek colonies (> Colonisation) and the S. proceeded via certain emporia (‘trading posts or stations’). Both parties also conducted business in the farther hinterland (Hdt. 4,17—27; 107). Greeks bought grain, wool, staple fibre plants, dried fish, precious metals from the Urals and Siberia and, from the 5th cent. BC, also slaves (cf. the Scythian ‘police’ force at Athens: Aristoph. Equ. 665; Aristoph. Lys. 433-475). The S. were interested in Greek luxury goods (Ael. VH 2,41). The Greek and Roman image of the S. is ambivalent. On the one hand, they saw them as primitive > barbarians, and on the other as just, pious people in close contact with nature (> Anacharsis; on whom Thuc. 2,973 Str. 7,3,7 f.). According to their own tradition, the Skolotic S. (Auchatae, Catiari, Traspians) were the oldest tribes of the S. (Hdt. 4,6). A Scythian kingdom formed on the Hypanis probably in the late 6th/early 5th cents. BC (2. BaoitetoUS. basileioi, ‘Royal S.’). It subjected other Scythian tribes and the Tauri. North of these S. lived, according to Herodotus, the =. vouddec/ S. nomddes (‘Pastoral S.’, ‘Roaming S.’) and farther north still the ©. yeweyow/S. georgoi (‘Farming S.’). To the west of the Royal S. were the Alizones, and north of them were the >. Geotijges/S. arotéres (‘Ploughing S.’) (Hdt. 4,17,18-23; 52-57). The S. find first mention in Greek literature in connection with the 512 BC Scythian campaign of ~ Darius [1] I (Hdt. 4,1). The king of the > Regnum Bosporanum was allied with the S. and used their cavalry (schol. Dem. Or. 20,147; Polyaenus, Strat. 6,9,4). However, this good relationship had to be purchased with tribute (Str. 12,4,6; Lucian, Toxaris 44), which sometimes led to conflict (cf. Dem. Or. 39,8). From the 5th cent. BC, > Hellenization of the Scythian elite occurred (cf. Scythian inhabitants in Greek poleis: Hdt. 4,78 f.; mixed Greek-Scythian populations in some cities). Many kings of the regnum Bosporanum bore Scythian names. The members of the Scythian royal house had close contacts with the kings of the > Odrysae (Hdt. 4,80). Late in the 5th cent., a new Scythian kingdom formed south of the Ister under > Ateas. After the Sarmatian incursion in the 3rd cent. BC, the ‘Royal Scythians’ moved their centre on to the + Chersonesus [2] on the Crimea (Diod. Sic. 2,43), with the royal seat at Neapolis (IOSPE 17, 668; cf. 352,13; 29). > Scilurus and his sons built several fortifications (Str. 7,4,3). Their relations with the regnum Bosporanum, which was allied to the Sarmatians, deteriorated. In 150 BC, > Olbia [1] was forced to capitulate to Scilurus. + Chersonesus [3] concluded an agree-

160

ment with > Pharnaces [1] I (IOSPE 17, 402). Around 110 BC, > Diophantus [2], a general of + Mithridates [6] VI, fought successfully against the S. under Palacus (IOSPE x*, 352). The Bosporan King > Asander [3] (47-17 BC) succeeded in defeating > Pharnaces [2] and subjecting the S. They freed themselves from this subjection around the mid rst cent. AD. Olbia once more came under Scythian rule, but was taken in AD 61 by the Roman legate > Plautius [II 14]. Conflict lasted into the 2nd cent. (IOSPE 2, 26; 27; 423). However, with > Chersonesus [3] still finding itself under threat from the S., Olbia was given a Roman garrison and Chersonesus became a Roman base against the S. (IOSPE 1°, 361). Late in the 2nd cent. AD, > Sauromates [2] II annihilated the kingdom of the S. in a battle (IOSPE z, 423). The S. lived on within the regnum Bosporanum and the Greek cities, but were culturally absorbed by the Sarmatians. In the Byzantine period, the term Skythai was used indiscriminately to describe barbarian peoples from the north and north east. 1 State Archives of Assyria, 1987 ff. M.RostovrzerF, Skythien und der Bosporus, vol. 1, 1931; Id., Skythien und der Bosporus, vol. 2 (Historia ES 93), 1993 (H.HEINEN ed.); E.H. Mrnns, Scythians and Greeks, 1913; B.A. RyBaKov, Gerodotova Skifija, 1979; A.I. Meryukova, Skifija i trakijskij mir, 1975; A. P. SmMirNOV, Die Skythen, 1979; J. HARMATTA, Studies in the Language of the Iranian Tribes of South Russia (Acta Orientalia Hungarica 1), 1951; E.I. SoLOMONIK, Epigraficeskie

pamjatniki Neapolja Skifskogo, in: Numizmatika i epigrafika 3, 1962, 32-48. Lv.B.

Scythe. The scythe (falx faenaria; Greek: yootodeénavov/ chortodrépanon) was regarded in Antiquity as a kind of = sickle and distinguished from it terminologically only by means of an adjective. Its use remained limited to Italy and the northern and western parts of the ancient world; in Greece, by contrast, it was unknown in Antiquity. Scythes were used for mowing grass and hay (Varro Rust. 1,49,1). Plinius distinguishes a shorter Italian type and a longer Gaulish one (Plin. HN 18,261: “falcium ipsarum duo genera: Italicum brevius ac vel inter vepres quoque tractabile, Galliarum latius”), for which there is a great deal of archaeological evidence. Its increasing use outside Gaul can be traced to improved techniques of keeping livestock and to a consequently increased need for fodder and a planned management of meadows (Colum. 2,16-18; Plin. HN 18,258-263). Since the longer scythe permitted the mowing of large areas in a short time, the motive of saving labour may also have played a role. + Agriculture 1 M.-C. AMouretri, Le pain et l’huile dans la Gréce antique, 1986,76;103 2K.D. Wuire, Agricultural Implements of the Roman World, 1967, 98-103; 208-210 3 WuirTeE, Farming, 448.

K.RU.

162

161

SEA

Scythes (ZxvOno/Skythés).

1 U.v. WiLaMow1Tz-MoELLENDOREF,

{1] Third son of > Heracles [1] (or + Zeus: Diod. 2,43,3) and — Echidna, brother of Agathyrsus and + Gelonus [1]. Is the only son able to accomplish the

582.

task, set by his father, of drawing his bow and putting on his belt, and so becomes the king of > Hylaea and the eponym of the > Scythae (Hdt. 4,8—r1o; Steph. Byz. s. v. 2xUGat; IG 1293 A 95 f.; cf. Sen. Herc. f. 533; Sen. Herc. Oetaeus 157). 1 A. NERCESSIAN, s. v. S. (1), LIMC 7.1, 794.

SLA.

[2] Tyrant of > Cos c. 500 BC; in 494/3 he handed his ‘well-established’ domain to his son Cadmus

[3] and with the help of Hippocrates [4] became tyrant in Zancle (modern Messina). While he went to war with the Siculi in 493/2 the Samians took possession of Zancle. Then, deposed by Hippocrates and imprisoned in Inycus in Sicania, he escaped to Darius [1], at whose court he enjoyed great esteem and died in old age (Hdt. 6,23 f.; Ael. Var. 8,17). H.Berve, Die Tyrannis bei den Griechen, 1967, 118 f., 139; G.Mappo ut, Il VI e V secolo a.C., in: E.GaBBa, G. VALLET (ed.), La Sicilia antica, vol. 2.1, 1980, 32f.

K.MEL

Scythians [1] See > Scythae.

[2] In late 5th and early 4th cent. BC Athens used a body of Scythian archers as public slaves (> Demosioi) who

were to keep order at the meetings of the Council and Assembly (e.g. Aristoph. Ach. 54; Equ. 665). They were also called Speusinioi after their alleged founder Speusinus (Suda, s.v. toEdtat; Poll. 8,132). A force of 300 was bought in the mid 5th cent. (And. Or. 3,5 = Aeschin. Leg. 173). According to the lexica they lived on the Agora at first but later they lived on the Areopagus and numbered rooo men (schol. Aristoph. Ach. 543 Suda l.c.). In the 4th cent. they were disbanded and at the Assembly their place was taken by the presiding phyle (proedretiousa phylé; > Boule; > Phyle [1] III.), in the late Hellenistic Period the éphéboi attended the Assembly under arms (+ Ephebeia). Buso.t/Swosopa, 979 f.; P.J. RHopEs, The Athenian Boule, 1972, 146 f. PR.

Scythinus (ZxvOivoc; Skythinos). iambic poet from Teos (Steph. Byz. s. v. Téws), perhaps 5th or 4th century B.C. S. composed a poem expounding > Heraclitus’ [1] philosophy (cited in Diog. Laert. 9,16 = fr. 46 WEHRLI), perhaps entitled On Nature (megi pvoews), as in the lemma of Stob. 1,8,43 citing fr. 2 W. on ‘time’, either in prose or in corrupted trochaic tetrameters [1], the metre of S.’ two lines about Apollo’s lyre cited Plut. de Pyth. or. 16,4024. Ath. 11,461e cites an account of Herakles’ conquests from an apparently prose ‘historia’ (FGrH 13 Fr).

~ Iambographers

Ep.:

H.DtieLs,

Poetarum

KS vol. 4, 1962,

philosophorum

fragmenta,

1901; IEG 2, 97 f.; D.E. GerBer, Greek Jambic Poetry, 1999 (with transl.). E.BO.

Scythopolis see > Beisan Sea. The world inhabited by Graeco-Roman Antiquity was essentially determined by its geographical centre, the > Mare Nostrum and the large adjacent seas, the +Tonios Kolpos, the — Aigaion Pelagos, and the > Pontos Euxeinos; the peripheral seas - > Mare Germanicum,

> Mare Suebicum,

> Caspian Sea, > Ery-

thra Thalatta and the adjacent seas Arabios Kolpos (the modern Red Sea), the Persian Gulf, and the > Oceanus — formed fundamentally different worlds (particularly the Persian Gulf at the time of the Near Eastern empires), which from time to time impinged on the Mediterranean world in various ways (cf. the Pontos Euxeinos at the time of the Milesian > colonization in the 7th/6th cents. BC). The waywardness of the sea had been familiar to the sea-faring peoples living on its coast — despite their religious dread of the sea ( Poseidon; cf. also the theme of the ‘inventor’ of navigation e.g. in Hor. Carm. 1,3,9ff.) — since the beginning of the Mesolithic. Jonian scholars also occupied themselves with the sea and developed for its various manifestations their own models of its genesis and cycle. They detected and stated constant wind directions (+ Winds) (cf. also [5]), seasonal weather conditions ([4]; — Meteorology), shoals (on the relative depths of the various seas cf. Aristot. Mete. 351a r1f.; 354a 11ff.), tides —a rare phenomenon in the Mare Nostrum apart from in the narrows (— Fretum Siculum, > Euripus [1], > Hellespontus, > Bosporus), in the northern Adriatic and off Massalia (earliest accounts of this in Hdt. 2,11; 7,198; eyewitness account of the mouth of the Indus in Nearchus FGrH 133 F 33, in Arr. Anab. 6,19,1f.; cf. [6]), doldrums (Aristot. Mete. 354a 22f.), salt content (as the reason for the load-bearing capacity of seawater in Aristot. Mete. 357b 6f.; 3592 5f.). The increasing sophistication of the technical possibilities of > navigation (cf. also [3]) enabled the Egyptians (from the 3rd millennium), the — Phoenicians (from the middle of the 2nd millennium), the Carians (first half of the rst millennium), the Greeks and the Carthaginians to voyage world-wide. There are literary records of e.g. the cicumnavigation of Africa under the pharaoh Necho, 610-595 BC; the voyage of > Colaeus as far as Gibraltar, 7th cent.; of > Euthymenes as far as Senegal, 6th/s5th cent.; of > Sataspes by way of Ra’s al-Badduzah in Morocco southwards, beginning of the 5th cent., and of Hanno [1] into the same region, beginning of the 5th cent.; the circumnavigation of the Arabian peninsula by > Scylax, 519/512 BC; the voyage of ~ Himilkon [6] to Britannia, beginning of the 5th cent., and of > Pytheas to Britannia and into the Mare Germanicum, end of the 4th cent.; of > Patrocles into the

163

164

Caspian Sea, beginning of the 3rd cent.; of > Hippalus [2] to India c. roo BC (+ Exploration, voyages of). Subliterary navigation manuals, out of which — periplus literature later developed, provided indications of route conditions important for navigation, particularly the configuration of the coast (narrows, islands, bays, river mouths, watering places, landing places, harbour, cult

individual river gods in the cult of the Greek poleis, but a large part of the information for the classification of individual deities as sea gods (Poseidon excepted) stems

SEA

sites).

Since the sea as a communication route — cheaper than land routes, as had been known for a long time — represented a considerable economic factor, the nuisance of > piracy grew into a particular problem. In the end, security at sea could only be guaranteed by states that wielded sea power with the help of superior > navies. Economic and power-political interests often seduced such maritime powers into > naval warfare [2], which was conducted with tactically refined techniques. ~+ Dockyards; + Navigation; > Sea gods; — Shipbuilding 1 W.CAaPELLE,

s.v.

Gezeiten,

RE

Suppl.

7, 208-220

2 F. MILTNER, s.v. Seekrieg, RE Suppl. 5, 864-905 31Id., s.v. Seewesen, RE Suppl. 5, 906-962 4 W.CAPELLE, s.v. Meteorologie, RE Suppl. 6, 315-358 5 G.SCHMIDT, R. Boxer, H.GuNDEL, s.v. Winde, RE 8 A, 2211-2387

6 F.SAUERWEIN, s.v. Gezeiten, in: H.SONNABEND (ed.), Mensch und Landschaft in der Antike, 1999, 184f. _E.0.

from epic (Homer), theogonic (Hesiod) and mythographic contexts, and only to a minor degree from a cultic context. Amphitrite, for example, had a cult on Tenos (significantly, shared with Poseidon) [2], but it is unclear to what extent she was worshipped there in the role of ‘sea goddess’. Traditions about the sea gods reflect continual reflection within the context of ancient polytheism as an open religious system. The Greeks never needed a fixed theology about the sea gods; therefore this category was always open to change. Although Poseidon was traditionally regarded as the lord of the sea (Hom. II. 15,185-193) and was regularly given accordant epithets (enndlios: Pind. Pyth. 4,204; peldgios: Syll 289,17f.; Paus. 7,21,7; porthmios: Syll.3 586,12), the wide range of his roles points to the above-mentioned permeability of the category of sea gods. He was associated with storms at sea (Hom. Od. 5,282-381; Hdt. 7,192) and earthquakes (Hom. Od. 4,505-510; Thuc. 1,128,1). From the rock of Poseidon Petraeus sprung a horse (hence Poseidon Hippios: scholium Pind. Pyth. 4,246; Paus. 7,21,7) which was associated with water through the > Hippocrene fountain [3. 1855f.]. In Euripides’ Hippolytus, the god brings forth a bull from the sea (Eur. Hipp. 1201-1217; cf. Hes. Sc. 104; Posei-

Sea bream see > Chrysophrys

don Taurios: Hesych. s.v. tateos); despite the use of the maritime metaphors of ‘saltwater’ and ‘fresh water’ [5] the tragedy is centred on Aphrodite and Artemis, not

Sea gods

+ Ceto,

Poseidon, and does not suggest that he is a sea god. Zeus could also bring about tempests (Sol. 13,17-24 WEST) and, like Poseidon, was invoked as Enalios (Aeschyl. TGrF 3 F 46a). Dionysus transformed offending sailors into dolphins; he also rode on a ship in a procession through the town during the Athenian > Anthesteria (H. Hom. ad Bacchum 7; Philostr. VS 1,25,1; [4.102111]). Votive inscriptions and offerings relating to sea voyages can be addressed to the most diverse of deities [6]. Greek interest in deities associated with the sea is thus less systematised than is frequently assumed. The interest in the mythological and cultic aspect of the sea is not surprising, but reflects the sea’s role in Mycenean trade and military activities (~ commerce) or in the Greek — colonisation of the Mediterranean. Significantly, in city states which were less concerned with sea voyages, such as Sparta, the non-maritime cultic aspects of Poseidon worship are more prominent.

for example, is missing; she is the daughter of Pontus and mother by Phorcys of the > Graeae (Hes. Theog. 270-336) and Eurybia (Hes. Theog. 239), for whom there is no further evidence, other than as an epithet of, for example, Poseidon (Pind. Ol. 6,58). There are points of contact with the group of > river gods, who, according to early tradition (Hom. Il. 21,196f.; Hes. Theog. 337-370) are descended from > Oceanus and ~+ Tethys. There is clear evidence of the significance of

C. ROMAN ~» Neptune’s classification as a sea god derives from his identification with Poseidon and the transfer of Greek mythology onto the Roman god. On the other hand, what is known about him predating Greek influence does not indicate a sea god: the Neptunalia festival was celebrated on the 23rd July, at a time when there was not much water in the rivers. The Latin Neptunus is

A. OVERVIEW

B. GREEK

C. ROMAN

A. OVERVIEW The modern category of sea gods has no direct ancient equivalent. This does not automatically make it unusable, but it is inadequate as an attempt to classify and systematize religious organisations in order to understand ancient polytheistic systems (> Polytheism). Moreover, scholars tend to concentrate on Greek

deities, while possible Roman equivalents are viewed as secondary and derived from Greek gods; therefore they are frequently denied independent discussion. B. GREEK The most well known list consists of seven ‘sea gods’ [1]: 1) > Poseidon; 2) + Amphitrite; 3) Tritons (> Triton); 4) the + Nereides; 5) the ‘Old man of the sea’ (Hes. Theog. 1003; Nereus: Hes. Theog. 233; Proteus: Hom. Od. 4,365); 6) > Proteus; 7) > Phorcys.

165

166

probably derived from the Sanskrit apam ndpdat, ‘offspring of the waters’ [8], the god therefore was not primarily a sea god. Only later Roman antiquarian conjecture cemented the connection with Poseidon: — Salacia was explained as derived from Latin salum, ‘sea wave’, and became a sea nymph associated with Neptune, as did Venilia, whose name was explained as derived from ‘wave which laps against the beach’ (venit) (Varro, Antiquitates rerum divinarum fr. 257 CARDAUNS).

Theogonies such as these first appeared in the 2nd/1st cents. BC. The earliest Roman sources on Roman religion, at the other hand, contain no theogonies. It is therefore pointless to force a connection according to the Greek model between Neptune and other water gods. However, numerous Roman river gods existed with only regional importance: the > Fasti Antiates maiores record a festival for > Tiberinus on the 8th December (InscrIt 13,2, p. 534f.); the god was called upon during periods of drought (Serv. Aen. 8,72) and played a role in the piscatorii ludi on the 7th June (InscrIt 13,2, p. 466). ~ Portunus had a temple in portu Tiberino (by the ‘Tiber harbour’, Varro, Ling. 6,19); his festival, the Portunalia on the 17th August, appears to have had more to do with entering the harbour than with water per se; the Latin portus (= ‘door’) already occurs in the laws of the Twelve Tables (Fest. 262 and 514 L.; [7. vol. 2,343]) and indicates great age, as possibly does a flamen (— flamines; Fest. 238,8f.). The Volturnalia for Volturnus were celebrated on the 27th August; this god also had his own flamen (Varro, Ling. 7,45) and was possibly old. His name was linked with a wind (Liv. 22,43,10) and a river of the same name (Cn. Gellius fr. 7 PETER; Liv. 8,11,13), or with an Etruscan proper name

[9.1653]. Most of these celebrations fell in the the summer months and had, like the Neptunalia, a close connection with an increase of water and its related activities. However, it is not surprising that they cannot be linked to the category of sea gods: unlike the Greeks, the Romans turned sailors relatively late in their history, at the time of the first Punic war; for this reason the religious connection with rivers was more important. This did not exclude offerings to deities whose area of influence included the sea, but whose role was not restricted to that of a sea god: e.g. the temple for the Tempestates, ‘stormes

at sea’, 259

BC

(InscrIt 13,2, p. 462), or

numerous offerings to Neptune before or after a sea voyage. 1 W.PérTscHER, s.v. M., KIP 3, 1136f.

2 R.ETIENNE,

J.P. Braun, Ténos, vol. 1: le sanctuaire de Poseidon et d’Amphitrite, 1986

3 E.SitrIc, s.v. Hippokrene, RE 8,

1853-1856 4DEUBNER 5 C.P. SEGAL, The Tragedy of the Hippolytus: the Waters of Ocean and the Untouched Meadow, in: HSPh 70, 1965, 117-169 6D.WacHSMUTH, Pompimos ho daimon, 1967 7 WALDE/HOFMANN _ 8 J. PUHVEL, Comparative Mythology, 1987, 277-282 RE 16, 1611-1670.

9 E.FRAENKEL, s.v. Namenwesen,

SEA PEOPLES,

MIGRATION

OF

A. Lesxy, Thalatta, 1947; L.R. PALMER, Poseidon and the World of Water, 1984. CRP.

Sea Peoples, migration of I. DescriIPTION POINT

IJ. EARLY PHASES

III. HIGH

IV. ORIGIN OF THE SEA PEOPLES

I. DESCRIPTION The term ‘Sea People’ or ‘Sea Peoples’ originates from Egyptian royal inscriptions of the r9th and 2oth Dynasties, where it is used as an addition to ethnonyms characterizing the tribal warrior-groups that, as seafaring invaders ‘from the middle of the sea’ (or ‘from the islands in the middle of the sea’), plagued Lower Egypt and the Egyptian sphere of influence in southern Syria from the beginning of the r4th until far into the rath cent. BC. Among the groups of ‘northern warriors’ named on the victory stele of the pharaoh Merenptah (1213-1203) as supporting the attempted invasion by Libyan tribes in 1209/8 (from Cyrenaica to the western Nile delta), the particularly strong, leading alliance of the Aqajwasa (= Hittite Abhijawa/Achawia/Achaiwot) is singled out as ‘the foreign land across the sea’ (besides smaller contingents of ‘Tursa from the sea’, Sardana, Luku/Lycians and Skrs). The characterization of the Sikalaju warriors (active in the eastern Mediterranean c. 1200 BC) as attackers ‘who live on ships’ (in a letter from the Hittite high king to the regime in Ugarit: socalled LunadusSu letter, Ras Shamra 3 4.129) also shows that the core of this movement comprised groups of sea invaders. The migration of SP was not a ‘mass migration’ (Vélkerwanderung)

in the strict sense: it rather

comprised numerous waves kinds, dispersed over a wide tively small tribal groups of liance with each other [2. 35

of sea invaders of many area, and comprising relawarriors, sometimes in alf.].

II. EARLY PHASES

The Egyptian court correspondence of El-Amarna (c. 1340-1330;

> Amarna Letters) mentions Serdanu

warriors as bodyguards in the service of Egyptian vassal princes in the Levant; Serdanu feature in documents of the 13th cent. as military colonists in the North Syrian kingdom of > Ugarit. Lower Egypt, however, had not only been subject to incursions (friendly or hostile), but also threatened by landings of groups of Sardana warriors ‘in their warships from the middle of the sea’ (Tanis and Aswan steles from the 2nd year of Ramesses II’s reign) some considerable time before the period of + Ramesses [2] II (probably 1279-1213). At the beginning of the reign of Ramesses II, the number of captive Sardana warriors sufficed to furnish an elite troop of infantry within the Egyptian army. According to pictorial and textual sources regarding the battle of + Qadesh (1275), this troop was able to save the pharaoh from utter defeat at the hands of the Hittite high king, whose army included among others Dardanian auxiliaries. Each of the three to four ‘divisions’ of the Egyptian mobile army soon had a regular unit of Sar-

SEA PEOPLES, MIGRATION OF

167

dana; in later times, in the battles of Ramesses III

against the great coalition of SP (c. 1180), these troops again proved themselves to be efficient and loyal. These Sardana warriors (appearing Europaeid in pictorial representations) uniformly wear horned helmets, carry round shields and both cutting and thrusting swords, and are equipped with a reinforced breast piece, evidently for close combat in formation. The Palastu- (= — Philistines) and Sikar-/Sikal-Sikalaju warriors, who subsequently (end of the 13th cent.) featured in great number among the sea invaders and in the regular Egyptian Sardana units, display the same ‘Europaeid’ phenotype and identical weapons and dress (but they are often depicted with a sturdy, burgonet-type helmet with a high, tightly set reed crest instead of the horned version). The sailing ships typical of the SP with their high stem- and stern-posts finished with birds’ heads, as documented in texts and pictorial representations from the time of Ramesses III (c. 1183-1152) at Medinat Habu, are clearly distinct from the sail- and oar-driven boats of the Early Greek Aegean; this type is not found in the Aegean until the vase paintings from the period after the great destruction horizon on the Greek mainland c. 1200 (end of Mycenaean III B/III C 1; > Shipbuilding). Helmet types similar to those of the SP similarly do not appear in the Aegean until the vase paintings of the 12th cent. (Mycenaean III C - ‘Pictorial Style’). Ill. HIGH POINT The SP culminated in the 80s of the

12th cent. BC, at

the beginning of the reign of Ramesses III. In the central section of the royal inscription marking the 8th year of his reign, the recent catastrophic fall of the Hittite imperial city of > Hattusa (at that point long an ally of Egypt) and of its most important client princedoms in the eastern Levant is expressly ascribed to hordes of invaders. From their base at > Amurru [2] (Lebanon), these invaders launched a combined land and sea attack on Egypt, Ramesses’ royal residence in the eastern Nile delta, and the Egyptian sphere of influence in Syria/ Canaan. The text names five regions: “(the lands) of Hatti (the Hittite homeland in Anatolia), Qedi (Cilicia), + Karchemish (a Hittite viceroyalty in northern Syria), + Arzawa (a Hittite vassal kingdom in western Asia Minor) and Alasija (Alasia/Cyprus; > Cyprus)”, which “were uprooted at (a single stroke)” by an alliance of five tribes of SP comprising “the Palastu (Philistines), Sikar/l (Sikeloi), Skr8, Danu (Danaoi!) and Ws”. Nothing could withstand them: “they lay their hands on the lands as far as the limits of the earth; their hearts were assured and full of confidence; (they told one another:) ‘Our plans meet with success!’” [3]. The text and imagery in subsequent sections concentrate on the critical defensive victories of Ramesses III over the land army and its retinue in Syria/Palaestina, and over the fleet of the coalition of the SP in the eastern Nile delta. The stylized (and compressed to the Egyptian perspective) account of a great invasive surge from the

168

Aegean against the core territories of the Hittite empire is broadly confirmed in the AlaSia correspondence (> Alashia) from the last phase of the reign of king Ammurapi of Ugarit (Ras Shamra 20, 18, L 1 and 20.238), and in the texts of Suppiluliuma II, the last king of kings of Hattusa (cuneiform texts Boghazkoy XII 38” col. III). These sources give details of a desperate defensive struggle at sea organized by the king of kings against flotillas of invaders that penetrated from Lucca/ Lycia via the precipitous shores of Cilicia to the harbours of Ugarit, and evidently also by land, as, at the peak of the crisis, elite troops were dispatched from Ugarit into the ‘land of Hatti’. However, the final collapse of Hittite power in the Anatolian heartland and in Cilicia did not occur until later, in the 80s of the 12th cent. BC, as, in his account of his exploits, the king of kings reports a great expedition to Cyprus, and sea battles against evidently very powerful ‘enemies of AlaSia’, at a time when Ugarit and Cyprus had already fallen to the SP [6. 21-34]. It is at present a matter of dispute as to whether and to what extent the invasions of the SP contributed to the great upheavals in the eastern Mediterranean after 1200. The dominant pattern of explanations is monocausal, and endogenous crises predominate as causal factors (series of earthquakes, hunger revolts or dynastic struggles within the clan of the Hittite high king). It is certainly possible that the KaSka tribe (+ Kaskaeans) from northern Pontus, as hereditary enemies of the Hittites, may have played an important part in the downfall of the empire; but this cannot be the sole explanation for the historical caesura created by the fall of Hattusa and that of all centres in the Anatolian heartland. This caesura is not relativized by the dynasty of the Hittite ‘viceroys’ of + Karchemish, who asserted themselves as kings of kings on the upper Euphrates, nor by a rival line to the family of the king of kings who continued to control a residual enclave in Lycaonia/— Tarhuntassa (Karadag/Kizildag). The end of the advance of the SP led to no far-reaching or lasting occupation of the captured territories by the invaders. Archaeological evidence for at least a temporary occupation by groups of SP does not extend beyond the Cilician Plain, Cyprus and the Levant. The significant consolidation of the power of the Palastu/ ‘Philistines’ (according to OT tradition originating in Caphtor/Crete: Am 9:7; Gn 10:14) was not an immedi-

ate consequence of the ‘migration’, but had its origins in the reinforcement of the garrisons in Canaan, known to have been undertaken by the Egyptians in the r2th/11th cents. under Ramesses III as a measure of border defence; their material culture shows relatively close links with the Mycenaean/Aegean area [5]. IV. ORIGIN OF THE SEA PEOPLES According to testimony from Egypt and Ugarit, the main place of origin of the SP was the Aegean; the additional participation of Early Greek and Aegean powers in the military expeditions is suggested by the stress

169

170

on the role of the AgajwaSa in the invasion attempt of 1209/8 from Libya (see above I.; [2. 5o—5]) recorded in texts of Merenptah. The Danu/na of textual and pictorial testimony from the time of Ramesses III, on the other hand, may be interpreted as the new warrior elite in the Peloponnese after the destruction of the Mycenaean palace centres. It is difficult to determine the part played by incursions of alien SP in the great destruction horizon of c. 1200 on the Greek mainland and on Crete; in the Argolid, this event was probably triggered by a violent earthquake, and, apart from conclusions by analogy that might be drawn on the basis of better documented events in the eastern Mediterranean, only a small amount of archaeological evidence is available (i.a. Barbarian Ware ceramics, Pictorial Style forms of weaponry and warrior images, and the threat, primarily to be seen in the o-ka series of tablets of the > Linear B archive from > Pylos [2], posed to the palace centre of Messenia by sea invaders [2. 15-20; 4]). The distribution of the attested ethnonyms of SP (see map in [6; 9]), some of which played a significant role in the western Mediterranean during the rst millennium BC, suggests — in accord with the archaeological evidence — that the initial place of origin of at least a portion of the SP should be sought to the north and northwest of the Mycenaean/Aegean area, in the Italian Adriatic and the Balkans. This is also the probable origin of the Hylleans (> Hyllus [1]), who, as the preeminent phyle and bearers of the Heraclid tradition (> Heraclidae), evidently played an important role in defining the Peloponnesian Doric identity (> Dorieis; ~ Doric Migration). + Asia Minor II. C.; + Dark Ages; > Hattusa IL; — Mycenaean culture and archaeology

4,4,528a

1S. DEGER-JALKOTZzy (ed.), Griechenland, die Agdis und die Levante wahrend der ‘Dark Ages’ vom 12. bis zum g. Jahrhundert v. Chr., 1983 2G.A. LEHMANN, Die mykenisch-friihgriechische Welt und der dstliche Mittelmeerraum in der Zeit der ‘Seevélker’-Invasionen um 1200 v. Chr.,1985 3 E.EpeEL, Der Seevélker-Bericht aus dem 8. Jahr Ramses’ III., in: P. PoSENER-KRIEGER (ed.), Mel.

G. Mokhtar 1985, 223-237 4S.JaLKorzy, Die Erforschung des Zusammenbruchs der sogenannten mykenischen Kultur und der sogenannten dunklen Jahrhunderte, in: J.Latacz, Zweihundert Jahre Homer-Forschung, 1991,127-154 5 O.LoretTz, Les Serdanu et la fin d’Ou-

SEA-GULL 7) to be crustaceous

(doteaxddeQua/ostra-

kdderma) and described in several species, including the edible Echinus esculentus L., (ibid. 4,5,530a 32-b 20). Their eggs, which were eaten particularly by the Romans as a delicacy (Plaut. Rud. 297; Hor. Sat. 2,4,33 on the best being from Misenum; Sen. Epist. 95,26), are mentioned in Aristot. Hist. an. 5,12,544a 18-23 (cf. Plin. HN 9,100, which also describes their motion with the help of their spines and their weighing themselves down with stones as protection from storms [1, vol. 2. 573 f.]). According to Plin. HN 9,164, sea urchins spawn in winter and are hunted at night by sea anemones (urticae; Plin. HN. 9,147). Plin. HN 18,361 lists them among the weather prophets. Sea urchins, crushed alive or burnt to ashes, were a popular remedy e.g. for bladder stones, haemorrhage, hair loss, orchitis and poisoning (Plin. HN. 32,58; 67; 72; 88; 103; 106 and 130). 1 KELLER.

C.HU.

Seafood see — Fish dishes (and seafood)

Sea-gull. The various ancient names do not admit reliable classification into particular species. Nevertheless, based on Aristot. Hist. an. 5,9,542b 17, Plin. HN 10,91 suggests gavia as the Latin equivalent of Adgoc/Iaros (Aagic/laris) and mergus of ai®valaithya (mergulus, mergunculus with the etymology in Varro, Ling. 5,78: “because it catches its food by diving into the water”). However, since the habit of diving is far more typical of the grebe family, which likewise has several species, these may be what both Pliny and Albertus Magnus, in De animalibus 23,129, had in mind. n@vyE/pdynx (o@vE/phdyx, Aristot. Hist. an. 8(9),18,617a 9), xn&/ kex (Hom. Od. 15,479) or xadné/katiéx and xénoc/ képphos (Aristoph. Pax 1067; Schol. Lycoph. 76; Aristot. Hist. an. 7(8),3,593b 14) also remain indeterminable. Only the Xagocg 6 Aevxdc/Idros ho leukos (‘the white laros’, Aristot. Hist. an. 7(8),3,593b 14) clearly points to a sea-gull. The interpretation of AdAo¢/Idlos in Hom. Od. 5,51 and of aithya (ibid 5,337) thus remains as uncertain as that of mergus (Verg. Aen. 5,128; Ov. Met. 8,625 and 11,753-795: transformation of Aesacus; Ov. Pont. 1,6,52). Aristot. Hist. an. 5,9,542b 17-

6 TR.

19 speaks of a full clutch of two or three eggs on the

und M.DotTuan, People of the Sea: The Search for the Philistines, 1992 7 G.A. LEHMANN, Umbriiche und Zasuren im 6stlichen Mittelmeerraum und Vorderasien

rocks, which is the case with sea-gulls. Dionysius [29] (Ixeutikon 2,5) also allows the /dros to be defined as a

garit, in: Ras Shamra-Ougarit XI, 1995, 125-140

zur Zeit der ‘Seevélker’-Invasionen, in: HZ 262, 1996, 1-38 8 W.-D.NIEMEIER, The Mycenaeans in Western Anatolia and the Problem of the Origins of the SP, in: S. Gitin et al. (ed.), Mediterranean Peoples in Transition, FS Tr. Dothan, 1998, 17-65 9E.D. OREN (ed.), The SP and Their World: A Reassessment, 2000. Gate

Sea urchin (éyivoc 6 Paddooos/echinos ho thalassios; Latin echinus). This echinoderm (member of the class of Echinodermata) is considered by Aristotle (Hist. an.

sea-gull from details of its behaviour, such as gathering at fishermen’s nets and their description (black on the wing tips and on the neck, in other words on the head). Their gluttony was well known (Aristoph. Equ. 956; Aristoph. Nub. 591; Anth. Pal. 7,295; Ath. 4,134e and 8,342a). Modern observations have proved that seagulls attempt to avoid storms by flying inland (Verg. G. 1,361; Luc. 5,553; Plin. HN 18,362). A. STEIER, s.v. Mowe, RE 15, 2412-2418; KELLER, vol. 2, 242-246; D’Arcy W.THompson, A Glossary of Greek Birds, 1936 (repr. 1966), 27-29; 192.

C.HU.

SEAHORSE

Seahorse see > Hippocampus Seal (pmxn/phoké, Latin vitulus marinus, ‘sea-calf’, or phoca, Manil. 5,661) was the term in Antiquity for the monk seal, Monachus monachus, up to 4 m long witha whitish underside and rare in the Mediterranean. Only Tac. Germ. 17 seems to allude to the pelt of the common seal (Phoca vitulina). The monk seal is known as early as Homer (Hom. Od. 4,404-06, cf. H. Hom. 3,77 pdxat te wehawaphdkai te mélainai, ‘the black seals’), but also in Aristophanes (Vesp. 1035; Pax 758) and Theocritus 8,52. Despite their innocuousness (Diod. 3,41) they were hunted (as fish catchers) and after being caught with fish nets (Manil. 5,661), they were killed, e.g. with tridents (Opp. Hal. 5,379-93). Rennet (atva/pitya, coagulum) from the stomach of seals was used, mixed with roots, e.g. of the plant herakleion phyllon, primarily as a remedy for epilepsy (Theophr. Hist. pl. 9,11,3; cf. Plin. HN 8,111; 26,113; 32,112). The skin of a Caspian species was worn only by oriental peoples such as the Massagetae (Hdt. 1,202). Among the Greeks and the Romans there was a belief that a seal skin could ward off lightning, hail and mildew (Plin. HN 2,146; Gp. 1,14,3 and 5; 5,33,7; Pall. Agric. 1,35,14). According to Suetonius (Aug. 90), the emperor Augustus always took one with him for fear of lightning and thunder. People also believed that a right flipper placed under the head would bring sleep (Plin. HN 9,42). Galen dismissed their hard flesh (De alimentorum facultatibus 3,30,4 and 3,36; [1]), on the grounds that it produced bad juices. Of the copious zoological information on seals in ancient sources only little is untrue (lack of a gall bladder: Aristot. Hist. an. 2,15,506a 23; Aristot. Part. an. 4,2,676b 28f; by bristling the fur indicates the beginning of ebb tide: Plin. HN 9,42). The birth of the young on land and their suckling are mentioned by Aristotle (Hist. an. 3,20,521b 24f; 6,12,566b 31-567a 3) and Pliny (HN. 9,41 and 11,235). Their way of life in water and on land is noted (Aristot. Hist. an. 6,12,566b 2731;

7(8),2,589a

yee

ios

27-31;

Aristot.

De

respiratione

10,475b 29-476a 1; Theophr. fr. 171,1; Plin. HN 8,111; Ael. NA 9,50). The enmity between seals and bears (Opp. Hal. 5,38-40) was sometimes presented in

the circus in Rome (Calp. Ecl. 7,65 f.). Taming them and training them to perform tricks was known to Plin. HN 9,41. Xenophanes wondered about a fossil seal in the quarries of Syracuse (21 A 33 DK). It is presumably the large sea elephant that Agatharchides mentions for the Indian Ocean (GGM 1,31).

Geographical names such as > Phocis and > Phocaea are reminiscent of the seal, as are coin images [2. tab. 4,22-24] from these places. There are seals among the followers of > Proteus (H. Hom. 3,77; Verg. G. 4,395). According to Agatharchides 1,136 and Diod. Sic. 3,17, since the earliest times the > Ichthyophagi and seals had been living peacefully side by side. Ael. NA 4,56 tells an anecdote according to Eudemus that a very ugly sponge-diver was made love to by a seal and accompanied in his work.

1 G.Hetmreicu (ed.), Galenos, De alimentorum facultatibus (CMG 5,4,2), 1923 2 F. IMHOOF-BLUMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972), O73

KELLER 1, 407 f.; A. STEIER, s. v. Phoke, RE 20, 453-457; H. Gossen, s. v. R., REx A, 945-949; TOYNBEE, Tierwelt 84 and ro4f. C.HU.

Seals I. ANCIENT NEAR EAST

II. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

I. ANCIENT NEAR EAST A. GENERAL B. FORMS, MATERIALS, MANUFACTURE C. CHRONOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT D. DECORATION, USE E. OWNERS

A. GENERAL The art of carving stone is known to scholars of the Ancient Near East as ‘glyptics’; the more appropriate term ‘sphragistics’ (from the Greek > sphragis) has not become widely accepted. Given the large number of attested original seals, and their impressions or rolled impressions from all periods, and given the great variety of types determined by their functions, seals constitute one of the most important sources in the cultural history of the Ancient Near East. B. FORMS, MATERIALS, MANUFACTURE Two main forms of glyptics are distinguished: stamp seals and cylinder seals, whose mantle surface bears the decoration. An unusual combination occurs when the top or bottom of the cylinder has the pattern of a stamp seal cut into it. Facetted seals with a handle, whose rotary surfaces are designed as stamps, and seal rings with convex seal surfaces are also rare. Generally, the stamp surface or height of the seal strip does not exceed 5 cm. Almost all materials susceptible to sculpting and shaping are attested, but the preferred substances were stone and semi-precious stones. Seals were almost without exception worked in intaglio, i.e. the image was incised into the seal, and the impression appeared in raised relief. Stamp seals are often pierced in the back, cylinder seals generally along their length, so that they could be worn about the person on a cord or chain.

C. CHRONOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENT Stamp seals are attested and their use demonstrated as early as in pre-ceramic Neolithic Syria (al-Kom, Tall Buqrus; c. 7000 BC). The first major evidence of stamp impressions in an administrative context is found at Tall Sabiy Abyad in Syria at the transition from the ceramic Neolithic to the Chalcolithic (early 6th millennium). The zenith of the stamp seal was in the Chalcolithic (c. 6000-3000) [5]. The cylinder seal emerged in the late 4th millennium. The earliest examples of cylinder seals and their impressions come from e.g. > Susa, ~ Uruk and Tall Birak and Tall a8-Saih Hasan in Syria. Over the subsequent three millennia, the cylinder seal

174

173

SEALS

Sealing a papyrus document

dominated glyptics in the Near East, but did not supersede the stamp seal entirely. With the increasing use of Aramaic letter script on surfaces other than clay tablets, stamped impressions on attached clay seals were again more widely used from the gth cent. on. Parthian and Sasanid examples connect to post-ancient Near Eastern, Islamic glyptics. The use of the cylinder seal ended in the Parthian period, around the time of Christ. D. DECORATION,

USE

At first, non-figurative decoration dominated, but

figurative compositions increased from the sth millennium on, and prevailed from the emergence of the cylinder seal. The purpose of a seal was to certify the presence of the seal owner by the impression. This ‘signature’ indicated who protected the various closures of mud, plaster, asphalt, etc. (on doors, boxes, sacks, baskets, vessels, seals/bullae on cords, etc.). With the emergence of > writing at the end of the 4th millennium, clay tablets were occasionally sealed, but only from the end of the 3rd millennium did they regularly bear seals. The hem of a garment, fingernails, the incision of pictures, etc., could serve as an alternative of a seal.

E. OWNERS The identification of the seal owner usually resulted from the image; however, from the late 4th millennium, there are occasional instances of additional inscriptions. The so-called ‘city seals’ of the early 3rd millennium, which bear only calligraphic signs of city names in changing combinations without pictorial decoration, remain mysterious [4]. Only from the mid—3rd millennium can inscriptions be attributed to individuals: from then on, it is possible to allocate specific seal subjects or materials to particular social groups. Except during a brief phase at the end of the 3rd millennium (Ur III period), uninscribed seals dominated. Apart from their practical importance, seals were also valued as > amulets, probably in connection with the properties attributed to the particular stone. Although the unambiguous connection between a seal and an individual was the rule, cases are known in which individuals had several seals, or inherited seals (e.g. phenomenon of the ‘dynastic seal’ [3]) or could lend them. Deities could own seals as well. A distinction between ‘public’ and ‘private’, as in the sense of our ‘official stamps’, cannot be perceived clearly. Attempts to ascribe particular seals to ‘authorities’ or administrative entities in the early phase of the development of the

cylinder seals based on iconographic distinctions cannot be substantiated without doubt [1]. A connection between office and decoration can only be demonstrated in the royal seals in the 2nd half of the 2nd millennium in Asia Minor (Hittite Kingdom; > Hattusa II) and in the Neo-Assyrian Empire (9th-7th cents.). 1 M.A. BRANDES, Siegelabrollungen in den archaischen Bauschichten von Uruk-Warka, 1979 2 D.COLLon, First Impressions. Cylinder Seals in the Ancient Near East, 1987 3McG.Grsson, R.D.Bic6és (ed.), Seals and Sealing in the Ancient Near East, 1977 4R.J. MATTHEWS, Cities, Seals and Writing, 1993 5 A. vON WICKEDE, Pra-

historische Stempelglyptik in Vorderasien, 1990.

II. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY Fine-silt, unfired clay, with the seal image (> Sphra-

gis) impressed in it, was used for the seal — usually a closure seal to protect a papyrus document. The sealing of the document followed a fixed procedure [1] (s. fig.). The clay with the impressed seal, dried to semi-hardness, enclosed the twists of fibre so tightly that it was not possible to open the document without damaging the seal. Exceptions to this practice have been discovered in the Hellenistic Mesopotamian finds from > Seleucia [1] (s. [2]) and Orchoe/— Uruk (cf. [3]), where a ring-shaped clay collar bearing the seal enclosed the document. To enable the sealed contents to be checked, a so-called duplicate document was developed from the 6th cent. BC [1. 232-234, 238 f.; 4]. This entailed writing the text twice on the same papyrus, but only sealing one version, the inner text (scriptura interior). The du-

plicate was occasionally restricted to a precis and served the conservation of evidence. The technique of sealing, like the papyrus generally used for its documents, originated from Egypt, where it was widely used from the Old Kingdom (> Egypt B) onwards. In Egypt, the > scarab, bearing a hieroglyphic inscription cut into its underside, was mostly used as sealing device. The Aramaic language area, where cursive letter script was developed, has provided the earliest seal finds outside Egypt so far [5; 6; 7], from the 8th/7th cents. BC. With the new > writing, papyrus and the technique of the clay seal very rapidly spread across the entire Mediterranean region. Its indication is the distribution of the scarab as a sealing stone, which was manufactured to the Egyptian model in Phoenician/ Carthaginian, Greek and Etruscan workshops from the 6th cent. BC.

SEALS

175

Clay seals have only been found since excavation methods were refined in the second half of the zoth cent., and there are often thousands of examples [8. 3 338]. However, in the Mediterranean climate (which is damp in winter) unfired seals were only preserved if the sealed documents were destroyed by fire and the seals were thereby hardened. Exceptions are the finds of original, sealed documents on the Nile island of Elephantine [9-13] and in Samaria [14]. The early seals at Carthage (late 6th-early sth cents. BC) belong to the remains of a Carthaginian temple archive, which continued to operate until the city’s destruction in 146 BC [8. 10-214]. The seal find from Selinus [4] (4th/3rd cents. BC) [15; 16] is also Carthaginian. Most finds of clay seals of the Hellenistic period belonged to private archives (or filing systems), e.g. that of an Aetolian family unearthed at Callipolis (s. [17; 18]), destroyed in the 3rd Macedonian War (c. 169/8 BC). These seals contain images of Hellenistic rulers and the impressions of public signets (official and city seals). Images of Ptolemaic rulers of the 2nd and rst cents. BC are seen on the remains of an archive at Nea Paphos [19]. The archive of (probably) a merchant, with business and correspondence documents, on Delos (s. [20; 21]), was probably destroyed in 69 BC. The remains of a presumably public archive was found in the city of Titani [22; 23] in Thesprotia. The seals of Doliche/Nicopolis [24-27] are from the papyrus archives of the Roman Imperial period, as are the remains of a large archive from Cyrene [28; 29], destroyed in AD 117 during the Jewish Revolt, and, found recently, a very large collection of Imperial seals from the salvage excavations at Zeugma [30]. For the use of seals in trade see > Toll 1K. VANDORPE,

in: M.-F.Boussac,

A.INVERNIZZ1

(ed.),

Archives et sceaux du monde hellénistique (BCH Suppl. 29), 1996, 231-291 2 A.INVERNIZZI, in: [1], 132-143 3 R. WALLENFELLS, in: [1], 114 4 D.Berces, Die Ton-

siegel aus dem karthagischen Tempelarchiv. Vorbericht, in: MDAI(R)

roo,

1993,

263-268

5 R. HEsTRIN,

M.DayaGI-MENDELS, Inscribed Seals, 1979, no. 4, 47 6 N. AvicaD, Seals and Sealing, in: IEJ 14, 1964, 193 f. pl. 44c 7J.W. Crowroor et al., The Objects of Samaria (Samaria-Sebaste

3),

1957,

2;

88

pl.

15,

29-43

8 D. BERGES, Die Ton-Siegel aus dem karthagischen Tempelarchiv, in: F.RaKos (ed.), Karthago 2. Die deutschen Ausgrabungen in Karthago, 1997 9 W. HonrotHetal.,

Bericht iiber die Ausgrabungen auf Elephantine, in: ZAS 46, I910, 14-61, esp. 22f.,28f.

Elephantine-Papyri,

1907

10O.RUBENSOHN,

11 H.Sayce,

Y.CowLey,

176

320

20 M.-F.Boussac,

Sceaux

publics,

Apollon,

Hélios, Artémis, Hécate (Les sceaux de Délos 1), 1992 21 N.Srampo.ipes, Ho erotikos kyklos (Les sceaux de

Délos 2), 1992 22 K.PREKA-ALEXANDRI, Seal Impressions from Titanis, in: Pact 23, 1989, 163-172 23 Ead., in: [1], 195-198 24 M.MaasKANT-KLEIBRINK, Cachets de terre — de Doliché (?), in: BABesch 46, 1971, 23-63 25 D. Koss, Nikopolis und Doliche. Neue Ton-Siegel aus dem Archeion des syrischen Nikopolis, in: JNG 34, 1984, 63-76 26 P. Weiss, Neue Ton-Siegel von ‘Doliche’, in: Chiron 22, 1992, 171-193

27 J. Spier, Ancient Gems

and Finger Rings (Cat. of the J. Paul Getty Museum), 1992, nos. 466-474 28 G.Mappotul, Le cretule del Nomophylakion di Cirene, in: ASAA 41/42, 1963/64, 39-145 29 D.SALZMANN, Portrat-Siegel aus dem Nomophylakeion in Kyrene, in: BJ 184, 1984, 141-166 30 J.WAGNER (ed.), Gottkénige am Euphrat (Sonderheft Antike Welt), 2001, 105-114.

Seasons (oat, hérai; tempora anni). I. Asta MINOR/ EGypt

II. GREECE AND ITALY

I. Asta MINOR/ EGypt The definition of seasons and of a year as a unit of time was largely governed by regularly recurring natural events, suchas the floods of the Tigris and Euphrates in Mesopotamia (a short vegetation period and summer drought, the topic of the Sumerian poem about the dispute between summer and winter, see Kindler 19, 604) and of the Nile in Egypt (Nile inundation, vegetation period, summer heat, each lasting for four months). The prevalent periods of precipitation in Iran, Anatolia (four seasons [2. 13]), Assyria and Syria/ Palestine (OT: winter and summer, [4. 1, 305]) determined the sowing and harvesting of the land (— Irrigation). Even the often annual military campaigns were generally confined to the favourable seasons. The change of seasons was reflected in mythology and the calendar of cultic festivals, particularly in the notion of the disappearance and return of fertility and vegetation deities, such as Dumuzi (+ Tammuz) in Mesopotamia, Telipinu in HattuSa and > Baal in Ugarit. ~ Calendar; > Chronology 1 W.HELcx, s.v. Jahreszeiten, LA 3,240f.

2H.A.Horr-

NER, Alimenta Hethaeorum,

1974

3 H.HUNGER, s.v.

Kalender, RLA 5, 297-303 ordnungen des AT, *1964.

4R.DE VAux, Die LebensH.ER.

I]. GREECE AND ITALY A. ASTRONOMICAL B. IN CULTURAL

AND CALENDRICAL

HISTORY AND

SEASONS

LITERATURE

Aramaic Papyri Discovered at Assuan, 1906

12 E.SacHau, Aramaische Papyri und Ostraka aus einer judischen Militarkolonie zu Elephantine, r911 13 E.G. KRAELING, The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri, 1953 14 M.J.Winn LertH, The Wadi Daliyeh Seal Impressions (Wadi Daliyeh 1), 1997 15 A.M. Bis1, Un cas trés rare d’emploi des “cretulae”, in: K.R. VEENHOF (ed.), Cunei-

form Archives and Libraries (30e rencontre assyriologique internationale, Leiden 16 C.Zoppi, in: [1],327-340

1983), 1986, 296-304 17 P.A. Pantos, Ta sphra-

gismata tes Aitolikes Kallipoleos, thesis Athen, 1985 18 Id., in: [1], 185-194

19H.KyRIELEIS, in: [1], 316—-

A. ASTRONOMICAL AND CALENDRICAL SEASONS The subdivision of the solar year was important for working the land, for shipping and warfare, and was done on astronomical, meteorological or calendrical criteria. The seasons determined the religious festivals. Starting with a bisection into summer and winter, both peaking at the respective solstices and delineated at the equinoxes, the four annual points themselves came to mark the change of the seasons. Due to the anomaly in

178

177

the apparent movement of the sun, the four sections are not equal in size: according to > Hipparchus [6] (as quoted in Geminus Astronomicus 1,9-41 and Ptol. Syntaxis Mathematica 3,4-6), spring has 94 1/2 days, summer 92 1/2, autumn 88 1/8, winter 90 1/8 (alterna-

tive values

[3. 281-285;

7. 55-61,

595,

929,

953,

SEASONS

6 A. LE B@uFFLe, Le ciel des Romains, 1989 7 O. NEUGEBAUER, A History of Ancient mathematical Astronomy,1975 8 A.REHM, Parapegmastudien, 1941 9B.L. VAN DER WAERDEN, Erwachende Wissenschaft, >1966 10 P. WuILLEuMIER, Cirque et Astrologie, in: MEERA 44, 1927, 184-209. W.H.

963]). Even though the original purpose of the four quarter-year points had been to mark the middle of their

1. GENERAL

respective season, in the astronomical division, they

THE

mark its beginning: spring starts with the spring equinox, summer with the summer solstice, autumn with the autumn equinox, winter with the winter solstice. There is also isolated evidence of a 90° shift in the division (Mart. Cap. 8,874): spring starting with the winter solstice and ending at the spring equinox and so on. In the Greek [3. 308-315] as well as the Roman world [3. 182-191], different locations favoured different calendrical measurements of time, many of them so unreliable that other indicators were sought: the appearance of a particular bird (swallow or nightingale) at the beginning of spring, the first or last clearly identifiable visibility of certain constellations after sunset (acronych) or before sunrise (heliacal: — Paranatellonta). According to Hes. Op. 383, the sowing period for farmers began with the heliacal rise of the ~» Pleiades, while the start of spring was marked by Arcturus’ acronych rise (Hes.Op. 565f), while Theophrastus (De signis tempestatum 6) defined the beginning of winter as the cosmic setting of the Pleiades and that of summer as their heliacal rising. Varro (in Plin. HN 18,271 and elsewhere) defined the cosmic setting of Lyra as the the start of autumn. In his calendar reform devised by — Sosigenes [3], Ceasar defined the seasons as starting at a.d. VIII Kal. (according to Plin. HN 18,211; 246; 256; 311), with the resulting dates of 24 December, 25 March, 24 June and 24 September, though other dates are also mentioned [3. 281]. According to the inscription on the sundial of Augustus (+ Horologium Augusti), the beginning of summer (QEPOYS APXH) fell on 7 May [1. 79]. Leap days generally ranged outside of the seasons. In astrology, the seasons played a role of lesser importance compared with the alternating system of fixed signs of the zodiac in the middle of each season, in each case preceded by the tropical signs and followed by the mobile signs marking the passage from one season to another [6. 74-87]. In analogical thinking, the seasons have been equated with the points of the compass, the ages of man and the elements, but particularly with the colours of the four > factiones in the circus: spring — green, summer — red, autumn — blue, winter — white [2. 336-338; ro]. ~» Calendar 1E.BUCHNER, 2 A.CAMERON,

Die Sonnenuhr des Augustus, 1982 Circus Factions. Blues and Greens at

Rome and Byzantium, 1976 der Chronologie Il, r911

3 F.K. GINzEL, Handbuch 4.J.GUNNING, s.v. Jahreszei-

ten, RE Suppl. 3, 1164-1175 5 W.HUBNER, Die Eigenschaften der Tierkreiszeichen in der Antike, 1982

B. IN CULTURAL

SEASONS

HISTORY

POINTS 3. THE

AND

2. LITERARY SEASONS

LITERATURE TREATMENTS

IN THE VISUAL

OF

ARTS

1. GENERAL POINTS The original purpose of dividing a year into seasons was to structure time with regard to certain activities. Initially, only that part of the year with a climate unfavourable to agriculture, shipping and warfare was given a distinctive name (yewwwv/cheimon), followed by the remainder of the year, initially collectively referred to as dea/héra (Oégoc/théros) [7. 1165f.]. This bisection of the year into summer and winter continued in the military context, despite a progressive differentiation of the seasons (Thuc. 2,1 xatd OéQ0¢ xali yewdva). With reference to spring (éag/éar), a trisection of the year is evident in the Homeric epics [7. 1168f.]. The division into four seasons, also evident in early sources (Alcm. fr.

20), came to prevail in the wake of the scientific findings of the Ionian natural philosophers regarding the rhythm of the solar year, and became established in the 4th cent. BC; autumn was referred to as wetommeov/ metoporon oder p0wonweov/phthindporon, based on the ancient term for high/late summer, d2@ga/opora [7. 1169f.]. Four seasons also appear in the works of Roman authors, where sometimes an older division into a summer and a winter half-year is still evident [8]. 2. LITERARY TREATMENTS OF THE SEASONS The cycle of the seasons as well as individual seasons appear as literary topoi and were assigned a certain functionality. In poetry in particular, the changing of the seasons was used to represent the evanescence of life (Hom. Il. 6,146-149; Hor. Ars P. 60-62) or the brevity of youth (Mimn. fr. 2 Allen); another popular motif was the cyclical renewal of nature in the course of the seasons in contrast with the finality of death (Ps.-Mosch. Epitaphios Bionos 99-104; Hor. Carm. 4,7) [6]. The equation of various ages in human life with the different seasons (Ov. Met. 15,199-213; Diog. Laert. 8,10) was

possibly based on Pythagorean thinking, In ancient philosophy from the Presocratics to the Neoplatonists, the cycle of the seasons was taken as proof of the existence of a cosmic order [ro. vol. 1, 91-93, 107-109, 152f.]; Seneca (Ep. 36,11) used the cycle to illustrate the Stoic doctrine of palingenesis. Similarly, Christian authors viewed the constant cycle of the seasons as proof of the teleological order of the world by the creator [1o. vol. 1, 198-205] or used it to illustrate the notion of resurrection (Tert. Apol. 48,7f.; Min. Fel. 34, 10-12) [13 3]; from about the 3rd cent. AD, this was joined by a genuinely Christian functionalization of the seasons as the result

SEASONS

179

180

of the allegorical interpretation of the bible (evident for example in Hrabanus Maurus, De universo 10,11) [10.

single unequivocally positive description of winter by any of the numerous Roman authors writing on this

vol. 1, 205f.]. Ancient medicine established links be-

topic [5].

tween the seasons and the incidence of certain diseases,

3. THE SEASONS IN THE VISUAL ARTS Depictions of the seasons (in contrast with the + Horai with their mythical and cultic roots and their only secondary association with the seasons) only set in towards the end of the Classical Period. The procession to celebrate the > Ptolemaia of 271/70 BC also included people dressed up as the seasons (Ath. 198b); for about the same period, it is also possible to reconstruct a visual representation of the seasons personified in female form (male representations of the seasons only became more common from the znd cent. AD onwards), together with the appropriate attributes (Spring: flowers, Summer: ears of wheat, Autumn:

the various stages in human life and the climatic zones [ro. vol. 1, 89f., 122]. Possibly in reference to a lost work by - Suetonius [2] S. Tranquillus, C., > Tertullianus [2] Q. Septimius Florens T. (De spectaculis 9) mentions the interpretation of the chariot race in the circus as a cosmic allegory, assigning a season to each of the four factiones (— Factiones [II]) [ro. vol. 1, 159163]. Amongst the individual seasons, spring enjoyed a particularly great popularity as a literary motif. It was the subject of numerous poetic descriptions (e.g. Pind. fr. 75,14-19; Catull. 46; Hor. Carm. 4,7,1-4; Ov. Tr. 3,12,1-30; Stat. Silv. 4,5,5-12; Anth. Pal. 9,363; 10,5) and appears in a double sense as a season of beginnings: on the one hand, it signifies the reawakening of nature (interpreted as the work ofVenus, as e.g. in Lucr. 1,1-20 {15. 147f.]), on the other it was seen as the season prevailing at the beginning of the world (Lucr. 5,8orf.; 818-820; Verg. G. 2,336-342; Pervigilium Veneris 2). Spring was seen as the most pleasant of the seasons (Hippoc. De aere aquis locis 12,3—9; Bion fr. 2,1 5-18); a lasting or eternal spring or an ideal spring-like climate (as a ‘mixture of the seasons’, xoGouc tov WO@v/krasis ton horén in conjunction with some elements of autumn) are topoi frequently found in the descriptions of distant, mythic or idealized landscapes (Hom. Od. 7,117-128; Verg. G. 2,149; Hor. Carm. 2,6,17f.; Ov. Met. 5,390f.), the Isles of the Blessed and > Elysium (Hom. Od. 4,566-568; Hor. Epod. 16,5 3-56; 6rf.), the + Golden Age (Ov. Met. 1,107f.), and later in Christian texts as a characteristic feature of > Paradise [9; 14].

Two aspects dominate the descriptions of autumn (as a personification particularly prevalent in Latin poets [2]). On the positive side, autumn is seen as beautiful, colourful, fruitful and as a time of maturity [13. 272-275] (which it can also symbolize in an erotic sense : Sappho fr. tosa; Philod. Anth. Pal. 5,124; Hor. Carm.

2,5), while its negative aspects were noted as

rainy weather (Hes. Op. 414-416) and the risk of disease (Bion fr. 2,13). Similar to the change of the seasons, the dropping of the leaves in autumn symbolized transience (Aeschyl. Ag. 79-82; Aristoph. Av. 685-687), as well as dwindling vitality (Ov. Tr. 3,8,27-31) and attractiveness (Hor. Carm. 1,25,17-20) [13. 276-278]. Just as summer, often described as excruciatingly hot (with théros/aestas not merely describing the beautiful part of the year), winter also appears as an unpleasant season. It was seen as repellent and hostile (Hes. Op. 504-563; snow used in analogies for armed combat: Hom. Il. 12,156-161; 278-289). The motif of the long or everlasting winter appears in the negative characterization of landscapes (Verg. Georg. 3,349-370; Ov. Tr. 3,10), while wintry properties also feature in descriptions of the Underworld [13. 281f.]. There is not a

grapes, Winter: warm clothing) [1o. vol. 1, 1r2-114;

different in 11.355]. From the mid—znd cent BC onwards, such depictions became significantly more prevalent, initially in Italy itself, later also in the provinces, with a further expansion in the rst cent. AD with the expansion of the iconographic repertoire [1o. vol. 1, 127-141]; such images appear on reliefs and wall paintings, mosaics and from the 2nd cent. AD onwards also on sarcophagi [10; 12]. In the service of imperial propaganda, images of the seasons featured on buildings and coins, i.a. as symbols of the felicitas temporum [r1o. vol. I, 163-184]; they were also integrated into other imagery [4]. 1 E. AHLBORN, Naturvorgange als Auferstehungsgleichnis bei Seneca, Tertullian und Minucius Felix, in: WS 103, 1990, 123-137 2E.AusrT,s.v. Autumnus, RE 2, 2613f. 3 C.P. BAMMEL, Der Tod, die Gestirne und die Jahreszei-

ten in antiker und christlicher Dichtung, in: JoAC 39, 1996, 5-12 4C.Cray, Nilus and the Four Seasons on a New As of Septimius Severus, in: NC 130, 1970, 71-87 5 P.-J. DEHON, Hiems Latina, 1993 6 M. FANTUZZ1,

Caducita dell’uomo ed eternita della natura, in: Quaderni Urbinati di cultura classica 26,2, 1987, Lo1—-110 7 J. GUNNING, s.v. Jahreszeiten, RE Suppl. 3, 1164-1175 8 R. Gustin, Le nombre des saisons chez les poétes latins, in: Les Etudes Classiques 15, 1947, 114-119

9 R.Gustin, Le printemps chez les poétes latins, in: Les Etudes Classiques 15, 1947, 323-330

10M.A. Hanr-

MANN, The Season Sarcophagus in Dumbarton

Oaks,

1951 11 R.HorN, Review of [10], in: Gnomon 27, 1955, 351-359 12 P.KRanz, Jahreszeitensarkophage, 1984 13 K.Preston, Aspects of Autumn in Roman Poetry, in: CPh 13, 1918, 272-282 14 H. REYNEN, Ewiger Frishling und goldene Zeit, in: Gymnasium 72,

1965, 415-433 15 R.THuROw, A&A 33, 1987, 140-162.

Fruhlingsbilder, in: HLH.

Seat. Essential item of furniture for sitting on in the sparsely furnished ancient household, mainly made of wood (maple, beech, oak), but sometimes also of bronze and partially or entirely of gold (Hdt. 1,14; Ath. 12,514) or marble. Occasionally individual parts of the chair also consisted of other materials such as ivory or onyx (Plin. HN 36,59), metal or precious metal. There

181

182

were also woven seats made of willow branches (Plin.

Sebasteia (ZePdotea/Sebdsteia, LePaotd/Sebastd, LePaotna/Sebastéa, LePaopero/Sebdsmeia or LePaoura/ Sebdsmia). Games in the Roman Imperial Period, for which inscriptions from a few Greek cities are the only evidence. One inscription from Sparta, in which the word S. (oeBaotdc/sebastés is a Greek synonym for the Latin augustus) appears linked with the name of an emperor (CIG I 1424: LePdoteva Negovavidera/Sebdsteia Nerouanideia, ‘S. in honour of Nerva’), shows that the games were celebrated in honour of the emperor. On the programme and procedure, however, nothing is known. A list of the most important epigraphical evidence from the places where S. were organised can be found in [1]. The games seem to have attracted almost

HN 16,174). Depictions and stone copies show what they looked like. In Antiquity the principal forms (cf.. Ath. 5,192e-f) were the > diphros (Sidooc; Latin sella), the > klismds (xduouds; Latin cathedra) and the +> throne (8Q6voc; Latin + solium). The diphros was a simple seat without armrests and back, which was found in the home or in tradesmen’s workshops. In illustrations on vase pictures prostitutes sit on them. Of particular significance was the Sideocs dxdadiac (diphros okladias; ‘folding seat’), which appeared in Greece from the 6th cent. BC and is then attested in Etruscan culture. In Roman times the folding chair veneered with ivory (— sella curulis) was the seat of office and seat of honour of the higher magistrates; the bisellium (double seat, cf. Varro, Ling. 5,128) similarly acted as seat of honour in the municipia, e.g. for the + Augustales. The klismds was a comfortable chair with a curved back, which in Greece primarily served as a seat for women. A corresponding role was played in Roman households by the cathedra (e.g. Juv. 6,91; cf. 9,52; Prop. 4,5,37). It also acted as a seat for pupils (Hor. Sat. 1,10,91), teachers and philosophers (Juv. 7,203) and therefore in the Christian period became the seat of Doctors of the Church and bishops. Owing to the transient nature of the material, only a few wooden fragments of seats have survived; the cathedra of Bishop ~— Maximianus [3], covered in ivory panels, has largely survived, as has an Etruscan bronze seat. In addition to these, miniature seats, copies made of stone and clay and countless depictions in ancient art can be cited. — Cushion; ~ Furniture (with ill.); —* Household equipment; > Kline; > Throne

SEBASTOPOLIS

no interest for more recent scholars, however. Connex-

ion with the > Augustalia is doubtful. 1 M.FLuss, s.v. ZeBaoteva, RE 2 A, 952. E. CAHEN, s.v. S., DS IV.2, 1163.

GF.

Sebastianus [1] A senior officer during the 2nd half of the 4th cent. AD. From 356 to 358 as dux Aegypti he was ordered to proceed against the followers of > Athanasius (Athan.

Sella curulis und fasces. Zur Reprasentation rémischer

Hist. Ar. 59-63; 72; cf. Lib. Ep. 318; 520). On 24 December3 58 he drove them from the churches (+ Historia acephala 2,4). From 363 to 378 he was comes rei militaris, in 363 took part in the Persian campaign of + Tulianus [11] Apostata (Amm. Marc. 23,3,5), and in 368 in the operation of > Valentinianus I against the Alamanni (Amm. Marc. 27,10,6). After Valentinian’s death he was seen as a possible successor, as he was popular among the soldiers (Amm. Marc. 30,10,3). Appointed magister peditum by — Valens, in 378 he advised him to begin the battle of > Hadrianopolis [3] before the arrival of > Gratianus [2]. He fell in the battle (Amm. Marc. 31,12,5-7; 31,13,18; cf. Eunap. fr. 47 Miiller-Dindorf = 44,3 f. Blockley). He was allegedly a Manichaean (> Mani; Athan. Hist. Ar. 59,1; 61,3).

Magistrate

PLRE 1, 812 (no. 2).

RICHTER, Furniture, 33-47, 89-91, 101-104; ST. STEIN-

GRABER, Etruskische Mobel, 1979, 34-42, 106-114, 15 8— 164; I.STROM, Decorated Bronze Sheets from a Chair, in: J.SwapD.tnc (ed.), Italian Iron Age Artefacts in the British Museum, 1986, 53-57; I.SCHAFER, Imperii insignia. (MDAI(R),

29th

Erganzungsheft)

1989;

B. JAHN, Bronzenes Sitzmobilar der griechischen Inseln und des griechischen Festlandes, 1990. RH.

Sebaste (XePaotr/Sebasté). City in Phrygia, founded under Augustus by means of > synoikismos (involving, i.a., Awoxwsmntetc/Dioskopéteis, probably also ®dAnueic/Phlemeis; [1. 85 f. no. 16]) on the eastern edge of the valley of the Sinder (2tvde0¢/Sindros, coins HN 684; modern Banaz river) (IGR IV 635; 682 |. 18).

Hellenistic wall remains at modern Selcikler, 2 km to the southwest of Sivasli (cf. name!) suggest that a polis already existed there. A portion of the ancient road to the east of Selcikler has been discovered. Bishopric in Late Antiquity (Hierocles, Synekdemos 667,8). 1 Cur. Hasicut, New Evidence on the Province of Asia, in: JRS 65, 1975, 64-91. L.BURCHNER, W.RuGE, s.v. S. (1), RE 2A, 951 f.; MAGIE, 472, 1334 0. 14; BELKE/MERSICH, 376-378.

E.O.

W.P.

[2] AD 432 comes et magister militum (utriusque militiae) in succession to his father-in-law > Bonifatius [1]; in 433 relieved of his office by > Aetius [5], in 434 banished from Italy, in 435 and again in 444 expelled from Constantinople and declared an enemy of the state. During this time S. showed up as a pirate in the Propontis, and after 444 as an aide to the West Goth -» Theodericus (Theoderic) and the Vandal Geiseric (> Geisericus), who, as an Arian, used the fact that S. was an orthodox Christian to have him killed (in reality for political reasons) in 450. F.M. CLover, Count Gainas and Count S., in: AJAH 4, 1979, 65-76; PLRE 2, 983 f. (S. 3); R.ScHARE, S., ein ‘Heldenleben’, in: ByzZ 82, 1989, 140-156. K.G.-A.

Sebastopolis (ZeBaotomodtc; Sebastdpolis). [1] City in the mountainous country of southeastern Caria between > Tabae and > Themisonium on the

SEBASTOPOLIS

road from Heraclea [6] and Apollonia Salbace to Cibyra, at modern Kizilca. The original place name is unknown; in the Imperial period the city was renamed S. and is recorded in inscriptions and on coins (HN 624; [r. 150 f.}). In literature it is first mentioned in the early Byzantine period (Hierocles, Synékdémos 689). 1 F.IMHOoF-BLUMER, Kleinasiatische Miinzen, 1901/2. L. BURCHNER, s. v. S. (2), RE 2 A, 955; W.M. CALDER, G.E. Bean, A Classical Map of Asia Minor, 1958; JONES, Cities, 77; MAGIE 2, 1157, 1334, 1524, 1534; ROBERT,

Villes, 220 f.; L.RoBERT, Et. Anatoliennes, 1937, 336 f. H.KA.

[2] City in > Pontus on the River Scylax (modern Cekerek), where originally Carana (Kdeava, Str. 12,3,37) was; modern Sulusaray. Coins [1], inscriptions [2]. 1HN 499 2 T.B. Mirrorp, Inscriptiones Ponticae, in: ZPE 87, 1991, 181-243. C. Marek, Stadt, Ara und Territorium in Pontus-Bithynia und Nord-Galatia (IstForsch 39), 1993, 54-57E.O.

Sebastos (Zefpaotdc/Sebastds). Originally a Greek equivalent for the Latin title Augustus, was not introduced as a title in the Byzantine court until the rzrth century AD; after 1081 it was conferred — also in combinations such as sebastokrator — by the Comnenian emperors predominantly on family members. A. KAzHDAN, s.v. S., ODB 3, 1862 f.

ET.

Sebennytus (ZePevvitoc/Sebennytos). Town in the central Nile Delta, on the Damiette arm of the Nile, Egyp-

tian Tb-ntr, Assyrian Sabnuti, modern Samannitd. As a city (its name was also used to denote the 12th district of Lower Egypt) S. is not recorded before the 8th cent. BC — as the residence of local Libyan princes. In the second half of the rst millennium BC it became one of the most important towns of the Delta. The kings of the 30th dynasty (380-342) were from there, as was the Hellenistic historian > Manetho [1]. The chief god of S. was —> Osiris(-Shu) (identified with the Greek Ares), remains of whose temple from the 4th-3rd cents. BC are still extant. > Isis and a lion-goddess were also worshipped in S. The city remained an important centre as a bishop’s see in the Byzantine and Medieval Periods. R.S. BIANCHI, s.v. Sebennytos, LA 5, 766-768.

184

183

— KJ.-W.

Sebethus. River in Campania, flowing into the Tyrrhenian Sea between Naples (> Neapolis [2]) and Herculaneum (Sebethos: Stat. Silv. 1,2,263; Vibius Sequester 151 R.; SETIEIOOX on coins from Naples: HN 40);

modern Fiume della Maddalena or also Sebeto. According to a myth, S.’ daughter (Sebethis nympha: Verg. Aen. 7,734; Colum. 10,134) bore Telon a son, > Oebalus [2]. An aedicula to S. is mentioned in the inscription CIL X 1480.

M. FREDERIKSEN, Campania, 1984, 19 (edited and revised

by N. PurcELL).

VS.

Sebritae, Sembritae (Ze()Poettal/Se(m) britai). According to Str. 16,4,8 and 17,1,2 the term (‘foreigners’) for

(allegedly

240,000)

Egyptian

soldiers who under BC) deserted from their garrison in Elephantine (cf. Hdt. 2,30 and Diod. Sic. 1,67) and settled in Sudan. As for the precise location of this settlement the sources conflict (cf. apart from Str. also Plin. HN 6,191 ff.; Ptol. 4,20 ff.). The historicity of Herodotus’s account can not be confirmed from Egyptian sources; There are, however, testimonies of a similar accident under > Apries (589570 BC). ~» Psammetichus [1] I (664-610

T.Erpe (ed.), Fontes Historiae Nubiorum, vol. 1, 1994, 302-312; A.B. Ltoyp, Herodotus, Book II, Commentary I-98, 1976, 125-132.

KJ-W.

Secessio. Roman tradition terms as secessio (from Latin secedere, ‘to go away, to withdraw’) the remonstra-

tive exodus of the Roman plebeians from the urban area delimited by the > pomerium on to a neighbouring hill. This action was on a number of occasions the culmination of confrontation between the patricians (> patricii) and the > plebs. The first secessio in particular may have been instrumental in the formation of a self-conscious plebeian community under the leadership of at first two, later apparently five people’s tribunes (— tribunus plebis), to whose protection all plebeians committed themselves by a lex sacrata (‘law subject to the sanction of execration’). The destination of the first secessio was the mons sacer at Rome — that it

was the Aventine was an invention of the historian Calpurnius [III 1] Piso (fr. 22 HRR=24 Cu.). The traditional date, 494 BC, may be approximately correct, as may the depiction of the secessio as a withdrawal of armed plebeians, i.e. a kind of ‘military strike’ (Ascon. 60 ST.=76 CL.; Cic. Rep. 2,58; Liv. 2,32-33). The second secessio was said to have been made in 449 BC by the Roman army, from the mons algidus (Cic. Rep. 2,63; Diod. Sic. 12,24,4) or mons vecilius (Liv. 3,50,1) to the Aventine and to the > Capitolium, and thereby to have brought about the fall of the decemvirate (Pomp. Dig. 1,2,2,24), according to other traditions the second decemvirate (— decemviri). It was in its wake that the leges Valeriae Horatiae were said to have been passed. The historicity of these events is disputed. The secessio of which only Florus (1,17,25) speaks, of 445 BC in connection with the campaign against the ban on marriage between patricians and plebeians, is unhistorical, and the mutiny of 342 BC (Liv. 7,38-42) has nothing to do with a secessio. In the third secessio, the indebted (propter aes alienum) plebs occupied the > Ianiculum (Liv. Per. 11; cf. Cass. Dio. fr. 37; Zon. 8,2). With the support of the compromise of the lex Hortensia (by which plebiscita were put on an equal footing with leges), the dictator Q.

185

186

Hortensius persuaded the plebs to return. The motive of debt has probably been assumed later for the first secessio by analogy with these events. In the late Roman Republic, the concept of the secessio inspired the withdrawal of C. Sempronius [I 11] Gracchus to the Aventine and that of L. Appuleius {I x1] Saturninus to the Capitol. It also played a part in tribunician agitations (Sall. Iug. 31,6,17; Sall. Hist. 3,48,1M.). If these appeared even to Caesar as insurrections (Caes. B Civ. 1,7,5; 31,63; 31,17), then it is all the more odd that, according to the testimony of Cicero, he wanted the civil war to be understood as a

+ Atticism from the middle of the 2nd cent. AD and WILAMOWITZz’s denial of a Second Sophistic was a denial that in this period declamation became a historical phenomenon more significant than hitherto [3], a denial developed by [4]. The term ‘Second Sophistic’ is

secessio (Cic. Lig. 19).

+ Patricii;

— Plebs; — Tribunus; ~ Struggle of the orders

Rome

[I D];

1T.J. CoRNELL, The Beginnings of Rome (c. 1000264 BC), 1995 2G.ForsSyTHE, The Historian L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi and the Roman Annalistic Tradition, 1994 3 Ep. Meyer, Der Ursprung des Tribunats und die Gemeinde der vier Tribus, in: Id., KS 1, 71924, 333-361

4G.Poma, Considerazioni sul processo di formazione della tradizione annalistica: Il caso della sedizione militare del 342 a.C., in: W. Eprr (ed.), Staat und Staatlichkeit in der frithen romischen Republik, 1990, 139-157 5K.A. RAAFLAUB, From Protection and Defense to Offense and

Participation: Stages in the Conflict of the Orders, in: Id. (ed.), Social Struggles in Archaic Rome, 1986, 198-243 6 J.VON UNGERN-STERNBERG, The Formation of the ’An-

nalistic tradition’: The Example of the Decemvirate, in: s.

[Sil wie oae

TyiUes.

Second Sophistic I. Concert

IJ. SOPHISTIC ACTIVITIES IV. LANGUAGE AND V. POLITICAL ACTIVITIES VI. EDUCATION

III. PosITION OF THE LEGACY STYLE

VII. LITERARY ACTIVITIES LATIN WEST

VIII. SOPHISTIC IN THE

I. CONCEPT A term often used by modern scholarship, particularly for the Greek culture (esp. literary culture) during the Roman Empire between AD 60 and AD 230 when ‘Sophistic declamation’ (uwedétn/melété) became one of the most prestigious cultural activities in the Greek world. Philostratus (Philostr.VS 1 praefatio 481, cf. 1,18,507) first uses (and, it seems, coined) the term ‘Second Sophistic’ to distinguish the declamatory conventions that he claims were introduced by — Aeschines (i.e., for example, the adoption of ‘personae’ of oligarchs, tyrants or historical figures etc.; cf. ~» declamationes) from the ‘philosophical’ eloquence of the 5th cent. BC > Sophists. Although, to a large extent, all his ‘Sophists’ follow these conventions, Philostratus does not use ‘Second Sophistic’ (1 devtéea oogiotixt/hé deutéra sophistiké) as a term to describe the rhetorical movement whose first member he identifies as > Nicetes [2] of Smyrna in the reign of Nero: 1,19;[1, 41-4 5]). Its first application to a period was by ROHDE, to describe the rise in Asianic > rhetoric (IV. A.4.) which he saw as preceding the predominance of

SECOND SOPHISTIC

widely used in scholarship (cf. [x] and the title of [5]): it

is especially useful to describe the literary culture of the first to the third cents. AD, in which the rhetorical training of the Greek élite and their admiration for effective public declamation influenced most of the literary genres (see [6]), and to remind us how often that culture defined itself by reference to its classical past (see [7; 8]). The noun oogotjs (sophistés) and the verb ood.otevew (sophisteiein) seem restricted to men who both taught rhetoric and had entered a career of public display (cf. [9.12-14; 10.393; 11.97—-100]), but usage is erratic even in legal literature (cf. a letter of Antoninus [x] Pius Cod. Iust. 27,1,6,2). Although Dionysius [40] of Miletus (Philostr. VS 1,22) is honoured with a statue as “rhetor and sophist” (6/twe xai cogrors/rhétor kai sophistés) (IK 17 = IEph 7, 3047), he is simply called rbetor on his sarcophagus at Ephesus (IK 12 = IEph 2, 426).

In whatever way the term Second Sophistic is understood, the evidence of literature (mainly Aristeides [3] and Philostratus [5—8]) and epigraphy demonstrates that from Nicetes [2] (under Nero) until at least the 2308, declamation was regarded not merely as an exercise in rhetoric but as a major art form in its own right (see especially [12]). According to Philostratus [5] (but cf. [23.87]) it flourished especially in Athens and the great cities of western Asia Minor, above all Pergamum, Smyrna and Ephesus, but his sophists are drawn from many other regions of old Greece (e.g. Thessaly, Perinthus, Byzantium), from Asia Minor (e.g. Miletus, Laodicea, Perge, Tarsus, Aegeae, even Cappadocia), Phoenicia and Egypt (Naucratis) as well as some from the Latin West (Arelate (Arles), Ravenna, Praeneste). This list could be expanded with names found in inscriptions. II. SOPHISTIC ACTIVITIES

Resident teachers of rhetoric taught young men and, like touring sophists of various levels of distinction, performed before a wider public in private or Imperial mansions, in lecture-halls within libraries, in council chambers, odeia and even full-size theatres. After a less formal discourse (didlexis, lalia) which acted as a prelude (prolalia) their formal speech (melété, Latin declamatio) was usually deliberative (Latin — suasoria), imagining a historical situation, invariably from before 323 BC (e.g. Artabanus [1] urges + Xerxes [1] not to invade Greece, Hermog. Peri Ideén 396, Philostr. VS 255,575 from Hdt. 7,10), though not always a possible one (Aristogeiton [2] claims the right to prosecute Demosthenes [2] for Medism and Aeschines [2] for Philippism, Philostr. VS 2,8,580). Less often it was a forensic theme (Latin > controversia) — e.g. the adulterer unmasked (ibid. 1,25,542) or “Should a man who

SECOND SOPHISTIC

187

188

has both started and then halted civil war should be

IV. LANGUAGE AND STYLE One goal pursued by all Sophists, if in varying degrees, was composition in classicizing > Greek, different from the Greek (probably) spoken in courts, assemblies and council meetings, and even more from informal or colloquial speech (cf. + koiné). As early as the first cent. BC there were debates as to how far the language and style of 4th cent. BC Attic orators should be taken as a model. Dionysius [18] of Halicarnassus claims that by his time (c. 30 BC), — Atticism was victorious [3], but stylistic features earlier linked with + Gorgias [2] and branded by opponents as ‘Asianism’ persisted in declamation until at least the 4th cent. AD, and pursuit of Attic vocabulary and syntax is best documented for the second and early third cents. AD [15], when it was supported by influential men like Herodes [16] Atticus and was facilitated by lexicographers such as > Moeris, > Phrynichus [4] and — Julius [IV 17] Pollux, whose works demonstrate the importance of linguistic archaism.

rewarded or punished?” (ibid. 1,26,545), often involv-

ing tyrants, pirates or rape. The audiences, rhetorically educated connoisseurs, could be vociferously critical or enthusiastic [12; 13].

Sophists also had opportunities to deliver diverse epideictic speeches (— epideixis): e.g. orations for funerals (+ Herodes [16] Atticus for his teacher Secundus, ibid. 1,26,544; Aelius > Aristeides [3], Or. 32 KEIL, for Alexander [32] of Cotiaeum; > Hadrian [1] for Herodes, Philostr. VS 2,10,586), birthdays (Aristid. Or. 30 Kei for Apellas), for the inauguration of a building (e.g. Polemon [6] for the Olympieum in Athens AD 13 1/2, Philostr. VS 1,25,533; Aristid. Or. 27 Ker at the rededication of the Hadrianeum in Cyzicus in AD 166, delivered both in the council chamber and at the festive ceremony, cf. Aristid. 51,16 KEIL), or praising a city ata festival (cf. Aristid. Or. 1 LENZ-BEHR: the Panathénaikos, for the Panathenae, probably of August AD 155, admired as a masterpiece by Menander [12] Rhetor; and probably Or. 26 KEIL, his praise of Rome) or on other special occasions, cf. e.g. Or. 18 KeiL: Aristides’ lament (monoidia) for Smyrna devastated destroyed by an earthquake. Aristides also claimed to innovate in composing prose hymns to gods (cf. esp. [14]). III. POSITION OF THE LEGACY -» Aristides [3] is the only Sophist in Philostratus for whom a substantial corpus survives: over 40 orations, the longest running to 230 modern pages demonstrate the range of a sophist’s oratory. Only a few are declamations (melétai): Or. 5 and 6 K. (debating Athens’ dispatch of reinforcements to Sicily: 413 BC), Or. 7 and 8 (urging Athens to make peace with Sparta: 425 BC and Sparta to be clement to Athens: 405 BC), Or. 9 and ro (Athens’ seeks a Theban alliance: 338 BC), Or. 1115 (presenting different cities’ cases after Leuctra: 371 BC); Or. 16 (for an envoy to Achilles, cf. Hom. Il., book 9). Otherwise we have from this period only a pair of declamations by > Polemon [6], in which the fathers of Callimachus and Cynegeirus each support his son’s claim to the prize for best performance (aristeia) at the battle of Marathon (490 BC); four by Lucian (two, Or.

1 and 2, relating to the 6th cent. BC tyrant Phalaris, and two anonymous controversiae: Or. 53 claiming a reward for killing a tyrant, Or. 54 a doctor contesting disinheritance for refusing to cure his stepmother; and two whose attribution to Herodes [16] and Hadrian [r] of Tyre are contested. Many of the surviving works (over 70) works of — Dion [I 3] of Prusa have sophistic colour, e.g. Or. 11, arguing (originally to a Trojan audience?) that Troy was never taken, or Or. 12, moving from praise of > Phei-

dias’ statue of Zeus at Olympia (where it seems the speech was first delevered) to theology and aesthetics. Other epideictic works by Dion are attested (praise of hair, praise of a parrot, Philostr. VS 1,7,487), but none is a declamation.

V. POLITICAL ACTIVITIES

This pursuit of classical norms should be seen partly as part of the wider pattern of recreating the Greek world (at the time a part of the Roman Empire) in the image of its glorious past [7] and partly — like the practice of public declamation itself —as creating yet another arena by which members of the ever-competitive Greek city élites could score points off their rivals [15]. In a world which set great value on public image and show, the Sophists’ virtuoso performances were occasions — as were embassies, debates in the municipal council and cultic ceremonies — for rivalry in self-representation. Nearly all the sophists in Philostratus and others whom he omits, were from the Greek city élites, and in that capacity many held high city offices and were major city benefactors (— euergétés; > Euergetism). They were often included in embassies to congratulate emperors on their accession or to procure or win or maintain privileges for their cities (and sometimes themselves; cf. {xo]). Dion [I 3], Polemon [6] and Aristeides [3] used their rhetorical skill to exercise influence not simply in their cities (like many other Sophists in Philostratus), but in their provinces and even beyond. In their own cities such activity (documented e.g. for Dion [I 3] by Or. 40-51, for Polemon [6] by Philostr. VS 1,5,31) is the characteristic behaviour of any member of local élites. But this is hardly so when Dio intervenes in the conflict between Nicaea [5] and Nicomedia (Or. 38) or in internal conflict in Nicaea (Or. 39), or Aristides urges the Asian cities to moderate their rivalry (Or. 23 KEIL) or appeals to the Rhodians to abstain from internal faction (Or. 24 K.).

VI. EDUCATION

Many Sophists must have spent more time and energy on teaching than declamation. In order to promote teaching, emperor Vespasian gave teachers of rhetoric — like grammatici (+ grammaticus) and doctors — immu-

189

190

nities from city offices, judicial serice and from priesthoods both civic and provincial (— munus, munera). This privilege was extended to philosophers by Nerva or Trajan, and Hadrian confirmed these arrangements. Antoninus [1] Pius (Cod. Iust. 27,1,6,2) limited holders to between three and five according to the city’s size (and excluded the philosophers), though he allowed men of outstanding skill (dgan epistemones) to be supernumerary and immune even when teaching outside their city [17; 18]. Emperors also established salaried chairs of rhetoric: Vespasian of both Greek and Latin at Rome, Pius allegedly throughout the empire (SHA Pius 11,3). These may have included the ‘civic chair’ (démdsios thrénos) of Greek rhetoric at Athens carrying a salary of 6000 drachmae (Philostr. VS 2,20,600), whose first holder was > Lollianus [2]. In the 170s Marcus [2] Aurelius added an Imperial chair salaried at 10,000 drachmae ——> Hadrianus [1] of Tyre was in office by AD 176 [19]. From no later than Hadrian (AD 117-138) the equestrian post ab > epistulis Graecis was, appropriately, often held by a distinguished rhetor, and this sometimes led to a procuratorial career (> procurator [1]) and further rewards [ro].

of > ékphrasis, taught through a handbook on rhetoric, created its own genre with the descriptions of imaginary paintings (e.g. the Imagines of the two Philostratoi, cf. > Philostratus [5] B. 5.) and influenced Aelianus’ [2] Varia historia, his Natura animalium and his fictitious Epistulae (‘letters’). The ékphrasis also features prominently amongst writers of novels (of whom + Achilleus Tatius [1] and + Longus are described in manuscripts as ‘Sophists’) as well as in Philostratus’ [5] Héroikos and Vita Apollonii. > Lucian uses the technique of the ékphrasis not only in some prolaliai, but also develops a humorous art form from the didlexis: its use in lighter entertainment is already noticeable in Dion’s work [I 3], though only of Lucian (who tells us that he started out as an orator) has a great amount of entertaining works been handed down,. Whether such works were performed in front of an audience or circulated as letters or pamphlets (or both), cannot really be resolved.

Some posts, however, and rare elevation to the Roman

Senate, like sophists’ authority within their cities, are as much (or more) attributable to their belonging to cities’ governing élites as to their skill in manipulating their declamations’ audiences. Competition for such distinctions encouraged professional quarrels in a profession already competitive. Such rivalry added spice to performances and tempted fans to trap their hero’s rival, as when Herodes’ pupils spoiled a supposedly extempore performance of > Philagrus by reading out the speech which he was giving but which had already been published (Philostr. VS 28,579). VII. LITERARY ACTIVITIES

Many rhetoricians were also engaged in intellectual areas beyond declamation: some devoted themselves to literature (epic, tragedy) or smaller literary forms in which improvisation was just as appreciated as in rhetoric itself. Other Sophists (specifically named in Philostr. VS 1,1-8) read or wrote about philosophical subjects either throughout their lives like > Favorinus of Arelate or after ‘converting’ from Sophistic, as his teacher Dion [I 3] claimed to have done [20; 21]. Others however regarded Sophistic and philosophy as fundamentally opposite concepts [22]. Herodes [16] Atticus was, aside from his teaching and declamation activities, not only extraordinarily rich and powerful (which was of great benefit to his Athenian and Roman senatorial career: cos. ord. AD 143), but he also discussed knowledgeably with philosophers and philologists within Aulus — Gellius [6]’ circle. Other Sophists such as Antiochus of Aegeae (Philostr. VS 2,4,570) wrote historical works. Rhetorical techniques and trends shaped the literature of the time to a great extent [23; 24]. The practice

SECOND SOPHISTIC

VIII. SopHISTIC IN THE LATIN WEST In the Latin West young people enjoyed the same rhetorical education as in the Greek East (> Rhetoric III. C.), and Rome had chairs of both Greek and Latin rhetoric, but Latin declamation as an adult art form seems neither prominent nor widespread (cf. > declamationes), not demonstrably becoming a fashion amongst city élites (who had other ways of establishing their Latin identity) and well attested only in the career of Apuleius of Madaura (> Ap(p)uleius [III]) in Africa [24]. IX. ASSESSMENT The prominence of declamatory oratory was not limited to Philostratus’ favoured period. It continued as a major cultural phenomenon into the 4th and 5th cents. AD, whose properly sophistic texts are more voluminous than those surviving from AD 60-230). We also already find teachers of rhetoric active in the Greek city politics by the late first cent. BC, and Greek declaimers of Augustan and Tiberian Rome are documented in the older Seneca’s [1] Controversiae and Suasoriae. The change about the time of Nero may not have been so much one of the sophists’ or rhetors’ role as of the theatre in which they played. The Greek world was recovering from the Roman expansion and civil wars, Nero’s short-lived gift of ‘freedom’ to Achaia stirred confidence, and Philostratus’ period saw an economic, cultural and even (in limited terms) political recovery in the Greek world that has fairly been termed a renaissance. What was uttered and done by rhetors in this period breathed more confidence and had a wider impact than what went before, and they themselves were prominent among the many elements of Greek culture that found a high place in Roman esteem and society > Declamationes; > Exercitatio; > Greek; > Greek literary languages; — Literature (III.D.-G., V.G.); > rhetoric (IV. A.4.)

SECOND

SOPHISTIC

1 T. WHitMarsH, Greek Literature and the Roman Empire, 2001 2 E.RonpE, Die griechische Sophistik der Kaiserzeit, in: Id., Der griechische Roman, 1876, 288-360 (31914), 310-387. 3 U.von WiLaAMow!ITz-MOELLENpDorF, Asianismus und Atticismus, in: Hermes 35, 1900,

1-52

4P.A. Brunt, The Bubble of the Second Sophistic,

in: BICS 39, 1994, 25-52 5 G. ANDERSON, The Second Sophistic: a Cultural Phenomenon in the Roman Empire, 1993 6E.L. Bowik, Literature and Sophistic, in: CAH *T1, 2000, 898-921 7Id., Greeks and Their Past in the Second Sophistic, in: Past and Present 46, 1970, 3-41 8 B.P. REARDON, Courants littéraires grecs des Ile et Ile siécles aprés J-C., 1971 9G.W. Bowersocx, Greek

sophists in the Roman Empire, 1969 10E.L. Bowie, The Importance of Sophists, in: YCIS 27, 1982, 29-59 11 S. Swain, Hellenism and Empire. Language, Classicism and Power in the Greek World AD 50-250, 1986 12 D.A. Russet, Greek Declamation, 1983 13 M.Korenyjak, Publikum und Redner: ihre Interaktion in der sophistischen Rhetorik der Kaiserzeit, 2000 14D.A. RussELt, Aristides and the Prose Hymn, in: Id. (ed.), Antonine Literature, 1990, 199-219

15 W.Scumi1b, Der Atticismus in seinen Hauptvertretern von Dionysius von Halikarnassus bis auf den zweiten Philostratus, 4 vols., 1887-1896, Index 1987

16 T.ScHMiITz, Bildung und Macht: zur sozialen und politischen Funktion der Zweiten Sophistik in der griechischen Welt der Kaiserzeit, 1997. 17 V.NutTron, Two Notes on Immunities, in: JRS 61, 1971, 52-63 18 M. GRIFFIN, Review of [9], in: JRS 61, 1971, 278-280 19 I.Avotins, The Holders of the Chairs of Rhetoric at Athens, in: HSPh 79, 1975, 313-324 20 P.DEsIDERI, Dione di Prusa: un intellettuale greco nell’ impero romano, 1978 21 A.Brancaccl, Rhetorike philoso-

phousa: Dione Crisostomo nella cultura antica e bizantina, 1986

22 A.MIcCHEL, Rhétorique et philos. en sec-

ond siécle aprés J.-C., in: ANRW II 34.1, 1993, 3-78 23 G. ANDERSON, The Pepaideumenos in Action: Sophists and Their Outlook in the Early Empire, in: ANRW II 33.1, 1990, 79-208 24 J.L. LigHtrFoot, Romanized Greeks and Hellenized Romans, in: O. TAPLIN (ed.), Literature in the Greek World, 2001, 239-266 25 S.J. HARRISON, Apuleius: a Latin Sophist, 2000. E.BO.

Secret police A. ANCIENT NEAR EAST

192

191

B. GREECE

C. ROME

A. ANCIENT NEAR EAST Xenophon (Cyr. 8,2,10ff.) tells of undercover informants, the “eyes and ears of the king”, who reported to the Persian king. Antecedents of this Achaemenid institution can be found in Mesopotamia: soothsayers (Mari 18th cent. BC) and state officials (Assyria 8th/7th cents.) undertook in their oath of office to report to the king any moves or actions against him. The extent to which fear of the “eyes and ears of the king” was an encumbrance to contemporaries can be seen in Mesopotamia in the way a secret informant was conceived of as a personified demonic force. Due to Acheamenid influence, this institution spread to India and China (znd and 7th centuries AD respectively).

B. GREECE Aristotle traces a characteristic of Greek tyranny to Achaemenid or generally ‘barbarian’ custom: the organized surveillance of citizens by informers (Pol. 1313b ro-15). As an example he mentions the potagogides (female(?) ‘informers’; probably under > Dionysius [I r]: cf. Polyaenus, Strat. 5,2,13; Plut. Dionysios 28,1) and the dtakoustai (‘eavesdroppers’; in the time of + Hieron [r]) of Syracuse, who were supposed to keep the tyrant informed by their activities (cf. Isoc. Or. 2,23; 9,42), prevent free speech and, above all, spread alarm (Aristot. Pol. 1308a 28). In the Hellenistic successor states of the Achaemenid empire, no similar system is known, but it can be presumed in the case of the Seleucids and above all the Ptolemies as part of a sophisticated administration, especially since in Egypt from the earliest times participation in the detection of offenders was required under the threat of punishment (Diod. Sic. 1,7753). For the protection of state interests, Greek poleis, which had neither police to enforce the laws nor public prosecutors, promoted mutual surveillance by citizens by means of rewards for prosecutors (citizens and metics), who were given up to three quarters of a fine (> sykophdntai; [5. 61-66; 8]); snooping was also expected in democratic Athens. It is debatable to what extent the Spartan > krypteia was also part of a secret service system; this is implied by the targeted killing of particular helots. C. ROME

Since there were no police surveillance organizations in Rome either, the Republican state also created incentives for citizens’ informal collaboration in state protection, which was achieved by laws specifying very high rewards (praemia) for particular notifications (+ Accusatio; > Delator) or by making awards in individual cases (even to slaves; [6. 31f., 51f.]; Sall. Catil.

36,5). In the Imperial period with the cohortes urbanae (+ Cohors) and the > vigiles, there developed policelike and militarily organised agencies, which were used for protecting the population of the City of Rome but also for keeping them under surveillance (cf. [6. 161— 169]). As well as supplying the army, it was the responsibility of the > frumentarii, who are known from the time of Trajan onwards, to serve as informers [2. 28]. Possibly from as early as the time of Augustus (Suet. Aug. 27), but certainly under Hadrian, > beneficiarti and > curiosi kept lists of suspicious citizens (including Christians [4. 583—586]). From the time of the administration reform of Diocletian and Constantine, the ~+ agentes in rebus and curiosi appeared at the head of a political secret police that was militarily organised, well-informed (Cod. Theod. 6,29,4) and feared for its sometimes extortive methods ([1; 2. 23-40, 72-75; 7], contra [4. 578-581]). 1 W.BLuM, Curiosi und Regendarii, 1969

2 CLauss

1 A.L. OPPENHEIM, The Eyes of the Lord, in: Journal of

3 O. HirscHFELD, Die Sicherheitspolizei im rémischen Kaiserreich, in: Id., KS, 1913, 576-612 4 Jones LRE

the American Oriental Society 88, 1968, 173-180.

5 MacDoweELL

_J.RE.

6 W.NippeL, Aufruhr und Polizei in der

193

194

romischen Republik, 1988 7 W.G. SINNIGEN, Chiefs of Staff and Secret Service, in: ByzZ 57, 1964, 78-105

8 W. ZIEBARTH,

Popularklagen

mit Delatorenpraemien

SEDATIUS

A.GuTSFELD, Die Macht des Pratorianerprafekten. Studien zum praef. praet. Orientis von 313 bis 395 n. Chr., 2001; PLRE 1, 814-816 (Salutius 3). A.G.

nach griechischem Recht, in: Hermes 32, 1897, 609-628.

W.ED.

Secretarium. A separated room’, a court room that generally was closed to the public in the Roman administrative buidling (— praetorium), mentioned in this sense as early as in AD 303 (Lactant. De mort. pers. 15,5; cf. [2. 166]). Bars (cancellum: Amm. Marc. 30,4,19; Lydus, Mag. 3,37) were used to divide the

public from the secretarium, which could further be closed off completely by curtains (vela). Access was permitted, however, to certain persons of rank (honorati). 1 A. CHECCHINI, Scritti giuridici e storico-giuridici, vol. 2, 1925 (repr. 1958), 119 ff.,171 ff. 2R.HANSLIK, S. und

tribunal in den Acta martyrum Scillitanorum, in: Mélanges Ch. Mohrmann, 1963, 165 ff. CE.

Sectio bonorum (‘liquidation of assets’) is the model for the Roman collection of debts (— missio in posses-

sionem) executed against debtors in Roman law. If someone, esp. a tax collector (+ publicani), owed money to the state, all his assets were liquidated. The buyer had to assume the debt. The purchase price went to the treasury (— aerarium). Guarantors (praedes) whom the

state debtor often had to procure were subject to SB as well.

— Debt M.Kaser, K.Hacxi, 71996, 389 f.

GA II.1, 374-3773 2, 406-409.

romische

Zivilprozefrecht SS,

Secundus. Common Roman cognomen, designating the second-born child.

originally

2 KajaNTo, Cognomina, 292. K.-L.E.

[1] Saturninius S. Salutius. Praef. praet. Orientis 361365 and 365-366 (iterum), from a non-senatorial family in Gallia, a non-Christian. Between 324 and 350, he held several offices at court as well as governorships in the western part of the empire. In 3 5 5-359, he held the quaestura sacri palatii at the court of Caesar Iulianus [xx] (CIL VI 1764 = ILS 1255) in Gallia who came to trust S. and, upon his rise to Augustus after the death of Constantius [2] II in late 361 appointed him as the east-

M.G.A.

Securis. The axe, sign of authority (> imperium), carried by the lictors (— lictor) together with the fasces (bundles of rods), was used in the early Roman period for beheadings (according to literary tradition the final instance at Rome being that of the sons of Junius Brutus (> Iunius [I 4]), Liv. 2,5,5). Later it was mostly used only outside Rome. Early in the 3rd cent. AD, Ulpian succinctly states: animadverti gladio oportet, non securi (‘[execution] must be carried out with the sword, not with the axe’, Dig. 48,19,8,1). But around the same time, Caracalla had — Papinianus executed with the securis, probably as a special humiliation (SHA Carac.

4). ~ Death penalty E. CANTARELLA,

Das

Secular games see > Ludi (K.); > Saeculum

1 Decrassi, FCIR, 267

[2] S. of Tarentum. Epigrammatist of the ‘Garland’ of > Philippus [32]. Four epideictic poems are extant: skillful variations of popular themes (Anth. Pal. 9,36; 260; 16,214). The most outstanding among them due to its originality and unique style is the lament of a donkey who in addition to the millstone is burdened with the threshing on the barn floor along with the horses (9,301).

I supplizi capitali in Grecia

e a Roma,

1991, 154-167.

C.E.

Securitas. Imperial Roman personification of general public and political ‘security’, based upon stable rule and the governing continuity of the Imperial house (frequent motif in times of domestic political crisis). Alongside the sparse literary and epigraphic attestations (Vell. Pat. 2,103,4; Tac. Agr. 3,1; CIL VI 2051,1,30), coins

and medallions of the Emperor are particularly prominent sources. Earliest secure evidence: bronze coin of Nero (AD 54-68) inscribed Securitas Augusti (other customary addenda Securitas Augg., perpetua, publica, temporum etc.). Securitas is depicted sitting or standing, without characteristic attributes (often with garland, sceptre or orb). The coin evidence continues beyond the reign of > Constantinus [1]. CA.BL Securities see — Surety; — Fiducia; — Pledge, law of; > Pignus

— Hypotheke;

ern praetorian prefect (Amm. Marc. 22,3,1). S.’s excel-

lent administration earned him such high recognition that he could survive two changes of emperor. Twice he declined the army’s offer to assume the emperorship due to his old age (Amm. Marc. 25,5,3; Zos. 3,36,1-2). In the summer of 365, Valens relieved S., who was weary of office, from his duties but had to reinstate him in late 365 due to Procopius’ [1] usurpation, only to grant him final retirement in 366. S., who had a son, died no later than 375 (Amm. Marc. 30,2,3).

Sedan chair see > Litter

Sedatius. M. S. Severianus Julius Rufinus Acer Metilius Nepos Rufinus Ti. Rutilianus Censor. A senator from the city of Limonum in Aquitania (AE 1981, he was probably admitted to senatorial status equestrian status. After quaestorship, people’s neship and praetorship he achieved command

640), from tribuof a

195

196

legion, the cura viae Flaminiae and praetorian governorship in Dacia (AD 150/1-153) and in 153 consulship. He was dispatched as consular legate to Cappadocia by Antoninus [1] Pius. There he and his army were defeated by the Parthians at Elegaea in 161; S. was killed in the battle and a legion, probably the legio IX Hispana, was annihilated. Lucianus [1] gives a very negative portrayal of him (Alexander 27; Quomodo historia conscribenda sit 21), perhaps unjustly.

BC, to refine its instrumentarium (App. Civ. 1,60). The evident abuse of both institutions in the Civil Wars of the 80s prompted the consul of the year 78 BC, Q. Luta-

SEDATIUS

Piso, FPD 1, 61-65.

W.E.

Seder Olam Rabba (Hebrew/Aramaic, literally ‘great world order’ in contrast to the less comprehensive work Seder ‘6lam zuta, ‘small word order’). Midrash work presenting a chronological record of dates from the creation of the world to the Bar Kochba revolt (AD

132-1353; ~ Bar Kochba). The Persian Period conspicuously comprises no more than 34 years, and the dates of Alexander [4] the Great to Bar Kochba are presented in summary only. The work, attributed to the Rabbinic scholar Jose ben Halafta (c. AD 160; cf. bJeb 82b; bNid 46b), probably appeared first in the Amorian Period (+ Amorians). The Seder Olam Rabba forms the basis for calculating time ‘since the creation of the world.’ According to this calculation, the destruction of the temple under Titus occured in the year 3828 (thus in AD 68). This calculation first appeared in literary texts (cf. Baraita di-Smuel) and on tomb stones in Southern Italy in the 8th or 9th cent. In the rrth cent it was established within Judaism as the generally authoritative method for calculating years. ~ Rabbinic Literature G.STEMBERGER Einleitung in Talmud und Midrasch, 81992, 319 f.; J.M. ROSENTHAL, s. v. Seder Olam, Encyclopaedia Judaica 14, 1091-1093. B.E.

Seditio. Cicero defines seditio, perhaps by analogy with the Greek term stdsis, as “dissensio civium, quod seorsum eunt alii ad alios” (“discord among citizens who separate and go different ways”: Cic. Rep. 6,1). Normally, however, seditio designates a serious disturbance of public order, in other words ‘rebellion’, in the military domain also ‘mutiny’ (Frontin. Str. 1,9). Attempts

at a legal precaution against seditio can be traced back to the Twelve Tables, which forbade coetus (nocturni) (‘night-time gatherings’) (Lex XII tab. 8,26-27 BRUNS =

14 f. CRAWFORD).

Meanwhile, in 133 BC, in battle

with Ti. Sempronius [I 16] Gracchus, Senator P. Cornelius [I 84] Scipio Nasica had no alternative but to

resort to the traditional form of irregular levying of troops in an emergency (evocatio: “qui rem publicam

salvam esse volunt me sequantur”; “those who want to preserve the res publica, follow me”, Val. Max. 3,2,17; cf. also Cic. Tusc. 4,51; Vell. Pat. 2,3,1). In 121 BC, with the > senatus consultum ultimum, the Senate made an attempt to grant itself jurisdiction to combat seditio and with the > hostis declaration, first implemented in 88

tius [4] Catulus, to make a legal ruling (Cic. Cael. 1; 70). The lex Lutatia de vi, like the soon to follow lex Plautia

de vi, provided for judicial punishment for a seditio by the newly set up quaestio perpetua de vi (Sall. Catil. 31,4; Sall. In Ciceronem 3; Cic. Mil. 3 5; Cic. Har. Resp. 15: “lege de vi, quae est in eos, qui universam rem publicam oppugnassent”;6 a law against political violence, directed against all those who had fought against the entire res publica”). However, it became evident in the case of the Catiline Conspiracy (> Catilina) and in the unrest aroused by Clodius [I 4] and Milo (> Annius [I 14]) that seditiosi (‘instigators of a seditio’) could, if need be, be brought to justice retrospectively. After a lex Iulia de vi by the dictator Caesar (Cic. Phil. 1,23), a lex Iulia de vi by Augustus brought the ultimate legal ruling on the crime, admittedly supplemented and modified many times, during the Principate period. According to later Roman judgement, the Gracchi appeared unquestionably to be seditiosi (C. and Ti. — Sempronius [I 11;I 16]; Juv. 2,24: “quis tulerit Grac-

chos de seditione querentes?”). According to Cicero’s interpretation, the + populares were principally responsible for the seditiones of the late Republic; C. Gracchus and Q. Varius, for instance, were expressly

counted among the seditiosi, and the tendency towards discordia (discord) and seditio is generally ascribed to the opponents of the > optimates (Cic. Sest. 101; 99). Seditiones were primarily started by the people’s tribunes (> tribunus plebis), which is why Cicero called the

people’s tribunate an institution created in seditiones for seditiones (Cic. Leg. 3,19). Though, whereas in

Cicero the Gracchi appear beside L. Appuleius [I rr] Saturninus and P. Sulpicius [I 19] (Cic. Har. Resp. 41; 43) in the list of important populares, the historiography of the Principate period has a pattern of four great seditiones, which includes the Gracchi, Saturninus and M. Livius [I 7] Drusus (Flor. Epit. 2,1-5; L. Ampelius, Liber memorialis 26; Aug. Civ. 3,26; cf. additionally Tac. Ann. 3,27 and App. B Civ. 1,2; 1,7-36). ~ Class struggle; > Rome I. D.; > Social Conflicts 1D.CxLoup, Lex Julia de vi, in: Athenaeum 66, 1988, 579-595; Athenaeum 67, 1989, 427-465 2A.W. LINroTt, Violence in Republican Rome, 1968 3 W.NIPPEL, Public Order in Ancient Rome, 1995 4 G.OsTHOFE, Tumultus-seditio. Untersuchungen zum rémischen Staatsrecht und zur politischen Terminologie der Romer, thesis Cologne 1952 (typescript) 5 J. VON UNGERN-STERNBERG, Untersuchungen zum spatrepublikanischen Notstandsrecht. Senatusconsultum ultimum und hostis-Erklarung, 1970. Jv...

Sedulius. Christian Latin poet. Author of an abecedarian + hymn in honour of Christ and a salvific history poem consisting of epanaleptic elegiac couplets. His main work is the Carmen Paschale, probably written in the first half of the 5th century, a biblical poem (+ Bi-

197

198

blical poetry) of 1750 hexameters in the Vergilian manner. Book 1 cites a series of Old Testament miracles, which prefigure, in a typological sense, the grace of God, which would become effective in the New Testament. Books 2-5 (the division is disputed) are concerned with the life and works of Christ. Here S. preferentially singles out spectacular acts of healing and strings them together as individual scenes (‘Kollektivgedicht’ [1. 37 ff.]). The account is often interwoven with elements of meditative reflection, aimed at spiritual edification. In addition, the treatment of the passion of Christ contains allegorical interpretations of modest scope. In a later prose version, the Opus Paschale, S. strengthened the expert exegesis of the text. The Carmen Paschale influenced > Arator and numerous medieval poets. From the Carolingian Period onwards, S. was a school author. The manuscript evidence is extremely rich for the whole of the Middle Ages.

lis towers over the city to the northwest on Monte Barbaro (431 m). In traditional rivalry with > Selinus [4] (earliest verifiable conflict 580/576 BC; Diod. Sic. 5,9), S. opposed Greek occupation and settlement. There was also a traditional alliance with > Carthage. At the time of the First Sicilian Expedition (+ Peloponnesian War) S. entered on the side of the Athenians (427-424;

1M. Mazzeaa, S., Carmen Paschale, vol. III, 1996. EDITION: J. HUEMER, CSEL ro, 1885 (insufficient). CONCORDANCE: M.WACHT, 1992. COMMENTARIES: M.MazzeaGa, 1996 (vol. 3); W.A. T.

VAN DER LAAN, 1990 (vol. 4). BIBLIOGRAPHY:

R. FAVREAU, ‘Epigraphie et miniatures:

les vers de Sedulius et les evangélistes’, Journal des Savants 1-2 (1993), 63-87;

R. HERzOG, La meditazione poetica,

in: La poesia tardoantica, 1984, 75-102; W.A. T. VAN DER LAAN, Imitation créative dans le ‘Carmen Paschale’ de S., in: J.DEN Boert (ed.), Early Christian Poetry, 1993, 135-166; C.P. E. SPRINGER, A solis ortus cardine, in: Ephemerides Liturgicae 101, 1987, 69-75; Id., The Gospel as Epic in Late Antiquity, 1988; Id., The Manuscripts of S., 1995; N. WRIGHT, ‘Arator’s use of Caelius Sedulius: a re-examination’, in Id. (ed.), History and Literature in Late Antiquity and the Early Medieval West (1995), 5164.

J.SCH.

Seduni. Celtic tribe on the upper Rh6ne in the modern Swiss canton of Valais (Liv. 21,38,9), who fought against Caesar (Caes. Gall. 3,1,1 ff.; 3,7,1) and were subjected by Augustus (Plin. HN 3,137); Their Late An-

tiquity capital Sedunum (modern Sion) was named after them. G.BarRuOL,

Les peuples préromains du sud-est de la

Gaule, 1969, 309-311.

H.GR.

Segericus (Segeric). Visigoth king in 415 AD, brother of > Sarus, successor to > Ataulfus but assassinated

after a few days, probably because of his pro-Roman attitude (Oros. 7,43,9). 1PLRE2,987 197 f.

2 P.HeEaTHER, Goths and Romans, 1991, WELLU.

(Léyeoto/Ségesta,

Thuc. 6,6,2). In 416/5, S. triggered the Second Sicilian Expedition (cf. Thuc. 6,46,3). In 410 BC, with Car-

thaginian help, S. was victorious over Selinus (Diod. Sic. 13,44,4). In 397 S. was besieged by Dionysius [xr] I (Diod. Sic. 14,48,5) because of its alliance with Carthage. In the 4th cent. S. ended up heavily dependent on Carthage, both politically and economically. In the end, the alliance S. concluded with Agathocles [2] in his war against Carthage could not, however, protect the city from being punished in 307 BC by Agathocles, whose demands for financial support from S. had not been met in full (temporary renaming as Dicaeopolis; Diod. Sic. 20,71); upon the conclusion of peace in 306, S. returned under Punic sovereignty (Diod. Sic. 20,79,5). S. supported Pyrrhus [3] in 276 BC during his Sicilian campaign (Diod. Sic. 22,10,2). S. entered the first of the — Punic Wars in 263 on the side of the Romans (Diod. Sic. 23,5,1); in 260 the city, which was the Roman army’s main base, was besieged by the Carthaginians, but was relieved by Duilius [1] after the sea battle of Mylae (Pol. 1,24,2; Zon. 8,11). From then on, for the Romans S. was a civitas immunis et libera (exempt from taxes and free) with a particularly large territory (Cic. Verr. 2,3,13). Athenion [2], one of the leaders in the Second Slave War (104-101; — Slave revolts), was from the region around S. (Diod. Sic. 36,5,1).

The earliest traces of settlement are from the Neolithic (finds particularly in the area of the theatre). The city, which was divided into two acropoleis and had immense fortifications, underwent various phases of building the earliest of which goes back to the beginning of the 6th cent. BC. The unfinished Doric peristyle temple (probably the work of an Attic stonemason) and the sanctuary in the Mango area at the foot of Monte Barbaro with a 6th-cent. BC Doric temple belong to the Classical period (c. 420 BC). The site of S., on large terraces with an agora, a theatre, a bouleuterion and possibly a gymnasium, was redesigned in the Hellenistic-Roman periods. In the middle of the rst cent. AD, the decline of the city began. From the period of Hadrian onwards, S. was only rarely visited — mainly to exploit its agricultural resources, until S. was finally entirely abandoned in the 6th cent. AD. Inscriptions: IG XIV 278-292; CIL X 7263. Coins: HN 164-167. R.J. A. Witson, Archaeology in Sicily 1988-95, in: Archaeological Reports, 1995-1996, 59-123, especially

115-118; E. Mannt, Geografia fisica e politica della Sici-

Segesta [1]

SEGESTA

"Eyeoto/Egesta,

Aiyeota/Hai-

gesta). City (elevation 318 m) of the — Elymi, like Entella and Eryx [1] in the west of > Sicily (with map), 10 km to the southwest of Castellammare; the acropo-

lia antica, 1981, 222 f.; V.Tusa, s. v. S., EAA 7, 1966, 151-154; R. CAMERATA SCOVAZZO, s. v. S, EAA 2. Suppl. 5, 1997, 197-203;

D. MERTENS, Der Tempel von S. und

die dorische Tempelbaukunst des griechischen Westens in klassischer Zeit, 1984.

GLF.

SEGESTA

199

[2] S. Tigulliorum. Place in Tigullii in Liguria (It. Maritimum

501,7;

502,1;

Plin. HN

3,48; Mela

2,4,72),

modern Sestri Levante. In the Imperial period, S. was part of regio IX and was under the jurisdiction of Genoa. p; G. MENNELLA, I Tigullii e la Liguria orientale in nuovi documenti epigrafici, 1989, 175-190.

G.ME.

[3] Non-locatable township of the Carni in the hinterland of Aquileia [1], abandoned in Pliny’s time (Plin. INEZ es) E.O.

200

Segimerus. Leader of the Cherusci, father of + Arminius, also recorded as Sigimerus. (Vell. Pat. 2,1 18,2). It is unclear whether the S$. who is mentioned by Cassius Dio (56,19,2) as a co-conspirator of Arminius is identi-

cal with this S. or with the identically named brother of + Segestes; this S., with his son Sesithacus, capitulated to the Romans in AD 15 (Tac. Ann. 1,71,15 Str. 7,1,4). The ‘conspirator’ may even be a third S. [1. 142] 1 D.Timpe, Arminius-Studien, 1970.

VL.

Segimundus. Son of — Segestes, the leader of the CheSegestes. Most important pro-Roman leader of the ~+ Cherusci, opponent of > Arminius. Like the latter

rusci (Str. 7,1,4). Elected priest of the imperial altar of the > Ubii (Ara Ubiorum) in AD 9, he tore up his

and like > Flavus [1], $. held Roman citizenship (Tac. Ann. 1,58,1). He warned P. Quinctilius [II 7] Varus, in vain, of Arminius’s conspiracy (Vell. 2,118,4; Flor.

priest’s fillets during > Arminius’ revolt and fled to the rebels (Tac. Ann. 1,57,2). The priestly office and the altar may be evidence of an Augustean province of Germania; they underline the close cooperation between the > Cherusci and the Romans. In AD 15 his father, under siege by Arminius, sent him to seek help from ~» Germanicus [2]. Germanicus pardoned him and sent S. under guard to the left bank of the Rhine (Tac. Ann. 1,5751-3). In AD 17 he, his sister Thusnelda and her three-year-old son + Thumelicus were led captive in

Epit. 2,30,33; Cass. Dio 56,19,3) and advised taking all the leaders (including Arminius and S. himself) into custody (Tac. Ann. 1,55,2; 58,2). After the Varus catastro-

phe in 9 AD S. had — according to his account before + Germanicus [2] in AD 15 — to take part in the uprising with the majority of the tribe (Tac. Ann. 1,5 5,3), but battles of alternating fortunes followed between Arminius and S., who was able to win back his daughter Thusnelda, abducted and made pregnant by Arminius. In the spring of AD 15, Germanicus freed S., who had been surrounded by Arminius, but S.’ surrender strengthened Arminius’ position. At Germanicus’ triumph in 17 AD, S. was an honoured spectator (Str. 7,1,4), his children + Segimundus and > Thusnelda and her son > Thumelicus were paraded in the procession. Beyond that only his deportation to Gaul (Tac. Ann. 1,58,5) is known. In the German nationalist view, S. was considered a traitor and a deserter. D.Timpe, Arminius-Studien, 1970.

VL.

Germanicus’ [2] triumphal procession (Str. 7,1,4). R. Wo.ters, Rémische Eroberung und Herrschaftsorganisation, 1990.

VL.

Segisamo. Station on the road from Tarraco to Asturica at modern Sasam6n (Str. 3,4,13; Plin. HN 3,26; Ptol.

2,6,50; CIL II Suppl. p. 932 f.). P. BARCELO, Das kantabrische Gebirge im Altertum, in: E. OLSHAUSEN, H.SONNABEND (eds.), Gebirgsland als Lebensraum (Geographica Historica 8), 1996, 53-61, plate XIX; F.J. Lomas SALMONTE, Asturia prerromana y altoimperial, 1989, 87; TIR K 30 Madrid, 1993, 207 f.

PB. Segetia. Roman goddess (from *séi, ‘sow (seed)’: [1.285]; from seges: Plin. HN 18,8; cf. Isid. Orig. 17,2,7). Linked to a triad in Aug. Civ. 4,8 (= Varro Antiquitates rerum divinarum fr. 166 CARDAUNS) in

Tutilina for it when harvested. The images (simulacra) of these deities could be seen in circo (Plin. HN. 18,8),

Segni. Germanic people, mentioned only by Caesar (Caes. Gall. 6,32,1 f.) together with the > Condrusi, between the — Treveri and the > Eburones, who assured him by means of an embassy in 53 BC, that they would not make common cause with the Germani on the left bank of the Rhine. Their presumed place of settlement was in the Luxemburgish and Belgian Ardennes.

possibly referring to reliefs on columns (Tert. De spec-

J.B. Keung, s. v. S., RE 2 A, 1075 f.; CH.B. RUGER, Ger-

the context of a polemical account of the multiplicity of Roman gods: Seia is stated to be responsible for the grain in the ground, S. for the same on the culm and

taculis 8,3; cf. Macrob. Sat. 1,16,8); it is probably for

this reason that Plin. ibid. leaves out that of Tutilina. A coin of > Salonina, the wife of > Gallienus, with a representation of dea S. [2] could, in combination with the polemics of Augustinus, suggest a cult continuing into Late Antiquity. 1 RADKE, GOtter

7.2, 524.

2 E.Simon, s. v. S., LIMC 7.1, 705;

JOS.

mania inferior, 1968, 35 f.

RA.WI.

Segobriga [1] Ibero-Roman city (Str. 3,4,13: LeyoBetya/Segobriga; Ptol. 2,6,56: Zeyoupia/Segoubia; Plin. HN 3,25), Ruins — including an amphitheatre — on the Cabeza del Griego hill, 2 Roman miles to the south of Saelices (province of Cuenca). S. was a member of the conventus of + Carthago Nova (CIL II 4252).

202

201

[2] Bishopric at Castellon, suffragan to Tarragona, later to Cartagena, modern Segorbe [1]. 1M.AtMaGRo,

Historia de Albarracin y su sierra, 3,

SEGOVESUS

[2]. After being destroyed and rebuilt the fort was held in the late 3rd and the 4th cents. by a larger garrison until the 390s.

1959.

1R.E. M. WHEELER, S. and the Roman Occupation of

M.ALMaGcroO, S., 1978; Ders., S., Bd. 1 (Excavaciones Arqueologicas en Espafia 123), 1983; TOVAR 3, 216-219.

Wales, 1924

P.B.

Segobrigii. Ligurian Celtic people settled around the mouth of the Rhodanus, whose king Nannus and his son Comanus appear in the founding legend of > Massalia (lust. 43,3,4-13, cf. Aristot. fr. 503 R.). A connection with terms such as Segovii, Segobriga and Segovia is discussed. G.BaRRUOL, Les peuples préromains du sud-est de la Gaule, 1969, 207 f.; D.PRALON, La légende de la fondation de Marseille,

in: M.Bars

et al. (eds.), Marseille

greque et la Gaule (Etudes Massaliétes 3), 1992, 51-56. E.O.

Segodunum Rutenorum, capital of the > Ruteni in Aquitania (Ptol. Daoate Leyddsouvov/Segddounon; Notae Tironianae 87,46: Segundunum or Secundunum; Tab. Peut. 2,3: Segodum or Segoduni), modern Rodez on the Aveyron. The economy of the surrounding area comprised mining and artistic pottery (centre of production of > Terra Sigillata at La Graufesenque in the Tarn valley, 2 km to the south of Millan). J.B. Keung, s.v. S. (1), RE 2 A, 1078-1080; Villes et agglomérations urbaines antiques du Sud-Ouest de la Gaule (Aquitania Suppl. 6), 1992, 133-136. MLPO.

2P.J. Casey, J.L. Davies, Excavations at

S., 1975-1979, 1993. TIR N 30/0 30, 1987, 15.

M.TO.

Segora. > Mansio or > vicus of the civitas of the > Pictones in the province of Aquitania, 33 leagues (72-6 km) from Lemonum and 18 leagues (39:6 km) from Portus Namnetum (modern Nantes) or from Iuliomagus (modern Angers) (Tab. Peut. 2,3). Of 12 different proposed locations, that of La Segourie (community of Le Fief-Sauvain, département of Maine-etLoire) is the most likely. A.CHAMPIGNEULLE, Le probléme de S., in: Annales de Bretagne 70, 1963, 69-92; M.PRovost, Carte Archéologique de la Gaule 49, Maine-et-Loire, 1988, 32 und 47-50 (under Le Fief-Sauvin)MLPO.

Segorigium. A > vicus, attested only in an inscription, presumably near the Worringen district of Cologne (CIL XIII 8518: vicani Segorigienses; today the inscription has disappeared). J.B. Keung, s. v. S., RE 2 A, 1087 f.

Segovellauni. Celtic tribe in the Roman province of

Segontia. City of the Celtiberian > Arevaci, mansio on the Caesaraugusta-Toletum road, modern Sigiienza. In 195 BC besieged by Cato [1] (Liv. 34,19,10), also sig-

Gallia > Narbonensis in the area between the Rhodanus and the Druna (modern département of Dréme). With the founding of the province the S. were absorbed into the civitas Valentinorum or the colonia Valentia founded under Caesar or Augustus (Plin. HN 3,34; Ptol. 2,10,12: Seyaddhavvot). Str. 4,1,11 subsumes them under the name Cavari.

nificant in the Sertorian War (77-72 BC, — Sertorius; App. B Civ. 1,110; Plut. Sertorius 21). A bishop’s see in the Christian Period.

EVANS, 254-257, 272-277; J. WHATMOUGH, The Dialects of Ancient Gaul, 1970, 80, 185; G. BARRUOL, Les peuples préromains du sud-est de la Gaule, in: Revue archéologique de Narbonnaise, Suppl. 1, 1969, 267-271.

TOVAR 3, 365; IIR K 30 Madrid, 1993, 208.

W.SP.

Segontiaci. Celtic tribe, probably in the southeast of

Segovesus.

Britain, which surrendered to Caesar in 54 BC (Caes.

sego-, ‘power, strength, audacity’ (cf. also CIL IJ 2871:

Gall. 5,21).

Secovesus [1. 254-255; 2. 1452]). Brother of > Bellovesus and son of > Ambigatus’ sister. According to the Celtic migration legend recorded in Livy (5,34,3—6), it fell to S.’ lot to advance with his group eastwards into the Hercynian Forest (— Hercynia silva) in about 600 BC. According to ancient tradition, modern southern Germany was as a consequence settled by Celts. The historical content of this legend is highly disputed. + Celts

A.L. F. Rivet, C.SmitH, The Place-Names Britain, 1979, 453 f.

of Roman M.TO.

Segontium. One of the main forts of the Roman occupation of North Wales [1], modern Caernarfon at the southwestern end of the Menai Strait. The first building phase dates from the governorship of Iulius [II 3] Agricola (c. 77/8 AD). The living quarters exhibit at least three building phases from the early 2nd century AD onwards. Rebuilding in stone took place under Hadrianus (117-138). The 2nd cent. garrison was evidently small. One of the main buildings from the Antonine period was probably the officium of a procurator

1 Evans

Celtic name

containing

the morpheme

2 HOLDER.

F. FiscHER, Die Kelten und ihre Geschichte, in: K. BITrEL et al. (eds.), Die Kelten in Baden-Wiirttemberg, 1981, 56-57:

W.SP.

203

204

Segovia. Celtic place name (possibly ‘fortress’); ethnic:

A duumvir and priests, a sacerdos and a flamen, are known as officials of the S. (CIL XIII 1633; 1642; 1629). The first of the S. to hold the office of priest of the sanctuary of > Roma (IV.) and > Augustus at the confluence of the Arar (Sa6ne) and the Rhodanus was a member of the Vlatii family (CIL XIII 1712; [5]); representatives of the family held that office quite frequently (vgl. CIL XIII 1851; ¢. 214/217). Forum Segusiavorum (80Ha) had an orthogonal street layout [3. 96f.], a forum with a temple, cryptoporticus and curia [7], also thermal baths and a theatre, which has not been located, constructed initially from wood and renovated under Claudius [II 1] in stone (CIL XIII 1642). Rodumna (Roanne), a farming settlement [3. 169] with a port on the Liger, developed in the rst and 2nd centuries AD into a craft centre (8 workshops, 13 kilns), where ceramics of a special design (bowls painted in the ‘Roanne style’) were made [4]. Aquae Segetae (modern Moingt) — named after Segeta, the protective goddess of healing springs — had a theatre and a cultic and thermal complex [3. 136-140]. From the mid 3rd cent. onwards Forum Segusiavorum and Rodumna [x] experienced economic decline, owing to the shift of trade routes to the Rhenus (Rhine). -» Caesar (with map); > Gallia (with map)

SEGOVIA

Segoviensis. [1] City of the Celtiberian > Arevaci (Plin. HN 3,27;

Ptol. 2,6,56; It. Ant. 435,5; but Liv. fr. 21: Segoviam et in Vaccaeorum gentem) at the confluence of the Eresma and Clamores on the northern slopes of Guadarrama between Madrid and Valladolid, now also S. The city is mentioned in the context of the battles between the + Lusitani under Viriathus and Rome from 147-139 BC (Frontin. Str. 4,5,22), similarly in 76/5 BC during the war waged by > Sertorius against those ruling in Rome (Liv. 91 fr. 22; Flor. Epit. 2,10,7). During the

Roman Empire S. was part, as a probably Flavian municipium, of the Conventus Cluniensis. Archaeology: in addition to building foundation walls, ceramics, wall paintings,

inscriptions, etc., an aqueduct (restored under Trajan in AD 98 [1; 2; 3. 348 f.]). [2] Unlocated village in > Hispania Baetica on the Singilis (modern Genil), mentioned in the context of the battles between Cassius [I 5] and the Lusitani in 48 BC (Bell. Alex. 57,6; [3. 113 f.]). 1 G. ALFOLDY, Die Inschriften des Aquaduktes von S., in: ZPE 94, 1992, 231-248 2 TIRK 30, Madrid, 1993, 209 3 TOVAR 3.

Segovii. Tribe in the > Alpes Cottiae, mentioned on the Augustus Arch in > Segusio (CIL V 7231; [1. 77]). Not

1 M. Genin, M.-O. LAaVENDHOMME, Rodumna (RoanneLoire) .... 1998 2J.B. Keung, s. v. S., RE 2 A, 1093-

located, presumably Alps.

la Gaule 42. La Loire, 1997.

at Montgenévre

in the French

1J.PRizuR, La province romaine des Alpes Cottiennes,

1968, 77.

H.GR.

Segusiavi. Celtic tribe between the Allobroges, Vellavii, Arverni, Haedui and Ambarri with three oppida (Essalois, Crét-Chatelard, Joeuvre) controlling the Liger (Loire), which flowed north-south through their terri-

tory. As clientes of the Haedui (Caes. Gall. 7,64; 75) they also came to the aid of > Vercingetorix at Alesia in 52 BC. Under Augustus a civitas libera of Gallia > Lugdunensis (Plin. HN 4,107; CIL XIII 8862; 8864), they had to surrender part of their territory to the founding of the colony of > Lugdunum in 43 BC. Several roads (Tab. Peut. 2,4 f.) crossed their territory. The construction of the road between Lugdunum and Mediolanum [4] Santonum (cf. [6]) under Agrippa [1] in 40-37 BC turned the Gallic village there into a traffic hub: Forum Segusiavorum (modern Feurs), the capital of the civitas Segusiavorum [1]. This road network was completed by the links between Lugdunum and Rodumna (modern Roanne), Mediolanum Santonum and Nemausus (preRoman route, repaired c. 230-240 AD, CIL XIII 8866),

and from Vienna through Forum Segusiavorum to Rodumna, which made it possible to connect the Liger and the Rhodanus (Rh6ne) by land transports starting in Vienna, a commercial reloading point. The Gier aqueduct, one of the four that supplied Lugdunum with water, ran across the territory of the S. for a little over 50 miles.

1106

3M.-O.LAVENDHOMME, Carte archéologique de 4R.PéRICHON, La céra-

mique peinte celtique et gallo-romaine en Forez et dans le Massif Central, 1974 5 B.Rémy, Une grande famille ségusiave: les Vlattii, in: Mélanges A. Bruhl (Rev. Archéo-

logique de l’Est et du Centre-Est, Suppl. 1), 1974, 95-110 6 J.-M.Roppaz, Marcus Agrippa (Bibliothéque des Ecoles Frangaises d’Athénes et de Rome 253), 1984, I-25 7 P. VALETTE, V.GUICHARD, Le forum gallo-romain de Feurs (Loire), in: Gallia 48, 1991, 109-164. J-M.DE.

Segusio. Main centre of the Segusini in the > Alpes Cottiae, modern Susa (Plin. HN 3,123: regio XI; Ptol. 3,1,40 erroneously places S. in the Alpes Graiae [2. 393-408; 3. 331-333]). S. commanded the route over Mont Genévre and was the gateway into Italy (Anim Marcans.n0,3 ssbaneulkateed,

i 7.3sn2s6222)) aioe

possessed > Latin law probably from the time of Augustus and was a > municipium from the time of Nero. Constantinus [1] conquered S. in AD 312. Outstanding monuments are an Augustine arch with an inscription giving information about the Alpine peoples (ILS 94; 9/8 BC.; [1]), an amphitheatre and the fortifications (end of 3rd cent. AD). 1D.Focuiato, L’arco de Augusto a Susa, 1992 2 A.CroseTro et al., Per una carta archeologica della Valle di Susa, in: Bollettino storico-bibliografico subalpino 79, 1981, 355-412 3 G.BaRRUOL, Les peuples préromains du sud-est de la Gaule, 1969. H.GR.

205

206

Segustero. Township at the confluence of the modern Buéch and the Druentia, modern Sisteron, in the département of Basses-Alpes, without a doubt a vicus of the civitas of the > Vocontii in the Roman province of Gallia Narbonensis (cf. Plin. HN 3,37), after Diocle-

the > Macestus formed the border to the land of Masa (East-Mysia/Bithynia) is suggested by the probably identical name of the neighbouring land of Abbawija (< luw. Ethnikon Abbaui-*) with Abbaeitis in the Greek Period. The island of Lazba/—> Lesbos (cf. [1. 451, 4535 2. 23-24] and > Hattusa II., map) also belonged to it.

tian’s province reform its own civitas (Segesteriorum: Notitia Galliarum 16,7). Station on the heavily used stretch of road (cf. Sall. Hist. fr. 2,98,4 M.) from Are-

late through Brigantio (modern Briangon), the Matrona [3] Pass (1854 m elevation) and Segusio to Augusta [5]

Taurinorum (Tab. Peut. 3,1; It. Ant. 342,5; Vicarello cup 64). A see in late Antiquity. A.L. F. Rivet, Gallia Narbonensis, 1988, 294 f.; G. BARRUOL, La Durance dans |’Antiquité et au Moyen Age, in: Delta 14, 1965, 19-25; Id., P.MarTeEL, La voie romaine

de Cavaillon a Sisteron sous |’Haut-Empire, in: Rivista di Studi Liguri 28, 1962, 125-202.

E.O.

Seha I. GEOGRAPHIC

LOCATION,

BORDERS

II. POLirTI-

CAL HISTORY

I. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION, BORDERS

SEHA

II. POLITICAL HISTORY

Even though S. was mentioned as early as the period of the campaigns of TudhalijasI (c. 1420-1400) in Arzawa and Assuwa (cf. > Wilusa), it did not fully surface in Hittite politics until the period of Arnuwandas II (c. 1320-1318). Inner-dynastic conflicts in the royal clan of S. had forced Manabatarhunta, the legitimate heir to the throne, to flee to the small country of Karkisa (in the border region of $., Masa and Wilusa) where he was accepted by means of Hittite recommendation. After the usurpator (his brother) Uratarhunta had failed due to interior politics, and Manabatarhunta was re-installed as king of S. with Hittite support, Manabatarhunta took the side of Arzawian King Uhhazidi in the decisive military confrontation between Hattusa and Arzawa (in the 3rd year of the reign of Mursili II, c.

Luwian-speaking (> Luwian) state in Northwestern

1316). After the defeat of the latter, he was able to

Asia Minor documented in Hittite transmission in the

maintain his position as king, but S. was contractually joined to the Great Hittite Empire as part of the alliance of the ‘Arzawa countries’ along with Mira and Haballa, states newly formed from Arzawa. The (extant) state treaty demanded the support of the instable government of the politically higher-ranking king of Mira (Mashuiluwa, later Kubantakurunta) and resulted in S.’s repeated involvement in the conflicts within the Arzawian royal clan of Mira in the following period. Thus the Arawian Prince Pijamaradu, who operated from Millawa(n)da/— Miletus [2] under the protection of the king of Ahhijawa (+ Achijawa; Greece),

15th—13th cents. BC. Its core area comprised the valleys of the Hermus [2] and the Caecus [1] (merging near the coast), and its name is derived from one of these two

rivers. The Hittite designation is Séhas utné (in Akkadian orthography KUR 1DSE-E-HA) ‘the land of S.,’ while the name ‘river land of S.’, often found in second-

ary literature, is based on the inappropriate translation of the determinative ID ‘river.’ In the north, S. borders on > Wilusa (at the Gulf of Edremit), in the south, the > Tmolus forms the border to > Mira (+ Arzawa). The idea that the headwaters of

The dynasty of the kings of Séha (c. 1350-1200 BC) K VK

Kings of Séha Vassal king of Séha

Uh

U

_Usurper of the throne of Séha

Usurper of the throne of Séha with the support of the king of Abhijawa. Son of the Arzawian prince Pijamaradu (s.—» Mira, with stemma)?

Séha 1350

Hattusa Suppiluliuma |.

Muwawalwi (K) Uratarhunta (U)

Manabatarhunta (K, VK)

Son

Arnuwanda Il. Mursili Il.

1300

Masturi (VK) CO Massanazi

Muwattalli Il. Mursili IIl.-Urhitesub

1250

Hattusili Il. (IL.')

Tudhalija III. (‘IV.')

Tarhunnaradu (U*) 1200

‘Descendant of Muwawalwi' (VK)

Arnuwanda III.

Suppiluliuma II.

207

208

was able to establish himself temporarily during the last few years of Manabatarhunta’s reign (beginning under Muwattalli Il, c. 1290-1272) in Wilusa (and Masa?). Pijamaradu threatened S. as well; he finally attacked the island of Lazba and abducted craftsmen working for

H. Ktune (ed.), Die rezente Umwelt von Tall Seh Hamad, 1991; Id., A.LUTHER, Tall Seh Hamad/Dir Katlimmu/

SEHA

Manabatarhunta and for the Hittite Great King to Millawa(n)da [3. 38-64]. Due to the unstable interior position of King Alaksandu of Wilusa (which soon thereafter was contractually joined to the Hittite Empire), the significance of S. as a stabilizing factor in northwestern Asia Minor increased. In response, the Hittites agreed to the marriage of the sister of Muwattalli Il with Manabatarhunta’s successor Masturi who thereby rose into the circle of

the most influential members of the royal clan of Hattusa (on the prosopography s. [4. 111 f.]). As one of the most important allies of his brother-in-law Hattusili II (IIL, c. 1265-1240), Masturi played a significant role in the deposition of Great King Mursili [1]-Urhitesub (c. 1272-1265). After the death of Masturi in the period of Tudhalija WI (IV, c. 1240-1215), internal power struggles erupted in the royal clan of S., in the wake of which a certain Tarhunnaradu was able to usurp the throne temporarily. His origin from the Arzawan dynastic line of Ubhazidi and Pijamaradu is supported by the fact that he had the support of the king of Ahhijawa. The Hittite fragment which reports the events and the militarily forced installation of a member of the dynasty of S. (a descendent of Muwawalwi) [5] also represents the last Hittite information about S. and about the entanglement of Ahhijawa in the political events of western Asia Minor. 1 F.SrarkeE, Troia im Kontext des historisch-politischen und sprachlichen Umfeldes Kleinasiens im 2. Jahrtausend, in: Studia Troica 7, 1997, 447-487. Tarkasnawa King of Mira, in: AS

2J.D. Hawkins, 48, 1998, 1-31

3 PH. HOUWINK TEN Care, Sidelights on the Ahhiyawa Question from Hittite vassal and royal correspondence, in: Jaarbericht van het Voor-Aziatisch-Egyptisch Genootschaap 28, 1983-84, 33-79 4TH. VAN DEN Hout, Der UlmiteSub-Vertrag, 1995 5 H.G. GUTERBOCK, A New Look at one Ahhiyawa Text, in: H. OTreN et al. (ed.), Hittite and Other Anatolian and Near Eastern Studies, FS S. Alp, 1992, 235-243. T.Bryce, The Kingdom of the Hittites, 1998; S. HEINHOLD-KRAHMER, Arzawa, 1977. FS.

Magdalu, in: Nouvelles Assyriologiques Bréves et Utilitaires 1996, 106-109.

Seia see > Sallustia

Seianus see > Aelius [II 19]

Seisachtheia (cetody Geta; seisdchtheia). Greek authors used the term seisachtheia (lit.’shaking off of burdens’) from at least the 4th cent. BC to denote the abolition or mitigation of debts by > Solon [1]. The portrayal of Solon’s measures in Aristotle suggests that the word was in general use in the 4th cent. (Aristot. Ath. pol. 6,1). While according to Androtion (FGrH 324 F 34; Plut. Solon 15,4), it was coined by those who had been freed from part of their debts by means of a reduction in interest, Diodorus Siculus (Diod. Sic. 1,79,4) and Plutarch attest that Solon himself termed debt redemption seisachtheia (a contrived euphemistic neologism: Plut. Solon 15,3). However, the term seisachtheia does not occur in the surviving poems by Solon. Ancient authors offer two interpretations. On the one hand, seisachtheia was said to refer to the debt relief in connection with Solon’s statement that he had “removed the boundary stones and freed the black earth” (Sol. fragments 36,6-7 West; Aristot. Ath. pol. 12,4; Plut. Solon 15,5—-6). Conversely, Androtion stated that the seisachtheia was not a complete cancellation of debts, but a reduction of the amount incumbent upon the debtor to pay by approximately one third, achieved by a realignment of the relationship between the mina and the drachma (FGrH 324 F 34; Plut. Solon 15,4). However, both versions depend on anachronistic assumptions. The function of boundary stones (6goV + horoi) as markers of estates serving as security for -» loans is not attested before the 4th cent. BC, and the + minting of coins only began at Athens at least 50 years after Solon’s archontate. Solonic legislation reduced the material burden on the Athenian population in various ways, and it may therefore be sensible not to suppose that the term seisachtheia referred to a single measure. — Debt, Debt redemption 1M.I.

Finvey, Studies in Land and Credit in Ancient

Athens 500-200 B.C., 1951, 6-7. Commentary on the Aristotelian

Séh Hamad, Tall. Town situated 70 km northwest of the Syrian district capital Dair az-Zaur on the east bank of the al-Habur in the Syrian steppe (35°37’N, 40°45’E), to be equated with the provincial and administrative centre Dur-Katlimmu in the Middle and NeoAssyrian Period (1300-612 BC). In the 7th cent. BC, it had a second, Aramaic name, Magdalu, which was modified to Magdala in the Hellenic-Parthian-Roman Period (3rd cent. BC — 3rd cent. AD). +> Magdala [2]

H.KU.

2 P.J. RHopes, A Athenaion Politeia,

1981, 125-130; 164-169.

RO,

Seius [1] S. Fuscianus. Senator, from early youth a friend of ~+ Marcus [2] Aurelius with whom he also studied philosophy together (SHA Aur. 3,8). S. was cos. suff. no later than AD 151 [1. 159 f.], cos ord. II in 188 and praef. urbi probably until 189 (SHA Pert. 4,3); his successor was the later emperor — Pertinax. S. presided over prosecutions of Christians (Tert. Ad nat. 1,16;

Hippolytos, refutatio 9,11,4; 12,7 f.). 1 ALFOLDY, Konsulat.

209

210

[2] L. S. Strabo. Father of L. > Aelius [II 19] Seianus.

magic, the patient and officiant identify themselves with ‘Horus, the offspring of S.’.

He was from Volsinii in Etruria (Tac. Ann. 4,1,2; 6,8,3;

CIL XI 2707) and was part of the elite of the equestrian Augustus appointed him +> praefectus praetorio. In this capacity, he took an oath to Tiberius after Augustus’s death (Tac. Ann. 1,7,2). Shortly afterwards, still in AD 14, his son became praetorian prefect alongside him (Tac. Ann. 1,24,2). In 15 he went as prefect to Egypt, where a year later he was replaced by C. Galerius [1]; presumably he died in office (Cass. Dio 57,19,1). For his family cf. class (Vell. Pat. 2,127,3).

[z. 181-183; 234-237].

SELENE

1 H.ENGELMANN,

J.Hatior,

Der Sachmet-Priester,

ein

friuher Reprasentant der Hygiene und des Seuchenschutzes, in: Studien zur altagyptischen Kultur 23, 1996, 103— 146 2 PH. GERMOND, Sekhmet et la protection du monde, 1981 3 S.-E.HoeEngs, Untersuchungen zu Wesen und Kult der Gottin Sachmet, 1976 4 F. von KANEL, Les prétres-ouab de Sekhmet et les conjurateurs de

Serket, 1984 5 J. Yoyotre, Une granit. Les Sekhmet d’Amenophis manente de la Déesse dangereuse, caise d’Egyptologie 87/88, 1980,

monumentale litanie de III et la conjuration perin: Bull. de la Soc. Fran46-75. Av.L.

1 DEMOUGIN.

[3] S. Superstes. Senator, cos. suff. before AD 193, the year in which he is known to have been curator operum publicorum alongside two different colleagues (CIL VI 1585b =ILS 5920; AE 1974, 11; [1. 237 f.]). 1 Koxs, Bauverwaltung.

[4] L. S. Tubero. Legate of > Germanicus [2] in Germania in AD 16 (Tac. Ann. 2,20,1); in 18 from 1 Feb-

ruary onwards, cos. suff. together with Germanicus; S. may have been a son of Q. Aelius [I 17] Tubero and adopted by S. [2] Strabo [1. 302-3 10 with stemma no. XXIII]. In 24 S. was prosecuted by Vibius Serenus for initiating a conspiracy against > Tiberius, but he was immediately acquitted because of his close relationship with Tiberius (Tac. Ann. 4,29,1). 1 Syme, AA.

[5] M. S. Varanus. Recorded as cos. suff. on 17 June 41 (AE 1984, 228). For his origin and on CIL III 8753 cf. fieea hte) 1 G. CAMODECA, Per una riedizione dell’ archivio Puteo-

lano dei Sulpicii, in: Puteoli 6, 1982, 3-53.

WE.

Sekhmet. Egyptian goddess, wife of Ptah (> Ptah) and

mother of the lotus god Nefertem. S. is usually depicted as a lion-headed woman; her main cult site is > Memphis. As her name (‘the powerful’) suggests, S. is a dangerous goddess par excellence. She is the ruler of the demons, especially the /3.tiw (‘slaughter demons’, the seven invisible decan stars;

> Astronomy B.2.). Hence

statues, primarily in the late period (713-332 BC), often represent her on a throne the sides of which are decorated with decan figures in the form of snakes. Identified with the wrathful eye of the sun, S. is > Sothis, the mistress of the decans. Hypostases of the goddess are assigned to every day of the year (chronocratores [5]). S. spreads diseases by means of the demons and demonic darts (to some extent personified). Consequently, she must constantly be appeased by appropriate rites. If these are successful, her power operates in a protective way against her own demons. Therefore she is also a healing goddess (> Healing deities) and her special — priest (w‘b Shm.t) is a physician specialising in epidemic control [1; 4]. In protective and healing

Sekina (literally the ‘inhabitation [of God]’ from Hebrew sakan, ‘dwell, inhabit’). Rabbinical term for the presence of God in the world; follows notionally from the description of God’s dwelling in the Temple (Jes 8,18; Ez 43,7—-9) or in his people (Ex 29,45) (cf. also the comparable reception of the concept in John’s theology of incarnation, Jo 1,14). The concept of Sekind is used to describe the immanence of an intrinsically transcendental deity. Proceeding from the idea of the continuous presence of the Sekina in the Temple (according to [1] the ‘presence Sekina’), which gives expression to the communion of God with his people, secondarily there was a transference to discontinuous appearances of the Sekina in other contexts ([{1]: ‘manifestation Sekina’): The Sekina of God manifested itself already in the Garden of Eden, to the patriarchs of Israel, to Moses in the Burning Bush, during the Exodus from Egypt, in the wilderness, and to the prophets. The idea that the Sekina accompanied Israel into Exile plays a significant role in present Rabbinical interpretation. However, the Sekina is also conceived as temporarily present with a praying congregation, in a synagogue, with a bench of judges, with those engaged in religious studies and with the sick. It is not an hypostasis of God, but is subjectively identical with him. At the same time, it is also to be distinguished from the Holy Ghost as a mode of divine manifestation. 1 A.GOLDBERG,

Untersuchungen

uber die Vorstellung

von der Schekhinah in der friihen rabbininischen Litertaur — Talmud und Midrasch (Studia Judaica 5), 1969 (with collocation and documentation of the textual material).

B.E. Sekoma see > Measure of volume III.

Selene (Zedtn/Selené, Mivr/Mene, cf. Latin > Luna [1]). In Greece in the Archaic and Classical Periods the + moon (thought of as female), although generally known as the nocturnal counterpart of the sun (Helios/— Sol), was barely personified (> Personification): she is neither present as a deity either in the epic tradition, where night (> Nyx) virtually replaces S., nor (with two exceptions) in the elegiac and lyric poets. Hesiod seems to fit S. into his cosmology almost as an afterthought, namely as a daughter of the Titan > Hy-

SELENE

211

perion and hence as a sister of Helios and — Eos (‘dawn’; Hes. Theog. 371-374). The only significant S. myth, her love for > Endymion (earliest evidence in Sappho fr. 134 VoicT), has been associated ([1]) with the Carian > Latmus [1]. In the earliest iconographic representations (c. 490-480 BC) a winged S. drives a chariot (Biga) with horses, later often oxen, but sometimes S. rides a horse or mule [2]. As a heavenly body whose waxing and waning face (etymology: of\ac/sélas, ‘shine’) dominates the night sky, however, S. occupied a central place in popular belief (Plat. Leg. 887e), e.g. in relation to biological growth, > menstruation or sickness, particularly in the case of demonic possession (~ Demons) or epilepsy [3]. This idea led to a close connection with > Hecate (cf. [4]). The phases of the moon, primarily new moon (neoménia) and full moon (dichoménia), had particular significance in agricultural practice. Lunar eclipses were felt to be terrifying throughout Antiquity (e.g. Thuc. 7,50,4; Tac. Ann. 1,28,1-3; ~ Eclipses), but they also gave rise to attempts at rational explanation (Democr. 68 A 75 DK). Such rationalism ultimately led both to the theory of concentric spheres of the heavens (> Planets) and to the representation of the heavenly bodies as recognizable deities (PI. Leg. 885d-e). In Middle and Neoplatonism, however, the moon was regarded as a residence of > demons

ZZ

60 km north-east of Babylon and 35 km south of Baghdad, at the mouth of the Nahr Malka (connecting canal

between the Tigris and Euphrates) and thus very favourably located for traffic and transport. S. was founded around 300 BC by > Seleucus [2] Nicator near ancient > Opis [3], according to Plin. HN 6,30,121 ff., to draw off the population of Babylon. However, its function as imperial capital was already lost to > Antioch [xr] in 293. According to Plin. HN 6,122, the city was fortified with a 6.7 km long double wall and moats. As a trading centre and with the influx of Babylonians, Macedonians, Greeks and Jews, S. soon gained great importance, with a population of 600,000 (Plin. HN 6,122; Paus. 1,16,3; App. Syr. 55). At first, S. was a bone of contention between the — Seleucids and local rulers, and later the > Parthians, who built their capital > Ctesiphon [2] on the other side of the river in the rst half of the 2nd cent. BC. S. was conquered by the Parthians in 141 BC. Surena’s triumphal march after his victory over the Romans under Licinius [I rr] Crassus in 53 BC led through S. After internal Parthian conflicts, S. was reconquered by + Vardanes in AD 43 (Tac. Ann. 11,8-9). The Romans conquered the city three times: in 116, S. opened its gates to Traianus without a battle; in AD 165, it was set on fire by - Avidius [1] Cassius for unknown reasons, whereupon the plague broke out in the Roman army

(Xenocrates fr. 56 HEINZE) and of human souls (Plut.

(Cass. Dio 71,2; Amm. Marc. 23,6,24; Zon. 12,2, etc.).

Mor. 943a~-45f). S. and > Helios often formed a divine couple, which represented the concept of an ordered heaven, but could also be made an analogy for many asymmetric oppositions, e.g.: male/female, king/queen, primary/secondary, dry/moist, fertilisation/growth. Her identification with — Artemis is probably a consequence of > Apollo’s identification with Helios.

In AD 198/9, S. was conquered by Septimius Severus, a

+ Artemis;

— Hecate;

— Luna;

— Magic;

— Moon;

~» Moon deities 1 T. Gantz, Early Greek Myth, 1993, 34-36 S/Luna,

LIMC

7.1, 1994,

706-715

Aberglaube, RE 1, 1894, 39-41 Hekate Soteira, 1990, 29-38.

2F.Gury,

3 E.RIESs, s.v.

4S.I. JoHNsTON,

C. PREAUX, La lune dans la pensée grecque, 1973; F. BuFFIERE, S.: la lune dans la poésie, la science et la religion grecque, in: Bulletin de la Société toulousaine d’études classiques 196-7, 1990/1, 5-20; A.-M. Tupet, La magie dans la poésie latine, 1976, 92-103. RG:

Selenes oros (Zedrvn¢ de0¢; Selénés Gros). “Mountains

of the Moon, from which the lakes of the Nile receive

melt water” (Ptol. 4,9,3) — according to the coordinate data in Ptol. l.c. probably modern Kilimanjaro (5895 m elevation) in northeastern Tanzania.

E.O.

Seleucia (Lerevxeva/Selevkeia, Latin Seleucia). [1] S. on the Tigris (Leredxera f éxi tH TiyoeVSelevkeia hé epi toi Tigrei: Str. 16,738; 743; 750 et passim; Latin Seleucia Magna: Plin. HN 6,43, cuneiform Selukuja [x],

modern Tall ‘Umar). On the right bank of the Tigris, c.

victory which he immortalized on his triumphal arch in Rome. Afterwards, S. lost all importance, but continued to exist into the Sassanid era (> Parthian and Persian wars).

S. had a republican form of government with its own law and famous coins — under the Parthians, it was the

primary mint of the empire. The patrician party, which was bitterly opposed by the people’s party, provided the 300 members of the senate. In connection with this party strife, there was a persecution of Jews under ~ Artabanus [7] III in which 50,000 Jews were murdered. According to Diog. Laert. 6,2,81, the philosophers + Diogenes [15] of Babylon (about 240-150 BC) and Diogenes the Epicurean (died about 144 BC) were from S., as was the astronomer — Seleucus [11] (1701275) BCAStrs L6st6):

Excavations by the universities of Michigan (1927— 1937) and Turin (1964-1976; 1986-1989) demonstrated that the city was laid out according to a ‘Hippodamian plan’ (+ Hippodamus). A canal separated the northern section, characterized primarily by public buildings, from the southern residential district. The Hellenistic remains are covered by thick layers from the Parthian era, nevertheless it is astonishing that no typical Greek structures (theatre; agora) have been discovered. Also, the Babylonian tradition is stronger than would otherwise be expected for a Seleucid foundation: burials were under the floors of the dwellings. Plaster stucco carved with abstract patterns covered the walls. The rooms of two archives, which end around 154/152

213

214

BC, no longer contained the documents presumably written on papyrus, but hundreds of the associated sealed clay bullae were fired in the fire which led to the destruction of the buildings. Numerous terra cotta figurines from the Parthian era demonstrate Hellenistic influence.

Roman agora, still extant up to two storeys high. Numerous imperial era ruins, baths and a heroon inside the city wall reflect the imperial prosperity of Lyrbe. A basilica with necropolis from the 5th cent. AD is preserved.

1 J.Eppinc, J.N.StrassMalER, Neue babylonische Planeten-Tafeln, in: ZA 6, 1891, 234 ff.

R.H. McDoweELL, Stamped and Inscribed Objects from Seleucia on the Tigris, 1935; S.B. Downey, s.v. Seleucia on the Tigris, Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, vol. 4, 1997, 513 f.; A. INVERNIZZI et al., La terra tra e due fiumi, 1985; Excavation reports in: Mesopotamia, from 1966 on. HJ.N.

[2] S. Pieria. Port of > Antioch [1], approximately 40 stadia north of the mouth of the Orontes, on the slope of the Coryphaeus, a southern spur of the > Amanus. The urban area lay between the valleys of two streams, surrounded by a 12.5 km long wall. In the 3rd > Syrian War, S. fell to the Ptolemies in 246 BC and was only retaken in 219 BC by > Antiochus [5] III. In rog BC, S. gained autonomy, which was confirmed by Pompeius [I 3] in 66 BC, because the city had resisted conquest by —» Tigranes I. The inner harbour of S., where a squadron of the imperial fleet was stationed, was connected to the outer harbours on the coast by canals. The frequent deployment of soldiers who had to prevent the silting up of the harbour is recorded from Vespasianus (AD 69-79) to the Antonines. According to Latin rock inscriptions, their most impressive performance was the construction ofa dam anda rock canal which guided the western stream around the harbour. Recorded as a bishop’s see in 325, S. nevertheless readily joined the emperor Tulianus’ [11] renewal of the old religion. The decline began in the 5th cent. with the advancing silting of the harbour. In 403, S. was plundered by Isauri (> Isauria). In 526 and 528, the population suffered such heavy losses from catastrophic earthquakes that the city was abandoned in 540 when the Persians advanced. G.Downey, A History of Antioch in Syria, 1961, esp. 56-66; D. VAN BERCHEM, Le port de Séleucie Piérie et |’infrastructure logistique des guerres parthiques, in: BJ 185,

1985, 49-87. [3] S. pros Beldi (E. med¢ BHA). Small town on the east bank of the Orontes, south of > Apamea [3], modern

Saqlabiya. Mentioned several times (Plin. HN 5,85; Paus. fr. 2) by late antique writers such as Steph. Byz. under the heading DedevxdBydoc/Seleukdbélos. —_J.wa. [4] Recently, a city S. has been located at the mouth of the Peri 15 km west of > Side [1. 21-23], while the ruins 23 km north of Side (modern Sihlar) previously claimed to be S. have been identified as Lyrbe (Avepr/ Lyrbé) (2. 206-208; 3. 15, 105]. According to a SideticGreek bilingual inscription, a pre-Greek settlement may have existed in Lyrbe [4]. A Hellenistic polis is attested to by isolated components of the predominantly

SELEUCIDS

1 J. NoLxé, Side im Altertum, vol. 1, 1993 2I1d., Pamphylische Studien, in: Chiron 16, 1986, 199-212 3 J. INAN, Toroslar’da bir antik kent. Lyrbe? — S.?, 1998 4 C.BrIxHE, G.NEUMANN, Die griechisch-sidetischen Bilinguen von Seleukeia, in: Kadmos 27, 1988, 35-43.

W.MA. [5] City in Cilicia Trachea (+ Cilices) founded by Seleucus [2] I near the mouth of the > Calycadnus, modern

Silifke. Conquered by the Sassanids in AD 260 (Res gestae divi Saporis 29). In the Diocletian reform (— Diocletianus), S. became the metropolis of the province of + Isauria with 33 suffragan dioceses. In 359, S. was the venue for an Arian synod (— Arianism). In the roth cent. S. was the capital of the Byzantine théma (+ Theme) of the same name. The city was richly furnished with public buildings: theatre, stadium, several temples (some converted to churches); also preserved are a cistern, necropoleis and a Byzantine-Armenian castle on the acropolis. J. Ker, A. WILHELM (ed.), MAMA 3, 1931, 3-22; MAGIE,

268, 1142 note 21; L.ROBERT, Documents de |’Asie Mineure méridionale, 1966, to1—105; T.S. MacKay, s.v. Seleucia ad Calycadnum, PE, 821 f.; H1tD/HELLENKEMPER, S.v. S.

F.H.

[6] Small settlement in northern — Pisidia, founded in the Hellenistic era [1. 43], 2 km north-east of the modern Bayat, settlement mound Selef (field name). In the Roman era, the town was called Claudioseleucia, in the

Byzantine era it is a bishop’s see under the name S. Sidera [2. 378]. 1 AULOCK 2, 43 f.

2 BELKE/MERSICH.

HB.

[7] S. on the > Euphrates (2. émi tot Zevypwatoc/S. epi

tou Zeugmatos). City founded about 300 BC by > Seleucus [2] I Nicator at the crossing of the Euphrates, where > Antiochus [5] III married a Pontic princess in 221 BC, and > Tigranes I had > Cleopatra [II 8] Selene executed. The new name > Zeugma became more and more established when Pompeius [I 3] gave S. to > Antiochus [16] I of Commagene in 65/4 BC and the city became part of the province of Syria in 31/30 BC. J. Wacner, Seleukeia am Euphrat/Zeugma (TAVO supplement B ro), 1976. J.WA.

Seleucid era see > Chronography Seleucids. The kings who are most often referred to as Seleucids are > Antiochus [2-14] and > Seleucus [2-8], less often, Demetrius {I7—9] and Philippus [24-25]. The

Seleucids, who were frequently related by marriage to other royal families, were the descendents of — Seleucus [2], the founder of the Macedonian kingdom and

snoiqeisy “IX [pL] soysonuy

auaseWWOD 40 *| [91] soysonuYy

be

[vb II] e4!poe1

auaseWWOD JO | ‘| [QL] seyepeuuzIW CO

2

(soujexn3)

| soudjape|iud

soydjape|iud

“IA [8] soxnajas

saueydid3

“WW [sz] soddijiyd soskuolq

|

‘1X SoydoHnUY

|

‘1 [pz] soddijiyd

BIYyed JO ‘IL {[Z] sayeesyd cosaqysneq

|

(aseuewW puz)

=i

— ‘A [Z] Soynajas

“IN [6] soujaweg

(eluped 4O

L

“IX [EL] soysonjuy

Ss

|

CO

|

|

|

(D9 OZL paaowsl) sOUdolUYy

Jaqysneq

(Da €6L 4) sowponuy — [LL] sayepesuyiw

PIUDLLY

JO S8X13X CO sIyDONUY

(ap|z ayy

| [E II] ax!POR]

[y] soreysy Jo “p)

49}0S *| [7] soysonuy

— (sauaweyIds jo ‘p) [1] Pedy

[€] soxnejas

ILLS 11] a41POeT CO somUITeEy “I [p] SoyNajas

(laduNOA ay} sOIeUdY JO 19}S!5)

1340S “Ill [g] Soynajas

|

| Joyedo|iyd ‘AI [9] SO4NAIAS

1910S *| [2] soujawaq

“| [ZL] sayepesyW Jo “p) aUNSopoyy co °Z JOJEXIN “HH [8] SOMJaWIag “| CO ea [pL II] BxVEdoa!y

Diadochi; + Wars of the Diadochi). The size and strength of the very heterogeneous and therefore structurally weak S. kingdom fluctuated early on (— States of the Hellenistic world, with maps). Under the advance of the > Parthians and the Romans and due to disputes over the throne, the kingdom dwindled away in the 2nd cent. BC and met its end when > Pompey [I 3] established Syria as a Roman province in 64 BC. The many Seleucid settlements founded with Macedonian and Greek inhabitants brought about a process of — Hellenization in the Near and Middle East. As Seleucus’ successors, beginning with > Antiochus [2] L., continued to count the years from his accession, the sole official dynastic era in the kingdoms of the Diodochi was established.

Diod. Sic. 19,12 f.; 19,55). S., who was the real initiator of the first coalition directed against Antigonus, fought against him from Phoenicia to the Aegean with troops belonging to Ptolemy, and in 3 12 together with Ptolemy defeated Antigonus’ son > Demetrius [2] at the southern Syrian city of Gaza. S. then returned to Babylon, and counted the years of his reign from the autumn of 312 in Macedonian reckoning, from the spring of 311 by the Babylonian calendar (see also — Seleucids; [3.

E. BEVAN, The House of Seleucus, 1902; A. MEHL, Zwischen West und Ost/Jenseits von West und Ost, in: K. BRoDERSEN (ed.), Zwischen West und Ost. Studien zur Geschichte des Seleukiden-Reichs, 1999, 9-43; S.SHERWIn-WHITE, A.KUHRT, From Samarkand to Sardis. A New Approach to the Seleucid Empire, 1993; WILL.

A.ME.

Seleucus (XéAevxoc/Séleukos, Lat. Seleucus). [1] Co-regent with Satyrus [2] I in the > Regnum Bosporanum, 433/2-393/2 BC (according to Diod. Sic. 12,36,1). As Satyrus is elsewhere (Diod. Sic, 14,93,1) described as a sole ruler, and other sources do not mention his name, his existence is not certain. V.F. GaypuKEvié, Das Bosporanische Reich, 1971, 231;

SELEUCUS

138-55]). S. was not recognized by Antigonus as an autonomous satrap and was also not included in the Peace of the > Diadochi in 3 11 [3. 120-8]. Although repeatedly threatened in Babylon until 301 by either Antigonus or Demetrius ([2. no. ro v rff., 21 ff.]; Diod. Sic. 19,80—-6; 90), between 311 and c. 303/2 he was able to annex the Iranian satrapies and Bactria-Sogdiana, and advance far into India. Against the gift of 500 elephants and a marriage settlement whose terms are not entirely clear, he ceded to the Indian king > Sandracottus (Chandragupta) all Indian territory, including land west of the Indus, in as far as it was no longer included in the list of satrapies of 315 (Diod. Sic. 19,48; Str. 15,2,9; App. Syr. 55527882; [3. 173-81, esp. 178]). When in 306/5 the Diadochi assumed royal status, S. followed suit. In the war of the second great coalition against Antigonus, S.’ elephants played a large part in his victory, achieved together with > Lysimachus [2], at the battle of > Ipsus (301). Of the spoils of war agreed with his allies, S. received parts of Cappadocia, but of Syria only the northern portion, as Ptolemaeus [1] I had occupied southern Syria and retained it (Pol. 5,67,4-13), which led to several wars between Seleucids and Ptolemaeans (> Syrian Wars).

E.H. Minns, Scythians and Greeks, 1913, 571; R. WER-

During the almost 20 years following S. founded nu-

NER, Die Dynastie der Spartokiden, in: Historia 4, 1955,

merous cities from northern Syria to Bactria-Sogdiana,

419-421.

partly on his own, partly together with his son > Antiochus [2] or by the latter’s agency, the most important of which were given dynastic names, e.g. the port of > Seleucia [2] Pieria, > Antioch [1] on the bend of the Orontes, later to become the chief royal residence, the military centre of > Apameia [3] on the Orontes, and — Seleucia [1] on the Tigris as capital of the ‘Upper Satrapies’, the Seleucid territory east of the Euphrates. He had territories in northern Central Asia reconnoitred (— Patrocles [3]), and maintained contacts with Greek poleis such as Miletos and Athens. Having in 299 taken — Stratonice [3], daughter of Demetrius, as his (additional?) wife [2], in 292 he married her to his son Antiochus [2], whom he appointed co-regent and sent (back) into the ‘Upper Satrapies’ with his new wife ([x. no. 3; 2. no. 11; 5. no. 291]; Plut. Demetrius 31,3 f.; 38; App. Syr. 59-61). Depending on the global political situation, S. allied himself with Demetrius, with Ptolemaeus I and others, but enjoyed only slight success in his efforts to gain territory in Syria and Asia Minor. Although S. eventually defeated and interned Demetrius (285), the latter’s fleet went over to Ptolemaeus I. Intrigues within the family of Lysimachus [2], and, in

Ly.B.

[2] S. I. Nikator (Nixatwe/Nikdtor, ‘victor’). Founder of the empire and dynasty of the — Seleucids. S. was born c. 355 BC the son of a Macedonian named Antiochus; he took part in the Asian campaign of his king - Alexander [4] ‘the Great’, becoming one of the latter’s ‘companions’, and enjoyed particular success in India in 326 (Arr. Anab. 5,13,4). In 324, in the marriages carried out by Alexander between Macedonians and Iranian women, he received as his wife + Apama [x], daughter of the Bactrian > Spitamenes (Arr. Anab. 7,4,6). All Seleucids descended from this couple. In 323, after Alexander’s death, S. received the central but subordinate post of > chiliarchos; in 320, however, after being involved in the assassination of > Perdiccas [4], who administered the empire, he received the satrapy of Babylon (Diod. Sic. 18,39,6) under the new arrangements agreed at > Triparadisus. In 316 S. prevailed with difficulty against the advance of > Eumenes {x] into Iran, but in 315, threatened by the claim to power of > Antigonus [1], who had vanquished Eumenes, he fled to > Ptolemaeus [rx] I ([z. no. 10 r 13 ff.];

SELEUCUS

219

part, resulting tensions between Lysimachus and S., led to the last war between two Diadochi: in 281 S. defeated Lysimachus at Corupedium in Lydia. He annexed further territories in Asia Minor, establishing at least one military settlement (— Thyatira), and called upon the Greek cities in the region to submit to his authority; the latter demand met with resistance, especially in Heraclea [7] on the Black Sea (Memnon FGrH 434 F 5-7). S. himself crossed the Hellespont with his army, with the intention of adding Thrace and Macedonia to the spoils of his victory over Lysimachus; but he was assassinated by > Ptolemaeus [2] Ceraunus, a member of his retinue (in the same year 281: [6. r 8]; Memnon FGrH

434 F 8; App. Syr. 62f.; Justin. 17,1,4-2,5). His heterogeneous empire fell into a state of severe crisis (> Antiochus [2]). [3] The elder son of + Antiochus [2] I and > Stratonice [3], from 280 to 268 S. was co-regent with his father. He was suspected of conspiracy and killed (OGIS 220,13; Pomp. Trog. prol. 26; Ioh. Antiochenus 55 = FHG 4,558). (4] S. IL Callinicus (Kadhivixoc/Kallinikos, OGIS 233,3 f.; App. Syr. 66,347). Born c. 265/260 BC, the elder son of > Antiochus [3] Il and > Laodice [II 3]; he was married to > Laodice [II 5]. His father named him as successor shortly before he died in preference to ~ Antiochus [4], born of his second marriage to the Ptolemy - Berenice [2]. With the help of his mother, S. prevailed against > Ptolemaeus [3] I, who had intervened to maintain the claim of his (already dead) nephew, and against dissident cities and satraps, but was then compelled by her to accept his brother Antiochus Hierax as co-regent, who ruled over Asia Minor with his seat in > Sardis. In the ensuing war between them c. 240, S. succumbed to his brother who, however, lost his territory to > Attalus [4] I (> Pergamum) and then in

228 attempted in vain to establish himself in Mesopotamia (Pomp. Trog. prol. 27; Plut. Mor. 489a-b; Justin. 27,1-3; Polyaenus, Strat. 4,17; Porph. FGrH 260 F 32,8). In the north-west of the empire, S. was

unable to prevent the rise of an autonomous kingdom in Bactria (+ Diodotus [2]) and to stop the territory of Parthia-Hyrcania from gaining independence, first under the satrap Andragoras and then under the occupying > Parni (— Parthia; Justin. 41,4,4-10), in spite of a campaign in 230-227. In common with other rulers, S. granted privileges and subsidies to > Rhodos after it was stricken by an earthquake (Pol. 5,89,8 f.). S. died in 226 after a fall from his horse. [5] S. II Soter Ceraunus (Zwtihe Keoavvdc/Soter Keraunos; original name according to Porph. FGrH 260 F 32,9: Alexandros [4. 25]). Born in 243 BC the son of > Seleucus [4] II and > Laodice [II 5], he attempted in vain to reconquer Asia Minor, lost under his father or more precisely under his uncle Antiochus Hierax to ~ Attalus [4] I, and, in the process, was poisoned by courtiers in 222 (Pol. 4,48,6-133 5,34,23 40,6; App. Syr. 66,347 f.; Justin. 29,1,3).

220

[6] S. IV Philopator (®iAondtwe/Philopatér OGIS 247,23; HN 762). Born after 220 BC the son of + Antiochus [5] II] and + Laodice [II 6]; married to his sister (?) > Laodice [II 8]; 196-191 ruled over the Thracian possessions (re-)conquered by Antiochus. During the war between Antiochus and the Romans, in 190 S. unsuccessfully besieged Pergamum, took captive L. > Cornelius [I 66] Scipio, in 190 at Magnesia with his cousin ~ Antipater [7] commanded the left wing of the army led by his father, and after the Seleucid defeat supported Cn. > Manlius [I 24] Vulso against the Galatians (Pol. 18,51;83 Liv.) 37,18).37;20548 B74 1dr e58s,8 fs 38,15,12 f.). From 189 S. was co-regent with his father; as king (from 187), he hoped to use diplomacy to strengthen the Seleucid empire, weakened after its defeat by the Romans: he remained aloof from the war between the Pontian king > Pharnaces [1] I and the Pergamene king > Eumenes [3] II (182-179); in 178, with the collaboration of the Rhodians, he married his daughter > Laodice [II 9] to the Antigonid king > Perseus [2], thus arousing the suspicion of Eumenes, who reported the event as being anti-Roman; and he sent his son — Demetrius [7] I in exchange for his brother ~ Antiochus [6] as a hostage to Rome. In his efforts to pay the war tribute exacted by Rome, S. sought money from the Jews (> Judaism C. 2.); but the chancellor he charged with the task, > Heliodorus [1], met with resistance, and in 175 assassinated his principal and king (2 Macc 3:1-4,7; App. Syr. 45,232 f.; Porph. FGrH 260 F 32,11; Jer. Comm. in Danielem 11,20), who left a young son Antiochus. [7] S. V Elder son of - Demetrius [8] II and > Cleopatra [II 14], he was killed by his mother for making himself king without her permission after his father’s death in 126 BC (Justin. 39,1,9; Liv. Per. 60; App. Syr. 69,362).

[8] S. VI Epiphanes Nicator (Embavis Nixatwe/Epi-

phanes Nikator; OGIS 261; BMC, Gr., Vol. 4, 95 f.). Eldest son of > Antiochus [ro] VIII and > Cleopatra [II 15]; in 96 BC, after the death of his father, he defeated his uncle + Antiochus [11] [X, but in 95 himself succumbed to the latter’s son > Antiochus [12] X in Cilicia, and was killed in + Mopsuestia (Jos. Ant. Iud. 13,366-8; App. Syr. 69,365; Porph. FGrH 260 F Bese) ~ Diadochi and Epigoni; + Diadochi, wars of the; ~ Hellenistic states 1A.T. Cray, Babylonian Records in the Library of J. P. Morgan, vol.2,1913 2 A.K. Grayson, Texts from Cuneiform Sources, vol. 5,1975 3 A.MEHL, S. Nikator, vol. 1,1986 4Id., Zwischen West und Ost/Jenseits von West und Ost, in: K. BRODERSEN (ed.), Zwischen West und

Ost. Studien zur Geschichte des Seleukidenreichs, 1999, 9-43 5A.J. Sacus, H.HuNGER, Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, 1988/9 6 Id., D.J. WisEMAN, A Babylonian King List of the Hellenistic Period, in: Iraq 16, 1954, 202-211. A.R. BELLINGER, The End of the Seleucids, in: Transactions of the Connecticut Academy 38, 1949, 51-102; E. BEVAN, The House of Seleucus, 1902; A.BoucHEé-LE-

pip)

221

CLERCQ,

Histoire des Séleucides

(323-64 avant J.-C.),

1913/4; K. BRODERSEN (ed.), Zwischen West und Ost. Studien zur Geschichte des Seleukidenreichs, 1999; J.D. GRAINGER, S. Nikator, 1990; GRUEN, Rome; E. GRZYBEK,

Zu einer babylonischen KOnigsliste aus der hellenistischen Zeit (Keilschrifttafel BM 35603), in: Historia 41, 1992, 190-204; W.OrTH, Die frithen Seleukiden in der For-

schung der letzten Jahrzehnte, in: J. SErBERT (ed.), Hellenistische Studien: Gedenkschrift H. Bengtson, 1991, 6174; S.SHERWIN-WHITE, A. KUHRT, From Samarkand to

Sardis.

A New Approach to the Seleucid Empire, 1993;

WILL.

A.ME.

[9] S. from Rhodes; son of Bithys; father of > Theodorus and Artemo (PP III/TX 5039; 141/o-116/5 BC priestess of Arsinoé Philadelphos); married to Artemo, the kanéphoros (> Kanephoroi) of 4177/6 (PP IIVIX 5038), he was citizen of Alexandria [1. 133, nos. 4/5] and was made > proxenos of Delphi in the autumn of 157 (FdD III 4, 161), which suggests that he held an important position under > Ptolemaeus [9] VI; he was

subsequently also proxenos of Lebana. From 145 to 131 S. was supposedly strategos and high priest of Cyprus (OGIS 150-161), bearing the title of a ‘relative (of the king)’ (syngenés). Probably about 144, but certainly before 141/o, he became nauarch of the entire Egyptian fleet. 1

T.B. Mirrorp, Seleucus and Theodorus, in: OpAth 1,

1953, 130-171.

W.A.

[10] S. of Tarsus, perhaps 2nd cent. BC. Athenaeus 1,13c names him as the author of a specialist text ‘Ahtevttxd/Halieutikd (‘On fishing’), and cites the assertion (7,320a) that the saltwater fish skaros (> Parrotfish, scarus cretensis; [1; 2]), a popular dish, had the habit — perhaps out of fear — of not sleeping at night, for which reason it could not be caught at nighttime. 1 KELLER 2,366

2 LEITNER, 217 f.

C.HU.

[11] S. of Babylon (more precisely Str. 16,1,6: from Seleucia; differently Str. 3,5,9: from the Red Sea); astronomer, active c. 150 BC between > Aristarchus [3] of Samos and > Poseidonius [3]. He held that the universe was infinite (DIELS, DG 328a 5) and the planetary system heliocentric (only proposed as a hypothesis by Aristarchus; but supposedly proven by S.: Plut. Platonicae quaestiones 7,1 = Plut. Mor. rooéc). He therefore assumed that the earth moves (DIELS, DG 383b 26). He observed the ebb and flow of the tides (Str. 1,1,9), explaining these by the phases of the moon in the equinoctial and solstitial constellations of the zodiac (Str. 355593; see > Zodiac). S. is to be distinguished from an astrologer of the same name of the time of Vespasian [2. 177]. 1 H.Gossen, s.v. Seleukos (38), RE 2 A, 1249 f.

und H.G. GunDEL, Astrologumena, 1966, 44.

2W. W.H.

[12] S. Cybiosactes (KuBtoodxtyd/Kybiosaktés). He was the husband of Berenice [7], brought from Syria

during the dispute with Ptolemaeus

[18] XII in the

SELEUCUS

summer of 56 BC and assassinated within a few days of the wedding (Cass. Dio 39,37,1; Str. 17,1,11); if it is he who is referred to by Porphyrius of Tyre (FGrH 260 F 32; 28), he was no fraud, but the brother of Antiochus [x4] XIII. H. HEINEN, Séleucos Cybiosactés et le probleme de son identité, in: L.CERFAUx et al. (eds.), Antidorum W. Peremans (Studia Hellenistica 16), 1968, 105-114. W.A.

[13] S. Homericus (Ouneidc/Homérikdés). Greek grammarian from Alexandria [1], active at the court of Tiberius (1st half of the rst century AD) (Suet. Tib. 56). He is supposed to have written a number of commentaries and exegetical works in the Alexandrian tradition, which survive only in fragments, a few scholia and glosses. Apart from treatises on Greek language and style, commentaries on almost all the important Greek poets (Suda, s.v. 2. “AdeEavdeetc), including Homer, Hesiod, the lyric poets and Simonides are ascribed to him. S.’ works, among them his treatise ‘On the critical signs of Aristarchus’ [4] (Kata tv “Agtotdexou onusiwv/Kata tén Aristarchou sémeion), when set against those of students of Aristarchus among his contemporaries (cf. esp. > Aristonicus [5] and > Didymus [1]), suggest an independent and often critical approach to the authorities of the Alexandrian school [8. 1256]; his etymological theory differs from the derivation theory of > Philoxenus [8] [4. 184-8]. Further historical-linguistic and exegetical works are the commentary on Solon’s laws (Meet tHv LOkwvoc G&EOvwv/Peri tén Sdlonos ax6non, FGrH 341 F 1), the treatise ‘On the Greek language’ (Ilegi “EAAnviouot/Peri Hellénismoi) [6. 61], a collection of synonyms (Ilegi tig év ovvwvbuots Suadoedc) and the glossary Ilegi yAwoow@v, comprising a collection of dialect variants in the form of an + onomastikon after > Parmenion [2] ([6. 173]; fr. 36-68 MULLER [3]). His ‘Lives’ (Iegi Biwv/Peri bion) appear to have been of a literary-historical character, relating to literary personalities; Tegi tiv wevd@c memtotevpévwv/Peri ton pseudds pepisteuménon (‘On things that have found false credibility’) may have comprised a literary-critical treatment of paradoxographers or fabulists [9. 447]. A theological treatise ‘On the gods’ (Meg 6e@v/Peri thedn), which makes use of Apollodorus [7], the philosophical-historical text Megi ptiAocodiac, mentioned in Diog. Laert. 3,109 (fr. 74-75 MU1LER), and a compilation of Alexandrian proverbs (egi tov mag’ ‘AdeEavdeetdor tagounudv), thought to be the source for the collection of the same name attributed to ~ Plutarchus [2] of Chaeronea (— Paroimiographoi) [5. XVI-XXI], complete the broad sum of S.’ literary activity. Numerous references and quotations in e.g. ~» Pamphilus [6], > Athenaeus [3], > Photius [2] and the Etymologicum Genuinum [4. 157-165] attest to his importance. + Glossography; —Grammarians; - Philology; ~ Scholia Ep.:

1FHG3,500

2FGrH341

3M.MULLER, De

Seleuco Homerico, Diss. Gottingen 1891

SELEUCUS

4 R.REITZENSTEIN, Geschichte der griechischen Etymologika, 1897.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

5 O.CRustus, Plutarchi De proverbiis

Alexandrinorum, 1887 6 M.Dusuisson, Le latin est-il une langue barbare?, in: Ktema 9, 1984, 55-68 7 K. Latte, Glossographika, in: Philologus 80, 1925, 13.6—

175 8B.A. MULLER, s.v. Seleukos (44), RE 2 A, 12511256 9M.ScHmiptT, Seleucus der Homeriker und seine Namensverwandten, in: Philologus 3, 1848, 436-459. MB.

[14] S. from Emesa. Greek poet of an indeterminate

period (perhaps 3rd cent. AD [2. 1251]), according to Suda o 201 the author ofadidactic poem ’Aonahtevtixa/ Aspalieutika (‘Angling’, 4 books) and a historical epic (or historical work, cf. FGrH 780, test. 1) with the title Tlae@uxd/Parthika (‘Stories of the Parthians’, 2 books). The Suda also gives a “Yxouvynua sig tovs Aveixots/ Hypomnéma eis tous Lyrikous (‘Commentary on the lyric poets’), justifying S.’ description as a ‘grammarian’ (yoaupatixdc/grammatikos).

It remains unclear, how-

ever, whether this work should be attributed to him or to > Seleucus [13] from Alexandria. 1 R.A. Kaster, Guardians of Language, 1988, 428-429 (Nr. 253) 2B.A. MULLER, s.v. Seleukos (43), RE 2 A,

1250-1251

3 O0.SEECK, Die Briefe des Libanius, zeitlich

geordnet, 1906, 272-273 A, 1248-1249.

41d.,s.v. Seleukos (33), RE 2 ST.MA.

Seleucus mons. Town in the territory of the > Vocontii (It. Ant. 3 57,8; It. Burdigalense 5 55; Seleucus is the Latin form of a Celtic personal name [1. 1462]) on the road from the Matrona Pass to Valentia (modern Valence) on the Rhodanus, modern La Batie-Montsaléon in the département of Hautes-Alpes, about 6 km to the northeast of Serres. Numerous finds (inscriptions, votive gifts; now in the museum of Gap) attest to its having been a frequently visited cult site (Allobrox, Silvanus, Mars, Victoria, Isis, Mithras).

> Magnentius was deci-

sively defeated at SM by Constantius [2] II in AD 353 (Socr. Mutooédevxoc/Miltoséleukos; Sozom. Dapon Hist. eccl. 4,7,3: Movttooéhevx0v/Montioséleukon). 1 HOLDER

2.

I. GANET, Carte archéologique de la Gaule 05. Les HautesAlpes, 1995, 62-82; I. BERAuUD, Le site de La Batie-Montsaléon, in: Cat. du Musée départemental de Gap, 1991,

253-274.

224

223

E.O.

Self-knowledge (yv@ous or émothun Eavtod/gndsis or epistemé heautouv; Latin notitia, cognitio sui; nosce-

re/cognoscere seipsum). The philosophical and popular conceptions of self-knowledge throughout antiquity often refer explicitly to the precept inscribed above the temple of Apollo in Delphi (> Delphi, > Oracles): ‘know thyself’ (yv@0t ofe]autov/gndthi s[e]auton); the precise date of origin of that inscription, however, is uncertain. The oldest testimony is Soph. fr. 509 P. (Ovynta Peovetv yor Ovytiy pvow/thneta phronein chre thnéten physin, “the mortal soul must think mortal

thoughts”). Numerous parallels are found in Pindar, Epicharmus and the three great tragedians, Aeschylus [x], Sophocles [1] and Euripides [1] (on self-knowledge in Greek tragedy, cf. [1]). Originally, the precept probably pointed to the limitations and frailty of humanity, in contrast to the permanence and perfection of the divine (Pind. Pyth. 8,95 f.; Eur. Alc. 799; Plut. De E 394¢; Sen. Consolatio ad Marciam 11,3). Self-knowledge is also interpreted as a warning against an overestimation of one’s capabilities (Xen. Cyr. 7,2,15 ff.; Aristot. Rh. 1395a 18; Plut. De tranquillitate animi 372c; Plaut. Stich..123 ff; Ov. Stoicism of the Imperial period is closely associated with ‘care for the self’ (émméheva Eavtot/epiméleia heautov, Latin cura sui), which is to teach both limitations and the

rationality of humankind (Sen. Q Nat. 1,17,4; Epict. Diatribai 1,6,23; M. Aur. 6,11). For > Neoplatonism, philosophy as such means withdrawal into one’s own inner being (émteomy eis autov/epitrope eis heauton). The unity of thinking and its object, and hence the issue of self-referentiality, is subjected to thorough analysis in Neoplatonism (e.g. Plot. Enneades 5,8,4,10; Procl. in Pl. Alc. 4,19). Philo [12] of Alexandria regarded knowledge of God as a precondition for self-knowledge, and expressly affirmed that the spiritual principle of the world was indeed knowable (Phil. De opificio mundi 69). However, the Christian commandment of self-knowledge emphasized human being’s sinful nature as much as his likeness to God. In the New Testament, the theme of self-knowledge is largely absent, being superseded by the knowledge of Christ (Mt. r1:25-27). Yet in > Augustine, introspection and inwardness become central in a novel manner, since > truth as relatedness to God is

225

226

not found in the external world, but solely in the human being’s inner being (Aug. De vera religione 39,72,202: noli foras ire, in te ipsum redi, “Do not go outside, return into yourself”). 1 E.LeFEvreE, Die Unfahigkeit, sich selbst zu erkennen. Sophokles’ Tragédien (Mnemosyne Suppl. 227), 20or. J. Annas,

Self-Knowledge

in

Early

Plato,

O’MeEara (ed.), Platonic Investigations, 1985,

in:

1 W.SPICKERMANN, Aspekte einer neuen regionalen Religion und der Prozef§ der interpretatio im rémischen Germanien, Ratien und Noricum, in: H.Cancik, J. RUPKE (eds.), ROmische Reichsreligion und Provinzialreligion, 1997, 145-167 2 E.M. WIGHTMAN, Gallia Belgica, 1985 3R.WiEGELS, Lopodunum 2, 2000. BIBLIOGRAPHY:

see Romanization.

D.]J.

111-138;

J. BruNnscuwic, La déconstruction du “Connais-toi toi-

méme” dans |’Alcibiade majeur, in: Recherches sur la philosophie du langage 18, 1996, 61-84; P.COURCELLE, Connais-toi toi-méme de Socrate a Saint Bernard, 3 vols., 1974-75; L.P. GERSON, Emtotegodt mQdc Eavtov: History

and Meaning, in: Documenti e studi sulla tradizione medievale 7, 1997, 1-32; C.GILL, Personality in Greek Epic, Tragedy and Philosophy, 1996; Id., Self-Knowledge in Plato’s Alcibiades, in: $.STERN-GILLET and K. CorrIGAN (ed.), Reading Ancient Texts: vol. 1, 2007, 97-113.; K.Kremer, Selbsterkenntnis als Gotteserkenntnis nach Plotin, in: International Studies in Philosophy 13, 1981, 41-68; A.C. LLoyp, Nosce teipsum and conscientia, in: Archiv fiir die Geschichte der Philosophie 46, 1964, 188200; H.Nortu, Sophrosyne. Self-Knowledge and SelfRestraint in Greek Literature, 1966; M. REISER, Erkenne Dich selbst! Selbsterkenntnis in Antike und Christentum, in: Trierer theologische Zeitschrift tor, 1992, 81-100;

H. TRANKLE, (NQOI ZEAYTON. Zu Ursprung und Deutungsgeschichte des delphischen Spruchs, in: WJA 11, 1985, 19-31;

SELINUS

V. Tsouna, Socrate et la connaissance de

soi: quelques interprétations, in: Philosophie antique 1, 2001, 37-64; E.G. WiLkins, The Delphic Maxims in Literature, 1929. FR.

Self-Romanization. SR is the English term for the Romanisation of German scholarship, whereas in its original sense English > Romanization is Romanisierung in German. While the latter emphasizes an active and intentional policy of the Romans in respect of peoples they ruled over, SR describes a dynamic process also implying that socially significant groups in Roman provinces have the desire to adopt the Latin language and the culture, lifestyles and religious practices of the Romans [1. 147 ff.]. The concept of SR reflects a continuing trend in scholarship that arose in the 1980s, stressing the active role and model function of the provincial elite, and the associated imitative effect in the population at large. E.M. WIGHTMAN [2. 169 et passim; 3. 2093°] initially used the term Romanity for this. SR emphasizes the independent development of provincial societies and cultures in the Roman empire, which differed tremendously from region to region and which were essentially the product of a reinterpretation of Roman culture against the foil of cultural values and traditions of provincial societies. The term therefore allows a distinction (largely ignored until today by German scholars) between an active policy pursued by the Romans and an uncontrolled development process leading to the formation of specific provincial identities. — Hellenization; > Romanization; > Rome I.

Selge (Léhyn; Sélgé). City in southern Pisidia, c. 1000 m above sea-level in a fertile area (wine, olives; styrax for incense, irises for a medicine: ‘Selgitic oil’) at modern Altinkaya (formerly Zerk) (Str.

12,7,3; Plin. HN 15,31;

23,95). In the Hellenistic period S. was one of the most significant settlements in > Pisidia and followed an independent policy against the > Seleucids and the Attalids (> Attalus) (Pol. 5,72-77; 31,2-5). In the Roman period S. lost its political significance and fell behind the Pamphylian cities of > Perge and — Side. Nevertheless S. had its share of the general prosperity of the Roman Imperial period and underwent a notable expansion of settlement, e.g. with a second agora and a large theatre. 1 A. MACHATSCHEK, S.SCHWARZ, Bauforschungen in S., 1981 2J.No..é, F.ScHINDLER, Die Inschriften von S.,

1991.

HB.

Selinuntum see > Selinus [4] Selinus (ZeAtvotc/Selinows). Name of several rivers and towns. [1] Southern tributary of the Alpheius [1] which enters west of Olympia, modern Krestena (Xen. An. 5,3,8; Paus. 5,6,6).

CL.

[2] River in Achaea, which originates on Mount Erymanthus near > Leontium close to modern Vlasia, flows through the territory of Aegium and enters the Corinthian Gulf east of modern Valimitika. Today again known as S. (Str. 8,7,5 [1. 82 f.]; Paus. 7,24,5). 1 R. BaLapié, Le Péloponnése de Strabon, 1980.

Yous

[3] River in the extreme south west of Sicily (Plin. HN 3,903 Ptol. 3,4,5), modern Modione. The city S. [4] at its mouth was named for it. Probably identical to the Lanarius in the It. Ant. 88,8. E. Mannl, Geografia fisica e politica della Sicilia antica, 1981, 113, 122; R.J. A. Witson, Archaeology in Sicily, 1982-87, in: Archaeological Reports 34, 1987/8, Los5— 150, here 144-148.

[4] (Zedkwotd/Selinots, Latin Selinuntum, the Sicilian city Selinunte). I. History

IJ. ARCHAEOLOGICAL

FINDS

I. HisToRY Port on the south-western coast of Sicily near present-day Marinella; founded in 628 BC (Thuc. 6,4,2; 651 BC according to Diod. Sic. 13,59,3 f.) by Megara [3] at the mouth of the S. [3] as the westernmost Greek colony (+ Colonization IV., with map). S. was able to

227

228

come to terms with the > Phoenicians and > Sicani, but

plateau (47 m high), with the acropolis and the adjacent area of the city to the north, and an eastern plateau (40 m high), with the so-called new city (no longer built on after 409 BC). The temples of S. (A, C, D, E, F, G, O;

SELINUS

there were constant problems with the > Elymi of Segesta [1] (cf. Diod. Sic. 5,9,2 f£.; Paus. ro,11,3). Heraclea [9] was founded by S., probably during a phase of the tyranny (2nd half of the 6th cent. BC; Theron, Peithagoras, Euryleon: Polyaenus Strat. 1,28,2). In 480 BC, S. was the only Greek city on the Carthaginian side at the Battle of > Himera, but without being called to account for it by the victors (Diod. Sic. 11,21,4 f.; 13,55,1). Besides + Syracusae, S. appeared to the Athenians to be their main enemy on the island in the course of their 2nd Sicilian expedition in 416 BC during the > Peloponnesian War (D.) (cf. Thuc. 6,20,3; 6,47,1). In the subsequent battles, S. supported Syracusae (cf. Thuc. 6,65,15 6567523 7515353 7557583 755 851). After the Athenian catastrophe in 413, S. aided Sparta in the Ionian War (Thuc. 8,26,1; Xen. Hell. 1,2,8-10; > Peloponnesian War E.). S. attempted to capitalize on the victory over Athens, and began a merciless war against Segesta, the ally of the Athenians. > Carthage then intervened in order to protect its interests on the island against the Greeks. The campaign under Hannibal [1] ended in 409 BC with the destruction of S.; the few inhabitants who survived or returned from their escape were allowed to continue living in S., but owed tribute to Carthage (Diod. Sic. 13,54-593; evidence and literature [1. 107—

14).

Carthaginian rule over S. was seldom disturbed after that — for example, when Hermocrates [1] recalled the former inhabitants of S. in 408/7 BC, fortified S. and attacked the epikrateia of Carthage (Diod. Sic. 13,63,3—5). Dionysius [1] I expanded the fortifications of S. on his campaign against > Motya in 397 BC (cf. Diod. Sic. 14,47,6). Agathocles [2] (307: Diod. Sic. 20,56,3) and Pyrrhus [3] (277: Diod. Sic. 22,10,2) were

also unable to bring S. the lasting freedom they wished. With the attack by the Romans against Lilybaeum in 250 BC (1st > Punic War), the city was abandoned, the fortifications destroyed, the population evacuated to Lilybaeum (Diod. Sic. 24,1,1). During Strabo’s time (around the beginning of the common era), the site of S. was largely desolated (Str. 6,2,6). Since then, only village life has developed there (cf. the Christian inscription CIL X 7201, 5th cent. AD).

I]. ARCHAEOLOGICAL FINDS

S. grew wealthy through the cultivation of wheat on its large territory, which stretched north to the borders of Segesta. The proceeds from the healing sulphur and thermal springs on Monte S. Colgero were also not insignificant (Str. 6,2,9). This wealth (cf. Diod. Sic. 13,44,3; 5754) is demonstrated, for example, by the enormous construction activity in the 6th/sth cents., the lavish treasury of S. in Olympia and the coinage in the 5th cent. BC. The ruins of S. lie on a tuff plain between the rivers S. [3] in the west and Hypsas (modern Belice) in the east. It is divided by the Gorgo di Cottone, a swampy depression (ancient harbour facilities here), into a western

cf. map) are Doric peripteroi (+ Peripteros); numerous

native and/or Punic elements are found in the details. S. is generally distinguished by a cultural variety. This is especially clear in the cultic area. The attribution of the cult structures to specific deities is difficult and mostly hypothetical. Punic cult symbols (after 409) were added to the ground outside of the pronaos of Temple A (490/460). Temple B (4th/3rd cent.; not on the map) is not a peripteros, but rather a small cult structure with four columns. The largest temple on the acropolis is C (c. 560 BC) with a remarkable metope frieze. Temple D (c. 540 BC) stands out with its large column intervals and elongated cella. West of this is a Punic sanctuary (walled temenos). In the north of the acropolis, the fortifications are easy to recognize. They demonstrate three building phases: the old wall (5th cent. BC and later), the fortifications of Hermocrates [1] and those of Dionysius [1] I. On the eastern plateau, Temple E (460/450 BC) was built over a predecessor of the 7th cent. BC. It was dedicated to Hera. This is a prime example of classical temple architecture. Like the other temples of S., Temple E was destroyed by an earthquake in the Middle Ages; today, it has been re-erected. The oldest temple on the hill (c. 530 BC) is F; without an opisthodomos, it also stands out through the length of its narrow cella and the large distance between its columns. G (520/470 BC) is one of the largest Doric temples in the Greek world (113.34 X 54.05 m, 8x17 columns). On the west bank of the S. [3] is a walled temenos with megaron, propylon and other cult structures, the sanctuary of Demeter > Malophoros. The necropoleis on either side of the S. [3] are extensive. Inscriptions: IG XIV 268 ff.; SEG 4,44; 11,1179; 14,594; 26,1113; Coins: HN 167-169 (sth cent. BC). 1 Huss.

M. SANTANGELO, Selinunte, 1961; D. MERTENS, Griechen und Punier. Selinunt nach 409 v. Chr., in: MDAI(R) 104,

1977, 301-320; Id., A.DRUMMER, Nuovi elementi della grande urbanistica di Selinunte, in: Kokalos 39/40, 1993/4, 1479-1491; L. GIULIANI, Die archaischen Metopen von Selinunt, 1979; C.Marconl, Selinunte. Le metope dell’Heraion, 1994; V.TusA, s.v. Selinunte, in: EAA 2. Suppl. vol. 5, 1997, 213-215; Id., s.v. S., PE, 823-

825; R. ARENA,

Iscrizioni greche arcaiche di Sicilia e

Magna Grecia, vol. 1, 1989; A. CARBE, Note sulla monetazione di Selinunte, in: Rivista Italiana di Numismatica 1986, 3-20.

E.O.

[5] City in Cilicia Trachea (> Cilices, Cilicia) near modern Gazipasa; first mentioned as a polis in Scyl. ro2. In 197 BC, S. was conquered by Antiochus [5] (Liv. 33,20,5). After the death of Traianus in S. (AD 117) the city was renamed Traianopolis (Cass. Dio 68,33,3; CIG 4423); in AD 260, the Persians conquered the city; in the sth cent., it was affected by the Isaurian disturban-

229

SELLA

CURULIS

Selinus: overall map

sie

\ To necropolis Eastern

temples

Eas Ancient city

Sanctuary of Demeter Malophoros

To necropolis

# 2

zi Harbour

Sanoms}: Cee

ee

ee

ee

Co

oe ee)

eeeeseeeeeESE

eoeooeoeoeeeeeeesee

IEE @@@O@OO@O@?eOO OO OO @

ces [1. 407 f.]. Located on an inselberg at the mouth of the river S., the settlement spread to the coastal plain in the Roman era. Apart from the necropolis, only a few ancient remains are superficially preserved [2. 29-32, 55-58, with map]. 1 HrLD/HELLENKEMPER

2 E.ROSENBAUM

et al., A

Survey of Coastal Cities in Western Cilicia, 1967.

animals and against skin diseases [1]. S. is also connected with one of the constellations of the northern sky [2]. 1 F. VON KAENEL, Les prétres-ouab de Sekhmet et les conjurateurs de Serket, 1984 2 O.NEUGEBAUER, R.A. PaRKER, Egyptian Astronomical Texts, Vol. 3, 1969, 183-192.

JO.QU.

Ker.

Sella see > Litter, Sedan chair; > Seat; > Subsellium

Selkis. Egyptian goddess (srq.t); her emblem is an ani-

Sella curulis. Folding chair used by Roman magistra-

mal interpreted as a scorpion or a water scorpion. Her

tes, entirely or partially made of ivory, with curved legs forming an S and without back and arms. The SC is of Etruscan origin and in its function as chariot’s and court’s chair, it has probably derived its name from the Latin currus (‘chariot’) (Gell. NA 3,18,4; Fest. 43; Serv. Aen. 11,334). Being a sign of a magistrate’s power, it was carried behind the government officials by servi publici (‘state slaves’) and was set up during their chair-

putative origin is in the western Delta. Together with + Isis, > Nephthys and > Neith she protects the viscera of a dead person in a canopic chest (+ Canope). Her symbol is found among those in the relief depiction of a ruler’s jubilee. In medicine and magic her priest, the ‘Exorciser of S’., primarily provides help for snake bites and scorpion stings, against miscellaneous dangerous

SELLA

CURULIS

Hs

231

Konstantinos at an elevation of 831 m [1; 3]. S. was destroyed in 3 89/8 BC by > Chabrias, after the battle of Leuctra in 371/o BC by > Epaminondas (Xen. Hell. 6,5,27) and was Spartan again after 367 BC (Xen. Hell. 7,4,12). In 222/1 BC Antigonus [3] Doson defeated Cleomenes [6] III [1; 2; 3; 4] near S. and destroyed the town. S. fell to the Achaei and at the time of Pausanias (2nd century AD) was desolated (Paus. 2,9,7; 3,10,7)1 S.GRUNAUER VON HOERSCHELMANN,

S.vV. S., in: LAUF-

FER, Griechenland, 610 2 PRITCHETT I, 1965, 59-70 3 K.PritcHetr, The Polis of S., in: A.L. BOEGEHOLD (ed.), Studies Presented to Sterling Dow on His Eightieth

Birthday, 1984, 251-254 4R.UrBan, Das Heer des Kleomenes bei S., in: Chiron 3, 1973, 95-102. H.LO.

Sella curulis; schematic structure

manship in the Senate, in the assembly, during judicial hearings and conscriptions. SC were sat in by the curulian magistrates (consul, praetor, promagistrate, aedile, dictator, magister equitum, interrex, consular tribune,

Selli (Xe\Aot/Selloz). Inhabitants of + Dodona, priests of the oracle of Zeus there. The S. appear as early as in Homer as its interpreters (Hom. Il. 16,234 f.; cf. Soph. Trach. 1166 f.; Callim. H. 4,286; Callim. Fr. 186,14). Their attributes (not washing their feet and sleeping on the ground) suggest a ritual connexion with the earth. The archaic priesthood of the S. later passed to the female Peleiades (Str. 7,7,12). As a variant name Hello/is recorded (Scholiall 16,234; Pind. Fr. 59; Callim. Fr. 675; Str. 7,7,10); it is often assumed that there is an etymological connexion with the people of the Hellenes (— Hellas) and the region of — Hellopia (cf. Aristot. Mete. 352b 1; Hsch. s.v. ‘EAAot) [1]. The progenitor of the S. is considered to be the woodcutter Hellus, who was shown a prophetic oak by a dove (Philostr. Imag.

2,33). 1 FRISK, s.v. “Edda.

H.W. Parke, The Oracles of Zeus, 1967, 1-163.

AA.

decemvir), as well as by the censor, the plebeian aedile

and the flamen Dialis, later by municipal officials and the > princeps. The SC were privately owned; in case of disrespect towards maior - potestas, they might be destroyed [x. 64 ff.]. During funeral processions, the SC of the ancestors were carried along (— Burial D.). In Late Antiquity, the cathedra, a high armchair, replaced theiS@: — Magistratus C.; > Seat; > Status symbols 1TH.

SCHAFER,

Imperii insignia: SC und fasces. Zur

Reprasentation romischer Magistrate, 1989 2 J.RONKE, Magistratische Reprasentation im romischen Relief, 1987

3 O. WanscHER, SC: The Folding Stool, an Ancient Symbol of Dignity, 1980 4 H.GABELMANN, Antike Audienz- und Tribunalszenen, 1984 5 A.ALFOLDI, Die monarchische Reprasentation im Kaiserreiche, 1970. L.d.L.

Sellasia (h(i) acia/Sel(l)asia). Polis (Diod. 15,64,1) of Spartan > perioikoi in the Oenus [1] valley about 10 km to the north of Sparta and 5 km to the east of the modern town of S., governing northern access into ~» Laconica. There is evidence of a fortified settlement on the hill of Palaiogoulas with finds from the s5th—znd cent. BC, and a phromrion (‘fortress’) on Mt. Hagios

Sellisternium. Comparable with the Roman banquet of the gods called the lectisternium. According to ancient table manners (men reclined on beds, women sat), at the sellisternium statuettes of the goddesses were placed on sellae (chairs, stools) and a meal was offered to them. Sellisternia are particularly transmitted as a component of the /udi saeculares (CIL VI 32323; 32329). Likewise they could be performed after ominous portents. Coins struck under Titus and Domitian refer to a sellisternium linked to a lectisternium on the occasion of an epidemic, a fire in Rome, as well as the eruption of Mount Vesuvius in AD 79. The coins have various illustrations on their reverse sides; thus for example, the sellisternium for Minerva is expressed by a Corinthian helmet lying on a stool (RIC 23a ff.). a.vs. Sellius. A. S. Clodianus. Senator, who is probably identical to the Asellius Claudianus mentioned in the Historia Augusta (HA Sept. Sev. 13,1). Suffect consul before 193 AD, the year in which he is recorded as curator operum publicorum (AE 1974, 113 [1. 236]). 1 Koxs, Bauverwaltung.

W.E.

2.33

234

Selymbria (ZndvpBeic/Sélymbria). City in Thrace on the Sea of Marmara, 60 km to the west of Byzantium/ Constantinople, modern Silivri. The original Thracian settlement, whose name can be interpreted as ‘city of Selys’, was colonised by Greeks from Megara [2] even before Byzantium, i.e. c. 700-660 BC. S. was conquered by the Persians after the > Ionian Revolt in 493 BC, was later a member of the > Delian League, after the + Peloponnesian War came temporarily under the rule of the Spartans and from 377 BC was a member of the Second > Athenian League. In the Roman Period S. is rarely mentioned and regained significance only after the foundation of Constantinople. Its renaming as Eudoxiupolis after the empress Aelia [4] Eudoxia did not last. From the time of Anastasius I, S. was where the ‘Long Walls’ ended in the south. S. is later often recorded as the see of a bishop, from the r2th cent. of an archbishop; in 1453 it was occupied by the Ottomans.

the epicleses of Dionysus Ovwvidac, Ovwvatos etc. and

Documented or surviving medieval remains are mostly

from the late Byzantine Period. E. OBERHUMMER, S.v. S., RE 2 A, 1324-1327; DAN, S.v. S., ODB 3, 1867 f.

A. KAzHALB.

Sem see > Semites

Semachidae (Xnuayida; Sémachidai). Attic Asty(?) deme of the Antiochis phyle, with one > bouleutés. According to Philochorus in Steph. Byz. s. v. =., situated in Epacria, the mountainous north of Attica, (at modern

Vredou [2]?). A second S., attested at the end of the 2nd/beginning of the 3rd cent. AD, was not a regular Attic deme [1. 13, 94 f., 121 no. 37]. 1 TRAILL, Attica, 13, 54, 69, 94 f., 112 No. 126, 121, No. 37, lable 10 }©=-.22.J.S. TRa1LL, Demos and Trittys, 1986,

139, 149.

H.LO.

Semasiology see > Lexicon / Vocabulary I. Semele (Zeuérn/Semélé, Etruscan Semla; also Ovwvy/ Thyoné). Daughter of + Cadmus [1] and > Harmonia, sister of > Agave, > Autonoe, Ino and — Polydorus (Hes. Theog. 975-978). S. is of significance due to the Theban myth of the birth of > Dionysus: when she was pregnant by Zeus (— Actaeon is said to have been her first suitor: Hes. fr. 217A M.-W.), she was persuaded by Hera to ask him to show himself in his true form. The weather god appeared as a thunderbolt, with which he killed her. He removed the unborn Dionysus from his mother’s womb and sewed him into his thigh and carried him to term (Hom. Hymn 26, 1-3; Pind. Pyth. 3,9899; Eur. Hipp. 5 55-564; Eur. Bacch. 2-3; 6-9; 87-102; 519-529; Ov. Met. 3,256-315; Ps.-Apollod. 3,26-29). Dionysus later recovered S. from Hades, giving her the second name of Thyone (Diod. Sic. 4,25,4; Charax, FGrH 103 F 14; cf. Ino/> Leucothea) and making her a goddess on Mount Olympus (Hes. Theog. 940-942; Pind. Ol. 2,24-30; Ps.-Apollod. 3,38). The name, derived from @veuv/thyein (‘to storm’) forms the basis of

SEMENTIVAE FERIAE

is related to the designation Oviddec for the Attic + Maenads. In Etruria S. was equated with Stimula. The Laconic cult legend recorded in Paus. 3,24,3 f. has no birth from the thigh. The main location of the cult, already alluded to in mythology (Pind. fr. 75; Eur. Phoen. 1751-1756 with schol.

1752; Theoc. 26,1-6) and historically widespread — usually alongside Dionysus (Erchia: LSCG 18 A 44-51; [2.263 f.]; Myconus: LSCG 96,22-24; Magnesia: IMagn. 214; Messapia, as thivina = Thyone: [t. 94 No. B 1.15]; Olbia: [5. 255]; Cologne: CIL XII 8244, [4. No. 39]) —is S.’s onxdc (sékos, ‘enclosure’) in the Theban sanctuary of Dionysus Kadmeios (Eur. Bacch. 6-12; Paus. 9,12,3; [vol. 7, 1,187 f.]; a sékods of Ino in Chaeroneia: [vol. 7, 2,82]). Festivals were probably celebrated at all the sites of her dnodos (Troezen: Paus. 2,31,2; Lerna: Paus. 2,37,5; Delphi, where the

festival was called Herdis: Plut. Mor. 293cd; [4. No. 25]; Samos: Iophon TrGF I 22 F 3). The ancient equation of S. with Ge/> Gaia (Apollod. FGrH 244 F 131; Diod. Sic. 3,62,9) rests on incorrect etymology, but modern derivations are also unconvincing. KRETSCHMER’S consequential hypothesis of a ThracianPhrygian earth goddess is refuted by the evidence of linguistics [3. 74-78] and religious history (Dionysus’ demonstrably Greek origins; cf. already [6]). — Dionysus 1 O.Haas, Messapische Studien, 1960 2 A.HENRICHS, Between Country and City: Cultic Dimensions of Dionysus in Athens and Attica, in: M. GRIFFITH, D.J. MASTRONARDE (eds.), Cabinet of the Muses, 1990, 257-277. 3 A.HeEuBECK, Phrygika I-III, in: ZVS 100, 1987, 70-85 4 A. KossaTz-DEISSMANN, Ss. v. S., in: LIMC 7.1, 713-726; 7.2, 530-534 5 B.LirsuiTz, Inscriptions grecques d’Olbia, in: ZPE 4, 1969, 243-256 6W.F. Otro, 7 SCHACHTER.

Dionysos,

31960

(1933),

62-70 TH.

Sementivae Feriae. Roman movable holiday (> Feriae) to promote the growth of the seed, which Ovid discusses in relation to 24-26 January (Ov. Fast. 1,657-704) with reference to the > Fordicidia of 15 April [1.142 f.]. The festival included sacrifices to ~ Tellus and > Ceres on two days separated by seven days (Lydus, Mens. 3,9); it was celebrated following the first spring sowing within 91 days of the vernal equinox (Varro, Rust. 1,34) and before the second spring sowing in late January or early February (Columella r1,2,9; Pall. Agric. 2,9; Varro, Rust. 1,29; 1,36; InscrIt 13,2 pp.

287 and 293). Twelve more agrarian deities ( Obarator; Runcina) were also invoked (prayer: Fabius [1 3.4] Pictor in Serv. Georg. 1,21, 2nd cent. AD; [2]).

The flourishing of the seed in the context of the yearly agrarian cycle was the overt purpose of the SF; a mention of dolls (oscilla: Prob. Georg. 2,385—-3 89) suggests a connection with the dolls in the cult of the agrarian ~ Lares compitales (schol. Pers. 4,28); they had an apotropaic function [3. 249 f.]. ~ Sondergotter

SEMENTIVAE FERIAE 1S. Weinstock,

Tellus, in: Glotta 22, 1934,

235

236

140-162

C. TEACHINGS As monks, the Semipelagians were convinced that in leading an ascetic and spiritual life, they could achieve salvation by their own efforts [3]. However, they saw Augustinus’ teachings of grace, predestination and (un)free will as threatening these ascetic efforts [4]. They emphasized that faith or the will for salvation (initium fidei) originates with human beings and is then perfected by God’s grace, in accordance with the daily practice of monks and others who seek to lead a moral life. The Augustinian — predestination theory, they contended, disqualified asceticism, rendered any moral preaching senseless and contradicted Church tradition. In opposition to the doctrine that there is an absolute number of individuals chosen by God, they developed the conviction that God chose those who — according to His foreknowledge — would prove worthy by virtue of their merit. Overall, they held fast to God’s basic will for salvation, in opposition to Augustinus, as well as postulating an interaction between grace and human freedom: their view was that original sin was an illness, but man had a certain degree of freedom to turn to God of his own accord [8].

2 J. Barer, Les feriae Sementivae et les Indigitations dans le culte de Cérés et de Tellus, in: RHR 137, 1950, 172-206 3 C.R. PutLiirs, Walter Burkert in partibus Romanorum, in: Religion 30, 2000, 245-258.

L.DeLatre, Recherches sur quelques fétes mobiles de calendrier romain, in: AC 5, 1936, 381-391. CRP.

Semilibral standard. Reduction stage of the RomanItalian > aes grave, introduced in 217 BC, according to which the libral > as weighed only half of the original anymore (RRC 38/1, c. 132 g). 1 RRC, p. 615 f. 2 R. THOMSEN, From Libral ‘Aes Grave’ to Uncial ‘Aes’ Reduction. The Literary Tradition and the Numismatic Evidence, in: Les ‘dévaluations’ 4 Rome. Epoque républicaine et impériale (Congr. Rome 1975), 1978, 9-30. GES.

Semipelagianism A. Concert

B. History

C. TEACHINGS

D. WRITERS

A. CONCEPT Semipelagianism is a modern term (probably first used toward the end of the 16th cent. [2]) for a movement in theological thought that emerged in the 5th/6th cents. in the monasteries of southern Gaul, rejecting the teachings of > Augustinus (cf. [7]) on grace and predestination. The term Semipelagianism remains academically useful, if one takes account of the following reservations: 1) There is no evidence of direct historical links to the > Pelagius [4] who was convicted in 419, nor to other Pelagians. 2) The monks of southern Gaul did not consider themselves to be ‘semi’-followers of Pelagius, whom they also rejected, but saw themselves as upholding the Church’s ancient theology of grace. Augustinus’ own term Massilienses (‘Massilians’) ex-

cessively limits the geographical area. 3) While the writers and works included under the term Semipelagianism deal with a common subject, they do not argue in favour of a single, uniform doctrine. K.KE. B. History Around the year 426/7, a monastery in Hadrumetum (present-day Sousse, Tunisia) gave rise to opposi-

tion to the teachings on grace and predestination that Augustinus had begun to develop in 410, in the course of a conflict with Pelagius and > Iulianus [16] of Aeclanum. Augustinus responded to this criticism in 427 in his writings De gratia et libero arbitrio (‘On Grace and Free Will’) and De correptione et gratia (‘On Rebuke and Grace’), which in turn led to protests and rebuttals from the monks of southern Gaul; the Semipelagian dispute was born [1]. After Augustinus’ death (430), writers like + Prosper Tiro of Aquitaine, his friend > Hilarius [2], and > Fulgentius [2] Ruspensis continued the fight against Semipelagianism, until it was condemned in 529 at the Synod of Arausio (today called the Synod of Orange) on the basis of eight — one-sided and exaggerated — canones (‘propositions’).

D. WRITERS The following are considered the most important exponents of the Semipelagian school of thought [6]: 1) Johannes > Cassianus (about 4352), who, particularly in his 13th conlatio, De protectione Dei (‘On God’s protection’), examined Augustine’s doctrine of grace; thanks to the authority of Cassianus, this work came to be virtually the manifesto of the monks of southern Gaul. 2) > Vincentius of Lerinum (before 450?), who, in his Commonitorium

(‘Commonitory’; 434), argued

in favour of tradition over the novelty of Augustine’s teachings. 3) > Faustus [3] Reiensis (490/495?), who wrote De gratia Dei (‘On the Grace of God’) in 470, which might be described as a compilation of the arguments advanced in the dispute over Semipelagianism; he concludes by supporting the views held by the monks of southern Gaul [5]. — Augustinus; > Predestination, theory of (III) 1J.CHENE,

Les origines de la controverse

semi-péla-

gienne, in: Année théologique Augustinienne 13, 1953, 59-109 2M.Jacquin, A quelle date apparait le terme “Semipélagien’?, in: Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 1, 1907, 506-508 3C.M. Kasper, Theo-

logie und Askese. Die Spiritualitat des Inselménchtums von Lérinsim 5. Jh.,199x 4 Id., Der Beitrag der Monche zur Entwicklung des Gnadenstreits in Siidgallien, dargestellt an der Korrespondenz Augustins, in: A.ZUMKELLER (ed.), Signum Pietatis. FS C. P. Mayer, 1989, 153-182

5 Tu. A. SmiTH, De gratia. Faustus of Riez’s Treatise on Grace,1990

6 A.SOLIGNAC, s.v. Semipélagiens, in: Dic-

tionnaire de spiritualité, ascétique et mystique 14, 1990, 555-568 7C.TipiLetTi, Rassegna di studi e testi sui ‘semipelagiani’, in: Augustinianum 25, 1985, 507-522 (bibliogr.) 8 F.WoOrtTeR, Beitrage zur Dogmengeschichte des Semipelagianismus, 1898 (repr. 1978) 9Id.,

Zur Dogmengeschichte des Semipelagianismus, 1899.

“a7

238

Semiramis (Levigapuc; Semiramis). Legendary Assyrian queen, the protagonist of numerous ancient, medieval and modern tales. Whereas Hdt. 1,184; 3,155 mentions her only briefly (alleged building activity in Babylonia), > Ctesias gives a detailed biography (extant e.g. in Diod. Sic. 2,4-20). According to this account, she was the daughter of the Syrian goddess Derketo, who abandoned her; fed by doves and raised by herdsmen, she grew to become a great beauty, married the Assyrian officer Onnes and accompanied him into a war with Bactria, which she decided in favour of the Assyrians by a bold coup de main. The Assyrian king > Ninus [1] forced Onnes to commit suicide and married S.; after his death she inherited the Assyrian Empire and, despite a dissolute lifestyle, found time to construct monumental buildings in Babylonia and Medea and to conduct campaigns to distant lands. A conspiracy hatched against her by her son > Ninyas [1] failed, but it brought about her abdication; having ascended to the gods, S. was worshipped on earth in the form of a dove. The account of Ctesias was subjected to multiple changes and embellishments in ancient literature (e.g.

Semis (late Latin semissis, ‘half’). In coinage half an + as (= 6 > unciae). A semis occurs in almost all series

Str. 2,1,26; 31; 15,1,5 £.; 16,1,2; Plin. HN 6,49; 7,207; 19,49; Juv. 2,108; Lucian. De Syria dea 14; Aug. Civ.

18,2,2 f.; further sources in [1. 305-308]); Historical

SEMITIC LANGUAGES

of the Italian > aes grave; in the decimal sequence, it appears in the place of the > quincunx, particularly in eastern Italy. In the Roman aes grave (from c. 280 BC),

semisses have a value indication ‘S’. Until c. 231 BC they bear various images, from c. 225 BC (introduction of the Prora series of > aes grave) a head of Saturn on the obverse and Prora on the reverse. Until the introduction of the > Sextantal

Standard

(c. 214-212

BC),

semisses were cast, after that stamped. Semisses also appear in the reduced bronze coinage at all levels down to the > Semuncial Standard. They were minted until c. 86 BC. Semisses do not appear with other images again until the issues of the naval prefects of M. Antonius [I 9] (> Quartuncial Standard). In Augustus’s Roman bronze coinage, semisses were missing; in the Lugdunum series of coins with an altar on the obverse, it was minted (from brass) instead of the > quadrans. In Rome itself there were semisses only in Nero’s coinage (first copper, then brass). A few rare small brass coins minted in Rome and in the East by the Flavians up to Hadrian may have been semisses or quadrantes. Otherwise, semisses no longer occur in the Imperial period.

criticism on the tradition is expressed by Berossus (in

1K.REGLING, s.v. S., RE 2A, 1348-1352 2 RRC, passim 3M.TAMEANKO, The Quadrans and S. Denomi-

Jos. Ap. 1,20) and Diod. Sic. 2,10, noting that the con-

nations in Roman Imperial Coinage, in: Bull. of the Soc. of

struction of the “+ Hanging Gardens” of — Babylon is incorrectly ascribed to S. In the Graeco-Egyptian — Ninus romance S. appears not as the proud ruler, but as a shy girl. The Armenian legend of S., as relayed by Moses [2] of Chorene (History of Armenia XIIXIX), focuses on her conflict with the handsome Armenian king Ara. The historical archetype of S. was Sammu-Ramat, the wife, presumably from Syria, of the Assyrian king Saméi-Adad V (824-811 BC) and the mother of his successor Adad-Nirari III (811-783 BC). Monumental inscriptions mentioning her name beside that of her son and a stela from ASsur dedicated to her bear witness to her great political power, just like that of the legendary S. The numerous campaigns against the Medes undertaken under Adad-Nirari III also appear to have found an echo in this legend; maybe it was the Medes who established the legend of S. Other characteristics of S. (killing her lovers, sodomy with a stallion) may be traced to mythical tales of the Mesopotamian goddess

American Numismatics 18/4, 1993, 86-93.

Istar (> Ishtar). The connection

of S. with doves is

probably motivated by folk etymology (Akkadian summatu, ‘dove’). On the disputed etymology of the name see [2].

+ Bisutun; > Gynaecocracy; > Mesopotamia; > Rhodogune 1 G. PettinaTO, S., 1988 (further lit. 309 f.) 2 T. KwasMan, Review of: M. CoGan, I. EpH‘AL (ed.), Ah,

Assyria. FS H. Tadmor (Bibliotheca Orientalis 55), 1998, 467 f. E.FRA.

DLK.

Semites. The term S., which was not introduced into

scholarship until the 18th cent., goes back to Sem, the son of > Noah in the ‘Table of Nations’ (Gn 10,21-31).

Noah’s sons named therein are regarded today as the eponymous heroes of various > Semitic languages. In modern scholarship, the term S. is limited to linguistics; traditionally, scholarship has assumed a group of Semitic languages or a Semito-Hamitic language family (also known as > Afro-Asiatic). Due to the unjustified expansion of the term to alleged consistent racial and anthropological characteristics of the speakers of Semitic languages, which was then politically abused in fascist states, the academic use of the term became largely obsolete. In modern language use, S. still refers vaguely to the peoples of the Near East. In the most general sense, one can also still find in scholarly literature the terms Semitic or Latin semitica which extend beyond their linguistic meaning to the cultural phenomena of this geographical realm. One also refers to Semiticisms in the analysis of linguistic influences from Hebrew and Aramaic on the Greek of the NT. + SEMITIC STUDIES CK,

Semitic languages. In 1781, A.L. SCHLOEZER introduced this term for the languages which were associated with the sons of Sem/Shem (Gn 10:21-31; — Semites)

and which had a common origin with the so-called Hamitic languages of Africa. The term Hamito-Semitic is used interchangeably with > Afro-Asiatic. Within the Hamito-Semitic languages, > Akkadian, or rather

SEMITIC

LANGUAGES

Sub-classification of the Semitic languages (partly based on Hetzron/Voigt) |.East Semitic

a. Amorite i

hal b. Akkadian-Eblaite

Babylonian Assyrian d. Samalic

Il. Northwest Semitic

a. Canaanite

b. Aramaic

c. Deir Alla

Phoenician/Punic Hebrew Moabite Edomite Ammonite

Ill.Central Semitic

a. Ugaritic

b. (North)Arabic

c. Old South Arabian

Sabaic Minaic

Qatabanic Hadramitic IV.South Semitic

a. Modern South epeeeeee

|

b. Ethiopic

es

aes

Mehr

Ge’ez

Gibbali-Shert

Tigrifia

Harari

Sogotri Bathari

Tigré

Gafat Gurage

Argobba

Harsust

Hobyot related

—

240

239

influence

+——}

interrelation

+ Eblaite (mid—3rd millennium BC), is attested earliest in writing; > Aramaic has the longest continuous written tradition; and modern > Arabic is most widely spoken. In the literature, the division of the Semitic languages remains controversial. According to the latest classification (HETZRON, VoicT), they can be divided into an East-Semitic branch that includes Akkadian and + Amorite, and a West-Semitic branch. The West-Semitic branch is further divided into a Northwest Semitic branch that includes Aramaic and > Canaanite, a Central Semitic branch including > Ugaritic, North Arabian and > Ancient Southern Arabian, and a South Semitic branch that includes > Ethiopian and the modern South Arabian languages. The traditional division classifies Akkadian as East Semitic, Amorite, Ugaritic, Canaanite and Aramaic as Northwest Semitic, and North Arabian, Ancient South Arabian, modern South Arabian and Ethiopian as South Semitic. The individual languages further consist of various dialects, which in

the case of e.g. Canaanite include > Hebrew, > Phoenician, ~ Ammonite, > Edomite and > Moabite. Most attempts at reconstructing a Semitic proto-language are contested. Semitic is significantly different from Indo-European in its phoneme inventory (laryngeals, pharyngeals and various dentals, sibilants), which is much reduced in some Semitic languages. Word formation is based on triliterality: the three radicals (consonants) of a root carry its meaning. Some roots may have originated from a two-consonant (biliteral) base that was later extended. The three proto-Semitic vowels a, i, u (long and short) only play a subsidiary role as their sounds change depending on adjacent consonants, and they are therefore not decisive in the articulation of a word. The individual types of morphemes are created by means of prefixes, infixes, affixes and vowel variations. Pronouns, verbs and nouns distinguish three numbers (singular, dual and plural) and two genders (masculine and feminine). The different aktionsarten (intensive, iterative, reflexive, causative etc.) are expressed by means of different verbal stems, which often vary from one language to the next. The Semitic languages do not distinguish tenses (past, present, future), but aspects, which differentiate completed action, incomplete action (spanning the time from the present to the future), and simple action (the imperative). The aspects are expressed by means of a suffix or prefix conjugation; exceptions exist, as e.g. in Akkadian. A characteristic feature of Semitic morphosyntax is the construct state (a noun followed by a genitival qualifier) that involves a close connection (resulting in loss of case ending of the governing noun and certain changes in the remaining word base) between the governing and the governed noun (with genitive ending). Paronomasia, i.e. the use of the same root in various syntactic functions, is a popular stylistic device. The Semitic languages prefer syndetic parataxis, but asyndetic parataxis is sometimes possible. > Language contact between the Semitic languages and non-Semitic languages (Greek, Latin, also Etruscan et al.) led to polyglot inscriptions (> Bilingual inscriptions, > Trilingual inscriptions); it also caused linguistic loans in either direction. One example of a Semitic loanword into Greek is ywtdv/chiton, ‘frock’ ( Mycenaean), in Latin the salute ave, still in the > Punic form avo in Plaut. Poen. 994 and passim. Numerous Hebraicisms are found in the Greek and Latin > Bible [1;2]. Then again, Semitic languages such as — Aramaic and ~» Hebrew have adopted Greek and Latin terms such as snhdrjn (ovvédquov/synhédrion) as loanwords. + Alphabet ILA. (with tables); — Bilingual inscriptions; -> SEMITIC STUDIES 1 BLass/DEBRUNNER/REHKOPF,

S. Vv.

2 HOFMANN/SZANTYR, Ss. v. Hebraismen Gramm., 154 (literature).

G. BERGSTRASSER,

Semitismen 3 SCHWYZER,

Einfihrung in die semitischen Spra-

chen, *1977; C.BROCKELMANN, Grundrif§ der vergleichenden Grammatik der semitischen Sprachen, 1908; R.HeEtTzron, La division des langues sémitiques, in:

242

241

SEMONIDES OF AMORGOS

(ed.), Actes du premier congrés

Semonides of Amorgos (Znuwvidync/Semonides: Choi-

international de linguistique s¢mitique et chamito-sémitique, 1974, 182-194; Id., The Semitic Languages, 1997; A.S. Kaye, Phonologies of Asia and Africa, 1997; B. K1EN-

roboskos in Etym. M. 713,17; most citations spell Lwvidne/Simonidés). One of the earliest known composers of iambic poetry (> Iambographers) of the 7th cent. The dating of Cyrillus (Contra Iulianum 1,14) to 664-611 BC is to be preferred (cf. - Archilochus) to that of the Suda o 446 to 490 years after the Trojan War, i.e. 693 BC (cf. the information wrongly transmitted under Simmias o 431). According to the Suda o 431 he led colonists from Samos to found Minoa, Aigialos and Arkesine in Amorgos. S. wrote [amboi and an ‘Early History’ (Agyatodoyia/Archaiologia) of Samos, perhaps the elegy in 2 bks. mentioned in o 446 [1.31]. No elegiacs of S. survive: 29 DIEHL (= Simonides 8 W* = 19-20 W* = Stob. 4,34,28) is demonstrated by P Oxy. 3965 fr. 26 to be by > Simonides [2] of Ceos (contra

A.CaquotT, D.COHEN

AST, Historische semitische Sprachwissenschaft, 2001; E. LipiNski, Semitic Languages — Outline of a Comparative Grammar, 1997; R.M. Voicr, Die infirmen Verbaltypen des Arabischen und das Biradikalismus-Problem, 1988.

Oke

Semiuncial standard. Reduction stage of bronze money introduced in 91 BC based on the lex Papiria (Plin. HN 33,46; RRC, p. 77; 596), according to which the — as was reduced to */24 of the Roman pound (> Libra ({x]) = 13,64 g [1]. A part of these asses with the head of Ianus on the obverse show the letters L-P-D-A-P on the reverse above the prora (ship’s bow), possibly for the words lege Papiria de assis pondere (RRC 338/1; p. 611). 1 SCHROTTER, s.v. Semunziaras/SemunziarfufS, 623.

GES.

Semnones. Tribe of the > Suebi between Albis (Elbe) and Viadua (Oder; Str. 7,1,3; Tac. Germ. 39; Tac. Ann. 2,45,1; Ptol. 3,1,22; 51), known to the Romans mainly

through — Tiberius’ campaign in AD 5 (R. Gest. div. Aug. 26; Vell. Pat. 2,106 f.). Given their size and cultic tradition, they regarded themselves as the oldest and most notable of the Suebi (Tac. Germ. 39; cf. [2.473479]). As allies of + Maroboduus, they fell to the -» Cherusci in AD 17 (Tac. Ann. 2,45,1), but were considered to be friendly towards the Romans around the end of the first cent. AD (Cass. Dio 67,5,3). In literary sources, the S. are last mentioned in AD 178, after they had already migrated in a southwesterly direction (Cass. Dio 71,20,2).

A Roman victory over the barbari

gentis Semnonum sive Iouthungorum is celebrated on the Augsburg inscription AE 1993, 1231. According to it, the + Juthungi are the [3] or rather a [4] young branch which emerged from the S. tribe and established their own identity. The S. play a crucial part in the ethnogenesis of the > Alamanni [1]. 1 R. Wenskus, Stammesbildung und Verfassung, *1977 2 D. Tipe, Tacitus’ Germania als religionsgeschichtliche Quelle, in: H. Beck et al. (ed.), Germanische Religionsge-

schichte (suppl. vol. RGA 5), 1992, 434-485 3 T.STICKLER, Iuthungi sive S., in: Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblatter 60, 1995, 231-249

4H.CastritIus, Die

Inschrift des Augsburger Siegesaltars ..., in: E.SCHALLMAYER (ed.), Niederbieber, Postumus und der Limesfall, 1996, 18-21.

B.Krutcer et al., Die Germanen, 2 vols., 51988, passim; M.SCHONFELD, s. v. S., RE 2 A, 1355 f. RA.WI.

Semo Sancus see > Sancus Semones see > Sancus

[2]). Of iambic fragments no. 7 (quoted by Stobaeus 4,22,193 but known to Ath. 179d and Ael. NA 16,24), the so-called Satire on Women, has received most attention: its 118 lines, lacking an addressee or conclusion, satirically compare types of wives to animals (e.g. fox, pig, monkey, ass — all of them unfavourably; only the industrious bee-woman comes off better) and its misogyny recalls > Hesiodus (but without direct quotation; cf. esp. [3]). Similar pessimistic — wisdom literature is represented in fr. 1 W., addressed to a boy or son (@ mait/6 pai, ‘boy’!), dismissing hope and ambition as powerless against illness, misfortune and death. Several of the other 40 fragments (all owed to quotation, many by Athenaeus and 2nd cent. AD lexicographers) are from firstperson narratives (of a sacrifice: 24-30; of a sexual escapade: 16-17, as to content cf. > Archilochus and ~ Hipponax); fr. 13 is without clearly tangible context. In fr. 22 (cf. also fr. 23) the speaker addresses a host at a banquet, suggesting that S.’ iamboi were meant for male, sympotic entertainment: fr. 1,7 and (if from a fable) fr. 9 would also suit a symposion (+ Symposium literature). No surviving fragment attacks an individual, but — Lucianus (Pseudol. 2) apparently knew poetry attacking one Orodoecides. S. was (together with Archilochus and Hipponax) acknowledged by Aristarchus [4] as one of the ‘three iambographers’ and was certainly read by Hellenistic poets. In later Greek literature however, S. is only rarely cited; at first by Strabo (fr. 21), six times by Plutarchus [2] (all of them fr. 5), by Clement [3] of Alexandria (fr. 6) and Ael. NA (fr. 7); Lucian knew of him and he seems to have been present in anthologies as well (these are the sources of Stobaeus’ quotations: frr. 1-4,7). Most of the fragments have been preserved by Greek lexicographers and grammarians; so far there are no papyri. -» Jambographers 1 E.L. Bows, Early Greek Elegy, Symposium and Public Festival, in: JHS 106, 1986, 13-35 27.K. Hupsarp, “New Simonides’ or Old S.? Second Thoughts on POxy. 3965 fr. 26 255-262, in: Arethusa 29, 1996, 255-262 3 N. Loraux, Les enfants d’Athéna, 1981, 75-117.

SEMONIDES

Epit1ons: 1999

OF

AMORGOS

IEG; D.E.

GERBER,

Greek

(with Engl. transl.); W.Marc,

Iambic

Poetry,

Griechische

Lyrik,

1964, 22 f. (Germ. transl. of fr. 7); E.PELLIZER, G. TEDESCHI, 1990 (It. transl. and comm.). COMMENTARIES: W. VERDENIUS, S. tiber die Frauen. Ein Kommentar zu Fr. 7, in: Mnemosyne 21, 1968, 132-58; 22, 1969, 299-301; H. LLoypD-JONEs, Females of the Species, 1975 (text, Engl. transl., comm., studies). BIBLIOGRAPHY 1921-1989: D.E. GERBER, in: Lustrum 33, 1991, 98-108.

LITERATURE: C.G. Brown, S., in: D.E. GERBER (ed.), A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets, 1997, 70-78. _E.BO.

Sempronia [1] Daughter of Ti. > Sempronius [I 15] Gracchus and Cornelia [I 1] (Plut., Ti. Gracchus 1,3), from 150 BC in a childless marriage with P. > Cornelius [I 70] Scipio Aemilianus, for whose death in 129 BC she is supposed to have been partly to blame (App. B Civ. 1,20 (83); Liv. Per. 59). Despite the threatening demeanour of the people, in 102 or ror BC she refused to acknowledge L. — Equitius [1] as her nephew (Val. Max. 3,8,6). R.A. BauMaN,

Women

and Politics in Ancient Rome,

1994, 48-50.

[2] Daughter of C. Sempronius [I 22] Tuditanus and mother of the famous orator Q. > Hortensius [7] Hortaltisi(CiowAtty 1336.44 Clot 3.3 Oo eer 9 33.253 015 53.555))[3] Daughter of C. Sempronius Tuditanus and granddaughter of C. Sempronius [I 22] Tuditanus, married to M. > Fulvius [I 1] Bambalio. She and her daughter ~ Fulvia [2] testified against T. > Annius [I 14] Milo in his trial for the killing of P. > Clodius [I 4] Pulcher in 52 BC (Ascon. in Milonem p. 36). [4] Daughter of C. Sempronius Tuditanus; sister of S. [3], wife of D. > Iunius [I 3] Brutus, the follower of Sulla. Wealthy, educated and intelligent, she was involved in > Catilina’s conspiracy and made her house available for meetings with envoys from the Allobroges (Sall. Catil. 40,5); she is depicted very negatively by Sallust (Sall. Catil. 24,3-25,5). R.A. BAuMAN, 1994, 67 f.

Women

and Politics in Ancient

Rome, TF.

Sempronius. Name of a Roman family. According to tradition, its members of the sth cent. BC (Atratini, S. [I 3-8]) are supposed to have been patricians and champions of patrician privileges (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 10,41,5; 10,42,3), an assumption that may have been a retrospective invention (the Sempronii only became patricians under Caesar or Augustus); in the historical period, we know only of plebeian branches of the family during the Republic (Asellio, Blaesus, Gracchus, Longus, Tuditanus) who played an important role in the 3rd and 2nd cents. E. BADIAN, The Sempronii Aselliones, in: Proc. of the African Classical Associations 11, 1968, 1-6

I. REPUBLICAN

PERIOD

244

243

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

K.-LE.

I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {11] S. Asellio. Roman historian; from a senatorial family [1], but not himself verified as a senator; in 134 BC tr. mil. under P. Cornelius [I 70] Scipio at Numantia (Gell. NA 2,13,3). Appreciably later, he became the

first Roman to write a work of contemporary history (supposed title: Rerum gestarum libri: Gell. NA 2,13,3; 4,9,123 13,21,8); this comprised at least 14 books, perhaps beginning in 146 BC and extending to at least 91 BC (fr. x1 P.: death of M. Livius [I 7] Drusus). In the preface (Gell. NA 5,18,8 f.), in imitation of > Polybius [2] (contra [3.73-7]), S. distanced himself from the notion of annales as lists of facts (> Annalists), and proposed a form of presentation that cast light on motivations and had a patriotic slant. The work was probably not a success [2. 114]; Cicero (Leg. 1,6) felt that, in terms of style, it represented a backward step in comparison with Coelius [I 1] Antipater; it appears that speeches were only indirectly cited (fr. 7 P. = 8 CH.; 10 P. = 12 Cu.). The earliest references are found in Gellius [6]. 1 E.Bapian, The Sempronii Aselliones, in: Proc. of the African Classical Associations 11, 1968, 1-6 2 BARDON 1,113-115 3U.W.ScHotz, Annales und historia(e), in: Hermes

122,

1994,

64-79

Fr.: HRR 17, 179-184; M. CuassiGnet (ed.), L’annalistique romaine, Bd. 2, 1999, 84-89 W.K.

[I 2] S. Asellio, A. Son of S. [I 1]; in 89 BC as praetor

urbanus he attempted to solve the credit crisis following the > Social War [3] by reviving old usury laws favouring debtors; this resulted in his being killed during a riot on the forum. The murder remained unpunished, as no witnesses presented themselves (Liv. Per. 74; App. B Civ. 1,232-9; [1. 475-81]). 1 E.BADIAN, Quaestiones Variae, in: Historia 18, 1969,

447-491

{I 3] S. Atratinus, A. According and cos. II 491 (MRR 1,12; 17; According to Livy (2,21,1 f.) Rom. 6,1,4), his first consulate

K.-L.E.

to tradition, cos. I 497 InscrIt 13,1,88; 352 f.). and Dion. Hal. (Ant. saw the dedication of

the Temple of — Saturnus [1. 234] and the associated institution of the + Saturnalia. His appearance in Dionysius of Halicarnassus as city commander in 487 (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 8,64,3), in the Senate during the debate concerning the agrarian law of Cassius [I 19] in 485 (8,74,1-76,1), and as first interrex in 482 (8,90,5; hence in Lydus, Mag. 1,38 the suggestion of a dictatorship of S.), is annalistic embroidery. 1 F. CoarELLI, in: LTUR 4, 1999, s. v. Saturnus, Aedes

[14] S. Atratinus, A. In 444 BC a member of the first college of consular tribunes (MRR 1,52 f.; InscrIt 13,1,95; 368 f.) which, however, retired after only three months, giving way to a college of consuls (Liv. 4,753; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 11,62,1-3; cf. S. [I 7]).

246

245

[I 5] S. Atratinus, A. Consular tribune in 425, 420 and 416 BC

(MRR

1,67; 70; 73; InscrIt 13,1,26 f.; 96;

374-7). According to Livy (4,44,2-10), during his second consular tribunate, when conducting the elections for the quaestorship, he attracted the displeasure of the people’s tribunes, who accused him of having shown improper favour to patrician candidates. To punish S., the people’s tribunes resumed proceedings against his cousin S. [I 6]. The further consular college including S., inserted between 428 and 427 in Diod. Sic. 12,77,1, is probably an interpolation [1. 9]. 1 BELocH, RG

[I 6] S. Atratinus, A. According to Livy (4,37,3-4,41,93

42,1-9; 44,6-10; cf. Val. Max. 3,2,8; 6,5,2), as cos. in

SEMPRONIUS

lost very many ships to misfortune, to the extent that Roman enterprises by sea ceased for a period (Pol. 1,39,1-7; Diod. Sic. 23,19; Oros. 4,9,10-12). A tradi-

tion of a triumph for S. (InscrIt 13,1,549) is probably a later invention. He was cos. IJ in 244. [1 10] S. Blaesus, C. As people’s tribune in 211 BC, he laid an accusation against Cn. Fulvius [I 7] Flaccus on account of the latter’s defeat at Herdonea (Liv. 26,2,73,12). As, however, that defeat is unhistorical, the story of the lawsuit would appear to have been embroidered upon an original account of Flaccus’ banishment ([1]; unconvincing [2]). Probably as an enlargement upon that account, it is further stated that, in 210, S. served under Q. Fulvius [I ro] Flaccus as legate in Capua, and that Flaccus soon afterwards exchanged him with the

423 BC (MRR 1,68; InscrIt 13,1,96; 374 f.) he led an operation against the Volsci so negligently that only the spirited intervention of the cavalry, under the leadership of Sex. Tempanius, rescued the difficult situation. Initially in 422, S. was accordingly prosecuted by the

propraetor C. Calpurnius [I 8] in Etruria (Liv. 27,6,1).

people’s tribune Hortensius, who, however, withdrew

SEMPRONII GRACCHI

his accusation when four people’s tribunes, each of them a participant in the cavalry attack of the previous year, and among them Tempanius, intervened on his behalf; in 420, however, under the impetus of his opposition to a lex agraria (> Agrarian laws) and the actions of his cousin S. [I 5], he was again brought before the

The most famous branch of the gens, it is attested from the 3rd cent. BC onwards, and achieved the consulate with S. [I 13] (on the cognomen see > Gracchus). On account of their political failure as people’s tribunes, the great grandsons of S. [I 13], Ti. and C. S. [I 16; I rr], were unable to maintain the status of the family;

court and condemned to a large fine.

the fates of their children are unknown (see Stemma).

R.M. Ocitviz,

A Commentary on Livy Books 1-5, 1965

[f 7] S. Atratinus, A. According to tradition, cos. suff. in 444 BC, after the first college of consular tribunes had retired after holding office for only three months (cf. S. [I 4]), and together with L. Papirius [I 20] Mugillanus first incumbent of the newly created post of censor (MRR 1,53 f.; InscrIt 13,1,95; 368 f.). C.MU. [I 8] S. Atratinus, L. (73 BC-AD 7). The son of Calpurnius [I 3] Bestia, adopted by a certain L. Sempronius; in 56 BC at the age of 17, he accused M. Caelius [I 4] who had previously sued S.’ father (Cic. Cael. 1 f.; Jer. Chron. p. 165 HELM). S. was augur and supposedly praetor in the year 40 (MRR 2,380; 385). He was then active as legatus pro praetore for Antonius [I 9] in Greece (ILS 9461; RRC 533). The dedications in Athens (IG IVIII* 4130 f.; SEG 23,130) to his sister(s) and in Patrae to his wife Marcia Censorina (SEG 30,433) presumably originate from this period. In 36 he was among the officers sent by Antonius with a fleet to the aid of Octavian (BMC, Greece, Sicily 61,8), and in 34 he became cos. suff. (Cass. Dio 49,39,1). At an unknown date, he went over to Octavian, and became proconsul of Africa with subsequent triumph in 21. He died in AD 7, supposedly by suicide (ILS 9338; Jer. Chron. p. 165 H. under a false date). 1 Syme, AA, Indexs.v.S.

2 Syme, RR, Indexs. v. S. J.BA.

[I 9] S. Blaesus, C. As consul in 253 BC, returning with his colleague from a plundering campaign to Africa, he

1 D.-A. Kuxorxa, Siiditalien im Zweiten Punischen Krieg, 1990, 87-91; see also comment 45 2J.SEIBERT, For-

schungen zu Hannibal, 1993, 237

TA.S.

[I 11-I £6]

The family may have continued by adoption; it was raised to the patrician status by Caesar or Augustus, and belonged to the Roman high nobility until disappearing in the rst cent. AD. K-LE. {f 11] S. Gracc(h)us, C. 153-121 BC; son of Ti. S. [I 15] Gracchus; people’s tribune 123-121, with a substantial reform program. After the violent death of his brother S. [I 16], S. was appointed to the agrarian commission in his place; he served 126-124 under L. Aurelius [I 15] Orestes as quaestor and proquaestor in Sardinia, returned to Rome against the will of the Senate and was elected as people’s tribune for 123 (— tribunus plebis). Brilliantly gifted as an orator and political strategist, he placed himself at the head of the Gracchan reform movement, and during his two years of office, focused and presented several factual proposals for reforms, with the aim of winning broad support and of thus removing the obstacles facing the reform party. Two laws were designed to deprive the Senate of the pretext for and the means of proceeding against the reformers: the lex de tribunis reficiendis provided a legal basis for the re-election of people’s tribunes; the lex de capite civis prohibited the Senate from instituting criminal courts and provided for capital punishment for the killing of citizens who had not been condemned by a court instituted by the people. His > agrarian law prevented disputed portions of state land from being distributed, and provided for exchange procedures for the purpose of assembling parcels of land for the establishment of colonies (— Coloniae). A lex frumentaria (> Grain laws) guaranteed the supply of grain to the Roman

SEMPRONIUS

248

247

The Sempronii Gracchi and their family connection in the 3rd and 2nd cents. BC Ti. Sempronius [| 13] Gracchus (cos. 238)

Sempronius = gentes { ] = numbers according to BNP

P. Cornelius [1 71] Scipio

P.S. Gracchus

Africanus (cos. | 205, Il 194)

P.C. [169] Scipio

Cornelia [1 1]co Ti.S. [1 15] Gracchus

P. Mucius [| 4] Scaevola (cos. 175)

(cos. | 177, Il 163)

P.C. [1 70] Scipio

Ap. Claudius [1 22] Pulcher

Aemilianus Africanus

(cos. 143, princeps senatus 136, + 130)

(cos. | 147, Il 134, + 129)

P. Licinius [| 19] Crassus Dives Mucianus (pont. max. 132, cos. 131, + 130)

P. Mucius [1 5]

Scaevola (cos. 133, pont. max.130)

CO

Sempronia [5]

Ti.S. [116] Gracchus oo Claudia [1 2] (tr, pl. 133, + 133)

C.S. [110] Gracchus oo Licinia [3]

(tr. pl. 123, 11 122,

|

Licinia co C. Sulpicius

Galba

+121)

three sons

one son

The members of the Gracchian agrarian commission Ti. Sempronius [1 16] Gracchus

C. Sempronius [1 10] Gracchus

Ap. Claudius [1 22] Pulcher

(133)

(133-121)

(cos. 143) (133-130)

P. Licinius [1 19] Crassus Dives Mucianus (cos. 131) (133-130)

C. Papirius [1 5] Carbo

M. Fulvius [1 9] Flaccus (cos. 125) (130-121)

(cos. 120) (130-119)

C. Sulpicius Galba (?)

L. Calpurnius [1 1] Bestia (?)

(121-?)

(cos. 111) (121-?)

It is debated whether C. Sulpicius Galba and L. Calpurnius Bestia were part of the agrarian commission (cf. MRR 1, 522); on the end of the commission, see Sp. —* Thorius.

population at a fixed, subsidized price; a construction program was to provide the necessary infrastructure (roads and warehouses). A lex militaris laid stress on the minimum age of 17 years to be observed in recruitment, and charged the public treasury with the cost of equipping soldiers with clothing. These measures were to be funded by the law granting the publicani the franchise for taxation in the province of Asia. All these laws addressed real problems that required resolution, while at the same time being designed to oblige the beneficiaries to the reformers. The same also applies to those laws that decisively impinged upon the position of the Senate or senators. The lex de provinciis consularibus stipulated that the Senate had to establish the official provinces of the future consuls prior to elections; the two (?) laws in respect of the judiciary (leges iudiciariae) withdrew the monopoly of judicial positions from senators, and in the end, excluded them from positions as judges in favour of the equites. The law in respect of restitution (— repetundarum crimen), intro-

duced by S.’ supporter, the people’s tribune M. > Acilius [I 12] Glabrio, transformed the civil procedure of restitution into a criminal procedure, excluding senato-

rial judges from the procedure which was aimed at senatorial defendants. This reduced the power and autonomy of the senatorial elite and favoured the equestrian class which consolidated its position in the course of the above measures (> equites Romani). The most significant accounts may be found in Plut. C. Gracchus and App. B Civ. 1,91-120; for further details see [7. 18-47].

The reform program may be seen, on the one hand, as a modernizing adjustment of the Roman state to the new circumstances created by Roman ascendancy in the Mediterranean world [4. 151-62], and, on the other hand, as a comprehensive attempt to give more weight to the reform party as against the Senate majority, without, however, putting in question the status of the Senate as the ruling institution. The status quo facing S. was the collapse of the agrarian reform program of his brother Ti. S. [I 16]. When the agrarian commission included in the landdistribution process the Roman state land that had been granted to the Italian allies, at their instigation it lost the right of adjudication in 129, at which point the process was for all practical purposes at an end. The opposing

249 strategy of the Senate majority was, in conjunction with a program of enforced road-building, to resettle on state pastureland those who were displaced, thus avoiding conflict with the owners of state agricultural land [3]. After the destruction of > Fregellae, a Roman citizen colony, > Fabrateria [2] Nova, was even re-established in Italy in 124. As early as 125, the consul M. ~ Fulvius [19] Flaccus, a member of the Gracchan reform party, reacted with an attempt to have citizens choose between Roman citizenship and the right of provocatio, and in this way overcome their resistance to the land-distribution project. After the failure of this plan, he followed the example of his opponents and established villages along the via Fulvia in his province of Gallia Cisalpina. This was the situation facing S. in 123. His aim was, by the founding of colonies and infrastructure, to create settlements and thus improve the supply of goods and services to the Roman metropolis > Rome III. E.). The legal basis was created for the establishment of citizen colonies in Capua and Tarentum, while a further colony is attested in Bruttian Scolacium (Vell. Pat. 1,15). As, however, the resumption of colonization in Italy after its interruption c.170 proved difficult, in the second year of his tribunate S. intended, on the one hand, to establish a large colony on the site of destroyed > Carthage, and, on the other hand, like Fulvius Flaccus (see

above), to use the prospect of Roman citizenship (for Latin communities; > civitas) and the right to vote in the Roman popular assembly (for the remaining allies; — comitia) in order to win over the allies to the cause of land distribution. Both projects were too much even for his supporters: the settlers wanted agricultural holdings in Italy, and the extension of the franchise to all the Italic peoples, which would have meant a revolution in the balance of political forces, appealed neither to the political elite nor to the citizenry. Significantly, at this time C. > Fannius [I 1] who had become consul with S.’ help in 122 turned against his patron. When S. departed to make preparations for the colony in Carthage, the people’s tribune M. > Livius [I 6] Drusus won over the people with the entirely unrealistic proposal to found 12 colonies in Italy, and to restrict the improvement of the legal position of the allies to protecting inhabitants of Latin communities from corporal punishment in the army. Upon his return, S. failed in his attempt to be reelected as people’s tribune. When, in 121, the people’s tribune + Minucius [I 8] Rufus called for, among other things, the repeal of the lex Rubria (> Rubrius [I 1]}), the founding statute for the colony in Carthage, violent confrontations ensued on both sides. For the first time, the Senate used the > senatus consultum ultimum to proclaim a > state of emergency, and the consul L. — Opimius [1] proceeded to the bloody implementation of the order to suppress the Gracchan uprising. S. and Fulvius Flaccus perished, it is said along with 2000 of their supporters. + Rome; > Seditio; > Struggle of the orders

250

SEMPRONIUS

1 J. BLEICKEN, Geschichte der romischen Republik, 51999 2 D.Strocxton, The Gracchi, 1979 3 F.T. Hinricus, Der rémische Strafenbau zur Zeit der Gracchen, in: Historia 16,1967,162-176 4J.MarrtIn, Die Popularen

in der Geschichte der spaten Republik, 1965 5 ROTONDI 6 G. WoLF, Historische Untersuchungen zu den Gesetzen des C. Gracchus, Leges de iudiciis und leges de sociis, 1972 7 A.H. J. GREENIDGE, E.W.Gray, History 133-70 B. C., *1960

Sources for Roman K.BR.

{I 12] S. Gracchus, C. Supposedly the son of Ti. S. [I 16] Gracchus, see L. > Equitius [1]. {I 13] S. Gracchus, Ti. As aedile in 246 BC, he imposed

a fine on Claudia [I 1] for insulting the people; this fine, together with other funds, financed the construction of the temple of (Jupiter) Libertas on the Mons Aventinus (Gell. NA 10,6; Liv. 24,16,19). As consul in 238, he fought first against the Ligurians, and then also in Sardinia. A. ZIOLKOWSKI, The Temples of Mid-Republican Rome,

1992, 85-87 [I 14] S. Gracchus, Ti. He was curule aedile in 216 BC, and after the battle of > Cannae magister equitum. He operated as consul in Southern Italy in 215 and 213, and with extended imperium in 214 and 212. He commemorated a victory at Beneventum in 214 with a picture in the temple of Libertas built by his father S. [I 13]: it would seem that he had won this victory primarily with slave troops (volones) who received their freedom as a reward (Liv. 24,14,1-16,9, in some respects unre-

liable; [1; 2]). He was killed in 212 in Lucania in an

ambush, set by the Lucanian and until then Roman ally Flavus in order to demonstrate to the Carthaginians his decision to change sides (Pol. 8,3 5,1 with [3]). 1 K.-W. WeLWEI, Unfreie im antiken Kriegsdienst 3, 1988, 15f. 2Id., Sub corona vendere, 2000, 92 f. 3 D.-A. KuKOFKA, Siditalien im Zweiten Punischen Krieg, 1990, 60-78

TA.S.

{1 15] S. Gracc(h)us, Ti. C. 220-150 BC, son of P. S. Gracchus and grandson of Ti. S. [I 13] Gracchus; father of the Gracchi. After the death of P. Cornelius [I 71]

Scipio Africanus, he married Cornelius’ youngest daughter > Cornelia [I 1]; of their twelve children, three survived: Ti. S. [I 16] and C. S. [I rr], as well as Sempronia [1] who married P. Cornelius [I 70] Scipio Aemilianus. In 190, on the staff of the two Scipios during the war against Antiochus [5] III, he was sent as a scout to Philippus V in Pella (Liv. 37,7,11). As people’s tribune (184?), he prevented the condemnation of L. Cornelius [I 72] Scipio, in spite of being an political opponent of the Scipios (Gell. NA 6,19). In 185 he was a member of the delegation to Philippus V (Liv. 39,24,13), and in 182 as curule aedile sponsored magnificent games. As praetor and propraetor in Hispania Citerior 180/179 he defeated the Celtiberians, founded the Latin colony > Grac(c)urris and established a sustainable peace (Liv. 40,3 5-50). Elected consul for 177 after his triumph (Liv. 41,6 f.), in 177/6 he fought suc-

SEMPRONIUS

252;

pant

cessfully in Sardinia (2nd triumph 175; victory oration in Liv. 41,28,8 f.). As censor in 169 with C. Claudius [I 27] Pulcher, he intervened against conscriptions and -» publicani, restricted political opportunities for freedmen and built the > Basilica Sempronia (Liv. 43,1416; 44,16,9-11). In 166/5 and 16r he led delegations in the East and worked for a relaxation of relations with + Antiochus [6] IV and > Demetrius [7] I (Pol. 30,27 and 30,30,7, as well as 31,32 f. and 32,1,1). Again consul in 163, he received Sardinia and Corsica as provinces. As presiding magistrate, he helped his brother-inlaw P. Cornelius [I 83] Scipio Nasica Corculum to win the consulate, but then annulled the election owing to religious reservations [1. 104]. 1 MUNZER?*

[I 16] S. Gracc(h)us, Ti. People’s tribune in 133 BC and proponent of an agrarian reform. Born in 162 BC, the son of Ti. S. [I 15] Gracchus and married to a daughter of Ap. > Claudius {I 22] Pulcher; he received a thorough education in rhetoric and philosophy, after the Greek model (teachers: Blossius [2] of Cumae and Diophanes [2] of Mytilene), served on the staff of his brother-in-law P. > Cornelius [1 70] Scipio Aemilianus during the 3rd > Punic War and distinguished himself in 146 at the storming of Carthage. As quaestor in 137, he served under the praetor C. > Hostilius [8] Mancinus at > Numantia and saved the Roman army from a hopeless situation by means of a capitulation agreement; this, however, was not recognized in Rome, and thus endangered his career. Politically, S. allied himself with a group opposed to the Scipios, other members of which, apart from his father-in-law, were the brothers P. > Licinius [I 19] Crassus Mucianus and P. > Mucius {I 5] Scaevola, as well as Q. > Caecilius [I 27] Metellus Macedonicus [1. 257-70].

He became people’s tribune in 133, with the aim of implementing an agrarian reform designed to create opportunities for agricultural settlers. A predecessor law of c. 180 had envisaged an upper limit of 500 > iugera of agricultural land (besides too head of cattle and 500 of small stock on state grazing land) for the private use of state land. In the meantime, however, a large amount of such land had accumulated in private hands. S. stipulated that agricultural land exceeding the upper limit of 500 iugera, plus 250 iugera for each of two sons, should be given back and distributed to peasant settlers. The premises and aims of the law are disputed. Communis opinio of modern scholarship, based on Plutarch (Ti. Gracchus 8-13) and Appian (B Civ. 1,26-47), sees the premises in the ruination of the Italian peasantry and, accordingly, the militia system which was dependent on it, and the aim in the restoration of that system which was meant to be achieved through re-allocation of land. The alternative view points to anachronisms and false assertions as to material facts in the Greek authors, draws upon the epigraphic tradition and archaeological evidence and asserts that the amount of land that was to be distributed was limited; its propo-

nents hold that the Greek tradition reflects the demagogic exaggerations of the reformers and their opponents, and maintain that the aim of the reforms was rather to link a factual program with an agenda grounded in power politics: to resume the colonization that had come to an end with the conquest of the Italian peninsula, despite the limited amount of territory available for distribution, and to win political ascendancy by means of this popular program [2]. The opposition centred on P. Cornelius [I 70] Scipio Aemilianus had already played with the idea of an agrarian reform. Probably during his consulate (140), C. + Laelius [I 2], the closest friend of Scipio Aemilianus, had put up for discussion just such a legal proposition, but withdrawn it owing to opposition. The allies of 133, too, met with vigorous resistance in the Senate. S. took the path of confrontation, struck out the compensation envisaged for the return of land, pushed acceptance of the law through against the opposition of the Senate, after removing his interceding (> intercessio) colleague M. > Octavius [I ro] and staffed the distribution commission with himself, his brother C. S. [I 11] and his father-in-law Ap. Claudius [I 22]. In a second step, by having this family commission granted power of decision in matters of ownership, he made it judge in its own cause. To finance the land distribution, S. passed a law providing for the acceptance of the Pergamenian royal treasure, falling to Rome by the terms of the will of > Attalus [6] III, and its use for the settlement program. With the removal of M. Octavius and the appropriation of the royal treasure, S. offended against traditional order (+ mos maiorum) and put in question the power of the Senate, itself grounded in tradition. When, again in breach of tradition, he applied for a second period of office, the Senate majority, on the initiative of P. > Cornelius [I 84] Scipio Serapio and circumventing the consul Mucius [I 5] Scaevola (who did not intervene either for or against S.), beat S. to death along with 200-300 of his supporters. In 132, further supporters and sympathizers of the reform movement fell victim to a special court in the Senate under the direction of the consul P. — Popillius [I 8] Laenas. Main sources: Plut. Ti. Gracchus; App. B Civ. 1,3 5-70; Vell. Pat. 2,2 f.; Liv. Per. 58; Val. Max. 1,4,23 3,2,17; Flor. Epit. 3,14; Oros. 5,8 f. (further sources in [3. I-10]). + Agrarian laws; > Struggle of the orders 1 MUNzER*

2 K.BRINGMANN,

Die Agrarreform des

Tiberius Gracchus, 1985 3 A.H. J. GreenripGe, E.W. Gray, Sources for Roman History 133-70 B. C., *1960, I=FEO

E. BapiaNn, Tiberius Gracchus and the Beginning of the Roman Revolution, in: ANRW D.Stocxron, The Gracchi,

I.1, 1972, 668-731; 1979; J.BLEICKEN,

Geschichte der R6mischen Republik, 51999, 61-64, 189199 (with a survey of the issues of research and bibliogra-

phy)

K.BR.

2.53

254

{I 17] S. Longus, Ti. As consul in 218 BC, he was about to carry the war against + Carthage which had just been declared from Sicily to Africa (Pol. 3,40,2), when the news of > Hannibal’s [4] attack on the plain of the Po forced him to disband the legions envisaged for that purpose, ordering them to re-assemble in 40 days at ~ Ariminum. On the way there, he himself conducted the elections for the following year (Pol. 3,61,8-14; 3,68,12 f.). Near Placentia, he joined his forces with those of his colleague P. Cornelius [I 68] Scipio, and, when Scipio was wounded, assumed sole command. Full of confidence that he would be able to bring the war to a victorious conclusion if he joined battle he did so at the period of the winter solstice (Pol. 3,714; Liv. 21,52-6). The defeat of the Romans ensured the loss of the Po plain. In Rome, S. was held responsible for the catastrophe. His career came to an end. As, in subsequent years, the Romans initially persisted in their readiness to join battle with Hannibal, it cannot have been this that constituted the accusation against S., but, presumably, concrete tactical and strategic errors. A later victory at Grumentum in 215 against one of Hannibal’s subordinate commanders (Liv. 23,37,10-13) is not historical [1]. S. died in 210 as > decemvir [4] sacris faciundis (Liv. 27,6,16). + Punic Wars

own trial, he had falsely accused M. Tuccius de vi (Cic. Fam. 8,8,1). He then probably went into exile (Cic. Att. 14,14,2). He is perhaps the praetorian who is said to

1 D.-A. Kukorka, Siiditalien im Zweiten Punischen Krieg,

1990, 23-24 T.Scumirtt, Hannibals Siegeszug, 1991, 69-87

{1 18] S. Longus, Ti. From 210 BC, he was augur and decemvir [4] sacris faciundis (Liv. 27,6,15-16), and in

200 as people’s tribune initially interceded against the granting of an > ovatio to L. Cornelius [I 36] Lentulus for his services, on the grounds that Lentulus had served only pro consule, but S. then bowed to the will of the Senate (Liv. 31,20). Curule aedile in 198, in 197 he was one of three — tresviri elected for a period of three years in order to found ten coloniae (Liv. 32,29,3-4) in all. In 196 and 195 S. served first as praetor, then, after an extension, in Sardinia. As consul in 194, he is supposed to have fought a battle against the Boii (Liv. 34,46,447,8); this is, at least in some details, dubious, presupposing as it does a harmonious collaboration between S. and his colleague P. Cornelius [I 71] Scipio, which would contrast with the strained relationship between their fathers as consuls. S. appears again on the scene of the wars in Gaul in the following year, once as legate to his successor, and once with his own (extended?) > imperium (Liv. 35,5,1; 8,6), then in r9x — probably as legate — in Greece (Liv. 36,22,7; 24,2). A subsequent autonomous command in Thrace and on the Danube remains puzzling (Plut. Cato 12,1). In 184 he was defeated by his rival M. Porcius > Cato [1] in the election for censor (Liv. 39,40,3); he died in 174 (Liv. 41,21,8). TAS. [I 19] S. Rufus, C. Known in Cicero’s circle owing to his quarrel with the banker > Vestorius from Puteoli; he was condemned in 51 BC because, in order to escape his

SEMPRONII TUDITANI

[I 22-1 24]

have invented roast stork (Acro on Hor. Sat. 2,2,49 f.).

JBA. [I 20] S. Sophus, P. The earliest known member of the Sempronii, after him attested only as plebeians, and at the same time an important representative of the rising Roman nobility (— nobiles). Already in 3 10 BC as people’s tribune, he was fighting the arrogance of Ap. Claudius [I 2] who was unwilling to relinquish the censorship (Liv. 9,33,3-3 5,26, fictitious in some details). His consulate in 304 BC saw the end of the second > Samnite war, a victory over the Aequi and the reforms of the aedile C. Flavius (Liv. 9,45-6; Diod. 20,101,5; Plin. HN 33,18). In 300, the very year of the plebiscitum Ogulnium creating the possibility for plebeians to be made pontifices, he became a member of that college (Liv. 10,9,2). In the same year, he served as a censor and

added the Aniensis and the Terentina to the Roman + tribus (Liv. 10,9,14). As praetor in 296, he organized the defence of Rome against a coalition of powerful enemies, and concerned himself with the establishment of colonies at Minturnae and Sinuessa (Liv. 10,21,4-9). He is supposed to have borne his cognomen in token of being an expert in the law (Pompon. Dig. 1,2,2,37). {I 21] S. Sophus, P. As consul in 268 BC he defeated the ~» Picentes. In response to an earthquake during the decisive battle, he is supposed to have vowed to build a temple to > Tellus; but other sources hold this to be of much earlier foundation [1]. 268 is also the year of the establishment of the colonies of Ariminum and Beneventum (Eutr. 2,16). As censor in 252, S. is supposed to

have applied his severity not only to senators and the holders of public horses, but also to his own wife (Liv. Per. 18; Val. Max. 2,9,7; 6,3,12). 1A.ZioLKowski,

The

Rome, 1992, 155-162

Temples

of

Mid-Republican TAS.

Sempronii Tuditani [I 22-1 24]. The epithet presumably refers toa hammer (tuder), used by the family as an emblem. [I 22] S. Tuditanus, C. Repeatedly confused by Cicero with his father S. of the same name; in 146 BC he probably took part as an officer in the campaign of L. Mummius [I 3] in Greece (Cic. Att. 13,33,2); in 145 he was quaestor (Cic. Att. 13,4,1), in 132 praetor (MRR

1,498); he achieved the consulate in 129 (MRR 1,504). In order to avoid having to exercise his function as a judge, assigned to him by the Senate, in disputes between the Gracchan land-distribution commission and dispossessed allies (App. B Civ. 1,80), he began the campaign in Illyria against the > Iapodes (Liv. Per. 59; App. Ill. 30), and, after defeating them, celebrated a triumph (InscrIt 13,1, p. 83). He proclaimed his exploits during the war on monuments (ILLRP 334; 335, newly constituted text in [1]; Plin. HN 3,129); they are probably also portrayed by the poet > Hostius [1]

255

256

in his Bellum Histricum. According to Cicero (Brut. 95), S. had an elegant style. He wrote a constitutional text (libri magistratuum; Macrob. Sat. 1,13,21) in at least 13 volumes (Gell. NA 13,15,4) and with an optimate tendency; also probably a Roman history from the beginnings down to the 2nd cent. BC (opposed in [2]; accepted by [3; 4]), as some references (esp. Dion. Hal.

and the Ptolemaeans, but also, in view of worsening tensions with Philippus V, to sound out the situation in

SEMPRONII

TUDITANI

[I 22-1 24]

Ant. Rom. 1,11,1; Gell. NA 7,4,1) would be difficult to accommodate in the other work.

Greece (Pol. 16,25,2; 16,273; 34,2; Liv. 31,2,3—-4) [4]. >» Macedonian Wars; > Punic Wars 1T.Scumitt, Hannibals Siegeszug, 1991, 237-254 2 D.-A. KuxorkA, Siiditalien im Zweiten Punischen Krieg,

1990, 146-147 3 A.ZIOLKOWSKI, The Temples of MidRepublican Rome, 1992, 40-41 4E. WILL, Histoire politique du monde hellénistique 2, 1982, 119-121; 13 1135 TA.S.

1 M.G. Morean, Pliny, N. H. II 129, the Roman Use of Stades and the Elogium of C. S. Tuditanus, in: Philologus 117,1973,29-48 2C.CicHorRtus, Das Geschichtswerk des S. Tuditanus, in: WS 24, 1902, 588-595 3 SCHANZ/ Hostus 1, 196f. 4 BARDON 1d, 105 f.

Il. IMPERIAL PERIOD [il 1] S. Caelianus. Equestrian, with a military function as praefectus or tribunus under Plinius [2] in Pontus-

Fr.: HRR

Bithynia (Plin. Ep. 10,29 f.); DEVIJVER 2, S 18.

1, 143-147; M.CHASSIGNET

(ed.), L’annaliW.K.

[II 2] S. Densus. Praetorian centurion who, according

{I 23] S. Tuditanus, M. As people’s tribune in 193 BC,

to Tacitus (Hist. 1,43,1), on r5. Jan. AD 69 defended Calpurnius [II 24] Piso Frugi, Galba’s [2] adoptive son,

stique romaine, vol. 2, 1999, 40-43.

he gave Latins and Italics the same status as Roman citizens in respect of the law governing credit (Liv. 355752-5); 189 praetor in Sicily. As consul in 185, he subjected the > Apuani (Liv. 39,32,1-5). He failed in his campaign for the censorship in 184 (Liv. 39,40,3), but this did not prevent him from becoming pontifex in 183; he died in 174 during an epidemic. K.-L.E. {I 24] S. Tuditanus, P. According to the account in Livy,

which in essence goes back to Ennius via Coelius, S. took part in the battle of > Cannae in 216 BC as a tribunus militum, and after the defeat fought his way back to Canusium with a few companions (Liv. 22,50,4-12 with [1]). In 214 he was curule aedile, 213 praetor. In that function and with prorogation for two further years, he is supposed to have led a detachment from Ariminum as his base, and even have been victorious at Atrinum (Liv. 24,47,14); this is as unhistorical

as the same commission of his predecessor M. Pomponius [I 7] Matho. In 209 he, like his colleague, became censor prior to his consulate, and against tradition named Q. Fabius [I 30] Maximus as > princeps senatus instead of the eldest censorian (— censor; Liv. 27,11,912). In 205, having been sent as privatus cum imperio to the Illyrian campaign, S. had no success in giving a new turn to the war against Philippus [I 7] V of Macedonia which the Romans had essentially been left to fight alone after the departure of the Aetolians in 206: at the mediation of the Epeirotes he concluded the Peace of Phoinike (StV 3, no. 543). Consul in 204, he went to Bruttium after having resolved problems regarding recruitment and finance (Liv. 29,15-16,3). Owing to contradictions in the sources, it is not possible to determine his share in the successes of this period there [2]; he had vowed a temple to > Fortuna Primigenia from Praeneste on account of a victory, the temple eventually being dedicated in 194 (Liv. 29,36,8; 34,53,5 with [3]). In 203, too, he is supposed to have remained with an extended command in Bruttium (Liv. 30,1,3; 27,7). In 200 he belonged to a delegation with C. Claudius [I 17] Nero and M. Aemilius [I 10] Lepidus, with the task not only of mediating in the conflict between the Seleucids

against the revolting praetorian guard, and in the process was killed (Plut. Galba 26; Cass. Dio 64,6,4 f. relating to Galba himself). [II 3] S. Gracchus. Descendant of the Republican family of the Sempronii Gracchi. He was held to be a good orator and poet who, however, misused his gifts (Tac. Ann. 1,53,3; Ov. Pont. 4,16,31). Nothing is known of any offices, unless he is the same as a triumvir monetalis under Augustus. He had an affair with Augustus’ daughter Iulia [6] during her marriage to Agrippa and after her marriage to Tiberius (Tac. Ann. 1,53; Vell. Pat. 2,100,5). He is supposed to have written the aggressive letter addressed by Iulia to Augustus. S. was banished to the island of Cercina in AD 1; his son accompanied him. The actual reason behind the entire affair in which S. participated is not easy to understand precisely; perhaps Augustus had refused him access to the consulate [z. 91]. After Augustus’ death, S. was killed in exile on Tiberius’ orders (Tac. Ann. 1,53,5 f.). 1 SyME, AA

[I 4] (S.) Gracchus. Praetor in AD 33; as chairman of a quaestio, his task was to pursue offences against taxation laws. Owing to the great number of those concerned, he brought the matter before the Senate (Tac. Ann. 6,16,3). He is possibly the same as the senator C. Gracchus who accused Granius [II 4] Marcianus in 35 (Tac. Ann. 6,38,4).

[II 5] C. S. Gracchus. Son of S. [II 3]; he grew up in exile, without the intellectual upbringing appropriate to his social standing. As the traditional career was barred to him (he probably never entered the Senate), he lived from commerce in Africa and Sicily. Accused in AD 23 of having given succour to the bandit > Tacfarinas, he was protected from prosecution by the governors of Africa, Aelius [II 16] Lamia and L. Apronius [II r] (Tac. Ann. 4,13,2 f.). [116] M.S. Liberalis. Equestrian from Acholla in Africa; in about AD 130 praefectus alae in Mauretania Tingitana under the governor Gavius Bassus (CIL XVI 173). Presiding procurator of Raetia under Antoninus

257

258

Pius (RMD 3, 164, attested on 31.10.1393 see for latest commentary [1. 225 ff.]), still serving in 140 [2. 293-9]. Finally 154-159 praefectus Aegypti [3. 511-24].

I>, of a> iugerum = 105.1 m*, as a measure of time to "/,4 of an hour, as an interest rate to '/24 of a + centesima (1 % a month, 12 % a year) ='/2 %.In the

1K.Dierz, in: Beitrage 2H.Wo.rr, n. Chr., in:

Ein neues Militardiplom aus Alteglofsheim, zur Archaologie in der Oberpfalz 3, 1999 Fragment eines Militardiploms des J. 140 Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblatter 63, 1998, 293-299 3 A.JORDENS, Ein Erlaf des Prafekten S. Liberalis zur Steuererhebung, in: Akten des 21. Internationalen Papyrologenkongresses, 1997, 511-524

SENA GALLICA, SENAGALLIA

late Roman and Byzantine system of weights a semuncia corresponds to 12 scripula (value indicator XII, IB; + scripulum) or 3 — solidi (value indicator SOL III, NI). In money, a semuncia has the value of */,, > as,

later also */,, > denarius. In the city of Rome, there is a coin called semuncia in the aes grave series of the libral standard (value indicator S or &), and it also appears as a coin in Luceria.

{il 7] P. Aelius S. Lycinus. Equestrian, from Ancyra in Galatia. After the militiae equestres he became procurator for inheritance tax in Gallia Narbonensis and Aquitania, procurator Daciae Porolissensis, procurator of the > idios logos in Egypt, procurator in Syria Palaestina; his career spanned the reigns of Septimius [II 7] Severus and Caracalla. His descendant was P. Aelius S. Metrophanes who was a member of the Senate. DEVIJVER 4, 1421 A 60; H. HALFMANN, Die Senatoren in den kleinasiatischen Provinz, in: EOS 2, 603-650; PFLAUM 2, 700 f.; PIR* A 256

{II 8] [?Sem]pronius Senecio. Named together with his

quaestor Maximius Attianus in an inscription from Philomelion (AE 1997, 1448), most probably as proconsul of Asia under Septimius [II 7] Severus; improved text in [1. 205-10; 2. 141-64]. If the nomen gentile is correct, he may have been a descendant of S. [II 9]. 1 W.Eck, Prosopographica III, in: ZPE 127, 1999, 205210 2 M. CurIsTOL, TH. DREw-BeEar, Le prince et ses représentants aux limites de |’Asie et de la Galatie, in:

Cahiers Glotz 9, 1998, 141-164

[Il 9] L. S. Senecio. Equestrian, involved under Trajan

in a trial (Plin. Ep. 6,31,7 ff.) for the forgery of the will of Iulius [II 13 8] Tiro (on him see CIL II 366r). The trial must have cleared him, as, it would seem subsequently, he pursued a procuratorial career (AE 1975, 849): praefectus fabrum, procurator Augusti a censibus provinciae Thraciae, also subsequently in Aquitania; procura-

E. HAEBERLIN, Aes Grave, 1910; 2 A, 1448-1449.

K. REGLING, s. v. S., RE H.-J.S.

Semus (Zfuoc/Sémos) of Delos. Greek antiquarian c. 200 AD. The Suda s. v. =. (where 6 "HAetoc is a corruption [1; 4]) mentions him as a ‘scholar’ (yeappatixdc/

grammatikés) and the author of Andwaxd/Déliaka (Delian history, 8 books; in other sources invariably called Andudc sc. ovyyeadr/Délids sc. syngrapheé) and a work On Delos (FGrH 396 F 1-22, for the most part

from Athenaeus). It dealt with cultural and religious antiquities and curiosities on and near > Delos, presumably in a periegetic structure. Of his work On Paeans a further fragment (FGrH 396 F 24 = Ath. 14, 622a-d) survives, which has significance for the pre-history of > comedy: descriptions of masks, garments and postures, of four kinds of musicians. Of his other works (two books Periodoi (2), a work On Paros and one On Pergamon) nothing survives. That S. was the author of a larger work On the Islands is the opinion of [2] (with bibliography; contra: [3]). In surviving fragments S. reveals himself to be a meticulous scholar. ~ Delos Lit.:

1 PH. BRUNEAU, Deliaca VIII, in: BCH 114, 1990,

553-591 (on fr. 18 JacoBy)

2 P.CECCARELLI, I Nesio-

tika, in: ASNP 19, 1989, 924-928 (with Lit.) 3 F.Jacosy, s.v. S., RE 2 A, 13§7=1359 Fritz, s. v. Parmeniskos, RE 18, 1569. Fr.: FGrH 396; FHGIV, 492-496.

4K. von S.FO.

tor monetae in Rome; procurator provinciae Iudaeae

(thus prior to 135/6, as the province had not yet been renamed Syria Palaestina). PFLAUM, Suppl. 33 ff.

Sena Gallica, Senagallia. City in Umbria to the south of the mouth

of the Sena on the > Ionios Kolpos

(Adriatic) coast (Lucan. 2,407; Sil. Pun. 8,453; in its

lower reaches the Sena is the modern

Semtheus. Egyptian village scribe (+ Komogrammateus) and owner of a dored, an estate awarded by the king (PPetrie II 38 a; Ill 31; PLille I 47,2 f.; 9 f.5 48,2 f. 8 f.), of about 27.5 sq km (10,000 drourai; > Aroura) in 251/o BC. PP I 837 £.; 841; IV 8387. W.A.

Semuncia. Roman unit, */24 of a larger whole. As a weight a semuncia corresponds to half an ounce/— — uncia (“semuncia, quod dimidia pars unciae”, Varro Ling. 5,171) and hence to '/24 of a> libra [1] = 13-64 g (value indicator S or =), as a measure of length to */24 of a > pes = 12:3 mm, as a unit of square measure to

Misa) in the + Ager Gallicus region, modern Senigallia. The Romans founded a colonia maritima there, probably in 289 BC (Pol. 2,19,12; Liv. Per. 11; Str. 5,2,10). In 207 SG was used by the Romans as fixed quarters (Liv. 27,46,4; > Punic Wars), before the battle of the Metaurus [2] (proelium Senense, Cic. Brut. 73). In 82 BC the city, which was sympathetic to the > Populares, was sacked by Pompeius [I 3] (App. Civ. 87 f.). SG became an early Christian bishopric and in 5 51 was used by the Byzantines as a naval base in their battle with the Ostrogoths (Proc. BG 4,23,9).

SENA

GALLICA,

M. OrTOLANI,

SENAGALLIA

N. ALFIERI, S. G., in: Rendiconti dell’ Ac-

cademia dei Lincei 8, 1953, 152-180.

GU.

Senaculum. In Rome, together with the Curia, the assembly place of the Roman Senate (> Senatus) at the Comitium (+ Forum [III 8] Romanum); beyond this specific location in the City of Rome and independent of it, a general term for a place where the Senate met. ~» Assembly buildings RICHARDSON, 348.

C.HO.

Senator see > Senatus

Senatus (the Roman Senate). I. AGE OF KINGS RIOD

II. REpuBLIC

III. IMPERIAL PE-

According to Roman tradition, the senatus existed as an advisory body for governing the state from the age of the kings onwards. > Romulus [1] was said to have established a council of roo members (Liv. 1,8,7; Dion. 2,12,1; Fest. s.v. patres, p. 288; Ov.

Fast. 3,127) which was later expanded to 300. The individual pieces of information about this are probably later constructions. It is plausible that a council of older men (senatus is related to senex: [1.513 f.]; cf. the appellation patres, ‘fathers’) existed early on, chosen by the king at his own discretion (Liv. 1,8,7; Cass. Dio fr. 5,11; fundamentally Fest. s.v. praeteriti senatores, p. 290). It is disputed whether only patricians (— Patricii) or also plebeians (— Plebs) were represented in the senatus. In favour of an initially purely patrician senatus is that only patrician senators participated in the confirmation of resolutions of the people by the patrum auctoritas (cf. Liv. 1,17,9) and the election of the ~ interrex (Cic. Dom. 38) into the Late Republic. The senatus may have played an important role in the election and naming of the new king. I]. REPUBLIC A. COMPOSITION

serious misconduct led to expulsion. Access to the senatus was also opened to the plebeian aediles before 123 BC, and to the people’s tribunes toward the end of the 2nd cent. (Gell. NA 14,8,2). Cornelius [I90] Sulla enlarged the (heavily decimated: Eutr. 5,9,2) senatus — primarily with members of the equestrian class (+ Equites Romani) - to 600 members

(Liv. Per. 89;

App. B Civ. 1,468) and made the quaestorship a prerequisite for membership in the future. Thus, all higher officials became senators and the senatus was replenished indirectly through popular vote (Cic. Sest. 137). Since Caesar rewarded many followers with enrolment in the senatus, it reached 900 members in 45 BC (Cass. Dio 43,47,3), in the triumviral period more than 1000 members (Suet. Aug. 35,1). Senators wore broad purple stripes on their tunics (latus > clavus) and special shoes (+ Calceus) as insignia of their class. Beginning in 194 BC, they had reserved seats at the > ludi (Liv. 34,54,4; Val. Max. 2,4,3). On the other hand, they were also

I. AGE OF KINGS

Hal. Ant. Rom.

260

259

B. Tasks

C. PROCEDURE

A. COMPOSITION In the Republican Period, the senatus was long composed of c. 300 members, allegedly from the time of the first consuls (Liv. 2,1,10; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 5,13,2),

and included plebeians (Fest. s.v. qui patres, p. 304), which probably anticipates the actual development somewhat. The senators were appointed at will by the upper officials until a lex Ovinia (before 312 BC) conferred the > lectio senatus on the > censores (Fest. s.v. praeteriti senatores, p. 290). In the subsequent period, former curule magistrates were elected as a matter of course, even being allowed, from the 3rd cent. on, to

participate in meetings of the senatus prior to their official election, and a seat in the Senate was considered to be, for all intents and purposes, for life, because only

subject to limitations: in particular, they were not allowed to engage in trade from 218 BC on (lex Claudia; Liv. 21,63,2f.). Although membership in a senatorial family increased the chances for access to a magistracy and the senatus, ‘newcomers’ (novi homines) constantly rose to the senatus, particularly in the lower ranks (cf. [2]). B. Tasks The basic task of the senatus, advising the upper officials, developed into a wealth of powers and opportunities to exert influence, which made the senatus the central ‘organ of government’ [3.18-20] in the Middle Republic. In contrast to the annual change of the magistrates, the senatus represented political continuity. On one hand, the influence of the senatus grew to be an encumbrance to arbitrary actions by the magistrates who (with rare exceptions) did not defy the collected authority and experience of the previous office holders and probably avoided personal conflict with the members of their class into whose circle they returned after the end of their period in office; on the other hand, it was also an encumbrance to the popular assembly (+ Comitia) whose functions were controlled and, in

part, absorbed by the senatus. The people had the power of legislation, but the consular proposals, at least, were regularly prepared and formulated in the senatus, frequently even being initiated by a request of the senatus to the magistrates; finally, laws were also repealed by the senatus for procedural errors, and the senatus assumed the right to exempt from the effect of particular laws (limited by C. Cornelius [I 2] in 67 BC). The + prorogatio of the imperia (> Imperium), originally concluded by the senatus and people together (Liv. 8,23,12), was later regulated by the senatus alone (especially Pol. 6,15,6). This development led to the senatus controlling or significantly influencing the most important areas of politics and government administration in the Middle and Late Republic. It had particular weight in ‘foreign

261

262

policy’. The right of the comitia to declare war and to conclude international treaties was reduced to a formality because the essential consultation took place in the senatus which was also responsible for drafting the treaties and overseeing them. The senatus received foreign ambassadors and sent its own > /egati on missions of war and peace (Pol. 6,13,6f.). During war, it assigned the duties of the generals ( Provincia), regulated the assignment and supply of the troops (e.g. Sall. lug. 27,5; Cic. Pis. 5), received reports on the course of the action from the generals (Cic. Pis. 38) and awarded the > triumph when applicable. Within the empire, the senatus supervised the provinces (e.g. as a court of appeal against violations by governors) and order in Italy,

the making of a decision through dispersing of the house (— Discessio). The subject presentation of the official was supplemented by explanatory statements (verba facere) which could be delivered wholly or in part by other people (e.g. priests, emissaries) as needed. For simple, especially non-controversial subjects, the decision could be made immediately thereafter (SC per discessionem: e.g. Cic. Phil. 3,24; Liv. 42,3,10). As a rule, however, the senators first gave their opinions (except for the sitting magistrates), called upon in their order of rank in the senate list. The first to speak was the princeps senatus (the longest-serving patrician censorial or consular), but from Sulla on the consuls elected for the following year (consules designati; Gell. NA 4,10,2; App. B Civ. 2,18). The senators expressed their positions (sententia, concluded by a call for a vote), briefly agreed with a previous speaker (assentiri) or signalled their agreement only by positioning themselves near a speaker without speaking themselves. Probably because of this vote ‘with the feet’ (pedibus) the word pedarii (senatores) served, according to Festus (s.v. pedarium, p. 232; cf. Gell. NA 3,18,1; different, but very contrived: [4.5 5-59]), as an unofficial (sometimes slightly derogatory: Cic. Att. 1,19,9) term for senators of lower rank (certainly below the praetorians: Tac. Ann. 3,65,2; Frontin. Aq. 99). Because the speaking time was not limited it was possible to digress from the subject and thus prevent a decision through filibuster (diem consumere: Cic. Att. 4,2,4). The presiding official compiled motions from the sententiae according to his own judgment, followed by the > discessio, and declared the result (‘haec pars maior esse videtur’: Sen. Dial. 7,2,1). During the vote

oversaw the state treasury (> Aerarium) the expendi-

tures of which it controlled (through instructions to the magistrates) and made important decisions in questions of religion, e.g. in respect of the establishment of new cults (such as that of > Mater Magna [r]), of decreeing public vows (votum) and festivals of supplication and thanksgiving (> Supplicatio) and expiating prodigies (> Prodigium). To maintain or restore the internal order of Rome, it declared political opponents > hostes (for the first time in 88 BC) in situations of crisis, constituted extraordinary courts (e.g. Liv. 39,14,6) and empowered magistrates (for the first time in 121 BC against C. > Sempronius Gracchus) to defend the state without regard for rights of protection of the citizens through the so-called > senatus consultum ultimum (cf. Caes. B Civ. 1,5,3; > Emergency, state of).

C. PROCEDURE The procedure of the senatus was not formally regulated, rather it followed tradition. Of the regular magistrates, only the consuls and praetors (Gell. NA 14,7,4) could convoke (cogere) the senatus, but from 287 BC onwards, the > tribuni plebis could also consult the senatus (Gell. NA 14,8,2). Promagistrates, priestly colleges and ambassadors, on the other hand, needed the help of a qualified magistrate in order to present their matters to the senatus. The summons provided the time, place and (sometimes) subject (e.g. Cic. Fam. 11,6,2). Meetings took place on any calendar day until a lex Pupia excluded the dies comitiales (> Fasti B.; Cic. Ad Q. Fr. 2,2,33 2,11(12),3). The meeting place had to be an inaugurated place (> Templum) in Rome or its precincts, i.e. besides the Curia Hostilia on the forum various temples, outside the > pomerium particularly those of Apollo and Bellona on the Campus Martius. Regular attendance by the senators was expected (Cic. Dom. 8), but there were often complaints of inadequate attendance (Cic. Ad. Q. Fr. 3,2,2; Liv. 38,44,6), and, with respect to the required minimum number of votes, the presence of a quorum had to be checked on request (Fest. s.v. mumera senatum, p. 174).

The actual consultation which was sometimes preceded by magisterial notifications consisted of three parts: the presentation by the magistrate (relatio), the

survey of the opinions of the senators (interrogatio) and

SENATUS

(e.g. Cic. Fam. 10,12,3; Liv. 9,8,13), an — intercessio

by equal or higher ranking magistrates, but especially by the people’s tribunes, was possible. In any case, the decision was recorded (for the type and form: > senatus consultum). III. IMPERIAL PERIOD

In the Imperial Period, the senatus lost some of its power and influence to the > princeps, but retained its social prestige and also long kept its role as a central organ of decision making. Augustus reduced (starting in 28 BC) the number of senators to 600 (Suet. Aug. 35,1), set the minimum census to 1 million HS (Cass. Dio 54,17,33 54526,3) and regulated access to the senatus in a way that senators’ sons received the latus clavus at the same time as the > toga virilis (Suet. Aug. 38,2) and gained a seat in the Senate by being elected > quaestor. From Caligula on, the circle of aspirants was expanded by granting the Jatus clavus to young equestrians (Cass. Dio 59,9,5); occasionally by Claudius, increasingly from the Flavians on, older equestrians were enrolled directly into the middle rank class of the senatus through — adlectio. While the senatus of the early Imperial Period essentially drew its members from Italy (apart from individual members from Spain and Gallia Narbonensis; cf. ILS 212, col. I, 1-4), under the Fla-

SENATUS

264

263

vians and the Adoptive Emperors, provincials — frequently from North Africa and the East (especially Asia Minor) — were increasingly enrolled. The tasks of the senatus changed considerably over time. Initially, it was still consulted on almost all matters (Suet. Tib. 30; Tac. Ann. 4,6,2), but gradually many decisions came to be made by particular officeholders or in the > consilium principis. But the senatus also received important new powers. In AD 14 Tiberius transferred the election of the magistrates — except the election of the consuls — to the senatus (Tac. Ann. 1,15,1) although the emperor was entitled to an extensive right of recommendation (- Commendatio 5.). After Tiberius, legislation (especially for civil law and the rules of administration) passed, for all intents and purposes, to the senatus. Still under Tiberius, the senatus likewise took on (at first in extraordinary cases: Tac. Ann. 2,28,3; 3,12,7) the > cognitio in criminal proceedings, above all when senators were accused (for preliminary stages and beginnings, especially [5]). In addition, control over the aerarium (over time only formally) was retained, as was the responsibility for honours and sacral decisions. The naming of the emperor took place with significant participation of the senatus; it also decided on the apotheosis of members of the imperial family and on the > damnatio memoriae. Overall, the reputation of the senatus was still considerable; in the East, it even received cultic honours (cf. last [6]). The procedures of the senatus were retained on the whole, but were heavily standardized (e.g. through the introduction of regular meeting days) and adapted to the imperial privileges. The princeps could call special meetings, introduce suggestions at any time (ILS 244,3-5), had the right to declaim sententiae first or also forward them later and vote like an ordinary senator. His proposals were frequently read out by an imperial quaestor as oratio principis; this was soon misused through the content of this proposal being reshaped as a sententia which everyone agreed to without discussion (rebuked by Claudius [III 1], BGU 6r1, col. Ill, 18-23). Over time, the official voting was replaced by rhythmic acclamation. There were further changes in Late Antiquity. Constantinus [1] I did re-enhance the status of the senatus which had played only a subordinate role under Diocletianus (Pan. Lat. 12,20,1), but he decisively changed its composition by creating the clarissimate (> Vir clarissimus) as a newly expanded upper class through the inclusion of the elite of the equestrian class and the municipal aristocracy, and by founding a second senatus in Constantinople which was initially of lower rank (Anon. Vales. 30), but was placed on a par with the Roman senatus after 339. Both Senates quickly grew to c. 2000 members (in the East, probably 3 58/9: Them. Or. 34,13). In place of the ranking by office, there was a new division in the 4th cent. into the ranks ~ clarissimus, — spectabilis and — illustris vir. Many senators lived in the provinces, far from the senatus.

With time, only the illustres took part in meetings, which became the rule under lustinianus [1] (Dig. 1,9,12,1). Since Rome had lost its role as capital, the Roman senatus was only a sort of town council under the leadership of the > praefectus urbi without any political importance, although it continued into the period of Ostrogothic rule. In the East, the senatus existed until the conquest of Constantinople (1453). + Magistratus; —> Patricii; 1 WaLDE/HOFMANN

2

> Rome I. 27.P. WisEMAN, New Men in

the Roman Senate 139 B.C.-14 A.D., 1971

3 W.KuNKEL,

Magistratische

Gewalt

schaft, in: ANRW 12,1972, 3-22

and

Participation

in the

und

Senatsherr-

4F.X. Ryan, Rank

Republican

Senate,

1998

5 W.KuNKEL, Uber die Entstehung des Senatsgerichts, 1969 (=in: id., KS, 1974, 267-323) 6 A. ERSKINE,

Greekness and Uniqueness: the Cult of the Senate in the Greek East, in: Phoenix 51, 1997, 25-37. M.BONNEFOND-Coupry,

Le sénat

de la republique

romaine, 1989; A. CHASTAGNOL, Le sénat romain a |’epo-

que impériale, 1992; JONES, LRE 2, 523-562; MOMMSEN, Staatsrecht 3, 835-1271; A.O’BRIEN Mookrg, s.v. S., in:

RE Suppl. 6, 660-800; R.J. A. TALBERT, The Senate of Imperial Rome, 1984; P. WILLEMS, Le sénat de la repu-

blique romaine, *1883—1885 (repr. 1968).

W.K.

Senatus consultum {1]

(SC; sometimes

senatus sententia:

ILS 18; 35a;

8208; informally also senatus decretum, e.g. Cic. Mil. 87; Cic. Sest. 32, or in archaic form senati decretum:

Sall. Cat. 30,3 and passim). The formal resolution by which the Roman Senate pronounced advice or instructions at the request (consulere) of magistrates; while not binding legally, it was in practice: in the Imperial Period, to some extent it even acquired force of law (Gai. Inst. 1,4; Pompon. Dig. 1,2,12; cf. [3. 432]). An SC that

was ineffective owing to a formal error or intercession by atribune (> Tribunus [7] plebis) was called (senatus) auctoritas

(Caelius in Cic. Fam.

8,8,5-8; Cass. Dio

55534 f.). The resolution was generally recorded immediately in the presence of interested witnesses (especially the petitioner), and from the early Imperial Period also the two > quaestores urbani, at the location of the sitting (Plut. Marius 4,2 f.); it did not become valid until it was deposited in the archive of the > aerarium, where the > scribae of the quaestors entered it in the official archives (> tabulae publicae). For a detailed account [2. 8-10; 4. 67-72].

In the Republican Period, the record took a standard form: the introductory formula named the president of the session, the day, month and place of the Senate sitting, and finally the witnesses in order of senatorial rank; the theme of the consultation was introduced with the formula quod ille verba fecit, and concluded with d(e) e(a) r(e) i(ta) c(ensuerunt); the resolution then

followed in indirect speech or in the form of an exhortatory sentence, and ended with a note of the ballot, Censuere (or C.). In the Imperial Period the record also included a summary of the grounds of the resolution,

265

266

the number present, and (from the 2nd cent. AD) also the name of the petitioner. Only in exceptional cases (e.g. SC de Bacchanalibus,

despite their character as low-value coinage; coins made of precious metal needed no such legitimization, and so they were minted without the SC device; the device also emphasized the primacy of the Senate, in keeping with Augustus’ political agenda.

ILS 18; SC de Cn. Pisone patre) were Senate resolutions

officially published. But parties benefiting from the resolution (towns or individuals) could obtain copies at their own expense and use them to provide a permanent record. There are many examples of such inscriptions in the Greek East (collected in [2]); these regularly comprise a semi-official Greek translation, often slavishly following the Latin text. A list (requiring augmentation) of extant Senate resolutions: [1. 808-12]. ~» Senatus

SENATUS CONSULTUM DE BAC(CH)ANALIBUS

1 A. Bay, The Letters SC in Augustan Aes Coinage, in: JRS 62,1972,

111-123

2A.M. Burnett, The Authority to

Coin in the Late Republic and Early Empire, in: NC 137, 1977, 37-63 3K.KRrartT, S(enatus) C(onsulto), in: JNG 12, 1962, 7-49 47.LempIG, SC auf kaiserzeitlichen Bronzemiinzen, in: JNG 31/32, 1981/82, 55-76 5 MoMMSEN,

Staatsrecht

6 A. WALLACE-HADRILL, Im-

age and Authority in the Coinage of Augustus, in: JRS 76, 1986, 66-87.

DLK.

1 A.O°’BrIEN Moonrg, s. v. S.c., RE Suppl. 6, 800-812 2 SHERK (esp. 4-19) 3R.J. A. TALBERT, The Senate of Imperial Rome, 1984. 4 M.Coupry, Sénatus-consultes et acta senatus: rédaction, conservation et archivage des

documents émanant du sénat, in: La mémoire perdue, vol. I, 1994, 65-102.

W.K.

[2] The inscription SC or EX SC appears on coins of the Roman Republic in the rst cent. BC indicating an SC, either in clear reference to the image on the coin, or — although this only on irregular issues by aediles, quaestors and tribunes — indicating that the coin ‘was minted on the basis of a SC’ (senatus consulto). Imperial-Period bronze coins, from the > sestertius to the > quadrans, bear an SC on the reverse from their introduction under Augustus c. 19 BC until the middle of the 3rd cent. AD, when they ceased to be minted. The explanation — which prevailed for a long time — that this meant ‘minted by resolution of the Senate’ amounted to a distinction between a bronze minting by the Senate, with SC, and a minting in precious metal by the emperor, without SC (‘diarchy’ in Mommsen [5. vol. 3,1146; vol. 2,1025]; taken up again by [2]).

According to [3], the inscription SC on the new bronze coinage of Augustus related to the images on the coins, meaning that the honorific oak-wreath and laurels depicted on the sestertius and the > dupondius had been granted Augustus by senatus consultum. This theory is supported by coins from the Republic and the Imperial Period, where the SC certainly relates to the images. [4] saw the SC as also being associated with the legends on the coins, claiming that it attests to the constitutional legitimization both of Augustus’ named heirs and of the status of the — tresviri monetales. The further suggestion is that, later on, when associated with the emperor’s titulature, it demonstrated the constitutional legitimization of the emperor himself: usurpers who lacked it (such as Pescennius Niger) minted no bronze coins because they were unable to use the device SG According to [rz], the purpose of the inscription SC was to announce the introduction and validity of the new bronze coinage of 19 BC by virtue of senatus consultum; this view is shared by [6]: but according to him the prime function of the SC on these coins was to identify them clearly as Roman, and lend them ‘authority’

Senatus consultum de Bac(ch)analibus. Edict of the consuls Q. + Marcius [I 17] Philippus and Sp. > Postumius [I 8] Albinus, on the basis of a Senate ruling (> senatus consultum) of 7 October 186 BC, ordering the suppression of the Bacchanalia in Rome and Italy (Il. 2 f.). The sole surviving copy of the edict, found at Tiriolo (province of Catanzaro) in 1640, is directed towards the authories in the Bruttian ager Teuranus (Il. 30), and orders official announcements to be made on at least three market days (I. 22 f.). The bronze tablet, measuring 27 x 28 cm and contained in a Baroque

frame, is today in the Kunsthistorisches Museum Vienna.

at

The text largely confirms the detailed account of the Bacchanalia scandal in Livy (39,8-19), but it raises a

number of questions regarding the legal procedures of the Roman magistrates, as well as regarding the modalities by which rites of the Bacchic cult (> Bacchus)

might continue to be permitted in the future. In particular, it has yet to be satisfactorily established who is meant by the foideratei (foederati, allies’) in the prescript (1. 2). Attempts to explain them as ‘Bacchus worshippers obliged to one another by oath’ (cf. [2. 169]) are unconvincing (correct rebuttal [4. 290]). As the bronze tablet was found in a region which was in all probability seized by Rome, and hence belonged to the ~ ager publicus from the time of the 2nd > Punic War, one might be led to assume that the ager Teuranus was allotted to the neighbouring Latin colony (— coloniae D) of Vibo Valentia and hence to the territory of the socii (as argued recently by [1]), but this is also no convincing explanation. The edict was not published in a township but in agro Teurano, and the brusque instruction in peremptory tone to the local magistrates hardly accords with the customary climate of discourse between Rome and her (Latin) > socii. The text is thus no

proof of an implementation of Roman resolutions in regions outside the Roman municipal territories (ager Romanus), as was inferred from Livy (39,14,7 and 39,18,7), according to whom the persecution was to be undertaken ‘in the city of Rome and throughout all of Italy’ (in urbe Roma et per totam Italiam). Few have fallen in with the equation of tota Italia and ager Romanus here and elsewhere (thus [3], cf. [4. 330 ff.]). Nor

SENATUS

CONSULTUM

DE

BAC(CH)ANALIBUS

does it contribute anything to the issue of the foideratei, which must therefore remain unresolved for the present. The inscription, one of the earliest Roman legal documents to survive in its original form, is also of great interest in historical linguistics for its archaic Latin [5. 289-298]. + Tolerance 1 O. DE CAZENOVE, | destinatari dell’iscrizione di Tiriolo e la questione del campo d’applicazione del senatoconsulto de Bacchanalibus, in: Athenaeum 88, 2000, 59-68

2 H. GaLsTERER, Herrschaft und Verwaltung im republikanischen Italien, 1976, esp. 37-41 3 E.GRUEN, The Bacchanalian Affair, in: Id., Stud. in Greek Culture and Roman Policy, 1990, 34-78 4 J.-M. PAILLER, Baccha-

nalia. La repression de 186 av. J.-C. a Rome et en Italie, 1988 5R. WACHTER, Altlateinische Inschriften: Sprachliche und epigraphische Untersuchungen zu den Dokumenten bis etwa 150 v. Chr., 1987 Epitions: CIL B 581 = ILLRP srr. TRANSLATION: L. SCHUMACHER, Lateinische Inschriften, 1990, no. Il.

H.GA.

Senatus consultum de Cn. Pisone patre. Text of a decision of the Senate dated ro December AD 20, recording the trial of Cn. > Calpurnius [II 16] Piso and

the verdict of the > senatus against him. Piso had been accused of the murder by poison of Germanicus [2] and of + maiestas [C], and had taken his own life on 8 December. The SC, 176 lines in length, starts, after the prescript and verdict motion (relatio) of Tiberius, with describing the facts of the case, and goes on to recount the penalties imposed on Piso and his ‘followers’ (comites), Visellius Karus and Sempronius Bassus and the acquittal of Piso’s children (+ Calpurnius [II 20] and> {II 23]) and his wife, > Munatia Plancina. The text was to be published in all provincial capitals and legionary camps on bronze tablets (Il. 168 ff.). In Spanish Baetica, the proconsul Vibius Serenus had it published in all towns. Six copies of these transcripts have been found in southern Spain in recent years. All are from illicit excavations, but they are now in the National Museum at Seville. Copy A of the text (c. 118 X 45 cm) is almost complete, and the minor lacunae are filled by Copy B which has these sections. The individual copies are almost indistinguishable. The trial of Piso is also treated by Tacitus (Ann. 3,1118). His report, which hints at Tiberius’ involvement in

the death of Germanicus, differs so radically from the content and official language of the SC that it can be assumed that the historian made no use of this document in his account [3]. 1 A. CABALLOS RuFINO et al., El senado-consulto de Gneo

Pison Padre, 1996

2 W.Ecketal., Das SC de Cn. Pisone

patre, 1996 (with German translation, 38-51) 3 W.D. LEBEK, Das SC de Cn. Pisone patre und Tacitus, in: ZPE 128, 1999, 183-211.

268

267

H.GA.

Senatus consultum Hosidianum. Senatorial decision,

named after the AD 47 suffect consul, Cn. > Hosidius [4] Geta [x. 609-612]. It provided for public regulation of private construction work (-> Building law B.). The bronze tablet with the text of the SC was excavated at + Herculaneum around 1600 and is now lost. Like the somewhat later SC Volusianum (AD 56), which was recorded on the same tablet, the SC Hosidianum penalized the purchase of domus and villae for the purpose of demolition with subsequent resale at a higher price of the materials and land, to stop the speculation in urban and rural plots which was damaging townscapes (cf. Cod. lust. 8,10,2-3: ne publicus deformetur aspectus). The demolition of dilapidated buildings and structural alterations on purchase were permitted with the consent of the Senate, as the SC Volusianum appears to show. Bans on the demolition of urban buildings had been included in > municipal laws since the lex Tarentina of the 70s BC (FIRA I’, no. 18 = lex Tar., |. 32 ff.; FIRAT’, no. 21 = > lex Ursonensis § 75; > lex Irnitana § 62),

with little deviation in the legal definitions. Literary and juridical sources (cf. the introduction to FIRA) also attest to the — probably mostly futile — struggle of the emperors and cities against property speculation [2. 74-

753 3]. 1 S. PANCIERA, in: EOS 1, 609-612 2 J. CROOK, Classical Roman Law and the Sale of Land, in: FINLEY, Property, 71-83 3 P.GarnseEy, Demolition of Houses and the Law, in: s. [2], 133-136. Ep.: CIL X rgo1 = ILS 6043 = FIRA I? Nr. 45.; Transl.: 3H. Frets, Historische Inschriften zur romischen Kaiserzeit, *1994, no. 35.

H.GA.

Senatus consultum ultimum. This modern term derives from Caesar (B Civ. 1,5,3) and Livy (3,4,9), and

means the ‘final’ or ‘highest’ decree of the Senate, by which the Senate declared a state of emergency at Rome and charged the senior magistrate(s) present in the city at the time to act against the emergency. The commission was usually given to one or both of the consuls, and occasionally to other officials (interrex; praetores; magister equitum). The crux of the decree, the wording of which probably varied, was the formula (consules) dent operam or videant, ne quid detrimenti res publica capiat. The magistrate was thus at first merely reminded of his self-evident duty ‘to see to it that no detriment befall the commonwealth’. Yet the inherent idea of the well-being of the commonwealth (res publica salva) is reminiscent of the evocatio, the extraordinary military levy, and thus betokens a course of extirpating + seditio. Consequently, at its first formulation in 121 BC during the conflict with C. > Sempronius [I rr] Gracchus, the SCU brought the law of > war into the urbs (+ Emergency, state of), thereby disregarding the same Gracchus’ lex Sempronia de capite civis of 123 BC, which was meant to guarantee the protection of citizens from the capital judgments of the magistrates

SENECA

269

270

(cf. also + hostis). Disputed in individual cases, the SCU remained a means to which, until the end of the Republic (43/40 BC), all powerful men at Rome could have recourse.

troversiae are imaginary cases, school exercises which sometimes touch upon everyday life and laws, but never correspond to the complex demands of the + declamationes. S. seems to have published this collection of 74 topics in ro books with the subtitle Controversiarum libri X. Later, he added a book entitled — Suasoriae (genus deliberativum), containing seven speeches, mostly mythological situations. The Controversiae were epitomized in the 4th cent. [14. III], but the introductions to books 1-4, 7 and ro remained untouched. This edition was the subject of acommentary by Nicolaus Trivet (cf. {14. III-XV] in the late 13th cent. Thanks to their theatrical style, the Controversiae were included in the mediaeval collection of tales, the Gesta Romanorum {13. 13]). The rhetorical writings were composed in S.’s last years. In his second field of work, S. wrote a history of Rome, covering the period from the age of the Gracchi down to his own time [11. 137-152]. This work was used by Florus [1], Lucanus [1] and S. [2] the Younger. It may be the source of the quotes in Lactant. Div. inst. 7,15,14 and Suet. Tib. 73 [8. 10]. The work’s basic tendency seems to have been towards the Republican side, but the freedom and peace that prevailed under Augustus were appreciated (Controv. 2,4,13; 4 praef. 5; 10 praef. 5). With S. the high regard for > Cicero as a stylist and orator began, as well as for the Ciceronian period (Controv. 1 praef. 6; cf. Suas. 6,17). In De vita patris (frag-

S. MENDNER, Videant consules, in: Philologus 110, 1966, 258-267; G. PLAUMANN, Das sogenannte S.c.u., die Qua-

sidiktatur der spateren romischen Republik, in: Klio 13, 1913, 321-386; B. RODL, Dass.c.u. und der Tod der Gracchen, thesis (law) Erlangen 1968; J.voN UNGERN-STERN-

BERG, Untersuchungen zum spatrepublikanischen Notstandsrecht. S.c.u. und hostis-Erklarung, 1970.

J.v.U.-S.

Senatus populusque Romanus see > SPQR Seneca [1] L. Annaeus S. (Seneca the Elder, Seneca Rhetor). I. Lire Il. Worxs I. LIFE Latin orator, born at > Corduba (modern Cordoba)

between 61 and 55, probably 55 BC (it was only because of the civil war that he was unable to hear Cicero,

Sen. Controv. 1 praef. 11). He came from a wealthy equestrian family, and owned estates (wine, olives) in the same region [8. 6]. He made two lengthy sojourns at

Rome (Sen. Controv. 4 praef. 3), where he heard the most famous orators and declaimers of his age: Asinius {I 4] Pollio, Arellius > Fuscus, Albucius [3] Silus, L. Cestius [II 4], Papirius [II 3] Fabianus and others, knowledge of whom we owe to him alone. He attended the rhetorical school of Marullus [r] at the same time as his friend Porcius [II 3] Latro (Controv. 1 praef. 22). He forbade his wife > Helvia [2] to study philosophy in greater depth (Sen. Dial. 12,17,3) because he ‘hated’ it himself (Sen. Ep. 108,22). The marriage produced three sons: L. Annaeus Novatus (L. > Junius [II 15] Gallio Annaeanus), L. Annaeus S. [2], the philosopher (= S. the

Younger), and L. Annaeus [II 3] Mela (father of the poet Lucan [1]), whom S. cherished more than his other sons

(Controv. 2 praef. 3). The most likely date of S.’s death is AD 39/40 [8. 4]. It is disputed whether S. was a lawyer like his son Mela. His return from Rome to Corduba weighs against the probability [8. 9]. Il. Works

S. devoted himself to two fields of literary activity: + rhetoric and > historiography. The former consisted in a gigantic compilation (Oratorum et rhetorum sententiae, divisiones, colores) of the most famous orators

and declaimers he had heard, and whose speeches he reproduced from memory. Among these were a) the + Controversiae, which corresponded to the genus iudiciale (- genera causarum). b) The Sententiae (> gnome [1] II) were notable sayings by the various orators on the subject in hand. c) Then followed differentiation of cases according to the legal > Ouaestiones (Divisiones). d) The Colores, i.e. the favourable or unfavourable light cast upon a matter — arranged by orator — concluded the survey. The subjects of the Con-

ment 99 Haase) the philosopher S. [2] seems to mention other writings by his father of which, however, we

know nothing. There is an incomplete and unpublished commentary on S.’s Controversiae et Suasoriae by HAKANSON in the library of the University of Uppsala. On the history of S.’s legacy, see [12; 7]. BIBLIOGRAPHY:

15S.BONNER, Roman Declamation in

the Late Republic and Early Empire, 1969 2 H. BORNECQUE, Les déclamations et les déclamateurs d’aprés Sénéque le pére, 1902 (reprint 1967)

3 L.CaLBoL! MonrteEFusco, La dottrina degli “status” nella retorica grecaeromana,1986 4 J.A.CRooK, Legal Advocacy in the Roman World, 1995 5 J. FAIRWEATHER, The Elder S. and Declamation, in: ANRW II 32.1, 1984,

514-556

6Ead.,S.theElder, 1981

7 G.CaLBout, S. il

Retore tra oratoria e retorica, in: I.GUALANDRI, G.C. Mazzoi (eds.), Gli Annei, 2003 8 M.GriFFIN, The Elder S. and Spain, in: JRS 62, 1972, 1-19

9 E. MicLiArio, Luoghi retorici e realta sociale nell’opera di S. il Vecchio, in: Athenaeum 77, 1989, 525-549 10 H.ScumiptT, Der Einfluf der Rhetorik auf das Recht der Papyri Agyptens, Dissertation, written on typewriter, Erlangen, 1949 11L.A. SussMAN, The Elder S., 1978 12 Id., The Elder S$. and Declamation Since 1900: A Bibliography, in: ANRW II 32.1, 1984, 557-577 13 W. TRILLITZSCH, Gesta Romanorum, 1973. EDITION: 14L.HAKANSON (ed.), L. Annaeus Seneca Maior, Oratorum et rhetorum sententiae, divisiones,

colores, 1989. TRANSLATION:

15 H.J. MULLER, 1887 (reprint 1963) 16 M.WINTERBOTTOM, 1974 G.C.

SENECA

[2] L. Annaeus S. (the Younger, Seneca Philosophus). I. Lire

272:

AyAat

I. Worxs

III. RECEPTION

new wife > Agrippina [3] that S. owed his recall to Rome, his praetorship and his position as tutor to the young — Nero [1] (Tac. Ann. 12,8).

I. LIFE L. Annaeus S., son of S. [1], came from a long-estab-

lished, prestigious and wealthy equestrian family of the province of Baetica. He was probably born at Corduba (Mart. 1,61,7 f.). Since he could remember Asinius [I 4] Pollio (Sen. Dial. 9,17,7), his birth must be dated to some years before Pollio’s death (AD 5). Combined with other evidence, this seems to suggest that he was born around the time of the birth of Christ. S.’s mother Helvia [2] had been “well brought up in an old-fashioned and strict household” (ibid. 12,16,3). His father epitomized “old-fashioned strictness” (ibid. 12,17,3),

loved oratory above all things and was repelled by the philosophical interests of his wife (who was some 35 years younger than himself) and of his son S. (the middle of three sons) (ibid. 12,17,4; Sen. Ep. 108,22). S. was probably closer to his elder brother Novatus (who, when grown up, was adopted by L. > Iunius [II 14] Gallio and took his name, cf. Iunius [II 15]) than to his younger brother Mela (> Annaeus [II 3]). But Mela’s son > Lucanus gained S.’s affection already as a young boy (Sen. Dial. 12,18,4-6; Anth. Lat. 441). S. received his education at Rome (Ep. 108). The speeches of the rigorous moralist > Attalus [8] excited him. Impressed by > Sotion [1], who based himself on Q. Sextius [I 1] and + Pythagoras, S. became a vegetarian for a time. In Sextius’ pupil > Papirius [II 3] Fabianus, too, the young S. found a guiding star in his quest for orientation (Ep.

From the reign of Nero dates our first evidence of S. as an individual actively involved in politics. He controlled the behaviour of Nero (and Agrippina) in concert with > Afranius [3] Burrus, commander of the + Praetorians (Tac. Ann. 13,2; Cass. Dio 61,4,1). He

was suffect consul in AD 56. For the young emperor, S. drew up a programme of ‘clemency’ (> clementia; Tac. Ann. 13,11). The treatise De clementia sought to induce Nero to embrace this programme out of vanity and fear. At the same time, S. was also considerably augmenting his already sizeable fortune during this period and later, by means of a skilled touch in business and gifts from the emperor. This attracted envy and hatred (ibid. 13,423; 14,52), which occasioned him to publish an encrypted self-vindication (Sen. Dial. 7). In the conflict between Nero and his mother Agrippina, S. and Burrus were on the side of the emperor. They remained influential for as long as the powerful prefect lived. After Burrus’ death (62), S. increasingly withdrew into private life (Tac. Ann. 14,52-56; 15,45). S. was at most an accessory to the conspiracy by C. + Calpurnius [II 13] Piso (Cass. Dio 62,24,1). After the conspiracy failed, $. was compelled to commit suicide (65); Nero prevented S.’s (second?) wife, Pompeia Paulina, from following her husband into death (Tac. Ann.

15,60-64). Tacitus writes of S. and his wife with some sympathy. Cassius Dio tends to assume ignoble motives for their behaviour.

100).

From his youth, S. had been prone to illness (especially bronchial and pulmonary complaints). At times,

A. RANGE AND

he contemplated suicide (ibid. 54,1 f.; 78,1 f.). S. recal-

INGS

led with gratitude the care of a maternal aunt (Dial. 12,19,2). Since she lived in Egypt for many years, where her husband (C. Galerius [1]) was prefect, it is often assumed that S., too, spent some time there. After her return, his aunt helped S. attain the quaestorship (ibid. 12,19,2). The date cannot be ascertained, but it was probably still during the reign of Tiberius, i.e. before AD 37. During this period, S. was probably also active as a lawyer. He himself states that he conducted trials (Ep. 49,2). Caligula detested S. personally (Cass. Dio 59,19,7 £.) and despised S.’s style (Suet. Calig. 53,2). In his later writings, S. speaks of Caligula with abhorrence. Soon after the accession of — Claudius [III 1] (AD 41), S. became enmeshed in the conspiracy concocted by + Messalina [2] against Julia Livilla [2]. The accusation of adultery hardly had foundation, but S. was condemned to death, then reprieved and his sentence commuted to the milder form of banishment (— relegatio), to Corsica. The seven and a half years there he experienced as greatly oppressive (Sen. Dial. 11). His son and only child had died shortly before the verdict (ibid. 12,2,5). S.’s banishment ended soon after the death of Messalina (early 49). It was to Claudius’

A. RANGE AND DATES S..s_ broad range of works (cf. Quint. Inst. 10,1,128f.) includes philosophical dissertations (twelve surviving together as ‘Dialogues’), speeches (which were also published), tragedies and a Menippean satire, as well as a biography of his father. It cannot be seriously doubted that some of the epigrams attributed to him are also authentic (cf. Anth. Lat. 232; 236 £.; 441). Many of S.’s works are lost; the extant works all date from the latter 25 years of his life. The earliest surviving treatise appears to be the Consolatio ad Marciam (‘Consolation to Marcia’; Sen. Dial. 6), written still in the reign of Caligula. The consolatory addresses to Helvia and Polybius (ibid. 12 and rr) were composed in the first years of his exile. It is very probable that some of his tragedies, too, were written on Corsica. Prior to 52, S. dedicated the 3 books De ira (‘On Anger’, ibid. 3-5) to his brother Novatus, who cannot have used his old name after this year at the latest. The + satire on the apotheosis of Claudius (Apocolocyntosis, see below, D) must have been written soon after Claudius’ death. De clementia (‘On Clemency’) belongs to the same period. De beneficiis, too, was

II. Works DATES

C. TRAGEDIES

B. PHILOSOPHICAL

WRIT-

D. APOCOLOCYNTOSIS

273

274

written after the death of Claudius (because of Ben.

benefactions’), S. proposes a theory of social relationships within the framework of Stoic ethics (> Stoicism). Here, S. acknowledges that even slaves may do benefi-

1,15,5). It would be possible to date this substantial work to S.’s last years, since its addressee, Aebutius [7] Liberalis, was still alive in AD 64 (Ep. 91,1). However, there are so many treatises (see below) which are firmly dated to the years 62-64 — De providentia (Sen. Dial. 1), Epistulae morales, Naturales quaestiones, the lost Moralis philosophia — that De beneficiis is estimated to have been written some time earlier.

B. PHILOSOPHICAL WRITINGS S.’s works were always provoked by a current situation, and were generally addressed to someone who was personally close to S., but they were clearly intended to reach a broader public. S.’s philosophical endeavour is dedicated to the correct way for men to behave. Even the study of nature is in the service of ethics. S. wishes man to attain mental tranquility, through knowing himself to be in harmony with nature and the divine. In his texts, he employs the method of alternating ‘precepts’ (praecepta) with historical ‘examples’ (exempla).

Admittedly, the moral insights can be realized in their entirety only by the ‘sage’ (sapiens), an ideal hardly fulfilled by anyone, including S. himself (Sen. Dial. 7; Ep. 75; 116,5). However, he is not only interested in intellectual understanding, but also in human relationships (in that connection, renunciation of the ‘multitude’: Dial. 7,2; Ep. 7). Friends were very important to S., e.g. Annaeus [II 7] Serenus (Dial. 2 and 9; Ep. 63) and Lucilius [II 4] (Dial. 1; Q Nat.; Ep.). S.’s ideas revolve around the mortality of man. Among his essential insights is the assertion that death is “the best invention of Nature” (optimum inventum naturae, Dial. 6,20,1) and may also be chosen voluntarily, that not the length of life, but its moral quality is of significance (ibid. 6; 11; Ep. 4; 26; 303; 363 543 61; 70; 77 f.; 99; 101 f.). Passions are harmful, and the most harmful of all is anger (ira). Yet they arise from error, and can be conquered by reason (Dial. 3-5). Since virtue is the only true good, the loss of ‘indifferent’ goods such as health, wealth, homeland, family, freedom, does not affect the sage’s mental tranquility (ibid. 12; Ep. 66 f.; 71; 74 f.). Nor does supposed injustice (De constantia sapientis, ‘On the constancy of the sage’ = Dial. 2). These are opportunities offered to the great man by divine providence to prove his worth (ibid. 1). The ‘consideration in advance of (potential) future misfortunes’ (praemeditatio futurorum malorum), he argues, draws the sting of fortuna (i.e. of > fate) (ibid. 6,9; Ep. 78,29; 98,5; 107,3 f.). However, the intelligent man will not lightly rebuff material goods, being in a position to make better use of it than the fool (De vita beata, ‘On the happy life’ = Dial. 7). One should contribute to society, but not at the cost of one’s own peace of mind. There must be an end to the many ‘occupations’ (occupationes) (De otio, ‘On leisure’ = Dial. 8; De

tranquillitate animi, ‘On the tranquility of the soul’ = Dial. 9; De brevitate vitae, ‘On the brevity of life’ = Dial. 10; Ep. 1; 22; 72). In the 7 books De beneficiis (‘On

SENECA

cia (benefactions) (Ben. 3,17-28; cf. Ep. 47), because,

from a philosophical perspective, he sees no distinction between a slave and a free person — in their humanity, all men are equal by nature. Admittedly, this conviction does not entail any effective social consequences for S., because the social order merely regulates the distribution of morally indifferent goods, and so requires no reform (— slavery). S. confesses himself a Stoic, claiming, however, to be drawing on the Stoa’s entire tradition, forming his own opinion and refining philosophy (Dial. 7,3; 8,3; Ep. 45; 64). Thus, he adopts or dismisses ideas of influential Stoics from > Zeno, — Cleanthes [2] and — Chrysippus [2] to > Panaetius [4], > Hecaton of Rhodes (Ben.) and — Poseidonius [3], > Athenodoros [2] of Tarsus (Dial. 9,3 f.; 9,7) and > Arius [1/> 2] Didymus (Dial. 6,4; 6,6). His rigour is also nourished by the Cynic tradition (Dial. 9,8) — he admired the Cynic > Demetrius [24], who was teaching at Rome in his lifetime (Dial. 1; Ep. 20; 62; 67; 91; > Cynicism). The mentally therapeutic concept of anticipatory thinking on future ills originates in the school of the > Cyrenaics. Friends of S. favoured Epicureanism - this is one of the main reasons of > Epicurus’ presence in S.’s writings. S. knows, for example, that Epicurus’ concept of ‘pleasure’ (voluptas), in contrast to the vulgar misconception, aims at moderation and sobriety (Dial. 7,12,4). If S. took up arms against any doctrine, it was the Peripatetic teach-

ing that the passions are necessary to a certain degree (metriopatheia:

Dial. 3,9; 12; 17; 5,3; Ep. 85,3 £5 85,10; 116,1). Aspects of the philosophy of Plato are also discussed (e.g. problems of the theory of > ideas in Ep. 58 and 65).

C. TRAGEDIES It has proved impossible as yet to give a philosophical interpretation of the tragedies of S. as well. In them, what we encounter is rather a S. who has abandoned himself to > myth with all its consequences. One reason for this may have been his banishment, because of which he found himself increasingly exposed to those feelings (cf. Anth. Lat. 236 and 237; Sen. Dial. 11,18,9) which are acted out in his tragedies — hatred, anger, fear, grief. S.’s characters act in a world of crime and pain, over-determined by a cruel fate with which no moral understanding can be reached. This dark side of S. also finds expression in the maliciousness of the Apocolocyntosis (see below). The characters here surrender to their feelings without losing their eloquence, a ‘transpsychological’ concept rooted not least in the rhetoric of S.’s day. S. was convinced of the persuasive power of the well-coined phrase (Dial. 10,2,2; Ep. 108,10; 108,26), hence his penchant for pointed and evocative expressions, both in prose and verse. S.’s dramas owe their structure largely to the Greek classics. Based on known tragedies by > Euripides [1]

SENECA

275

are Hercules (furens) (‘Raging Hercules’), Troades (‘The Trojan Women’), Medea and Phaedra, whereas

Oedipus is based on > Sophocles [1]. Also Phoenissae (‘The Phoenician Women’) and Thyestes owe their most important themes to these two tragedians. Only the source of Agamemnon remains a puzzle to scholars. Hercules Oetaeus (‘Hercules on Oeta’) is a variation on

the Sophoclean ‘Women of Trachis’, but is not by S. The details of the composition strongly draw on epic antecedents (especially — Ovidius’Metamorphoses). The choral songs reflect the themes of the particular play, but the chorus has hardly a genuine dramatic role. It still remains a matter of dispute whether S.’s tragedies were meant to be performed. S$. was ambitious in matters of form as well, as is shown by some polymetric choral songs as well as by the play on literary genres in the Apocolocyntosis. D. APOCOLOCYNTOSIS The Apocolocyntosis — the title ‘Pumpkinification’ has still to be satisfactorily explained — mercilessly settles scores with the emperor Claudius [III 1] by reference to his physical and mental afflictions, although the theme of sexuality is strictly avoided, perhaps in consideration of Agrippina. However, the latter is nowhere mentioned, nor is Claudius’ son > Britannicus, or his daughter > Octavia [3]. At all events, the ‘beneficiary’ of the satire is Nero, who is celebrated as the founder of anew Golden Age. It is impossible to determine precisely what the intended purpose of this text was, since we do not know what audience it was meant for, other than Nero himself. II]. RECEPTION A. ANTIQUITY AND MIDDLE AGES TIMES

B. MODERN

A. ANTIQUITY AND MIDDLE AGES

S. as author was already ‘exceedingly liked’ in the reign of Caligula (Suet. Calig. 53,2, cf. above). Pliny the Elder (— Plinius [1]) valued S. as a scholar, however, he makes no mention of the Naturales quaestiones (‘Natural Questions’), but refers to lost writings, e.g. De situ Indiae (‘On the Geography of India’; Plin. HN 6,60).

To Columella, S. was ‘a man of outstanding talent and learning’ (vir excellentis ingenti atque doctrinae), as well as a highly successful winemaker (3,3,3). Poets speak of S. with affection and regard (Mart. 1,61,7 f.; 4540,1 f.3 7,45,1-43 12,36,8—10; Stat. Silv. 2,7,29-32; Juv. 5,108 f.; 8,211-214). A devotee, whose name is

unknown, makes S. a character in the praetexta —» Octavia [4]. The play follows S.’s tragedies also in terms of formal structure. To an even greater extent, the author (also unknown to us) of the > Hercules Oetaeus appropriated the formal language of S. (and aligned his poetical world view with his philosophical one). Both tragedies were transmitted together with S.’s, and were long believed to be the work of S. Hercules Oetaeus was greatly influential in shaping the views on S. the tragedian, down into the 2oth cent.

276

Quintilian (+ Quintilianus [1r]) (Inst. r0,1,125-131)

primarily focuses on S. the stylist. In this, his judgment targets a peculiarity which, it seems, was mocked already by Caligula (Suet. Calig. 53,2: exact meaning controversial). Quintilian criticizes that S. ‘broke up his weighty ideas in his tiny little epigrams’. He resents S. for having brought about the disparagement of more important authors — and here are meant above all Quintilian’s favourite orators, first and foremost Cicero (cf. Inst. 10,1,105—118) — and he regrets the great influence which S.’s ‘decadent manner of writing, enfeebled by all kinds of errors’ once had on the young. The criticisms of the Archaists are even sharper — understandably, since S. thought even less of Ennius, for instance, than he did of Cicero (Gell. NA 12,2,2-9). + Fronto’s [6] accusation of S. as ‘dressing the same idea a thousand times, now in this cloak, now in that’ (De orationibus 2) has some truth in it, yet fails to see the crucial point: essential ideas simply must, for psychagogic reasons, be repeated, and indeed in different ‘cloaks’. S. the moralist, whose philosophy was founded upon religion and orientated towards monotheism, was valued from early on by the Christian writers. Tertullian (> Tertullianus), - Lactantius [1], Jerome (— Hieronymus) and Augustine (> Augustinus) all quote him, thus transmitting fragments from lost writings: the Moralis philosophia (Lactantius), De matrimonio (Jerome), De superstitione (Augustine). The idea that S. personally knew and valued Christians suggested itself. Thus, an unknown author of the 3rd or 4th cent. was able to forge a correspondence between S. and the Apostle Paul (— Paulus). It concluded with the exhortation that S. might wish to become an intercessor for Christianity (‘novum te auctorem feceris Christi Iesu’, § 14). This correspondence, the authenticity of which was not questioned before the Renaissance, was instrumental in helping shape the mediaeval view of S., and further favoured S.’s influence. Jerome adopted S. into the catalogus sanctorum (Jer. Vir. ill. 12), though he did

not consider him a Christian. S. only ‘became a Christian’ in the 14th cent., through Giovanni COLONNA and Boccaccio. Generally speaking, there was never complete certainty as to the extent of the works by S. On the one hand, his father’s (cf. S. [1]) oevre was added to his philosophical writings; on the other hand, the philosopher and the tragedian were held to be two different authors. Both errors are first found in the sth cent., in the work of Sidonius Apollinaris (Carm. 9,230-240). It is striking in regard to the reception of S. in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages that excerpts and sentences are assembled whose broad effect far exceeds knowledge of the complete works. Much is included which is reminiscent of S., but is not by him (at least not in the form presented), e.g. the Formula vitae honestae of + Martinus [3] of Bracara, which is based on a lost treatise by S. (De offictis?) and which was attributed to S. himself after Martinus’ death (580).

278

277

At no time was S. forgotten, but he was not always among the most widely-read authors. The oldest manuscripts date from the 9th to rrth cents. However, only in the 12th cent. did reception of S. flourish, e.g. at the school of Chartres and in Peter Abaelard. In general, S.’s thoughts were of little importance to scholasticism (exception: Roger Bacon). B. MODERN TIMES S. was among those who acquired a new reputation in the Renaissance. He cast a spell on the foremost minds. The ideas and language of PETRARCH are infused with his spirit. ERASMus admired him in his younger years, though later, he distanced himself from him for reasons of faith, morality and style. He also came forward in the discussion of authenticity, and as an editor of S.’s works (Ed. 1515 and 1529). CALvIN (before his conversion) published a commentary on De clementia

(1532). The zenith of modern reception of S. was reached in the late 16th cent., when moralists such as the sceptic MONTAIGNE,

and even more

so the neo-Stoic Justus

Lipsius adopted important ideas of S. He was also promoted as a stylistic paragon, a counter model to Cicero, e.g. by Marc-Antoine Murer and, again, Lrpsius (who created an authoritative edition of S.’s prose writings, 1605). It was at this time that S.’s complete works were first translated into national languages. S. certainly had enemies in the intellectual battles of this period. They reprehended his lifestyle (LA ROCHEFOUCAULD) or his supposed lack of true insight (MALEBRANCHE). Among his last great admirers were Francis HUTCHESON, David Humg, Denis DiDEROT and Jean-Jacques ROUSSEAU.

The first post-ancient tragedy was written early in the r4th cent., in Latin, and was modelled on S. (Albertino MussaTo’s Ecerinis). In the same period, Nicolaus TRIVET made a commentary on all ten plays in the cor-

pus. The dramas of S. continued to provide impulses both to vernacular and Latin tragedy through the Renaissance

and Baroque

periods.

However,

they no

longer satisfied later centuries, against benchmarks such as ‘rationality, good taste and naturalness’. While someone like J.C. SCALIGER (Poetices libri septem, 1561, 6,6) could judge S.’s ‘grandeur’ (maiestas) to match that of the Greeks and his linguistic art (cultus ac nitor) even to transcend that of Euripides, A. W. SCHLEGEL for one could not remotely see him competing with the Greeks. Likewise, S. as philosopher was no longer able to answer the challenges facing philosophy in the r9th cent. Only a more recent understanding of the ‘artificiality’ of art, as it developed in the zoth cent., was again able to find something in S.’s ‘Kunstwollen’. Similarly, only the renewed interest in philosophy as an art of living can do justice to S.’s philosophical striving. ~» Philosophy; — Satire; > Tragedy Editions:; L.D. REYNOLDS, 1977 (Dial.); Id., 1965 (Ep.); P. FADER, 1928 (Clem.); F. PRECHAC, 2 vols., 1926/1929 (Ben.); H.M. Hing, 1996 (Q Nat.); O. ZWIERLEIN, 1986 (Trag.); C.W. BaRLow, 1938 (correspondence with Pau-

lus).

SENECIO

COMMENTARIES: G.VIANSINO, 1968 (Dial. 1-2); T. Kurtu, 1994 (Dial. 11); C. FAVEZ, 1928 (Dial. 6); C.E. MANNING, 1981 (Dial. 6); P. GRIMAL, 1969 (Dial. 7); Id., *1966 (Dial. 10); C.Favez, 1918 (Dial. 12); P. Fare, C.FAVEZ, 1950 (Clem.); G.SCARPAT, *1970 (Ep. 65); A. STUCKELBERGER, 1965 (Ep. 88); R.J. TARRANT, 1973 (Ag.); M. BILLERBECK, 1999 (Herc. f.); J.G. Fircu, 1987 (Herc. f.); C.D. N. Costa, 1973 (Med.) (reprint 1989); K.TOCHTERLE, 1994 (Oed.); M.Correy, R.MayeEr, 1990 (Phaedr.); E.J. KENNEY, P.E. EASTERLING, 1990 (Phaedr.); M. FRANK, 1995 (Phoen.); E.FANTHAM, 1982 (Tro.); A.J. BoyLe, 1994 (Tro.); R.J. TARRANT, 1985 (Thy.); P.T. EDEN, 1984 (Apocol.); A.A. LUND, 1994 (Apocol.); C.F. Russo, 51965 (Apocol.); O. SCHONBERGER, 1990 (Apocol.); C. PRATO, 1964 (epigrams). BIBLIOGRAPHY: ANRW II 32.2, 1985; ANRW II 36.3, 1989; A. ARMISEN-MARCHETTI, Sapientiae facies. Etude

sur les images de Sénéque, 1989; F.L. Batries, A.M. Huco, Calvin’s Commentary on S.’s De clementia, 1969;

A.BAUMER, Die Bestie Mensch. S.s Aggressionstheorie, 1982; H. CANcIK, Untersuchungen zu S.s Epistulae morales, 1967; C.D. N. Costa (ed.), S., 1974, 116-165; J. DINGEL, S. und die Dichtung, 1974; P. Famer, Etudes sur Sénéque, 1921; M. FUHRMANN, S. und Kaiser Nero, 1997; M.T. Grirrin, S. A Philosopher in Politics, 1976; P. GrIMAL, Sénéque ou la conscience de |’Empire, 1978 (German 1978); Id. (ed.), Senéque et la prose antique, 1991; E. HACHMANN, Die Fihrung des Lesers in S.s Epistulae morales, 1995; I.HaporT, S. und die griechisch-romische Tradition der Seelenleitung, 1969; B. L. HIJMANS Jr., Inlaboratus et facilis. Aspects of Structure in Some Letters of S., 1976; R.Jakosi, Der Einfluf Ovids auf den Tragiker S., 1988; R. JUNGE, Nicholas Trevet und die Octavia Praetexta, 1999; M.LAusBERG, Untersuchungen zu S.s Fragmenten, 1970; E. LEFEVRE (ed.), Der Einfluf S.s auf das europdische Drama, 1978; M.Maucu, S.s Frauenbild in den philosophischen Schriften, 1997; G. MAuRACH, S., 32000; G.Mazzout, S. e la poesia 1970; A.L. Morro, Guide to the Thought of L. A. S., 1970; A.L. Morro, J.R. Crark, S. A Critical Bibliography 1900-1980, 1989; M. ROZELAAR, S., 1976; B. SCHONEGG, S.s epistulae morales als philosophisches Kunstwerk, 1998; C.SCHUBERT,

Studien zum Nerobild in der lateinischen Dichtung der Antike, 1998; W. TRILLITZSCH, S. im literarischen Urteil der Antike, 2 vols., 1971; C. WALDE, Herculeus labor. Studien zum pseudosenecanischen Hercules Oetaeus, 1992.

JD. [3] S. Grandio. Roman declaimer, known to us only

through his slightly younger contemporary S. [1] the Elder (Suas. 2,17). He received his ironic ‘grand cogno-

men’ (cognomentum) because he refused to speak about anything but ‘great’ and ‘sublime’ things (e.g. the deeds of ‘great’ Xerxes). S. [1] confused and addled talent. His tions finally took on an almost preferred big slaves, concubines only huge figs, wore oversized claiming, stood on tiptoe.

attests that his was a

declamatory predilecpathological form: he and silver vessels, ate shoes and, when deCw.

Senecio. Brother of Bassianus [3], allegedly incited him to rebel against Constantinus [1] (Anon. Vales. 15). Whether he can be identified with the dux S. recorded by ILS 664 as in Noricum in 310 AD is the subject of discussion. PLRE 1, 820 (S. r). B.BL.

SENECTA, SENECTUS Senecta,

Senectus

279 (Latin

‘old age’; Greek

Ifjeas/

Geras). Daughter of Erebus and > Nyx/Night (Cic. Nat. D. 3,17,44), personification of old age (Hor. Epod. 8,4), often mentioned in connection with illnesses and human suffering (cf. Sen. Epist. 108,28: “senectus enim morbus est”): Verg. Aen. 6,275; Sen. Herc. f. 696; Sil. Pun. 13,583 et passim.

CW,

Senia. Port in Liburnia, modern Senj in Croatia, a Roman oppidum (Plin. HN 3,140), but possibly a colonia (cf. Tac. Hist. 4,45: “colonia Sienensis”), there were + Augustales [1] there. S. was a toll station “(portiorum publicum Illyrici”, CIL Il] 3016 f.). The officials of S. were from Italic families (Gavii, Gessii, Verridii); in

the 2nd/3rd cent. AD families from eastern provinces settled in S. (evidence of a Jew from Tiberias, a Greek from Nicomedia). J.J. Witxes, Dalmatia, 1969, 200 f.; M. GLAvici1C, Contributions towards the Study of the Palaeogenesis and Urban Development of Antique S., in: Radovi Filozofskog fakulteta u Zadru 32, 1993, 79-104. PLCA.

Senis (Zfvic; Sénis; Demotic Snj). Greek form of the Egyptian toponym Sum.t, which is documented under various names, particularly Tuovodvuc/Tmousanis (‘the island of Snj’). Sum.t denoted the island of Biga (possibly also an originally larger group of islands) in the First Cataract of the Nile on the border between Egypt and Nubia to the west of - Philae. Biga is primarily known through rock inscriptions from the Middle Kingdon; there is also written evidence of a border fortification. Remains of a temple date to the late Ptolemaic and Roman periods. The ancient Egyptians regarded Biga as the location of the grave of > Osiris (-» Abaton) and the source of the Nile. 1 J. LocHER, Topographie und Geschichte der Region am ersten Nilkatarakt in griechisch-r6mischer Zeit, in: Archiv fir Papyrusforschung, Beihefte 5, 1999, 159-165

2 E. WINTER, s. v. Bigga, LA 1, 792-793.

5.8.

Sennacherib (Assyrian Sin-abhé-eriba, ‘[the moon god] Sin has replaced the brothers’; 2 Kg 18,13: Sanhérib; 2 Kg 19,20: Snbrb; LXX: Lev(v)aynouw/Sen(n)achérim u.4.; Hdt. 2,141: Lavaycetpoc/Sanachdribos; other forms of the name: [4. 2271]). Son of > Sargon [3] II,

280

to Berossus (FGrH 680 F 7c; 685 F 5). Later tradition

placed special importance on S.’s campaign against Phoenicia (~ Phoenicians, Poeni III) and > Palaestina of 7or which culminated in the occupation of Jerusalem. It is discussed by Herodotus (2,141) and in the Bible (2 Kg 18,13 ff.; Jes (Is) 36 f.; 2 Chr 32) which also reports the murder of S. by his two sons. According to cuneiform sources, one of the murderers was S.’s son Arda-Mulissi [2. r-20]. Nergilus, who was mentioned by Berossus (FGrH 685 F 5) and was at first assumed to have been a possible participant in the murder conspiracy as well should probably be identified with the Babylonian King Nergal-uSézib (694-693) [1. 25, 36 f.]. For further references to S. in Babylonian, Aramaic, Greek, Jewish-Rabbinic and Islamic texts, see [4; 2. 7, 21-28]. The most important source about S.’s regency are his own inscriptions, transmitted in large numbers [2; 3]. — Assyria; > Mesopotamia 1S.M. Burstetn, The Babyloniaca of Berossus, 1978 2 E. FrauM, Einleitung in die Sanherib-Inschriften, 1997 3 D.LucKENBILL, The Annals of Sennacherib, 1924 4 F. WEISSBACH, s. v. Sanherib, RE 1 A2, 2271-2282.

E.FRA. Sennea (Zevvéa; Sennéa). Settlement which can be identified, on the basis of an inscription [1], with a ruin site at Golciik Oren on the Melas (modern Manavgat) between — Side and > Cotenna [2]. 1H.Swosopa

et al., Denkmaler

aus Lykaonien, Pam-

phylien und Isaurien, 1935, No. 109 col. Ill 2 H.Branpt, Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft Pamphyliens und Pisidiens im Altertum, 1992, 106.

W.MA.

Senones [1] Celtic people which migrated at the end of the 4th cent. BC from the south of Gaul into the area between the Apennine mountains and the Ionios Kolpos (Adriatic) in the region of the Rivers Sena and Tinna in Umbria and Picenum (Liv. 5,35,3). As allies of the -» Samnites in the third Samnite War, they were defeated by the Romans in 295 BC, and their territory was seized by Rome; they were expelled a few years later (+ Ager Gallicus). Rome founded Sena Gallica there probably in 289 BC (Pol. 2,19,12; Liv. Epit. 11). Excavations in Osimo, Arcevia, Fabriano, Filottrano, San

Assyrian King from 705 to 681 BC. After ascending the throne, he moved the royal residence to Nineveh (+ Ninus [2]) which was then generously expanded. The main political problem of his regency was the conflict with > Babylon. In 689 BC, after several futile attempts to control Babylon indirectly, S. ordered it to be completely destroyed. The political theology connected to the Babylonian god + Marduk was transferred to the Assyrian state god > Assur [2] in a religious reform (which was revoked by S.’s successor > Asar-

Ginesio and Piobbico have shed some light on the cultural history of the S.

haddon).

cam-

Terres Blanches du Grand Villon). Caesar stationed six

paigns against ~ Elam as well as against various peoples in the Zagrus region and Anatolia. In Cilicia, S.’s troops appear to have fought against Greeks according

legions in the territory of the S. in the winter of 53 BC (Caes. Gall. 6,44). In 52, the S. joined > Vercingetorix’ rebellion (ibid. 7,4). Augustus organized the S. into a

Aside from Babylonia, $. conducted

M.T. Grassi, I Celti in Italia, r991, 65-80.

GU.

[2] One of the most powerful Celtic peoples in Gaul (Caes. Gall. 5,54) between the middle reaches of the

Liger (Loire) and the Sequana (Seine), bordering to the north on the Belgae across the Sequana (Caes. Gall. 2,2), with such oppida as Metiosedum (modern Melun)

and Vellaunodunum (near modern Montargis or in the

281

282

civitas of Gallia + Lugdunensis with > Agedincum as capital. The S. participated neither in the rebellion of AD 21 nor in the > Batavian Revolt in 68. > Diocletianus’ province reform removed the region of > Autessiodurum from the S. to the province of Lugdunensis I (Amm. Marc. 15,11,11). In the 4th cent., Agedincum and Autessiodurum became sees, Metiosedum not until the 6th cent. The boundaries of the territory of the S., whose neighbours were the Tricasses and the Lingones in the east, the Carnutes and the Parisii in the north, and the Bituriges in the west, are problematic in the south: Intaranum (modern Entrains) and Aballo (modern Avallon) are sometimes considered to belong to the Haedui [2. fig. 44], and sometimes to the S. [5. 1485-1487]. We know of two pagi (pagus Stampensis/Etampes: CIL XIII 10002,305a; pagus Tutiacus/Toucy: ILS 7049) and in Agedincum itself of a vicus (ILS 7049); vicani Masavenses/Mesves (ILS 4702) are documented as well as several magistrates (decemvir, praefectus annonae: CIL XIII 3.067; decurio: ILS 4547; a sacerdos arae inter confluentes Araris et Rhodani: ILS 7050; flamines munerarii: ILS 7049 f.; AE 1992, 1240). The civitas honoured C. Iulius [II 32] Caesar in Agedincum (CIL XIII 2942). Economically, the territory of the S. was particularly favourable: with the Sequana, Icauna and Liger it contained three navigable waterways, and with Massava (modern Mesves), Condate (modern Cosne) and Brevodorum (modern Briare) it had three ports on the Liger. The Romans made Agedincum into a significant mansio (Tab. Peut. 2,4) at the crossing of the roads to Augustodunum, Lutetia, Samarobriva Ambianorum and Cenabum. Only Agedincum, where veterans settled and in whose environs opulent villae have been discovered [3. 230], was a truly urban centre with large baths [1] situated within the late antique city walls. Autessiodurum, Itaranum (centre of the cult of > Epona, ILS 4839, and of Ucuetis, AE 1995, 1095) and Aballo, where the extraordinary Montmartre statues [6. 223 5— 2339] are dedicated to an indigenous Mars [4. 188 f.], remained small market towns.

Sententia

1 J.-P. ADAMet al., La facade des thermes antiques de Sens (Rev. archéologique de |’Est et du Centre-Est, 6. Suppl.), 1987 2GRENIER 2.1, 1934, 115 f. 3 J.GUERRIER, Onomastique et société dans la civitas des Senons, in: Rev. archéologique de !’Est et du Centre-Est 30, 1979, 219-232 4 J.-J. Hatt, Le culte de Mars indigéne dans le Nord-Est de la Gaule, in: ibid., 183-196 5 J.-B. KEUNE, s. v. S., RE 2 A, 1477-1494 6 ESPERANDIEU, Rec. 3. J.-M.DE.

Senonia. At the end of the 4th cent. AD a province (officially Lugdunensis S.: Notitia Galliarum 4,1; Notitia Dign. Occ. 3,31; 22,19; Senonica: ibid. 1,117; cf. Laterculus 2,16) of the Septem Provinciae dioikesis of

the Galliae praefectura with the civitates of Senones (as a centre of administration, formerly Agedincum), Autessiodurum, Tricasses, Meldi, Parisii, Carnutes and Autricum (modern Chartres) and Aureliani (modern Orléans). E.O.

SENTINUM

[1] Aphorism, v.

> Gnome [1] II A; > Proverbs

[2] Literally etymologically derived from the root sin, the sense of something uttered; in Roman legal terminology, e.g. the sense of a private legal action (cf. e.g. Dig. 28,1,r on a testament) or a law (cf. Dig. 23,2,44,5). Sententia in particular meant the verdict, in civil or criminal law, delivered by a judge (— index, ~ arbiter). In this sense, sententia was already used for the process of the — legis actio. This shows an understanding of the judicial utterance as an expression — albeit authorized — of a personal conviction. The same is also indicated by the reporting of the judge’s legal opinion by use of the word videri (‘it can be seen’ or ‘it is evident’; Cic. Acad. 2,146). In the formula procedure (— formula), the sententia already had the sense of an utterance with authority, and finally, in the context of the > cognitio procedure, it became a — iudicatum or a res iudicata (‘something decided by the judge’). The corresponding verb no longer then referred to evidence but to an order (iubere, e.g. Dig. 42,1,59 pr.) or a desired regulation (statuere, e.g. Dig. 27,2,5). Significantly, however, the ‘verdict’ in the Anglo-American legal world, which is still characterized by the authority of the judge, is still called the ‘sentence’. In the formula procedure, the sententia was limited, in accordance with the provisions of the formula, to acquittal (absolutio) or conviction (— condemnatio), the latter essentially leading to a monetary fine. There was no prescribed form either for the composition or the rendition of a sententia, but the latter was generally made verbally. Only with the cognition procedure did the prior record in writing become a formal requirement; the verdict was read from this written document (Cod. Iust. 7,44). In the context of this procedural type, the judge was also free to compose the content of the sentence as he wished; he could adapt it to the particular individual case, as he was no longer bound by the principle of the condemnatio pecuniaria (‘monetary conviction’). As in all three types of procedure the sententia was a final verdict, i.e. a concluding utterance of the judge dealing with the object of dispute, the judge was forbidden to amend it after it had been issued. It was probably only from the time of the Principate that the possibility developed with the formula and cognition procedures of appeal to the princeps (— appellatio). In accordance with its character as a final verdict, the sententia constituted grounds for enforcement, both in civil and criminal cases. M.Kaser,

K.Hack1t,

Das

rémische

Zivilprozefrecht,

*1996, I21, 370-374, 494-500.

CPA.

Sentinum (Sévtwov; Séntinon). City in Umbria on the left-hand tributary of the > Aesis of the same name; > municipium,

— Regio

VI (Str. 5,2,10;

Plin.

HN

3,114; Ptol. 3,1,53), tribus Lemonia [1. 274], remains

1.5 km to the northeast of Sassoferrato. The Romans won a victory there in 295 BC in a battle deciding the

SENTINUM

Third Samnite War (Pol. 2,19,6; Liv. 10,17 ff.) and

therefore built a sanctuary at Civitalba (temple terracottas, 3rd century BC). In 41 BC S. was destroyed by Q. Salvidienus Rufus [I 1] in the Perusian War (— Perusia) (Cass. Dio 48,13,4-6) and rebuilt under Augustus. S. was affected by Alaricus’ [2] invasion in 410 AD (Zos. 5,37) and by the Byzantine war against the Ostrogoths under Totila in 551 (Proc. BG 4,29,4). 1L.Ross TayLor, The Voting Districts of the Roman Republic, 1960. A.PaGnanl, 1978.

S., 1957;

L.BRECCIAROLI

TABORELLI,

S., G.U.

Sentius. Italian family name, attested at Rome from the 1st cent. BC, but of political importance only from the time of Augustus,

with S. [II 4-6] (SCHULZE,

228). K.-L.E.

I. REPUBLICAN

284

283

PERIOD

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {1 1] S., L. Mint magistrate in ror BC (RRC 328) and praetor urbanus c. 93-89 (ILS 8208; Syme, RP 2, 608 f.). [12] S. Saturninus Vetulo. Proscribed in 43 BC, took

refuge on Sicily (Val. Max. 7,3,9). With his cousin Scribonius [I 7] Libo he led the embassy to Antonius [BI 9] for Sex. Pompeius [I 5] in 40 BC (App. B Civ. 5,217). Both remained with Pompeius until the latter began his hopeless war in Asia in 35 (App. B Civ. 5,579). S. [II 4] was probably his son (cf. Vell. Pat. 2,77,3). JBA. II]. IMPERIAL PERIOD

[If 1] Cn. S. Aburnianus. Cos. suff. in AD 123 (RMD 1, 21). C.S. Aburnianus (CIL VI 2080, |. 33) may have been related to him. W.E. {il 2] S. Augurinus. Latin poet at the turn of the rst/2nd cents., known through the letters of the younger Pliny (> Plinius [2]); saw himself in the tradition of > Catullus [1], Macer > Licinius [I 31] Calvus and, especially, Pliny (Plin. Ep. 4,27 with the highest praise for the poetry of the youth and quotation of the only fragment = 8 hendecasyllables, v. also Plin. Ep. 9,8). He may be identical to Q. Gellius S$. Augurinus, proconsul of Achaia or Macedonia under Hadrian (CIL III 586, 12306). EDITION: FPL 167. COMMENTARY: COURTNEY 365 f.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

H.DAHLMANN,

Die Hendekasyllaben

hear of him again: at first elected sole consul, until, after long unrest, Lucretius [II 5] Vespillo was made his colleague in office at the suggestion of Augustus. Vell. Pat. (2,92) praises the strictness with which S. presided over the elections and acted against Egnatius [II ro] Rufus. It was under his consulship too that the form of Augustus’ legal competencies was designed, Augustus’ imperium being, as for a consul, extended to Rome and Italy (cf. [3]). As quindecimvir sacris faciundis, S. took part in the ludi saeculares in 17 BC. Later proconsul of Africa [4. 21]; governor of Syria c. 10-7 BC, where he became embroiled in the internal affairs of the family of Herodes [1]. His three sons (among them S. [II 5] and [II 6]) accompanied him to Syria [5. 20-23]. Active c. AD 3-6 as legate in Germany, where he received the ornamenta triumphalia for his military accomplishments (Vell. Pat. 2,105). He seems to have predeceased Augustus. The titulus Tiburtinus (CIL XIV 3613 = ILS 918) does not refer to him [6. 199 f.]. 1R.SymMe, RP II 20.Satomies, Senatori oriundi del Lazio, in: H. SOLIN (ed.), Studi storico-epigrafici sul Lazio antico, 1996 3H.M.Cortron, A. YAKOBSON, in: Festschrift for Miriam Griffin, 2001 4 THOMASSON, Fasti Africani 5 E.DaBrowa, The Governors of Roman

Syria, 1998 6G.ALFOLDy, Un celebre frammento epigrafico tiburtino anonimo, in: I.D1STEFANO MANZELLA (ed.), Le iscrizioni dei Cristiani in Vaticano, 1997, 199208.

{Ii 5] C. S. Saturninus. Son of S. [II 4]. He accompanied his father to Syria in c. ro-7 BC. Cos. ord. in AD 4. His brother was S. [II 6]; PIR? S. {Il 6] Cn. S. Saturninus. Son of S. [II 4], brother of S. [II 5]. Like his brothers, he accompanied his father to Syria in c. 10-7 BC, possibly as tribunus militum, though it is also conceivable that he commanded a legion. He was suffect consul in succession to his brother S. [II 5] in AD 4. In AD 17, he accompanied Germanicus [2] to the East, taking over the governorship of Syria on Germanicus’ death by agreement of the other ~ comites (Tac. Ann. 2,74,1), a decision Tiberius must have retrospectively approved of. When, late in AD r9, Cn. Calpurnius [II 16] Piso sought to regain the province, S. moved against him with the provincial troops, defeating him at the fort of Celenderis. Nonetheless, he allowed Piso to return to Rome alone, without military escort. S. remained in Syria until at least AD 21 (CIL III 6703). He must have remained influential under Tiberius, in spite of his being a comes of Germanicus. His son was S. [II 7]. E. Dasrowa, The Governors of Roman Syria, 1998, 34 f.

des S. Augurinus, in: Gymnasium 87, 1980, 167-177.

J-W.B. [If 3] S. Claudianus. Equestrian prefect of the Ravenna fleet in AD 225 (unpublished military diploma). {fl 4] C. S. Saturninus. Of a republican senatorial family, from Atina [1. 605-616; 2. 45]. At the beginning of the triumviral period, as a very young man, he was allied with Sex. Pompeius [I 5]. He was able to return to Rome in 39 BC (Vell. Pat. 2,77,3). Only in 19 BC do we

[Il 7] Cn. S. Saturninus. Son of S. [II 6]. Cos. ord. in AD 41 together with Caligula after whose death he proposed reinstating the old res publica (Jos. Ant. Iud. 19,166-186). Claudius seems not to have ostracized him for this — on the contrary, according to Eutropius (7,13), S. must have accompanied the emperor on the conquest of Britain, probably as comes. For this he received the ornamenta triumphalia and a statua trium-

285

286

phalis on the Forum Augusti [1. nos. 13, 14, 27]. If Tac. Hist. 4,7,2 refers to him, he must have had connections with the future emperor > Vespasianus and must have perished in the reign of Nero, probably towards its end. CIL IX 2460 does not refer to him, because he was probably of patrician rank.

ing role. In the First Jewish War in AD 67 S. was on the side of Rome. After the suppression of the Jewish rebellion Rome’s political and cultural influence was reinforced. Under the emperor Hadrian the old Jewish city administration was replaced by a new non-Jewish one, a temple was built and the city was renamed Diocaesarea. The expulsion of the Jews from Judaea as a consequence of — Bar Kochba’s rebellion (AD 132135) led to a greater Jewish settlement of S., resulting in the development of a varied cultural life of Jewish-Hellenistic character. Thus c. 200 the Sanhedrin was relocated to S. under the leadership of the patriarch + Jehuda ha-Nasi, before the Patriarchate established itself and its institutions in Tiberias in the middle of the 3rd century. Whether and to what extent S. was destroyed as a consequence of the suppression of a local uprising by the Roman governor Gallus or by the earthquake of 363 is unclear. S. was again expanded and beside the still overwhelmingly Jewish population a Christian community developed. From the 5th cent. S. is recorded as a bishop’s see.

1G.CamMopeca,

Tabulae

Pompeianae

Sulpiciorum,

1999.

W.E.

Sephres (Leperc/Sephrés, Manetho (Sync. 107); Egyptian Sshw-R*/ Sahure). Second king of the 5th dynasty (c. 2496-2483 BC), probably the brother of Userkaf and a son of Queen Khentkaus. His pyramid temples near Abu Sir are preserved relatively well, esp. their relief decoration; they are representatives of the canonical type (> pyramid).The sun-temple of S. is known from written sources, but has not yet been found. Finds of isolated groups of statues probably originate from there. Several expeditions to Sinai and Nubia are documented in annals and expedition inscriptions. 1 L.BorcHarpT, Das Grabdenkmal des Kénigs Sahure, Vol. 1-2, 1910-1913 2 CH. MEYER, s. v. Sahure, LA 5, 352 1. SS.

SEPTEM

R.A. Hors.ey, Galilee. History, Politics, People, S.S. MILLER, Studies in the History and Traditions 1984; C.L. and E.M. Meyers, s.v. S., The Oxford clopedia of Archaeology in the Near East 4, 1997, 536.

Sepias (=ynmdc/Sépids). [1] Strip of the coast of the southeastern Magnesia [1] Peninsula, where a Persian fleet moored in 480 BC and suffered great losses due to a storm (Hdt. 7,183-191). [2] City in the south of the Magnesia [1] Peninsula (Hdt.

7,183), which was incorporated into the > synoikismos of Demetrias [1] in about 290 BC (Str. 9,5515). Its ruins are near modern Puri.

[3] Cape on the southern coast of Magnesia [1] (Apoll. Rhod. 1,582), now S. again (formerly Agios Georgios) near Platania. PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN 1, 161; F.STAHLIN, Das hellenische Thessalien, 1924, 52. HE.KR.

AQUAE

1995; of S., Ency527JP.

Septem (also Septem Fratres). Term for a chain of seven mountains on the African coast near the Straits of Gibraltar (Ptol. 4,1,5: “‘Entddeipou. dQ0¢/Heptadelphoi Oros; Mela 1,5; Plin. HN 5,18; It. Ant. 9,3), and later probably for the settlement there, the modern Spanish Ceuta (by way of Arabic Sabta). Archaeological remains bear witness to S. as a significant ancient centre for producing salted fish [1]. From the late Roman period there is a basilica [2]. After a failed attempt at conquest by the Visigoth king > Theudis in 5 3 4, the emperor Iustinianus [1] expanded S. as a fort (Procop. Vand. I,1,6;

2,5,6; Procop.

Aed.

6,7,14;

Isid. De origine

Gothorum 42). With the Islamic conquest of the Iberian Sepphoris

(Zéxdwei/Sépphoris,

cf. Jos. Ant.

Iud.

14,5,9 et passim) a city in Galilaea, on the east-west link between > Ptolemais [8] (Akko) and > Tiberias. Settled by the Iron Age, S. was heavily fortified under Alexander [16] Iannaeus c. 100 BC. Presumably, S. was the most important city of Galilaea even before the institution of one of the five synhedria as the government of Judaea by the Roman governor Gabinius [I 2] in 57 BC. In 37 BC it fell to Herodes [1]. After his death in 4 BC there was unrest, which was suppressed by Varus. After Galilaea had fallen, in accordance with his will, to Herodes’ son, the tetrarch Herodes [4] Antipas, the latter extended the city and used it as the seat of his government until the founding of Tiberias c. AD 20. Subsequently the two cities dominated lower Galilaea in constant competition with one another. In the middle of the rst cent., after the relocation of the archives and the royal treasury, S. was again able to assume the lead-

peninsula (in 710/r) S. too fell to the Arabs. Under them, S. attained its economic and cultural zenith as a

hub of trade between Europe and sub-Saharan Africa [3]. Inscriptions: AE 1986, 716. 1J.BRAvo PEREZ, Nuevos datos sobre la economia del

territorio ceuti en €poca romana: las factorias del salazon, in: E. RIPOLL PERELLO (ed.), IJ Congreso internacional ‘El Estrecho de Gibraltar’, vol. 1, 1995, 439-472 2E.A. FERNANDEZ SOTELO, La basilica tardoromana de Ceuta, in: Ibid., 509-533 3 H. Ferwart, s. v. Sabta, El’, 1999 (CD-Rom)

4H.Dessau,s. v. S. Fratres, RE 2 A, 1550.

LT-N.

Septem Aquae (Septaquae). Pagus (‘district’) in the territory of the Sabini at > Reate (CIL IX 4206 f.; 4399), with its springs and lakes a centre of tourism (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1,14), also visited by Cicero in 54 BC (Cic. Att. 4,15,5; > Rosea rura). NISSEN 2, 474.

G.U.

SEPTEM

MARIA

288

287

Septem Maria. Area of lagoons (seven at the time of naming) at the mouths of the Padus and the Atesis (Plin.

2,214; 3,68). Still, it appears that only from the time of Augustus (who was himself an epulo, R. Gest. div. Aug.

in the > Atria

7; ILS 107,5) were the septemviri counted among the

region, enhanced by the Etrusci with the waters of the + Sagis, and still navigable in the Roman Imperial period, partly by means of fossae, between Ravenna and Altinum. Statio on the Via Popilia to the east of Atria

most important of the urban priestly colleges, as the fourth most prestigious after the ~ pontifices, + augures and — quindecimviri sacris faciundis (R. Gest. div. Aug. 9,1; Suet. Aug. 100; Cass. Dio 53,1,5). The coin BMCRE vol. 1, 20 no. 98, from 16 BC, may for the first time show the > patera (‘libation bowl’) as the symbol of the septemviri [4. 135 f.]. Like the other priestly colleges, they now also had functions to fulfil in the context of the imperial festivals and the > ruler cult which went beyond their original remit (e.g. InscrIt 13,2 p. 114 f.; Cass. Dio 53,1,5; [2. 305, 399]). + Collegium [1]; > Epulo [2]; > Ludi; > Priests

HN.

rrof.), modern

Laguna

Veneta

(It. Ant. 126,6; Tab. Peut. 4,5). L.Bosto,

1S. M., in: Archeologia Veneta 2, 1979, 33-44. G.U.

Septempeda. Municipium in Picenum, tribus Velina, Regio V, established in the 2nd cent. BC on the left bank of the upper Flusor (modern Potenza) (Str. 5,4,2; Ptol. 351,525 Plin. HN 3,111); located 2 km to the east of San Severino Marche near Macerata. S. was ona connecting road between the Via Salaria and the Via Flaminia (It.

Ant. 312; 316; cf. CIL IX 5936). Remains of the city

1 F. BERNSTEIN, Ludi publici, 1998

3 J.RUpxKe, Kalender 1995

2 LATTE

und Offentlichkeit (RGVV

40),

4A.V. SIEBERT, Instrumenta sacra (RGVV 44),

1999.

AN.BE.

wall survive. The existence of a 7th cent. BC Piceni set-

tlement with a necropolis at Pitino 4 km to the northeast of S. has been demonstrated. M.LANDOLFI, S., 1991.

GU.

Septemviri (‘College of seven men’). Founded at Rome in 196 BC by resolution of the people, initially as a college of three men (Liv. 33,42,1), later (perhaps under L. + Cornelius [I 90] Sulla) enlarged to seven, and finally, by Caesar, to ten members (Cass. Dio 43,51,9),

the Roman urban priestly college known as the tresviri, later septemviri epulonum (e.g. InscrIt 13,2 p. 114 f.) or epulones (> epulo; e.g. Liv. 33,42,1; Paul. Fest. 68 L.),

took its name from its arrangement of the > Iovis epulum, the sacrificial banquet (ludorum epulare sacrificium: Cic. De or. 3,73) for Jupiter, Juno and Minerva during the > /udi (III F) plebeii. A Iovis epulum during the ludi Romani is only reliably attested from the Augustan Period on, but the possibility cannot be entirely excluded that it took place from the mid rst cent. BC [1. 285-289]. The septemviri also fulfilled a number of other cultic and administrative duties during the > ludi from at least the rst cent. BC (Cic. Har. resp.

21; [2. 398]). Nominally, the college of the septemviri was created to relieve the pontifical college (+ Pontifex) (Cic. De or. 3,73) and was subject to the latter’s authority (Cic. Har. resp. 21; cf. Cass. Dio 48,32,4). [tis not known whether its members were appointed by popular election in the late Republic, like those of other priestly colleges. Its foundation in the early 2nd cent. BC can also be explained by the wish to increase the number of official posts [3. 323-330] and to curtail the powers of the plebeian aediles in the organization of the ludi plebeii by the interposition of a subordinate priestly body for the prestigious Jovis epula [1. 288-291]. This would be consistent with the fact that, after the first years of the existence of the septemviri, high-ranking septemviri are not attested again before the mid rst cent. BC (MRR

Septerion (Zentijguow/Septerion), not Stepterion (Xtemtrouov/Stepterion), was the name of a nine-yearly sequence of festivals and rituals, in the course of which a boy would set fire to a wooden construction beneath the temple of Apollo in > Delphi, would then himself be led in a procession into the Thessalian + Tempe valley to be ritually purified there of his ‘offence’ with accompanying sacrifices in the river > Peneius. A central constituent was the plucking at the sanctuary to Apollo there ofa laurel branch, which the boy carried in a celebratory procession along a sacred route through the Delphic amphictyony (+ Amphiktyonia) and back to Delphi; the laurel wreaths woven in the Tempe valley are supposed to have been given to the winners of the subsequent — Pythia [2] —- before 586 BC these were also enneateric — (Theop. FGrH 115 F 80). In the ancient — rationalising and quite contradictory — mythographic tradition from the 4th century BC onwards (Theop. l.c.; Ephoros FGrH 70 F 3 rb; in detail: Plut. De def. or. 15,417e-418d) the S. was considered as the ritual representation of > Apollo’s killing of > Python [1], the dragon (or person) that dwelt in a cave (or hut) in Delphi (or in the Tempe valley: Plut. Quaest. Graec. 12), of the ensuing wanderings of the god, his ritual purification in the Peneius and his return, laurel-wreathed, to Delphi. Since Antiquity there have been alternative but rather less convincing interpretations (Plut. De def. or. 15,418a; [1]), whereas the association of S., dragon-slaying and subsequent — daphnéphoria is documented as cult aetiology as early as the first half of the sth century BC (Pind. Pae. roa fr. 52 | SNELLMAEHLER = A2 RUTHERFORD).

+ Aetiology; > Expiatory rites; > Katharsis 1 W. BurKERT, Homo necans, *1997, 144-147. M. BLeEcu, Studien zum Kranz bei den Griechen (RGVV 38), 1982, 224-226; I. RUTHERFORD, Pindar’s Paeans,

2OOI, 200-205.

AN.BE.

289

290

Septicius. C.S.Clarus, equestrian. Plinius [2] the Younger dedicated the first book of his letters (Plin. Ep. 1,1) and Suetonius his book De vita Caesarum (cf. Lydus, Mag. 2,6) to him. C. AD 120-122 praef. praet. of Hadrian beside Marcius [II 14] Turbo. According to an account in Historia Augusta (SHA Hadr. 11,3), he and Suetonius overstepped the boundaries of court etiquette with respect to the emperor’s wife > Sabina. Dismissed, therefore, from his post, presumably while he and Hadrian were staying in Britain.

a juror was included (Cic. Verr. 1,38; Cic. Clu. rr5 f.).

SYME, RP 3, 1283-1285.

W.E.

Septimania see > Visigoths

SEPTIMIUS

J.BA.

IJ. IMPERIAL PERIOD [If 1] S. Flaccus. Probably legate of the /egio II] Augusta in the Flavian period. He undertook a three-month campaign from the territory of the + Garamantes to that of the Ethiopians (Ptol. 1,8,4). THOMASSON, Fasti Africani, 138 f.

{1 2] P. S. Geta. Brother of the emperor — Septimius [II 7] Severus. His career is known in its entirety, from [r. 541] from Leptis Magna. His father, of the same name, is attested by both the Historia Augusta (HA Sept. Sev. 1,2) and [1. 414, 607]. S. was praetor at the

Septimius. Nomen gentile, probably originally Etruscan, occurred at Rome only from the rst cent. BC onwards. SCHULZE, 229.

I. REPUBLICAN

PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

PERIOD

{1 1] A certain S. from Camerinum was commissioned

to recruit followers for > Catilina at Picenum in 63 BC, presumably because he was of the Umbrian-Picenan municipal nobility (cf. CIL I* 1921; 1929) (Sall. Catil. Agii§)){I 2] Friend of Horace’s; he hoped to enter the > cohors amicorum of a member of the imperial household through his relationship with the latter (Hor. Carm. 2,6(2); Hor. Epist. 1,9: Tiberius). Probably identical with the S. mentioned by Suetonius (vita Horatii 2), who was also acquainted with Augustus. [I 3] S., C. As praetor in 57 BC, he advocated Cicero’s recall from exile (Cic. P. Red. Sen. 23), and thereafter administered the province of Asia (BMC, Gr. Lydia 334,52).In 51, he appeared among the witnesses to two rulings by the Senate (Cic. Fam. 8,8,5 f.). He may be identical with the augur attested for 45 BC (Cic. Att. AREYAR Tet [I 4] S., L. Served under Pompeius Magnus as centurio

in the war against the pirates in 67 BC. In 55, having meanwhile become tr. mil., he was left behind in Egypt by A. Gabinius [I 2] with Roman soldiers to protect Ptolemy XII. S. played a decisive role in the planning and accomplishing of the murder of Pompeius [I 3] (Caes. B Civ. 3,103 f.; Cass. Dio 42,3,3), and fought against Caesar in 48/7 (Cass. Dio 42,38,r).

[15] S., P. Quaestor of M. Terentius

> Varro, date

unknown; Varro dedicated books 2-4 of his De lingua Latina to him (Varro, Ling. 5,1; 7,109). His identifica-

tion with other Septimii who were active in literature (Vitr. 7, praef. 14; Quint. Inst. 4,1,19) is uncertain.

[16] S. Scaevola, P. Juror in the trial of > Abbius Oppianicus in 74 BC, convicted of extortion in 72.

When the /itis aestimatio was set, the amount of the (unproven) bribe which he was said to have received as

beginning of the reign of Commodus, then legionary legate, proconsul of Sicily and praetorian legate of Lusitania. He was suffect consul around AD 191. Consular legate of Moesia inferior probably from 192, certainly in 193. His brother, the emperor, kept him at a distance (HA Sept. Sev. 8,9 f.). Consular governor of the Tres Daciae in 195 (> Daci, Dacia C with map). Cos. iterum only in 203. Shortly before his death, he warned his brother of the plans of the praetorian prefect, Fulvius {II ro] Plautianus. 1 J.M. REYNOLDs, J.B. WARD PERKINS (eds.), The Inscriptions of Roman Tripolitania, 1952 2A.R. Birvey, S. Severus, *1988, 218

3 Piso, FPD 1, 150-156.

[II 3] P. S. Geta. Son of S. [II 7], emperor AD 211; cf. — Geta [2]. W.E.

{II 4] S. Serenus. Latin lyric poet, mentioned by Jer. Ep. 53,8 alongside Catullus and Horace and read until the toth cent., flourished probably in the 3rd cent. AD, according to the dating of > Terentianus Maurus (verse 1891: nuper). Formerly counted by scholars among the so-called > poetae novelli. Author of Opuscula ruralia, opposing > Annianus with strict standardization of the verses (27 fragments in diverse metres). Identification

with the translator of > Dictys Cretensis is controversial (cf. > Septimius [II 5] Serenus Sammonicus). EDITION: FPL 175-180. COMMENTARIES: S. MatTrtiaccl, I frammenti dei poetae novelli, 1982, 105-206; COURTNEY, 406-420. BIBLIOGRAPHY: J.-W. Beck, Annianus, S. S. und ein vergessenes Fr., AAWM 1994, no. 4; K.SALLMANN, s. v. S. 1-3, in: HLL 4, 591-598 (§ 484). Further reading s.

+ poetae novelli.

J-W.B.

[II 5] S. Serenus Sammonicus. According to the Historia Augusta, son of Serenus [2] Sammonicus, supposed to have been esteemed as a poet by Alexander Severus (SHA Alex. Sev. 30,2). According to [1], he is identical with S. [II 4] Serenus, the author of the Opuscula ruralia [x. 208 f.; 2. 592 f.], and to the translator of the socalled > Dictys Cretensis [1. 194-208; 2. 593], less plausibly also with the antiquarian Serenus [2] Sammonicus [2. 598]. It is scarcely credible that his pupil, ~ Gordianus [3] the younger, left him the substantial library of his father (SHA Gord. 18,2).

SEPTIMIUS

1T.CHAMPLIN, 1981, 189-212 (§ 484).

Serenus Sammonicus, in: HSCPh 85, 2K.SALLMANN, in: HLL 4, 591-598 P.L.S.

{Il 6] C.S. Severus. From Leptis Magna. Related to > Septimius [II 7] Severus, whose entry to the Senate he secured (SHA Sev. 1,2). His career is known from ILAlg

1 1283 (cf. AE 1967, 536 and AE 1971, 534). After the praetorship, he was legionary legate, praetorian governor of Lycia-Pamphylia, cos. suff. in AD 160, governor of Germania

(inferior?), proconsul of Africa in 174.

Died after 177 as, according to AE 1971, 534, he took part in a consilium of Marcus Aurelius in that year. A.R. Bir ey,

292

291

S. Severus, *1988, 219.

W.E.

[il 7] Imp. Caesar L. Septimius Severus Pertinax Augu-

stus. Roman emperor, AD 193-211, founder of the Severan dynasty. I. ORIGINS AND CAREER II. THE ROAD TO AUTOCRACY III]. PARTHIAN AND BRITISH CAMPAIGNS IV. APPRAISAL

I. ORIGINS AND CAREER

Born L. S. Severus, on 11 April AD 146, at Leptis Magna, son of the equestrian P. S. Geta and Fulvia Pia (SHA Sev. 1,1-3; Cass. Dio 76,15,2; 78,11,6; 78,17,1; CIL VII 19493 =ILS 439). After the death of > Paccia Marciana, he married again, in 185: His second wife was lulia [12] Domna, from the priestly dynasty of -» Emesa in Syria (modern Homs). He had two sons by her: Septimius Bassianus (~ Caracalla) and Septimius — Geta [2].

After the customary education of a boy of his class at Leptis (SHA Sev. 1,4; Eutr. 8,19; Aur. Vict. Caes. 20,22), he worked at Rome as an ~> advocatus fisci,

and, after the intercession of S. [II 6] with > Marcus [2] Aurelius, he was accepted into the senatorial class without first having completed the equestrian military career path (— tres militiae). His cursus honorum was highly promising: guaestor 170/1 [1. 88, note 98; 2. 4750], quaestor II in Sardinia

171/2 (SHA Sev. 2,3 f.;

[2. 50]), legatus proconsulis provinciae Africae 173/4 (Inscriptions of Roman Tripolitania 555; [3. 112, no. 43;2. 51 £.]), tribunus plebis candidatus 174 (SHA Sev. 3,1), praetor 178, iuridicus Asturiae et Callaeciae c. 178-181 (SHA Sev. 3,4; [1. 88 f.; 2. 55]) and legatus legionis IV Scythicae in Syria during the governorship of Helvius > Pertinax 181-183 (SHA Sev. 3,6; [2. 6873]). Here, S.’ career came to a halt, probably because ofa revolt against > Commodus. He spent some time at Athens (SHA Sey. 3,7), but then, after the replacement of the praef. praet. — Tigidius Perennis, served once more as legatus Augusti pro praetore in Gallia Lugdunensis, c. 186-189 (SHA Sev. 3,8; 4,1; Cass. Dio 74,3,2;

[2.75 f.]), before serving as procos. in Sicily, 189/190 (SHA Sev. 4,3; [2.77]), cos. suff. in 190 (Cass. Dio 72,12,4) and finally legatus Augusti pro praetore in Pannonia superior, 191-193 (SHA Sev. 4,2; Cass. Dio 73514533 [2. 83]).

Il. THE ROAD TO AUTOCRACY

S. was proclaimed emperor by Pannonian troops on 9 April 193 at Carnuntum, after Helvius Pertinax had been murdered by the praetorians and -> Didius [II 6] Iulianus had bought the title of emperor from them (SHA Sev. 5; SHA Did. Iul. 5,2; SHA Alb. 1,1; Ps.-Aur. Vict. epit. Caes.

19,2; Cass. Dio 73,14,3; Herodian.

2,9,2; [2. 94-97]). At the same time, the army in the eastern part of the Empire declared > Pescennius Niger emperor at Antioch (Syria) (Herodian. 2,7,1-2,8,9), and the legions in Britannia raised > Clodius [II x] Albinus aloft on their shields (Cass. Dio 73,15,1 f.; CIL VIII 1549; 17726; 26498). S., who was accepted by all legions on the Danube (except the legio X Gemina at Vindobona, modern Vienna), on the Rhine, in Spain and North Africa [4. 22 f., 152; 2.98], immediately crossed the Alpine passes to Italy and was declared a hostis by the Senate (SHA Sev. 5,5; Cass. Dio 73,16,r); however, he was acknowledged by the Senate (1 June 193) even before he reached Rome. The next day, Didius Iulianus was murdered (Cass. Dio 73,17,4 f.5 Herodian. 2,12,3; [2. 99-102]). After S.’ triumphal entry into Rome on 9 June (Cass. Dio 74,1,3 f.), he assumed the title of pontifex maximus, dissolved the Praetorian Guard and replaced it by his own trusted legionaries, whom he rewarded with an extraordinarily high — donativum (Cass. Dio 74,1,1 f.; Herodian. 2,13,1T2322, 0Aes >LOMeL24S3|2eLOsnt |). S. at once emphasized his continuity with Pertinax, who was deified and whose name he adopted (Cass. Dio 74,4,1-74,5,5)- He successfully offered Albinus the title of Caesar, thus bringing him over to his side. The forces of Pescennius Niger were defeated by S.’ commander > Fabius [II 6] Cilo, who suffered heavy losses in the attempt, in the winter of 193/4 at > Perinthus in Thrace (Cass. Dio 74,6,3; SHA Sev. 8,13-16). In spite of the unsuccessful siege of Byzantium, he crossed over to Asia Minor, winning victories early in 194 at Cyzicus and Nicaea [5] through Ti. > Claudius [II 17] Candidus (Cass. Dio 74,6,4 f.; SHA Sev. 8,17). He forced his way over the Taurus passes and decisively defeated Pescennius Niger in late March 194 at Issus, capturing and killing him (Cass. Dio 74,7,2-8; Herodian. 3,4,6). Egypt had already recognized S. before that (13 February; BGU 326 II 12); the province of Syria was divided for security reasons (Syria Phoenice and Syria Coele), Antioch was severely punished [2. ro8—r14]. S. now redoubled his efforts at continuity, and announced his (fictitious) adoption by > Marcus [2] Aurelius, a strategy that made S. the brother of Commodus (CIL VIII 9317; [2.117]). From early in 194, he was already using the title of + pater patriae. The support given to Pescennius by Parthian vassals (Cass. Dio 75,3,2 f.) gave S. the pretext for his first expeditio Parthica in the first half of 195; this led to the conquest of > Osroene and > Adiabene (victor’s title Adiabenicus, Arabicus, on coins also Parthicus: SHA Sev. 9,10). The sanctions against Jews and Christians may already be dated to this period (cf. SHA Sev. 17,1;

293

294

Eutr. 18,18; Tert. Apol. 35; [5]). In late 195, Byzan-

erected at Rome, including his triumphal arch on the Forum Romanum (Arcus Septimii Severi, cf. city map + Roma 2, no. 59.; CIL VI 1033 = ILS 425), and in 206/7 fought against the robber band of > Bulla ‘Felix’ in Italy (Cass. Dio 76,10,1-7; [2. 161-169]). In 202, he took his third consulship [8. 57] together with Caracalla, married the latter to > Fulvia [3] Plautilla, daughter of the powerful praef. praet. > Fulvius [II 10] Plau-

tium, last bastion of the followers of Niger, also fell,

and lost its city privileges (Herodian. 3,6,9; Cass. Dio 74,12,1-14,6; [2. 119]). Only now did S. return to Rome.

S. had probably given his elder son Bassianus the name M. Aurelius Antoninus already in mid—195, in order to reinforce the dynastic connection with the Antonines, and had appointed him Caesar (SHA Sev. 10,3; Herodian. 3,10,5), an affront to the Caesar Albinus. Late in 195, the Senate followed suit with a hostis declaration against Albinus who responded to this by having himself proclaimed Augustus (SHA Sev. 10,2; Herodian. 3,6,8). The matter was only decided in February 197 at > Lugdunum (modern Lyons), in a battle that brought heavy losses to both sides (Cass. Dio 75,6,1-8; Herodian. 3,7,2; Zon. 12,9). Albinus died while trying to escape (Cass. Dio 75,7,1 f.; Herodian. 35756 f.5 [2. 121-128]). Like Syria, Britannia too was divided into two provinces (Herodian. 3,8,2). The reckoning with the Senate, which harboured many who sympathized with Albinus, followed — accompanied by executions (Cass. Dio 74,9,1 ff.; [6. 112 ff.]). III. PARTHIAN AND BRITISH CAMPAIGNS Attacks by the > Parthians on Roman territory gave cause, in spite of their lack of success, for a second war. Of the three new legions raised for the purpose, however (I-III Parthica, under the command of equites), the II Parthica remained stationed close to Rome, which constituted a breach with immemorial custom (Cass. Dio 55,24,4). Still in 197, S. advanced into Mesopotamia encountering almost no resistance, took Ctesiphon [2] in late October (SHA Sev. 16,1; Cass. Dio 75,9,4) and had the victory celebrated at Rome on 28 January 198; S. assumed the title of Parthicus maximus [2. 129 f.]. At the same time, he had his sons Caracalla and Geta declared Augustus and Caesar respectively (SHA Sev. 16,3 f.). S. remained in the East for a while, intending to re-organize it. He gave up the attempt to conquer — Hatra [x] after two failures (Cass. Dio 75,10,1;

I1,1-12,5),

visited

Alexandria

[x] in the

winter of 199/200 and went on to tour Egypt (CIL III 6581; [2. 135-140]). In Syria again from late 200, he created the new province of Mesopotamia (capital + Nisibis) along with the already existing province of — Osroene, put both under the command of an equestrian praefectus and stationed the legions I and III Parthica there (Cass. Dio 75,3,2; [7-1435f., 1539 £.; Detaonta|)e Returning to Rome early in 202, he remained there until 208 —a stay interrupted only by a visit to his homeland Africa in 203, and to Leptis Magna in particular, which he had splendidly embellished. He sought to consolidate the power of his dynasty while at the same time placing himself in the context of Roman traditions: In 204, he celebrated the Roman Secular Games (> Saeculum III, > Ludi K), the ludi honorarii and the ~ Troiae lusus {2. 146-160], had numerous buildings

SEPTIMIUS

tianus (Cass) Dioi76,1,2: CIL Vi226;)[2.1374.244))

and celebrated the tenth anniversary of his reign (decennalia: Cass. Dio 76,1,3-5; Herodian. 3,10,2). However, S.’ efforts at dynastic stability was ham-

pered by the thirst for power on the part of Caracalla and the irreconcilable hatred between the latter and his brother. In 205, the commander of the Praetorian Guard, Plautianus, fell victim to a plot of Caracalla. The feud between the brothers became so notable that — tradition would have it — the emperor found unrest in Britannia a most convenient way of removing his sons

from Rome. In 208, he set off with his family to fight the tribes of the > Caledonii and > Maiatai, who lived in what is today Scotland (Cass. Dio 76,11,1; 12,1; Hero-

dian. 3,14,1 f.). His intention was probably to incorporate the entire island of Great Britain into the Roman sphere of control. From > Eboracum (modern York), he drove far to the north in two campaigns, in spite of failing health. He built marching-camps and the permanent fortress of Carpow on the Tay (Cass. Dio 76,13,1-4; 76,15,1 f.; Herodian. 3,14,4-10;[9. 52-54; 10. 47-62]), and in 210, he had himself and his sons (Geta having also been elevated to the rank of Augustus in 209) named Britannicus maximus [2. 170-187]. S. died on 4 February 211 at York, and was buried and consecrated in the > Mausoleum Hadriani at Rome (SHA Sev. 24,1 f.).

IV. APPRAISAL In the ancient tradition, S.’ tense relationship with the Senate (— senatus) tended to cast a negative light on his reign (which was by far the longest between those of Marcus [2] Aurelius and Diocletian). His preference for the equestrian class (> equites Romani) in the army and the administration of the empire to the detriment of the senators, the enlargement of the army and lavish payments to his soldiers (which contributed not insignificantly to the > devaluation of money), as well as the stationing of a legion in close proximity to Rome, which reduced Italy to the status of a mere province, contributed to the image of a ruthless potentate, the ‘African on the throne’ who, supported by the army and surrounded by his minions, disregarded Roman traditions. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that S.’ use of equestrians and his autocratization of the Empire, for instance, followed a long tradition, and that in many respects he drew the consequences of a development rather than initiating radical innovations. Not least, it was equestrians, the jurists > Papinianus and > UIpianus, whom S. offered the opportunity to revise and codify Roman law, establishing it for centuries to come.

295

296

His long reign, after the chaos that followed the death of Commodus, when six emperors flashed across the stage in just a few months, brought stability and calm. From this the provinces in particular benefited — but so too did Italy, and in the end, Rome under S. enjoyed one final blossoming of its urban development (+ Roma III G). ~» Legio; > Parthian and Persian Wars; > Year of four emperors

R. STONEMAN, Palmyra and its Empire, 1992, Index s. v. Vorodes. M.SCH.

SEPTIMIUS

1 ALFOLDY, FH 2 A.R. Birey, S. Severus, 71988 3 THOMASSON, Fasti Africani 4 J.HASEBROEK, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Kaisers S. Severus, 1921

5 K.H. ScHwarTe, Das angebliche Christengesetz des S. Severus, in: Historia 12, 1963, 185-208

6 G.ALFOLDY,

S. Severus und der Senat, in: BJ 68, 1968, 112-160 7 E.RITTERLING, s.v. legio, RE 12, 1211-1829 8 DEGRASSI, FCIR 9 J.J. WiLKEs, The Roman Legionary Fortress at Carpow, Perthshire, in: Roman Frontier

Studies 1967, 52-54 10J.D. Leacu, J.-J. Wires, The Roman Military Base at Carpow, Perthshire, Scotland: Summary of Recent Investigations (1964-70, 1975), in: J. Fitz (ed.), Akten des 11. Internationalen Limeskongres-

ses (Székesfehérvar 1976), 1977, 47-62 11£E.Bir.ey, S. Severus and the Roman Army, in: Epigraphische Studien 8,1969, 63-82 12 A.R. BirLEY, The Coups d’état of the Year 193, in: BJ 169, 1969, 243-280

13 E. KETTENHOFEN, Die syrischen Augustae in der historischen Uberlieferung, 1979 14 A.M. McCann, The Portraits of S. Severus, 1969 15 R.F. SMirH, The Army Reform of S. Severus, in: Historia 21, 1972, 481-500 16 T.D. BARNES, The Family and Career of S. Severus, in: Historia 16, 1967, 87-107 17 KIENAST’, 156-159.

TE. {fl 8] C. S. Severus Aper. Cos. ord. in AD 207 (unpub-

lished military diploma). Probably identical with the relative Caracalla had killed in 212 (Herodian. 4,6,3; SHA Carac. 3,6f.; PIR S 311). Presumably son of P.S. Aper, cos. suff. in 153 (cf. [1. 214 f., 219]), or of the consul of 160 (S. [II 6]).

Septimontium. Roman festival on ‘seven hills’, celebrated on December 11 (=I ID. DEC.). Already in Antiquity, the S. was associated with the foundation of the city of + Rome (Antistius Labeo in Fest. p. 474; Paul. Fest. p. 459 L.; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 69). The hills to which > feriae (‘holidays’) applied (Palatinus, Velia,

Fagutal, Cermalus, Caelius, Oppius, Cispius) [2. 203 f.] were not identical to the ‘classical’ seven hills of the city which subsequently became canonical. The idea of a proto-urban settlement of Rome on the hills of the S. is once more under discussion in recent research [x. 268-380], but has not been proved beyond doubt. Accounts of the festival itself are disparate. No reliable evidence survives from the Republican period. Festus talks of sacrifices performed on each of the above-mentioned hills, while Antistius Labeo explicitly attests this only for the Palatine and the Velia. According to Varro (Ling. 5,41; 6,24), the S. was a festival exclusively for the inhabitants of the ‘seven hills’ (feriae non populi), though he means the ‘classical’ and not the ‘proto-urban’ hills. Suetonius (Suet. Dom. 4,5), conversely, knows nothing of such limitation on participation in the festival, but distinguishes only between the people, the Senators and the equestrians, who received presents from Domitian at a banquet he held on the S. It remains unclear how the custom reported by Plutarch that no harnessed teams were used in Rome on the S. fits in (Plut. Quaest. Rom. 69). The festival may have continued to be celebrated into the 3rd cent. AD, if its mention in Tert. Ad nat. 2,15 is to be seen as evidence (in favour of this view [2. 204]). 1 A.CARANDINI, La nascita di Roma, 1997 2 SCULLARD, Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman

Republic, 1981.

CF.

1 A.R. BIRLEY, S. Severus, 71988.

[II 9] C. S. Vegetus. Equestrian prefect of Egypt under Domitian, AD 85-87 [1. 507]. 1 G. BASTIANINI, II prefetto d’Egitto, in: ANRW §03-S17.

II 10.1, W.E.

{11 10] Iulius Aurelius S$. Vorodes (IGR 3, 1032). Palmyrene, appearing in inscriptions from AD 258/9 to

April 267 (IGR 3, 1036, 1040-1045, cf. [1. no. 134], undated). Procur. Augusti ducenarius in Syria in the 260s, and holder of local offices, until his career was ended, probably by the murder of > Odaenathus [2]. In spite of [2], it is questionable whether S., who is called agoranomos (IGR 3, 1045; > Agoranomoi), is identical with a certain OYOPQA (Voréd) who appears in the Res Gestae divi Saporis, Greek version, line 67, with the same title and as a follower of > Sapor [1] I (PLRE 1, 981 f.). 1H. Seyric, Les fils du roi Odainat, in: Annales archéologiques de Syrie (Damascus) 13, 1963, 159-172 2 D.SCHLUMBERGER, Voréd l’agoranome, in: Syria 49, 1972, 339-341.

Septimus. Must be a former Roman individual name (see below) which in the classical period no longer appears as a > praenomen. Etymologically, it corresponds to the Latin ordinal septimus, ‘the seventh’ (cf. ~ Quintus, > Sextus). A synonymous name exists in Umbrian (old-Umbrian nom. Se(f)tums). The (neo)Umbrian vocative evolved, with phonetic and graphic variations, into the Etruscan Sehtume (genitive Sehtumna). The common genitive Septumius/Septimius is a regular derivation from the older Latin *Septumos. SALOMIES, I1I-114, 119; D.H. STEINBAUER, Handbuch des Etruskischen, 1999, 464.

Septizodium.

Ostentatious

monumental

Neues D.ST.

facade,

almost 90 m long, at the intersection of the Via Triumphalis and the > Via Appia, which led into the city, near the > Circus Maximus, forming the conclusion of the southeastern slope of the Palatine in Rome (and terminologically often confused with the + Septizonium).

297

298

The splendid facade, presumably of five storeys, consisted of three exedra side-by-side, which were provided with terminations at right angles towards the sides of the monument. The S. was built during the reign of the emperor > Septimius [II 7] Severus (presumably in the context of the expansion of the Palatine he initiated) and dedicated in AD 201. The term S. is ancient; it appears on the (also Severan) > Forma Urbis Romae. The function of the S. is debatable. It is usually regarded as a particularly outstanding example of an monumental Roman > nymphaeum, but there is nothing to suggest a technical or constructional connexion between the site and an aqueduct and reservoir. It is also unlikely that the S. can be seen as a representational entrance to the Palatine (> Mons Palatinus), which we should rather assume to have been a gate construction corresponding to the contemporary fashion (> Gates; porches). It seems possible, therefore, that this should be seen as an ostentatious facade unconnected with water features, whose — hotly debated — decoration with statues must then take on a particular significance. A conclusive reconstruction of the monument is no longer possible today. Until the 1580s, a large proportion remained standing and is depicted in various Renaissance drawings (but with little accurate detail), e.g. by Marten VAN HEEMSKERCK and J. BREUGHEL; these drawings now form the basis of any reconstruction. From 1588 the ruins were removed at the behest of the pope Sixtus V; from the still usable building components arose e.g. the church of Santa Maria Maggiore. Various modern excavations on the foundations permit certain inferences, but only about the ground plan and not the eleva-

hebdomekonta,

tion. —+ Roma (Rome) P. Cuini, D. MANIcIOLyt, II Settizodio, in: Bull. della Com-

missione archeologica communale di Roma 91.2, 1986, 241-262 und 92, 1987/88, 346-353; RICHARDSON, 350;

Id., in: N. THOMSON DE GRUMMOND, An Encyclopedia of the History of Classical Archaeology, vol. 2, 1986, 1023. C.HO.

Septizonium. District of the city of Rome, mentioned only by Suetonius (Suet. Tit. 1) as the location of the house in which the emperor — Titus was born; presumably on the Quirinal. Often confused with the > Septizodium. RICHARDSON, 350 f.

C.HO.

Septuagint I. OrIGIN

II. MANUSCRIPTS III. SIGNIFICANCE

AND TRADITION

I. ORIGIN According to the legend of the origin of the Septuagint, which is based on the so-called Letter of > Aristeas [2] ({12. 20-37; 15. 677-687; 13]), king Ptolemy [3] Il Philadelphus had the > Pentateuch translated into Greek for his library by 70 (or 72; 70 = &Bdounxovta/

SEPTUAGINT

Latin septuaginta interpretes, hence

the name S./LXX) scholars over a period of 70 (or 72)

days. The name then came to refer to the Greek translation of the entire Hebrew > Bible including the Apocrypha (> Apocrypha literature). This story is probably rooted in some factual basis (Euseb. Praep. evang. 13,12,1-2). However, the Greek translation was no doubt motivated by the needs of the Jewish community in Alexandria, which had become acculturated into Greek society [1]. There is substantial dispute as to whether there was really a first redaction of the Septuagint (first posited by De LaGarDE, 1863; also in this tradition are the Gottingen and Cambridge editions [2; 1]) or whether there were several parallel translations from the very beginning (a position first held by KAHLE, early 20th cent.) (cf. [16]). A view somewhere between the two extremes has taken hold (first: [8]), which presumes that there was an original translation of most of the Septuagint, but that it quickly split into different traditions as it was subsequently handed down. Following the translation of the Pentateuch, the prophets and the scriptures were translated as well; those translations were probably completed by roo BC. It is likely that the translations were of a Hebrew text that had already been canonized [12. 4-7]. According to Tov, four levels can be distinguished in the ‘history of the text’ [16. 130-133]: 1) the original translation, 2) numerous parallel forms of the text that have been corrected, 3) a relatively consistent text in the 2nd and 3rd cents. AD., 4) new branches of the text following completion of Origen’s Hexapla [2] (3rd cent. AD) and the revision by Lucianus (> Lucianus [2], died AD 312). Apparently the translation of the Septuagint was already criticized as too free during the 2nd and rst cents. BC, which led to a revision of the text (cf. [16], level 2; so-called Palestinian kaige-Theodotion revision; > Aquila [3], approx. AD 125; Symmachus, end of the 2nd cent. AD). There are references in literary sources to the opposite tendency, namely to

reject any modification of the Septuagint (because it, like the Hebrew original, was considered to be divinely inspired) (Letter of Aristeas; Phil. De vita Moysis 2,40). II. MANUSCRIPTS AND TRADITION

The Septuagint represents the most significant Greek translation of the Bible. Its Hebrew model differs substantially from the traditional Masoretic text (> Masorah). Accordingly, the Septuagint is of enormous importance for the Hebrew text tradition [16. 152160]; the most important and earliest codices (Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus and Vaticanus) are from the 4th/5th cents. AD [14; 9]. However, they largely represent the text types that originated in the edition of Origen’s Hexapla (see [16], level 4). The Hexapla included six columns (1. Hebrew text, 2. transliteration, 3. Aquila, 4. Symmachus, 5. revised version of the Septuagint, 6. kaige-Theodotion revision). It is only available through the Milan and Cairo > Genizah palimpsests and the Syrian translation (Syrohexapld; fragment in [2]). In

SEPTUAGINT

addition there are numerous papyrus finds (from the 1st centaeaDeson) mlz manuscript fragments from + Qumran [17] and quotations in ancient authors (Philon [12], cf. [rr], losephus [4], Church fathers; quotations listed in [2]). III. SIGNIFICANCE The Septuagint is the most extensive work that was translated from an oriental language into Greek, and one of the most important documents of the > Hellenization of > Judaism (— Literature IV); it was presumably intended both for the needs of Judaism (reading of the scriptures, services) and for a wider non-Jewish readership. Since any translation amounts to a commentary

on the source text [10. 541-571], the Septuagint can be considered the first commentary on the Old Testament; nearly word-for-word passages alternate with Midrash-like interpretations (— Targum, + Rabbinical literature). The language of the Septuagint, the Greek of the so-called > koiné, put its mark on ~ Testamentary literature and the New Testament. In Judaism, it was ultimately replaced by the more literal translation by Aquila (2nd cent. AD, used into the 6th cent. AD) and was hardly recognized by the Jewish community after that time [18]. It was the > Bible of early Christianity and the early Church, and continues to serve as the text of the Old Testament used by the Greek Orthodox Church today. ~ Vulgate EpITIONs: 1A.E. Brooke, N.McLean et al., The Old Testament in Greek, 1906 ff. 2 Gottinger Akademie der Wissenschaften

300

299

(ed.), S. Vetus Testamentum

1926 ff. (‘Gottinger S.’, not yetcompleted)

Graecum,

3 A.RAHLFs,

S., 2 vols., 71962 (11935) BIBLIOGRAPHY: 4S.Brock, et al., A Classified Bibliog-

raphy of the Septuagint, 1973 5 C. DoGntez, Bibliography of the Septuagint (1970-1993), 1995. LITERATURE:

6 A. AEJMELAEUS,

On

the Trail of S.

Sepulchri violatio. ‘Tomb violation’ (e.g. the destruction or damaging of a tomb, the burial of persons other than those permitted by the owner, the use of a tomb as a dwelling, etc.), an offence not recorded in the early period of Roman law (but cf. Cic. Leg. 2,24,61), was, to the jurists of the rst-3rd cents. AD, an object of a private suit pursued by a personal action granted by the + praetor (— actio in personam). This actio sepulchri violati was allowed to the party entitled to the tomb by bonum et aequum (‘by equitable discretion’, ~ aequitas). If this party did not wish to sue or if there was no entitled party, the actio could be brought before the praetor by quivis ex populo (‘any one of the people’). It then produced a fixed monetary fine which fell to the victorious claimant. Among multiple claimants, the claim was awarded to the one cuius iustissima causa esse videbitur (‘whose grounds are found to be the most just’, Ulp. Dig. 47,12,3 pr.). The actio SV, which developed out of the need for order and security, probably came under the special jurisdiction of the > recuperatores’ courts. The legal consequence of conviction was infamy (— infamia, Ulp. Dig. 47,12,1). An Imperial edict probably dating from the early years of the Christian calendar (rescript? diatagma Kaisaros FIRA I no. 69), and whose extent of historical and geographical applicability is uncertain, threatens the death penalty following an accusation (or cognition?) hearing for tymborychia, i.e. for disturbing the rest of the dead at family tombs. According to Macer Dig. 47,12,8 (3rd cent. AD), the SV could be pursued under the lex Iulia de vi publica et privata (“Julian law against public and private violence”). Depending on the social status of the perpetrator, the punishment could be hard labour in the mines, relegatio, banishment or death (cf. Pauli Sent. iS

Iki

ehitslaroe IDK, 7 zene sie)

-» Deportatio; > Relegatio; > Death penalty E. GERNER, s. v. Tymborychia, in: RE 7 A 2, 1735-1745,

Translators, 1993 7K.ALAND, Repertorium der griechischen christlichen Papyri, vol. 1,1976 8 E.J. BICKERMANN, Some Notes on the Transmission of the Septuagint,

esp. 1742-1745;

in: $. LIEBERMANN

logische Grundlagen, 1992, 211-213; B. SCHMIDLIN, Das Rekuperatorenverfahren, 1963, 79-82; DE VIsscHER, Le droit des tombeaux romains, 1963, 139-142, 150-194.

1950,149-178

(ed.), FS A. Marx. Jubilee Volume,

9S. JELLICOE, The Septuagint and Mod-

ern Study, 1968 10 id. (ed.), The Phenomenon of Biblical Translations in Antiquity ....1974 11 R.HANHART, Studien zur S. und zum hellenistischen Judentum, 1999 12 M.HENGEL, A.M. SCHWEMER (eds.), Die S. zwischen Judentum und Christentum, 1994 13 N. MEISNER, Aristeasbrief, 1973 14 A.RAHLES, Verzeichnis der griechi-

schen Hss. des AT, 1914 15 SCHURER 3.1, 474-492, 677-687 16E.Tov, Die griechischen Bibeliibersetzun-

Kaser, RPR

I, 3785, 380, 610, 628,

630; Id., Zum rémischen Grabrecht, in: ZRG 95, 1978,

15-92; J.U. Krause, Die Familie und weitere anthropo-

FRR. Sequana (Xnxodvad/Sékodnas, Xynxovavoc/Sékouanos), modern Seine. River in Gallia (Caes. B Gall. 1,1,2; Mela 3,2,20; Plin. HN 4,105; 109; Amm. Marc. ESF 5 Otte 45, LAs 352—55 0450585

2uCOL

ae Oa

OeTl:

17E.C. ULRICH,

Cass. Dio 40,38,4) rising - contrary to Str. 4,3,2 —notin

The Septuagint Manuscripts from Qumran..., in: id. (ed.), The Dead Sea Scrolls and the Origins of the Bible, 1999, 165-183 18 G. VELTRI, Eine Tora fiir den K6nig Talmai, 1994. LWA.

the Alps but on the plateau of Langres, then flowing through the Paris Basin and, meandering strongly from Iuliobona (present-day Lillebonne) and broadening

gen, in: ANRW II 20.1, 1987, 121-189

Septumuleius. Rare Roman family name. In 121 BC L. S. delivered the head of C. Sempronius [I 11] Gracchus to the consul C. Opimius [1] and allegedly was given its weight in gold for it (Cic. De or. 2,269; Diod. Sic. 35,29; Plut. C. Gracchus 17,4 f. etc.).

K-LE.

into an estuary, arriving at the mare Britannicum (present-day English Channel). According to literary tradition, the S. formed an ethnic border between the Belgae and the Galli or Celtae. The border of the Roman province between > Lugdunensis and > Belgica, however, was further east. The S. played a strategic role in the

301

302

Gallic War in 54 BC (Caes. B Gall. 7,57-62). As early as 52 BC and later in AD 296 in the war of Constantius [1] against > Allectus, the estuary mouth of the S. served as a base for operations against Britannia (Str. 4,3,3; Pan. Lat. 5,14). The S. was of both military (Not. Dign. Occ.

west on the Arar against the Haedui and Lingones

42,23) as well as economical

importance (cf. nautae

organised in skipper corporations: CIL XIII 3026; [asi ate|)E A Dea Sequana documented in inscriptions (CIL XII 2859-2865; ILS 9312) was worshipped at the source of the S. 8km distant from Saint-Seine. The temple complex (last excavation 1963-1967) is located at the eastern side of the valley and expands over three levels. On the uppermost level, the spring-water was caught in a basin surrounded by a large peristylion, further below was a fanum and on the mid-level an elliptical building surrounding a large rectangular basin. At the bottom of the valley, 278 wooden figures were found as well as unique votive offerings in stone (381) and metal (256). The representations of symbolic ‘mock-sacrifices’ (e.g. children who carry a puppy) suggest a type of redemptive procession comparable to the liturgy of the Roman > Robigalia. The spring-water of the S. in particular was worshipped as a goddess in connection with ideas of purity, resurrection and return to an original state (of health) (cf. e.g. ‘anatomical’ offer-

ings depicting the direct localisation of a physical ailment — limbs, breasts, sexual organs, eyes, torsos, inner

organs, heads). Written documents on votive offerings refer to the dedicants. The statues represent rich patrons of the sanctuary. The sanctuary was active from the rst to the 4th cent. The finds are kept in the Musée Archéologique of Dijon. 1 EsPpERIANDIEU, Rec. 3.

S.Deyts, Les bois sculptés des sources de la Seine, 1983; Ead., Un peuple de pélerins, 1994; TIR M 31, 1975, 186 f.

SEQUESTER

(Gaese BiGallir 12726 Geaenottia 4s. uly 4e3525145954) and in the south on the upper Rhodanus (Rh6ne; Caes. B Gall. 1,33,43 7,64,7 £.) while the Ambarri settled further west. The border region against the Leuci in the north was sparsely populated (Vosegus). During the Gallic administrative reform of 16/13 BC, the civitas of the S. with Vesontio as the main city was added to the province of Belgica. Under Domitianus, it was added to the newly founded province of Germania superior in AD 82/90 (Ptol. 2,9,21). In AD 21, the S. joined the revolt of the Haedui (— Iulius [II 126]) (Tac. Ann. 3,45). In 68/69, they fought on the side of Iulius [II 150] Vindex for Galba and were probably rewarded for this with the ius Latii (Cass. Dio 63,24; Tac. Hist. 4,67; Tac. Ann. 1,51,4). The peak that followed lasted until the

2nd half of the 2nd cent. when the urban infrastructure regressed esp. in Vesontio and Epamanduodurum (present-day Mandeure). The reason for the unrest among the S. under Marcus [2] Aurelius (SHA Aur. 22,10) must be found in the social tension resulting from fiscal strains. In the context of the provincial reform under + Diocletianus, the area municipality of the S. as well as that of the Rauraci and the Helvetii was conjoined with Equestris (present-day Nyon) into the province of Sequania or Maxima Sequanorum (Notitia Galliarum 9,1; Not. Dign. Occ. 1,109; 3,23; 22,11; 22,13), which, in turn, was divided into several smaller administrative centres. After 443, the > Burgundiones occupied the entire area of the S. In 534, it was integrated into the Frankish kingdom. 1 B. FiscHer, Le premier monnayage des S., in: Et. Celtiques 25, 1988, 69-78.

M.GscualIb, Die rémischen und gallo-rémischen Gottheiten in den Gebieten der Sequaner und Ambarrer, in: JRGZ 64, 1994, 323-469; J.B. Keung, s v. S., RE 2A,

F.SCH.

1639-1658; M.MancIn, Zur Besiedlung der FrancheComté wahrend der Romerzeit, in: Offa 44, 1987, 153173; H. WaLTER, La Franche-Comté romaine, 1979.

Sequani (Xnxoavoi/Sékoanoi, Xyxovavoi/Sekouanoi). A Celtic people, ethnically and culturally related to the north and east Gallic tribes, who in the Prehistoric Period presumably lived on the Sequana [1] (Seine) first, later in present-day Franche-Comté. In the mid rst cent. BC, the rule of king Catamantaloedes was succeeded by an aristocratic regime (Caes. B Gall. 1,3,4). The S. called the Germani into their country against the + Haedui and were forced to cede to them large parts of their territory (Caes. B Gall. 1,31). The battles of + Caesar against the > Helvetii and Ariovistus in 58 BC brought the S. into the Roman Empire (Caes. B Gall. I passim; Cass. Dio 38,32; Liv. Epit. 104). The area annexed by the Germani was partially added to the colonia Augusta [4] Raurica. The region of the S. organised by Augustus as a civitas bordered in the north east on the Rhenus (Rhine; Gaes: BiGalls15; 4510.35) Stt. 453545, 456,00), 1m the east on the Jura and against the Helvetii (Caes. B Gall. 1,2,33 1,8,13 Str. 4,3,45 4,6,11), in the west and north

F.SCH.

Sequester. Literally probably (from secare, ‘to divide’) a neutral person independent of the parties. According to the late Classical Roman jurist Modestinus (3rd cent. AD), sequester is the person to whom several entrust an item that is the subject of a dispute (Dig. 50,16,110). Until this period, the parties generally deposited the item whose replevy they disputed voluntarily and out of court. In occasional cases, e.g. Dig. 43,30,3,6 (custody of a child), however, the > praetor could also make an official order for such a deposit. Thus, the sequestration gradually acquired the character of an arrest in rem (i.e. of an interlocutory legal protection). However, at no time was the procedural context a distinguishing feature of the sequester, even if it did predominate in practice (Paul. Dig. 16,3,6). This context was also decisive, for instance, in determining whether the term of adverse possession for the possessor was running or not (Dig. 41,2,39). Lhe sequester was liable to the parties depos-

303

304

(‘ejectment

seraphim come to be presented as angelic beings (1 Enoch 61,10; 71,7).

E. Jaxas, Vom sequestrum der legis actiones bis zum verbindlichen ‘Gerichtsdeposit’ des ProzefSgegenstandes, in: Studia in honorem Elemer Polay, 1985, 23 5-243; M. Ka-

O. KEEL, Jahwe-Visionen und Siegelkunst, 1977, 115; id.,

SEQUESTER iting by the actio depositi sequestraria against the sequester’, Dig. 16,3,12,2).

SER, K.Hack1,

Das rémische

Zivilprozefrecht,

294.

C.UEHLINGER, G6ttinnen, 1992, 311-314.

Gétter

und

Gottessymbole, B.E.

*1996,

C.PA. Serapion (Zeganiwv; Serapion).

Sera (Sifjea; Séra). According to Marinus [1] of Tyre, who drew on a Greek travel account (c. AD 100), the

city of S. was at the end of the > Silk Road (Ptol. Geog. 1,11,3-6 and 6,13,1); this may refer either to the western or to the eastern end. The western city in question could be expected to be found in the area of modern Kashgar, for the eastern city one could suggest Liangchou in Gansu. In favour of the identification with Kashgar is a description of the > Seres as blond and blue-eyed (Plin. HN 6,87). Marinus incorrectly envisaged S., the métropolis ton Séron (‘capital city of the Seres’), not as a border city but as the centre of the Dnoinr/Sérike (‘Silk Country’); he identified the latter with the hinterland of coastal China (Sinai: Ptol. Geog. 1,17,4) and was aware that this is the location of the source of the Huang He (ibid. 6,16,3).

Serapeum

Syntaxis 1,10).

S. might have been a student of Hipparchus [6], but he is unlikely to be identical to the astrologer S. of Alexandria (CCAG 8,4, 1922, 225-232; [3] in opposition to

[2]). 1 A.KLotz, W.KROLL,s. v.S.(4),RE2A,1666f.

(Laeametov/Sarapeion,

Laedsmov/Sara-

pion).

[1] Term for the burial and cult sites of dead Apis bulls in Memphis (+ Apis [1]), and generally for cult buildings of the god > Serapis derived from it in the GraecoRoman world. [2] As a reflexion of presumably Egyptian terms such as pr-wsjr-hp a place name in Greek and Latin sources (see also [1]). According to the > Tabula Peutingeriana there were three such places in the Nile Delta; one was on the road leading from Heliopolis [1] to Clysma through the Wadi al-Tumailat, Hero (i.e. Héroonpolis)

and S. The precise location is uncertain. 1H.Kees, s.v.S., RE 2 A 2, 1923, 1665

Seraph(im)

[1] S. of Antioch. Mathematical geographer to whom Plin. HN 1,2 referred to as gnomonicus (‘measurer of shadows’). In 59 BC, Cicero (who was his contemporary) received S.’s geographical treatise from Atticus as the newest source for his planned Geographica but was hardly able to understand the content (Cic. Att. 2,4,1). In the treatise, Cicero encountered S.’s fierce criticism of > Eratosthenes [2] (ibid. 2,6,1). S. estimated the circumference of the > sun to be 18 times that of the earth (Anecd. Par. 1,373,25f) and created handy tables for converting civil into astronomic hours (Theon on Ptol.

WH. [2] Envoy of Ptolemaeus [18] XII in Rome along with Dioscorides [6]. When the two went to — Achillas on behalf of Caesar (Caes. B Civ. 3,109,3 f.), one of them was murdered (Liv. fr. 50; Cass. Dio 42,37,2). If it was S. who survived; he became strategos of Cyprus in 43 BC. He supported Cassius [I 10] against Cornelius {1 29] Dolabella and as a result was forced to flee to

Tyrus in July 4. From there Antonius [I 9] extradited him to Cleopatra [II 12] VII (App. B Civ. 4,262; 5,35). H.HEINEN,

JO.QU.

(Hebrew sdraf, plural s‘rafim, from the

verb srf, ‘burn’; Greek oggadi/seraphin, Latin seraphin). Old Testament term for the cobra (cf. Egyptian Uraeus). Apart from the natural threat from this animal (Dtn 8,15; Nm 21,9) an apotropaic aspect plays a particular role in the Old Testament tradition: a seraph attached to a pole repels a plague of snakes in the Israelites’ camp (Nm 21,7-10) 6-9 in AV, but not saying this. Finds of numerous seals, primarily from the 8th century BC, indicate the Egyptian origin of the idea. Seraphim could also be represented as winged. A definitive reinterpretation and development is found in Is 6,1-4, where the seraphim that surround God enthroned ina sanctuary. Covering their faces with their wings at the proclamation of God’s holiness, they express the idea that God’s numinosity is so potent that even those beings with the greatest power must protect themselves. With the development of a differentiated angelology

2W.

and H.G. GunpeL, Astrologumena, 1966, 113 f. 3 D. PINGREE, Review of [2], in: Gnomon 40, 1968, 278.

Rom

und Agypten von

51 bis 47 v. Chr.,

1966, 100-106.

W.A.

[3] In the rst/2nd cents. AD, S. was a friend of > Plutarchus [2] (Plut. De Pyth. or. 396d; Plut. Symp. 628a) who introduces him as a poet and writer of dithyrambs and characterises him as a Stoic and archaist. He is probably identical to the tragedian S. quoted by Stob. 3,10,2 (IrGF I 185). U.v.WiLtaMowiITz-MOELLENDOREF, KS 2, 1941, 217 f.

BZ.

[4] Egyptian astrologer who (among other soothsayers) predicted the impending death of Emperor > Caracalla in AD 217 while pointing to guard prefect Macrinus, who was to become the succeeding Emperor. Caracalla had S. thrown to a lion. After the lion failed to attack him, S. had to be killed in a different way (Cass. Dio

79(78),454 f.). 1 F.H. Cramer, Astrology in Roman Law and Politics, 1954,215

2A.Srein,s.v.S.(1),RE2A,1666.

WH.

305

306

[5] S. of Thmuis (In Greek often Daganiwv/ Sarapion). Bishop of Thmuis in Lower Egypt (c. AD 300 — after 370). The rhetorically talented S. began as an ascetic

of the sacred bull of > Memphis, in which -> Osiris, the god of the dead, is of greater theological significance. Within Egyptian sources, S. is documented in the Ptolemaic royal oath throughout the country. There he appears in the traditional phonetic form Wsjr-Hp next to > Isis and ‘all the gods of Egypt’ [3. 163-171]. Bilingual inscriptions from the > Serapeum of Alexandria [1] likewise indicate hieroglyphically this form as the equivalent of S. [5]. Apart from these attestations, however, he appears almost only in the area of Memphis. The extant Egyptian cult building in the Serapeum of Memphis dates back to > Nectanebus [2] II, but older cult buildings from the Ramessides period (13th/r2th cents. BC) are proven through inscriptions and spolia. PKairo CG 31045 (Saitic) and 50117 (Ptolemaic) are letters to the god Wsjr-Hp [2]. The Memphite Egyptian Wsjr-Hp is less exclusively exalted than the Greek S.: he is placed next to other deceased sacred bulls such as the Wsjr-Mr-wr (Osiris-> Mnevis) from Heliopolis [4. 12]. Likewise the living > Apis [1] is a central theme in Memphite documents besides Osiris-Apis. + Bull cults

and as the leader of a colony of monks (+ Monasticism)

and became bishop before AD 335. He had close connections to the father of monks Antonius [5] and bishop - Athanasius of Alexandria under whose orders he acted repeatedly (in 336/337 in the battle against followers of > Melitius of Lycopolis, and for the institution of a 14-day lent in Egypt). In 353, he represented the interests of Athanasius at the Imperial Court of Mediolanium [1] (Milan). After Athanasius fled in 3 56, S. turned against the Arians (> Arianism) and the socalled Tropicists (who had split off from them), who refuted the divinity of the Holy Ghost. S., who followed Athanasius in his theology, wrote the first Christian treatise against the Manichaeans in c. 330 (Adversus Manichaeos, CPG 2485; German translation [1. 164204]; > Mani). Along with letters to the successors of Antonius (CPG 2487) and to bishop Eudoxius (CPG 2486), numerous fragments and inauthentic texts have been transmitted [1. 67-105]. The so-called Euchologium, a collection of 30 prayers beginning with an anaphora (text, Engl. translation: [2. 46-81]) is probably a compilation of older material created in the mid 4th cent. Its genesis, liturgical placement and connection to S. are contested ([{3]; S. as the compiler: (22/83) fs 1 K.FirscHeEn,

1992 Thmuis

S. (Patristische Texte

und Studien

37),

2M.E. JoHNsoNn, The Prayers of Sarapion of (Orientalia Christiana Analecta 249), 1995

3 Id., Baptismal Rite and Anaphora in the Prayers of Sarapion of Thmuis, in: Worship 73, 1999, 140-168.

—_J.RI.

[6] S. of Alexandria. Otherwise unknown author of a singular funerary epigram from the ‘Garland’ of > Philippus [32]: a dialogue between a passer-by and the skull of a deceased “hard worker” written in a disheartened tone in courtly as well as audacious language (Anth. Pal. 7,400). GA IL1, 376 f.; 2, 409 f.

M.G.A.

Serapis (Zaeamc/Sarapis, also Légamic/Sérapis, Latin Serapis), original Egyptian bull god whose main cult was in Memphis; from the Hellenistic period, it was widespread throughout the Mediterranean region. I. Egypt

Il. GRAECO-ROMAN

ANTIQUITY

I. EGYPT The Greek form Sarapis (Zagasmic; Sadrapis), and in later sources Serapis (Léeamic; Sérapis), derives from the combination Wsjr-Hp (Osiris — Apis [1]), which is rendered as ooegamtc (oserapis) in the oldest sources from Memphis, e.g. in the Curse of Artemisia (UPZ 1;

4th cent. BC). Because the initial sound was understood as the article (6; ho) it became detached, resulting in the creation of the later form of the name. The Egyptian component of the god is based on the mortuary aspect

SERAPIS

1 D.Kesster, Die heiligen Tiere und der Konig, 1989, 56-101 2A.-G.MIGAuHID, Demotische Briefe an Gotter,

1986 3M.Miunas, Die hieroglyphischen Ahnenreihen der ptolemaischen K6nige, 1999 4 J.Ray, The Archive of Hor, 1976 5 A.RoweE, Discovery of the Famous Temple and Enclosure of S. at Alexandria, 1946 6 UPZ, vol. 1.

JO.QU.

Il. GRAECO-ROMAN ANTIQUITY The new ruler in Egypt, Ptolemy [1] I. Soter, the successor of Alexander [4] the Great, quickly recognized the importance of the S. cult; thus he gave 50 talents for the funeral of an Apis bull (Diod. Sic.1,84,8; [1]). The extant sources name the first three Ptolemaic rulers as the founders of the > Serapeum in Alexandria [2; 3]. At the behest of a dream, Ptolemy I. had the statue of Pluto(?) brought from Sinope to Alexandria [x]; the new god was called S.; > Bryaxis is said to have created the first cult statue (Tac. Hist. 4,83 f.; Plut. De Is. et Os. 361f-362e; Clem. Al. Protrepticus 4, 48,1-3). Greek sources equate S. with > Dionysus, > Hades, > Zeus and — Asclepius (Diod. Sic. 1,25). The iconographical feature of this syncretic god is the > kdlathos (‘basket’) with ears of corn on his head of curly hair [4]. In addition, the last part of the name S. may also be connected to the Greek king Apis, who died in Egypt. This ambiguity must have been beneficial to the dynastic claims of the — Ptolemies: as the tutelary god of Alexandria (moMevs; poliews), the Hellenistic $. evoked diverse cultural traditions as a partly Egyptian (Wsjr-Hp), partly Ptolemaic god. As such he assumed the characteristics of > Osiris, the original consort of Isis. Although S. became the recipient of prayers and dedications, appeared together with —> Isis on monuments and was closely connected to the royal family, he did not supplant Osiris in the context of mythology and ritual; the latter remained at the heart of the cult.

SERAPIS

308

307

The S. cult spread quickly in the Mediterranean region. There are temples for instance in Athens (Paus. 1,18,4f.; 4th cent. BC) and Corinth (Paus. 2,4,6). S. followers organized themselves as Sarapiastaiin thiasoi (> Thiasos; > Associations). The largest concentration of inscriptions and sanctuaries is found on Delos (sources: [5]). At first, there were only Egyptian priests of Egyptian gods, but from the end of the 3rd cent. BC there were also indigenous people and Athenian citizens [6]. S. was probably brought to Italy by traders. However, in the Republican and early Imperial Periods, S. appears there only in connection with Isis; in this context the cult of S. is also elevated to an official cult (sacrum publicum) in Rome. The determining factor for the connection of S. with the Imperial family was > Vespasianus, who was proclaimed princeps in Alexandria and whose special relationship with S. is documented (e.g. Tac. Hist. 4,81; [7]). Jos. BI 7,123 f. records that in AD 71, after their victory in the Jewish War, Vespasian and Titus had spent the night before their triumphal procession in the Iseum Campense. If not immediately afterwards, then certainly following Domitian’s extensive renovation after a fire in the 80s of the rst cent., a serapeum, attached to the temple of Isis, was also part of this temple complex [8]. Alexandrian coins and also a cameo depicting emperor > Hadrianus [II] and > Faustina [2] as S. and Isis may also be evidence of a reference to Ptolemaic-Greek tradition. [9. no. 137]. In the Hadrianic Period the connection with Helios (— Sol) is documented for the first time in the formula Aw “Hiiw peyarw Laeasmd. (Dii Helioi megaloi Sarapidi: ‘for Zeus Helios the Great S.’). Under Commodus, S. appears on coin embossments; the phrase Serapidi Conservatori refers to S.’ function as the protector of the cargo ships from the grain-rich provinces of Egypt. Portraits of Septimius Severus depict him with the iconographic features of S., especially with his forelocks. This demonstrates the converging of Roman and Pharaonic-Ptolemaic dynastic ideologies. In Alexandria, Caracalla dedicated the sword with which he is supposed to have murdered his brother and co-regent to S. (Cass. Dio 77,23,3; 78,7,3f.), and had a temple on the Quirinal in Rome built for him [10] — possibly as a counterpart to the temple of > Iuppiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitoline hill. Until the 5th cent. AD, S.also appears on coins which were minted on the occasion of the public vows at the beginning of the year (vota publica), and on > contorniati, which were distributed as New Year’s gifts to the population by the Roman emperors [11; 12]). Inthe 5th cent., S. may have had a religious significance for some, but for others, his function was that of an abstract concept; the grain from this province was an indispensable guarantee of public welfare (— salus publica) for followers of all religions, including Christians. As a result of Theodosius’ religious edict which affirmed Christianity as the sole state religion, the Alexandrian Serapeum was destroyed in AD 391 under the supervision of the Patriarch Theophilus.

1 D.J. Taompson, Memphis under the Ptolemies, 1988, 2 P.M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, vol. 1, 212-265 1972,246-259 3 J.STAMBAUGH, S. under the Early Ptolemies (EPRO 25),1972 4 G.CLERC,J.LECLANT, s. v. S., LIMC 7.1, 666-692; 7.2, 504-518 5L.VipMan, Sylloge Inscriptionum Religionis Isiacae et Sarapiacae (RGVV 28), 1969 6 F.DuNaND, Le culte d’Isis dans le bassin oriental de la Méditerranée (EPRO 26), 1973

7 A.HEnRICHS, Vespasian’s Visit to Alexandria, in: ZPE 3, 1968, 51-80 8 K.LeEMBKE, Das Iseum Campense, 1994 9T1T.TAMTiNnH,s. Vv. Isis, LIMC 5.1, 761-796; 5.2,

501-526 10 R.S. VALENZANI, s. v. Serapis, LTUR 4, 302f. 11 A.ALFOLDI, Die alexandrinischen Gotter und die Vota Publica am Jahresbeginn, in: JoAC 8/9, 1965-66, 53-87 12 Id., E.ALFOLDI, Die Kontorniat-Medaillons, 1990.

G.HOLBL, s.v. S., LA 2, 870-874; 1973; R.MERKELBACH,

W. HORNBORSTEL, S.,

Isis regina, Zeus S., 1996; S.A.

TakAcs, Isis and S. in the Roman World, 1995; L. VipMAN, Isis und S. bei den Griechen (RGVV 29), 1970.

S.TA.

Serbs (Zéoefot; Sérboi). The early history of the S. and the Croatians is known in outline only due to the condition of the sources: Aside from a brief mention in the Carolingian Imperial Annals (Annales regni Francorum, MGH

SS 1,209: ad Sorabos, quae natio magnam

Dalmatiae partem obtinere dicitur) from the 9th cent. AD, we only have the report by Constantinus [1] Porphyrogennetus (de administrando imperio 32 Moravcsik/JENKINS) following the two —- contradictory — chapters on Croatia (ch. 30 and 31). The report claims that the S. had been invited by Emperor > Heraclius [7] in AD 623 to move from their home “beyond

the Turks (meaning: the Hungarians) ... to the neighbourhood of Franconia” into their later settlements. The same report also ascribes their christianization to Heraclius (see below). In the following (lines 30 ff.), Constantinus offers a report about the earliest creation of a Serbian state and its relationship between > Byzantium and the > Bulgarian Empire which was expanding towards the south west (cf. [2. 35 ff.; 4]). As is the case for the other chapters dealing with the early medieval history of — Illyricum, one cannot clearly distinguish between old tradition, the adoption of stereotypes of Byzantine Imperial ideology and rhetoric, the projection of conditions of the 9th/roth cent. back onto the 7th cent., and downright speculation (as in the supposed derivation of the probably Iranian name S. from Lat. servi). Even the list of rulers from the 9th/roth cents. that follows is not without its chronological and factual problems (cf. comm. on Const. Porph., p. 130137). While Constantinus’ report was unconditionally accepted up to the 2nd half of the roth cent., the critical school of Slavic historiography rejected it in its entirety (above all [1. 107 ff.]; cf. in detail [3. 139 ff.]). A shift did not occur until the early 20th cent. when Oriental sources confirmed the existence of northern S. By now it seems certain that a connection to the Sorbs who at that time had not yet been christianised cannot

SERENA

BO9

310

be dismissed as pure speculation: According to these sources, a militarily organised tribal alliance of $. who had migrated from the north began to rule over the Slavs who had settled earlier in the region of future Serbia (cf. [3. 158 ff.], altogether more critical than [4]). Early Serbia was therefore a > sclavinia where there was a substantial break with Roman-Byzantine tradition. In contrast to comparable pre-state forms of government in the region (e.g. that of Zakhlum), the core of the Serbian state was largely cut off from the coast and the traditions of the Latin Church that continued there. Although it is ultimately unclear whether christianization occurred from Byzantium, from the coast or from Bulgaria (cf. [5; 2. 62 ff.]: finally between AD 867-874), the S. adopted the Cyrillic form of ~ Church Slavonic as the liturgical language from the Bulgarians and their literature remained dependent on them for cents. The separation from Byzantine suzerainty and the growth of Serbian power under Great Zupan Stefan Nemanja did not occur until the end of the 12 cent.; the intermediate position between Latin and orthodox Christianity remained extant: Stefan was baptized twice, according to Catholic and Byzantine rite. — SERBIA

dence. A bishop’s see in the 4th century, in 343 a synod met there to solve the Arian dispute (— Arianism). There is evidence of many cults (Tyche, Serapis, Apollo

1K.JrrECEK,

Geschichte

der

Serben,

vol.1,

1911

2 G. PopsKaLsky, Theologische Literatur des Mittelalters in Bulgarien und Serbien 865-1459, 2000 3R.KarTiCi¢, Literatur- und Geistesgeschichte des kroatischen FrihMittelalter 1999 4B. FERJANCIC, Dolazak Hrvata i Srba na balkansko Poloustvo, in: Zbornik Radova vizantoloékog instituta, 35, 1996, 117-154 (Serbian with French abstract) 5 Ly. Maxsimovic, Pokrstavanje Srba i Hrvata, in: ibid., 155-174 (Serbian with French abstract).

S.Cirkovic, La Serbie au Moyen Age, 1992, 13-35; S. GavRILOvIC¢ (ed.), Istorija Srbskog naroda u Sest knjiga, vol. 1, 71994, part 2, 109-169 (with contributions by J. Kovacevic, S. CIRKOVIC a. 0.).

JN.

Serdica (Seodini/Serdike, modern Sofia). I. EARLY HISTORY

UNTIL THE ROMAN

PERIOD

II. ByZANTINE PERIOD

I. EARLY HISTORY UNTIL THE ROMAN PERIOD Settlement of the Thracian Serdi on the Oescus [1] between the Scombrus and Haemus mountain ranges, a nodal point of roads (It. Ant. 13 5,4; Tab. Peut 7,5; Ptol. 3,11,8); modern Sofia. Settled since the 8th/7th centu-

ries BC, in the sth/4th centuries BC S. developed under the kings of the > Odrysae into a place with an urban character. In the course of his Thracian campaigns in 29/8 BC Licinius [I 13] Crassus also marched victoriously through Serdi territory (Cass. Dio 51,25,4 f.). From AD 45 S. was the location of a Roman fort, from the time of Trajan onwards a Roman colonia. Minting is recorded from Marcus [2] Aurelius until Gallienus. From the time of Aurelianus S. was the capital of the province of Dacia Ripensis, from — Diocletianus of Dacia Mediterranea, under > Constantinus [1] I a resi-

Iatros,

the

Thracian

Horseman,

Zeus

Hypsistos,

Mithras, Cybele, Dionysus). M.SrancevA,

Serdica au I*-IV° siécle de notre ére, in:

Izvestija na arheologiceskija institut 37, 1987, 61-743 B.GERrov, Zemevladenieto v rimska Trakiha i Mizija, 1980, 121-123; TIR K 34 Naissus, 1976, 113; A. FROVA,

SVS

a PE 82.8) f:

Lv.B.

II. BYZANTINE PERIOD

Procop. Aed. 4,1,31 (Zagd.m/Sardiké) mentions the renewal of the walls by > Iustinianus [1]. This measure was part of the Byzantine attempts to secure the region

south of the Danube limes against the > Slavs. Following the Slav-Avarian attacks S$. became an isolated outpost of Byzantium, which did not succumb to attacks by Khan Krum until 809 [3; 4]. From then on, with brief interruptions S. was part of the First Bulgarian Kingdom (> Bulgaria), (Slavonic Sredec < Serdica, from which Byzantine ToiaditCa; incorrect: [10]) until it was regained by Byzantium in 1018 for almost 200 years. Archaeologically [5. 269-277] the church of Saint George, which can be traced back to the 4th cent., is noteworthy (in detail: [2]) as is the cathedral of Saint Sophia, which gave the city its present name during the High Middle Ages; its current state (several precursor buildings) may be traceable to the 6th cent. [6; 7. 25 5257]. Near this church is one of the most important late antique necropoleis of Bulgaria (4th—6th cent.), partly decorated with frescoes [8]. The ancient plan of the city can still be traced to some extent in the layout of Sofia today [9]. Remains of defences and thermal baths also survive. 1H. WitHetmy, Hochbulgarien, vol. 2, 1936 2A.E. Kirin, The Rotunda of St. George and the Late Antique Serdica, 2000 3 V. GIUZELEV, Die spatantike und frihmittelalterliche Stadt auf bulgarischem Territorium (6. bis to Jh.), in: R. PILLINGER (ed.), Spatantike und friihbyzantinische Kultur zwischen Orient und Okzident, 1986, 21-24 4]. VENEDIKOV,S., in: V. BESEVLIEV, J. [RMSCHER (eds.), Antike und Mittelalter in Bulgarien, 1960, 161-165 5 R.F. Hopinorr, Bulgaria in Antiquity. An Archeological Introduction, 1975 6B.D. Fivov, Sofijskata Tsrpkva Sv. Sofija, 1913 7 R.KRAUTHEIMER, Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture, 41986

8 R.PILLINGER et al., Corpus der spatantiken und frihchristlichen Wandmalereien Bulgariens, 1999 9 M.StanceEvA, Patrimoine archéologique de Sofia, in: Académie Bulgare de Sciences (Institut archéologique et Musée), S., vol. 2, 1989, 6-36 (Bulg.) 10 V.GyJUZELEV, s.v. Sofia, LMA, 7, 2024 f. (with bibliogr.) 11 R. BROWNING, s.v. S., ODB 3, 1876 (with bibliogr.). JN.

Serena. Born c. AD 365 in Spain, daughter of > Honorius [2], niece of > Theodosius I, who held in great esteem the highly educated S., adopted her after the death of her father in 379(?) and in 384 married her to > Stilicho. Children of this marriage were > Maria [I 3],

311

312

» Eucherius [2] and > Thermantia. S. gained significant influence at the court of > Honorius [3], who she had cared for when he was a child. In 408 she came into opposition with Stilicho but nevertheless fell into disgrace when he was killed, was prosecuted and executed for high treason in Rome. Claudianus [2], who owed her a number of favours, wrote a panegyric (Laus Serenae) to her (Claud. Carmina minora 30).

cites and uses, only the title Res Reconditae (at least 5 books), suggesting grammatical/antiquarian content, is known. S. is often also used by others in Late Antiquity (as in Arnobius [1], Donatus [3], Sidonius Apollinaris, Lydus Mag. 3,32, with an incorrect date).

SERENA

PLRE x; 824:

K.G.-A.

Serenus [1] Quinctius S$. Sammonicus (also Quintus Serenius). Author of the Liber Medicinalis, a collection of thera-

peutic recipes which can be neither dated nor identified; Q. has at times been identified with S. [2] Sammonicus or with his son (Septimius [II 6] $. Sammonicus; both died at the beginning of the 3rd cent. AD). The collection (dating between the 2nd and 4th cents. AD) cannot be chronologically ordered with any accuracy. It is written in hexameters and contains 64 recipes, divided into two sections: recipes for illnesses affecting individual organs listed from head to foot (vv. 11-788 = recipes 1-41); general ailments such as injuries, fever, fractures and dislocations, insomnia, catalepsy, epilepsy, jaundice, toothache, burns or poisoning (vv. 789-end = reci-

1PIR'S 122 27.CHAMPLIN, S. S., in: HSPh 85, 1981, 189-194 3 K.SALLMANN, in: HLL 4, 597 f. (§ 484, no. 3).

[3] (2éonvoc; Sérénos). Mathematician from Egypt (Antinoupolis), probably lived in the 4th cent. AD. S. wrote two works (surviving complete) on conic sections: In Teoi xvaAivdgov touts (Peri kylindrou tomés, ‘Cutting a cylinder’; ed. [x. 2-117], translation [2; 4. 164]) he proves theorems on the equivalence of sections of cylinders and cones and on the projection of a cylinder onto a plane. In Iegi x®vou tous (Peri kénou tomés, ‘Cutting a cone’; ed. [1. 120-303], translation [33 4. 65-167]) he deals with theorems and exercises on sections through the vertex of the cone, which are therefore triangular. S.’s commentary on ~— Apollonius [13]’s Kwvixa (Konikd, ‘Conic sections’) is lost, apart from a fragment in > Theon of Smyrna (ed. [x. XVIII f.]). 1 J. L. HerperG (ed.), Sereni Antinoensis opuscula, 1896

2 E.Nizzg, Serenus von Antissa: Ueber den Schnitt des

pes 42-64).

Cylinders, 1860

The sources cannot be determined with precision; the work exhibits numerous features in common with > Celsus [7] and the > Medicina Plinii, which has not been dated precisely. As the author himself states, it was intended for non-specialists; this is the reason for his verse form, which is traditionally interpreted as facilitating learning by rote. The editio princeps was probably published in Venice in 1474.

Schnitt des Kegels, 1861 4 P. VER EECKE, Serenus d’Antinoé: Le livre ‘De la section du cylindre’ et le livre ‘De la

Eprtions: F.LomBarpi, Il Liber medicinalis di Quinto Sereno Sammonico, 1956; R.PEPIN, Quintus Serenus (Serenus Sammonicus), Liber medicinalis, 1950 (w. French transl.); C. RUFFATO, La medicina in Roma antica: il Liber medicinalis di Quinto Sereno Sammonico, 1996 (w. Italian transl.); F. VOLLMER, Quinti Sereni Liber Medicinalis, 1916. LITERATURE: K.-D.FISCHER, K.SMOLAK, s.v. Q.S., HLL 5, 1989, 315-320 (§ 556); F.E. Kinp, s. v. S. (7)

Sammonicus, RE 2 A, 1675-1677; J.H. PHitiips, The Structure of the Liber medicinalis Quinti Sereni, in: G.SaBBAH (ed.), Le latin médical (MPalerne 10), 1991, 337-350; P.VAN DE WOESTIJNE, Index verborum in Quinti Sereni librum medicinalem, 1941. A.TO.

31Id., Serenus von Antissa, Ueber den

section du céne’, 1929 5 71.L. Heatu, A History of Greek Mathematics, vol. 2, 1921, 519-526

6 I. BULMER-THOMas, Dictionary of Scientific Biography, 12, 1975, 313-315. MF.

Seres (Zfoec/Séres, Latin also Serae), the ‘silk people’ (cf. Chinese si, ‘silk’ [12]). The mention of = silk (oneixd/sérikd), formerly ascribed to > Nearchus [2] ({1]; FGrH 133 F 19), turned out to be an addition by

Strabo [5. 110°]; the citation of Apollodorus of Artemita in Str. 11,11,1 is equally questionable: [1. 347; 5.109]. The silk parapetdsmata (‘curtains’) of Caesar’s games (Cass. Dio 43,24,2) and the Parthians’ silk standards in the war with Crassus (Flor. Epit. 1,46,8) are unequivocal cases of Chinese goods. It is Augustan literature (Verg. G. 2,121; Hor. Carm. 1,12,56; 3,29,273

Ov. Am. 1,14,6) that provides the first indications of the S. and thus of the silk trade, which was indirectly introduced by deliveries from the emperor Wu (141-87 BC) to the Xiongnu, who in turn took the silk farther

[2] S. Sammonicus. Famous scholar and moral critic in the era of Septimius [II 7] Severus (AD 193-211; Macr. Sat. 3,16,6 ff.), and, like the latter, probably of African origin (for identification cf. > Septimius [II 6] S. Sammonicus). The SHA (Geta 5,6) has S., who was prob-

ably tutor to the two princes, as a friend of Severus’s son Geta, to whose brother > Caracalla he is therefore supposed to have fallen victim at the end of 211 (SHA Car. 4,4). Of his books, some dedicated to Septimius Severus, some to Caracalla, which > Macrobius [1] often

west [6. 85]. According to Apollodorus of Artemita (FGrH 779 F 7) the Bactrian Greeks encountered the S. during one of their advances; there is a lack of further details. According to Plin. HN 6,87, the S. were blond and blue-eyed; the likelihood of this has been increased by the discovery of blond dry-mummies in the north of Xinjiang. Chinese information also speaks of blond peoples in central Asia, the Wusun. Apollodorus’s account presumably refers to an advance by the Greeks against Kashgar, which may have been known to the Romans as > Sera.

313

314

Initial geographical ideas of the S. were inadequate. They were placed to the east of the - Scythians as residents of the Serian Ocean (GLM 6,30; 26,6; 45,38;

I. REPUBLICAN

74,6; 88,38; 92,6; Oros. 1,2,14; 47) or quite generally with these and the Indians in the East (Mela 1,2,11;

3,7,60; Sil. Pun. 6,4; 15,793; 17,595). Plin. HN 6,54 is Inconsistent

(see also [x. 55 f.]); 7,27;

12,2;

12,17;

12,38; 12,84. The Peripl. m.r. 64 GGM 303 has more accurate information when it speaks of the great city of OtvavThinai in the north of the island of > Chryse; cf. Livat i) @ivaw/ Sinai é Tinai in Ptol. 7,3,6. Similarly for TcCiviota/Tzinista (cf. Old Indian Cimasthana, Persian Cinistan, Syrian Sinastan) in Cosmas Indicopleustes (2,45 ff.). Thinae is the capital of > Sinae [2], the term for southern China; contra [7. 145]. Thinai was known from the sea route, in which Indian intermediary trade played a large part. In the annals of the Han dynasty [x. 49 f.] there is talk of a legation from the ruler Andun (Marcus [2] Aurelius Antoninus) from Dagin (Rome).

Finds at Oc-Eo in the Mekong Delta also indicate intensive sea traffic [2. 84]. From a later period there is an account — going back to the land link with China — by Theophylactus Simocattes (7,7,11 DE Boor) of the powerful city of Tavycot/Taugast; cf. the Turkish name for China, Tavga¢) in northern China [7. 169]. The S.’s love of freedom and their gentleness (Plin. HN 6,54; Solin. 51; Amm. Marc. 23,6,67; Euseb. Praep. evang. 6,120,12 ff.), their justice (Mela 3,7,60) and the Great Wall (Amm. 23,6,64) were famous. The most important goods to reach the West by sea and by the caravan road [7] were: iron (Plin. HN 34,145; Oros. 6,13,2), bows and arrows (Chariton 6,4,2), cushions (Hor. Epod. 8,15) and, above all, > silk (ongixdv/sérikon; Latin sericum, seta). Information in Paus. 6,26,6 on the cultivation of silkworms (ono/sér) is to some extent correct. 1 F. ALTHEIM, Weltgeschichte Asiens im griechischen Zeitalter, vol. 1, 1947. 2/Id., Literatur und Geschichte im ausgehenden Altertum, vol. 2, 1950 3 Id., Geschichte der Hunnen, vol. 5,1962 4M.WHEELER, Der Fernhandel des rémischen Reiches, 1965 5 W.W. Tarn, The Greeks in Bactria and India, +1966 6 H. FRANKE, R.TRAUZETTEL, Das Chinesische Kaiserreich, 1968 7 N.PIGuLEWskajaA, Byzanz auf den Wegen nach Indien, 1969 8M.G. Rascuxe, New Studies in Roman Commerce with the East, in: ANRW II 9.2, 1978, 604-1378.

Sergia. Elder sister of L. Sergius > Catilina, married to the Roman equestrian Q. Caecilius [I 2], who was alleg-

edly killed by his brother-in-law in 81 (Q. Tullius Cic. commentariolum petitionis 9; cf. Ascon. 84 C). K-LE.

Sergiopolis see > Rusafa Sergius. Name of an old patrician family. The tribus Sergia was named after it. The family is attested to have attained consulship in the sth cent. BC (S. [I 5]) but did not achieve lasting importance in the historical period. The attempt of its best-known member, L.S. > Catilina, to attain the consulship once more failed with the Catilinarian Conspiracy.

SERGIUS PERIOD

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {I 1] S., M. (?) According to Plutarch (Sulla 32,3; Cicero 10,3), the brother of L.S. > Catilina, killed by him in 81

and posthumously put on the proscriptions list. ProbK.-L.E. ably a later invention. {I 2] S., (L.?) Son of > Catilina from his first marriage, whom his father is alleged to have murdered to induce ~ Aurelia [2] Orestilla to marry him (Sall. Catil. 15,2; Val. Max. 9,1,9; App. B Civ. 2,4). [1 3] S., L. Probably a freedman of > Catilina. Cicero mentions him (Cic. Dom. 13 f.; 21; 89) as a follower of — Clodius [I 4]. He may be identical to the S. mentioned in CIL I* 1882.

J.BA.

{I 4] S. Catilina, L. The conspirator > Catilina. [I 5] S. Fidenas, L. Cos. I in 437, cos. IJ in 429, consular

tribune in 433, 424 and 418 BC (MRR 1,58 f.; 62; 65; 68; 72; InscrIt 131,26; 95-97; 370-377). Contrary to Liv. 4,17,7 f., where S.’ cognomen — Fidenas is ex-

plained from his victory as cos. I over the Fidenates, modern scholarship connects the cognomen the region of + Fidenae, which probably bounded on the tribus Sergia where S. was born and which took its name from his gens, and with his participation in a three-man commission which may be connected with this. This commission, according to Livy (4,30,5 f.), was deployed in 428 to investigate and punish the support which Fidenae had given to the Veientians in their war with Rome (cf. to this matter [1. 560]). In his third consular tribunate, he suffered a defeat at the hands of the Aequi (Liv. 4,46,5 f.). 1R.M.

Ocitviz,

A Commentary

on Livy Books

1-5,

1965.

[I 6] S. Fidenas, L. Member of the college of consular tribunes of 397 BC, which resigned before the end of its year in office as vitio creatum (‘faultily elected’) (MRR 1,86 f.; Inscrlt 13,1,28 f.; 384 f.), and a member in 3.94 of an embassy with a votive gift taken from the booty from conquered — Veii (Liv. 5,28,1—5).

[I 7] S. Fidenas, M. (InscrIt 13,1,28 f.; 380-383). According to Livy (5,8,4-9,8; 5,11,4-12,2), the discord

between S. and his colleague Verginius during S.’ second consular tribunate led to the liberation of > Veii which was besieged by a Roman army under their joint leadership, whereupon the entire college was compelled to abdicate. A severe financial penalty was imposed on S. the following year. CMU. [I 8] S. Orata, C. Became famous for his wealth and his sense for innovation. He built splendid villas around the Lucrine Lake (> Lacus Lucrinus), which he then sold. Later, he began to farm oysters there (Val. Max. 9,1,1; Plin. HN 9,168). For this reason, he probably also bought back property from > Marius {I 7] Gratidianus. In the case concerning the property’s encumbrance, S. was represented by the orator > Licinius [I ro] Crassus (Cic. De or. 1,178). S.’ business sense offended the aristocratic values (clearly: Plin. HN 9,168), and he is thus

SERGIUS

316

315

mostly condemned as a negative example of luxuria

tribe of the Leuathae (Aevé0a/Leudthai), and sought

(> Luxury). In this spirit too, S. was said to owe his

help from his uncle Solomon at Carthage. He is attested with a command in Italy in 545/7. — Procopius [3]

cognomen to his favourite fish, the ‘golden trout’ (aurata/orata) (Varro, Rust. 3,3,10; Columella 8,16,5; Macrob. Sat. 3,15,2 f.). J.D’ArMs, Romans on the Bay of Naples, 1970.

J.BA.

(Vand. 2,22,2; Arc. 5,28) gives a negative assessment of

his character and abilities. STEIN, Geschichte des spatrémischen Reiches 2, 547-5 51; 553; PLRE 3B, 1124-1128, Nr. 4.

{1 9] S. Silus, L. Father of > Catilina, lived in modest circumstances (cf. on the son, Q. Tullius Cic. Commentariolum petitionis 9; Sall. Catil. 5,7). K.-LE. [1 10] S. Silus, M. As praetor urbanus in 197 BC, ina

speech still known to Pliny the Elder, he described i.a. his countless campaign wounds inflicted since 218 BC, including the loss of his right hand, and his two escapes from captivity with > Hannibal [4] (Plin. HN 7,104106). He thereby defended himself against the accusation of colleagues that his disabilities excluded him from carrying out sacrifices. Great-grandfather of ~ Catilina. TA.S. II. IMPERIAL PERIOD [II 1] L. S. Paullus. Senator, probably from —> Antioch [5] in Pisidia; curator riparum et alvei Tiberis under

Claudius. HALFMANN,

101;

H. HALFMANN, Die Senatoren aus den

kleinasiatischen Provinzen, in: EOS 2, 603-650.

ET.

[II 8] S. of ReS‘aina (Léoytoc; Sérgios). Archiatros (‘chief physician’), Syrian translator and scholar (d. AD 536). He is best known as the translator into Syriac of several of + Galen’s writings, of Pseudo-Aristotle’s Peri Koésmou and of the Pseudo-Dionysian corpus (> Dionysius [54]). The early Syriac translation of Porphyry’s (> Porphyrius) Eisagoge and Aristotle’s (> Aristoteles [6]) Categoriae are often ascribed to him by scholars, but there is no clear evidence for this. S. wrote two Syriac introductions to Aristotle’s logical works, and a short treatise on the spiritual life, which prefaces his translation of the Pseudo-Dionysian corpus. A Syriac treatise under his name on the ‘Causes of the Universe’ is in fact a translation of > Alexander [23] of Aphrodisias’ work of this title, lost in Greek (S$. may have been the translator). Barhebraeus (d. 1286) was probably correct in stating that S. was the first person to translate Greek philosophical and medical texts into Syriac.

proconsul mentioned in Acts 13,7 with whom the apos-

A.BAuMSTARK, Lucubrationes syro-graecae, in: Jahrbicher fiir classische Philologie Suppl. 21/5, 1894, 3 58-384; H.HuGonnarpD Rocug, Aux origines de l’exégése orientale de la logique d’Aristote: Serge de Resh‘aina, in: Jour-

tle Paul (— Paulus [II 2]) had dealings.

nal Asiatique 277, 1989, 1-17; Id., Les Catégories d’Ari-

{II 2] Q. S. Paullus. Proconsul of Cyprus c. AD 46/48 (SEG 20,302). Probably brother of S. [II 1]. He is the

HALEMANN, 101 f.

[II 3] L. S. Paullus. Probably son of S. [II 1]; cos. suff., probably in AD 7o. H.Ha.rMann, Die Senatoren aus den kleinasiatischen Provinzen, in: EOS 2, 603-650.

[Ii 4] L. S. Paullus. Descendant of S. [II 3]. Cos. ord.

iterum in AD 168. Suffect consul before this, probably under Antoninus Pius. Maybe identical with the proconsul of Asia, Servilius Paulus, in Eusebius (Hist. eccl. 4,26,3). Also praefectus urbi around 168. HALFMANN, 163 f.

[II 5] L. Serg[ius Paullus? M. Antoni]Jus Zeno. Praetorian governor of Cilicia under > Gordianus [3] III. AE

1990, 991. {Il 6] L. S. Volusius Matidius Heracleidianus. Procon-

sul of Lycia-Pamphylia, probably in the 3rd cent. AD, honoured by the city of Patara. S.SAHIN, Epigraphische Mitteilungen aus Antalya I, in: EA 31, 1999, sof. W.E.

[Il 7] Nephew of — Solomon [2], magister utriusque militiae under Justinian (— Iustinianus [1]). Last attest-

ed in AD 559 as patricius, he became governor (dux) of the province of Tripolitana (North Africa) in 543/4. Here, he proved diplomatically no match for the Berber

stote

... dans

un commentaire

syriaque

de Serge de

Resh‘aina, in: Documentie studi sulla tradizione filosofica medievale 8, 1997, 339-363; Id., Note sur Sergius de Resh‘aina ..., in: G. ENDREsS, R. KRUK (eds.), The Ancient

Tradition in Christian and Islamic Hellenism, 1997, 121-

143.

S.BR.

{II 9] S. lof Constantinople (Zéey.oc; Sérgios). Patriarch of + Constantinople AD 610-638. S. was born in Syria around 580, and later lived at Constantinople, where immediately prior to his election as patriarch he had occupied the office of deacon of > Hagia Sophia. After the overthrow of > Phocas [4] in 610, S. crowned the new emperor, > Heraclius [7], with whom he rapidly developed a close relationship of personal trust. At the siege of Constantinople by the Avars and Persians in 626, he was, together with the — patrikios Bonus, regent for the absent emperor’s son Constantinus, still a minor, and his defence of the city was successful. Soon after taking office, S. began the search for a new formula of unity to reconcile the Orthodox Church with + Monophysitism in Syria, Palestine and Egypt. The resolution of this issue became urgent when these regions returned to Byzantine rule at the end of the Persian War in 628, after lengthy enemy occupation. The union of the churches was in fact announced in 633, but failed because of resistance from both sides. Shortly before the death of S., Heraclius issued the so-called Ekthesis pisteds (‘Statement of the Faith’), at S.’ urging

318

317

and with the assent of Pope Honorius I. This sought to end the schism by forbidding discussion of the energies in Christ and propagating ~ Monotheletism, i.e. the dogma of the single will in two natures. However, shortly before, Syria and Palestine (including Jerusalem) had fallen into Arab hands, and the political goal of the efforts towards unity had hence become obsolete. The Ekthesis pisteds was revoked in 648, and S. himself was posthumously declared a heretic at the 681 Council of Constantinople, when Monotheletism was condemned. J.L. vAN DieTen, Geschichte der Patriarchen, 1972, 1-56,

174-178;

F.CarcioNneE,

Sergio

Onorio I nella controversia 1985.

di Costantinopoli

monotelita

ed

del VII secolo, ALB.

Seriphos (Zéeupoc/Sériphos). Island of the western ~» Cyclades (x1 km in diameter, 75 km? in area, with Mount Turlos at 486m elevation; marble, granite, gneiss) with numerous bays and three islets (modern Bous, Piperi and Seriphopoulo). S. had been settled by the 3rd millennium BC (early Cycladic idols) and the + Iones took possession of it in the historical period (Hdt. 8,48). S. resisted Persian demands for tribute and in 480 BC took part on the Greek side in the battle of Salamis [1] (Hdt. 8,46; 48; > Persian Wars). The island was a member of the > Delian League, from 377 BC of the > Athenian League. It was repeatedly afflicted by pirates. From 84 BC S. was Roman. The ancient polis of S. was at modern Seriphos in the southeast of the island. Despite ore deposits (iron in magnetite and haematite, lead, copper), S. was mocked for its poverty and in the Imperial Period was a place of banishment (Tac. Ann. 2,853 4,21; Juv. 6,564; 10,170). The mute frogs of S. were famous (Ael. NA 3,38; Plin. HN 8,227). Cf. also Pind. Pyth. 12,21; Aristoph. Ach. 542; Scyl. 58; Str. 10,5,33 10; Ptol. 3,15,31. Coins: HN 490. Inscriptions: Syll.3 153,12; 933 562,81; IG XII 5, 509-519. PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN 4, 74-76; H. RIEDL, W. KERN (eds.),

Geographische Studien auf Seriphos, 1986; H. KALETSCH, s.v. S., in: LAUFFER, Griechenland, 611 f.

Serius. Old Italic nomen gentile (SCHULZE 229). [1] C. Iunius S. Augurinus. Cos. ord. in AD

AKU.

132

(DEGRASSI, FCIR 38).

[2] C. S. Augurinus. Son of S. [1]. Cos. ord. in AD 156, procos. of Africa in 169/170 [1. 69 f.]. Presumably he, and his father too, already had patrician rank; cf. CIL

VI 1979. 1 THomMasson, Fasti Africani.

W.E.

Sermaei (LeQuatoi, Sermaioi). A city, mentioned from

450/449 until 432/1 in the Athenian tribute lists (ATL 398 f.) and reassessed in 421 BC, probably to be located on the western side of the Chalcidian peninsula; its later history is unknown. M. ZaAHRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 223-225.

MZ.

SERMON,

HOMILY

Sermon, Homily J. GENERAL REMARKS, CONCEPT AND ORIGINS Il. SPEAKER, PLACE AND TIME

III. History OF

THE ANCIENT CHRISTIAN SERMON

I. GENERAL REMARKS, CONCEPT AND ORIGINS The term sermon refers to a type of speech (Greek dutria/homilia, Latin sermo) given, beginning in the

2nd cent. AD, as part of an ancient Christian religious service (+ Cult, Cultus IV) following readings from the Holy Scriptures (> Bible). The sermon dealt either with topics of the readings or with the current feast or festal period of the liturgical year, but also and increasingly with — saints (B). Methods of interpretation that had been generally introduced (e.g. > Allegoresis) would make the texts refer to the needs of a specific Christian congregation and usually, implications for the proper conduct of a Christian were drawn. It was common to derive exempla from the Bible. In addition, a Christian sermon was supposed to serve what > Paulus [2] (e.g. 1 Cor 14:5) described as the oikodome (‘spiritual edification’) of the congregation. The concept of homilia, which originally meant an informal conversation between philosophers and their pupils (ot 6uAntai/hoi homilétai), was disseminated in the Latin West and elsewhere by > Hieronymus and Tyrannius > Rufinus [6] [1. 170-172]; initially the Greek /6gos and Latin tractatus were also used in the same sense, but they gradually lost currency in favour of homilia. At first the Latin praedicatio recalled the function of a sermon in the context of the general proclamation (kéryssein) of the gospel; it was not until the 4th cent. that it became a terminus technicus. Occasionally the term ‘homily’ is used in scholarly work to refer to a sermon that interprets the Biblical text verse by verse; this practice is not based on an ancient model. The prehistory of the Christian sermon includes the ‘missionary speeches’ of the apostle Paul [2] and other members of the first and second generations when they were held in Jewish synagogues (cf. e.g. Acts 18:4); otherwise they are considered part of the wider category of Christian instructional speeches. It is difficult to draw a terminological distinction between these and sermons during the early period. A Christian sermon in the true sense is a sermon given within the framework of the religious service; it developed out of the Jewish practice of interpreting readings from the Bible during services at the synagogue. There is evidence of this genre in the form of a few synagogue sermons that have been preserved in the Armenian tradition of the works of ~ Philo [12] of Alexandria. Formally, both Jewish and Christian sermons were influenced from the beginning by > diatribe as a type of speech (details: + Diatribe C), which is evident, for example, in one of the earliest preserved examples, the Pascha (Pesach) sermon of — Meliton [3] of Sardes, where the preacher uses the stylistic devices of anaphora, antithesis, exclamations, oxymoron, paronomasia, rhetorical questions and repetition, among others.

319

320

These devices are also found in the sermons of less prominent and less educated Christian theologians, as evidenced by an anonymous Easter sermon from the 4th cent. which has been passed down under the name of > Epiphanius [1] of Salamis (anaphorical anésté, ‘He is risen’: (Ps.-)Epiphanius, Homilia in Christi resurrectionem PG 43, 465). They also exhibited formal characteristics of the Biblical texts that were the subject of interpretation, particularly parallel phrases. Along with such ceremonial speeches, many Christian sermons were also characterized by spontaneous responses to the audience’s conduct and as such had some features in common with dialogue, in tune with the oral nature of sermons [2]. For similar reasons, there is frequent use of redundancy, filler words and other stylistic peculiarities of oral speech; in many cases the train of thought is less argumentative than cumulative. It is not unusual to find extemporaneous speaking based on notes. Many sermons were passed down in shorthand form which was reworked to a greater or lesser degree; others were revised for later reuse and shortened by deleting characteristics of oral speech. Occasionally they were also published in the form of a commentary or an exegetical treatise. The sermon as cultic speech, whether Jewish or Christian, is an ‘innovation’ that cannot be traced back directly to an exactly corresponding pagan type of speech [3. 25].

made between the ambo and the enclosure around the

SERMON, HOMILY

II]. SPEAKER, PLACE AND TIME

Speaker, place and time mark Christian sermons as cultic speech: As a rule, sermons were given by the leader of the congregation or the bishop (> Episkopos [2]), but sometimes also by local or visiting prominent theologians (—> Origenes [2]), presbyters or elders. Owing to a more differentiated hierarchy and the emergence of a normative Christian doctrine, they were theoretically restricted to the bishop beginning in the 3rd cent. (Socr. 5,22,58; Ambrosiaster in epistulam ad Efesios 4,12,4 and Coelestinus I, Epist. 21,2), a restriction that did not

remain unchallenged (Epiphanius, Panarion 75,3,3 and Hier. Epist. 52,7). Sermons by presbyters continued to be passed down (— Severianus of Gabala and > Leontius [6] of Byzantium); in isolated cases (e.g. > Origenes [2]: Eus. HE 6,19,16) there were also reports of sermons given by lay preachers. Monks, usually abbots, would preach for the congregation (Regula Benedicti 2), only under special circumstances in public (Greg. M. Dial. 1,4,8). As a rule sermons would be held in Christian cultic buildings — in other words, until the 4th cent. in socalled ‘house churches’ (> Dura-Europus) and later primarily in municipal (bishop’s) churches, occasionally also in a baptistery, burial chapel, cemetery or other memorial site, sometimes also in the imperial palace or a private venue. The preacher would speak either from the bishop’s cathedra or from a special pulpit; there is archaeological evidence of a variety of types of raised ambos located in the central nave, either in the middle or at the edge of that area. A link that was sometimes

altar (cancelli) led to the development of the German word ‘Kanzel’ [4]. By the 4th cent. it was common in many parts of the empire for the entire social spectrum of a city or rural community to be present to hear a sermon, and it appears that this sometimes included non-Christians — e.g. Jews — as well. Particular attention was paid to the newly converted and to candidates for baptism (catechumens). The so-called ‘pillar sermon’ held in the spring of 387 in Antioch by the presbyter > Iohannes [4] Chrysostomos, in an effort to calm a rebellion triggered by a tax increase (CPG Suppl. 4330), offers insight into the function of Christian sermons in late antique society. In many places expressions of approval or dis-

approval were common. Sermons, like Christian services in general, were probably initially confined to the sabbath, but they were later held on days of the Lord and feast days as well. Sermons were part of Services of the Word and of the Sacrament, but also of special occasions (e.g. vigils held before festivals). There is evidence from the 3rd cent. of a daily Service of the Word, held in the morning, in which books of the Bible were sequentially explicated through sermons (lectio continua). In the imperial church > liturgy, the sermon was held during the first part of the service, before the Eucharist and during the Service of the Word. The order varied to some degree from place to place. Ill. HistoRY OF THE ANCIENT CHRISTIAN

SERMON Some of the first Christian sermons from the znd cent. have been preserved; among the extant fragments, the Passah (Pesach) homily of > Meliton [3] of Sardes,

preserved in its entirety, stands out. A first milestone was the homiletic work of > Origenes in the 3rd cent., with over a hundred preserved sermons out of a far larger number that were originally written. In the same tradition are the three Cappadocian theologians and bishops —> Basilius [1] the Great, > Gregorius [2] of Nyssa and — Gregorius [3] of Nazianzus, whose sermons predominantly reflect their central theological themes. In contrast, the many surviving sermons of Iohannes [4] Chrysostomos convey a great deal of the local colour; some of his sermons were simultaneously translated into the Syrian language of the rural population, and in Constantinople they were occasionally translated into the Gothic language. In contrast, the metric and didactic homilies (memre/madrase) of + Ephrem (died AD 306) reflect the original Syrian tradition, with respect to form as well as theology. Among the preachers in the Latin West was > Ambrosius of Milan who impressed i.a. Augustinus, roughly 500 of whose sermons have been preserved, in most cases in the form of word-for-word, uncorrected shorthand notes. Also following the tradition of Ambrosius are other preachers of Italic origin such as » Maximus [14] of Turin. While Pope > Leo [3] the Great published

S27

32D

sermons ina most elevated style, Pope > Gregorius [3] I the Great and > Caesarius [4] of Arles aimed rather at attaining a sermo humilis (‘low style speech’). These latter sermons had a particularly pronounced influence on European sermons during the Middle Ages. Collections of sermons (‘homiliaries’) were common in East and West in the Late Antique Period and were read from by less educated preachers. Among others, Johannes [4] Chrysostomos and Augustine established general rules for a Christian sermon. In the fourth book of his De doctrina christiana, Augustine declared that preachers should be understandable and follow the principle of delectare ac prodesse (‘entertainment and usefulness’), which he elaborates in an informative (docere through praecepta, ‘teaching through rules’) as well as performative manner (flectere through exempla, ‘guiding through examples’). Research is especially needed into the sermons of less well-known theologians of Christian Antiquity, most of which have in the past been attributed to prominent authors like Johannes [4] Chrysostomos; in some cases they have not yet been critically edited. — Diatribe

hands of Philippus [4] II no later than 348 BC; later its territory was probably annexed to the newly founded Cassandrea (— Potidaea).

1M.SacuotT, s.v. Homilie, RAC 16, 1994, 148-175 2 A. MERKT, Miindlichkeit: Ein Problem der Hermeneutik patristischer Predigten, in: Studia Patristica 31, 1997, 76-85 3 C.SCHAUBLIN, Zum paganen Umfeld der christlichen Predigt, in: E.MUHLENBERG, J. VAN OorRT (eds.), Predigt in der Alten Kirche, 1994, 25-49 (repr. in: G.Binper, K.EHLIcH (eds.), Kommunikation in politischen und kultischen Gemeinschaften (Bochumer Alter-

tumswissenschaftliches Colloquium 24), 1996, 167-192) 4 C. DELvoye, s.v. Ambo, RBK 1, 1966, 126-133. EpITIONS: A.EHRHARD, Uberlieferung und Bestand der hagiographischen und homiletischen Literatur der griechischen Kirche, 1937-1952 (unfinished); H.J. SIEBEN, Kirchenvaterhomilien zum NT, 1991. BIBLIOGRAPHY:

M.B.

CUNNIGHAM,

P.ALLEN

(eds.),

Preacher and Audience, 1998; J. HAMMERSTAEDT, S.v. Improvisation, RAC 17, 1996, 1257-1284; D.G. HUNTER (ed.), Preaching in the Patristic Age, 1989; M. OLtvar, La Predicacion Cristiana Antigua, 1991; K.-H. UTHEMANN, Die Kunst der Beredsamkeit in der Spatantike, in: NHL 4,

1997, 327-376.

CM.

Sermylia (ZeQuvdAia/Sermylia). City on the right bank of the Chavrias to the south of modern Ormilia at the northern end of the Gulf of Torone (Hdt. 7,122; Scyl. 66). The earliest evidence for S. is on silver coins minted in the 6th cent. BC (HN 207). Judging by the magnitude of its tribute during its membership of the > Delian League (ATL 4o0 f.), varying between three and seven talents, S. was after Torone the most important Chalcidian city. At the beginning of the > Peloponnesian War S. ceded from Athens; in the middle of the 420s battles took place in the area of S. (IG P 1184); in the Peace of Nicias in 421 the Athenians were guaranteed possession of the city (Thuc. 5,18,8). S. minted copper coins for a while [x], was certainly for many years a member of the Chalcidian League and fell into the

SERTORIUS, Q.

1D.M. Rosinson, P.A. CLEMENT, The Chalcidic Mint and the Excavation Coins Found in 1928-1934, 1938, 313-

M. ZAuRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 225 f.

M.Z.

Serratus (from Latin serra, ‘saw’: ‘saw-shaped’, ‘jagged like a saw’). Serrati (naummi) is, according to Tacitus

(Germ. 5), the term for the Republican Period Roman - denarius with a serrated edge. The edges of serratus blanks were incised before minting. The incisions were meant to show that the coins were entirely of silver, and not a non-precious metal merely coated with silver (> Subaeratus).

An early example of a serratus is a denarius of the master of the mint C. Iuventius Thalna (RRC, 202/rb,

Rome) from the year 154 BC, which was also minted without serrations (RRC, 202/1a). Towards the end of the 2nd century BC serrati came into circulation in quite large numbers (RRC, 311-314, Rome, 106/5 BC), the last ones are from the 60s BC (RRC, 412, Rome, 64 BC). Before the Romans, the Carthaginians minted gold serrati towards the end of the 3rd century BC, at the beginning of the 2nd century BC the Macedonians and the Seleucids minted bronze serrati. 1 K. REGLING, s.v. S., RE 2 A, 1743 f.

Serrheium

2 SCHROTTER, S.v.

GES.

S., 628.

(Zéogeiov duoa/Sérrheion akra, TEEEELOV

telyod/Sérrheion teichos, Léoevov/Sérrhion; Latin Serrheum). Cape (Str. 7a,1,48; App. B Civ. 4,101 f.) and

castle on the north coast of the Aegean, in the west of the Plain of Doriscus (Hdt. 7,59) in the area settled by the Thracian Satrae, modern Makri west of modern

Alexandroupolis. While occupied by the — Delian League, the castle was captured in 3.46 BC by Philippus [4] If (Aeschin. Or. 3,82; Dem. Or. 6,64; 7,373 9,153

10,8; 65; 18,27; 70). In 200 BC Philippus [7] V took S. from the Ptolemaic garrison in the Second > Macedonian War (Liv. 31,16,4). B. Isaac, The Greek Settlement in Thrace until the Macedonian Conquest, 1986, 131 f.; MULLER, 98. Ly.B.

Sertorius, Q. B. 123 BC at Nursia (Samnium), of an equestrian family. He gained military experience in 105/4 under Q. = Servilius [I 12] Caepio and C. — Marius [I 1] in the wars against the > Cimbri and — Teutoni, and in 98-93 under T. > Didius [I 4] in Spain, where he particularly distinguished himself and acquired intimate knowledge of the country. In 91, S. was quaestor in Gallia Cisalpina, after which he fought in the > Social War [3]. In 89 or 88, his candidature for the people’s tribunate was thwarted by the resistance of

SERTORIUS,

Q.

L. > Cornelius [I 90] Sulla, and S. changed sides to join

Sulla’s opponent, L. + Cornelius [I 18] Cinna. He assisted in the conquest of Rome by Marius and Cinna, but had Marius’ slave troops put down when they terrorized the city. Praetor in 85 (?), he criticized the military leadership of the Marian-Cinnan commanders at Sulla’s return in 83. When the Cinnan regime collapsed, he took both Spanish provinces, but was forced to yield them to the Sullan governor, C. Annius, in 81. He then went to Mauretania. In 80, the Lusitanians recalled him to Spain, and raised him to command the Hispanians and the antiSullan Roman exiles. He succeeded in holding out against the Roman governors Q. —> Caecilius [I 31] Metellus Pius and M. > Domitius [I 11] Calvinus for several years, thanks to his bravery and the support of the indigenous population (who believed S. to be divinely inspired), to the extent that in 77 he had most of Spain under his control. In that year, the remains of the army of the consul for 78, M. > Aemilius [I 11] Lepidus, under the command of M. > Perperna [5] Veiento, went over to him. S. attempted to Romanize the Hispanians, and together with an ‘anti-Senate’ of Roman and Italian exiles, he formed a focus of resistance to the

post-Sullan regime at Rome. An alliance concluded in 76/5 with > Mithridates [6] VI of Pontus was also intended to serve the purpose of reconquering Italy from Spain. When Cn. - Pompeius [I 3] took over Hispania Ulterior, S. was at first able to defeat him at Lauro (near Saguntum). Pompey was beaten again at the Sucro River in 75, but at Segovia, S.’ quaestor, L. Hirtuleius, was defeated by Metellus, while a third battle was indecisive. Thereafter, S.’ military good fortune gradually deserted him, and his despotic behaviour cost him the support of the Hispanians and his Roman followers, until he fell victim to a conspiracy led by Perperna in 73. Alongside Caesar and Pompey, S. was the outstanding general of his time. His moderate conduct in the civil war, his resistance to the post-Sullan regime and his tragic demise are reflected in the sympathetic treatment in Sallust’s Historiae (mostly lost), on which the main

biographical source, Plutarch, also based his account (Plut. Sertorius; on this [4]). The ‘Roman’ perspective is represented by Appian (B Civ. 1,505-538). 1 A.SCHULTEN, S.,1926 2 E.GaBBA, Republican Rome, the Army and the Allies, 1976, 103-125 3 PH.O.SPANN, Q.S. and the Legacy of Sulla, 1987. 4C.F. Konrap, Plutarch’s Sertorius. A Historical Commentary, 1994 5 1d., A New Chronology of the Sertorian War, in: Athenaeum 83, 1995, 157-187.

K.-LE.

Servaeus [1] Q. S$. Senator, who as a praetorian accompanied Germanicus [2] to the East. There he converted Commagene into a province (Tac. Ann. 2,56,4). In 20 AD he took part in a lawsuit against Calpurnius [II 16] Piso in the Senate (Tac. Ann. 3,13). Later in alliance with Aelius [II 19] Seianus, in 32 after the latter’s overthrow

he was convicted, to the regret of many in the Senate (Tac. Ann. 6,7,2).

324

323

[2] Q. S$. Fuscus Cornelianus. Senator from Gightis in Africa. After being a praetor dealing with the cura viae Salariae (‘care for the Salarian way’), he became a judge (> Iuridicus

3) per Calabriam,

Lucaniam,

Apuliam,

Bruttios (‘for the territory of Calabria, Lucania, Apulia and Bruttii’). After that, legate (> Legatus 5) of the

Legio XIII Gemina in Dacia, and of the Legio I Italica in Novae in Lower Moesia in 227 AD. C. 230 praetorian legate in Galatia. W.Eck, s. v. S. (4b), RE Suppl. 14, 663 f.

[3] S. Innocens. Descendant of S. [1] [1. 185-190]. His cognomen Innocens (‘the innocent’) could therefore have been chosen to allude to the innocence of his ancestor (S. [1]) [2. 1053]. Suffect consul in 82 AD (FO*

43). 1 W.Eck, Ein diploma militare aus Moesia superior, in: Chiron 21, 1991, 185-201

2 SyYME, RP 3.

[4] C. Sertorius Brocchus Q. S. Innocens. On the form of the name see [1. 190 f.]. Suffect consul in ror AD (FO? 46; RMD 3, 143). Proconsul of Asia probably in 117/8 (IEph 2,429). 1 W.Ecx, Ein diploma militare aus Moesia superior, in: Chiron 21, 1991, 185-201.

W.E.

Servenius. L. S. Gallus. Praetor urbanus in AD 62 who had published an edict in the Forum Augusti [1]. 1G.Camopeca, La ricostruzione dell’élite municipale ercolanese degli anni 50-70, in: Cahiers du centre G. Glotz 7, 1996, 167-178 (= AE 1996, 407).

W.E.

Servilia [1] Born in c. 100 BC, daughter of Q. Servilius [I 13] Caepio and Livia [1], half-sister of M. > Porcius [I 7] Cato. In c. 85, she married M. Iunius [I 9] Brutus (d. in 77) and became the mother of the future murderer of Caesar, M. Iunius [I ro] Brutus. S.’s second husband, the lacklustre D. Junius [I 30] Silanus with whom she had three daughters probably owed his consulate to her. The intelligent, independent and poised woman who remained close to > Caesar even after their love affair in the period surrounding the year 59 (Suet. lul. 50,2) raised Brutus, whom she had adopted into her own gens, to be the enemy of Cn. Pompeius [I 3]. Cato withdrew from her influence and S. blamed Porcia [2] for Brutus’ turn towards — stoicism (cf. Cic. Att. 13,22,4). Her daughters’ marriages to M. Aemilius [I 12] Lepidus, P. Servilius [I 24] Isauricus and C. Cassius [I 10] were designed to strengthen Caesar’s camp. The murder of Caesar by Brutus and Cassius destroyed S.’s life’s work. Nevertheless, she continued to protect their interests in Rome and fought against the alienation of the conspirators - demanded by Cicero and the senate — from old Caesarians such as M. Aemilius [I 12] Lepidus and C. Vibius Pansa in her personal meetings in June of 44 and July of 43 (Cic. Att. 15,11; Cic. Ad Brut.

326

325 1,18,1). She was

not subject to the > proscriptions

(Nep. Att. 11,4). The deaths of her son and son in law at Philippi in 42 destroyed S.’s hopes. M. Antonius [I 9] sent her Brutus’ ashes (Plut. Brutus 53,3). [2] Sister of [1], second wife of L. Licinius [I 26] Lucullus and mother of his son Marcus [I 28]. Rumours about S.’s love-affairs drove Lucullus to divorce (Plut. Lucullus 38,1; Plut. Cato minor 24,2 et alibi).

[3] Probably the daughter of P. Servilius [I 24] Isauricus and the granddaughter of S. [1], honoured in c. 46-44 BC in Pergamum (IGR 4,434). Her engagement to Octavianus (~ Augustus) was broken in late 43 in favour of Clodia (Suet. Aug. 62,1); S. married her cousin M. Aemilius [I 13] Lepidus and after his execution committed suicide in 36 (Vell. Pat. 2,88,3 f., with obscure details).

JO.

[4] Daughter of Q. > Marcius [II 2] Barea Soranus, married to Annius [II 12] Pollio. Her mother was possibly one S., daughter of Servilius [II 4] Nonianus {1. 96]. After her husband’s banishment, Nero forced both her and her father to kill themselves in AD 66 (Tac. Ann. 16,30-35; [2]). 1 R.SyME, Ten Studies in Tacitus, 1970 CHARLIER, Nr. 526; 710.

2 RAEPSAET-

WE.

Servilius. Name of a Roman patrician family (epigraphically also Serveilius), said to have migrated to Rome from Alba Longa under king Tullus > Hostilius [4] (Liv. 1,30,2; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 3,29,7). The oldest branches are the Ahalae and Fidenates in the 5th and 4th cents. BC; the Caepiones and Gemini, from whom the Vatiae (Isaurici) descended, appear in the 3rd cent. The last prominent member of the Servilii Caepiones was the murderer of Caesar, M. > Junius [I ro] Brutus, son of > Servilia [1], and himself adopted into the family. F. MUNZER, s.v. S., RE 2 A, 1777 f. (stemma).

I. REPUBLICAN

PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

PERIOD

{I 1] A fleet commander in the Black Sea under Pompey in 65 BC (Plut. Pompeius 34,5). Identifications with other S. are uncertain.

J.BA.

[I 2] S., C. In 102 he was praetor or propraetor in Sicily, where he fought unsuccessfully against the rebelling slaves; he was probably condemned in Rome in ror for this reason (Cic. Div. in Caec. 63; Ps.-Ascon. 203; Diod. Sic. 36,9,1). Identification with an augur M.(?) S., who in 102 (?) unsuccessfully accused L. > Licinius [I 25] Lucullus for abuse of office (Plut. Lucullus 1,1), and was thereupon accused in his turn by the sons of Lucullus (Cic. Prov. cons. 22 etc.), is disputed. ALEXANDER, 3 5-38.

K-LE.

{I 3] S., M. Tribunus plebis from 10.12.44, S. defended the murderers of Caesar, and allowed Cicero to speak in

SERVILIUS

the people’s assembly (Cic. Fam. 12,7,1; Cic. Phil. 4,16, cf. 3,13). He was subsequently active as a legate to the murderers of Caesar in Rhodes and Lycia (BMCRR 2,483 f.). He presumably obtained a pardon in 42, and is the same as the S. mentioned in 39 in the Senate resolution concerning Panamara (SHERK 27). He certainly knew the region well. It is uncertain whether he is the S. prosecuted de repetundis in 51 (Cic. Fam. 8,8,2 f.). J.BA, {I 4] S., Q. He was sent in 91 BC as praetor or propraetor with imperium to Picenum; his assassination (along with the legate Fonteius) led to the outbreak of the — Social Wars [3] (Liv. Per. 72; App. B Civ. 173 f. etc.). SERVILII AHALAE [I 5-I 6]

Old branch

of the family (precise relationships

unclear), from which the Caepiones later derived (on

the cognomen see > Ahala). K.-LE. [I 5] S. Ahala, C. Two different versions of tradition (both in Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 12,1,1-4,5) associate S. with the death of Sp. Maelius [2], suspected of adfectatio regni (ambition to rule as king). According to one version, Maelius was killed in a melee that arose when, by order of the appointed dictator > Quinctius [I 7] Cincinnatus, S. as magister equitum wanted to lead him away to answer the accusations against him (cf. Liv. 4,13,12-14,7, where S., unlike the account in Dion. Hal., himself kills Maelius; see also Cic. Cato 36). In the other account, according to Cincius Alimentus and Calpurnius Piso (in Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 12,4,2-5 = Calpurnius Piso fr. 24 HRR [fr. 26 CHASSIGNET] = Cincius Alimentus fr. 6 HRR [fr. 8 CHASSIGNET]), S. as a private individual, although commissioned by the Senate, killed Maelius with a dagger that he had hidden under his armpit (ala; hence in Dion. Hal. the cognomen Ahala). Independently of the period of the witnesses cited, the latter version appears to be the earlier, while the former, which has S. acting as magister equitum, probably only arose as a result of the controversy surrounding the action of > Cornelius [I 84] Scipio Nasica against Ti. > Sempronius [I 16] Gracchus (see [1. 1318]; cf. [2]). 1 A.W. Linrott, The Tradition of Violence ..., in: Historia 19, 1970, 12-29 2 J.VON UNGERN-STERNBERG,

Untersuchungen zum spatrepublikanischen recht, 1970, Index, s.v. S.

Notstands-

[1 6] S. Ahala (Axilla), C. Despite the differing praenomina and cognomina assigned to S. in the tradition (cf. InscrIt 13,1,374-7; esp. Structus in the Chronographer of 354), expert opinion sees the consul of 427 BC and consular tribune of 419, 418 and 417 as one single person ([1. 1773-5] followed by MRR 1,66; 71-3; but cf. [2. 603], with reference to the uncertainty of the tradition). Although Livy does not ascribe any noteworthy actions to him, the accumulation of offices in the decade between 427 and 417 demonstrates that S. was a significant political personality of the period.

SERVILIUS

1 F.MUNZER, s.v. S.no. 37, RE2 A, 1772-1775 2R.M. Ocitviz, A Commentary on Livy Books 1-5, 1965.

C.MU. {I 7] S. Balatro, P. A ‘client’ of > Maecenas [2], known

only from Hor. Sat. 2,8 and Ps.-Acro on Hor. Sat. 2,3,166; he did not restrain his mockery, even towards Augustus.

J.BA.

SERVILII CAEPIONES [I 8-I 15]

The branch of the gens Servilia that remained patrician claimed descent from the Early Republican Servilii Ahalae. During the 3rd and 2nd cents. it provided seven consuls, but declined in importance in the rst cent. BC. The mentions of S. Caepiones during the Late Republic relate to individuals that are difficult to differentiate. Attested with certainty are only S. [I 14-15]. F. MUNZER, s.v. S., RE 2 A, 1775-1780.

J.BA.

[I 8] S. Caepio, Cn. From 213 BC pontifex, and in 207 curule aedile; in 205 as praetor urbanus he was entrusted with the resettlement of Campanians dispossessed of their land (Liv. 28,46,6). When consul in 203, victories were ascribed to him in Bruttium that are certainly unhistorical (Liv. 30,19,11). The constitutionally complex process of his recall from the pursuit of > Hannibal [4] to Africa is equally implausible (Liv. 30,24,1-4; [r]). In 195 he led a legation to Carthage, allegedly with the secret commission of having Hannibal assassinated; Hannibal in fact fled (Liv. 33,47,6-49,4; Justin. 31,2). S. was ambassador to Greece in 192. He died in 174. 1 Huss, 4137°.

328

Ba

TAS.

[I 9] S. Caepio, Cn. Son of S. [I 8]; in 179 BC aedilis curulis, 174 praetor in Hispania ulterior. In 172 he is attested as a member of the embassy to king > Perseus [2] of Macedonia, charged with the preparation of Rome’s declaration of war (Liv. 42,25,1-13, possibly an annalistic invention); as consul in 169 he remained in Italy. {I 10] S. Caepio, Cn. Son of S. [I 9], and elder brother of S. [I rr]; as consul in 141 BC he conducted the investigation against L. > Hostilius [11] Tubulus (Cic. Fin. 2,54); in 138 witness with his brother for the prosecution in the de repetundis proceedings against his fellow consul Q. > Pompeius [I 1] (Cic. Font. 23). In 133, on the basis of an extraordinary command with Q. > Caecilius[I 27] Metellus Macedonicus, he suppressed a slave revolt in Sinuessa and Minturnae (Oros. 5,9,4); he was censor in 125. {I 11] S. Caepio, Q. Son of S. [I 9], and younger brother of S. [I ro]; as consul in 140 he received the command in Hispania ulterior, and, in breach of the peace treaty concluded by his brother Q. > Fabius [I 29] Maximus Servilianus, unsuccessfully resumed the war against ~ Viriatus, whom he eventually had removed by assassination (App. Hisp. 301-3; Liv. Per. 54 et passim). H. Simon, Roms Kriege in Spanien, 1962, 140-142.

[I 12] S. Caepio, Q. Born c.150 BC the son of S. [I 11]; 129-125 legate to M. > Aquillius [I 3] in Asia (OGIS

2,551, Z. 253 30; BE 1963, 220); 109 praetorin Hispa-

nia ulterior, where in 108 he defeated the - Lusitani, celebrating a triumph in 107. As consul in 106, he either distributed the membership of legal juries (~ Quaestio), since C. + Sempronius [I 11] Gracchus made up of equestrians (+ Equites Romani), between equestrians and senators (thus Liv. Per. 66), or returned it entirely to the senators (Cic. Inv. 1,92; Cic. De or. 2,199 f.; 223; Cic. Brut. 161; 156). His law became the subject of bitter dispute, and was repealed in ror by C. > S. {I 22] Glaucia. $. then undertook a command in Gaul, and plundered - Tolosa (today Toulouse); the rich booty (aurum Tolosanum, ‘gold of Toulouse’), allegedly originating from the Celtic attack on the temple of Apollo at Delphi in 271, was lost in an inexplicable manner on the way to Massilia. In ros his command was extended against the > Cimbri. Owing to his unwillingness to comply with the orders of the higherranking consul Cn. > Mallius [1] Maximus, the dispute between them led to the Romans’ catastrophic defeat at Arausio (today Orange). S.’ imperium was withdrawn (Ascon. 78C); he was expelled from the Senate (Rhet. Her. 1,24; Cic. Balb. 28), then in r04 prosecuted (probably unsuccessfully) for embezzlement of the aurum Tolosanum (Cic. Nat. D. 3,74), and again in 103 by C. + Norbanus [I 1] for high treason (- Perduellio). S. avoided the verdict by going into exile in Smyrna, where he died. {I 13] S. Caepio, Q. A relative of S. [I 12], as quaestor in 103 or 100 BC he violently resisted the grain law of the tribunus plebis L. > Ap(p)uleius [Il 11] Saturninus (Rhet. Her. 1,21; 2,17; Sall. Hist. 1,62 M). Upon enactment of the law, with his colleague L. > Calpurnius [I 18] Piso he issued coins bearing the legend ‘For the purchase of grain by resolution of the Senate’ (RRC 330), so as to suggest the Senate’s support. In about 95 he was prosecuted for his violent actions when quaestor, but defended by L. > Licinius [I ro] Crassus and acquitted. On private grounds, he fell out with his brother-in-law at the time, M. > Livius [I 7] Drusus, and so became an enemy of the Senate. In 92 he brought an accusation against the princeps senatus M. + Aemilius [I 37] Scaurus, who replied with a counter-accusation (Ascon. 21C). In 91, Drusus even threatened to throw him from the Tarpeian Rock (- Tarpeium saxum; Vir. ill. 66,8 f.). Praetor late in the 90s, in 90 he accused Scaurus again under the lex Varia (Cic. Sest. ro1; Cic. Scaur. fr. e; Q. > Varius [I 3] Hybrida); then, while fighting again as a legate in the Social War [3], he died in an ambush set by the > Marsi [1] (Liv. Per. 73). E. BapiAN, Studies in Greek and Roman History, 1964,

34-70.

K.-LE.

[I 14] S. Caepio, Q. c.100-67 BC. The son of > Livia [x] and probably S. [I 13] was a military tribune in 72 (Plut. Cato minor 8,1), and in 67 was to serve under Pompey in the campaign against the pirates, but died in Aenus (Flor. Epit. 1,41,10; Plut. Cato minor rr).

330

329

[115] S. Caepio Brutus, Q. According to Cic. Phil. 10,25 and his own coins (RRC so1—504), he is to be identified with the murderer of Caesar, M. > Iunius {I 10] Brutus, and must have been adopted by a relative of his mother. Presumably, the Q. Caepio praetor in Cic. Fam. 7,21 also refers to Brutus, as does the Caepio Brutus (Cic. Att. 2,24) mentioned by > Vettius in 59.

Assignment of the Caepiones in Ascon. 34 C and Cic. Ad Q. fr. 1,3,7 is uncertain, as is that of the individual betrothed to Caesar’s daughter (Plut. Caesar 14; Suet. also); D.R. SHACKLETON

BaILey, Two Studies in Roman

No-

menclature, 1976, 129-131.

[I 16] S. Casca Longus, P. One of the murderers of Caesar; tribunus plebis in 43 BC, in 43/2 he served under M. Iunius [I 10] Brutus in Lycia, and probably died in AQn J.BA. {1 17] See > Damocrates {1 18] S. (Geminus), C. He was a prisoner of war of the

Carthaginians for 15 years, until his son S. [I 19] when consul in 203 was able to liberate him (Liv. 30,19,6-

12). According to Livy, S. belonged to the college of tresviri for the foundation of Cremona and Placentia,

and therefore — according to Pol. 3,40,9 — must previously have been praetor. As both his sons were plebeians, the > transitio ad plebem must have been completed at the latest by him. {1 19] S. Geminus, C. First assuredly attested as pontijexmine2 Tomb @r (cies t|pontlive 25.4505;) [2 hone Liv.

25,15,4-6). When he was plebeian aedile in 209, the news that his father S. [I 18], until then believed to be dead, had survived as a captive of the Carthaginians, is supposed to have caused the legitimacy of his tenure of plebeian offices (an earlier people’s tribunate cannot be dated) to be disputed (Liv. 27,21, 10); S. is subsequently said to have had that legitimacy confirmed by a law during his consulate (Liv. 30,19,9). Notwithstanding [3], the circumstances and legal background remain difficult to discern: probably an indication of considerable falsification. S. was curule aedile and magister equitum in 208, and in 206 praetor in Sicily. As consul in 203 (province: Etruria), he liberated his father (Liv. 30,19,6-8); he is also said to have carried out investigations of conspiracies (Liv. 30,26,12); otherwise, military functions are neither known nor capable of being discovered (notwithstanding [4]). In 202 he was appointed dictator by his brother S. [I 25] as consul, and functioned as such into the next official year; he was the last to hold this office until L. > Cornelius [I 90] Sulla [5]. In 20x he belonged to a decemvirate for land allocations in Samnium and Apulia. In 194 he dedicated the temple of Jupiter > Veiovis (Liv. 34,53,7). Pontifex maximus from 183, he died in 180. He was also decemvir sacris faciundis (Liv. 40,42,8-11). 1 E.BapiAn, The House of the Servili Gemini, in: PBSR 52,1984,66 2D.-A.KuKOoFKA, Siiditalien im Zweiten Punischen Krieg, 1990, 57-60 3 A.AYMARD, Liviana, in: REA 45, 1943, 199-224 4 J.SEIBERT, Hannibal,

SERVILIUS 1993, 448%

5 A.AYMARD, Liviana, in: REA 46, 1944,

237-265.

{I 20] S. Geminus, Cn. As consul in 217 BC, his task was to defend Italy against an attack by Hannibal [4] at Ariminum (Pol. 3,75,6), but he was unable to prevent the defeat of his colleague C. > Flaminius [1] at the Trasimene Lake (> Lacus Trasumenus), and himself lost his advance cavalry. In Apulia he then transferred his troops to the dictator Q. > Fabius [I 30] Maximus. As commander of the Roman fleet, he foiled a landing by the Carthaginians at Pisa, in his counter-attack advanced as far as the Gulf of Sirte, and landed a garrison on Cossura (Pol. 3,96,10-14). After the end of the dictatorships of Fabius and M. > Minucius [I ro], he together with M. > Atilius [I 22] Regulus commanded the Roman army until the accession of new consuls, first as consul himself, then with his > imperium extended by the comitia (Pol. 3,106,2—-11); he was killed in 216 as commander of the infantry at the battle of > Cannae. > Ennius [1] (cf. Ann. 268-86) already credits him with a prominent role in that battle, as the only senior officer who, with the consul L. > Aemilius [I 31] Paullus, recommended tactics of restraint [1]. This version of events, which contradicts older tradition, has exerted a considerable influence on later accounts of the battle. — Punic Wars 1 T.Scumitt, Hannibals Siegeszug, 1991, 219-226.

{I 21] S. Geminus, P. Consul in 252 and 248; he and his

twin brother Q. looked very much alike, and were given the cognomen Geminus (twin; Cic. Acad. 2,56). TAS. {I 22] S. Glaucia, C. He was a gifted orator and success-

ful demagogue, whom Q. > Caecilius [I 30] Metellus Numidicus attempted unsuccessfully to remove from the Senate in 102 BC. As tribunus plebis in tox and praetor in too he collaborated with L. + Ap(p)uleius {I 11] Saturninus against the Senate, and enacted a repetundae law (— Repetundarum crimen) filling legal juries with equestrians again (MRR 1,571 f.). In 99 he strove illegally for the consulate, with the intention that Saturninus would become tribunus plebis for the third time. After they had attempted to carry through their election by force, C. > Marius [I 1] had them killed at the instigation of the Senate (MRR 1,574 f.). E. Bapian, The Death of Saturninus, in: Chiron 14, 1984,

IOI-147.

K.-LE.

[I 23] S. Globulus, P. He was tribunus plebis in 67 BC (Ascon. 58 C), praetor in 64 and propraetor in Asia in 63 (Cic. Flac. 76; 79; 85). [I 24] S. Isauricus, P. Son of S. {I 27]. Born c. 94 BC, in 60 as a quaestorian with M. > Porcius [I 7] Cato, the uncle of his wife Iunia, S. spoke in defence of the free cities (Cic. Att. 1,19,9; 2,1,10). In 54 he also stood at Cato’s side as praetor (Cic. Att. 4,18,4), but in 49 immediately joined > Caesar, and in 48 was awarded with the consulate (Caes. B Civ. 3,1). After proving himself as Caesar’s representative in Rome (Caes. B

SERVILIUS

Ash

332

Civ. 3,21; Plut. Caesar 37), from 46 to 44 S. was proconsul of Asia (Cic. Fam. 13,66 ff.; SHERK 55). After

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD {Il 1] M. S. Cos. ord. in AD 3. Descendant of an old Republican plebeian family. Married to one Nonia (Plin. HN 37,81). Probably also active in Galatia (ILS 9502 and [1. 94 f.]). In 17, Tiberius declared effective a will naming S., even though it had proved to be invalid

Caesar’s death, S. declared himself against M. > Antonius [I 9] and for Octavian (Cic. Ad Brut. 1,15,7; Fam. 12,2,1), and in 41 again became consul (Suet. Tib. 5). J.BA. We then lose sight of him. {I 25] S. Pulex Geminus, M. He became augur in 211 BC, was curule aedile in 204, magister equitum in 203, and consul in 202 in succession to his brother S. [I 19], whom he appointed dictator in the course of the year, while he himself went to Etruria. Apparently his imperium was extended for the investigation there. In 201 he belonged to a decemvirate for the allotment of land in Samnium und Apulia, and from 197 to 194 to the triumvirate for the foundation of various colonies. As a war hero and impassioned orator, in 167 he was still able to find the correct words to defuse the displeasure felt over a triumph of L. > Aemilius [I 32] Paullus after the victory at Pydna (Liv. 45,35,5-39,20; Plut. Aemilius 30,2-32,1). TAS. [1 26] S. Rullus, P. As tribunus plebis in 63 BC, he advocated an agrarian law providing for the appointment of a commission of ten men (+ Decemviri [3]), and the distribution of state land and purchased land to the unpropertied. Cicero suggests, probably not without justification, that the law had political motives, and that S. was acting only for opponents of > Pompeius [I 3] (thus probably — Licinius [I 11] Crassus; Cic. Leg. agr. I-2 passim). After Cicero brought the law down, there is no more news of S.

J.BA.

[I 27] S. Vatia Isauricus, P. c.134-44 BC, the grandson of Q. > Caecilius [I 27] Metellus Macedonicus. In 90/89 probably praetor and propraetor (perhaps in Sardinia) (MRR 2,26), he achieved a triumph in 88 by the good offices of L. > Cornelius [I 90] Sulla, who supported him for consul in 87; he was, however, defeated by Sulla’s opponent C. > Cornelius Cinna (Plut. Sulla 10,3). In the Civil War he supported Sulla, who awarded him for his services with the consulate in 79. S. received a command against the pirates and the mountain tribes in southern Asia Minor, and he brought these under subjection as proconsul from 78 to 74, in campaigns lasting several years; he thus created a solid provincial structure (Sall. Hist. 2,87Ms; Str. 14,3,3-14,5,73 votive inscription for the capture of Isaura Vetus: CIL I” 2954; acclamation as imperator, and adoption of the victorious epithet Isauricus: CIL 741; MRR 2,90; 99; [1]). He triumphed again in 74 (Cic. Verr. 2,5,66). S. was then one of the leading conservative politicians, supporting Cicero against > Catilina and in his struggle for permission to return from exile, but in 63 (like Q. ~ Lutatius [3] Catulus) was defeated by Caesar in the election for pontifex maximus (Plut. Caesar 7,1). In 55 he was censor with M. Valerius Messalla Niger (regulation of the Tiber after an inundation, CIL I? 766a-t). He died in 44 at the age of 90, and received a state funeral (Jer. Chron. p. 157 H). His son was S. [I 24]. 1 MaGIE 1, 287-291.

K.-L.E.

(Tac. Ann. 2,48,r). 1 R.SyMg, Ten Studies in Tacitus, 1970.

{I 2] C. S. Diodorus. A member of the tribus Quirina, from Girba in Africa. An equestrian with the rank of + vir egregius. After three equestrian postings — as praefectus cohortis II novae miliariae equitatae, tribunus legionis XIV Geminae, praefectus alae I Tungrorum Frontonianae — he became procurator of the ratio privata, then procurator centenarius in Moesia inferior

and in Noricum, procurator ducenarius in Hispania Tarraconensis, and presiding procurator in Hispania superior = Gallaecia shortly before 227 or in that year. The base of his statue, raised to him in Lavinium, bears several inscriptions throwing light on the relationship between membership of the imperial elite and citizenship of a town. G. ALFOLDY, Provincia Hispania superior (Schriften der

Philos.-Histor. KI. der Heidelberger Akad. der Wissenschaften 19), 2000, 7-16; D. Nonis, Un patrono dei dendrofori di Lavinium, in: RPAA 48, 1995/96, 248 ff.

[fl 3] M. S. Fabianus Maximus. Senator, perhaps from Africa. His career is attested in its entirety in CIL VI

1517 = ILS 1080; cf. CIL VI Suppl. VIII 3, pp. 4708 f. After four praetorian posts, he achieved the suffect consulate in AD 158. Probably in 160, curator aedium sacrarum; in 161 he was for a short time legate of Moesia superior; attested as legate of Moesia inferior in 162/3 ([1. 232]; AE 1980, 818). 1 ALFOLDY, Konsulat.

[il 4] M. S. Nonianus. Son of S. [II 1]. Senator, cos. suff. in 35, VIIvir epulonum and proconsul of Africa under ~ Claudius [III 1] [r. no. 1170). Probably married to one Considia, as his daughter also bore that name (Plin. HN 24,43). He was perhaps linked with other senators influenced by — Stoicism; > Persius [2] associated with him. But he was also close to Tiberius; he may even have stayed with Tiberius on Capri during the last years of the emperor’s life. He wrote a work of (probably contemporary) history, of which, however, nothing further is known. He died in 59; Tacitus wrote an obituary of him, distinguishing him as an exemplary individual (Tac. Ann. 14,19). 1A.MEeERLIN,

Inscriptions latines de la Tunisie, 1944

2 R.SyMeE, Ten Studies in Tacitus, 1970, 79-90; 91-109.

[II 5] Q. S. Pudens. Senator, from Africa. Cos. ord. in 166. Married to Ceionia [2] Plautia, sister of the emper-

or > Verus. Proconsul of Africa probably shortly after 180. The senator of the same name mentioned in ILS 1084 = ILAlg I 281 was probably his son. THOMASSON, Fasti Africani, 71 f.

333

334

[II 6] S. Vatia. Senator with praetorian rank, probably tracing his descent from the Republican family of the Servilii. He led a secluded life in his villa in Baiae under Tiberius (Sen. Ep. 55). WE.

his appearance as a figure in > Macrobius’s [1] Saturnalia (set in AD 383 or 384; probably written after 430): there, he is a grammarian working in Rome, and an adulescens (thus born between 353/354 and 368/369: Macrob. Sat. 7,11,2; cf., on the other hand, 12,15; 1,24,8 and 20; 2,2,12; 6,6,1). Considering the anachronism of the characters’ ages admitted by Macrob. Sat. 1,1,5, it would also be possible for S.to have been bornas late as 370/3 80. It is contested whether Macrobius’ characterization of S. as an expert on Virgil presupposes the existence of his (unmentioned) Virgil commentary. In any case, he belongs into the early 5th cent. and into clearly pagan surroundings.

Servitus (‘Subserviency’) in Roman law meant the encumbrance of a piece of land in the sense that the owner was obliged to tolerate certain impacts enacted by the encumbrancer or was not allowed to impact another piece of land in certain ways (however: there was no obligation towards positive actions, in faciendo consistere nequit). Servitus on rural tracts of land (servitus praediorum rusticorum) included road easements (iter), paths for driving cattle (actus), roads for transporting goods (via), water ducts (aquae ductus). In the city, servitus (servitus praediorum urbanorum) included the rights to have rainwater drip on the neighbouring lot (servitus stillicidii) or to drain it through pipes (servitus fluminis), to insert a beam of one’s own house into the wall of the neighbouring house (servitus tigni immittendi), to support one’s building on structures belonging to the neighbouring building (servitus oneris ferendi), to disallow the neighbour to build higher (servitus altius non tollendi). These ‘real subserviencies’ existed alongside ‘personal subserviencies’ (rights regarding another’s lot to benefit a person), including esp. > ususfructus (‘usufruct’). Servitus of rural lots was a + res mancipi and was legitimized through > mancipatio or, as in other types of servitus, through — in iure cessio. Servitus of provincial lots was based on unofficial agreements (> pactio) and promises (> stipulatio). Beyond these, various types of legitimization existed. Servitus was protected through vindicatio servitutis (> rei vindicatio) and > interdictum. HONSELL/MAYER-MALY/SELB,

180-191;

vol. 1, 440-454, vol. 2, 298-306.

KASER,

RPR

D.SCH.

Servius {1] Rare Roman —> praenomen; Siglum: SER, at times

confused with Sergius; carried by King S. > Tullius in the 6th cent. BC. Up to the Imperial Period, it was used mainly by the noble families of Cornelii, Fulvii and Sulpicii. The nomen gentile Servilius is derived from S., specifically from an undocumented diminutive of S. The etymology is regarded as uncertain, but an Etruscan origin is unlikely. Present-day scholarship is largely unanimous in regarding the ancient opinion that S. > Tullius was the son of a slave as based on the similarity in sound of servus, ‘slave.’ SALOMIES, 47-48, 162-163.

D.ST.

[2] Roman grammarian, Virgil commentator in c. AD 400. I. Lire

TARY

I]. SHORTER WORKS IV. RECEPTION

III. VIRGIL COMMEN-

I. LIFE Due to the lack of autobiographical clues, S.’ productive period can be dated only vaguely on the basis of

SERVIUS

Il. SHORTER WORKS Under varying forms of his name (S.; Marius/ Maurus S. Honoratus; Sergius), S. is attributed with several shorter grammar works (ed.: GL 4, 405-565): De finalibus about the quantity of final syllables; Centimeter or De centum metris; De metris Horatit; Latin-

Greek Glossae. In respect to these works, his authorship has been secured only for the elementary Commentarius in artem Donati, which is a commentary on the Ars minor and Ars maior by his teacher Aelius -» Donatus [3]. Based on these are later Explanationes in artem Donati (on this [6]; [8]). Ill. VIRGIL COMMENTARY The most important work by S., a commentary in lemmata on > Vergilius (in the manuscripts: expositio or explanatio), has been transmitted in a shorter (Serv., Vulgate-Servius, S) as well as in an expanded version (Serv. auct., also referred to as Serv. Danielis, DServ. oder DS after the editor P.DANIEL, Paris 1600; the excess of DS compared to S, printed in italics in the edition by THILO/HAGEN, is called D Scholia). According to the communis opinio, S is based on the great commentary on Virgil by Aelius Donatus [3] (apparently lost since the 9th cent. except for the introduction); the anonymous compiler of DS, who worked in the early 7th cent. before Isidorus [9] of Sevilla, expanded S through renewed recourse to Donatus. The manuscript tradition of both editions S/DS reveals the sequence Eclogae-Georgica-Aeneis; the internal reference system (such as S Ecl. 2,31 ‘ut diximus in Aeneide’), however, reveals that S (in contrast to Donatus and DS as well) had the sequence Aeneis-Eclogae-Georgica. The exact dependencies and possible intermediate stages between Donatus/S/DS are largely unsettled [5; 10; 12]. Beyond clarifying the meaning of words and sentence structures (the latter often facilitated through ’ordo est’), S. almost looks for occasions for grammar articles. DS in particular shows an interest in rhetoric (from identifying figures to the analysis of speeches) as well as in literary criticism and poetics (s. especially [14]), such as the consideration of the ‘point of view’. S. employs few allegories (cf. S Ecl. 3,20; 3,71) and has almost no allusions to contemporary events (it is contested whether his note on Aen. 7,604 alludes to the conquest of Rome in AD 410).

SERVIUS

335

IV. RECEPTION After Donatus’ commentary on Virgil was lost, S.’ commentary dominated (for the most part as S, only few manuscripts offer DS) the field. A list which is complete only for the 9th-12th cents. [12] shows 145 extant medieval manuscripts (compared to 1017 Virgil manuscripts: [19]). Authors of the Middle Ages (cf. [16]) used S. as an encyclopedic source for much of their knowledge of ancient myths (indirectly as well through the + Mythographi Vaticani which are based on S.) and facts about antiquity. To this day, S.’ wide spectrum of interests should generally — and in particular regarding Virgil — serve as a model for classical-philological commentaries. — Grammarians III.; > Macrobius; > Vergilius BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1E.THOMAS, Essai sur S. et son com-

mentaire sur Virgile, 1880 2H.GerorGul, Die antike Aeneiskritik, 1891, reprint 1971 31d., Die antike Vergilkritik in den Bukolika und Georgika, in: Philologus Suppl. 9, 1904, 209-328

41935,

103-105

and

4 ScHANZ/Hostus,

vol.

4.1,

*1914,

vol. 2,

115-131, 258-279

7R.A.Kaster, Macrobius and

S., in: HSPh 84, 1980, 219-262 8 L.Ho.tz, Donat et la tradition de l’enseignement grammatical, 1981, especially 223-230 9J.E. G. Zerzet, Latin Textual Criticism in Antiquity, 1981, 81-147 10S.TIMPANARO, Per la storia della filologia virgiliana antica, 1986, 143-159, 161-176 11 P. BRuGGIsSsER, Romulus Servianus, 1987 12 G. BRUGNOLI, s. v. S., EV 4, 1988, 805-813 (tradition) 13 R.A. Kaster, Guardians of Language, 1988, 169-197 14 C.Lazzarini, Elementi di una poetica serviana, in: SIFC 82 (3a ser. 7), 1989, 56-109, 241-260 15P.L. SCHMIDT, in: HLL § 527, 148-154 16A.UHL,s.v.S.,

LMA 7, 1995,1797f. 17D.FOWwLER, The commentary on Virgil of S., in: CH. MARTINDALE (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Virgil, 1997, 73-78 18 A.UHL, S. als

Sprachlehrer, 1998 (correctness of language) 19G.C. ALESSIO, s. v. Medioevo, in: EV 3, 1987, 433-443. EDITIONS: COMMENTARY ON VIRGIL: G.THILO (H. HaGeEn), 1-3.1, 1881-87 (3.2 Appendix Serviana, ed. H. HaGEn, 1902, with further commentaries on Virgil not by S.); Editio Harvardiana, vol. 1 (Aen. x-2), ed. E.K. Ranp et al., 1946 (scathing criticism: E. FRAENKEL, Kleine

Beitrage zur klassischen Philologie, vol. 2, 1964, 339-390, first 1948/49); vol. 2 (Aen. 3-5), ed. A.F. STOCKER et al., 1965; G. RAMIRES, 1996 (special edition S/DS Aen. 9 with bibliography LXVI-XCIV). INDEX RERUM ET NOMINUM: SCHULTZ, 1930.

J.F. MOuNTFORD, J.T.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: W.SUERBAUM, in: ANRW II 31.1, 288-

295 (until 1975); also [12. 812 f.].

Greece. Theophrastus (Hist. pl. 8,3,1-4) describes the leaves, the stem, the (white) foxglove-like flowers and the seeds in the elongated bilocular capsules (ibid. 1,11,2 and 8,5,2 = Plin. HN 18,53). Sowing takes place in summer (Theophr. Hist. pl. 8,1,1 and 4; Plin. HN 18,49), to some extent in June/July (Colum. 11,2,50). The oil, produced from the small seed corns by grinding, was used for food (according to Hdt. 1,193 in Assyria as a substitute for olive oil) and as a medicine, e.g. for ear infections (Dioscorides 1,34 WELLMANN = 1,41 BERENDES; Plin. HN 22,132 and 23,95), the seeds in poultices for eye diseases, burns and snake bites (Dioscurides 2,99 WELLMANN = 2,123 BERENDES). In Athens serving sesame cakes (onoapf/sésamé or onoapotc unciae).

Roman unit for '/s of a larger whole. As a weight it equals */s of a > libra [1] = 40.93 gr. (value mark I-L; AE 1968, 258), asa length, '/s ofa pes =37 mm, asan area, '/s of a > iugerum = 315 m’. In the eastern Mediterranean the sescuncia as a weight was also equal to 12 Attic > drachmai (value mark I-B). In coinage, the sescuncia corresponds to '/s of an > as, later also */s of a — denarius. As a coin the sescuncia is found in Venusia (SNG Munich, 1970, 550) and in Paestum (SNG Copenhagen, 1969, 1346). 1 F.HuLtscuH, Griechische und rémische Metrologie, 27882 2K.REGLING, s. Vv. S., RE 2 A, 1853. H.-J.S.

Sesklo. Village, about 10 km to the north of the Pagasetic Gulf on the threshold of the Plain of Thessaly. The place of settlement, which has been excavated there since 1905, gave its name to a long prehistoric epoch of Greece (6th—4th millennia BC). It had been settled since the pre-ceramic Neolithic, and flourished with up to 3000 inhabitants in the middle Neolithic. Typical of the culture of S. are rectangular houses, a central megaron building and a special pottery (finds in the archaeological museum in Volos). The place burnt down but was inhabited again in the later Neolithic, when the culture named after the neighbouring village of Dimini was flourishing (4th millennium). Remains of the settlement extend as far as the beginning of the Mycenaean Period (tholos graves; > Tholos). G.CHOURMOUZzIADIS, Magnesia,

1982,

The

23-29;

Story

of a

E.HANSCHMANN,

Civilization: s.v.

S., in:

LauFFER, Griechenland, 614; Ead., s.v. Dimini, in: Ibid.,

194 f.; D. LeEKLEy, N. Erstratiou, Archaeological Excavations in Central and Northern Greece, 1980, 153 f.; D. THEocnaris, Neolithic Greece, 1973. HE.KR.

5a7

338

Sesonchosis (Zeodyyoots, Leodyywouc/Sesonchosis, Sesonchosis). Greek form of Shoshenq, Egyptian $s(1)q, name of probably five rulers of the 22nd/23rd dynas-

legend, extant in fragmentary form in two unpublished Demotic papyri, about prince S. and his father Amenemhet [5]. Since a king Amenemhet appears as the father of prince S. in these sources, S. I rather than S. III (successor and probably son of S. II) is likely to have been the origin of this myth.

ties.

[1] The best-known is ShoshenqI (c. 945-924 BC) [x. 287-302], who according to 1 Kg 14,25 f. (there called Shishak) laid waste to parts of Judaea and was prevented from conquering Jerusalem by being paid large amounts of gold. A list preserved on the Bubastite Gate in Karnak names places in > Judah and Israel allegedly conquered by him. [2] S. Il (c. 877-875) is known through his tomb, which was discovered in Tanis [2. 37-50]. [3] Under S. III (c. 837-798?) a division of the kingdom into northern and southern constituent states took place. [4-5] S. IV (c. 805-790) and S. V (c. 774-736) remain obscure. [6] Variant of > Sesostris, cf. also Sesonchosis Romance. ~ Sasychis 1K.A. Kircuen, The Third Intermediate Period in Egypt, 31995 2P.MontET, La nécropole royale de Tanis, vol. 2,195§1I.

Sesonchosis Romance. prose work, known to fragments (POxy. 1826, the 4th cent. AD; POxy.

JO.QU.

Conventional title for a Greek us from a number of papyrus end of the 3rd or beginning of 2466 and 3319, 3rdcent. AD).

The main character was Sesonchosis (> Sesostris); the

legend ascribed to him acts of pharaohs of various dynasties. The narrative exhibits analogies to the > Ninus Romance, but the style of the fragments places it close to the New Testament and Apocryphal acts of the Apostles (+ New Testament Apocrypha). — Novel S.A. STEPHENS, J.J. WINKLER (ed.), Ancient Greek Novels: The Fragments, 1995, 246-266. M.FU.

Sesostris (Leo@oteic; Sesdstris). Greek form of the name of three Egyptian rulers of the 12th Dynasty, Egyptian z(j)-n-Wsrt: S.1 (1956-1911/10 BC), S. II (1882-1872 BC) and. III (1872-18 53/52 BC). In Hdt. 2,102-110 and Diod. Sic. 1,53-58, S. appears as the greatest general of Egypt, who conquered large parts of Asia and Europe. An alleged settlement of Egyptians in -+ Colchis is reported to go back to his campaigns. He is supposed to have been brought up together with all other Egyptian men who were born on the same day, for which possible Egyptian parallel cases [1] exist. After his return to Egypt from his campaigns, he escaped from an attempted murder by his brother, saving himself from the flames on the bodies of two of his sons. In the > Alexander Romance (— Pseudo-Callisthenes), he revealed himself to Alexander [4] the Great as > Sesonchosis, a great ruler of the past. The so-called > Sesonchosis Romance probably originated from an Egyptian

SESTERTIUS

1B. MatutEu, L’enigme du recrutement des ‘enfants du kap’: Une solution?, in: Géttinger Miszellen 41-48 2C.OBSOMER, Les campagnes de S. dote, 1989 SDS ele L995 4S.A. J.J. WINKLER (ed.), Ancient Greek Novels: ments, 1995, 246-266

177, 2000, dans HéroSTEPHENS, The Frag5 G.WrpMeER, Pharaons Maa-

Ré, Amenemhat and Sesostris: Three Figures from Egypt’s Past as Seen in Sources of the Graeco-Roman Period, in: K.RyYHOLT

(ed.), Acts of the 7th Demotic Conference,

2001, 361-378.

JO.QU.

Sestertius. ‘Sesterce’, Roman coin, abbreviated from semistertius = ‘third half = 2 */. > asses (Varro Ling. 5,173; Volusius Maecianus 46; Prisc. De figuris numerorum 17 f.; Vitr. De arch. 3,1,42). The sestertius was introduced around 214-211 BC together with the — denarius, as one quarter of the latter, which weighed "/>2 of a Roman pound and was equivalent to 10 > asses in the > sextantal standard, which was introduced at the same time. The sestertius was minted as a small silver coin at "/288 of a pound = 1 > scripulum. The images correspond to the > denarius and > quinarius: obverse head of Roma in helmet, reverse the Dioscuri on horseback. As denomination, the obverse bore II S (2 as + semis). In written usage, this value was crossed through (CIL I,2 1 No. 809 Z. 9; ILS 5317), later perfunctorily written as HS. The abbreviation HS was also retained after the revaluation of the sestertius to 4 asses around 141 BC and into the 3rd cent. AD. In comparison to the denarii, the silver sestertius was minted only in limited numbers from the beginning, and was already abandoned around 207 BC (RRC S. 34 f.; 628). However, probably because it initially corresponded to the weight of 1 scripulum, the sestertius nevertheless became accepted as the coinage of accounting. As such, it was called sestertius nummus or simply > nummus (ILS 7313; 8302, in numerals ILS 7911 f.; Cic. Rab. Post. 45). For simplification, sestertium also gained the meaning

1,000

sestertii

or

even

100,000

sestertii

{z. 1881]. In the Imperial era, the salary classes of the procurators (— Procurator) were named for their income in 1,000 sestertii (sexagenarii, ducenarit, etc.).

The silver sestertius was only coined again around 90 BC after the lex Papiria, then in several issues from 48-44 BC, all without denominations and with different types. All of these mintings were limited in scope. The sestertius reappeared in the copper coinage of the fleet prefects of M. Antonius [I 9], for the first time in brass. Here, it was vaguely oriented on the > quartuncia standard with one as equalling */, > uncia, i.e. a sestertius equalling 1 ounce, and bore 2 denominations, HS (crossed through) and A (4 asses). With the resump-

tion of copper minting by Augustus around

18 BC

339

340

intro-

[1] S., L. In order to illustrate the just administration of the first collegium of > decemviri, especially the justice of C. Iulius [I 13] Iullus, Livy (3,33,9 f.) and Cicero (Rep. 2,61) tell the anecdote that after a corpse was found buried in the house of S., Iulius — who, because of his office, could have condemned S. without granting the opportunity of provocation (> provocatio) — chose to charge him before the people. The praenomen P. that Livy gave to S. might indicate that a part of the tradition identified S. with the decemvir S. [5]. C.MU. [2] S. (Quirinalis), L. Born in 73 BC as the son of Albinia and of P. S. [3]. As early as 56, he appeared in his father’s lawsuit (Cic. Sest. 6; 10). In 44-42, he was quaestor and proquaestor under M. Iunius [I ro] Brutus (Cic.

SESTERTIUS (> Senatus

consultum

[2]), the sestertius was

duced as a brass coin of c. r ounce with an oak wreath and laurel twigs on the obverse, S C and the name of the master of the mint on the reverse. The sestertius and the other imperial coins made of base metal were divisional currency.

After Augustus, an imperial portrait appeared on the obverse, the reverse of the sestertius was used specially for the depiction of important events. By the late 2nd cent., the difference in the metal between brass and bronze coins blurred. Starting in the late 2nd cent, the sestertii, now often made of bronze, were often struck on planchets that were too small. In Greece, the sestertius was received as tetrassaron (teteaooagov/tetrdssaron) or noummos (vovpmoc/

noummos; > nomos [4]). However, the determination of the individual nominal values in the local bronze coinages in Thrace, Asia Minor and the Near East is difficult; weights and sizes of the individual nominals could deviate from the imperial Roman coinage. Clear denominations are rare. There was a local sestertius coinage corresponding to the imperial Roman, for example, in Lugdunum under Augustus and Tiberius and in Viminacium (Moesia superior) from AD 240-255. In the course of the monetary devaluation of the 3rd cent., bronze coins were forced more and more out of circulation; the > antoninianus, made of ever poorer silver, was increasingly accepted as the uniform currency. The minting of sestertii was abandoned after 260, when the antoninianus became de facto a silverplated bronze coin and the sestertius had too high a material value in relation. The double sestertius (head of the emperor with rayed crown) of Traianus Decius and Postumus remained episodic. Accounting according to sestertii largely ended with the end of the minting of the sestertius 1R.ZrEGLER,

Methodische

Uberlegungen

zur Rekon-

struktion von Nominalsystemen der stadtischen Aes-Pragung im Osten des rémischen Reiches, in: Litterae Numismaticae Vindobonenses 4, 1992, 189-213 2K.REGLING, s.v. Sesterz, RE 2A,

3 BMCRE, passim

4RIC, passim

1878-1882

5 RRC, passim.

DLK.

Sestinum. Etruscan township in the upper Pisaurus (modern Foglia) valley, modern Sestino, until the 4th cent. AD a flourishing municipium of the regio VI (Plin. HN 3,114), tribus Crustumina (CIL XI, p. 884). Etruscan and Roman burial finds, building foundations, sculptures, coins, inscriptions (CIL XI 5996-6025). A. MInTO, S., 1940; M. CorBIER, De Volsinii a S., in: REL 62 (1984), 1986, 236-274; G.Pact, Due dediche al dio Romulo d’etd tardo-antica, in: Cahiers du Centre G. Glotz 7, 1996, 135-144; M.ToreELui (ed.), Atlante dei siti archeologici della Toscana, 1992, 162-164. S.AM.

Sestius. Roman nomen gentile, sometimes confused with Sextius. The family surfaced as patrician with S. [1] and [5] in the mid 5th cent. BC. In the late Republic, it had only (politically insignificant) plebeian members. Rarer

Att. 16,2,4; Cass. Dio 53,32,4; SHERK

56; BMCRR

2,472 f.; IPerg 4062). He was proscribed in 43 (App. B Civ. 4,223), then pardoned and finally appointed cos. suff. in 23 (Cass. Dio 53,32,4). From his time with Brutus, he was a friend of > Horatius [7] who dedicated Carm. 1,4 to him. [3] S., P. Born in c. 95 BC, S. was married first to Albinia, then to a certain Cornelia. Sestia and S. [2] (Cic. Sest. 6; Fam. 5,6,1) were children from his first marriage. As quaestor of C. Antonius (I 2), S. took part in the fight against > Catilina (Cic. Sest. 8-12) in 63 and thereafter accompanied the former as proquaestor to Macedonia (Cic. Sest. 13). As tr. pl. in 57, he championed the recall of Cicero (Cic. P Red. Sen. 20) which earned him the charge of de vi in 56 (Cic. Ad Q. Fr. 2,3,5). Cicero’s successful defence speech (Cic. Sest.) is the most important source for S. In c. 55 he held the praetorship, because the lex Pompeia de iure magistratuum required that this office had to lie 5 years in the past before he could enter the governorship in Cilicia (49: Plut. Brutus 4,2). In 48, Caesar granted S. the continuation of his office (Cic. Att. 11,7,1; Bell. Alex. 34,5). In 39 and 35, he appeared in the senatorial rulings concerning Panamara and Aphrodisias respectively (SHERK 27; 29). Cicero mocked his style (Cic. Att. 7,17,2; cf. Catull. 44) but later judged S. positively (Cic. Ad Brut. 2,5,4). [4] S., Q. In 48 BC, he was part of a group that attempted to kill the Caesarian governor Q. Cassius [I 16] Longinus in Spain. He was caught but was able to redeem himself by paying a ransom (Bell. Alex. 55,5). J.BA. [5] S. Capitolinus Vaticanus, P. According to Livy (3532553 353353 £.), he campaigned in 452 BC as consul for the establishment of the decemviri and, as a result, was voted into their first collegium of 45x (InscrIt 13,1,93 £.; 364 f.; MRR 1,44-46). Festus (268; 270) mentions a law introduced by S. and his co-consul which limited the + multa to two sheep and 30 cows (on this [1. 98—ror]). Cf. S. [1]. 1 D. Fracn, Die Gesetze der frithen rémischen Republik,

1994.

C.MU.

Sestus (Lnotdc/Séstds). City on the European shore of the Hellespont (Hom. II. 2,836) where it is narrowest (known as the Heptastadion, Str. 2,5,22; 7a,1,52), con-

341

342

nected over a stretch of about 60 m by walls with the anchorage of Apobathra (Theop. FGrH 115 F 390; Str. 13,1,22), probably near modern Yalikavat. Founded c. 600 BC on the site of a Thracian settlement by Lesbos (Ps.-Scymn. 709 f.). It was from there that Darius [1] crossed over to Asia Minor in 512 BC after his campaign against the — Scythians (Hdt. 4,143,1); Xerxes bridged the Hellespont from there in 480 BC (Hdt. 7533; Str. 13,1,22) on his campaign against the Greeks. After their victory in the Mycale Mountains the Athenians conquered the strongly fortified city, which was held by the Aeolians and the Persians, in 478 BC (Hdt. 9,114-119; Thuc. 1,89,2). S. was also of strategic significance in the > Peloponnesian War (Xen. Hell. 1,1,7; 2,1,25). The Macedonians under Parmenion [1] crossed over to Asia Minor there in the spring of 334 BC (Arr. Anab. 1,11,6). In the Roman Period S. lost its earlier significance; Iustinianus [1] I had S. fortified once more (Proc. Aed. 4,10,24 f.).

interpretatio

Cu. Danoy, Altthrakien, 1968, 252; B. Isaac, The Greek

Settlements in Thrace Until the Macedonian Conquest, 1986, 195 f. Lv.B.

SETHIANISM

Graeca (- Interpretatio II) as Typhon (+ Typhoeus). In the Greek + magical papyri he occasionally assumes the ‘role of a devil’ in contexts of black magic. The animals associated with him (the S. animal, the boar and the ass) also had negative connotations. S.’s constellation, the bull’s thigh (i.e. the Plough), is also considered dangerous, and for this reason it has to be tethered in the northern sky so as not to harm Orion (i.e. Osiris) [2].

However, besides his negative role as the killer of Osiris, S. was also considered to be a protector of > Re;

he applies his strength, which surpasses that of all the other gods, to protecting Re from his arch-enemy, the snake Apophis [3]. Apart from the gods of the immediate circle of Osiris and the Asiatic deities, S. was primarily related, somewhat ambivalently, to > Thot. Occasionally, a son is attributed to S., an ephemeral croco-

dile demon called Maga, whose mother is unknown. For the most part, however, S. is thought to be childless, probably because of the temporary loss of his testicles in a battle with Horus; then again, he is considered particularly lascivious. His chief cult sites were Ombus (— Ombi [1]), sprmrw/Safaniya (in the Oxyrhynchus district), Awaris,

Setaea (D1toua; Sétaia). One of the Greeks’ Trojan pris-

Pi-Ramesse and the western oases (Al-Dahila, Al-Ha-

oners of war after the capture of Troy. On Mount ~ Sybaris, fearing threatening servitude, she persuades the women captured with her to set fire to the Greek fleet. As punishment she is shackled to a cliff for vultures to feed on (Lycophr. 1075-1082; Tzetz. Ad Lycoph. 921; 1075-1081). The place takes it name, Setaeum, from her (Steph. Byz. s. v. Zytatov; EM s. v. LYntaiov). According to Apollodorus (Epit. 6,15¢ = Tzetz. Ad Lycoph. 921) the fleet is burned by > Laomedon [1]’s daughters > Aethilla, > Astyoche [2] and + Medesicaste [2], according to Plutarch (Romulus 1,17f-18b) by one Rhome (in part of the tradition the eponym of the city of Rome). SLA.

riga). > Sethianism

Seth. As the killer of his brother > Osiris, S. is a central

Sethianism. Sethianism denotes a particular version of

figure of Egyptian mythology [8]. He is usually depicted with the head of an unidentified animal (known as the S. animal). He litigates and fights with the son of Osiris, — Horus, over Egypt’s rule [1]. Together, the two gods embody Upper and Lower Egypt; much more common, however, is the connexion of S. with the desert and foreign lands. In the New Kingdom, this led to his identification with the Syrian > Baal, who is associated with his consorts, the Asiatic goddesses — Anat and ~ Astarte. Through this connexion at the latest, S. took on characteristics of a weather god (+ Weather gods). The Ramessid period witnessed the flourishing of the S. cult (royal name > Sethos); in the Late period (713-332 BC), S. was increasingly proscribed due to the influence of the increasingly dominant cult of Osiris. In the Roman period, the cult of S. continued to flourish only in the oases (> Oasis), and with noteworthy modifications [4]. In other respects the S. of the Late period was considered to be an enemy of the gods [6], hence the

+ Gnosticism is denoted, after the role of > Seth, the sone of Adam, within this doctrine and through the critical adoption of an old heresiological term. It is primarily documented in a group of texts that were found near + Nag Hammadi. To this group belong the following: the Apocryphon of John, NHCod II,1, III,1, IV,x (with codex Berolinensis Gnosticus 2 and Iren. Adv. Haereses 29); the Hypostasis of the Archons, NHCod 11,4; the Gospel of the Egyptians, NHCod IIl,2, IV,2; the Apocalypse of Adam, NHCod V,5; the Three Steles of Seth, NHCod VII,5; Zostrianus, NHCod VIII,1; Melchizedek, NHCod IX,1; the Thought of Norea, NHCod IX,2; Marsanes, NHCod X; the Allogenes, NHCod XI,3; the Trimorphic Protennoia, NHCod XII. Further records are the untitled text from the codex Brucianus as well as Epiphanius, Ady. Haereses 26 and 39f. The doctrine of the Sethians is founded on their selfperseption as the seeds of Seth. Accordingly, Seth is

1 A.H. Garpiner, The Library of A. Chester Beatty, The Chester Beatty Papyri No. I,1931 2A.VON LIEVEN, Der Himmel iiber Esna, 2000, 24-29 3 G. NAGEL, S. dans la barque solaire, in: BIAO 28, 1929, 30-39 4 J. Osine, S. in Dachla und Charga, in: MDAI(K) 41, 1985, 229-233

5 E.Orro, Thot als Stellvertreter des S., in: Orientalia 7, 1938, 69-79 6S.ScHOTT, Biicher und Spriche gegen den Gott S., 1929 (with a supplement by J.Goyon, in: BIAO 75, 1975, 343-347)

Jumilhac, 1961 1972.

| 7J.VANDIER, Le papyrus

8 H.TE VELDE, S., God of Confusion, A.v.L.

SETHIANISM

regarded as the gnostic saviour. However, Sethianic soteriology may also take the form that Adamas is the actual saviour, who employs his son Seth as a means for salvation. A kind of superstructure is the notion of the four aeons of the avtoyevis (autogenes, ‘self-begotten’): Harmozel, Oroiael, Daveithe and Eleleth, who represent the heavenly resting places for Adam, Seth, the prehistoric and the present Sethians. The autogeneés himself is the third link in a triad of gods, specifically the divine son of the Invisible Spirit and his companion and spouse Barbelo. Another characteristic of this form of Gnosticism is the doctrine of eras. It is founded on the notion that the demiurge Jaldabaoth attempts to destroy the seed of Seth through the deluge, as well as the thought complex that the children of Seth — as the inhabitants of the land of Sodom and Gomorrha - were threatened by the fiery judgement of Jaldabaoth but were saved by the representatives of the world of light. This is tied to the notion that the saviour must come into the world three times altogether. Sethianism knew two sacraments, the more general one of baptism and the higher and repeatable one of cultic rise. Baptism can happen not only on earth but in heaven as well; the water used for baptism on earth has its source in heaven, where the three guards Micheus,

Michar and Mnesinus watch over it. Another trinity of persons, Jesseus, Mazareus and Jessedekeus, seems to have embodied the heavenly baptismal water itself. Heavenly and earthly baptisms are identical in the cult. Baptism enacts the eschatological rejection of darkness and the adoption of light. B.Layron (ed.), The Rediscovery of Gnosticism. II: Sethian Gnosticism (Studies in the History of Religions 41.2), 1981; J.-M.SEvrRIN, Le dossier baptismal séthien

(Bibliothéque Copte de Nag Hammadi, Section Etudes’ 2), 1986; J.D. TuRNER, Sethian Gnosticism: A Literary History, in: C.W. Hepricx, R.Hopeson (eds.), Nag Hammadi, Gnosticism, and Early Christianity, 1986, 55-86.

344

343

H.-M.SCHE.

Sethlans. Etruscan god of smithing: on the coins of ~ Populonia — the Etruscan city in which ore was smelted — the head of the god and the tools of a smith (tongs, hammer and double hatchet) were depicted [1. 271 fig. 1]. Representations stretching back to the 6th century BC from Greek myths [2. fig. 112] attribute to S. the role of the Greek + Hephaestus [3]. From the 4th century BC the name is attested, with the variants oe6/ans

In Etruria S. appears as a god of lightning, he, + Tinia and other gods (Serv. Aen. 1,42) are equipped with a lightning bolt. He can also avert fire (App. B Civ. 5,49). In accordance with the Etrusca disciplina (> Etrusci, Etruria III. D.) temples of S. were located outside the city walls (Vitr. De arch. 1,7). 1 M.Cristorani (ed.), Dizionario della civilta etrusca, 1985,271 2PrFirFiG 31.KRauskopr, s.v. S., LIMC

4.1, 654-658 4H.Rrx, Teonimi etruschi e teonimi italici, in: Annali della fondazione per il Museo Claudio Faina 5, 1998, 207-229.

L.A.-F.

Sethos (2é0we; Séthds). Name of two pharaohs, Egyptian Sthj. [1] Sethos I. Second king of the r9th dynasty, c. 1290-

1279 BC, already designated successor during the short reign of his father > Ramesses [1] I. One of his epithets (‘he who repeats creation’) suggests that his reign was supposed to be seen as the beginning of a new era, and indeed it was: most of the defining characteristics of the 19th dynasty, which became particularly distinct in the time of his son Ramses [2] II, began with S. He undertook several successful campaigns to Syria and Palestine, where initially he secured the Egyptian influence against the expanding Hittites. There are also records of campaigns against the Libyans and the Nubians. After the problems of the > Amarna period Egyptian rule was reestablished from the Orontes [7] to the Fourth Cataract. Internally, S. had the temples and representations of gods restored, which had been destroyed in the Amarna period. He began the building of a new residence in the Nile Delta (later Ramses City) and had numerous temples in Egypt and Nubia newly built or extended (many only finished by Ramses II). His tomb and mortuary temple in Thebes were used as a model for later kings of the New Kingdom. His mummy was moved several times in the 21st dynasty and survives in good condition. [2] S. IL. Fifth (or sixth?) king of the r9th dynasty, probably the son of Merenptah, c. 1203-1197. The basis of his chronology depends on whether the king Amenmesse (later regarded as illegitimate) was his predecessor (then S. would have reigned c. 1200-1194) or a temporary ‘rival king’ in Upper Egypt. During the time of S., Egypt was threatened (and presumably also affected) by invasions of the Libyans; even in Upper Egypt sporadically a state of war predominated. Hence only few monuments to S. are recorded. The decoration of his tomb was altered several times.

(ET Ta S.8), oe6lansg (ET Ta G.3), Getlans (ET Fa S.4), on Etruscan mirrors and gems; on the bronze Liver of

R. STADELMANN, K.A. KITCHEN, s. v. S., LA 5, 911-918; TH. SCHNEIDER, Lexikon der Pharaonen, *1996, 424-429.

Piacenza (> Etrusci, Etruria II. D.), however, it is not

K.-W.

mentioned. Etymologically the name S. belongs to the Umbrian substrate of Etruscan; in view of the meaning of the Latin word — situla (‘bucket’) and its close connexion with a specialised form of smithing, a link with the Umbrian *Sitelans, meaning ‘master (producer) of situlae’, can be considered certain [4. 211, 225].

Setia. City in Volsci territory on the Ufens (modern Ufente) river in the > Ager Pomptinus, modern Sezze. Founded in 382 BC as a Latin colonia (Vell. 1,14), S. set itself against Rome in the Latin War in 340 (Liv. 8,3) and in the Second Punic War in 209 BC (Liv. 27,9;

345

346

29,15,5). In 198 BC slaves together with Carthaginian hostages and prisoners interned in S. revolted (Liv. 32,26,5—-18). Parts of the city walls have survived. Temples of Apollo (CIL X 6463) and of Augustus (CIL X 6461; 6469) anda basilica (CIL X 6462) have not been located, but there is evidence of a sanctuary to Juno (8th-6th cent. BC) at Archi di San Lidano, a further sanctuary (5th—1st cent. BC) at Tratturo Canio, and of villae and baths.

micization of the Roman east after the Arab conquest. Modern interdisciplinary approaches and especially the contribution of historical sciences (anthropology, archaeobotany, palaeoecology), however, relativize this perspective and underline the primary economichistorical components of SC.

L. ZACCHEO, S., 1983; R. VOLPE, S., in: Supplementa Italica 6, 1990, 19-31. GU.

Settlement continuity. By SC the historical study of settlement understands uninterrupted continuation of a society of settlers for any longer period of time in one place, preferably across epoch boundaries. SC arises a) when one society of settlers adheres to its residential and economic space, or b) when a particular place of settlement is visited by societies of settlers continuously over quite a long period. Corresponding to the modern understanding of the term ‘settlement’ as a unit of residential and economic area, today the term SC is defined primarily in terms of economic history, whereas previously ethnic aspects were dominant. For scholars, SC is demonstrable in various ways: 1) by a historical tradition expressly stating the continuity of a settlement in the above sense; 2) by archaeological finds, either when the excavated stratigraphy of a site yields an uninterrupted settlement sequence, or when the sequence of occupation of associated burial places (from an archaeological

analysis of the burial site)

makes the uninterrupted use of a burial place by an associated settler community likely; 3) by archaeobotanical finds, primarily pollen analysis, which by means of ‘settlement indicators’ (cultivated plants) makes phases of human settlement activity visible, just as by means of wild plants it shows any discontinuities. Viewed historically, SC stands for stable settlement conditions during which the relationship of the settlers to their economic areas remained unaltered or continued to develop without recognizable breaks. This can also signify economic stagnation, however, when adherence to traditional economic sites within a small area is associated with large-scale economic changes. Particular significance was attributed to SC in the context of epoch transitions in the history of events or leadership. Cultural change in the earliest farming cultures of the Neolithic, the ‘colonization’ by the Israelites of late Bronze Age Palestine, the transition in the Orient from the Persian period to the Hellenistic, ‘becoming Roman’ (> Romanization) in the East and the West, the ‘colonization’ by Germanic peoples during the Migration period, and the beginning of Islamic power in the Orient and northern Africa, time and again raise the question of SC. In the interests of ideology this often used to be constricted to ethnic or racial components, primarily in relation to the settlement of Germanic peoples in the west of the Roman Empire and to the Isla-

+ Town, city;

SETTLEMENT, FORMS OF

> Town (C)

P.E. Husincer, Kulturbruch oder Kulturkontinuitat von der Antike zum Mittelalter, 1968; G.NIEMEIER, Siedlungsgeographie, vol. 4, 1977, 171 f.; C. Vira-Finzi, Archaeological Sites in Their Setting, 1978, 9-155; J. WERNER, E. Ewia (eds.), Von der Spatantike zum Friihen Mittelalter, 1979, 9-16; B. BALDWIN, Continuity and Change, in: R. HOHLFELDER (ed.), City, Town and Countryside ..., 1982, 1-25; H.-P. KUHNEN, Studien zur Chronologie und

Siedlungsarchaologie des Karmel (Supp. to TAVO B 72), 1989, 264-269.

H.KU.

Settlement, forms of. Form of settlement is a term used by archaeobotanists, geographers, historians and archaeologists studying the connexions between residential and economic areas [1. 14 f.] that result from the choice of location of settlement, use of land, and forms of cultivation and production, in short, from the totality of human activities in terms of space, at a particular topographical position. Since the Neolithic Revolution, forms of settlement had been subject to a process of differentiation, proceeding at a pace that varied regionally: from the 6th millennium BC, initially in the Orient, later also in Europe, central city-like settlements with a corresponding functional surplus began to emerge from the mass of simple rural settlements. These settlements were as a rule fortified, served as centres for ruling and cults, and had strategically favourable locations. They lived on their overarching functions for industry, trade and communications and were dependent on the surrounding lands for their basic provisions. Besides larger city-like centres (+ Town, city), a further category is fortified ‘citadels’ or princely seats (> Princes’ tomb), in the Mediterranean area (e.g. - Mycenae, > Tiryns) from the Bronze Age, north of the Alps (e.g. + Heuneburg, Mont Lassois) from the Iron Age. These central settlements attained their highest stage of development around the Aegaean, where since c. 600 BC poleis (> Polis) with developed municipal constitutions had emerged, whose citizens controlled the surrounding > territorium with villages (> komé) inhabited by dependent tenants. The large late Celtic fortified settlements of the West (> Oppidum) up to a certain degree reflect these developments in the Greek Mediterranean world, in which during the Hellenistic period a tendency developed for neighbouring village settlements to group themselves into single large fortified settlements (— Synoikismos). The Greek polis constitution laid the foundation for the development of highly differentiated kinds of Roman settlement. These developed during the > Romanization of Italy in the Republican period. The late Republic and the early Principate expanded this mu-

347

348

nicipal policy, which provided a privileged legal status for communities with significance for the state, in the provinces. Thus the > Roman Empire had > coloniae and > municipia as privileged classes of urban settlement whose citizens owned property in their territoria. Imbedded in the associated economic areas was the villa rustica (> Villa) as a rural form of settlement and production. Beneath this level are vici (> Vicus), civitates (> Civitas) and oppida as forms of settlement without their own territoria and without privileged legal status. To be strictly distinguished from these legal categories, by contrast, are size and outward appearance of settlements, as these components depend on other factors, such as significance for traffic routes and economic power. The > constitutio Antoniniana and the reforms of — Diocletianus and Constantinus [1] I caused the various categories of municipal law to lose their significance, so that the Latin terms for settlements in late Antiquity hold little relevance to questions of settlement geography. — Municipal laws; + Settlement, continuity of; ~ Town, city

Aragvi) to the Portae Caucasiae (modern Dariali), near

SETTLEMENT, FORMS OF

1 G. Kossack et al. (ed.), Archaologische und naturwis-

senschaftliche Untersuchungen an landlichen und frithstadtischen Siedlungen ..., 1984.

GENERAL:

G.SCHWARZ, Allgemeine Siedlungsgeografie

(Lehrbuch der Allgemeinen Geographie 6), 1966, 191248; M.Born, Geographie der landlichen Siedlungen, 1977, 27-40; H. JANKUBN, Einfihrung in die Siedlungsarchaologie, 1977, 103-173; E. ENNEN, W. JANSSEN, Deutsche Agrargeschichte, 1979, 20-71; F. Kos, Die Stadt im Altertum, 1984, 18-238. STUDIES ON SPECIFIC TOPICS: J.COLLIS, Oppida, 1984; H.GALSTERER, Stadt und Territorium, in: F. VitTINGHOFF (ed.), Stadt und Herrschaft (HZ Beiheft 7), 1982, 75-106; B.GRAMSCH, Nordostdeutschland, in: B. Cotes, A. OLIvieER (ed.), The Heritage Management of

the modern town of Cicamuri in Georgia. Excavations: Hellenistic city wall and buildings with ashlar foundations (with cramp insets), clay brick walls above and tiled roofs. — Harmozice; > Iberia [1] O.LoRDKIPANIDZE, Das alte Georgien (Kolchis und Iberien) in Strabons Geographie: neue Scholien, 1996, 112 f.; 174 f. AP.-L.

Seuthes (LevOnc/Seuthés). [1] S. I. Odrysian king, son of > Sparadocus, who in 424 BC inherited the kingdom from his uncle > Sitalces [x] (Thuc. 2,101,5; 4,101,5) after the latter had ended the fight against — Perdiccas [2] in 429 through S.’ intervention. In the following, S. was married to Perdiccas’ sister Stratonice [1] (Thuc. 2,101,6). Beginning

in 410 under > Maesades und > Teres, partial principalities separated themselves from the Odrysian kingdom which had been quite powerful at S.’ accession (Thuc. 2,97,3). S. was succeeded in c. 410/405 BC by + Medocus [1. 119-121; 3. 78-83].

[2] S. Il. Thracian paradynast in the late sth to the early 4th cent. BC on the Propontis under king > Medocus at whose court he had been raised. S. took the rest of Xenophon’s ‘ten thousand’ into his service in order to recapture the empire of his father - Maesades (Xen. An. 7). Inc. 398, he supported > Dercylidas (Xen. Hell. 3,2,2-9). After S. revolted against Medocus (Aristot. Pol. 5,8,13 12a), the two reconciled in 389 with the help of Thrasybulus and formed an alliance with Athens (Xen. Hell. 4,8,26; Diod. Sic. 14,94,2; 1G II/III* 21,22 = StV 238). Through — Iphicrates, S. gained new territories (Nep. Iphicrates 2,1). Shortly before the > Peace of Antalcidas, S. once again became an enemy of Athens

Wetlands in Europe (Europae Archaeologiae Consilium

(Arist. 1,293; [1. 122-125, 216-219; 3. 84-88]). Inter-

Paper no. 1), 2001, 55-63; V.FRiITz, Die Stadt im Alten

esting silver coins and probably bronze coins as well are

Israel, 1990,

attributed to S. [1] or S. [2] [3. 76-78].

15-19; A.H. M. Jones, The Greek City from

Alexander to Justinian, 1940 (repr. 1979); H.-P.

KUHNEN,

Studien zur Chronologie und Siedlungsarchaologie des Karmel (Beiheft zu TAVO B72), 1989, 234-255; M. MUL-

LER-WILLE, Siedlungs- und Flurformen als Zeugnisse friihgeschichtlicher Betriebsformen der Landwirtschaft, in: H.JANKUHN,

R.WENskus

(ed.), Geschichtswissen-

schaft und Archaologie (Vortrage und Forschungen 22), 1979, 355-372; G. Pucci, Schiavitu romana nelle campagne, in: A. CARANDINI (ed.), Settefinestre ..., 1984, I521; H. von Petrikovirts, Kleinstadte und nichtstadtische Siedlungen, in: H.JANKUHN et al. (ed.), Das Dorf der Eisenzeit und des friihen Mittelalters .... 1977, 86-135;

E. WILL, Die 6konomische Entwicklung und die antike Polis, in: H.-G. KIpPENBERG

(ed.), Seminar: Die Entste-

hung der antiken Klassengesellschaft, 1977, 100-135. H.KU.

Seusamora (Zevoduoea/Teiocuoea; Seusdmoral/ Seisdmora). One of three cities of Iberia in the Caucasus

mentioned by name in Str. 11,3,5; a fortress on the route through the valley of the + Aragus (modern

[3] Hipparch

of — Cersobleptes

(Polyaenus,

Strat.

7,32), at times identified with S. [2] or S. [4].

[4] S. Il. Odrysian ruler from c. 330 to the early 3rd cent. BC who built his residence + Seuthopolis following Greek models. S. fought successfully against the foreign Macedonian rule of Alexander [4] the Great (Curt. 10,1,45). The conflict against > Lysimachus [2] first ended in a draw in 323 (Diod. Sic. 18,14, 2-4; cf. 19,73,5; Paus. 1,9,6), in

313, however, S. was defeated

when he supported the revolt of the Pontic cities and Antigonus [1] (Diod. Sic. 19,73,8). S. had four sons with his wife Berenice: Hebryzelmis [2], > Teres, Satocus and Sadalas (IGBulg. 3,173 1); it is unclear whether Rhebulas and Cotys (IG I/II? 349 = Top 193) are the sons of S. [4] or S. [3]. S. developed a rich bronze coinage [I. 307-316; 2; 3. 172-202]. 1 Z.H. ARCHIBALD, The Odrysian Kingdom of Thrace, 1998 2K.-L.Etvers, Der Eid der Berenike und ihrer Sohne: eine Edition von IGBulg. III 2, 1731, in: Chiron 24, 1994, 241-266 3U.PrTER, Die Minze der thrakischen Dynasten (5.-3. Jh. v. Chr.), 1997. UP.

350

349

Seuthopolis (ZevOdxoAtc/Seuthopolis). Residence city of king Seuthes [4] III of Thrace, 3,5 km to the south of modern Koprinka (municipality of Kazanlak in Bulgaria) at the confluence of the Goljama Varovica and the Tonzos (modern TundzZa). A city wall of 890 menclosed a pentagon (orthogonal city layout) of 5 hectares. In the agora there was a temple to Dionysus, with a great altar in its centre. In the northern part of S. there was a fortress defended by a wall of its own (4620 m?) with the

residence of Seuthes III (40 x 17 m); there was also a sanctuary here to the Samothracian Cabiri (> Samothrace). S. issued its own coins. Building crafts, pottery and metal working were well developed. Numerous amphora stamps document far-reaching trading relations. S. existed until c. 270-260 BC. D.P. Dimitrov, Trakijskijat Grad Sevtopolis, in: Sevtopolis x, 1981, 11-17; Id., M.CiéiKova, The Thracian City of S., 1978; K. Dimitrov, Antiéni moneti ot Sevtopolis, in: Sevtopolis 2, 1982, 7-127; A.G. Poutter, Ancient Bulgaria, vol. 1, 1983, 289-303. Ly.B.

Seven against Thebes. Mythological subject matter, first treated in Greek epic (Thebaids in the epic cycle, EpGF p. 21-27; Thebaid by — Antimachus [3]) and

then in tragedy; extant: Aeschylus ‘Seven against Thebes’, ‘Exta éi @nfac/Hepta epi Thebas, Septem contra Thebas; Soph. Ant.; Soph. O. C.; Eur. Phoen.; Eur. Supp.; Eur. Hypsipyle (fr.). The lyric poets Stesichorus (PMGEF p. 180-183; 213-218) and Pindar (O. 6,13-17;

N. 9,8-27) also used aspects of this material as their

theme. The story was already known to Homer (Hom. Il. 4,376-410 and elsewhere). Later sources are in particular Sen. Phoen., Stat. Theb., Diod. Sic. 4,65, Apollod. 3,6 f., Hyg. Fab. 68-74 and Paus. 2,20,5; 9,5,1214; 8,3-9,5; 18,1-6; 25,1 f.; 10,10,3 f. Groups of statues of the Seven and their sons, the Epigoni, stood on the Sacred Road to Delphi and on the agora

in Argos

(Paus.

10,10,3 f.; 2,20,5).

Various

scenes from the myth were depicted on Greek vases (especially in the first half of the 5th cent. BC), on Apulian vessels, on the frieze of the heroon at Golbasi-Trysa and a gold amphora from Panagjuriste, frequently in Etruscan art (antepagmentum of temple A in Pyrgi, pediment from Talamone, funerary urns) and occasionally on sarcophagi [1; 2; 3]. + Eteocles [x] and > Polyneices, the sons of — Oedi-

pus, become enemies when they fight over the rulership of — Thebes. They agree to rule alternately while the other leaves the country, but Eteocles, who comes to power first, breaks the agreement and refuses to hand over the throne. Polyneices, with the support of his father-in-law > Adrastus [1], the king of Argos, and six other leaders, thereupon marches against Thebes. The six are > Tydeus, who has also fled his homeland, the seer -> Amphiaraus (brother-in-law of Adrastus), + Capaneus, nearly always — Parthenopaeus and ~ Hippomedon [r], sometimes Mecisteus and Eteoclus and occasionally Halitherses (Adrastus himself is not always counted as one of the Seven; cf. Aesch. Sept.

SEVEN AGAINST THEBES

375-652; Eur. Supp. 860-938; Stat. Theb. 4,32-3445 Apollod. 3,63; Hyg. Fab. 70; Paus. 2,20,5; 10,10,3;

Pind. see above). Amphiaraus, who knows that the expedition will fail and he himself will perish, opposes the venture and hides, but his wife > Eriphyle, bribed with a necklace, betrays him (Hom. Od. 11,326 f.; 15,243248). The army interrupts its march in Nemea in search of water. While Hypsipyle (+ Lemnian women), the wet-nurse of the king’s son Opheltes/Archemorus, is showing the Argives a spring, her charge is killed by a snake. The Argives save Hypsipyle from the wrath of the parents and celebrate the first Nemean Games in honour of the deified child (+ Nemea [3]; Eur. Hypsipyle; Stat. Theb. 4,646-7,104). The march continues and Tydeus is sent to negotiate with Eteocles, but without success. On his way back to the army, he is ambushed by the Thebans, but Tydeus kills all fifty men except for Maion [2] (Hom. Il. 4,374-3933; 5,801-808; Stat. Theb. 2,364-743). An attempt at reconciliation by > Tocaste likewise fails (Eur. Phoen. 115 f.; 301-637; Sen. Phoen. 363-664; Stat Theb. 7,470-615). The Seven, recognizable by the symbols on their shields, take up position in front of the seven gates of Thebes and storm the city. Eteocles, supported by ~ Creon [1] and > Teiresias, organizes the defence. An oracle demands the life of a descendant of the > Sparti for saving Thebes; Creon’s son > Menoeceus [2] sacrifices himself (Eur. Phoen. 833-1092; Stat. Theb. 10,5 80-836). Apart from Adrastus, who flees on his stallion > Areion, all the leaders of the attackers perish: Amphiaraus is swallowed up by an earthquake, Tydeus is slain by > Melanippus [1], whose brains he devours as he dies, Parthenopaeus and Hippomedon are killed, Capaneus is hit by a lightning bolt from Zeus while climbing the walls and Eteocles and Polyneices kill one another in single combat. Creon as the new king forbids burial of his fallen enemies. > Antigone [3] nonetheless buries her brother Polyneices, for which she is punished by death (Soph. Ant.). The widows of the Argive princes, led by Adrastus, come to Athens to plead with > Theseus. He leads a new campaign against Thebes and is victorious and the dead receive their honours. > Evadne [2] throws herself on Capaneus’ funeral pyre (Eur. Supp.; Stat. Theb. 12). Ten years later the sons of the Seven, the Epigoni (cf. + Epigoni [2]), successfully mount a revenge campaign (Hom. Il. 4,405-410; Diod. Sic. 4,66; Apollod. 3,80-82; Hyg. Fab. 71; Paus. 10,10,4). — Aeschylus (B.2.); + Epic cycle; > Theban circle 1 J.KrauskorF, Der etruskische Sagenkreis und andere griechische Sagen in der etruskischen Kunst, 1974 2 Id., s.v. Septem, LIMC 7.1, 730-748 3 KocH/SICHTERMANN, 186 ill. 202; 416 f. ill. 439. G.L. ARMANTROUT, The Seven against Thebes in Greek Art, Diss. Univ. Michigan 1990 (1991); E. BETHE, Thebanische Heldenlieder, 1891; W. BURKERT, Seven against Thebes: An Oral Tradition between Babylonian Magic and Greek Literature, in: C. BRILLANTE (ed.), I poemi epici

rapsodici non omerici e la tradizione orale, 1981, 30-48 (Lit. 48); M. Davigs, The Epic Cycle, 1989, 23-32; C. Ro-

SEVEN

AGAINST

THEBES

BERT, Oidipus,

1915; A.Rzacu,

s.v. Kyklos, RE 11.2,

2361-2378; F.G. WeLCKER, Der epische Cyclus, vol. 2, *1892, 313-4053 Id., Die spateren Thebaiden, auch die des Statius, in: Id., KS zur Griechischen Literaturgeschichte 1, 1844, 392-401; U.vON WILAMOWITZ-MOELLENDORFF, Die sieben Tore Thebens, in: Hermes 26, 1891, 191-242; E. Wust, s.v. Polyneikes, RE 21.2, 1774-1788; C. ZIMMERMANN, Der Antigone-Mythos in der antiken Literatur und Kunst, 1993. CL.K.

Seven Sages. Plato (Prot. 343a) is the first to mention seven names. Of those > Thales of Miletus, > Pittacus of Mytilene, > Bias [2] of Priene and > Solon [1] of Athens firmly belong to the circle of the SS (ot éxté& oodov/hepta sophoi; Latin septem sapientes), whereas + Cleobulus [1] of Lindus, Myson of Chen and ~» Chilon [1] of Sparta compete with altogether ten others (primarily > Pythagoras [2]) (Diog. Laert. 1,40-42). In contrast to Plato, Demetrius [4] of Phalerum (10,3 DK) replaces Myson with > Periander of Corinth. With this the final catalogue was established. The connexion between > wisdom and the number seven is supported by oriental and early Greek parallels [1. 15; 2. 106]. It was earlier than Plato that the circle of the SS was invented ([3. 357 f.], otherwise: [4]): The tradition had developed by the 6th/5th cents. BC, presumably supported by the + oracle of Delphi, where at the Temple of Apollo there were sayings to read, which were ascribed to one or other of the SS [5. 2251 f.; 6. vol. 1, 649-652; 3. 361 f.]. Their origin is explained as a change from the period when the paradigms of practical cleverness offered by Greek myths (— Nestor [1], > Odysseus) were no longer adequate [3. 362-364]. Gnomic proverbial wisdom is considered characteristic of the SS (primarily worldly wisdom and political shrewdness; —> gnome). By the Classical period the legendary and the historical in ancient tradition (Alc. fr. 360 VoIGT, Simon. fr. 37 and 76 PaGE; esp. Hdt. 1,27; 29-333; 59; 74 f.; 1703 7,235) could no longer be separated. Particularly in the Hellenistic period other fictions were echoed in collections of sayings (10,3 DK),

epistolary novels (Diog. Laert. 1,43-122) and in the literary invention of a symposium of the SS (Plut. Mor. 146b-164d). Pittacus was an ~ aisymnétés, Solon a political mediator, other sages were political advisors. Thus, in the competition between philosophy and rhetoric both sides were able to appeal to them (Cic. De orat. 3,56). The numerous likenesses of individuals (also double herms) and groups of SS represent ideals without authenticity [7. 81-91; 8. 95-108]. 1B.SNELL, Leben und Meinungen der Sieben Weisen, 41971 2 W.BurRKERT, Die orientalisierende Epoche in der griechischen Religion und Literatur, 1984 3 W.ROsLER, Die Sieben Weisen, in: A. ASSMANN (ed.),

Weisheit. Archaologie der literarischen Kommunikation, vol. 3, 1991, 357-365 4D.FEHLING, Die Sieben Weisen und die friihgriechische Chronologie, 1985 5 O. BARKOWSKI, s. v. Sieben Weisen, RE 2 A, 2242-2264 6 Nitsson, GGR-

a)

351

7G.M. A. RicuTer, The Portraits of

the Greeks, vol. 1, 1965 8 B.C. Ewa.p, Der Philosoph als Leitbild. Ikonographische Untersuchungen an romischen Sarkophagreliefs, 1999. Ife

Seven wonders of the world see > Wonders of the world

Severan dynasty. The SD, also referred to as “The Severans’, ‘Severan era’, or, owing to the origins of the family in Africa and Syria, the ‘African/Syrian emperors’, lasted c. 40 years from the accession of their founder, > Septimius [II 7] Severus (AD 193-211), via his sons by Iulia [12] Domna, > Caracalla (198-217) and + Geta [2] (209-211), to Iulia Domna’s great nephews + Elagabalus [2] (218-222) and — Severus [2] Alexander (222-235). The sequence of Severan emperors was interrupted for about a year (April 217-mid 218) by the rule of Macrinus who, however, associated himself with his immediate predecessors by adopting the epithet Severus, and giving his son, whom he appointed first Caesar then Augustus, the epithet Antoninus (RIC IV 2).

The emperor Septimius Severus was descended on his father’s side from a respected Punic family in + Leptis Magna, the family having possessed Roman citizenship since the rst cent. AD, and was divided into an Italic and an African branch; on his mother’s side he was descended from the Fulvii, migrants from Italy. The grandfather L. Septimius Severus had held the highest office in Leptis Magna, that of a > sufetes, and had become the first > duumvir in the town raised to the status of colonia under > Traianus [1]; the Italic branch had already attained senatorial rank in his father’s generation, while the African branch attained it with the

future emperor, who began his senatorial career in Rome in about 164 [1. 8-56]. When, shortly after the murder of > Pertinax, Septimius Severus was acclaimed emperor by the soldiers in Carnuntum who were angered by the sale of imperial office to Didius [II 6] he, like > Vespasianus before him (> Flavian dynasty, see appendices), could demonstrate no kinship relations with earlier emperors. Unlike Vespasian, however, he did not confine himself to securing family rule through the involvement of his sons, but also included his wife > Iulia [12] Domna who, although she is not likely to have had any external political influence, as > Augusta [o] (see appendices) received many familial honorific titles (Mater et al.) [2. 75-97; 142]. Above all, however, Septimius established links with his predecessors. Not only did he associate himself with Pertinax, beloved by the Danube legions, by proclaiming himself his avenger, pursuing the latter’s deification (— consecratio; Cass. Dio 74,17,4), and immediately adopting his name as part of his own imperial name: in 195 he had recourse to ~ Marcus [2] Aurelius, having himself adopted into the former emperor’s gens Aurelia. He thereby became the son of Marcus Aurelius (RIC IV 1, no. 686) and brother of + Commodus (AE 1951, no. 75), lifting the latter’s

>

Yq

Pasapanw) (GOZ

2429

BNR} Co (7) “Ww

sniainy II] [OL

sniuydas II] [Z (€0Z

(eugew

‘B|jeoeseD)(12-861

smiuiydas snueisseg snijainy snuluojuy

a]

Se

g ‘g

= sniwidas II] [€ 2429 sniwndas PyaH

8329)‘[Z]

2

(LLZ-€6L)

uondope

snijainy

smianas “Zz CO sniwiydasSMaaas

L2-602 (1

'

annry

snauey [7]

sniuydas ||] [Z ‘sae “7

aS

eiDDed euRlueW CO 7“, ‘p) a40Jaq(S81 ‘dw

sniudas BJD

sydaq

sniwiqdassnuanas

snueiyne|d

ajajns) ye

BIAINY eid CO ‘g

*7

ueiaAasasnoy

=)

BlAjn4 [€] pal!xa)(GOZ

‘S02) I/

ay)

snyeqese)3) ‘[Z]

snueA snqAy snijainy

;

[=

224) =

eB1)n) [ZL] esaew oO “>

(27-812

snueisseg «) (0 snuluojuy

———————-

| B1/N|[6] */ CO 7 Co

snyay

snijainy snuaaas [Z]

BIYSN|JeSBIqieg

‘w

CO

BURIGIC

snurisseg

PAY varuey UMOUUL] snissay snueinew

snueixa|y

snisnsny

Pysnsny

sniwmijdas =

euwog =

«————_uoljdopy (snissay) snijn| SNuURIXa|\y «) (807

sniin| II] [ZZ “so2) “YNs “82 (00Z

BI/N| [ZZ] Seimaeos (eBuRisseg) CO “xXag snueA ||] [9 snjja4eW

euwod

snueisseg snjeqese|q ye (esatug

Japuexajy (S€Z-7ZZ) BN] Pyne [LL] B1ausiod ‘| CO °Z CO eIIN]| BIINbY BIBA’S [eISAA) (UIBIIA '€ CO eluuy eljainy Pulysney ‘py CO eI]N] BIINby BIBAVS |PISAA) (UIBIIA

"Ww

B/N} [ZL]

ysaud) 40 JOS

Snijn| ||] [ZZ

SnuluOjUY (O8L-L9L)

fom)

394 SEVERAN DYNASTY

SEVERAN DYNASTY

355

» damnatio memoriae and immediately having him deified. Septimius could now present (starting with + Antoninus [1] Pius; cf. + Antonine) five deified forebears (CIL VIII 9317; ILS 420). At the same time, his elder son Septimius Bassianus (+ Caracalla) was also adopted into the gens and elevated to Caesar (from 195: M. Aurelius Antoninus Caesar). In 197 Caracalla became Augustus and Geta [2] was appointed Caesar (209 Augustus), both sons being presented throughout the empire and especially to

the

army

as

Septimius’

successors

356 influence had not previously been known, and was seen as un-Roman (> Imperial family, women of the; ~» Women rulers, see appendices; [2. 9-74]). 1 A.BrrLey,

Septimius

Severus,

The

African

Emperor,

21988 2E.KETTENHOFEN, Die syrischen Augustae in der historischen Uberlieferung, 1979 3 W.KuHOFF, Felicior Augusto, melior Traiano, 1993. 4H. HALFMANN, Itinera principum, 1986 5 J.SUNsKEs-THompson, Aufstande

und Protestaktionen im Imperium Romanum, 1990. W.ED.

[3. 102-8;

4. 50-3]. After Septimius’ death in 211, rule accordingly passed without problem to his sons. The army’s loyalty to the SD was so firmly established that Macrinus had to conceal his participation in the murder of Caracalla (217) [5. 68-70], and was immediately toppled when a pretender appeared in the person of Elagabalus, some 14 years old at the time, whose mother — Iulia [22] Soaemias was not only related to the imperial house, but was even supposed to have conceived him from Caracalla with whom she was supposed to have had an aitaine (Gass Dios ox 3O t idness.guten (54 74—9)|\)When acceptance of Elagabalus wavered owing to his lack of interest in military affairs and his peculiar lifestyle, in 221, at the urging of his grandmother Iulia [17] Maesa and his aunt Iulia [9] Mamaea, Elagabalus adopted the latter’s son > Severus [2] Alexander who was about 14 years old. Alexander, after the murder of his adoptive father and cousin in 222, ascended the throne with ease; but his attempt to perpetuate the SD by elevating his father-in-law Seius Sallustius [II 5] to Caesar (225) met with failure when Sallustius was implicated in an attempted overthrow, and was executed in 227. Being the last of the Severans, Severus Alexander was murdered along with his mother in 235 at Mogontiacum (modern Mainz) by the soldiers who had acclaimed + Maximinus [2] Thrax emperor. Owing to its stability, the SD had temporarily protected the Roman Empire from the turmoil of continual claims by pretenders to the throne which were to endanger the internal and external security of the Empire during the 3rd cent.; at the same time, however, by their open preference for the military, the Severans had also prepared the ground for the dominant role of the army in the succession to the throne (— Soldier emperors; [5. 3]). The mainly negative portrayal of the period in ancient sources (Cassius [III 1] Dio, Herodianus [1], — Historia Augusta), due to the tense relationship between the Severans and the Senate, conceals the formers’ achievements, especially in the first phase of the dynasty, in the areas of law, administration and consolidation of the frontiers (cf. the evaluation under — Septimius [II 7] Severus). Another cause of the poor opinion of the Severans in ancient sources was the critical role of Syrian women within the imperial house, especially pronounced both in the transfer of rule and politically, at the time of the very young accessions of the emperors Elagabalus und Severus Alexander. Such

Severe style [1] Name given by [6. 124] to a group of Greek majuscule book-hands (+ Majuscule); characteristics are stiff, angular strokes, caused by the ‘severe’ letter forms

(with a predominance of straight rather than curved strokes), and the contrast between narrow (e. g. E, O, O, =) and broad letters (e. g. A, A, K, A, M,N, I, T). [5]

used the term Bakchylideische Unziale (‘Bacchylidean uncials’), referring to the most famous example, the book roll of Bacchylides’ epinicia (PLond. inv. 733 = PLit. Lond. 46). [7. 22], on the other hand, includes severe style in the category of ‘formal mixed’ hands: alternation of broad and narrow letters, mixing angular forms (in the case of broad letters) with round. Further features are, for example, the downward-curved A with a pointed tip, a very broad M, a W witha central ‘curled’ stroke, a small O, placed higher than the bottom line, a ® with a flattened and often rhomboid ring, and an » with a very flat or completely missing middle vertical stroke. The large number of book-hands generally regarded as severe style is an inhomogeneous group and not a > writing style in the strict sense; it should more properly be called a ‘style category’. Variants: observance of the two-line system, varying distances between letters, letters executed in upright or sloping style, uniform hand as well as alternating main and hair strokes, and also sometimes letters with deco-

rative strokes [3. 37-38]. The script of the Bacchylides roll itself has unusual special forms of A,M,N, Y, which have no counterpart in any other severe writing. Sug-

gestions of dating for the Bacchylides papyrus (and its severe style) range from the rst cent. BC [4. 75] to rst— 3rd cents. AD [2. ro9-110]. TURNER [7], followed by CAVALLO [1. 74], thinks the middle of the 2nd cent. AD is likely; he interprets the archaic qualities of the script as a conscious return to Ptolemaic models at the time of Hadrian and the Antonines [7. 22], which was generally marked by archaizing tendencies. The severe style became extremely widespread in book production in the 2nd and 3rd cents. AD and, with a preference for increasingly sloping letter forms, continued to develop further, but was ultimately superseded by the > uncials and the sloping pointed majuscule. The ‘upright’ type of the sloping pointed majuscule of the mid-Byzantine period (gth—roth cents.) possibly goes back to the severe style, as suggested in particular by the stylisation towards an upright axis [2. 108-109, 110°]. > Majuscule; > Uncials; > Writing styles

358

sDVE 1G.CavaLLo,

Note

sulla scrittura greca

libraria dei

papiri, in: Scriptorium 26, 1972, 71-76 2E.Crisci, La maiuscola ogivale diritta, in: Scrittura e civilta 9, 1985, 103-145 3 M.S. FuNGuI, G. MEsSERI SAVORELLI, Sulla

scrittura di P. Oxy. Il 223 + P. Kéln V 210, in: Analecta Papyrologica

1, 1989, 37-42

4F.G.

Kenyon,

The

SEVERINUS

404 and probably died in 409. His over 40 extant sermons (on his works, cf. CPG 2, no. 4185-4295, 4701,

4735, 4906) reveal that he was a representative of Antiochian-typological textual exegesis with a dogmatic interest.

Palaeography of Greek Papyri, 1899, 75-76, Taf. 13

H.-D.ALTENDORF,

5 M.Norsa, La scrittura letteraria greca dal secolo IV

Untersuchungen

zu

Severian

von

6 W.SCHUBART,

Gabala, Diss. (typewr.) Tubingen 1957; K.-H.UTHEMANN, Forms and Communication in the Homilies by

Griechische Palaographie, 1925, 124-132, Taf. 83-89 7 E.G. TURNER, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World (ed. P.J. PARSONS), 71987. G.M.

Severian of Gabala ..., in: M.B. CUNNINGHAM, P. ALLEN (Ed.), Preacher and Audience. Studies in Early Christian and Byzantine Homiletics, 1998, 139-177. PH.H.

[2] Archaeological term for the period of post-archaic, pre-classical Greek art (in all genres) from 490/480 to 460/450 BC, first recognized by H. MEYER (1812) [1], replaced by Lanciotz with herber Stil (‘austere style’; [2]), though this did not gain acceptance. Anglophone scholars use both ‘severe style’ [3] and ‘early classical’

[2] Iulius S.; Latin Rhetor in the sth cent. AD from Gallia, praised by Sid. Apoll. Epist. 9,15 for his elevated style. His rhetorical compendium, aimed at an unidentifiable Desiderius — probably a student of rhetoric — presents the rhetorical edifice of teachings neither systematically nor completely but is interesting because of its quotations from otherwise lost writings and its treatment of Latin stylistics.

a.C. all’ VIII d.C., 1939, 21-22, pl. 10a

[4]. 1 D. Wixiers, Zu den Anfangen der archaistischen Plastik in Griechenland, 1975, 20

2E.LANGLOoTz, Frihgrie-

chische Bildhauerschulen, 1927, 19 and passim 3B.S. Ripeway, The Severe Style in Greek Sculpture, 1970 4 J.BoaRDMAN, Greek Sculpture. The Classical Period, 1985, 20-89.

Montanari

(ed.), Iulii Severiani Prae-

cepta artis rhetoricae summatim collecta de multis ac syntomata, 1995 (with extensive introduction).

Cw.

DLWI.

Severia. Games recorded many times for Greece (for Roman areas only CIL XIV 474), either under the transliterated spelling DeBreua/Sebéria or similar forms such as LeProeia/Sebéreia, Vevieva/Seuereia or Deovrjoera/ Seouéreia. The S. are only documented epigraphically and on the reverses of coins, never in literary texts. For this reason only very little is known about them; there has been no recent study. The name and the time of the occurrence of the S. tell us that they were celebrated in honour of the Severan dynasty (193 to 235 AD), occasionally also later (in 252 in Sardis). The main venues were Athens and cities in Asia Minor such as Nicaea [5], Nicomedia, Sardis, Tarsus. Some information, particu-

larly the connexion with the Nemean (> Nemea [3]),

Olympic (> Olympia IV.) and Pythian Games (> Pythia [2]), and data on ephebes, agonothetai (> Agonothetes) and gymmnasiarchai (— Gymnasiarchy) clearly suggest that the S. were mainly of a gymnic nature.

A.HarTMANN, Ss. v. LefBrygera, RE 2 A, 961-964.

A.L. CasTELLI

GF.

Severianus [1] The bishop of Gabala (present-day Gabla) in Syria who appeared from AD 4o1 as a preacher in Constantinopolis. His name is primarily tied to the acrimonious conflict with Johannes [4] Chrysostomus after the latter was nominated as ecumenical patriarch. Both were regarded as gifted preachers, and their rivalry, characterised by reciprocal slights and their open competition for the favour of Empress Aelia [4] Eudoxia, finally led

to the deposition and exile of Chrysostomus. Due to the unrest that followed, S. also returned to his diocese in

Severinus [1] Pupil of Libanius, then lawyer, entered service at the Imperial court (AD 363?), was comes rerum privatarum to > Theodosius I (AD 388-390), comes sacrarum

largitionum in 391 and finally praef. urbi Constantinopolitanae in 398-399. P. Perit, Les étudiants de Libanius, 1956; PLRE 1, 830 f. (S33) K.G.-A.

[2] S. of Noricum

d. 8.1.482 in the monastery

of

Favianis (Mautern on the Danube) which he had founded. His actual origin (Roman aristocrat?) is obscured

behind the hagiographical topoi of the Vita Severini (‘Life of S.”) composed by the Abbot > Eugippius at the monastery of Lucullanum (present-day S. Severino near Naples) in 511. According to this, S. arrived in the Roman province of Noricum ripense in the mid 5th cent., stood with the oppressed population through times of political instability and maintained contacts with kings of the Rugians and with > Odoacer. When the population of Noricum ripense was forced to migrate southwards in 488, the monks took the body of S. with them. Barbaria, a leading aristocratic woman (mother of > Romulus [2] Augustulus?), had a mausoleum erected for S.’ bones at Lucullanum. Ep.: P.REGERAT, Eugippe, Vie de Saint Séverin (with French transl.), SChr 374, 1991 (Lit.); TH. NUssLeIn, Das Leben des Heiligen Severin (Lat./Ger.), 1986.

Lit.: F. Lorrer, S. von Noricum. Legende und historische Wirklichkeit, 1976.

S.L.-B.

SEVERUS

Severus I. GREEK

360

359

II. ROMAN

I. GREEK (Levtjeoc; Seuéros).

[1] Platonist, probably 2nd cent. AD. He wrote a monograph On the soul [1. 80, 299; 2. 409-13, 428f., 435 f.]

and a commentary on Plato’s Timaeus [1. 52, 217f.5 2. 407-9]. He appears in these works to be an originalminded, somewhat stoicizing interpreter of Aristotle’s doctrine of categories [1. 259; 2. 413f.; 3. 66, 288f.], and of Plato’s theories of the soul [1. 299; 3. 56, 278 f.] and of the origin of the world [4. 116-18, 417-21]. His works were read in the school of Plotinus (Porph. Vita Plotini 14); Proclus was foremost in refuting his theories [2. 422-8, 430-4].

~ Soul, theory of the 1 DOrRIE/BALTES 3, 1993

2 A. Grok, Il medioplatonico

Severo: testimonianze e frammenti, in: Annali dell’Istituto

Italiano per gli Studi Storici 12, 1991/1994, 405-437 3 DORRIE/BALTES 4,1996

4 DORRIE/BALTES 5, 1998.

FRAGMENTS: A.GIOE (s. [2]); S. Lita, Introduzione al Medio platonismo, 1992, 156-157. BIBLIOGRAPHY: L. Brisson, Notices sur les noms propres, in: Id. et al., Porphyre, La vie de Plotin I, 1982, 110;

W.Deuse, Untersuchungen zur mittelplatonischen und neuplatonischen Seelenlehre, 1983, 102-108; J. DILLON, The Middle Platonists, *1996, 262-264; K.PRAECHTER, s.v. Severos, RE 2 A2, 2007-2010.

M.BA.

[2] Gnostic, end of the 2nd cent. AD. Eusebius reports that S. was > Tatianus’ successor as head of the Encratite sect (a name given to strict, ascetic groups of early Christians); they were said to have rejected Paul and the Book of Acts (Euseb. Hist. eccl. 4,29). According to Epiphanius (Adv. haeres. 45), the Severians held that, besides the good God, there are lords of the Earth whose chief (Jaldabaoth) created the devil in the form of

a > snake. The devil united with the Earth to produce wine and woman, which should therefore be avoided as

the work of Satan. Epiphanius stresses that, at the time he was writing (c. AD 375), only a few followers of S. remained. F. WritaMs, The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis I, 1987, 346-348 (Engl. transl.); R.C. CEcirE, Encratism, 1985. J.HO.

[3] S. of Antioch. Theologian and Syrian Orthodox patriarch of Antioch [1] (512-518); born c. 468 of pagan parents in Sozopolis (Pisidia), h He studied in Alexandria [1] and at the law school in Beirut (> Berytus). While at the latter he was converted to Christianity (488) and subsequently became a monk, living near Gaza. From 508 to 511 he was in Constantinople promoting the anti-Chalcedonian cause (~ Synodos), and on the deposition of the Chalcedonian Flavian II, Severus was elected Patriarch of Antioch (512), only to be deposed himself after the accession of > Justinus [1] I (518). Apart froma brief visit to Constantinople in 536, the rest of his life was spent in Egypt, where he died on 8

February 538. The Greek originals of his extensive writings have almost all been lost, due to their condemnation as heretical in 536 (> Heresy), but many are preserved in early Syriac translations, notably his 125 Cathedral Homilies (no. 77 being the only one also preserved in Greek), the Orationes ad Nephalium, Philalethes, Contra Grammaticum (i.e. against > Johannes [15] of Caesarea), correspondence with Sergius Grammaticus, treatises against — Iulianus [18] of Halicarnassus, and a collection of hymns. Many exegetical excerpts are preserved in Greek in > catenae. Three biographies survive, of which the earliest, by Zacharias Scholasticus and covering his life up to 512, is of particular interest. EDITIONS:

M.BRIERE, F. GRAFFIN et al., Patrologia Ori-

entalis, vols. 4, 8, 12, 14, 16, 20, 22 f., 25 f., 29, 35-38, 1906-1976 (homilies with Fr. transl.); J.LEBON, R.HESPED, CSCO volsa93 4. TOM daar Drie KTGih. esate. 244 f., 295 f., 301 f., 318 f., 1929-1971 (polemical writings); E.W. Brooks, Select Letters, 2 vols., 1902-1904 (selected letters; with Engl. transl.); Id., Patrologia Orientalis 6-7, 1911 (hymns with Engl. transl.); F. Petit, La chaine grecque sur l’Exode, vol. 1: Fragments de Sévére d’Antioche, 1999 (with Fr. transl.); M.A. KUGENER, Patrologia Orientalis 2, 1907 (biographies by Zacharias and John of Beth Aphthonia; with Fr. transl.); K.E. McVey, CSCO 530-531, 1993 (biography by bishop Georgios); CPG 3, Nr. 7022-7081. BIBLIOGRAPHY: A.GRILLMEIER, Jesus der Christus im Glauben der Kirche, vol. 2.2, 1989, 20-185; F. GRAFFIN,

s.v. Sévére d’Antioche, Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 14, 1990, 748-751.

S.BR.

Il. ROMAN [1] See + Septimius [II 7] Severus [2] S. Alexander. Imperator Caesar M. Aurelius S. Alexander Augustus, Roman emperor (222-235), from the dynasty of the Severans. Born 1 October, AD 208 in Arca Caesarea in Phoenicia (CIL I p. 255; 274; Hdn. 5,7>4; Aur. Vict. Caes. 24,1; SHA Alex. Sev. 1,2), son of the procurator Gessius Marcianus and > Julia [9] Avita Mamaea (SHA Alex. Sev. 1,2; Cass. Dio 78,30,3). Originally named (Gessius) Iulius Bassianus Alexianus,

he was brought up by his mother and his grandmother ~ Julia [17] Maesa (cf. [1]). Priest of the Sun God at ~ Emesa (Hdn. 5,3,2-12). Through the mediation of his grandmother adopted by Elagabalus [2] in June 221, and elevated Caesar under the name M. Aurelius Alexander (— Feriale Duranum; Cass. Dio 79,17 f.). He became > princeps iuventutis, and in 222 cos. I. S. became emperor after the murder of > Elagabalus {2] on 13 March 222 (Cass. Dio 79,19-21; SHA Alex. Sev. 1,1-3); he received the titles Augustus, pater patriae and pontifex maximus from the Senate on 14 March. His name now became Severus Alexander, son of Divus Magnus Antoninus (Caracalla). His mother directed state business through a council of state (Hdn. 6,1,2); > Ulpianus, soon praefectus praetorio, played a leading role, but was assassinated in 223 (Cass. Dio 80,1,1-2,2; POxy. 2565). S. was married to Seia > Sal-

361

362

lustia Barbia Orbiana Augusta; his father-in-law, L. Seius — Sallustius [II 5], apparently elevated to Caesar in 225, was killed in 227 after a coup attempt (Hdn. 6,1,9f.; SHA Alex. Sev. 49,3 f.). S. was cos. II in 226, cos. III in 229 with Cassius Dio, who only narrowly escaped the fate of Ulpianus (Cass. Dio 80,4,2). There was also a mutiny of soldiers in Mesopotamia,

Sex

who killed their commander

Flavius Heracleo (Cass. Dio 80,4,1-2). The Sasanid > Ardashir [1] founded a Persian empire in the East, and in 230 advanced across the Euphrates (> Euphrates frontier). $. and his mother went to war against Ardashir in 231 (Hdn. 6,4). They were able to eliminate a rival emperor proclaimed in Emesa (Zos. 1,12). A battle on the Euphrates in the early part of 232 prevented the Persians from pursuing their advance into Roman territory (Hdn. 6,5-7). S. remained mainly in > Antioch [1] during the Persian campaign. While there, he heard the news of a German attack, and in 234 was forced to hurry to the Rhine (Hdn. 6,6f.). On 19 March 235, there was a mutiny of the army at > Mogontiacum (the modern Mainz); they proclaimed their commander > Maximinus [2] Thrax, an equestrian, emperor, and killed S$. and his mother (Hdn. 6,9,7; Eus. Chron, Armenian version, p. 225 K; SHA Alex. Sev. 59,6). The detailed vita in SHA is for the most part fictitious [2. 146-62]. 1 E.KETTENHOFEN,

Die

syrischen

Augustae,

2 R.SyMeE, Emperors and Biography, 1971 177-182 4RIC, vol. 4.2, 62-96.

1979

3 KIENAST, AB.

[3] S. was AD 365-367 comes domesticorum in the West part of the Empire (Amm. Marc. 27,8,2; Cod.

Theod.

6,24,2f.),

367-372

magister

peditum.

He

fought against Alamanni (Amm. Marc. 27,10,6; 29,4,3

f) and Saxons (Amm. Marc. 28,5,2). PLRE 1, 833 (no. Io).

[4] Valerius S. In AD 382 praefectus urbi Romae (Cod. Theod. 6,6,1; 14,6,4 et passim), previously in all likelihood procos. Africae (cf. Cod. Theod. 12,12,8). He was a Christian (ILCV vol. 1, 1592). His son was Valerius > Pinianus [2], husband of > Melania [2] the Younger W.P. (Pall. Laus. 61,2). PLRE 1, 837 (no. 29). [5] Libius S. Roman emperor in the West (19.11.46114.11.465); cos. 462. Of Lucanian, supposedly senatorial family, he was proclaimed by — Ricimer in Ravenna, but never recognized by — Leo [4] I in the East (to this extent a usurper). S. resided in Rome, and was apparently concerned to maintain good relations with the Roman Senate and the pope, allowing Ricimer a free hand. He probably died a natural death. D. HENNING, Periclitans res publica, 1999, esp. 40 f.; 149154; PLRE 2, 1004 f. HL.

[6] Fl. Valerius S. See > Valerius [II 3 1]

Seviri see > Ludi III. H. Sewers see > Canalization; > Canals; > Water supply

[1] see > Genealogy [2] Sex (medical aspects). The speculations of medical

writers on the way in which sex was determined in utero could reinforce social and cultural assumptions about the relative roles of the sexes. One model which existed in Classical Antiquity in both medical and other works suggested that seed was the prerogative of the male, the female merely contributing ‘matter’ and a place in which the seed could grow. This is most famously articulated by Aristotle, who denied that women had the capacity to produce any sort of seed (Aristot. Gen. an. 727b7-12; cf. Ps.-Lucian, Amores 19). The account given by the writer of the Hippocratic De natura pueri instead argued that both the male and the female partner contributed seed, this being of both ‘male’ and ‘female’ kinds. The sex of the foetus was also affected by the time of the month at which intercourse took place; if menstruation was in progress, a girl was more likely to be conceived. When the seed from the male mixed with that from the female, a battle ensued in which not only the sex of the child but also its physical characteristics were determined by whether the mother’s seed or the father’s was victorious. Both quantity and quality of seed played a role in this (Hippoc. Genit. 6 = 7,478 L. [Littré]); for example, the presence on a given occasion of a particularly strong seed coming from the father’s nose meant that the child too had this type of nose (Hippoc. Genit. 8 = 7,480-2 L.). In sex determination, however, for most of the menstrual cycle ‘strong’ seed made a boy and ‘weak’ seed a girl. The idea that sex depends on which seed happens to be dominant at the time of conception may suggest that there is a ‘sliding scale’ [1] operating here rather than a simple opposition between two entirely opposed sexes. Despite — or, perhaps, because of — the normal insistence on the importance of maintaining the appropriate roles for both sexes, Graeco-Roman medicine contains much speculation about the possibility of shifting from one sex to another. The body of Phaéthousa of Abdera, who is mentioned in the Corpus Hippocraticum, is said to have become masculine after her husband left, as her voice deepened and she grew body hair after ceasing to menstruate (Hippoc. Epid. 4,8,32 = 5,356 L.). Soranus (Gynaecologia 3,7) suggests that women can stop menstruating if they take too much exercise, since they will have no surplus blood to lose; however, they remain ‘women’. Many myths (such as that of Caeneus, and of Teiresias) and stories of sex change challenge even more radically the idea of the fixed nature of the two sexes. Medical writers describe both the sexual act and its effects on health. Too much sex was considered bad for both sexes (e.g. Aristot. Gen. an. 727a22-25). The Hippocratic treatise De genitura suggests (4 = 7,474-6 L.) that women enjoy intercourse until male ejaculation, which brings their pleasure to a peak before dousing it; analogies are drawn with the effects of pouring wine on a flame and cold water into boiling water. However,

363

364

although women experience pleasure for a longer time, it is less intense than the sudden, brief pleasure of men.

DéE/Séx; It. Ant. 405,3: Saxetanum) on the southern coast of the Iberian peninsula, probably at modern Almufiécar, to date not excavated. It is scarcely recognisable today owing to considerable sedimentation that the Phoenician settlement was originally on a peninsula or island, surrounded by hills which now frame the bay. Only the necropoleis of Cerro de San Cristobal and Puente de Noy permit any statements about the chronology of S.; the typically Phoenician burial inventories found there date from the 8th cent. BC.

SEX

There

is a certain

ambivalence

in ancient

writers

towards the effects of intercourse on the male body: for example, Pliny recommends as little as possible, but nevertheless claims it can revitalise a sluggish athlete, restore a husky voice and cure visual disturbances or an unsound mind (HN 28,58 [16]). Hippocrates (Genit. 1 = 7,470 L.) argues that the reason why sexual intercourse is generally weakening to the male is that the sperm emitted consists in the richest and most powerful part of the bodily humours. The ‘use of pleasure’ for an elite Graeco-Roman male was ideally within the context of demonstrating virtue through the mastery of the self and the control of the body [2]. If carried out to excess, sex was thought to become a strong potential source of shame. The writers of sex manuals, a genre arising as part of the 4th cent. BC interest in classification, which listed positions for heterosexual intercourse and encouraging over-elaborate pleasures, were described as ‘writers of shameless things’ (Gvatoyuvtoyeadovanaischyntographot) and the books themselves were described as immoderate or excessive [3]. Men were supposed to know what to do without any instruction and to be in control at all times; thus sex manuals were seen as unnecessary, being ‘soft’ and feminine works (Mart. 12,43). As for women, the medical models of the female

body offered them far fewer chances of controlling their bodies in the ways recommended for men. The female body is described as being dominated by the sexual function; it needs regular intercourse from puberty onwards in order to keep the womb moistened and open, to heat the blood and agitate it so that it moves freely around the internal channels [4]. “If women have intercourse with men, their health is better than if they do not” (Genit. 4 = 7,476 L.). Analogies were drawn with ploughing the soil to promote good drainage, preparing it for the planting of the seed (cf. Artem. 58,1012 PACK; [5]). Sexual intercourse was however thought harmful for pregnant women (Soranus, Gynaecologia 1,56). 1 M. GLEESON, The Semiotics of Gender, in: D. HALPERIN et al. (ed.), Before Sexuality, 1989 2 M. FoucauLt,

L’Usage des plaisirs, 1984 3H.N. PARKER, Love’s Body Anatomised, in: A. RICHLIN (ed.), Pornography and Representation

in

Greece

and

Rome,

1992,

90-111

4 L.DeEan-JongEs, The Politics of Pleasure, in: Helios 19, 1992, 72-91 5 P.DuBols, Sowing the Body, 1988, 3985.

P. BARCELO, Karthago und die Iberische Halbinsel vor den Barkiden, 1988, 33 f.; J.L. LOpEz Castro, Hispania Poena, 1995, 106-111; M.PELLICER CATALAN, Ein altpunisches Graberfeld bei Almufécar (Prov. Granada), in: MDAI(Madrid) 4, 1963, 9-36; Tovar 1, 81 f. P.B.

Sextans. A sixth part of a twelve-part whole, a sixth of a pound,

or

an

~—as

(Varro

Ling.

6,171)

=

two

+ unciae. The sextans, obverse a shell, reverse a caduceus (herald’s wand; RRC, 14/5, Rome, 280-276 BC)

or obverse a head of Mercury, reverse a prora (ship’s prow; RRC, 35/5, Rome, 225-217 BC) and with two balls as a value indicator on each side, was initially cast, after the reduction of weights (— Semilibral standard), from about 215 BC, minted (RRC, 41/9, Rome, 215212 BC). With the introduction of the > semiuncial standard the minting of sextantes was abandoned [1. 2031]. 1K. REGLING, s.v. S., RE 2 A, 2030 f. S3163

2 SCHROTTER, S.V.

GES.

05

Sextantal standard. Reduction stage of the RomanItalic > aes grave amounting to */ of the original libral as, introduced at Rome c. 214-212 BC along with the ~» denarius, which was worth 10 sextantal asses (> As) (Fest. 468: during the 2nd Punic War). Bronze and silver were hereby set at a fixed rate to one another for the first time. A novel feature are the minor types (letters or symbols). They partly correspond to those of the silver coinage in the denarius system. This was also the time of the first minting of the large bronze nominals. Some coins (asses and fractions) were underweight, and the weight standard of the entire bronze coinage, which had already begun to fall from c. 207 BC, slowly and continually declined, until by the mid 2nd cent. BC, the weight of an as had fallen to less than one ounce (+ Uncia).

M. ArtHuR-KatTz,

Sexuality and the body in ancient

1 RRC 6-8; 11-12; 24-35; 52f.; 596; 611 f.; 627 f. 2 R. THoMsEn, Early Roman Coinage, vol. 2, 1961, 36; 76-95 31d., From Libral ‘Aes Grave’ to Uncial ‘Aes’, in:

Greece,

4,

Les ‘Dévaluations’

in: Métis

1989,

155-179;

J.P. HALLETT,

Roman attitudes towards sex, in: M. Grant, R. KirzinGER (eds.), Civilization of the Ancient Mediterranean.

Greece and Rome, vol. 2, 1988, 1265-1278.

Sexi. Phoenician

settlement (Hecat. FGrH

HK.

1 F 43:

LiEoc/Sixos; Str. 3,4,2; 3,5,5: E&ttavol/Exitanot; Mela

2,94; Plin. HN 3,8: Sexi Firmum Iulium; Ptol. 2,4,7:

a Rome, vol. 1, 1978, 9-22.

DLK.

Sextarius (later Greek Egotn¢/xéstés, ‘a sixth’). Roman unit of fluid and dry capacity equalling '/4s of an > amphora [2], ‘ls of a > congius, 2 + heminae, 4 ~> quartarii and 12 cyathi (+ Cyathus [2]; see table); a sextarius corresponds to approximately 0,546 1. As a measure of volume sextarius also occurs on ancient

365

366

SEXTIUS

Roman units of fluid and dry capacity and their relationships: sextarius Unit: Approximate volume:

cyathus 0,0451

109)

— quartarius 0,1361

4

hemina C2731

sextarius 0,5461

congius igi

amphora 26,21

96

48

8

I

Te;

6

I

2

I

modius 8,751 3 64

322

measuring vessels. Colloquially sextarius was also used for '/s of anything. The sextarius was the largest measure of both fluid and dry capacity; higher units had distinct names. 1 H.CHANTRAINE, s.v. Eéotyc, RE 9 A, 2 F.Huttscu, Griechische und rémische *1882.

2114-2129 Metrologie, H.-J.S.

Sextia [1] Wife of L. Cornelius [II 59] Sulla Felix who died in AD 21. When her second husband Mamercus Aemilius {II 14] Scaurus was forced into suicide in 34, she killed herself together with him (Tac. Ann. 6,29,1). RAEPSAET-CHARLIER, no. 711.

[2] Possibly a sister of S. [1]. When her son-in-law L. Antistius [II 12] Vetus was accused in AD 66, she, he

16

I

I

{I 3] S., M. From Fregellae. In 209 BC, when 12 Latin colonies (— coloniae) declared themselves unable any longer to bear the burdens of the 2nd Punic War, S., as representative of 18 others, declared them ready not only to assume the duties already imposed upon them, but also to fulfil still more extensive obligations (Liv. 27,9-12). Details of this report, e.g. the role of S. as the spokesman of various communities, remain unclear and are distortions of an original account, the subject of which was the particular loyalty of individual colonies to Rome. + Punic Wars; > Socii (Roman confederation) J.-L. Voisin, Tite-Live, Capoue et les Bacchanales, in: MEFRA 96, 1986, 601-653, especially 644 f. TA.S.

{1 4] S., P. Praetor 89 (?) BC, propraetor in 88/7 in

and her granddaughter Antistia [3] Pollitta took their

Africa, where he refused refuge in the province to C. Marius [I r] as he fled the Sullans (Plut. Marius 40,3 f.;

own lives (Tac. Ann. 16,10 f.).

App. B Civ. 1,279). Cassius [III 2] Dionysius of Utica

RAEPSAET-CHARLIER, NO. 712.

WE.

dedicated to him his Greek edition of the treatise of the Carthaginian Mago [12] on agriculture (Varro, Rust. I,I,10). K.-LE.

Sextilia. Married to L. Vitellius, cos. II] in AD 47. Her sons were A. Vitellius, the later emperor, and his brother L. Vitellius. After her son was enthroned in Rome in the summer of 69 she was given the honorary name Augusta (Tac. Hist. 2,89,2); she died of old age shortly afterwards (Tac. Hist. 3,67,1). Suetonius (Vit. 3) speaks of her approvingly. RAEPSAET-CHARLIER, NO. 715.

W.E.

Sextilius. Name of a Roman plebeian family, historically attested at Rome from the 3rd cent. BC. The name was a common one, but its bearers were politically inK.-L.E. significant. J. REPUBLICAN PERIOD II. IMPERIAL PERIOD I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {I 1] Legate of L. Licinius [I 26] Lucullus in 69 BC. Distinguished himself in the Armenian war (Plut. Lucullus 25,4-6; App. Mithr. 381-385), but fell into Parthian hands in 68 (Cass. Dio 36,3,2 f.). {I 2] Praetor before 67 BC, together with his colleague Bellinus, he was kidnapped by pirates (Plut. Pompeius 24,6). JOR.

[1 5] S. Rufus, C. Quaestor on Cyprus between 51-50 and 47 BC (MRR 3,198), probably not the same as L. Rufus, the naval commander of C. Cassius [I 10] (Cass.

Dio 47,31,3), but maybe the S. Rufus operating in 43 JO.F.

with a squadron off Cilicia (Cic. Fam. 12,13,4).

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD [II 1] S. Felix. Praesidial procurator of Noricum in AD 69, successor to Petronius Urbicus. He went over to Vespasian at an early stage, using his auxiliary units stationed on the Inn to protect the region against an assault by the procurator of Rhaetia, who was a supporter of Vitellius (Tac. Hist. 3,5,2). In 70, he and his forces took part in the war against Iulius [II 139] Tutor in Gaul (Tac. Hist. 4,70,2). [fl2] L.S. Paconianus. Praetor peregrinus in AD 26 (AE 1987, 163). Identical with the Sextius P. in Tacitus (Ann. 6,3,4) who wished to murder the future emperor Caligula. When he published aggressive poems against the domus Augusta in 35, he was condemned and executed (Tac. Ann. 6,39,1). WE.

Sextius. Roman nomen gentile, also confused with — Sestius. According to tradition, the family achieved

SEXTIUS

prominence in the 4th cent. BC with S. [I 6] who obtained access to the consulate for plebeians. The family was unimportant under the Republic, with the exception of S. [1 3]; the branch which was best known into the 3rd cent. AD originated with Caesar’s follower S. {I 2], but it made spurious claims to be descended from the first plebeian consul S. [I 6] (hence the epithets AfriK.-L.E. canus and Laterensis). I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD II. IMPERIAL PERIOD I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD [1 1] S., Q. Founder of the philosophical school of the ‘Sextians’ in the mid rst cent. BC in Rome. He eschewed a political career (Sen. Ep. 98,13). Seneca characterized S., whose books (no longer extant) he valued highly, as ‘philosophizing in the Greek language, but according to Roman morality’ (“Graecis verbis, Romanis moribus philosophantem”, ibid. 59,7). S. was close to the Stoics, but did not wish to be a Stoic himself (ibid. 64,2). In fact, he also took up Pythagorean doctrines: thus he advocated vegetarianism (ibid. 108,17) and suggested to examine one’s conscience each evening (Sen. Dial. 5,36,1). The Sextians also followed > Pythagoras [2] and > Plato [1] in their doctrine of the soul (Claudianus Mamertus, De statu animae

368

367

2,246; 249). He is perhaps identical to the quaestor of the consul L. Calpurnius [I 1] Bestia in 111, in the war against Iugurtha (Sall. ug. 29,4), and to the praetor who, by decree of the Senate, rededicated a travertine altar to an unknown deity located at the north-eastern corner of the Mons Palatinus (ILLRP 291). MRR 2,18;

3,198 f. K.-L.E. [I 5] S. Naso. Praetor in 44? BC (Cic. Phil. 3,25); a supporter of Pompey, and one of Caesar’s murderers in 44 (App. B Civ. 2, 474), he was probably the individual who was proscribed and killed in 43, and who yet took revenge on the person who denounced him (ibid. 4,107). [16] S. Sextinus Lateranus, L. According to Livy (6,34,5-42), S. and his colleague C. Licinius [1 43] Stolo

were re-elected tribuni plebis every year between 376 and 367 BC. During this period S. and his colleague attempted to put through the so-called leges Liciniae Sextiae, and in 367 succeeded despite patrician resistance. One of the provisions contained in the leges was the opening of the consulate to plebeians, and in 366 S. became the first plebeian consul (cf. MRR 1,1,114 f.; InscrIt 13,1,33 f.; 104; 398 f.; on the details of the leges ~ Licinius [I 43]).

C.MU.

2,8 pp. 129,9-14). The

school disappeared after only two generations (Sen. Q

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

Nat. 7,32,2). Whether S. — or his son — was the S. Niger

{1 1] T.S. Africanus.

mentioned by Pliny and Dioscurides remains uncertain. JD. {I 2] S., T. From Ostia, born c. 85 BC. In 54 or before probably quaestor; from 53 Caesar’s legate in Gaul (MRR 2,232; 239; 245). As propraetor of Africa nova in 44 (MRR 2,330; 349) he espoused the cause of M. Antonius [I 9]. The triumvirs appointed him additionally to Africa vetus which, with the help of the followers of P. > Sittius [1], he won from the republican Q. Cornificius [3] in 42 after hard-fought battles (App. B Civ. 4,227-9; 236-42). In accordance with Antonius’ agreement with Octavian (— Augustus), S. delivered the provinces to C. Fuficius [2] Fango in 41, but at the end of the same year, at the outbreak of the bellum Perusinum (- Perusia), he took up arms again and recovered the territories (Cass. Dio 48,22,1-6). M. Aemilius [I 12] Lepidus took them over in the middle of 40, after which there is no word of S. except in respect of his descendants. JOR. {I 3] S. Calvinus, C. Consul in 124 BC. As successor to M. Fulvius [I 9] Flaccus he fought in southern Gaul against the Liguri, Vocontii and Salluvii in 124/3, over whom he triumphed in Rome in 122 (InscrIt 13,1,83; Ihiva RermonseStrse4en,558Vell) Patemmans sa) > ins n22ehe founded the fortress of - Aquae [III 5] Sextiae (the modern Aix-en-Provence) on the site of his victory over the Salluvii. {1 4] S. Calvinus, C. Probably the son of S. [I 3], in Cicero’s youth (c.100-90 BC) he was regarded as an important orator (Cic. Brut. 130); politically moderate, he was an opponent of L. Appuleius [I 11] Saturninus and friend to C. Julius [I 11] Caesar Strabo (Cic. De or.

Iunia [6] Silana, but was dissuaded by threats from Agrippina [3] (Tac. Ann. 13,19,2). Cos. suff. AD 59. In 62 he was to carry out the > census in the provinces of Gaul together with Volusius Saturninus and Trebellius Maximus, but quarreled over the matter with the former (Tac. Ann. 14,46). He is possibly mentioned with his father of the same name in CIL VI 41058. The family was from Ostia. He was probably admitted to patrician status by Claudius [III r] [x. 37].

Senator.

He wanted

to marry

1 H.-H. Pistor, Prinzeps und Patriziat, 1965

{il 2] T. S. Africanus. Descendant of S. [II 1]. Cos. ord. in AD 112. His son was S. [II 3]. CIL VI 1518 = 41131. {i 3] T. S. Lateranus M. Vibius Ovel|[lius ? —] Secundus L. Vol[usius Torquatus ?] Vestinus. Son of S. [II 2]; pa-

trician. After a brief, typically patrician career, he received his ordinary consulate as colleague of the emperor Lucius > Verus in AD 154; proconsul of Africa 168/9 [1. 69]. 1 THOoMAaSSON, Fasti Africani

{11 4] P.S.Lippinus

Tarquitianus.

Senator.

Legate,

probably of a legion, under > Tiberius (CIL VI 1524 =

41059). [Il 5] T. S. Magius Lateranus. Cos. ord. in AD 94. PIR S

472. [Il 6] T.S. Magius Lateranus. On the name CIL VI 41131. Son of S. [II 3]. Commander under Septimius [II 7| Severus in the campaign against the Parthians in AD 195 (Cass. Dio 75,2,3). Cos. ord. 197. Septimius Severus gave him the domus Laterani on the Caelius as a gift (LTUR II 179 f.; AE 1995, 222).

SEXTUS

369

379°

{Il 7] C. S. Martialis. Imperial procurator, from Mactaris in the province of Africa. His dates must remain

or from a non-Christian collection slightly adapted by a Christian editor, who would thus have created the extant collection (cf. > Silvanus). The gnomes of S. combine Cynical/Stoic and neo-Pythagorean ideas with an ascetic and encratic/rigorous tendency (> Severus [2]). Decretum Gelasianum 5,4,11 declares the work to be apocryphal and heretical. An epitome is extant under the name of a Cleitarchus.

open (CIL VII 11813; cf. [1. 265]). On his descendants see CIL VI 41289. 1 A.MaGIoncaLpA, L’epigrafe da Mactar di C. S. Martialis, in: A.MasTINo (ed.), L’Africa Romana 9,1, 1992, 265-290

[il 8] S. Paconianus. See L. Sextilius [II 2] Paconianus. [il 9] P. S. Scaeva. Proconsul of Creta-Cyrene in 8/7 or 7/6 BC; mentioned in one of the Cyrene edicts of Augustus (AE 1927, 166 ll. 42; 47). {11 10] S. Sulla. From Carthage. An acquaintance of + Plutarchus [2], in whose dialogue De cohibenda ira (452 f.) he figures as an interlocutor of C. Minicius [4] Fundanus. WE.

Epitions: H.Cuapwick, The Sentences of S., 1959; R.A. Epwarps, R.A. WILD, The Sentences of S., 1981 (with Engl. transl.); J.KRoLL, Die Spriiche des Sextos (German transl.), in: E.HENNECKE (ed.), Neutestamentliche Apokryphen, *1924; P.-H.Porrier, Les Sentences de S. (NHCod XII,1)/Fragments (NHCod XII,3), 1983; F. Wisse, The Sentences of S., in: C.W. HEepRIcK, Nag Hammadi Codices XI, XII, XIII, 1990. J.HO.

(2] S. Empiricus

Sextula (‘A small sixth’ = */s of the > uncia; cf. Varro Ling. 5,171: aeris minima pars sextula, quod sexta pars unciae).

Roman

unit

of measurement

constituting

/y2 of a bigger whole. As unit of weight, the sextula corresponds to */72 of the + libra [1] = 4,55 g, as unit of area to ‘/72 of the + iugerum = 35 m’. In the Late Roman and Byzantine weight system, the sextula was equivalent to four scripula (value symbol A; — scripulum) or one > solidus (value symbol N). Sex-

tula also appears as part of the declared weight on silver crockery from Late Antiquity (CIL XIII 3100,5; 10026,25; 29a). 1S.BENDALL, Byzantine Weights, 1996 2 F.HuLtscn, Griechische und romische Metrologie, 71882 3 L.SCHWINDEN, Zu Maf und Gewicht eines neugefun-

(ZéEtocg “Eumeteuxdc/Séxtos

Empeiri-

kos; Lat. Sextus Empiricus), end of the 2nd cent. AD.

Pyrrhonean Sceptic (> Pyrrho) and empirical physician (> Empiricists; Diog. Laert. 9,116); but cf. his criticism of the medical empiricism of his day as being dogmatic (Sext. Emp. PH 1,236-41). S. wrote the only two surviving Pyrrhonean texts: (1) Outlines of Pyrrhonism (veewveior brotunmoeid/Pyrrhdneioi hypotyposeis, 3 bks., = PH), (2) Adversus Mathematicos (eos Mabnuatixov¢d/Pros Mathématikous, Against the Mathematicians, 11 bks., = AM). Not extant are: On the soul

(Ilegi wuyts/Peri psychés, AM 10,284) and Empirical hypomnemata (Eunewuxd btxopvqnwata/Empeirika hypomnemata, AM 1,61), perhaps identical with the Medical hypomnemata (lated brouvqvata/latrika hypomnemata, AM 7,202).

denen Silbertellers, in: D. AHRENS (ed.), Ordo et Mensura

The two extant texts are not only our main source

(1. Interdisziplinarer Kongref§ fiir Historische Metrologie

for Pyrrhonean Scepticism (cf. > Scepticism), but also

1989), 1991, 197-206.

an important source for Greek, especially Hellenistic philosophy. They were clearly based on a rich Pyrrhonean literature (cf.+ Theodosius [I 2], > Menodotus [2], - Herodotus [3]), going back to + Aenesidemus. S.’ own contribution to that literature remains unclear. The PH follow a Pyrrhonean distinction between two kinds of sceptical discourse (PH 1,5-6): (1) the presentation of the sceptical position and (2) arguments against dogmatic theses (+ Dogmatists). A statement is described as dogmatic if it claims to provide a philosophical or scholarly answer to the question as to how things really are (PH 1,13-14). Accordingly, PH bk. x comprises a description of Pyrrhonean Scepticism, PH bks. 2 and 3 contain arguments against the most important dogmatic theses in the fields of logic, physics and ethics. AM provides comprehensive arguments against logical (bks. 7-8), physical (bks. 9-10) and ethical (bk. 11) theses. Books 1-6 are directed against grammarians, rhetoricians, geometers, arithmeticians (number theorists), astronomers and astrologists, as well as harmonists (music theorists). Arguments against dogmatic theses are notcalculated to prove the opposite of those theses, but to demonstrate that they have no sufficient grounds. The arguments demonstrate that, whatever may be spoken in favour of

H.-J.S.

Sextus I. GREEK

II. ROMAN

I. GREEK [1] The name ‘Sextus’ is associated with a Greek collection of 610 maxims (> Gnome) in all, known from two Greek MSS (Patm. 263, Vat. Gr. 742; Pap. Palau Rib. 225°, c. AD 400 offers 21 ‘gnomes’); they probably originated c. AD 200. > Origenes [2] is the first to mention the title LéEtov yv@pau (Séxtou gndmai), remarking among other things that ‘most Christians read them’ (Orig. Contra Celsum 8,30). In about 399, > Rufinus {II 6] Tyrannius translated a collection of 451 maxims into Latin, naming as author of the original the bishop and Roman martyr Sixtus II (making it a work of the bishop’s youth). Jerome disputed this identification, naming as the author ‘Xystus Pytagoricus’ (Jer. Comm. in Ez. 6). The great popularity enjoyed by the text into the Middle Ages is attested by the Armenian, Georgian, Arabic, Ethiopian, Coptic (in NHCod XII,2) and Syrian translations. > Porphyrius in his Letter to Marcella uses about 50 maxims, but there is dispute as to whether he derived them from the extant Christian collection,

SEXTUS

372%

a =

the theses, equivalent arguments speak against them, so that one should abstain from either agreement or judgement ( Epoche; PH 1,10). Whoever has gained a sceptical attitude to things has acquired the characteristic Pyrrhonean ability to see what grounds speak against a claim, and in consequence to abstain from judgement (PH 1,8-19). PH 2-3 and AM claim to offer (to the prospective Sceptic, among others) aids for arguing against particular dogmatic theses. Much space (PH 1,3 1-186) is given to the presentation of so-called ‘tropes’ (tedomov/ tropoi, esp. the ro so-called Tropes of Aenesidemus, PH 1,36-163); these provide the prospective Sceptic with schemata for demonstrating that a claim has insufficient grounds: if, forexample, a person perceives something in a particular way in particular circumstances, it is sufficient to demonstrate that the same person in different circumstances, or other persons or other creatures, may perceive that thing in a different way. The background to the Sceptic’s unwillingness to pronounce judgement as to how things really are is S.’ account of the origin of — philosophy in general, and Scepticism in particular (PH 1,12; 26; cf. Ps.-Galen, Historia philosophica 8). Outstanding individuals (ueyadodvets/megalophyeis) are troubled by the irregularity of things (tagayt/taraché): for example, things may sometimes present themselves as good, sometimes otherwise (e.g. as bad); one would like to know whether they are good or bad, whether the course of the world is governed by God, and the implications for the way one should dispose one’s life. The attempt to resolve this question by philosophical or scholarly investigation is undertaken in the hope of putting such trouble to rest. A particular disposition is required in order to be aware of these questions and troubled by them, and so seek a fundamental solution: this, according to S., is the beginning of philosophy. The Sceptic differs from other philosophers in that, in the course of time, he has learned that, despite all one’s efforts, these questions cannot be answered, but that he can nevertheless dispose his life satisfactorily. His original trouble is not solved by his having found the hoped-for answer, but, surprisingly, by the very fact that he has managed without that answer (PH 1,26-29). Other philosophers, on the other hand, have given up reflecting further on these questions: the > dogmatists [x] accept an insufficiently founded answer because they believe they cannot lead a rational life without such an answer; the academics (+ Academy) do not adopt an answer, basing their position, however, on the assertion that these questions cannot be answered; thus, at least in this one question, they are themselves dogmatic. Pyrrhoneans abstain from judgement even in respect of this question: they do not maintain that things cannot be known; it is merely that, at least up to the present, they have no answer (PH 1,1-4). Not to have an answer, to abstain from judgement, proves in practice to be an attitude worth striving for. When S. maintains (PH 1,25 ff.) that the goal of the Sceptic is freedom from a troubled mind (aétagakia/

—» Ataraxia), this is not to be understood as a philo-

sophical thesis regarding the purpose of life, but as a statement of fact. When S. believes that, through experience, he has found a commendable path (abstention from judgement), this is not a philosophical thesis, but an observation. The Sceptic is not guided in his way of life by judgements as to how things are, but by the way he perceives them in the circumstances actually prevailing, where and how he grew up, what he has learned or observed, what deliberations he has undertaken (PH

1,21-24). But he leaves the question open as to whether things are really the way he perceives them in these circumstances. As the only systematic elaboration of Scepticism, S.’ writings were not again widely distributed until the Renaissance, in particular by the translation of PH (1562) and AM (1569); they then proceeded to exert great influence on the philosophy of the Modern Age (cf. [11]). — Ataraxia; > Pyrrho; > Scepticism; > SCEPTICISM EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS: 1/J.ANNAS, J. BARNES (eds.), Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Scepticism, 1994 (Engl. transl.) 2R.Bett, Against the Ethicists (Adversus

Mathematicos XI), 1997 (Engl. transl.)

3 D.L. BLANK,

Against the Grammarians (Adversus Mathematicos 1), 1998 (Engl. transl. and comm.) 4R.G. Bury (ed.),

Sextus Empiricus, 1933 (with Engl. transl.) 5 H. MuTscHMANN, J. MAu, Sexti Empirici opera, vol. 1,

21958; vol. 2, 1914; vol. 3, 1954; vol. 4, 1962 6 H. FLUCKIGER, Sextus Empiricus, Gegen die Dogmatiker, Adversus mathematicos libri 7-11, 1998 (German transl.) 7M.HosseNFELDER, Sextus Empiricus, Grund-

riff der pyrrhonischen Skepsis, 1968 (German transl.) 8 F.JURss, Sextus Empiricus, Gegen die Wissenschaftler 1-6, 2001 (German transl. andcomm.)

9 E.SPINELLIN

(ed.), Sesto Empirico Contro gli Astrologi, 2000 (with It. transl. and comm.). BIBLIOGRAPHY: 10 V.BROCHARD, Les sceptiques grecs, 1959, 309-330 11 J.ANNAS, J.BARNES, s. [1] 12 L.Froripi, Sextus Empiricus. The Transmission and

Recovery of Pyrrhonism, 2002 Way, 1996

13 B. Mates, The Sceptic

14 R.J. Hankinson, The Sceptics, 1995

15 K.M. Vocr, Skepsis und Lebenspraxis. Das pyrrhonische Leben ohne Meinungen, 1998.

MER.

Il. ROMAN [1] A rare Roman > praenomen. Sigla: SEX., SEXT., or merely S.; Greek DéEtoc/Sékstos (cf. Sextus Empiricus). It is identical with the Latin ordinal sextus, ‘sixth’ (cf.

~ Quintus). The Etruscan nomen gentile Sekstalu was formed on an early borrowing from the Latin. The nomen gentile Sextius derives in regular fashion from the praenomen S. Whereas, however, Sestius reflects regular phonetic evolution, the written form Sex- re-establishes the relationship to the cardinal numeral sex. SALOMIES, 49-50, IIT.

D.ST.

[2] S. Iulius Africanus. Author of the first Christian chronicle of the world (znd/3rd century AD). Usually assumed to have been born c.160—170, and to have died after 240, S. mixed in elevated circles and travelled widely. Possibly a native of Jerusalem (a Jewish origin

373

374

cannot be attested with any certainty [8. 510; 5]), he maintained links with king Abgar IX of Edessa (179216), at whose court he made the acquaintance of + Bardesanes. Also attested is a stay beginning prior to 221/2 in Alexandria [1], where S. intended hearing > Heraclas, a pupil of + Origenes [2], at the so-called Catechetical School. In 222, S. supported the cause of Nicopolis/> Emmaus [1] — probably his place of residence at the time — with the emperor Alexander > Severus [2]. For Severus, he established the library of the Pantheon near the thermae Alexandrinae: he may even have built it [6. 820]. S. did not hold any ecclesiastical office: later suggestions that he was i.a. bishop of Nicopolis are based on misapprehensions. S” earliest and most important work is his world chronicle, entitled XeQovoyeadia/Chronographiai (CPG 1690). While the complete work in five volumes, covering the period up to 221, was still available to Phot. 34, only fragments now survive, especially in ~ Eusebius [7] of Caesarea and in the chronicle of Georgius Syncellus (incomplete collection of the fragments in [1]). S. was the first person to establish, for apologetic motives, direct associations between events from Judaeo-Christian and Graeco-Roman history, thus becoming the founder of Christian chronography. He estimates the age of the world at 6,000 years; the birth of Christ occurs in the year 5500, and, for the chiliast S., the end of the world will see the beginning of Christ’s thousand-year rule on earth. Besides the + Bible, he uses various Jewish and pagan sources. The work was used subsequently by i.a. > Hippolytus [2], + Eusebius [7] and Byzantine authors. Likewise extant in fragmentary state are the Keotoi/Kestoi (‘Embroideries’ or ‘Embellishments’ [2]), dedicated to Alexander Severus. The compilation, probably in 24 volumes, treats highly various themes in encyclopedic style (military tactics, medicine, agriculture, etc.). The absence of specifically Christian content, along with the author’s interest in magical practices [7], raises questions as to his religious orientation. Two letters survive complete: in his Epistula ad Aristidem (CPG 1693: [3. 53-62]), S. concerns himself with the differences between the two pedigrees of Jesus given in Mt and Lk, and in the letter to Origen with the question as to whether the story of Susanna belongs in the book of

Sexuality

Daniel (CPG 1692: [3. 78-80]). Epit1ons: >1846,

1M.J. Routu, Reliquiae sacrae, vol. 2,

238-308,

cf. 357-509

(repr.

1974)

2 J.-

R. VIEILLEFOND, Les “Cestes” de Julius Africanus, 1970 (with French transl.)

3 W.REICHARDT, Die Briefe des S.

an Aristides und Origenes, 1909. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 4H.GeELzer, S. und die byzantinische Chronographie, 2 vols., 1880, 1898 (repr. 1978) 5 E.Hapas, The Jewish Origin of Julius Africanus, in:

Journ. of Jewish Studies 45, 1994, 86-91 6 H.U. ROSENBAUM, s.v. Julius Africanus, Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon 3, 1992, 819-824 7 F.C. R. THEE, Julius Africanus and the Early Christian

View of Magic, 1984 8 F. WINKELMANN, s.V. Iulius Africanus, RAC 19, 508-518. JR

SEXUALITY

I. DEFINITION SEXUALITY

II. MARITAL

AND EXTRAMARITAL

IN GREECE AND ROME

IN LITERATURE AND ART

III. SEXUALITY

IV. CHRISTIANITY

I. DEFINITION The term sexuality — derived from the Latin sexus ‘(male and female) gender’ — is not an ancient one. It has been in use since the end of the 18th cent. in order to describe the sexual nature of organisms; in the modern sense, it stands for human sexual life in its biological, psychological and social aspects. Recent historical investigations of sexuality reject the view of human sexuality as a biologically determined, historically invariant instinctive behaviour; in line with modern anthropology, they emphasize that sexual behaviour is essentially determined by social norms, which in turn are subject to historical change. To Antiquity, it was an alien notion that sexual desire should exclusively focus on only one gender; under certain circumstances, both men and women would enter into sexual relations with people of the same or the opposite sex. However, in the philosophical debate beginning with Plato, male > homosexuality has also been both criticized and rejected (PI. Leg. 83 8e-839a; 841d; cf. later Musonius 12). A range of different expressions is used to describe sexual desire (e.g. £ewc/— érds; EmOvpia/epithymia; Latin cupiditas, concupiscentia, voluptas, libido; > impulse) or sexual contact (e.g. &peodiova/aphrodisia). Plato described three strong appetites (epithymiai): the appetite to eat, to drink and the sexual appetite (Pl. Leg. 782d-783¢; cf. 83 6ab); Musonius expresses the view that the creator of man had given to each of the two genders the strong desire for sexual union with the opposite gender (Musonius 14).

It was a wide-spread assumption in Antiquity that the sexual constitution of men and women differed widely; it was explicitly elaborated in medical, philosophical and scientific works (Aristot. Hist. an. 539b; 571b; 608a-b; Plut. Mor. 650F-651E). In Antiquity, the determining factors of an individual’s sexual behayiour were: legal status (free or not free), age and gender. Different sexual behaviour was associated with various ages; young men were seen as quickly excitable, young women as sexually particularly active (Aristot. Pol. 1335a). Sexuality in old age was often depicted as unseemly or ridiculous. Il. MARITAL AND EXTRAMARITAL SEXUALITY IN GREECE AND ROME Literary sources differentiate between marital and extramarital sexuality in respect of heterosexual relations. Because marriage was entered into with the aim of producing children, sex played an important role in —> marriage and constituted one of the most important strands in matrimony; a law by > Solon [1] allegedly stipulated that the husband of an —> epikléros had to have sexual relations with her at least three times a month (Hom. Od. 23,166 ff.; Eur. Iph. A. 544-556;

SEXUALITY

BTS

376

Plut. Mor. 142F-143A; 769A-D; Plut. Solon 20). In marital sexuality, men played the active and dominant part, while demonstrative sensuality was frowned upon in married women. Virginity was not mandatory for marriage, but much valued. In Athens, fathers could sell their daughters into > slavery, if they had sexual contact with men before marriage (Plut. Solon 23,2; cf. also Aeschin. In Tim. 182). In Rome, the seduction of a virginal maiden was regarded as a sexual offence (— stuprum); watching over the chastity of daughters fell under the control sphere of the > pater familias (Val. Max. 6,1; Liv. 3,44-48). Because the main purpose of marriage was the birth of legitimate descendants, the sexual behaviour of married women was closely scrutinized. In Athens, violent or consensual extramarital sexual intercourse with a married woman was classified as > adultery (uovyeta/ — moicheia) and as an insult to the lawful husband. A law allegedly going back to > Draco [2] permitted immediately to kill an adulterer caught in the act, and the same applied to a man who had unlawful sexual relations with another man’s mother, sister, daughter or concubine (Demosth. Or. 23,53; Lys. 1,30 f.). Unfaithful wives faced > divorce (Demosth. Or. 59,85-88) and also being barred from all religious festivals exclusive to married female citizens. In Rome, the seduction of a married woman by another man was considered adultery (— adulterium). Punishing the adulteress was the duty of the pater familias and her male relatives (Cato in Gell. 10,23,4 f.; Cic. Brut. 330; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2,25,6; Cic. Rep. 4,6). As the consequence of the Julian laws on marriage and morals passed by Augustus in AD

in form ofoblique references (Hom. Il. 24,675 f.; Hom. Od. 5,154 f.; 10,333-347) or of graphic (e.g. in comedy: Aristoph. Eccl. 938-1111; Aristoph. Plut. 1067— 1096) or poetic depictions (e.g. in Roman elegies: Prop. I,I; 2,15). > Novels describe the awakening of sexual desire (Longus 1,11-14; 1,23-273 1,32), while poetry also dealt with male impotence (Ov. Am. 3,7; cf. Mart. 11,29; 11,46; 11,81; 12,86). Sexual behaviour that went beyond accepted limits was criticized with derisive intent (Mart. 11,61; 12,55; 12,75; 12,85) or included in the reports on sexual excesses of tyrants and Roman emperors accused of all kind of perversions (Suet. Cal.

18 (lex Iulia de adulteriis coercendis and lex Iulia de maritandis ordinibus), adulterium and stuprum became

public offences, dealt with by a standing tribunal. In sharp contrast with the chastity expected from women, their alleged greater sexual enjoyment (Apollod. 3,71) and their promiscuity (Aristoph. Eccl. 225) remained common topoi throughout ancient literature. In Greece as in Rome, > prostitution, > concubina-

tus and — paederasty provided free men with many and varied opportunities for extramarital sexual relations with women of lower social status, but also with other

men. Sexual relations with one’s own female or male slaves were just part of the absolute power of the master, while it was forbidden to take advantage of slaves belonging to someone else. The ancient terminology for enforced sexual intercourse shows that it was linked with violence, mockery (tBouc/bybris) and defilement (SvapOeigew/diaphtheirein; Latin: vitiare) of the victim and was seen as a disgrace (aioyvvewv/aischynein; Lat. flagitium). Rape was mainly dealt with by self-administered justice, but in some instances, the law imposed the payment of fines (Lys. 1,32; Marcus Dig. 48,6,3,4; Ulp.

Dig. 48,5,30,9). II]. SEXUALITY IN LITERATURE AND ART

Descriptions of sexual activities are found in many literary texts; depending on the genre, they were either

24; 36; Suet. Nero 27-29; Suet. Dom.

22; Tac. Ann.

15,37; SHA Comm. 5,4-11; SHA Heliogab. 5; 8,6 f.; 10,§-7; 26,35). In this context, the excessive life of the women of the ruling families or the Roman elite became the subject of critical descriptions (Messalina: Tac. Ann. 11,12; 11,34,2; Juv. 6,116-132; Sabina Poppaea: Tac.

Ann. 13,45; Faustina: SHA Aur. 19,7; Theodora: Procop. Arc 9,1-28).

Greek philosophers dealt less with the sexual act itself in their moral debates, but rather with the extent

and effect of sexual desire. Both Plato and Aristotle recommended restraining sexual desires (Plat. Resp. 389e; 559¢; Aristot. Eth. Nic. r118a-b; 1147b 20 ff.). Sexual relations between men and women were generally discussed in the context of economic reflections on the proper way to conduct a marriage which was to ensure procreation and a successful economy within the — otkos (Xen. Oec. 7,18—22; Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1162a 16-33). Iractates on the proper conduct of marriage from the Imperial period, e.g. Plutarch’s Coniugalia praecepta (Mor. 138A-—146C), presented marriage as a mutual partnership and demanded faithfulness from both partners (same view also in Musonius 13). Ancient art is rich in erotic images of couples and groups (— Eroticism II.). Attic vase paintings from the period of c. 575-425 BC [8], from later periods mainly images on hand mirrors, also wall paintings and floor mosaics from the Roman period as well as several utensils (e.g. oil lamps) depict coital scenes in a variety of positions and sexual acts. Associating the depicted scenes with unambiguous symbolism is problematic, e.g. always to interpret penetration a tergo as an exercise of power. IV. CHRISTIANITY Christians regarded sexuality as a danger to man’s exclusive focus on God. For that reason, it was one of the basic principles of Christian moral teachings to demand from the outset a strict regulation of sexual activity. Paul was among the first to demand sexual continence, but accepted monogamous marriage as a form of life which served to avoid a life of sexual sin (x Cor 7). Some Church Fathers urged chastity which was to make the body more receptive for divine inspiration (cf. e.g. Tert. De monogamia; Tert. De exhortatione castitatis; Tert. De cultu feminarum; Clem. Al. Strom. 2,23). >» Augustinus (Augustine) saw sexuality on the

SHEEP

377

378

one hand as a natural disposition present in man even in Paradise, but on the other as a symptom of man’s alienation from God (Aug. Civ. 14,21-24). Christian understanding of sexuality was shaped for centuries by linking it to the dogma of original sin as expressed by Augustine. From the 3rd cent., the Church promoted the ideal of monogamous marriage, whereas earlier minorities, mainly in the eastern parts of the Imperium

Common Smooth-Hound (yaded¢ Aetoc/galeds leios, Mustelus laevis), 3) Thresher Shark (dAwsmexiac/ alopekias), 4) Cat Shark (oxtddov, scyllium), 5) Dogfish Shark (dxavOias), 6) Starry Smooth-Hound (aotegiac/asterias, Mustelus vulgaris) and 7) Blue Shark (xaoyaoiac/karcharias, to the perhaps identical menotic/prestis, pristis, pistis). But Aristot. Hist.an. 6,10,565a 14—-6,11,566a 19 counts all but the shark-

Romanum, followed an ascetic life, which also included sexual continence (> Ascesis/Asceticism). ~ Eroticism; + Gender roles; > Homosexuality; > Im-

like nos. 3 and x (yadewdn/galedde: Hist.an. 6,11,566a 31) as true sharks; Hist.an. 8(9),37,621b 16 distinguishes no. 5 from the galeoi, however. In Ael. NA 1,55 there are three species of no. 1: a) the largest (Blue Shark?), b) those with speckles (xateottywévowkatestigménot) and c) those with spines (xevteiva/kentrinai = no. 5). From this it must be concluded that ky6n (dog) was a general folk term, as in Hom. Od. 12,95f. Their reproduction is described in Aristot. id. 6,10,565 a 15ff.: they lay eggs which are then incubated in the mother’s body (cf. also Ael. NA 11,37; implausible information about their hunting habits: 1,55). According to Paus. 2,34,2 they were hazardous to swimmers, Plin. HN 9,110 sees only scyllia as a danger for pearl fishers. In Ath. 7,306d sharks appear in lists of cooking materials in comedies (xa@xagiac: 7,294C-e;

pulse; > Marriage; > Pornography; — Prostitution; -» Venereal diseases; Woman; > GENDER STUDIES 1 P. Binc, R. COHEN, Games of Venus. An Anthology of Greek and Roman Erotic Verse from Sappho to Ovid, 1991 2P.BRown, The Body and Society. Men, Women and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity, 1988 3J.N. Davipson, Courtesans and Fishcakes, 1997 4Id., Dover, Foucault and Greek Homosexuality: Penetration and the Truth of Sex, in: Past and Present 170, 2001, 3-51 5 G.DOBLHOFER, Vergewaltigung in der Antike, 1994 6 M.FoucauLt, Histoire de la sexualité (English transl.: The History of Sexuality), vol. 2: L’usage des plaisirs, 1984 (English transl.: The Use of Pleasure, 1985); vol. 3: Le souci de soi, 1984 (English transl.: The Care of the Self, 1986) 7D.M. HALpeRIN et al., Before Sexuality, 1990 8 M.F. KitMer, Greek Erotica, 1993 9 A.RICHLIN (ed.), Pornography and Representation in Greece and Rome, 1992 10A.K. SreMs (ed.), Sexualitat und Erotik in der Antike, 1988 11S. TREGGIARI, Roman Marriage, 1991, 229-319

121.STAHLMANN, Der gefes-

selte Sexus. Weibliche Keuschheit und Askese im Westen des romischen Reiches, 1997 13 J.J. WINKLER, The Constraints of Desire. The Anthropology of Sex and Gender in Ancient Greece, 1990.

E.HA,

Shahrab (Sahrab) see > Satrap

Shahrbaraz + Chosroes [6] II’s general who in 614 AD conquered Jerusalem and in 626 besieged Constantinople. On 27 April 630 he overthrew > Ardashir [3] III and ruled as Persian king of kings until he was himself killed on 9 June 630 [1]. PLRE 3B, 1141-1144. 1 M.IBN-G. AT TABARI, Geschichte der Perser und Araber

zur Zeit der Sasaniden (with German transl., comm. and additions by TH. NOLDEKE), 1879 (reprint 1973), 290303, 388-390.

M.SCH.

Shami see > Sami

ddwmexia: 8,356c, also yakedo and xbwv). Nowadays

only no. 5 (the dogfish) is eaten, in the form of smoked ‘fillet strips’. Although experiences with sharks favoured the genesis of the myths of + Andromeda and + Hesione, the sea-monster (xf\toc/kétos) is seldom shark-like. The Berlin Hydria no. 3238 [3. vol. 3.2, 2053] exhibits appropriate fins and teeth. The rediscovery by the German anatomist and physiologist JOHANNES MULLER (1801-1858) in material from the Mediterranean of Aristotle’s common smooth-hound, which had not been observed since 1673, in the spring of 1840 [1; 2] was considered a sensation. 1 J.MULLER, Uber den glatten Haien des Aristoteles und iiber die Verschiedenheiten unter den Haien und Rochen in der Entwicklung der Eier, in: Physikalische Abh. 1840, 1842, 187-259 2 W.HaBERLING, Der glatte Hai des Aristoteles. BriefeJ.Millers tiber seine Wiederauffindung an W.H. Peters 1839-1840, in: Archiv fiir Gesch. der Naturwiss. und Technik 10, 1928, 166-184 3 ROSCHER.

C.HU.

Shearwaters see > Divers

Sheep I. THE NEAR EAST AND EGypt

II. GREECE

Shapur (Sapir) see > Sapor

III]. ROME

Shark. On this order of cartilaginous fish (cedayn/

I. THE NEAR EAST AND EGYPT (Sumerian udu, sheep, u,, ewe, udu.nita, fat-tailed sheep; Akkadian immeru (culture word) [4]; Egyptian

selaché, oehay.alselachia, yovigaxovtalchondrakonta, cf. Aristot. Hist.an. 1,2, 489b 6; Ael. NA 11,37) the sources offer no potential for tidy distinctions, only different terms. Aristotle was indeed familiar with the most important species: 1) Barbelled Hound Shark (xbmv/kyOn, yaheds veBeiac/galeds nebrias), 2)

zr (w3p.t).

The Near East lies in the natural range of the Asiatic mouflon (Ovis orientalis), which was apparently used in various locations for the breeding of wool sheep; the

379

380

earliest examples for this important step [8] come from the area of south-eastern Asia Minor/northern Levant/northern Mesopotamia in the 7th millennium BC [7. 73]. From the 7th/6th millennia BC on, the sheep played a prominent role in all times and all regions of the Near East. This is reflected in numerous pictorial depictions — although these scarcely permit internal differentiation — and above all in the written sources. Sheep are frequently mentioned from the beginning of the written record in Mesopotamia (end of the 4th millennium BC) [6]. Besides the importance of sheep as the primary sacrificial animal (— Sacrifice) and as a supplier of milk, meat and manure, textiles made from their + wool (in many different qualities) mainly represented the most important export for Mesopotamia in all times [5]. The prominent economic significance of the sheep is paralleled by a strongly differentiated terminology

was a close connection between keeping livestock and growing crops. For the Mycenaean era, the > Linear B texts record large herds of sheep which were owned and managed by the palaces. In Homer, the wealth of the nobility is based primarily on the ownership of animal herds; thus, the swineherd Eumaeus says that Odysseus owns twelve herds of cattle, as many herds of sheep and a larger number of pigs and goats (Hom. Od. 14,100-104), and in another passage it is reported that 300 sheep were

SHEEP

according to species, sex, age group, nature, breeding,

keeping and use [4. 131 f., 134]. Domesticated sheep [2. 1122] are known in Egypt from the beginning of the 4th millennium BC. Depictions record, above all, sheep with horizontally protruding, corkscrew-shaped horns (Ovis longipes palaeoaegyptiaca) and, from the Middle Kingdom onward, sheep with inwardly turned Ammon horns (O. platyura aegyptiaca). There is a remarkable discrepancy between the frequent occurrence of ram gods and the apparently unimportant role of sheep in normal economic life. This includes the fact that details from sheep breeding rarely appear in wall paintings. Meat and milk were used as foodstuffs, but sheep do not appear in the sacrificial lists. Also the fact that the hide was used for leather, but wool was not used for clothing (rather > linen) indi-

cates a taboo which cannot be defined. ~ Domestication; > Breeding, of small domestic animals 1J.BorssNeck,

Die

Haustiere

in Altagypten,

1953

2 E. BRUNNER-TRAUT, s. v. Domestikation, LA 1, 11201127. 3 Bull. on Sumerian Agriculture, vols. 7-8 (Domestic Animals of Mesopotamia), 1993/1995 4 Chicago Assyrian Dictionary I/J, 1960, s. v. immerum, 128-134

5 H.E. W. CRAWFORD, Mesopotamia’s Invisible Exports in the Third Millennium, in: World Archaeology 5, 1973, 232-241 6M.W. GREEN, Animal Husbandry at Uruk in the Archaic Period, in: JNES 39, 1980, 1-35 7L.K. Horwitz et al., Animal Domestication in the Southern Levant, in: Paléorient 25, 1999, 63-80

8M.L.RypErR,

Changes in the Fleece of Sheep Following Domestication, in: P.J. Ucxo et al. (ed.), The Domestication and Exploitation of Plants and Animals, 1969 9 L.STORK, s. v.

Schaf, LA 5, 522-524

10E. Vira, L’exploitation des

animaux en Mésopotamie aux IVe et Ile millénaire avant J.C., 1998 1967.

11F.E. ZEuNER, Geschichte der Haustiere, HJ.N.

II]. GREECE

Animal husbandry existed alongside agriculture in Greece from the 7th millennium BC. As more recent studies have shown, the breeding of animals had only a limited scope in Neolithic Thessaly; moreover, there

stolen by the Messenians (Hom. Od. 21,18-19). In Archaic and Classical Greece, besides the herds which sea-

sonally covered large distances between the summer and winter pastures (+ Transhumance; cf. on this Soph. OT. 1125-1140), there were also smaller stocks of animals near the courts and rural settlements, where the animals received additional feed and alternated between neighbouring pastures. Rather smaller stocks are recorded for the Classical era, thus for example a herd of 50 sheep which Theophemus seized as security for outstanding payments (Demosth. Or. 47,52), or a herd of sheep which Theophon bequeathed (Isaeus 11,41). The occupation of the herdsmen was difficult, less respected work, which was mostly performed by slaves. Thessaly, Thrace, Macedonia and Epirus were famous for their sheep, and Arcadia had the poetic sobriquet ohvundoc/polymélos (‘with many sheep’). Instructive information on sheep breeding is provided by Aristotle [6] (Aristot. Hist. an. 573b; 596a; 610b). The most important product of sheep breeding was > wool; the fine wool of Athenian and Milesian sheep was especially valued (Ath. 2,43c; 12,519b; 12,540d; 12,553b; 15,691a). Dairy farming served primarily to make — cheese, which was considered easily digestible (Hom. Od. 9,218-233). Sheep produce less milk than goats, need to be watered more often and require better feed (Aristot. Hist. an. 596a). In Greek antiquity, the sheep was the most common sacrificial animal; it provided less meat and was less esteemed than the cattle used by the poleis for public sacrificial offerings, but it was much more affordable for individual citizens or small groups. The sacrificial calendar of the deme - Erchia in Attica does not mention cattle. In contrast to goats, there were no negative connotations associated with sheep. Occasionally, the symbolic potency of the ram was evoked: one example is the uncastrated ram for Poseidon Temenites on Mykonos, which was not allowed to be brought into the city (LSCG, Supp, 96,5—6). Interestingly, rams were also the primary sacrifice for > Persephone. When sheep were slaughtered depended essentially on the purpose for which the herd was kept. If the consumption of meat was the focus, many young animals, especially males, were killed. On the other hand, in a herd which was primarily oriented on the production of wool, there were primarily older, castrated animals. However, sheep-keeping which focused on dairy production required herds of adult ewes. As the sacrificial calendars show, the dates of the religious festivals were

381

382

chosen so that, on the one hand, sufficient young animals were available, and on the other, it was not necessary to feed them. + Cheese; + Husbandry; > Milk; > Sacrifice; > Textiles, production of; > Wool

Milesian sheep were esteemed above all, during his time breeds from Gallia Cisalpina (from Altinum, Parma and Mutina; Columella 7,2,3-5; cf. Plin. HN 8,190191). The extent to which these were different breeds cannot be determined with certainty, because the ancient descriptions of their appearance could apply to almost any breed, and a distinction was made solely between sheep with fine or coarse wool (Varro Rust. 2,2,20; Columella 7,2,6; 7,3,7; Plin. HN 8,189). Many herds of sheep were pastured in mountainous regions during the summer, but wintered in the plains of southern Italy, thus covering long stretches annually; there were legal regulations for this form of — transhumance (Varro Rust. 2,2,9; CIL IX 2438). The illegal grazing of fields in connection with sheep farming was often complained about in Egypt (cf. [15. 59-64]). In addition, both pasturing and stabling are recorded (Varro Rust. 2,2,7; Columella 7,3,19-26). Exact information on the size, composition and total stocks of sheep herds comes from the papyri records: depending on the district, the average herd size here varies between 70 and 99 animals; however, goats, which were usually kept with sheep, are also included (c. 8 % of the individual stock). Also demonstrated here is the practice of owners of smaller herds combining their stocks into a larger group under the leadership of a shepherd (cf. P Oxy. 3778). According to Varro, who mentions herds of 700 and 800 animals (Varro Rust. 2,10,11), it was common in Epirus for one shepherd to watch 100 sheep with coarse wool, and 2 shepherds to watch 100 sheep with fine wool (Varro Rust. 2,2,20; cf. 2,10,r1 with slightly differing numbers and Cato Agr. 10,1). Particular importance was ascribed to the character of the shepherd for the success of sheep farming (Varro Rust. 2,10; Columella 7,3,16; 7,3,26); on Italian estates, the shepherds were subordinate to a senior shepherd known as magister pecoris, who not only had knowledge of veterinary and human medicine, but also was expected to be able to read and write in order to be able to render an account of the herds to his master (Varro Rust. 2,10,10; cf. Columella 7,3,16). If sheep were not kept in transhumance, they were to remain in the pasture from morning to sunset from May to September and be watered twice daily. In the autumn, they were grazed on harvested grain fields (Varro Rust. 2,2,10-12; Columella 7,3,23-25). If they had to be fed in the winter, this was to be with elm and ash leaves, hay, alfalfa, medicago, vetches, legume husks, beans, sweet peas and barley; in addition, it was essential to provide the sheep with salt (Columella 7,3,19-22). In breeding, the effort to have white lambs was crucial. Breeding rams were carefully selected; the required characteristics were described precisely (Varro Rust. 2,2,4; Columella 7,3,1-4). It was also attempted to improve the quality of the wool by crossing domestic sheep with wild rams (for Spain cf. Columella 7,2,4 f.). Suitable ages for breeding were stated as three to eight years for rams and two to seven years for ewes. The sheep were mated in the period between the end of April

1O.BRENDEL, Die Schafzucht im alten Griechenland, thesis Giessen, 1934 2 A.BuRFoRD, Land and Labour in the Greek World, 1993, 151-156 3 R.HAGG, Osteology and Greek Sacrificial Practice, in: Id. (ed.), Ancient Greek Cult Practice from the Archaeological Evidence, 1998, 49-56 4P.HALsTeap, Counting Sheep in Neolithic and Bronze Age Greece, in: I.HopDER et al. (ed.), Pattern of

the Past. FS D. Clarke, 1981, 307-330 5 Id., Pastoralism or Household Herding. Problems of Scale and Specialization in Early Greek Animal Husbandry, in: World Archaeology 28, 1996, 20-42 bandry in the Greek

6S. Hopkinson, Animal HusPolis, in: WHITTAKER, 35-74

7 ISAGER/ SKYDSGAARD, 91-92

8 M.H. JAMESON, Sac-

rifice and Animal Husbandry, in: WHITTAKER, 87-119 9 M.H. JAMESON et al., A Greek Countryside: The Southern Argolid from Prehistory to the Present Day, 1994, 285-287 10 W.RIcHTER, Die Landwirtschaft im homerischen Zeitalter (Archaeologia Homerica

II H), 1968,

53-64 11 V.Rosivacn, The System of Public Sacrifice in Fourth-Century Athens, 1994. MIJA.

Il. ROME A. INTRODUCTION

SHEEP

B. BREEDS AND

FARMING

OF

C. USE

A. INTRODUCTION The keeping of sheep is already archaeologically proven for the earliest Roman era and, in the 2nd cent. BC, was a component of the Roman estate economy; Cato mentions sheep in his inventory of a 240-acre estate and in a contract on the leasing of a sheep herd (Cato Agr. 10,1; 150; cf. 96). The later + agrarian writers treat the breeding and keeping of sheep extensively (Varro Rust. 2,2; Verg. G. 3,284 ff.; Columella 7,2-5; Plin. HN 8,187-199). Among small livestock (goats, pigs, sheep), the sheep (ovis) had a special place by its function as a provider of wool, meat and milk (Columella 7,2,1), not only in the Italian-style villa economy, but also especially in the regions of the Imperium Romanum in which nomads kept large herds of animals. For example, the keeping of sheep is recorded for the territory of Palmyra; the Talmudic tradition also provides details on the important role which they played in Jewish Palestine. Numerous papyri provide information for Roman Egypt. B. BREEDS AND FARMING OF SHEEP The paramount goal of sheep farming was the production of wool. Sheep which provided the finest possible white wool were preferred, because this was the easiest to dye (Columella 7,2,4). Therefore, Tarentine sheep were recommended, although they required particular care by the shepherds and, if possible, the estate owner, because of their great sensitivity (Columella 7,4). Before Columella’s time, Calabrian, Apulian and

SHEEP

383

384

to the end ofJuly, so that they lambed between October and December with the usual gestation period of 150 days (Varro Rust. 2,1,18; 2,2,14-18; Columella 75356-73 753,11-19; Plin. HN 8,187; 8,189; Pall. Agric.

cattle, keeping of; > Sacrifice; > Textiles, production of; > Wool

SHEEP

8,4,2-5).

C. UsE In the Roman era, the economic importance of sheep farming was essentially based on the fact that vast majority of clothing items was made from sheep’s wool (cf. Plin. HN 8,187: “ita corporum tutela pecori debetur”, “so to sheep are we indebted for the defence of our bodies”). Valuable > wool was protected by blankets which were put on the sheep; especially high-quality wool was obtained by castrating Tarentine rams and later butchering them at the age of two (Columella 7,4,4). Shearing was to take place in a period in which the sheep would not be cold, but also would not suffer from the heat: in the spring or, in cold regions, the early summer (Varro Rust. 2,11,6; Columella 7,4,7; Pall. Agric. 5,6; 6,8; 7,6). After shearing, for which large scissors were used, the fleece of the sheep was treated for three days with a liquid of boiled lupines, wine and armurca, afterwards the sheep were washed with saltwater. The raw wool was sold in the form of a fleece (see

e.g. SEG VII 403-407); in Roman Egypt, the price for fleeces ranged between 16 and 24 drachmae [3. 352]. In Pompeii, raw wool was processed by specialized workshops (officinae lanifricariae). Other important products of sheep farming were + milk und the associated - cheese, which was produced preferentially from sheep and goat milk (Varro Rust. 2,11,1-3; cf. Edictum Diocletiani 6,95). Not without reason does Columella treat the production of cheese immediately following his discussion of sheep and goats (Colum. 7,8). The meat of sheep was also valued; near cities, a large percentage of the lambs were slaughtered (Columella 7,3,13; Edictum Diocletiani 4,3; for leather cf. 8,13-14). There was also trade in sheep; thus, Columella offers instructions for the purchase of sheep (Columella 7,2,6; cf. Varro Rust. 2,2,5 f.), and elsewhere states that lambs from one’s own stock are to be preferred to others, that is, probably purchased (Columella 7,3,13-14). Prices for sheep have been recorded from Roman Egypt [3. 302-305]. Finally, the sheep was also used extensively as a sacrificial animal in various cults of the Roman Empire (Plin. HN 8,187), which may have provided the impulse for trade. Sheep were the most common sacrificial animal in Antiquity; this is also behind Judaeo-Christian metaphor: the OT compares the fate of the suffering prophets toa “lamb led to the slaughter” (Jer 11,19; Is 53,7). Particularly in connection with the so-called fourth Servant Song (Is 52:13-53:12), Christianity developed an understanding of Jesus Christ as the “Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world” (Jo 1:29; cf. the interpretation of Is 53:7 f. to Jesus in Acts 8:32 ff.). ~ Agriculture; + Cheese; > Husbandry; > Indoor-fed

1 A.Ben-Davip, Talmudische Okonomie. Die Wirtschaft des jiidischen Palastina zur Zeit der Mischna und des Talmud, vol. 1, 1974, 128-130 2H.-J.DRexHace, Der Handel, die Produktion und der Verzehr von Kase nach

den griechichen Papyri und Ostraka, in: MBAH 15.2, 1996, 33-41 3/1d., Preise, Mieten/Pachten, Kosten und Lohne im romischen Agypten bis zum Regierungsantritt Diokletians, 1991 4 FLACH, 301-309 5 J. M. FRayn, Sheep-Rearing and the Wool Trade in Italy during the Roman Period, 1984 6 W.HABERMANN, Die Deklarationen von Kleinvieh (Schafe und Ziegen) im rémischen

Agypten. Quantitative Aspekte, in: P. Herz (ed.), Landwirtschaft im Imperium Romanum, 2001 (Pharos 14), 77-100 7 W.KROLL, s.v. lana, RE 12,1, 594-617

8 J.F. MatrHews, The Tax Law of Palmyra: Evidence for Economic History in a City of the Roman East, in: JRS 74, 1984, 157-180, esp. 172 f. 9 W.O. MoELLER, The Wool Trade of Ancient Pompeii, 1976 10 F.ORTH, s. v. Schaf, RE 2 A, 373-399 11 A.PapaTHomas, Finfundzwanzig griechische Papyri (P. Heid. VII), 1996 12 J.Perers, R6mische Tierhaltung und Tierzucht. Eine Synthese aus archdozoologischer Untersuchung und schriftlich-bildlicher Uberlieferung, 1998, 75-107 13 M.SCHNEBEL, Die Landwirtschaft im hellenistischen Agypten, 1925, 323-328 14 WHITE, Farming, 301-312 15 C.R. WHITTAKER (ed.), Pastoral Economies in Classi-

cal Antiquity, 1988.

K.RU.

Shell fish. See > Crustaceans; > Molluscs; > Mussels

Shenoute of Atripe (Coptic ‘child of god’; Greek XwovOwoc/Sinouthios); abbot and important author of Coptic literature, died between AD 436 and 466 (466 is

most often given as the year of his death). The stages in his life can be deduced from his writings and from a panegyric vita [6] written by his successor Besa. At an early stage, S., the son of a peasant family, entered the White Monastery at Sauhag in Upper Egypt, which had been founded by a maternal uncle. He took over its leadership in about 385. Under his charismatic direction the monastery, near the village of Atripe on the west bank of the Nile, became an important monastic centre with a far-reaching influence. As head of the monastery, S. took pains to fit the monastic form of social living, which can be traced to > Pachomius, to the local conditions, while teaching a strict asceticism and not shrinking from corporal punishment. A soughtafter adviser, who besides Coptic also had a command of Greek, he accompanied the bishop > Cyrillus [2] of Alexandria [1] to the Council of Ephesus (+ Synodos) in 431.

S. left behind a comprehensive work in Sahidic, the Upper-Egyptian main dialect of > Coptic. According to more recent studies ({7; 8]), the corpus, held exclusively in the library of the White Monastery (incipit catalogue of 119 writings: [7. 772-779]), comprises nine volumes of Kanones with regulations for monastic life and eight volumes of Logoi, predominantly homilies and treatises. In addition, there is a considerable correspond-

385

386

ence. Because of the extremely difficult transmission, the available collected editions ([{1; 2]) are inadequate. The works of S., who repeatedly polemised against exploitative landowners and ‘paganism’, constitute early original evidence and are of great significance to Coptology. — Monasticism

Il. ROME In the early period Roman soldiers used a rectangular shield, which was then — under Etruscan influence —

Ep.:

1J.Leripotpt, W.E. Crum,

H. WIgSMANN

(ed.),

Sinuthii archimandritae vita et opera omnia, Vol. 1, 3 and 4, 1906-1913, 1931-1936 (CSCO 41, 42, 73: text; CSCO 96, 108, 129: translation)

2E.C. AMELINEAU, (Euvres

de Schenoudi, 2 Vol., 1907-1914 (with French translation)

3 T.ORLANDI, Shenoute Contra Origenistas, 1985

(with Italian translation)

4D.W. Younc (ed.), Coptic

Manuscripts from the White Monastery: Works of Shenoute, 2 Vol., 1993 5 H.BEHLMER (ed.), Schenute von Atripe: De iudicio (Cat. del Mus. Egizio di Torino I/8), 1996 (with Germantranslation) 6D.N. BELL, Besa, The

Life of Shenoute, 1983 (Engl. translation). Lit.: 7 S.EMMEL, Shenoute’s Literary Corpus, Diss. Yale 1993 81d.,Shenoute’s Literary Corpus: A Codicological Reconstruction, in: D. W. JOHNSON (ed.), Acts of the Fifth

International Congr. of Coptic Studies 2.1, 1993, 153162

9P.J. FRANDSEN, E. RICHTER-AER@E, Shenoute: A

Bibliography, in: D. W. YounG (ed.), Studies in Honour of H. J. Polotzky, 1981, 147-176 10 J. LErPOLDT,

Schenute von Atripe und die Entstehung des national agyptischen Christentums (TU 25.1), 1903 11 T. ORLANDI, s. v. Shenoute d’Atripé, Dictionnaire de Spiritualité 14, 797-804. JRL

Shield I. Greece

II. ROME

I. GREECE Shields were primarily used to protect soldiers in battle; as a crater from Mycenae (c. 1200 BC) vividly shows, shields were already part of the equipment of warriors in the Mycenaean period. Homer mentions a round shield (éomic/aspis) which was embossed with sheet bronze and strengthened with the skins of oxen (> Cattle) (Hom. Il. 12,294-297; 13,156-166). In the middle there was a shield boss (dudaddc/omphalos; Hom. Il. 13,192). A strap (tehapdv/telamon; Hom. Od. 11,609-614) enabled the shield to be carried without holding it in the hand. The soldiers of the early hoplite phalanx (— Hoplitai) fought with aspides (Chigi Vase, late 7th cent. BC, Rome, VG), which had a diameter of about 700-1000 mm. In the Classical period the shield remained an important part of the equipment of hoplites; shields are depicted on numerous vases in scenes from Trojan battles and in the leave-taking scene (Hector-Andromache; stamnos by the Cleophon Painter, Munich, SA; Beazley, ARV* 1143,2). The shields of hoplites were of wood, often reinforced with bronze plates, and were given pictorial representations on the outer side. On the inner side the shield had a loop for the forearm, as well as a handgrip. It was considered an offense, during an expedition or a battle, for a soldier to throw down his shieldin order to run away (And.

1,74).

SHIITES

replaced by a round shield (clipeus) (Diod. 23,2,1 f.).

The rectangular long-shield (scutum), which covered the whole body, did not appear until later, when battle ranks organized into maniples replaced the inflexible + phalanx (Liv. 8,8,3). In the middle of the 2nd cent. BC the equipment of a heavily armed soldier included a convex scutum about 1.20 m long and 0.75 m wide, which consisted of several layers of wooden boards and was covered with linen and ox leather; on the upper and lower edges it was reinforced with iron bands, to protect it against damage from sword blows or from being placed on the ground; its iron shield boss was to fend off thrusts and thrown stones. Light-armed infantry and - cavalry were equipped with small round shields (parma, about 0.90 m in diameter; Pol. 6,22-23). Towards the end of the 2nd cent. BC, at the time of C. Marius [I r], a new type of shield, long and oval in shape, appeared. Both types, the scutum and the oval shield, continued to exist in the Principate, while at the same time new shapes emerged (Cass. Dio 49,30,1; Jos.

BI 3,93-97). The scutum, which in the Principate was in

the shape of a longitudinally halved hollow cylinder and had a hemispherical umbo (‘shield boss’), remained predominant in the Roman army, but — particularly in auxiliary units (> Auxilia) — there were also other types of shield. The elite troops of a general were recognizable by their round shields, whereas the soldiers of the legiones (> Legio) were equipped with scuta (Jos. BI 3,95). Reliefs on Trajan’s and Marcus Aurelius’ Columns document the use of various shields in the legiones and auxilia. The designation scutata for cohorts of the auxilia (ILS 2611; 2692) refers to their being equipped with scuta and is unlikely to have been a honorific title. 1M.C. BisHop, J.C.N. Coutston, Roman Military Equipment from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome, 1993 2 M. FEUGERE, Les armes des Romains, 1993

3 C.SAULNIER, L’armée et la guerre dans le monde étrusco-romain, 1980

4C.SAULNIER, L’armée et la guerre

chez les peuples samnites, 1983 5 A.M. SNoDGRass, Arms and Armour of the Greeks, *1999. Y.LB.

Shiites (< Shia/S7‘a, literally ‘party’, elliptical for ‘Party of > Ali’). Term for the supporters of Ali in the struggle for the caliphate (+ Caliph). According to the number of imams (+ Imam) they recognise, Fiver (e.g. Zaidites in Yemen), Sevener (e.g. Ismailites in Pakistan and central Asia; Fatimids 909-1171 in northern Africa and Egypt, > Fatima) and Twelver Shiites (group with the largest number of adherents, today in e.g. Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon) are distinguished. Martyrdom, i.e. dying for the expansion and defence of > Islam and direct entry to > paradise, plays a role primarily in Shiite Islam (— Hussain). Fewer than one in five of all Muslims today are Shiites. — Hassan; > Sunnites H. Ham, Die Schia, 1988.

H.SCHO.

SHIPBUILDING

388

387

Shipbuilding

Schematic representation of shipbuilding

I. ANCIENT ORIENT AND EGypt III. CLAsstcaAL ANTIQUITY

II. PHOENICIA

I. ANCIENT ORIENT AND EGYPT Due to the lack of original finds from most regions of the ancient Orient, little can be said about shipbuilding, except for Egypt. The fact that many Syrians were employed in Egyptian shipyards and that a ship (from around 1300 BC) found at Ulu Burun, Turkey was built in the same technique as Egyptian ships indicates that a uniform shipbuilding technique was used throughout the eastern Mediterranean. Here, wooden planks were placed in the desired position with wooden dowels; additional boards were then fastened to a floor board (not a keel) also with wooden dowels, sometimes with hawsers as well. Finally, the dowels were wedged in place and the seams were pitched. The numerous depictions of ships on Egyptian reliefs and paintings show a variety of ship types. In agreement with the significance of > navigation in Egypt and southern Mesopotamia, shipbuilding had great importance, which is expressed by high officials boasting of this activity. A variety of special terms for the people involved, parts of the ship and the materials used are recorded in Egypt and southern Mesopotamia. While it is not known where ships were built in southern Mesopotamia, we know of a large number of shipyards in Egypt, which received, in part, prefabricated ship parts. In the 18th Dynasty (15th/14th cents. BC), the main shipyard was located at - Memphis, where warships were built for attacks in the area of the Levantine coast and to defend the bases there. Wood was used everywhere in the region — in Egypt and the Levant, mostly cedar wood — but also apparently reed: this is recorded for Egypt in various pictorial sources; for southern Mesopotamia, this can be gathered from the depiction of ships on early cylinder seals, where the raised bow and stern still show the leafy tips of reeds.

4

A O

«i CO

W.K. Simpson, s. v. Schiffbau, LA 5, 616-622; M.-Cu. DE GRAEVE, The Ships of the Ancient Near East (2000 — 500 B. C.), 1981; G.F. Bass, Sea and River Craft in the Ancient Near East, in: J. SASSON (ed.), Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. 3, 1995, 1421-1431; A. SALONEN,

Die Wasserfahrzeuge Fennica VIII,4), 1939.

in Babylonien

(Studia Orientalia

Mixed construction technique

HJ.N.

II. PHOENICIA

The Phoenician shipbuilding tradition, the origins of which go back to the early Bronze Age, was familiar with at least three types of vessel: the fast, light ‘longship’ for extensive trading journeys and expeditions and naval actions, the spacious ‘roundship’ as a freighter for shorter trading journeys, and boats for coastal navigation. A certain idea which serves as the foundation for some speculations about the construction and appearance of Phoenician ships is provided primarily by Assyrian depictions on the bronze fittings on the doors of the

palace of Salmanassar III in > Balawat (9th cent. BC),

on the limestone reliefs in the palace of Sargon II in Horsabad (8th cent.) and of Sennacherib (7th cent.) in Nineveh (— Ninus [2]), coin images from the Phoenician metropolises Aradus, > Byblus, > Sidon and sporadically > Tyrus (mid 5th—4th cents.), but also from Punic tomb stelae from the tophet of > Carthage (4th— 3rd cents.) and tomb paintings in Kef el-Blida and Djebel Mlezza, Tunisia. Shipwreck finds, such as those at Ulu Burun and Gelidonya Burnu, Turkey (14th and 12th cent. respectively), Kyrenia, Cyprus (4th cent.), or Marsala, Sicily (3rd cent.), provide occasional valuable

389

390

SHIPBUILDING

1 Keel

tropis

2 Wale

zostér

3

Stem

steira

4

Foresail

artémon

5 Foresail yard (cf. 9) 6 Yard-arm brace kerichoi, himantes 7

Foremast

rostrum

= artemo

(cf. 9) ceruchi, funes

artémon?

artemo?

8 Mainsail

histion

velum

9 Sail-yard

armenon (histo-)

antemna

13 eg

keraia,

eet V

epikrion

SS eS,

carina

10
Navigation M.E. AuBeET, The Phoenicians and the West, 1993, 146151, 329 (with literature); P.BARTOLONI, Schiffe und Schiffbau, in: $.Moscati (ed.), Die Phonizier 1988, 7277, 132-138; Id., Navires et navigation, in: V.KRINGS (ed.), La civilisation phénicienne et punique (HbdOrI 20), 1995, 282-289; J.DEBERGH, s. v. navires, DCPP 310 f. (with literature); K.DEVRiIEs, M.Katzev, Greek, Etruscan and Phoenician Ships and Shipping, in: G. F. Bass, A History of Seafaring Based on Underwater Archaeology 1972, 38-64.

CH.B.

III. CLAssicAL ANTIQUITY

Over the course of Antiquity, there were significant changes in the field of shipbuilding, as is demonstrated by the numerous wrecks found in the Mediterranean and north-western Europe and by depictions of ships on vase paintings, reliefs and mosaics. In the Mediterranean region, the keel is recorded for the Aegean ships of Syros (3rd millennium BC). Keels, ribs and crossbeams appear in depictions and terra cotta models from the 2nd millennium BC. The earliest evidence for planks joined by tongue and groove is provided by the Ulu Burun wreck (west coast of Asia Minor; 14th cent. BC, see above I. and II.). However,

up to the end of the Archaic era, the lacing of the plank seams is still frequently recorded (cf. Hom. Il. 2,135; Hom. Od. 14,383). Only after this does the tongue and groove technique — already recorded in Homer (Od. 5,248) — dominate: the planks are connected by thin boards (placed in opposing slits) and the ends of the tongues are additionally fixed in the grooves by dowels. Shipbuilders in Antiquity followed the principle of ‘shell construction’: first they attached the stem and stern posts — often some main ribs as well — to the keel, and then formed the hull piece by piece, joining the planks together. They then fitted the floor timbers and ribs into it. Hull stability could be further strengthened by horizontal wales stretching across the outer skin of the ship, double planking, attaching an inner keel or nailing longitudinal beams and planks inside the ship. Beginning in the 5th cent. BC, this allowed the construction of merchant ships with hull lengths of over 40m and cargo capacities of more than 450 t. However, the vast majority of freight ships remained relatively small, at 20-150 t. Gigantic ships such as that of Hieron [2] of Syracuse (Ath. 5,206d—209e) were built extremely rarely.

SHIPBUILDING

391

392

Toward the end of the Principate, there was a slow transition from shell construction to skeleton construction in the Mediterranean region. Planks were then nailed to an already finished framework of keel and

Ships of the Port of London, 1994 7 MEIGGS, 116-153 8 A.J. Parker, Ancient Shipwrecks in the Mediterranean

ribs. This construction method, also termed frame-ori-

ented, and the practice of overlapping planks (clinker building) can also be observed earlier in north-western Europe.

Materials for ship building were coniferous woods for planks, and hardwoods such as oak, beech, elm, ash and cypress for keels and ribs (Theophr. Hist. pl. 5,7). Oak was the preferred material in the northern Alpine region (Caes. B Gall. 3,13,2). The bolts with which the ribs and timbers were fastened in the shell were normally made of metal —copper or bronze, later also iron— as were the metal sheets nailed to the hulls of freight ships to keep off dangerous shipworm. Other conservation materials applied to the outer hull of ships were resinous substances such as tar and > pitch. Mediterranean warships and cargo ships had steering oars on both sides of the stern, entering the water at an angle and operated with a lever by a steersman sitting in the stern (Lucian, Navigium 6). The use of only one stern rudder on the sternpost is recorded for Rhine ships in the Roman era. Mast and sail were part of the equipment for larger ships from early on. At first, a square sail placed amidships was sufficient. Beginning in the 5th cent. BC, two and three-masters appear in pictorial depictions. Roman trading ships were usually two-masters with a square sail and a triangular topsail on the main mast and a slanted foremast which carried a small square sail (artémon; Latin artemo(n)). The use of spritsails and lateen sails is also recorded. Information on the organization of shipbuilding is offered by an Egyptian papyrus from around AD 250: it records the daily pay of the shipbuilders and sawyers, who worked for three weeks on the construction of a larger vessel (P Flor. 1, no. 69 [13]). In military shipbuilding, the use of mass production techniques with prefabricated, standardized components and planned shipbuilding (formal construction) are to be reckoned with from the Hellenistic era. The primary tools in shipbuilding were handsaw, adze, plane, cross-cut saw, chisel, hammer, axe, wooden brackets, knife and wedge, as well as measuring rod and compass. Sawing- and work scaffoldings were also used to fix and work the building timbers and hull supports. A Roman tomb relief from Ravenna shows the shipbuilder P. Longidienus in his workshop [12]. Ramps and slipways would have allowed the launching of the ships; dry docks were used to build larger ships in Roman Egypt. + Navigation; > Rigging 1L.BascH, Le musée imaginaire de la marine antique, 1987 21L.Casson, Ships and Seamanship in the Ancient World, *1986

3 D.ELLMeErs, Vor- und friihgeschichter

Boots- und Schiffbau in Europa nérdlich der Alpen, in: Das Handwerk in vor- und friihgeschichtlicher Zeit 2, Archaologische und philologische Beitrage, AAWG 1983, 471-534 4J.Hausen, Schiffbau in der Antike, 1979

5 O.H6cKMann, Antike Seefahrt, 1985

6 P. MARSDEN,

and the Roman Provinces, 1992 9/I.U. TH. PEKARY, Artemon und Dolon, in: Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungarica, 41, 1989, 477-487

10 M.Rivat, La charpenterie navale romaine. Matériaux, méthodes, moyens, 1991 11 Wuire, Technology, 141156 12 ZIMMER, Cat. no. 62-68 13 D.COMPARETTI, G.ViTeELLI (ed.), Papiri Fiorentini, vol. 1 (no. 1-105), 1906.

H.KON.

Shipwrecks, exploration of. In recent decades, underwater archaeology has enabled the discovery and investigation of well over 1,200 shipwrecks in littoral areas of the Mediterranean and the Roman provinces, dating from 1500 BC to AD 1200. The number of shipwreck find sites continues to grow considerably thanks to the exploration, which began around 1990, of deeper waters of the Mediterranean using special submersible craft. Only shipwrecks discovered in inshore waters at depths of up to 40m have hitherto been sufficiently investigated and documented. Shipwreck exploration affords precise insights into the construction of ancient ships (> Shipbuilding), their performance and the goods and objects they carried (+ Navigation; > Commerce).

In essence an ancient shipwreck is a snapshot, preserved under a layer of silt and sand, of ancient technical tradition, long-forgotten shipping and trade routes and, not least, the everyday life of the crew. The disadvantage that the deck structures and masts of almost all shipwrecks have disappeared is to some extent offset by the preservation in anaerobic conditions of organic materials such as wood, textiles and food remnants. Still, the amphorae stowed en masse aboard ships (> Transport amphorae), the large — dolia and other pottery vessels have naturally withstood the test of time in far greater numbers and in better condition than the baskets, crates, barrels and casks which were also used as transport vessels. Shipwrecks are found in different regions of the Mediterranean and from different periods. The main find sites correspond to the main focus of diving tourism: the coasts of southern France, SW Asia Minor, Italy and the Adriatic. While only occasional wrecks are datable to the Mycenaean and Late Mycenaean periods, their numbers rise continually through time from the 7th cent. BC. Most wrecks are dated between 200 BC and AD 200. Their numbers in later periods fall sharply in consequence of the constantly diminishing amount of trade being done in the Mediterranean region. The following list (see table) of important shipwrecks shows the technical details of ancient ships and the goods and artefacts aboard them. The selection also includes ships from the north-western provinces (incl. river ships from the Rhine and Danube), not least in order to document the particular tendencies in structural evolution in peripheral areas of the Imperium Roma-

num. ~ Shipbuilding (with fig.); > UNDERWATER ARCHAEOL-

OGY

393

SHIPWRECKS,

394

EXPLORATION

OF

Chronological table of ancient wrecks (2nd millennium BC — 7th cent. AD)

i

Wreck

Find site

Date/Type/Size of | Cargo ship

Structural details/ other finds/notes

WIE Burun PARKER

Turkey (SW coast of Asia Minor)

c. 1350-1300 BC (2); F.31.215-16m

Shell-construction; use of tongue-and-groove technique for joining planks (= classical

no. 1193

—-468 mostly flat copper bars from Cyprus (c. ro t); tin bars (c. 1 t); terebinth resin (c. 1 t);

150 Canaanite amph. (vol. 6.7—

shell constr.); planks and keel

26.7 l); 170 glass bars; ebony spruce; grooves and tongues and cedar wood; ivory and oak; 24 stone anchors. Similar hippopotamus tusks; artefacts, to this ship is the one sunk jewellery and weapon compo1250-1150 BC off Cape Gelinents from various regions be- _— donya A (cf. PARKER no. 208)

tween Sicily and Babylon, the Baltic and Nubia. 2.

3.

Cape Iria [10]

Giglio A [4]

Greece, Argolic Gulf

Italy

c. 1200 BC; relatively large Cypri-

Cypriot goods (flagons, pithoi and pitchers, some filled with

ot (?) F.

olive oil and pomegranate pulp); Cretan stirrup vases;

c. 600-590 BC; F.

decorated Mycenaean vases. Etruscan and Samian amph.; copper and lead bars; south Etruscan pottery.

4.

BonPorte A

S France off Cape Taillat

c. 550-525 BC; F.

PARKER no. 106

5.

6.

Gela

lian and (at least) 2 Chian amph.

Sicily

late 6th/early

PARKER

sth cent. BC; F;1.

no. 441

approx. 20m

Porticello

Italy, Strait of Messina

c. 425-400 BC; F.; l. approx. 17 m

PARKER no. 879

7.

Alonni-

9.

Ionian, Corinthian (types

Shell-construction with lashed planks; hull & keel, etc. pine, silver fir, oak and elm; many

OBA. Remains of the ship indicate __ shell-first structure, plank joints lashed together.

Aand

— B), Attic and Carth. amph.;

Plank joints still lashed together.

black-figured pottery among other luxury tableware; total approx. 20 t. Wine amph. (from Mende and __ Classical shell-first; lead-cladBosporus, S Italy, W Sicily); 3 ding. life-size bronze statues; 20 lead bars; pots; total approx. 30 t.

Greece, Aegean

sos [6]

8.

Etruscan amph. (some with graffiti); 12-15 Graeco-Massi-

with copper and tin bars, metal processing tools. Two stone anchors; stones as ballast; comprehensive OBA.

Kyrenia PARKER no. 563

Cyprus

Marsala 1 PARKER

Sicily, W coast

no. 661

late sth cent. BC;

4000 mostly intact wine amph.

Ship not yet studied; ship’s

large F.

(from Mende and Skopelos);

anchor wood with lead core.

€. 310-300 BC; very old F.; 1.13.6 m, w. 4.4m

late 3rd cent. BC; Carth. ship sunk

Attic pottery was stowed on top. 400 wine amph. (esp. Rhodian,

Hull of Aleppo pine (with outer lead cladding); classical _ shell-first constr.; signs of repair; personal items and OBA (pots, tableware) for 4 asymmetry); total approx.20t. | crew members? | Nocargo; only large no. of balAphraktos rowing-ship; last stones (from island of Pan- _ planks (some overlaid like roof also 10 other types); 9,000 almonds in jars; 29 stone mortars (placed to one side of the keel to compensate for hull

by violence (perh. _ telleria) and some OBA (Greek, _ tiles) of Corsican pine; some warship); l. Italian & Carth. amph., Italian other wood from N Africa; fellapprox. 30 m, pottery from late 3rd/early 2nd _ing dates: 235 (465) BC; 200 w.5m cent. BC); pers. items. (Carth.) markings reveal planned constr. process with

prefabricated pieces; lead cladding; no naval ram? ro. Marsala 2 PARKER no. 662

Sicily 7o mS of Marsala

3rd cent. BC?; Carth. warship.

11. Grand Congloueé A PARKER no. 472

S France, S of Monaco

c. 210-180 BC; F.

Only prow stem and thin, upward-curving ram survive; planks (pine) and ribs (oak) also have Carth. markings. 400 Graeco-Italian amph. (type Camp. A); 30 Rhodian amph. with stamps; amph. from Cnidus and Chios; black-glazed Campanian ceramics (c. 7,000

pieces with graffiti).

SHIPWRECKS,

Wreck

EXPLORATION

396

395

OF

Find site

Date/Type/Size of | Cargo ship

Structural details/ other finds/notes

12. Pisa, Hellenistic ship [5. 37£.]

_Italy

Early 2nd cent. BC; large Carth.F.

Graeco-Italian wine amph. (type Camp. D); Carth. amph. filled partly with shoulders of pork; 1 lion; 3 horses; Volterra pottery; black-glazed. lamps; Iberian vases; 4 Carth. thy-

Only scant remains of the ship survive (planks, wood); seems to have collided with a harbour structure; human bones among the cargo that slipped overboard.

13. Dramont

S France, SEside

c.

miateria; oil flasks; 2 lagynoi. 120 Dr. 1B amph., Dr. 20

Keel and ribs oak; planks

of fle d’Or

F.; |. approx.12—

C Parker no. 373

110-100 BC(?);_

13m

| amph., few Lamb. 2 Amph; 50 ~— Aleppo pine. A working area iron rods; blocks of pine resin; quern and ballast stones; pottery; metal objects. 70 marble columns; marble structural elements; marble & bronze artworks from Greece; lead bars with numerous small finds; wt. total approx. 350 t.

14. Madhia {2]

Tunisia, near Thapsus

c. 110-90 BC; Roman F,; |. approx 40 m, w. approx 14 m, h. approx 6.5 m

15. Cavaliére PARKER no. 282

S France

100 BC; small F.; |= Lamb. 2, Dr. rC and Dr. 1A 1.13 m,w.4m amph. (mostly filled with wine); smoked or salted pork quarters; wt. total approx. 3 t; also

_laid with stone flags allowed the traders to make cork stoppers for amph. on board. Classical shell-first struct., thick inner planks; thin outer planks (black pine) dowelled —_ on with bronze nails; skeleton elm; lead cladding; 4 large anchor stocks; bilge pumps;

catapult fragments.

approx. ro t ballast.

16. Albenga PARKER

Italy, Ligurian

c. 100-80 BC large

coast

F.; capacity

amph. (packed in 5 layers).

(without continuous deck?);

approx.500-600t

‘Types:esp. Dr. 1B (mostly filled

ribs & frames oak; planks soft-

no. 28

with red wine), Lamb. 2 (prob.

| wood; mast rib with trace of

filled with wine); much pottery (Camp. A plates & imitation Campanian bowls). At least 100 amph. esp. of type Dr. 1 (with stamps); some Lamb. 2 & Dr. 1 A amph.; luxury furniture & art objects from Greece.

—_mast; assoc. finds: (partly black-glazed) tableware, jars; 7 bronze helmets. |Many OBA & personal items; bilge pumps.

17. Fourmique C PARKER no. 425

S France

18. Dramont

S France off fle

c. 75-25 BC; F.;1.

(several layers) Dr. 1B amph.;

Bow & stern asymmetrical,

d’Or

approx. 25 m,w. 7m

many with stamps, some even still with amph. seals (some

protective sheet between inner & outer planks; inner protec-

with inscription S. Arri. M.f.);

tive coat of paint, no lead cov-

also some Apulian & Lamb. 3 amph. & some Rhodian & Carth. amph. (filled with olives).

ering, remains of rudder survive; 2 anchor stocks have markings of ship owner Sex. Arri...] (carrying his own goods acc. to amph. seals). Classical shell-first struct.;

A ParKER no. 371

19. Madra-

gue de

S France off

c. 70-50 BC; F.;1.

6,000-7,0o00 amph. stowedin3

Toulon

approx. 40 m,

layers, below esp. Dr. 1Bamph. _ prow stem jutting prominent-

w.9m;capacity: 375-400 t

from S Latium (filled with red ly; planks silver fir, ribs and wine) with the stamp P. Vevei keel/inner keel (carefully Papi; on top amph. with stamp __ lashed at ends to bow & aft

Giens PARKER no. 616

20. Mal de

Ventre PARKER no. 637

80-60 BC; F.

Acc. to estimates, up to 13,500

Classical shell-first struct.; lead | covering; wood indicates ship _prob. built in Adriatic region; mast boots for main & foresails; much OBA, coins from Numidia, Massilia and S Spain. — Classical shell-first struct.

Sardinia west

50 BC (?); F.;

coast

1. 36m,w.12m

O(uintus) Mae(..) Ant(..); topmost (packed in crates) hund-

stems) oak, elm, walnut & pine; double planking; lead

reds of pieces of coarse and black-glazed pottery; stern filled with firewood & volcanic

cladding; rigging remains; collecting vat for bilge water; 5 lead bars; 2 bronze helmets.

earth (ballast?). 1,000 lead bars (total approx.

Lead anchor stocks.

35 t), marked (e.g. M. C. Pontielienorum M. f., C. Arulius Hispalis, C. Arulius Hispalius.

eA

398

SHIPWRECKS,

EXPLORATION

OF

Wreck

Find site

Date/Type/Size of | Cargo ship

Structural details/ other finds/notes

21. Planier C PARKER no. 826

S France

E5obewe! approx.20m,w. approx. 5 m

Dr. 1B amph (with potter’s marks); also Panella 2 & Lamb. 2 amph. (these with owner’s stamp); pottery & minerals (red orpiment, lead oxide and blue glass mass).

One side of ship well preserved; lead cladding; remains of steering gear; rich OBA in stern area, 5 beakers & 5 plates in fine-walled pottery (evidence of corresponding crew num-

22. Valle Ponti PARKER no. 1206

Italy, Adriatic coast off Commachio

C5 SED OA sie approx.25 m,w. approx. 5.4m

_— Flat-keeled ship; ribs tied to _ hull with ropes; hearth in stern, iron anchor; among assoc. _ finds also small boxes, leather __ bags, baskets & sacks; shoes, sandals, tools & a stone weight (32.7 kg) with initials M. and TT. Rufi = ship owner?)

23. Tradeliére

S France off Cannes

c. 20-10 BC; F.

Midships roofing tiles and 102 lead bars from Carthago Nova (stamped e.g. L. Cae. Bat. & Agripp.); to fore and aftamph. of types Dr. 6 & Dr. 2-4 (with tituli picti); also E Mediterranean amph.; 17 lamps; coarse pottery; bronze vessels & tableware; 6 small votive temples; pork & mutton quarters. Approx. 300-400 amph.; mostly Italian Dr. 2-4 amph. (3 types, prob. from Adriatic

bers?)

PARKER no. 1174

24. Grand RibaudD PARKER nO. 477

25. Commachio [14]

S France, island of Grand Ribaud

Italy (off Ferrara)

26. Pisa wreck B [5. 42f.]

Italy

oy peisa wreck C [5- 4648]

Italy

28. Ladispoli

Italy

Classical shell-first struct., lead _—_cladding. Remains of a bilge pump; rigging remains.

region); hazelnuts; pottery; glass. c. ro-1 BC; F. Midships rx large dolia, Timbers: oak (for planks), from Minturnae approx. 2 t wt. (when filled; alder and willow; the capsized (Latium); |. they are stabilized with joists ship buried bulkheads, joists approx. 18 m;caand bear names related to Minand deck superstructures pacity approx. 45— turnae in S Latium); 250 amph. under it; planks and ribs were sot in bow and stern; incl. 200 Dr. _ joined with iron nails; no lead 2-4 amph. (some stamped) cladding; remains of a bilge from around Naples, another pump and rigging. According group of this type comes from to pottery finds (some with the Adriatic region of Italy. graffiti), 6 people were on board: including Pap(us), Ma[...] and/or Mar(ius) and Sex. R[...]. Late rst cent. BC; —_102 lead blocks (some Decked ship with square rig; Ps'ls2am; stamped Agrippa); amph.; classical shell-first struct.; but w. 5.62 m;capaccherry wood blocks; northern ribs tied to hull with esparto; ity approx.130t Italian T.S.; 6 small votive tem- _ cargo space with ceiling ples. boards; tiled roof in stern; several loading hatches. late Augustan peri- Mostly reused Dr. 6A and Hull 9.4 m |. to upper deck od (after 7 BC); Lamb. 2 amph. for transporting _ wall well-preserved; classical Campanian F,; |. fruit, nuts, olives andesp. sand _ shell-first struct.; ballast stones approx 14 m, w. for tempering pottery clay; of Vesuvian lava; many onapprox. 4.3 m prob. area of acquisition: board utensils and personal Adriatic region; alsosome Dr.9 __ items. Skeleton finds, one man and Ha 70 amph. and one dog, near the ship. 27 BC-c. AD 40; 6 rowing benches along whole harbour boat?; length. The sharp prow, promi-

|. 11.7 m, w. 2.8m

nent just below the waterline, was prob. fitted with a metal covering.

AD 1-15;riveror

Midships rx dolia (with inner

A PARKER

coastal F.; |.

coating), vol. each 3,000 1. One

and flat-bottomed; shallow

no. 233

approx 20m

dolium stamped Soterichus/ Pirani. fec. and [Sote]/ric. f. Fore and aft of dolia, Dr. 2-4 amph. of Campanian type (still

curved keel; remains of bilge pump. Cooking and eating utensils in stern (incl. stamped T.S., Baetic Ha 70 amph., lamps), also box of coriander and caraway packed in small sacks.

corked).

Hull of ‘normal construction’

SHIPWRECKS,

Wreck

29. PortVendres B PARKER no. 875

30. Dramont

EXPLORATION

400

399

OF

Find site

Date/Type/Size of ship

Cargo

Structural details/ other finds/notes

S France ancient

c. AD 42-48; large

harbour entrance of Port Vendres

F.

Esp. Dr. 20 amph. (from at least II potteries); their tituli picti indicate at least 5 different oil

Ship hull little studied; some ribs and planks survive with remnant of yard; lead cladding;

production sites); also Ha 70

3 iron anchors(?); comprehen-

amph. (content: defrutum) and

sive OBA (remains of a lifting-

some Dr. 28 amph; inscriptions on all 3 types mention rz suppliers; other cargo: S Spanish pottery, metals (incl. 18 tin bars stamped L. Val. Aug. |. a com.); glass. 2.5-3.5 t roof tiles; 40 stamped T.S. vessels from La Graufesenque; rough pottery (100-200 bowls, dishes and jars from Fré-

block; S Gaulish T.S.; glass,

pots, lamps, Beltran 2A garum amph., etc.).

Ship badly damaged; tools; OBA; x iron anchor.

Dramont

c. AD 60-70; local F.; |. approx. 1m m

E Spain off

c. AD 70-80; F.; |.

At least 76 (some reused)

Hull ext. tarred; ribs and

Ampurias

approx. 9-10 m, W. approx. 3 m; capacity approx. 8t

planks Scots Pine or Black Pine; olive pins; use of copper

PARKER

stamped Dr. 20 amph.; fine Baetic pottery (1,500 beakers and cups); 42 lamps from Rome inscribed Oppi; approx. 2,750 T.S. vessels from La Graufesenque with 54 different stamps and 30 individual names. 60 (empty!) Gaulish amph. (esp. Laubenheimer G 5 type); rough pottery from Lorgues and Fréjus (c. 1,000 bowls,

no. 994

mortars, jars and pots); approx.

G PARKER no.

S France Cap

377

jus).

Bl. Culip D PARKER

nO. 347

32. Les Roches d’Aurelle

S France off St. Raphael

c. AD 80-100; F.;

l.approx. 12-15 m

& iron nails; remains of a ship’s pump; very many OBA and many personal items.

No information.

250 roof tiles from region of Fréjus. 33- Punta

Sicily W coast

Scario A PARKER no. 961

34.

ist cent. AD?;

Large cargo of tiles (tegulae,

large F.

imbrices and floor tiles) with

circular stamps: Ti. Cl. Felic. ex Officin(a). Classical Mediterranean shell-

Ober-

Germany Ober-

Early 2nd cent.

stimm

stimm

AD; Roman river

ship 2 [8]

35: Saint Gervais C PARKER no. L002

S France

boat (rowed); l. 15.4 m, w. 2.65 m, h. approx. 1.05 m AD 149-154; F. sunk in ancient harbour.

first; at least 9 rowing benches; mast well to fore; concave-con-

vex prow; timber felling date AD 102 (+10).

Main cargo: Dr. 20 oil amph. (acc. to tituli picti and stamp

filled AD 149-153 near Astigi (check mark R as proof of in-

tended import to Rome is missing); also S Spanish Beltran 2B amph. with inscr. Vin(um)

36. Zwam-

merdam B, D, F PARKER nos. 1255,

1257, 1259

Netherlands Zwammerdam

AD 150-225; river

pram; dimensions: wreck B: 22.75 x 2.95 m, h. 0.95 m; wreck D: 34 x 4.4m, h. 1.2 m; wreck F: 20.40 X 3.55 m,h.o.g0m

No detailed study yet.

R(ubrum?) Aur(elianum?) Vet(us?); Gaulish wine amph. of Laubenheimer G 4 type. Remains of tile and pine debris found in wrecks B (max. capacity approx. 30-35 t) and D (max. capacity c. 110 t). Generally, fort supply goods of any kind would be conveyed on vessels of this kind.

Robust hull (incl. keel & keelson) 17 x 6 ml. survives, forestem concave towards mids-

hips, mast bench for main and foremasts. The ship, from Baetica, docked in the Narbonensis, where it loaded wine, before continuing to Fossa Mariana.

Long, vat-like oak hull; floor plate of caravel constr. and flat (no keel); side walls at right

angles (mostly planks overlapping like roof tiles); mast well to fore; iron nails join frames,

ribs & planks. There were many prams of this kind in the river systems of Rhine, Maas and Schelde; cf. e.g. PARKER

NOS. 379, 533, 629, 630, 856, S575 E2G 2.

401

402

Wreck

Find site

Date/Type/Size of | Cargo ship

37. Procchio PARKER no. 906

Italy Elba

c. AD 160-200;F.; |. approx. 18 m

38. Torre Squarrata PARKER

Italy off Tarentum

AD 180-205;F.;1. over 30m;capacity max. 240 t

no. 1163

SHIPWRECKS,

EXPLORATION

OF

Structural details/ other finds/notes

Sulphur oxide bars stamped Classical shell-first struct., lead [M] or [i]; pear-shaped amph. cladding; outer planks pine?; (from Gaul); C Tunisian amph. inner planks fir; skeleton elm; of Africana 1 type (content: evidence of galley; many OBA figs); many glass fragments. and much ship equipment. 18 roughly carved sarcophagi; Ship (> 60 yrs old?) repaired 23 large blocks (alabaster from many times; OBA (TripolitaAsia Minor and white Thasian _—_nian amph.; pottery; bricks; marble); marble incrustations

masons’ tools, glass, etc.).

between blocks; wt. approx. 160 t.

39. London PARKER no. 606

England

GAD Doors li approx. I5 m

40. Punta Scifo A PARKER no. 965 41. Mellieha PARKER no. 691

Italy Calabria

early 3rdcent.AD; F.; |. approx.3035m.

Malta

c. AD 200-250; F.

42. Monaco

Monaco

c. AD 200-250(?);

A PARKER

poss. rowed F.;

no. 708

l.15m,w.4m

43. CapoGra-__ nitola A PARKER

W Sicily

AD 225-275; F. for rock transport

Channel Is.

AD 280-287; F.; keel l.: 14.05 m

no. 229

Cargo (max. 92 t): sandstone Hull built on skeleton with from Medway region; mill massive keel; planks connected stone, pottery, tools and equipto solid ribs and frames with ment. iron nails. Marble columns, bases, block Fragments of oak planks & &statues,some over 22t,from spruce timbers; rich OBA. Dokimeion and Proconnesus, total approx. 150 t; amph.(?). Large (Syrian?) mortaria; glass | Hardly any indication of hull vessels (prob. packed in crates); design; ship accessories; roof many reused amph., glass tile remains of galley, 2 bronze pieces and blue glass mass; tex- _ vessels; bones; also pottery; tile fragments. ballast stones. Prob. Mauretanian amph.; Classical shell-first constr.; Africana—z amph. (both types flat-bottomed amidships; ribs stamped and with graffiti); & frames alternating; inner & wooden stamp with initials outer planks; hull ext. painted CAF betw. 2 palmettes for mak- _ with pitch; pottery (incl. rough ing amph. stamps. ware and Chiara T.S.). Over 60 marble blocks from Iron anchor & large lead Proconnesus stowed in 8 rows; anchor stock. wt. approx. 350 t; marble fragments betw. blocks indicate

previous such transports. 44. Guernsey [13]

Pottery (pitchers, bowls, cooking pots); remains of wooden barrels; amph.; pine resin;

= Massive oak skeleton struct.; keel, ribs, frames and planks connected by iron nails;

bricks (prob. from deck accom- _ remains of bilge pump. modation).

45. LaLuque B PARKER

_ S France

no. 611

c. AD 300-325 (?); F.; |. approx. 20m, w.6m

4 different forms of African amph. & spherical amph., of

Carefully built hull; planks only 3 cm thick; thin oak keel

which some still contained

coated with soaked cloth;

remains of crayfish; 250 lamps

frames fitted to hull wall with

(African type, stamped, e.g.

iron bolts; mast boot; bilge

c. AD 400; coastal and river F.; |.

Victor/inus de officina Cecili) Almagro 50 & 51c amph. (many were still corked and

pump. Symmetric hull; solid inner bracing with stringers and

A PARKER

max.

contained sardine bones); also

wales; some frames firmly bolt-

no. 874

w. 5-6m

some amph. with Latin graffiti; total wt. 70-75 t; Containers supported/packed with wooden frames/dunnage.

Early sth cent. AD; one of 5 Roman ships of

No cargo.

| ed to the heavy keel; further elements of skeleton construction: wooden plugs and copper nails served to fix planks to keel. Oak river warship; built by master mould technique; iron nails connected planks and

46. PortVendres

47. Mainz wreck F ship no. 9

S France

Germany

18-20 m,

PARKER

late antiquity;

ribs; benches and rowlocks for

no. 627

|. 21 m, w. 2.5 m

30 rowers; mast rib placed well to fore; concave-convex prow with ram at waterline.

SHIPWRECKS,

EXPLORATION

Wreck

48. Marzamemi II

OF

404

403

Find site

Date/Type/Size of | Cargo ship

Structural details/ other finds/notes

Sicily

c. AD 500-540;F.

Ship not preserved; remains of amph., bricks, clay utensils,

Architectural elements from Aegean (int. furnishing of a

[3]

church), incl. 28 column stems, column bases, capitals; altar remains; an alabaster canopy;

_weights and a steelyard, iron fittings.

cabinet panels; ro pillars. 49. Saint Ger-

_S France

vais B PARKER no. Loor

c. AD 600-625;F.;

Spelt wheat from Italy, Africa

Skeleton struct.; only at hull

|. 15-18 m, w. 6 m; capacity approx. 41-49 t

or Spain (for the city of Arles?); reused amph. in stern, filled with pitch (prob. from SW

ends is the tongue-and-groove technique now used for plank connection; floor frames and some half-ribs fixed to keel

Gaul).

with iron bolts; mast boot preserved; OBA (esp. N African

Chiara D T.S., amph. from Gaza; a barrel).

Abbreviations: amph.: amphora; Carth.: Carthaginian; Dr.: Dressel (amph. type); F.: freighter; Lamb.: Lamboglia (amph. type); OBA: on-board accessories; struct.: structure; T.S.: Terra Sigillata

Numbers in square brackets refer to the bibliography LITERATURE: 1/J.ApDams, Ships and Boats as Archaeological Source Material, in: World Archaeology 32, 2001, 292-310 2U.BauMer et al., Neue Forschungen zum antiken Schiffsfund von Mahdia (Tunesien), in: In Poseidons Reich. Archaologie unter Wasser, 1995, 72-81 3 A. Boung, Das Kirchenwrack von Marzamemi, in: Skyllis 1, 1998, 6-17. 4M.Bounp, Das Giglio-Wrack, in: [2], 63-68 5 S.BRuNi (ed.), Le navi antiche di Pisa, 2000 6 E. Hapjipakt, Ein Schiffswrack aus klassischer Zeit vor der Insel Alonnisos, Griechenland, in: [2], 69-71 7 G.RuppRECHT (ed.), Die Mainzer Romerschiffe, *1982

8 H.ScHaarr et al., Die Romerschiffe in Oberstimm, Ausgrabung und Bergung, in: Das Archadologische Jahr in Bayern 1994, I12-116 9 M.Jurisic, Ancient Shipwrecks of the Adriatic, 2000 10G.LoLos et al., Der Schiffsfund von Kap Iria (Golf von Argos) in: [2], 59-62 11 A.M. McCann, J.FREED, Deep Water Archaeology, 1994 12A.J. PARKER, Ancient Shipwrecks of the Mediterranean & the Roman Provinces, 1992

13 M.RULE,

J.Monacuan,

Vessel

Guernsey, 1993

A Gallo-Roman

Trading

from

14 H.Wi1LLIAMs, Commacchio Wreck,

in: Encyclopaedia of Underwater and Maritime Archaeology, 1997, 105. PERIODICALS: Bollettino di Archeologia Subacquea 1/2, 1995/1996 ff.; Deutsche Gesellschaft zur Férderung der Unterwasserarchaologie e.V., Rundschreiben 1, 1991 ff.s; Skyllis. Zeitschrift fiir Unterwasserarchdologie 1, 1998 ff. ONLINE PUBLICATION: _ http://index.waterland.net/ navis/home/frames.htm H.KON.

Shirin (Sira) [1] (Sirin, Leioeu /Seirém, Xworv/Siren).

M.SCH. A Christian

from Huzistan, one of the wives of > Chosroes [6] II, who was elevated by him to queen in AD 592 (Theophylaktos Simokattes, Historiae 5,13,7). She was still alive in 627 (Theophanes, Chronographia anno mundi 6118). Only late oriental authors tell of her suicide over the corpse of her husband [1. 401-405]. The S. topic underwent many literary revisions in the Islamic world,

of which the epic Chosrou and S. by the Persian poet Nezami (Nesami; translated into German by J. CH. BURGEL, 1980), completed in 1180 or 1181, is the best known. PLRE 3B, 1144. 1 Frrpaust, The Epic of Kings (Engl. transl. by R. Levy, 1967).

[2] see > Sirin

Shiz see > Sis Shoes. According to ancient literature (Poll. 5,18; 7,8 594; 10,49; Herodas 7,54 ff.), there was a great multi-

plicity of varieties of > sandals and boots; only in a small number of cases is it possible to identify footwear mentioned by name with that represented in monumental art or with surviving originals (e.g. > calceus). From Classical Greece alone we have 82 words for footwear, named after origin, people, shape, colour, material or use: many kinds of footwear were adopted from other countries and given the name of their country of origin, e.g. ‘Persian shoes’, Megomai/Persikai. Others were named after whoever introduced them, such as the light soldier’s boots called igtxeatides/iphikratides (Diod. 15,44; Alci. 3,57) after the Athenian general — Iphicrates. Depictions and surviving originals permit us to distinguish slippers, sandals, (low) shoes and boots, with laced sandals being by far the most commonly worn. Closed footwear — such as boots — was represented in art as early as the Mycenaean and Minoan periods. The favourite footwear of the Archaic and Classical periods was the > krépis [2], the > lakonikai and the aepvdr/ arbylé. The last of these came up to the ankle; it arrived in Greece probably from the Orient at the end of the 6th cent. BC. The évégouic/endromis was a more comfortable boot, which covered half the calf; its side opening

405

i i

406

Roman shoes

Greek shoes

Endromis

Krepis

SHOES

Calceus senatorius

Calceus equester

Sculponea

Soccus

Kothornos

Actor's cothurn

Embas

was closed by horizontal thongs. The éuBac/embds was a soft felt boot worn by women, poor people and the elderly; it had flaps hanging over the rim of the leg and was laced like the endromis. For the kdthornos (high boot of soft leather), cf. > cothurnus. Roman footwear also included, in addition to the solea (— Sandals) and the > calceus, the caliga, which was not only a typical boot for soldiers (> Caligula) but was also worn by farmers and manual workers; it had a sole, usually hobnailed, with a leather upper covering the foot like a flap (+ Karbatiné). The pero was an ankle boot, which was originally part of the clothing of Roman citizens but then became the footwear of farmers and ordinary people. It had a closed upper (in contrast to e.g. the calceus) and was tied above the ankle. The mulleus was another kind of boot, which appears in Imperial period art in statues of the emperors in armour, as well as in figures of deities and personifications of nature: it was a flap-boot, to which a lion or panther scalp was attached to the front of the upper rim of the leg, while the animal’s paws were left hanging down on the sides. The mulleus covered the ankle, could come up to the calf, and was usually closed but sometimes also open like a sandal, freeing the toes. The crepida was a comfortable low shoe, with a sole strengthened with hobnails e.g. of iron; on the heel or around it, sewn to the sole, was a leather side, punched with eyelets (ansae), through which thongs (amenta)

were laced round the foot and to above the ankle. For special purposes e.g. a hobnailed worker-shoe was used, such as those that have been found e.g. in Trier [5],

Mulleus

Carbatina

Cothurn

407

408

or the sculponea, which was carved from wood and worn by slaves and farmers. The gallica (sc. solea) was an agricultural/rural man’s shoe, originally from Gaul

stars and had noticed a particularly prominent time of yearly swarms and the meteor falls connected to them. Diogenes [12] of Apollonia described shooting stars as stars made of stone that fall to the earth leaving a glowing trail (64 A 12 DK). Scientific progress, however, was suppressed by Aristotle [6] who considered them to be inflamed steam (ava0umidoetc/anathymidseis). He explained their varying shapes, sizes, speeds and paths in the density, width, length and height of air [4. 407439], and claimed that they were restricted to the sublunar region because the heavens were perfectly regular and godly [3]. Aristotle’s interpretation dominated up to the Modern Period. In Antiquity, the popular belief was held that the fall of shooting stars indicated a person’s luck or death — depending on the type of glow. Sen. Q Nat. 1,1,3 associated the appearance of particularly large shooting stars with the deaths of Augustus, Seianus and Germanicus.

SHOES

(Cic. Phil. 2,76). It can be deduced from Xen. Cyr. 8,2,5 that, at least in Greek cities, cobbling (+ Cobbler) was a specialized

craft. The motif of cleaning shoes is unusually uncommon in ancient art [4]. Clay imitations of shoes and boots survive from as early as the Geometric and Archaic periods; there are others, of clay, bronze, glass, etc., from the Classical and Roman periods. Particularly from the Roman period original footwear is known primarily from legionary camps to the north of the Alps (e.g. [5]) and from graves in the dry regions of Egypt

(e.g. [6]). ~ Cobbler;

> Cothurnus; > Sandals; > Soccus

1 ZIMMER 3 G.PUGLIESE

2J.M. Camp, Die Agora von Athen, 1989 CARRATELLI

Mosaicilll, 1991

(ed.),

Pompei,

Pitture

e

4R.HuRSCHMANN, Symposienszenen

auf unteritalischen Vasen, 1985, 156 pl. 22 cat. no. A 34 5 A.L. Buscu, Die roémerzeitlichen Schuh- und Lederfunde der Kastelle Saalburg, Zugmantel und Kleiner Feldberg, in: Saalburg Jb. 22, 1965, 158-210 6H.PHILIPP,

Vergoldete Lederpantoffeln, in: Jb. der Berliner Mus. 13, 1971, 5-17. K.EHRBACHER, Griechisches Schuhwerk, thesis Wirzburg 1914; O. Lau, Schuster und Schusterhandwerk in der griechisch-rémischen Literatur und Kunst, 1967; L. BonFANTE, Etruscan Dress, 1975, 59-66; K.D. Morrow,

Greek Footwear and the Dating of Sculpture, 1985 (witha list of Greek terms and bibliography); H.R. Gortre, Mulleus, Embas, Calceus, in: JDAI 103, 1988, 401-464. R.H.

Shooting stars. From earliest times, shooting stars were regarded as stars that fall from the sky or as stars that change their position and burn up in the sky. This notion led to the terms (ittovtec Gotéeec/dittontes astéres (Pl. Resp. 10,621b), duabéovtes xai éxmveotuevor

aotégec/ diathéontes kai ekpyrumenoi astéres (Aristot. Mete.

1,4,342a

27; b 19) or petafatvovtes

Gotégec/

metabainontes astéres (Hippolytus, refutatio omnium haeresium 1,8,10). Special kinds of shooting stars which today can no longer be identified were the ‘goats’ (aiyec/aiges), ‘javelin throws’ (dxovtopoi/akontismoi), torches’ (Aaunddec/lampddes) and ‘throws’ (BodtSec/ bolides). The Romans had corresponding terms — stellae transcurrentes, transeuntes, transversae

and transvolantes

(Sen. Q Nat. 7,23,2; Verg. Aen. 5,528) —or designations such as ardores, bolides, clipei, faces, fulgura, globi, haedi, lampades and trabes. The ancient popular explanation considered shooting stars to be stars that separated from the firmament to find a new place in the sky or to fall to earth and burn up or expire leaving a residue. The tradition holds that Anaxagoras [2] had predicted the fall of the famous meteor rock of Aegospotami (467/6 BC) (cf. Diog. Laert. 2,10 and 59 A 11 f. DK). One might presume that he had observed the periodic return of shooting

1 F. CoRNFORD, Plato’s Cosmology, 1937. 21.DURING, Aristoteles, 1966, 385-399 3 A.Jor1, Der Kosmos als Lebewesen, in: J.ALTHOFF, et al. (ed.), Antike Naturwissenschaft und ihre Rezeption, Vol. 12, 2002

4 F.SoLMSEN, Aristotle’s System of the Physical World, 1960 5 W.WIELAND, Die aristotelische Physik, 1962.

Short form of names see > Personal names

Shorthand see -» Tachygraphy Shrew (Greek wvyaht/mygal, Lat. sorex or Old Latin saurex and mus araneus, ‘spider mouse’). Due to its

secretive habit, this insectivore family of mammals with various species was hardly known in Antiquity. It was often confused with the ordinary — mouse. Pliny describes the ears of the sorex as hairy (HN 11,136) and the tip of the tail as similar to that of the cow or lion (ibid. 11,265). Their hibernation is correctly mentioned by Plin. HN 8,223 (referring only to the garden shrew

[1. 175]). Much superstition and magic was reported: supposedly, egrets (ardeola) and shrews prey on each other’s young (Plin. HN 10,204) and the number of liver fibres (fibrae) correspond to the number of days of the lunar cycle (ibid. 2,109). The connection to magic explains why their chirping (t.t. desticare), for instance, was regarded as an unfavourable sign in Roman auspices (Plin. HN 8,22). Thus, it prevented the appointment of C. + Flaminius [1] to magister equitum in the Second Punic War. Perhaps due to the risk of infection or the musky smell, the bite, particularly of a pregnant female, was regarded as highly poisonous, esp. for animals (Aristot. Hist. An. 7(8),24,604b 19-21; Columella 6,17,1; Plin. HN 8,223 und 227; Timotheus 39,3 [z. 41]). As an antidote to the bite, Pliny recommends the > mole (Plin. HN 30,20) and the “the maw of a lamb soaked in wine, the ash of ram’s claws with honey and a young weasel” (ibid. 29,88) and to cover the bite with a torn-up shrew, if possible the biter itself (ibid. 29,89). A shrew that fell into wine must was claimed

409

410

not to spoil the wine if it is burnt to ash and stirred into the wine (Colum. 12,31). A castrated shrew was clai-

Siagu. City in Africa Proconsularis to the southwest of Neapolis [9] (ZayotW/Siagoul: Ptol. 4,3,9; Tab. Peut. 6,1; civitas Siagitana: [1. 793]), modern Ksar el-Zit in eastern Tunisia. In 28 AD — sufetes held the leading

med to chase off all other shrews after its release (Plin. HN 30,148).

In medicine, shrews were used in a variety of ways: watering eyes were supposedly cured by antimony (stibi) ground up with the ashes and the fat of shrews (Plin. HN 29,118). The — probably external — application of the fat of boiled ~ doormice and shrews was supposed to prevent paralysis (ibid 30,86). Eating a shrew during pregnancy was supposed to give the child dark eyes (ibid. 30,134). A coin from Cyme shows a water-shrew above a shell [3. pl. 2,9]. In contrast to its persecution by the Romans, the Egyptians revered the shrew as a useful insect-eater and often mummified and buried it (KELLER 1, fig. 6). 1 LEITNER

2F.S. BODENHEIMER, A. RABINOWITZ (ed.),

Timotheus of Gaza On Animals, 1950 (with English trans. and comm.) 3 F.IMHoorF-BLUMER, O.KELLER, Tierund Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972). KELLER,

1,14-17;

1819.

A.STEIER,

s.v.

Spitzmaus,

RE

3 A, C.HU.

Shuvalov Painter. Attic red-figure vase painter c. 440410 BC, named after a former owner of one of his pots in Saint Petersburg. The SP worked as a figure painter in a specialised ceramic workshop, which mostly produced jugs of various types, neck amphorae and hydriai (— Pottery, shapes and types of A3, B4-8, Brr), the majority of which were exported to the western Mediterranean. The SP adopted this market orientation from the Mannheim Painter, the founder of the workshop, and also followed him in certain types of jugs and their decoration (jug of shape VII with an owl on the neck). He himself did not leave the workshop, — Aeson [2] and the > Eretria Painter joined him. His most important pictures can be found on jugs of shape IV (> Pottery, shapes and types of, similarly B7) with usually three figures and a handle ornament characteristic of the workshop, e.g. > Perseus [1], the bribing of > Eriphyle and the death of + Orpheus. Scenes on oinochoai, hydriai and amphorae (— Pottery, shapes and types of As, B4, Brr—12) focus on Apollo, whereas the choai (— Pottery B6) show scenes from boys’ lives. The picture on the jug Berlin (SM F 2414) —a hetaera climbing on to a youth’s lap — depicts the sexual act in a way that was to become classical. Features of the Rich Style dominate late small-scale drinking vessels. BEazLey, ARV, 1206-1210; BEAZLEY, Paralipomena, 463; BEAzLEY, Addenda’, 334-347; A.Lezzi-HAFTER, Der Schuvalov-Maler, 1976; B.FREYER-SCHAUENBURG, CVA Kiel 1 (Deutschland 55), 1988, plate 39, 40,1-4; E.Roupe, CVA Berlin 1 (DDR 3), 1990, plate 36,3-6;

M.Rosertson,

The Art of Vase-Painting in Classical

Athens, 1992, 227-229; CHARLES EDE Ltd., Liste Apollo, 1995, No. 25, 27. A.L.-H.

SIBLING MARRIAGE

positions in the city (CIL V 1, 4922) —a sign of a strong Punic tradition. There are records of decuriones for the 2nd and 3rd cents. AD (CIL VIII 1, 964). Inscriptions: CIL VIII 1, 964-967; suppl. 1, 12446-48; 4, 24090;

[1. 792, 795]; AE 1933, 66. 1 A. MERLIN (ed.), Inscriptions latines de la Tunisie, 1944. AATun 050, Bl. 37, Nr. 4; H. Dessau, s.v. S., RE 2 A, 2066.

W.HU.

Siana cups. A genre of Attic black-figure cups, named after a site on Rhodes. The dominant type of drinking vessel in the second quarter of the 6th century BC, which later continued for a long time beside — LittleMaster cups. Compared to its antecedents, > komast cups, in a SC the offset rim is higher, the flaring stem is taller and the handles point slightly upwards. Also new and characteristic is a tondo image on the bottom of the cup- often with a kneeling figure — which is framed by a border of tongues or other ornaments. For decorating the exterior there are two systems: either the pictures are painted across the kink, which is marked by a black line, between the bowl and the rim (overlap), or the two zones are decorated separately (‘double-decker’), the lower usually figured, the upper more often ornamental. Favourite themes are symposia, cavalcades, duels, komasts (+ Kémos), sports scenes and mythological subjects. Painters specialising in SC included e.g. the C Painter, who is still very much influenced by > Corinthian vases, the more ambitious Heidelberg Painter, who took more interest in mythological themes, and the less fanciful Griffin-Bird Painter. > Lydus [2] and his companions also painted SC. BriIjDER’s classification by shape and painting of the more than 1000 SC is of significance for the chronology and stylistic development of this period. H.A. G. BrijDER, Siana Cups, Bd. 1-3, 1983, 1991, 2000 (vol. 4 in preparation). HM.

Siberis (Zifeguc). Right-hand tributary of the > Sangarius, dangerous because of its flooding (Procop. Aed. 5,4,1-3), also called Hieros flumen (Plin. HN 5,149), modern Kirmir Cay: (otherwise still in [r]). From the rst until the 3rd cent. AD it formed the border between ~ Bithynia and > Galatia (Plin. loc.cit.). 1 W.RucGE, s. v. Hieros flumen, RE 8, 1589. BELKE, 224.

K.ST.

Sibling marriage. There had been sibling marriage among the pharaohs in Egypt since ancient times, albeit not between full siblings; it was an imitation of marriage between gods. Outside the royal house marriage between half-siblings was unusual. Marriage between

4II

412

full siblings was later practiced by a number of Ptole-

1,6,7), Servius (Serv. Aen. 3,445; 6,12) and Isidorus (Isid. Orig. 8,8,1) derive S. from Greek siou (=theon) boule (‘advice of a god’); Lydus (Lydus, Mens. 4, 47) and Suda (s.v. =.), read S. as a Latin and Pausanias (x0,12,r) as a Libyan word [4. 2074 f.].

SIBLING MARRIAGE

mies (Ptolemaeus II, IV, VI, VIII, IX, XII, XIII?, XIV). Zeus and Hera, Isis and Osiris were invoked as parallels

for their subjects, thus seeking sacred reinforcement so as to reduce foreign influences at court. Private persons apparently imitated the practice of the royal couple: sibling marriage was more often found in cities than in the country, with distinct regional differences in frequency. Apart from the royal model, avoiding dividing inheritance may have been the most important reason for this particular marriage strategy. As late as 212 AD sibling marriage was relatively common, but declined after 212, as it was prohibited under Roman Law. Sibling marriage now became clearly rarer, but had to be specifically forbidden once more by Diocletian. S.ALLAM, LA, Bd. 2, 568-570; H.RuppREcHT, Kleine Einfithrung in die Papyruskunde, 1994, 108.

W.A.

Sibyl (SipvrAAro/Sibylla, Latin Sibylla). A. GENERAL

B. ORIGINS,

NUMBER, NAMES

CC. LIT-

ERARY CHARACTER AND ‘NACHLEBEN’ A. GENERAL In Greco-Roman culture Sibyls are an unspecified number of seers, inspired by the gods from birth, who retain their virginity throughout their life, grow very old, but are not immortal. They are sometimes mentioned in the same context as > Apollo and in this show certain similarities to other prophetesses, such as — Cassandra or the > Pythia [1]. The Sibyls function as mediators between gods and men but do not act as part of an institutionalized oracle; their prophecies are always unsolicited and they make their pronouncements after often very long journeys (Paus. 10,12,5). They convey their prophecies (usually about catastrophes) in their own names in hexameters

and write them down (e.g. on plant leaves), though the ‘Sibylline Books’ and ‘Sibylline Oracles’ (— Sibyllini libri, Sibyllina oracula) that were spread under the name of the S. are > pseudepigraphy of unknown proyenance. B. ORIGINS, NUMBER, NAMES

The origins, number and names of the Sibyls were already subjects of research in antiquity. While they probably came from Asia Minor originally, their authority spread throughout the entire Greek cultural area and later also to Rome, where the Sibyllini libri took on a prominent place in oracular practice. Sibylla seems originally to have been a feminine proper name (cf. Serv. Aen. 3,445), which gradually developed into a generic name. Individual S.s were usually distinguished by the addition of a place name (e.g. Tiburtina, Cumana: S. from Tibur, S. from Cyme). Later on, S. with individual names once again occur, such as Herophile, Demo, Phoito and Sabbe. The etymology, still not clear today, was already disputed in antiquity: Varro, Res divinae fr. 56a,7 CARDAUNS (in Lactant. Div. inst.

Until the 4th century BC, for instance in the oldest mention of all, by Heraclitus (Heracl. 22 B 92 DK), and in Aristophanes (Pax 1095 f.; 1116), there is reference

to just a single S. Although a variety of numbers (e.g. two: Mart. Cap. 2,159; three: schol. Aristoph. Av. 962) [4] and names (Thessalica, Sardica, Aegyptiaca et al.; cf. Suda s.v. =.) circulated, Varro’s catalogue (l.c.) of the following ten S$. became canonical (in chronological order): Persica, Libyca, Delphica, Cimmerica, Erythraea, Samia, Cumana, Hellespontica, Phrygia, Tibur-

tina (S. from Persia, Libya, Delphi, Cimmeria, Erythrea,

Samos, Cyme, from the Hellespont, from Phrygia, from Tibur). C. LITERARY CHARACTER AND ‘NACHLEBEN’ Ascribing a specific ethnic origin to a S. allowed her to be adapted to different cultures and religions. The S. Hebraica (Iudaica), Hebrew (Jewish) S., fits seamlessly into the system of biblical prophets, as do other Sibyls into Christianity [2]. > Vergilius’ fourth eclogue, interpreted as an allusion to Christian salvation, plays a decisive role in this. The often broad chronological dimension of the S.’s prophecies was replaced by a Christian eschatological one, and the S.’s obvious contempt for the world and for people tied in with Christian and Jewish contemptus mundi (‘contempt for the world’). It is due to this Christian interpretation that S. are often depicted in the Fine Arts (e.g. MICHELANGELO, Sistine Chapel, 1508-1512, or Raphael SANzio’s frescoes in Santa Maria della Pace in Rome, 1512). Although the S.s’ oracles are often mentioned in literature (— Sibyllini libri), only the S. of Cumae (> Cyme [2]) went on to become a literary figure: in Virgil’s Aeneid she accompanies > Aeneas [1] into the underworld (cf. Ovid Met. 14,132~-153; Petron. Sat. 48,7 f.). She also plays a decisive role in R. VON RANKE-GRAVES’ novel I, Claudius (1934). - Oracle; > Prophet; — Sibyllini libri 1 M.CaccaMo

CALTABIANCO, s.v. S., LIMC

7.1, 753-

7573 7-2) 547-549 2 A.Momic iano, Dalla Sibilla pagana alla Sibilla cristiana, in: ASNP 17, 1987, 407-428 3 H. W. Parke, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy in Classical Antiquity, 1988 4A.Rzacu,s.v. Sibylle, RE 2 A, 20732LOsk

CW.

Sibyllini libri, Sibyllina oracula. In Antiquity, both the Sibyllini libri that were used by the Roman > quindecimviri sacris faciundis for the state’s > expiatory rites during the Republican era and the oracle texts of the Imperial Period were traced back to the ~ Sibyls (+ Pseudepigraphy). The Sibyl of Cumae is said to have sold the Sibyllini libri (‘Sibylline books’), also termed libri fatales [1. 562-565], to king > Tarquinius [11] Priscus (Lactant. Div. inst. 1,6). In accord-

413

414

ance with a Senate resolution, the secret books, written in Greek, were consulted (documentation: [2. 2108-

ing the troublemakers among the — Argyraspides (‘Silver Shields’) to their deaths (Diod. 19,48,3 f.; Plut. Eumenes 19,3 f.). - Megasthenes lived at his court (Arr. Anab. 5,6,2) and according to [1. 242-244] was S.’ ambassador to > Sandracottus.

2117]), until the fire that destroyed the temple of Jupiter at the Roman Capitol (83 BC) destroyed them as well. A reconstructed version was used until the 4th cent. AD. A fragment concerning the expiation of a +> prodigium is contained in > Phlegon [3. 383-388]. For further information, see — quindecimviri sacris faciundis. The ‘Sibylline oracles’ (Sibyllina oracula) of the Imperial Period have only a fictitious connection with the Sibyllini libri and are based rather on Hellenistic ideas; the authors remain unknown (> Apocryphal literature). The oldest texts, written in Greek, are the Jewishinfluenced books 3-5, which contain such material as denunciations of nations, > apocalypses and views on Jewish ethics. Books 1 and 2 probably include supplementary material written by Christians, although a Jewish text may have been the original source. Books 6-8 are Christian in character — book 6, for example, in the form of a > hymn (only 28 verses). Books 7 and 8 were frequently cited by Lactantius; they are extremely heterogeneous (cf. the — acrostich Sibyllina oracula 8,217-250). Book 6, along with 7,1 and 8,218—428, is included in one class of MSS as book 9 (book 4 is listed there as book 10). Books 11-14 contain oracles of Jewish origin that speak out against Rome. The prose prologue is the most recent part of the Sibyllina oracula (sth cent. AD: [4]). For more on their influence cf.

[3. 230-329; 461-478]. 1H.Cancik, Libri fatales, in:

D.HELLHOLM

(ed.), Apo-

calypticism in the Mediterranean World and the Near East, *1989, 549-576 2 A.Rzacn, s.v. Sibyllinische Orakel, RE 2 A 2, 2103-2183 3 J.-D. GauGer, Sibyllinische Weissagungen, 1998 4L.Rosso UBIGLI, s.v. Sibyllinen, TRE 31, 240-245. Sibyllina Oracula: EDITIONS: J. GEFFCKEN, 1902 (GCS 8). TRANSLATIONS: J.H. FRIEDLIEB, 1852; J.COLLINS, in: Old Testament Pseudepigrapha 1, 1983, 317-472; J.D. GAUGER, 1998 (Greek-Germ.: bks. 1-8(10) und rr).

COMMENTARIES: H. MERKEL, 1998 (Jiidische Schriften aus hellenistisch-r6mischer Zeit V 8; bks. 3-5); D.S. PotTER, 1990 (bk. 13). BIBLIOGRAPHY:

JI.CHIRASSI

COLOMBO,

T.SEPPILLI

(eds.), Sibille e linguaggi oracolari, 1998; H.W. PARKE, Sibyls and Sibylline Prophecy, 1988. MSE.

Sibyrtius (=iPbetiog; Sibyrtios). Friend of Peucestas [2].

He was installed as satrap of Carmania by Alexander [4] in 325 BC, but was soon redeployed to Gedrosia with Arachosia and Oreitae (Arr. Anab. 6,27,1) and was confirmed in office by Perdiccas [4] and Antipater [1]; after 323, however, only Arachosia is mentioned (Diod. 18,3,3; Arr. FGrH 156 F 9,36). He allied himself to Eumenes [1] (Diod. 19,14,6), but had to flee when the latter accused him of high treason (Diod. 19,23,4; 19,27,4). After Eumenes’ death Antigonus [1] returned the satrapy to him, with the secret commission of send-

SICANI

1 A.B. Bosworth, A Historical Commentary on Arrian’s History of Alexander, vol. 2, 1995. EB.

Sicani (Ztxavoi/Sikanoi). People in — Sicily whose origin was already being discussed by ancient authors: Timaeus (FGrH 566 F 38; according to Thuc. 6,2,2 also others) considers them autochthonous, according to others (Hellanicus FGrH 4 F 79; Thuc. 6,2,2; Philistus FGrH 556 F 45; Ephor. FGrH 70 F 136; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1,22,2) they originated near the Sicanus River in Iberia, from where they had been driven away by the Ligures. It was from them that the island of Sicily, previously called Trinacria, acquired the name Sicania. Displaced by the > Siculi migrating from Italy (Thuc.

6,2,4 f.; Diod. Sic. 5,2,6; also fleeing from eruptions of Etna/> Aetna: Diod. Sic. 5,6,3), they retreated to the

west of the island. According to archaeological studies, the first forms of cultural expression by the S. before the arrival of the Siculi can be seen in the findings at Thapsus (15th-13th cents. BC), shaped by contacts with the Aegean world and visible primarily in sepulchral architecture (tholos tombs). The retreat to the west,

begun at the end of the Bronze Age (findings at Cassibile: 1050-850 BC) with the arrival of peoples from the Italian peninsula (possibly the Siculi), was probably completed c. 850-730 BC. The localization of the Sicanian centres known from literary sources (e.g. Omphace, Mactorium, Motyum, Crastus, Cydonia, Uessa) remains hypothetical, since there is a lack especially of linguistic evidence. In view of the results of archaeological study, the settlement at Sant’ Angelo Muxaro is significant (necropoleis with monumental tholos tombs). The sanctuary of Polizzello (7th—6th cents. BC) may have been of pan-Sicanian significance as a cultic centre. The most important cults of the S., such as the cult of Meteres, which came from Crete (Diod. 4,79) and was located at Engyon, and the Temple of Aphrodite in Camicus, which was built over the tomb of Minos (Diod. 4,79,3 f.), remain poorly defined. Sicanian origin and a Minoan substrate [1. 37 f.] are also ascribed to the cult of Aphrodite on Mount ~> Eryx [1] (Diod. 4,83,4). The proportion of MinoanMycenaean culture in that of the S. (cf. the myth of the death of Minos in Camicus: Hdt. 7,170) becomes apparent in the accumulation of elements of Aegean style up to the historical period (e.g. bronze figures with tridents, sculptures of bulls’ heads, dishes decorated with stylized octopuses). Pottery made on a wheel from grey or dark-coloured clay with impressed or engraved geometrical decoration is evidence of S. culture in the early historical period. There also is a later phase with pottery that is painted with geometrical motifs and inspired by oriental-style Greek production. The few finds of

SICANI

metal objects (middle of the 7th cent. BC) demonstrate a remarkable standard (gold cups, rings from Sant’ Angelo Muxaro). Amber and bone jewellery (votive gifts from Polizzello) is of equal quality. The process of assimilation to Greek culture, which accelerated mainly from the 5th cent. BC, caused the ancient centres of the S. to fall almost entirely into oblivion. An inscription in the Heraeum on Samos (Inv. no. 48) tells of disputes between Himera and S. (first half of the 6th cent. BC). A vain attempt by Teutus, the king of the rich Sicanian city of Uessa, to resist > Phalaris’ expansion dates to the 5th cent. BC (Polyaenus, Strat. 5,154; Frontin. Str. 3,4,6). Sicanian mercenaries took

part in > Gylippus’ military actions against the Athenians in 414/3 BC (Thuc. 13,7,7). 1 G.PUGLIESE 1986.

416

415

CARRATELLI,

Storia

civile,

in: Sikanie,

V.La Rosa, Le popolazioni della Sicilia: Sicani, Siculi, Elimi, in: G. PUGLIESE CARRATELLI (ed.), Italia, omnium terrarum parens, 1991, 3-110; G. BRETSCHNEIDER (ed.),

Da Cocalo a Ducezio. VII. Congresso internazionale di studi sulla Sicilia antica (Kokalos 34/5, 1988/9), 1992/3.

Sicanus (=txavoc; Sikanods). From Syracuse, son of Execestus; in the autumn of 415 BC he, > Hermocrates [1] and Heracleides [2] were elected plenipotentiary strategoi (Thuc. 6,73). Sent in 413 to conquer Acragas, he returned without achieving anything (Thuc. 7,36; 7,50,1). His attempt to set fire to the ships salvaged by the Athenians from a lost sea battle (at the beginning of September 413) failed (Thuc. 7,70-74). + Peloponnesian War K.MEL.

Sicarii see > Zealots Sicca Veneria. Indigenous city of Africa proconsularis on the road from Carthage to Cirta (Plin. HN 5,22; Prol. 4,3,303 8,14,9; It. Ant. 45,1; Tab. Peut. 4,5; Solin. 27,8), modern El-Kef in Tunisia. In 241 BC, SV had to

take in the Carthaginian mercenaries who had returned from Sicily (Pol. 1,66 f.; [1. 253 f., 471]). On the basis of the peace treaty of 201 (> Punic Wars), SV may have become Numidian. In the war with > Iugurtha (r11105 BC), SV was the theatre of a skirmish between Iugurtha and Marius [I 1] (Sall. Iug. 56,3-6). The earliest archaeological evidence is from the Numidian period. Pottery found in SV reveals Punic influence. SV also owed its renown to a sanctuary in which sacred prostitution was practised (Val. Max. 2,6,15 — interpreted incorrectly by the author). SV was raised by the later Augustus to the rank of colonia (Iulia Veneria Cirta Nova) (CIL VII 1, 1632; suppl. 1, 15858; 15868;

16258). The city territory included numerous castella (ILS 444; 6807; CIL VIII suppl. 4, 27828). In AD 256, Castus was bishop of the city (Cypr. Sententiae episcoporum 28). Justinianus [1] I built new fortifications (Procop. Aed. 6,7,10). Inscriptions: CIL VIII 1, 1623-

1769 and 1775; 2567; 2569; 2, 10621 f.; suppl. 1, 15669; 15723 f.5 15726; 15829-16257 and 16281;

16367;

17164; 2, 18067; 3, 22175; 4, 27568-27697

and 27744/5; [2. nos. 1588-1611]; AE 1981, 867; RIL 17; [3. 2, 1986, 315-320]. Archaeological finds: amphitheatre, theatre, city wall from the Byzantine Period, baths, cisterns, two basilicas, mosaics, statues (in the Bardo Museum in Tunis). The rhetor Arnobius [1] (3rd/4th cents.) was also from SV. 1 Huss 2 A.MerRLIN (ed.), Inscriptions latines de la Tunisie, 1944 3 Revue des Etudes Phéniciennes-puniques et des Antiquités Libyques. AATun o50, sheet Environs du Kef, no. 145; A. BESCHAOUCH, Le territoire de S. V. ..., in: CRAI 1981, 105-122; J. Desances (ed.), Pline l’Ancien. Histoire naturelle. Livre V, 1-46, 1980, 197-199; H. DEssau, s.v. S. V., RE 2 A, 2187 f.; C. LEPELLEY, Les cités de |’Afrique romaine ..., vol. 2, 1981, 156-161. W.HU.

Siccius Dentatus, L. The tradition portrays S. (sometimes different nomina gentilia in the sources) as a plebeian whose self-confident demeanour, originating in his own military achievements, created enemies and who, as a consequence, was perfidiously eliminated. Thus, S. only narrowly escaped a plan of Romilius [1], cos. in 455 BC (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 10,36-493 52,25 56,2), to dispose of him by conferring upon him a military command doomed to failure, after which occurrence, as people’s tribune in 454, he had Romilius convicted. Afterwards, however, he was murdered himself by his own soldiers at the instigation of the decemviri [1] he had criticized (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 11,25-27; cf. Liv. 3,43,2-7). The historical essence of the personality of S. was dramatically elaborated in the tradition to such effect that Festus and Gellius described him as the ‘Roman Achilles’ (Fest. p. 208; Gell. NA 2,11,1-4; Val. Max. 3,2,24; Plin. HN 7,ro1f. et al.). A.Kuio7z, L. Siccius Dentatus, in: Klio 33, 1940, 171-79; R.M. Ocitvie, A Commentary on Livy Books 1-5, 1965,

475 f.; S.P. OAKLEY, Single Combat in the Roman Republic, in: CQ 38, 1985, 409.

C.MU.

Sicel (Siculan). Language of a pre-Greek population in eastern Sicily, known from some 100 glosses recorded by ancient authors as Siculan, and from an only imprecisely delimitable number of inscriptions, mostly from the 6th and 5th centuries BC, written in a somewhat modified Greek alphabet. The four most important inscriptions are: a jug (guttus) from Centuripe (almost 100 letters), a stela from Sciri near Caltagirone, a block of stone from Mendolito (over 50 letters each), a vase

from Montagna di Marzo (45 letters). The language is certainly Indo-European and displays sporadic parallels with + Oscan-Umbrian (Mendolito: tevta Fegeyaieo, Oscan touto, vereiias) and — Latin (glosses dayxhov ‘sickle’, with dissimilation < *d’alk-klo-m, Latin falcula; wowtov ‘return gift’, Latin matuum). Yet it

is still almost entirely incomprehensible and certainly not very closely related to these, although some origin myths claim that the > Siculi are from central Italy.

417

418 A. ZAMBONI, II Siculo, in: PROSDOCIMI, 951-1012 (best

SICILY

Sicilus, song of see > Song of Sicilus (Seikilos)

overview); U.SCHMOLL, Die vorgriechichischen Sprachen Siziliens, 1958; Una nuova iscrizione anellenica da Montagna di Marzo, in: Kokalos 24, 1978, 3-62. JU.

Sicilian expedition see > Peloponnesian War Sicilian vases. Just before the end of the 5th cent. BC, production of red-figured vases began in Himera and Syracuse in Sicily. In style, ornamentation, vase shape and themes they reveal considerable influence from Attic vase painting (+ Meidias Painter). In the second

quarter of the 4th century BC a number of Sicilian vase painters emigrated, in order to lay the foundation on the Italian mainland of Campanian and Paestan vase painting (+ Campanian vases; > Paestan ware). To a limited extent vase production remained in Syracuse, but it was not until 340 BC that the typical SV developed. Three groups of workshop can be distinguished: the first group worked in Syracuse and Gela (LentiniManfria Group), the second is in the Etna region (+ Centuripe vases) and the third can be located on Lipari. Characteristic for SV is a heavy use of additional colours (particularly white). Types of vessel with large surface areas (kalyx krater, hydria) are used mainly in the initial phase of SV, but smaller types (bottle, lekanis, lekythos, skyphoid pyxis; cf. > Pottery, shapes and types of) predominate. Mythical themes appear on SV relatively rarely; instead, images from the world of women, representations of cupids, heads of women as sole motifs and > phlyakes are common. By about 300 BC the production of Red Figure vases in Sicily had come to an end. TRENDALL,

Lucania,

575-664;

TRENDALL,

Lucania,

Suppl. 3, 265-305; A.D. TRENDALL, Red Figure Vases of South Italy and Sicily. AHandbook, 1989, 29 f., 233-2543 J.M. Papcetr, M.B.CoMsTock u.a., Vase Painting in Italy. Red-Figure and Related Works in the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston, 1993, 186-188.

Sicilicus

(also —> quartuncia

=

R.H.

‘/, > uncia;

Greek

oxedixdc/sikelikos). Roman unit of */48 of a larger whole. As a weight the sicilicus corresponds to */48 of a

+ libra [1] = 6,82g and hence 1'/, > sextulae, as a length "/4s of a > pes = c. 6 mm, as an area */48 of a

+ iugerum = 52,5 m*, as a time unit */4s of an hora (hour) = 1/4 minutes (Plin. HN 18,324). In the imperial monetary system of the Greek East the sicilicus was synonymous with the > assdrion. In the late Roman and Byzantine systems of weights the sicilicus was equivalent to 6 scripula (value mark VI or E; > scripulum) or 1'/2 solidi (> Solidus). In the coinage system the sicilicus is the smallest unit of the semilibral standard that was actually minted. 1 S.BENDALL, Byzantine Weights, 1996 2F.HuLTscu, Griechische und rémische Metrologie, *1882 3 O. VIEDEBANTT,

2194.

K.REGLING,

s.v. S., RE

2 A, 2193-

H.-).S.

Sicily (ixedia/Sikelia, Sicily). The largest island in the Mediterranean (+ Mare Nostrum; cf. Str. 2,5,19; dif-

ferently Hdt. 1,170 and Timaeus FGrH 566 F 65): 25,460 km’, including the offshore islands such as the Insulae Aegates, Ustica, the Aeoli Insulae, Cossura, Lopadusa (present-day Lampedusa), Aethusa (presentday Linosa) and Melite [7] 25,953 km’. I. NAME II. GEOLOGY AND GEOGRAPHY III. ToPOGRAPHY IV. SICILY IN THE ANCIENT GEOGRAPHERS V.SICILYIN MYTHOLOGY VI. History VII. RELIGION

I. NAME The island was originally called Trinacria (Tewaxeia/Trinakria, Hellanicus FGrH 51 F 79b), later Sicania (Xtnavin/Sikanié, Hdt. 7,170; Diavia/Sikania, Thuc. 6,2,2) and only then Sicelia (1xeda). The change of name reflects the successive immigration of the -» Sicani and > Siculi; however, Trinacria is probably an unhistorical construction from the Homeric > Thrinacia (Hom. Od. 11,107; 12,1273; 12,13 53 19,275), tak-

ing into account the triangular shape (tria dkra) of the island. II]. GEOLOGY AND GEOGRAPHY

Sicily was wrenched from mainland Italy in the Diluvium when the 3 km wide > Fretum Siculum was formed (described thus by ancient authors, cf. Aesch. fr. 402; Pl. HN. 3,86; Str. 1,3,10). Crossing the Mare Africum, S. is 140 km away from Africa. In the north of the island the curve of the Apennines continues westwards in the Monti Peloritani (up to 1286 m high, crystalline schist, gneiss), the + Mons Nebrodes (up to 1847 m high), the Madonie (Tertiary sandstones, clays, with the Mons Maroneus/present-day Pizzo Carbonara, 1977 m high) and the west Sicilian mountainous country (Triassic and Jurassic chalk levels) as far as Mt. Eryx [1]. In the centre of the island lies seismically active, hilly country (marl, clays, sulphur-bearing sediments) and further to the south the Pliocene tableland with the Heraia mountains (present-day Monti Erei). The tableland of + Hybla [1] (calcareous sandstone) with the Colles Hyblaei (present-day Monti Iblei) forms the final section in the southeast. Finally, in the centre of the eastern region the active volcano Mt. Etna /> Aetna [r1] (present-day c. 3260 m high) dominates its own landscape [x]. The mountain is described in Str. 6,2,7 f. The plains in the coastal region are important in the history of S.’s colonization — the narrow coastal strips along the length of the north coast from > Lilybaeum to > Messana [1] and further along the northeast coast as far as Aetna, as well as the alluvial plains in the south (Campi Laestrygonii, present-day Piana di Catania), of > Gela, + Acragas, > Heracleia [9] and —> Selinus [4]. There are only a few satisfactory natural harbours on S.’s coasts (cf. Motya, > Panormos [3], > Syracuse). The sub-tropical Mediterranean island climate is

7 ck

& ePuqie

ole

aweu Wapow

wnyunjos

PULeLUe>)

jou uones07 = é B}IQUAH

PauiyUod

aweu une

ied JEW

anydins

Aurenb awq

RIIIA ‘ayeayyyduy

winapo ‘aiyeau|

snjonpeenby

isSulpjing UBWOY

(pasnyafuos / paijuan) peos juepoduy|

(snysn3ny Japun)

wnidioiunw

UOeI0| J2UIO

ePIOOUL

gs

wn LA” ¢5 aquq. ; aun BY “Je

3

AVWYSHL

he

YEES

Sy

woooe

(D8 LOL-vOL)

F) AEM

000%

PARIS F544

O00

—

F Worf

4 /

ff

ees)

———4

ie

sayesoy arjnsu|

00S

BIIDIS JO BDUIAGIg

BI[IDIS JO QDUIADIg

Dd OLZ/7LZ

Dd HLT 2 [UN || CAIH $O WOpSuly a4} 0} Fulsuojaq SUMO]

UONesIUILUpe UBWOY a4} JO yeas

PYEIBPIOJ SEPAID

sluNnUULU! aNbye eJaq)| SEAIS

ayy ul saneis Aq painyded uoe907

(Dd ZEL-BEL

JENA BAP|S PUOIIS AY} U! SBAP|S hq Ajjnyssadonsun pagaisaq uolyes07

Re

a vysaBas TFS


) AY!

»

a San

\

(GEG GV—DA

Ay

S Wunjuasusy ‘unWw

5 YS eas as

SJ WO@SEL

Vans

SNIOJAH /SO1OJAH

wy,

WNILVD

IIe

(unypnoig)

Of

paerinenent Ww

4 -sedun ie

, ; > yr

eulrey ied

10UI}U0E7 4399ID AWPU SNWYONVd

=

naegAjiq ‘unw

Mts,

/erejqhyH ereSayy pariqhH eiesay Y

GS /UORN WIN

(@Bd1UBD|NA/1] ) aearied!] aejnsu|

o8E

Dd Woy Lez >

?

FVSADVUAS /vesnyeshs wunruoyT

4 eUPSSOW. I : ~~

420 4 19 SICILY

421

422

characterized by hot, dry summers and mild winters with heavy rainfall. S$. was well known for its abundant crops -, mainly wheat growing (cella penaria rei publicae nostrae, Cato in Cic. Verr. 2,2,5), though people also went in for viticulture and livestock breeding (horses, sheep, pigs); wool, honey and wax from S. were also traded.

lowing a futile siege of Camicus, the Cretans who had hurried over to avenge him, interred Minos in a > hypogeum, on top of which a temple dedicated to Aphrodite was built, which was much frequented by the local population. In historical time his mortal remains were given back to the Cretans by > Theron (Diod. Sic.

Ill. TopoGRAPHY

In essence, the coasts have probably not changed since Antiquity; nevertheless, an increase in the sea level has been detected in the southeastern coastal area (Syracuse) [2; 3]. The silting up of the harbours of Acragas, ~ Camarina and Selinus is also a coastal phenomenon; the port of > Catania became a victim of the Etna eruption of 1669. There are numerous short streams which flow down from the mountainous interior and empty into the sea; the Symaethus (148 km), Halycus (84 km), and Himeras (the southern one 112 km, the northern one 32 km) are larger rivers. The abundance of thermal springs is not surprising in view of the volcanic nature of entire parts of the country (cf. Selinus [4], > Segesta [1], > Himera). Little is known about the network of streets which crossed the island. — Cicero’s Verres speeches (particularly 2,3,192; 5,169) and the memoranda of various itineraria, e.g. Itin. Anton. 86,2-98,1 (cf. in addition [4; 5]) provide the sources. Only one single mile-stone was found on the island; it comes from the road running from Acragas to Panormus (cf. [6]).

On the research into the numerous country estates on S. see [7; 8].

IV. SICILY IN THE ANCIENT GEOGRAPHERS

Descriptions of the island are found in the works of the following ancient geographers: Str. 6,2f.;Plin. HN. 3,86-94; Mela 2,115-120; cf. 3,51; Ptol. 3,4; Solin. 5,2-6,2; Dionys. Per. 267-480; Avien. Descriptio orbis

terrae 631-645; Scyl. 13; Itin. Anton. 86,2-98,1; Tab. Peut. 6,5-7,2; Geogr. Rav 23; Guido 56-62. Important references to the island’s natural history are also found in the works of ancient historians to whom the landscape was worth mentioning as a real setting for historical events (cf. Pol. 1,42,3-7; Sall. Hist. 4 fr. 25-28; Diod. Sic. 5,2,1-5,12,4; lust. 4,2,1-5,11). The Greeks,

with their inclination to schematise geographical images, recognized the island’s triangular shape early on (cf. Pind. fr. 322 SNELL), which extends between the capes of Pachynus, Pelorias and Lilybaeum (Pol. 4,42,3-7; Dionys. Per. 469; comparison with a delta in Mela 2,116). Nevertheless, the island is viewed in principle as being tilted by 90° (cf. Str. 6,2,1) (cf. [9]). £0. V. SICILY IN MYTHOLOGY The myth of > Minos’ death became indigenous amongst the Sicani through contacts with the MinoanMycenaean culture (cf. Hdt. 7,170 f.): Minos, who had arrived on S., was killed by > Cocalus, the king of Camicus, whilst pursuing Daedalus [r], the creator of admirable buildings on the island (cf. Paus. 7,4,5). Fol-

SICILY

4579,3 £.). The adventures of > Heracles [1] which were played out in the northwest and southeast of the island, refer to

the island’s pre-colonial contacts with the Doric culture. Besides the robbers Solus and Motye (FGrH 1 F 76f.), Hercules killed Eryx [2], the eponymous king of Eryx [r], who had purloined one of + Geryoneus’ cattle (Diod. Sic. 4,23,1f.). He introduced the cult of > Demeter and Kore to Syracuse (Diod. Sic. 4,23,43 5,452). The kidnapping of > Persephone was located near Henna, [1] according to one version of the myth (Diod. Sic. 5,2-5); Zeus had given her the island as a present on the occasion of her marriage to Pluto. GLF. VI. History A. EARLY HISTORY B. THE GREAT COLONISATION C. OLDER TYRANNIES D. LATER TYRANNIES AND THE MONARCHY E. ROMAN PROVINCE F. BYZANTINE UND ARABIC PERIOD

A. EARLY HISTORY The geopolitical and economically significant location of the island between the eastern and western worlds of the Mediterranean was the cause of its eventful historical development, influenced by the most diverse of peoples and cultures. The earliest settlers on S. to be named in ancient literature were the > Elymi. + Entella (Ephor. FGrH 70 F 68), > Eryx [1] and + Segesta [1] (Thuc. 6,2,3) are named as their towns. They were forced eastwards by the > Sicani, who, in

their turn, were again forced to move eastwards by the ~ Siculi who crossed over from Italy. The Siculi drew back from the Greek settlers (see below) to the north coast and into the interior without putting up any resistance worth mentioning (cf. > Ducetius). During the Athenians’ first Sicilian expedition (427-424 BC) in the > Peloponnesian War, the Siculi are mentioned for the last time when they supported Athens (IG I 291). The — Phoenicians had already set up trading bases on the coasts (> Colonisation III.) towards the end of the 2nd millennium; they, like the Siculi, were also pushed eastwards by the Greeks and finally only remained in -~ Motya, > Solus and > Panormus [3] (Thuc. 6,2,6). B. THE GREAT COLONISATION

The so-called Great Colonisation began on S. in the 2nd half of the 8th cent. (cf. Thuc. 6,3—5; > Colonisation IV.) with the immigration of the Iones (+ Colonisation II.) and the Dorieis. Their earliest settlements were Naxos (Chalcidians from Euboia), Syracuse (Corinth),

Acragas

around 580 BC).

(Rhodes

and

Gela;

600

BC

or

SICILY

424

423

C. OLDER TYRANNIES The ancient sources provide scarcely any information about development within the Greek towns on S.. In analogy to similar events for example in Athens, where the body of source material is better, the rise of tyrants (> Tyrannies) points to strong social tensions [10]. From time to time proper territorial regimes arose, as for instance in Syracuse (beginning of the sth cent., + Gelon [1]). Their dynamics provoked opposition from the Carthaginians because the latter had taken over the protectorate of the Phoenician colonies on S. when — Tyre became more and more dependent upon the Assyrians (Tiglath-pilesar III., 745-727). However, at the battle of Himera (480 BC) the Carthaginians were heavily defeated by the tyrants Gelon and Theron (Hdt. 7,165-167). Gelon’s brother > Hieron [1] even extended his power to Italy (— Pithecussae). He organised and ran his court in Syracuse as a centre of Greek culture with > Aeschylus [1] and > Pindar [2] being active there. The conflict between Selinus and Segesta developed from the failure of the Athenians’ second Sicilian expedition (415-413 BC) in the > Peloponnesian War (D.). This brought the Carthaginians back to the

fray, and to the walls of Syracuse (409-405 BC), where an epidemic in their army forced their commander -» Himilco [1] to abandon the siege. D. LATER TYRANNIES AND THE MONARCHY Though the subsequent peace treaty did protect the town and its tyrant Dionysius [1] I, it also established the Carthaginian hegemony in the east of the island. In 387 BC, Dionysius even expanded his territorial domination over the Fretum Siculum to Italy (> Rhegion). His foreign policy endeavours were directed mainly against — Carthage and the > Etruscans. Under his rule, too, the court in Syracuse developed into a centre of Greek culture (— Plato [1]). In 344 BC, Dionysius [2] II abdicated after a struggle for the throne. The Corinthian > Timoleon induced him to do it; Timoleon, with an ever growing crowd of followers, got rid of various tyrannical regimes in the east of the island and also humbled the Carthaginians at the battle of Crimissus in 340/339 BC. Thirty years later > Agathocles [2], a tyrant in Syracuse, again pursued the plan of finally driving the Carthaginians out of S.. However, despite numerous campaigns (3 11-307 BC) he did not succeed; he saw himself forced to recognise the > Halycus as the demarcation line between the Carthaginian epikrateia (‘dominion’) and the Greek towns in the east (StV 3,437). In 278 BC, king > Pyrrhus [3] allowed himself to be drawn into quarrels concerning domestic politics in Syracuse and agreed to the request for support in the struggle against the Carthaginians. In fact he mounted a successful campaign straight across the island as far as Lilybaeum, which was successfully held by the Carthaginians. Here however the coalition between Pyrrhus and the Greek towns broke up, which is why the king left the island again in 275 BC.

E. ROMAN PROVINCE The cause of the first + Punic War (264-241 BC)

developed from the disputes over the -» Mamertini, a band of mercenaries from Campania, who had quit the service of Agathocles [2] and established themselves in Messana [r]. In these battles Hieron [2] II of Syracuse proved himself to be a more loyal and useful ally to the Romans in their endeavours to drive the Carthaginians completely out of S. (Pol. 1,20,1 f.). As a result, his kingdom, whose size cannot be compared with that of a Hieron Ior Dionysius I, was preserved after the peace of 241 BC (not a territorially unified structure; with the towns of Agyrium, Acrae, Helorus, Herbessus (?), Centuripae,

Leontini,

However, the under Roman which Cicero known about ince (cf. map;

Megara,

Netum,

Tauromenium).

larger, eastern part of the island came rule. In spite of the excellent information offers in his Verres speeches, little is the beginnings of this first Roman prov> provincia);

its administration

was

obscured by the regulations of 210 BC when the realm of the king of Syracuse (after 215 BC, ~ Hieronymus [3], the grandson of Hieron II) had been subjected to Roman control in the Second Punic War (212/210 BC). These regulations were reformed in 132 BC after the first Slave War (c. 138-132 BC) and in 99 BC after the second (104-101 BC; > slave rebellions). Since 241 BC the Roman Senate had been sending one of the two — praetors — his official residence was Syracuse/Syracusae — to S. with the task of collecting tributes and port tariffs (App. Sic. 2,6); after 227 BC there was as a matter of course a praetor for governing the province (Liv. Per. 20). Two > quaestors were on hand to assist the praetor; one of whom held office in Lilybaeum, and

the other in Syracusae. The towns of the province were divided into four classes: three civitates foederatae (Messana,

Tauromenium,

their only commitment), immunes

(Centuripae,

Netum:

army

service was

five civitates liberae atque Halaesa,

Segesta,

Panormus,

Haliquae; ‘free and free from tax’), 34 civitates decu-

manae (amongst them Catina and Leontini: liable to tax as under Hieron II), 26 civitates censoriae (amongst

them Syracusae and Lilybaeum: their land became ~+ ager publicus). Lilybaeum was the base for the Roman operations at the end of the Second Punic War and at the start of the Third. Both slave wars revealed deep-reaching social problems which are to be sought not only within the slave community but also in the communities with their different legal status and their various ethnic configurations. Under > Augustus, S. became a senatorial province under a > proconsul with praetorian imperium. According to the admittedly not very reliable record in Plin. HN 88-91, all in all 63 communities, i.e.five -+ coloniae (Panormus, Syracusae, Catina, Thermae, Tyndaris, Tauromenium), a town with Roman citizens (Messana), three towns with — Latin law (ius Latii; Centuripae, Netum, Segesta), 46 civitates stipendiariae

and 13 oppida, whose legal status remains unknown, are encountered in the province. However, Strabo’s de-

425

426

scription of S. (6,2f.), based on Poseidonius’ report,

3 B. Basie et al., Landings, Ports, Coastal Settlements and Coastlines in Southeastern Sicily, in: A. RABAN (ed.),

the administrative centres. From AD 652, Arab attacks represented a constant threat; this led to the fortification of the coastal towns and to the population retreating into the mountains. Finally internal conflicts made an Arab-Muslim occupation and land settlement possible from AD 827, which did not however bring the Byzantine presence on S. to an end completely; a triangle of fortresses around Taormina remained under Byzantine control until AD 965. The Arab appropriation mainly covered the area in the east around Palermo (> Panormus [3]) and the south around Agrigento (> Acragas). From AD 910, under the rule of the Fatimid, Arab S. became de facto independent from AD 947 under the governor dynasty of the Kalbites, and experienced a short period of stability. Finally, from AD 1040 internal unrest facilitated the Norman conquest in AD

Archaeology of Coastal Change, 1988, 15-33 4G.UccerI, La Sicilia nella Tabula Peutingeriana, in:

— SICILY

also clearly transfers conditions from the latter’s period [3] (2nd/rst cent. BC), to the time of Augustus and therefore likewise cannot be regarded as reliable. Following > Diocletian’s reform of the provinces, the administration of S. was led by a > consularis, who was answerable to the > vicarius urbis Romae. A rationalis (+ rationibus, a) was responsible for the taxes. Traces of Christianity can be substantiated after the 2nd cent. AD (catacombs). From AD 440 raids by the Vandals. In AD 535, S. came under the rule of Theoderic. 1 F. Ticny, It., 1985, 46-49

2G.LeENA et al., Approdi,

porti, insediamenti costieri e linee di costa nella Sicilia sudorientale, in: Archivio Storico Siracusano 2, 1988, 5-87

Vichiana 6, 1969, 127-171 5 [d., Sull’ Itinerarium per maritima loca’ da Agrigento a Siracusa, in: AeR 14, 1970, to7-117. 6 A.D1 Vira, Un milliarium del 252 a.C. e Vantica via Agrigento- Panormo, in: Kokalos 1, 1955, Io-21 7R.J. A. Witson, Sicily under the Roman Empire, 1990, 194-214 8 G.BEjor, Gli insediamenti della Sicilia romana, in: A. GIARDINA (ed.), Societa romana e impero tardoantico, vol. 3, 1986, 463-519 9 K. ZIEGLER, s. v. Sikelia (1), RE 2 A, 2461-2522, esp. 2468 f. 10 H.Berve, Die Tyrannis bei den Griechen, 1967, 128-154, 593-607. P. LEvEQUE, La Sicilie, 1967; A.StTaz1o, Monetazione ed economia monetaria, in: G. PUGLIESE CARRATELLI (ed.), Sikanie, 1986, 81-122; S. GARRAFEO, II rilievo monetale trail VI e ilIV secolo a.C., in: Ibid., 261-276; E. DE Miro, s. v. S., EAA 2. Suppl. vol. 5, 1997, 242-252; L. BIvona,

Epigrafia latina, in: Kokalos 34/5, 1988/9, 223-230; E. GabBa, G.VALLET (ed.), La Sicilia antica, 2 vols., 1980; G. MANGANARO, La Sicilia da Sesto Pompeo a Diocletiano, in: ANRW

II 11.1, 1988, 3-89; M.A. S. GoLps-

BERRY, Sicily and Its Cities in Hellenistic and Roman Times, 1982; U. KAHRSTEDT, Die Gemeinden Siziliens in der ROmerzeit, in: Klio 35, 1942, 246-267; D. KIENAST, Die Anfange der romischen Provinzialordnung in Sizilien, in: V. GIUFFRE (ed.), Sodalitas. FS A. Guarino, 1984, 105123; R.Soract, I proconsuli di Sicilia da Augusto a Trai-

SICILY

1060. A.Aziz, A History of Islamic Sicily, 1975; P.Corst1, E.KIsLINGER, s.v. Sizilien II., LMA 7, 1950-1954; L.Cracco Rueeini, La Sicilia tra Roma e Bisanzio (Storia della Sicilia 3), 1980, 1-96; V. V.VON FALKENHAUSEN, Il monachesimo greco in Sicilia, 1986; A. GUILLOU, La Sicile byzantine: Etat des recherches, in: ByzF 5, 1977, 95-145; R. TRAINI, s. v. Sikiliyya, El’, CD-Rom 1999. 1.T.-N.

VII. RELIGION Cave paintings from the Palaeolithic Age are known on S. (Grotta del Genovese, Levanzo; Addaura Caves,

Monte Pellegrino), however, there is no certainty with regard to their significance as ritual scenes. In the Chalcolithic Period (3000-2000 BC), burial cultures which were influenced by various Mediterranean regions (especially the eastern Aegaean, Lower Italy) existed all over the island. From the beginning of the Bronze Age (2000 BC) there were also burial chambers hewn into the rocks (e.g. in > Pantalica; on > Thapsus), which

(Suppl. Kokalos 14), 1998; A. PINZONE, Provincia Sicilia,

existed until after the the Phoenician and Greek colonizations. Tangible traces of Mycenaean and Minoan religions (Pantalica, Thapsus, > Syracusae) are found here and there, which originate from local imitations and not from Mycenaean colonization. Around tooo BC, the beginning of the Iron Age, independent indigenous forms of religion, which are often not archaeologically distinguishable from one another, evolved for the first time with the new waves of immigrants (— Ely-

1999.

mians, — Sicani, — Sicels). Indigenous cult sites are

Maps: R.J. A. TaLBerT (ed.), Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World, 2000, 47. E.O.

often grottoes or niches in rocks (as in the sanctuary of Segesta in the contrada Mango or the cave sanctuary of Agrigento/ Acragas). Chthonic cults turned into Greek Demeter cults. Rather more Greek religious elements (types of temple, iconography) than Phoenician ones were adopted. The Greek reflections of some presumably originally indigenous cults are documented: worship of springs, lakes, rivers and trees; cult of Anna and the Paides (AE 1900, 91-92, Buscemi rst cent. AD) as well as the Palikoi.

ano, 1974; R.J. A. Witson, Towns of Sicily during the Roman Empire, in: ANRW

II 11.1, 1988, 90-206; V.La

Rosa, Le popolazioni della Sicilia ..., in: G.PUGLIESE CARRATELLI (ed.), Italia, omnium terrarum parens, 1989, 3-112; R.SAMMARTANO, Origines gentium Siciliae

F. BYZANTINE UND ARABIC PERIOD After a short period under Ostrogothic rule, S. fell to Byzantium (> Belisarius) in the course of the Gothic War (AD 535-552). Specific procedures intended to reHellenize S. and impose Byzantine culture were introduced through numerous administrative and Church policies. These measures were concentrated mainly on eastern S. with > Syracuse and Catania (— Catane) as

427

428

The worship of > Astarte, of > Melqart as well as the Carthaginian chief deities + Baal Hammon and ~» Tinnit is typical of the Phoenician-Punic religion in the west of Sicily. The following are in evidence through archaeological work: aniconic baityloi (altars, stelae; ~ Baitylia), the symbol of Tinnit, votive stelae deco-

teaching, liturgy and ceremony the Church of S. followed Roman tradition until Gregory [3] the Great (AD 540-604), under Byzantine rule it drew closer to the eastern tradition.

SICILY

rated with inscriptions

and (sacrificial) reliefs, cult buildings with a labyrinthine lay-out of rooms (Kfr/present-day Solunto), the tofet of Mtwa/— Motye, Mozia (7th—4th cents. BC, a place for keeping urns and commemorative stelae, but not a site for cremations). Egyptian and Greek influences on the Phoenician-Punic religion in Sicily are recognizable in all periods; the latter were strengthened through cultural exchange with the Greeks of Sicily. No cultic continuity can be ascertained under Punic rule (apart from Demeter Malophoros); continuity of the cult site is documented for indigenous cults (on > Eryx [1], Diod. Sic. 4,83,4). Greek colonies in the south and east of S. cultivated close ties with their Greek mother towns, however, they formed their own changeable panthea (often swapping the town deity, Hera or Athena, for ~ Demeter). The thorough investigation of a cohesive archaeological background for the finds from Sicilian cults has only been attempted up to now for the Demeter cults of the Archaic- Classical period [ro]. Elements of other religious Mediterranean cultures (Egypt, Asia Minor) also made a lasting impression on Greek religion in S. To begin with, Greek and indigenous forms of religion existed side by side and encountered one another in forming new local cults. In the sth cent. BC, magnificent temple buildings were a part of the political image ofthe Greek towns; fundamental impetus for the development of the Doric peripteros came from S. The creation of myths by the Greeks on S. also included pre-historic and early historical cults as well as indigenous and Phoenician-Punic ones. The Roman province of S. had Greek, Punic and Roman religions. In the Roman period indigenous cults were no longer independent. The contact between Greek and Punic religions led to the creation of forms of religion specific to local areas; the religion of urban Rome was occasionally spread through acculturation. For its part, the cult of > Venus Erycina was significant for religious development in Rome. Graeco-Oriental cults ( Isis) were also imported to S. In the Imperial Period, too, elements of Roman religion combined with local traditions (> Fasti; podium temple). The harmonisation of religious administration (in the sacral law and in the offices of the priesthood) came about through the establishment of Roman — coloniae and + municipia. New cults (e.g. the cult of Mithras) were rare. > Christianity spread on S. from the 2nd cent. AD (catacombs in many towns). There is archaeological evidence of Jewish communities from the 4th cent. AD, but they were probably older than that. Links with traditional religion are visible in the Jewish and Christian burial cult and in the continuation of elements of individual local cults in the cults of Christian saints. In

1 E.Cracert, Culti e miti nella storia dell’antica Sicilia, 1911t 2B.Pace, Arte e civilta della Sicilia antica, vol. 3, 1945, 451-721 3 E.MannlI, Sicilia pagana, 1963

4 A.BRELICH, La religione greca in Sicilia, in: Kokalos 10/11, 1964/65, 35-63 5 R.SCHILLING, La place de la Sicile dans la religion romaine, in: Ibid., 259-286 6 G. SFAMENI-GASPARRO, I culti orientali in Sicilia, 1973 7 A.Messina, Le communita ebraiche della Sicilia nella documentazione archeologica, in: Henoch 3, 1981, 200219 8 Il cristianesimo in Sicilia dalle origini a Gregorio Magno, 1987 9R.J. A. Witson, Sicily under the Roman Empire, 1990 (esp. 277-312)

10 V.H1nz, Der Kult von

Demeter und Kore auf Sizilien und in der Magna Graecia (Palilia 4), 1998 11R.LEIGHTON, Sicily before History, 1999 12R.BARCELLONA, S.PRIcoco (ed.), La Sicilia nella tarda antichita e nell’ alto medioevo. Religione e societa (Atti del convegno di studi 1997), 1999. HE.K.

Sicinius. Roman plebeian nomen gentile, often confused with > Siccius; members of the family frequently appear as people’s tribunes in the sth cent. BC, but the family is otherwise insignificant. K-LE. I. REPUBLICAN

PERIOD

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {[ 1] S., C. Tradition links S. with the origins and early

development of the people’s tribunate (— tribunus plebis): S. was firstly the initiator of the > secessio plebis of 494 BC and then one of the people’s tribunes, subsequently elected for the first time (Liv. 2,32,2; 2,33,23 Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 6,45,2; 6,89,2; cf. Diod. Sic.

11,68,8: S. as tr.pl. in 470 after their number had been increased to four), then aedile in 492 (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 7,14,2; Liv. 2,34,9) and as tr.pl. in 491 leader of the > plebs in the internal struggles triggered by > Coriolanus (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 7,33,1-34,23 355336,4; 61,1-3; Plut. Coriolanus 18,3-9; MRR 1,15; 17 f. with the praenomen L. in each case). CMU. {I 2] S., Cn. Plebeian aedile in 185 BC, in 184 he stood unsuccessfully for the succession to a praetor who had died in office, achieved this office in 183; in 177 member of the founding committee for > Luna [3]. Immediately after having been elected to a second praetorship for 172, he dealt with a plague of locusts (> Grasshoppers) in Apulia (Liv. 42,10,7—8), then tackled the issues of Ariarathes IV of Cappadocia, of buying the freedom of some > Ligures who had been wrongfully enslaved and finally, in 171, he attended to acquiring armaments against Perseus [2]. He may have been the leader of an embassy to the Illyrians in 170 (cf. Liv. 435,10).

GRUEN, Rome, 413 f. n. 85.

TASS.

429

430

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD {11 1] S. Aemilianus. From a municipal family from + Oea. His brother S. Amicus married Aemilia [6] Pudentilla. When, fourteen years after the death of Amicus, she married Apuleius of Madaura (> Ap(p)uleius [III]), $. accused Apuleius of magic before the governor of Africa, Claudius [II 47] Maximus, on behalf of his nephew S. Pudens, probably in 15 8/9. The charge which was heard in Sabratha seems to have been unsuccessful (Apul. Apol. 2; 28; 32; 45 and elsewhere). For a description of his character by Apuleius see [1. 271 f.], on his relations [2. 728].

blades with traces of use on one side (bright ‘polish’) and remains of bitumen on the end with which the blades were fixed to the inner side of a curved piece of wood, less often to an animal bone (lower jaw). There is evidence for Mesopotamia from the late 4th millennium BC of sickles of hard-fired clay in great numbers, for which use by left or right hand can be distinguished. From the second half of the 3rd millennium BC onwards sickles of copper/bronze, mostly with a separate handle, occur more frequently, but in Egypt flint sickles are still in use in the 2nd millennium. From the end of the 2nd millennium BC sickles with blades of iron were able to prevail. In addition to their function as tools, particularly in the Bronze Age, sickles had a role as a means of payment, i.e. cast and standardized copper/bronze blades were considered an objective unit of weight: ‘xx minai in sickles’. + Agriculture

1 T. Barnes, Tertullian, 1971

2M.Corsier, Les famil-

les clarissimes d’Afrique Proconsulaire, in: EOS, Bd. 2,

685-754. {Il 2] Q. S. Clarus Po[ntianus?] Senator from > Oea, related to S. [II 1]. Praetorian governor of Thrace in AD 202 [1.170 no. 45]; shortly afterwards suffect consul

(AE 1972, 554; [2. 728]). 1 THOMASSON I 2 M. CorBier, Les familles clarissimes d’ Afrique Proconsulaire, in: EOS, vol. 2, 685-754. WE.

SICULI

A.SALONEN, Agricultura Mesopotamica nach sumerischakkadischen Quellen, 1968, 163-169; 414-417. R.W.

II]. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

Sicinos (Zixwoc; Sikinos). Island in the southern > Cyclades (39 km’; Scyl. 48; Str. 10,5,1; Ptol. 3,15,31), rising to 552 m (Agios Mamas), rich in marble and slate;

no natural safe harbours, today also named Sikinos. Its poetic epithet Oindé ‘wine-bearing’ (Apoll. Rhod. 1,620; Plin. HN 4,69; Steph. Byz. s. v. =.) indicates viticulture. Already inhabited in the 3rd mill. BC (Early Cycladic ceramics), in the historical period it was settled by Ionians. In the sth cent. BC S. probably capitulated to the Persians (Hdt. 8,46). S. was a member of the

+ Delian League, from 377 BC of the —> Athenian League (Xen. Hell. 6,2,12; Diod. Sic.

15,47,2). The pol-

is of S. was in the west of the island on Mount Agia Marina (few remains, e.g. necropolis and heroon of the 3rd century AD, converted in the Early Christian period into a church, now part of the Episkopi Monastery). There is inscriptional evidence of a temple of > Apollo Pythios. Further ancient remains in the east of the island at Cape Malta. Inscriptions: IG XII 5, 24-34; suppl. 177. Coins: HN 491. PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN 4, 139-141; A. FRANTZ, s. v. S., PE,

839; Id. et al., The ‘Temple of Apollon Pythios’ in S., in: AJA 73, 1969, 397-422; H. KALeETSCH, s. v. S., in: LAUFFER, Griechenland, 614 f. AKU.

Sickles (Soénavov/drépanon, Seendvy/drepane, deencaviov/ drepanion; Latin falx, falcula, falcicula) were used in various areas of ancient > agriculture. The sickle proper (falx messoria: Pall. Agric. 1,42,2; falx stramentaria: Cato Agr. 10,3) was used for harvesting corn and in the eastern Mediterranean also for haymaking (Hom. Il. 18,5 50-5 53; Hom. Od. 18,365-370; Varro Rust. 1,50,1; Colum. 2,20,3; Plin. HN 18,296; Anth. Gr. 9,384,13-14). Harvesting corn with a sickle was laborious, since the harvester had to work bent over; among Roman reliefs a depiction on the sarcophagus of Annius Octavius Valerianus (Rome, VM) is particularly impressive. + Agriculture; > Grain 1 M.-C. AMoureTTI, Le pain et l’huile dans la Gréce antique, 1986, 100-103 2 ISAGER/SKYDSGAARD, 52 f. 3K.D. Wuirte, Agricultural Implements of the Roman World, 1967, 72-97; 205-211. K.RU.

Sicoris. Left-hand tributary of the Iberus [2] (Ebro) in ~ Hispania Tarraconensis (Caes. Civ. 1,40,1; 48,3; 61,1; 63,1; Plin. HN 3,24), modern Segre. It rises in the

territory of the > Cerretani and in its course passes through > Ilerda (Lérida). TIR K/J 31 Tarraco 146 f.

P.B.

Sickle I. ANCIENT ORIENT AND EeGypT

II. CLAssicaL AN-

TIQUITY

I. ANCIENT ORIENT AND EGYPT The sickle is a classic harvesting tool with a largely unaltered basic form: a curved blade with its edge on the inside, made of wood, ceramic, copper/bronze or iron. The earliest evidence of sickles in Egypt and the Near East is from the 8th/7th millennia BC: flint or obsidian

Siculi (Xixedot/Sikelof). People in Sicilia. Ancient writings date the arrival of the S. from Italy variously (Hellanikos FGrH 4 F 79b 3: three generations, Philistos FGrH 556 F 46,4: 80 years before the Trojan War, Thuc. 6,2,5: 300 years before the Greeks’ western colonisation). Modern archaeological studies date it to the end of the 2nd millennium BC (end of the Bronze Age; finds from Cassibile: 1050-850 BC). It was preceded by

431

432

settlement of small Ausonian groups to the north east from the 13th cent. BC onwards (late Bronze Age; finds from Pantalica: 1250-1050 BC), contemporaneous with the development of the first Ausonian phase on Lipari. The S.’s language is related to Oscan ([1]; -» Oscan-Umbrian). Driven by Greek colonists to the

inland on two plateaus on the northern slopes of the Arcadian/Achaean mountains between the gorges of the Asopus [3] in the east and the Helisson [2] in the west.

SICULI

northern coast and eastwards into the interior, the S.

retreated into mountain strongholds. The movement in which > Ducetius attempted to unite them in 461-450 BC ultimately failed. The S. subsequently opened up entirely to Greek culture. During the first Sicilian expedition (427-424 BC; — Peloponnesian War) they supported Athens with more than 160 talents (IGI 291; cf. [2]). The S.’s chief cult of Adranus, Hyblaea and the Palici, whose archaeology is still not clearly understood, is seen as related to geoseismic activity. 1 L. AGosTinianI, I modi del contatto linguistico tra Greci e Indigeni nella Sicilia antica, in: Kokalos 3 4/35, 1988/89, 167-206 (Lit.) 2C.Ampo_o, I contributi della prima spedizione ateniese in Sicilia, in: PdP 232, 1987, 5-11. V.La Rosa, Le popolazioni della Sicilia: Sicani, S., Elimi, in: G. PUGLIESE CARRATELLI (Ed.), Italia, omnium terrarum parens, 1991, 3-110; R. PERONI, Enotri, Ausoni, Itali

e altre popolazioni dell’estremo sud d’Italia, in: Ebd., 113189; G. BRETSCHNEIDER (Ed.), Da Cocalo a Ducezio. VII.

Congresso

internazionale

di studi sulla Sicilia antica

(Kokalos 34/5, 1988/9), 1992/3.

Siculus. Roman cognomen (describing origin: ‘from Sicily’, and epithet of victors; cf. > Cloelius [4-7]; ~ Herennius [I 1o}). KajJANTO, Cognomina, 52; 193.

K.-L.E.

Siculus Flaccus. Along with > Frontinus and —- Hyginus, most significant of the Roman > surveyors. He probably lived under Trajan and Hadrian in the 2nd cent. AD and in his work De condicionibus agrorum (‘On the legal status of landholdings’) described the forms of Roman land ownership and the working methods of gromatici (> groma); what survives of it [1] relates to Italy. 1 C. THULIN (ed.), Corpus agrimensorum vol. 1.1, 1913, 98-130.

Romanorum, J.BU.

Sicyon (Sixvev; Sikyon). I. Sire

II. History

III. STATE OF BUILDINGS

[OLE Port on the Gulf of Corinth, 26 km to the west of

Corinth. Its territory was confined to the east by the river Nemea [2] (border with Corinth), to the west by the river Sythas (border with Pellene) (Paus. 7,27,12). S.

was famous as early as Antiquity for the fertility of the valley and for the highlands of Neogene marl. In the Archaic and Classical periods S. — a community of various small settlements [1] — was without natural protection on the plain. The Hellenistic city was built 4 km

Il. History The earliest information on the historical development of the city concern the hundred years of tyranny under the Orthagorids (-* Orthagoras [1]), the timings of which are disputed [2]. There is also discussion of the ideological orientation of measures instigated by Cleisthenes [1] (600-570) (Hdt. 5,67-69): whether against the ruling Dorian upper classes or against Argos [II x] and the aristocrats [3]. This is the period in which a small rectangular building with columns and a metope frieze (the ‘monopteros’, c. 560 BC), and a round building with a Doric colonnade (Tholos, c. 580 BC) were commissioned by the Orthagorids and erected in + Delphi (with plan), both incorporated into the treasury before the end of the 6th century ([4; 5]; Paus. 10,11,1); as well as the first phase of the treasury in — Olympia (Paus. 6,19,1 ff.). In about 510 the tyranny was toppled with Spartan help (papyrus fr. FGrH 105 F 1; Plut. Mor. 859c-d). From then on S. was allied with Sparta and as a consequence took its side in all wars, even after the Battle of Leuctra in 371 BC. Under the tyranny of Euphron [2] (368-366 BC), however, the city was turned against Sparta by the Thebans (Xen. Hell. 7,1,44-463 2,11; 3,1-12; 4,1; Diod. Sic. 15,70,3). Party quarrels, fuelled by Thebes, Sparta and the king of Macedonia, involved S. in sometimes bloody disputes between oligarchs, democrats and tyrants [6. 305-307, 676 f.]. In the > Lamian War in 323/2 S. participated on the side of the allies against Antipater [1] (Syll.3 310). In 303 BC Demetrius [2] Poliorcetes conquered S. and ordered the city’s relocation from the plain to the uplands (Diod. Sic. 20,102,2-4; Plut. Demetrios 25,3; Paus. 2,7,1). Aratus [2] liberated the city from Macedonian influence and brought it into the Achaean League (— Achaei, with map), in which, as one of the most flourishing of the allied cities [6. 70-87], S. occupied a leading position (Pol. 2,43,3; Plut. Aratos 9; 41; Paus. 2,8,4; 7,7,2). After the destruction of Corinth in 146 BC, S. gained a large part of its territory and the running of the Isthmian Games (> Isthmia; Str. 8,6,23; Paus. 2,2,2). An earthquake in about 140/150 AD seriously damaged the city (Paus. 2,7,1). S. was famous as the home of significant painters and bronze casters (cf. Pamphilus [2], Pausias, Canachus [2], Polyclitus [x], Lysippus [2]).

Ill. STATE OF BUILDINGS Of the city of the Archaic and Classical period, a necropolis (sth—4th cents. BC until the Roman period) to the south of the Asopus and some building remains and mosaics (5th—4th cents. BC) [8] survive, and of the city founded in 303 remains of a theatre [8; 9. 13.4142], a gymnasium (builder: Cleinias, Aratus’ father), temple foundations, a hypostyle bouleuterion [ro], a

434

455

105 m long stoa, Roman thermal baths now used as a museum and a large 6th cent. Christian basilica on the plain. Further documentary sources: Pind. O. 13,109; Pind. N. 9,13 9,533; 10,43; Pind. 1.3,44; Str. 8,2,2; 8,6,24 f.; 8,7,4; 8,8,5; Paus. 2,5,5-2,12,2. Inscriptions: IGIV 424-438. Coins: HN’, 409 ff., 417.

SIDE

dated to this period, as is the city gate with a round interior courtyard [2. 27-40]. During the Roman wars

2 V.PaRKER, The Dates of the Orthagorids of Sicyon, in: Tyche 7, 1992, 165-175 31d., Some Aspects of the Foreign and Domestic Policy of Cleisthenes of Sicyon, in:

against the — pirates (late 2nd cent. — 67 BC) the harbour and shipyards were used by the pirates, and slaves were traded there as well (Str. 14,3,2). In 78 BC, S. was separated from the province of > Asia [2] and integrated into the province of > Cilicia, serving as a naval base against the pirates. In 42 BC, S. was added to the Galatian kingdom of > Deiotarus which Augustus declared to be the province of Galatia in 25 BC (Cass. Dio

Hermes 122, 1994, 404-424

49532533 53,2653).

1 N. PHARAKLAS, Dtxv@vee. (Ancient Greek Cities 8), 1971

4 P.DE LA CosTE-MESSE-

LIERE, Au Musée de Delphes, 1936 5 D. LAROCHE, M.-D. NENNA, Le trésor de Sicyone et ses fondations, in: BCH 114, 1990, 241-284 6H.BeERvE, Die Tyrannis bei den Griechen, 1967 7K. Vorsis, Nouvelle mosaique de Sicyone, in: BCH 100, 1976, 575-588 8 W.FIECHTER, Das Theater inS.,1931 9 G.Roux, Pausanias en Corinthie, 1958 10A.PHILADELPHEUS, Note sur le bouleu-

térion de Sicyone, in: BCH 50, 1926, 174-182. G. NAPOLITANO, s. v. Sicione, EAA 2. Suppl. 5, 1997, 252-254; A.K. ORLANDOS, ‘“Avaoxadat Lixva@voc, in: Tloaxtixa thc Axadnutas AOnvav, 1938, 120-123; 1939, IOO-1023; 1941, 56-60; 1951, 187-1913; 1952, 387-3953

1953, 184-190; 1954, 219-231; T.S. SCHEER, Ein Museum griechischer ‘Frihgeschichte’ im Apollontempel von Sikyon, in: Klio 78, 1996, 353-373; C.H. SKALET, Ancient Sicyon. With a Prosopographia Sicyonia, 1928; K. VoTsis, Avaoxay Lixvevos, in: Teaxtina tis Axadnpiag AOnv@v, 1984, A. GRIFFIN, S., 1982.

241f.;

1987,

66-68;

1988,

30f.;

Side (Zidn/Sidé). Port on the East Pamphylian coast (Plin. HN 5,96; Ptol. 5,5,2; Tab. Peut. 10,2) 10 km west of the mouth of the Melas (present-day Manavgat Cay1) in > Pamphylia on a flat peninsula (conglomerate rock), formerly Eski Antalya or Selimiye, today again S. The river port (Manaua on the Melas) and particularly the sea port brought great prosperity to S. in the Hellenistic Period and especially in the Roman Imperial Period. The non-Greek name and the native Luwian language — Sidetic (cf. [3]) which was spoken well into the Late Hellenistic Period as well as a Late Hittite basalt cauldron [1] found there are evidence of a Pre-Greek settlement. According to ancient tradition (Skyl. ror; Arr. Anab. 1,26,4; Str. 14,4,2), S. was a colony of Cyme [3]. In the mid 6th cent. BC, S. was under Lydian rule (Hdt. 1,28) followed by Persian rule up to the occupation by Alexander [4] the Great in 334/333. The minting of coins which began in c. 430 BC shows, at first, an orientation towards eastern trade as evidenced by the Persian-Cyprian standard of coinage, while Greek influences dominated from the 4th cent. BC on [4. 4951]. After belonging to Antigonus [1] fora short time, S. became Ptolemaic (301-218) and was subsequently integrated into the > Seleucid Empire until 189 BC (Liv. 35,8,6; 13,5). Lhe > symmachia with Rome beginning in 169 BC led to economic prosperity which in turn afforded S. a certain degree of political independence (cf. the preservation of the Sidetic language). The older parts of the city wall that separated the headland from the mainland with 13 obverse towers is probably to be

In the Roman Imperial Period (esp. in the 2nd and 3rd. cent.), S. enjoyed another prosperous period as a trading town (with slave market). Under Claudius {III x], S. was newly designed, with monumental columnated streets running from the main gate to the south western district (still to be researched) and to the west into the centre with an agora and theatre and further to the temple district south of the harbour. > Athena and + Apollo, the main deities of S., were probably worshipped there [2. 77-96; 4. 106-114]. For the late rst cent. AD, a monument for Vespasian documents a special relationship to the Flavian imperial family. Beginning in the mid 2nd cent. AD, most of the buildings in the city were re-designed or newly built. As a result, the appearance and the dating of the previous buildings are unknown. It is likely that the aqueduct as well as the peristyle which was probably dedicated to the > ruler cult with the so-called Emperor’s Hall south of the agora (with a wealth of sculptures) stem from this period, while the temple of > Men (?) on the western end of the great colonnaded street and the monumental nymphaeum in front of the city gate which was decorated in the late 2nd cent. must be dated into the Period of the Severan dynasty (AD 193-235) [4. 82 f.]. The many donations of agones reveal the city’s interest in agonistics and, along with the granting of asylum (> Asylia) to the temple of Athena (272/3) and the third neocory (+ Neokoros) under Valerianus, bespeak the city’s prosperity in general. The honorary title Nauarchis, city of an admiral, reflects the significance of S. for Rome as an important naval base in the > Parthian and Persian Wars [4. 91 f.]. The city wall was probably fortified in the context of the Sasanid threat beginning in 260 and the siege by the + Goti in 269 (Dexippus, fr. 23) The ecclesiastic title of métropolis awarded in the late 3rd cent. reveals the increasing importance of the Christian community in S. After the defence against Isaurian attacks (353-410; Amm.

Marc.

14,2,8-11),

the building activities in the late sth cent. (theatre, agora, thermal baths, three basilical churches — one of them above the temples of Athena and Apollo — an episcopal palace, mausolea) attest to a new peak of the diocesan town; it came to an end through Persian (611— 628) and, above all, Arabic aggression (from 649). The urban area was now reduced by half through the building of a new city wall west of the agora and the peristyle and finally became completely desolate in the 9th/roth cent. Inscriptions [4]; coins [5].

SIDE

435

1 A.M. Manset, Ein Basaltkessel aus S., in: Anadolu 3, 1958, 1-3 21d., Die Ruinen von S., 1963 3 G. NEUMANN, Die sidetische Schrift, in: ASNP ser. 3,8,3,

1978, 869-886 4J.NOoLLE, S.im Altertum (IK 43), 1993 5 Id., Zur Geschichte einer kleinasiatischen Stadt in der

romischen Kaiserzeit im Spiegel ihrer Miinzen, in: Antike Welt 21, 1990, 244-265. A.M. MansEL, S., RE Suppl. 10, 879-918; W. BRANDES, Die Stadte Kleinasiens im 7. und 8.Jh., 1989, 102 f.;

H. Brant, Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft Pamphyliens und Pisidiens im Altertum, 1990, 34 f., 48 f., 102, 174-176; K.GRAF VON LANCKORONSKI, Stadte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens, vol. 1, 1890, 125-152. W.MA.

Sidero (XiSnow; Sidérd), second wife of + Salmoneus and, after his death, first wife of > Cretheus, the ruler of lolcus. She torments her stepdaughter — Tyro, daughter of Salmoneus and his first wife Alcidice and

Cretheus’s niece, who grows up with them in Thessaly. + Neleus [1] and — Pelias, the exposed sons of Tyro and Poseidon, recognize and free their mother; Pelias

kills S. on an altar to Hera; Cretheus marries Tyro (Apollod. 1,90-96). In tragedy, S. and Salmoneus in Elis together torment Tyro by beating her and cutting off her hair, because of the twins she had out of wedlock (Soph. Tyro fr. 658 TrGF; Diod. Sic. 4,68; Anth. Pal.

3,9; [1. 66-99, 164-173]). 1 P. DrAcer, Argo pasimelousa, Bd. 1, 1993 2 E.Srwon, s. v. Neleus, LIMC 6.1, 727-731

s. v. Salmoneus, LIMC 7.1, 652-655.

436 BC on his march from Capua to Rome (Liv. 26,9,2). Teanum Sidicinum, the capital of the S., minted its own

coins until the 3rd cent. BC [1. 169 f., 211 f.], although the ager Sidicinus was already within the Roman sphere of influence in 297 BC (Liv. 10,14,4). Under Augustus (Liber Coloniarum 1,268,6) or Claudius [2. 383] a colonia (tribus Terentina, regio I; Plin. HN 3,63) was settled there. 1M.Humpert, Municipium et civitas sine suffragio, 1978 2L.Keppre, Colonization and Veteran Settlement in Italy, 1983 3 B.p’AcostINo, L’incontro dei coloni

greci con

le genti

anelleniche

della

Campania,

Sido deposed (according to Tac. Ann. 12,29-30), together with his brother > Vangio, their uncle + Vannius, who — himself a Quadus — by Roman mandate ruled the kingdom of the > Suebi, which neighboured the > Quadi. The two brothers then ruled the Suebi state together and remained faithful to Rome. S. fought on the side of the followers of - Vespasianus together with — Italicus [2] and a contingent of troops on the front line in the battle of Cremona in 68/9 AD (Tac. Nabi, yekysats oherae))) HOLDER 2, 1540.

3 ead.,

P.D.

ROMAN

gual (Sidetic-Greek; one is from — Seleucia/Lyrbe), one voting tablet, and one inscription on a vessel from the 3rd/2nd cent. ({2] and [1] each with older literature;

[3]). In spite of the scarcity of material, it is obvious that Sidetic is an independent language of the West-Anatolian branch and distinct from the neighbouring > Luwian. The foreign influences on > Pamphylian also likely go back to Sidetic. 1 C.BrIxHE, G.NEUMANN, Die griechisch-sidetische Bilingue von Seleukeia, in: Kadmos 27, 1988, 35-43 2 G. NEuMANN, Die sidetische Schrift, in: ASNP ser. 3,8,3, 1978, 869-886 3]J.NoLLé&, Mitteilungen zu sidetischen Inschriften, in: Kadmos 27, 1988, 57-62. FS.

Sidicini. People in central Italy, neighbours of the Samnites and the Campani, probably of Oscan origin (Str. 5,359; coin finds [4]). Encroachments on the S. by the ~» Samnites in 343 BC resulted in the first Samnite War (Liv. 7,29,4-6; [3. 540]). In the Latin War (> Latini) the S. joined a coalition against Rome (Liv. 8,5,3; coins [4]). Hannibal [4] passed through their territory in 211

W.SP.

Sidon (215dv/Sidon; Hebrew Sid6n, Arabic Saida). I. To ALEXANDER

Sidetic. One of the Anatolian languages; written in its own alphabetic script (+ Asia Minor VI), which runs from right to left, and attested in > Side and the surrounding area. In addition to inscriptions on coins (5th/4th cent. BC), six mostly brief dedicatory inscriptions are known today, among them three that are bilin-

in:

G.PuGLiEsE CARRATELLI (Ed.), I Greci in Occidente (Ausst.-Kat. Venezia 1996), 1996, 533-540 4BICGI 19, 8. v. Teano Sidicino, 2006 M.LG.

THE GREAT

IJ. PTOLEMAIC AND

ERAS

I. To ALEXANDER THE GREAT In Homer (Hom. Il. 6,290 f.; 23,743 f.; Hom. Od. 4,83 f., 618 et passim; cf. Jos 13:6; 1 Kg 5:20), S., 35 km

north east of > Tyrus on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean, is synonymous with Phoenicia in general. In the rst millennium BC, its cities, besides S$. (Gn 10:15) also Tyre, Beirut (> Berytus), - Byblus [1] and Arwad (+ Aradus [1]), had supra-regional influence on the economy, trade and art. Despite the modern settlements, written sources and excavations provide an insight into the history of the city. In the 2nd half of the 2nd millennium, Egypt dominated the Phoenician cities. According to the > Amarna letters (No. 144 f.), King Zimrida of S. requested Egyptian help against political enemies. In other Egyptian, Ugaritic and Hittite texts, S. is regularly mentioned along with Tyre ({1. 23-25]; cf. Joel 4:4; Zech 9:2). In the 9th cent. BC, S. was loyal to the Assyrians [TUAT 1, 360; 363] until Luli of S. rebelled against > Sennacherib (705-681 BC) and was replaced by Tuba’lu [TUAT 1, 388]. The renunciation of vassal status to > Asarhaddon (680-669 BC) by Abdimilkutti of S. led to the destruction of the city, the deportation of its populace and the new foundation of Kdar-AsSur-aha-iddina (‘Asarhaddon’s harbour’) in 677 BC (TUAT 1, 395 f., 402). After a brief period of quiet, S. was subjugated

438

437

once again by -» Nebuchadnezzar [2] (605-562 BC; ANET 308, cf. Jer 25:22; 27:3 ff.). Under King > Tennes, the city was destroyed in 351 BC by the Persian Artaxerxes [3] III Ochus (3 59/8-338 BC) after an attempted rebellion by the Phoenician cities. In the OT, S. is incorrectly included in the territory of Israel (Jos 19:28). The city’s particular way of life (Judg 18:7), deities (Judg 10:6; 1 Kg r1:5), wealth (Is 23:2; 4; 12) and trade (Ez 27:8 f.) were familiar, and prophecies of its downfall were formulated in more recent texts (Jer 25:22; Ez 28:20-23; Joel 4:4). In the NT, Jesus (Mt 15:21) and Paulus (Acts 27:3) are reported to have stayed briefly in the territory of S., which is positively contrasted with towns in Galilaea (Mt 11:21 f.). The size of the ancient city is unknown. A Great Sidon (Jos 19:28) is mentioned alongside a Little S. in an inscription of Sennacherib [TUAT 1, 388]. Perhaps a part of S. lay on islands off the coast, because Asarhaddon speaks of an island city [TUAT 1, 395]. Excavations since the roth cent. have traced settlement back to the 4th millennium and discovered, among other things, significant murex remains, which indicate an important > purple industry. Inscriptions by kings of S. from the Persian era (6th—4th cents.) along with other epigraphic and numismatic evidence provide a glimpse of the cultural history [1. 54-58]. In the territory of the city, several necropoleis have been excavated, in which the sarcophagi of ESmunazar I and Tabnit were found, from whose inscriptions the royal names of the 6th and 5th cents. have been reconstructed. Two of them, Esmunazar II and Bodastart, built the temple of Esmun, of which a 25 mhigh podium has been preserved. In the Hellenistic/Roman era, the cult tradition was continued

and the Greek —> Asclepius was identified with the healing god > Esmun [1. 59-62]. The ESmin tradition survived into the Byzantine era. 1 N.JrpejIAN, Sidon through the Ages, 1971.

RL.

II. PrOLEMAIC AND ROMAN ERAS In 332 BC, Alexander [4] the Great conquered S. and appointed Abdalonymus as king, to whom (as sponsor) the so-called + Alexander sarcophagus is to be ascribed. Later controlled first by the > Ptolemies then, beginning in 200 BC, by the — Seleucids, the city became autonomous in 111 BC (new era) and was included in the federated cities by Pompeius [I 3] in 64 BC. Against the will of Cleopatra [II 12], Antonius [I 9] respected these rights, which, however, were withdrawn from S. in 20 BC after anti-Roman riots. In the Imperial era, S. lost significance, which could not be prevented with the granting of colonial status by Elagabalus. The philosophers Boethus [2] and [4] came from S., as did the Epicurean > Zeno. Christianity spread to S. quite early. The city was destroyed by an earthquake in sor. S. became Arabic in 637/8. ~ Hypogaeum (with fig. of the royal necropolis) V.von

GRAEvVE, Der Alexander-Sarkophag

Werkstatt (IstForsch 28), 1970;

und seine

R. ZIEGLER, Antiochia,

SIDONIUS

APOLLINARIS

Laodicea und S. in der Politik der Severer, in: Chiron 8, 1978, 493-514; R.Box, Alexander oder Abdalonymos?,

in: Antike Welt 31, 2000, 585-599.

J.WA.

Sidonius Apollinaris. C. Sollius Apollinaris $. The most important Latin author of Gaul in the second half of the 5th cent. AD; b. on 5 November 430/431 in > Lug(u)dunum (present-day Lyons). I. Lire Il. TRANSMITTED worK III. STYLE I. LIFE

A scion of a wealthy provincial aristocratic family, S. increased his prospects of a political career by marrying + Papianilla, the daughter of > Avitus [1], future emperor of the Roman West. After the latter was murdered, S. stood probably at first on the side of the enemies of > Maiorianus [1], who was installed in 457 (in support [13. 36-57, esp. 181-185], cf. also [10. 603 f.]), but quickly earned the emperor’s favour. Majorian’s violent death (461) forced S. to retreat to his manor. He devoted the following years entirely to writing. In 467, however, S. agreed to act on behalf of his home country, under threat from the Visigoths, and travelled as a legate to Rome to emperor > Anthemius [2] who appointed him praefectus urbi and patricius [3. XIX f.; 14. 79]. Upon his return to Gaul in 468 or 469, the dissolution of Roman power had been completed there. He became a cleric and instigated his election as the bishop of Auvergne with official residence in Avernum (today Clermont; on the exact circumstances and dating, cf. [7. 169-186; 9. 40; 14. 218]). He is frank to admit (Ep. 2,1,4) that in conferring to him the

pastoral staff political considerations played a greater part than religious zeal (so [11. 3 56-377]). Accordingly, his episcopate was marked by the defence of the diocese against the — Visigoths, an undertaking which ended with the bishop’s surrender and exile (475). In 476/477, S. was able to return to his ecclesiastic office in Clermont, where he died in the 480’s (on the dating, cf. Ex OND 535 adi: sll) Il. TRANSMITTED WORK Aside from the panegyrics on Avitus, Maiorianus and Anthemius, along with the accompanying poems Carm. 1-8, S. wrote 16 separately published Carmina minora. The poems, written in hexameters, elegiac distichs and hendecasyllables — nugae (‘trifles’) in the author’s own estimation (Carm. 9,9) -, are introduced by a dedicatory poem to Magnus Felix (Carm. 9) and end with the Propempticon ad libellum (Carm. 24: ‘Farewell poem for the book’), in which the collection of poems is sent on a journey to the recipient of the dedication (on this in detail [12]). Carm. rr and 15 are wedding poems, Carm. ro and 14 their versified praefationes, Carm. 18-21 epigrams, Carm. 13 a petition, Carm. 17 an invitation, and Carm. 16, 22 (cf. [4]) and 23 poems of gratitude for hospitality. S. divided the total of his 147 letters into 9 books, explicitly following Pliny’s model (Ep. 9,1,1; on the history of origin and

439

440

editions of the letter collection, the circle of addressees,

4,23). Because of its location, S. had strategic significance, as in the > Corinthian War in 392/1 BC (Xen. Hell. 4,4,13; 4,5,19). S. was famous for the quality of its apples (Ath. 3,82a-c).

SIDONIUS APOLLINARIS

the historical reliability and the epistolographic classification, cf. [5. 6-18]). The letters of gratitude, consolation, congratulation and recommendation are usually addressed to high-ranking personalities (informative regarding the purpose and design of the corpus: [16]). Ill. STYLE As regards vocabulary, flection and syntax of his letters and poems, S. never strayed far from his models — Statius, Ovidius, Vergilius, Horatius, Claudianus [2], Silius [II 5] Italicus, Ausonius; for prose Plinius, Symmachus [4] and Cicero [4. 27; 5. 25, 105 f.]. The excessive use of alliteration, homoeoteleuta, paronomasia and onomatopoeia is just as characteristic for his work as the tendency towards longer periods, hyperbole and synecdoche, metonymy and periphrase (according to (4. 23], a ‘late after-effect of Asianism’). S. was strongly rooted in pagan knowledge; his membership of the Christian Church rarely surfaced and he showed no interest in an intellectual negotiation between Christian and non-Christian positions. Philosophical or theological disputes also were not his forte due to his strongly developed taste for concrete, vivid, and practical political issues. EDITIONS:

1C.LUETJOHANN, G. S. A. S. Epistulae et

Carmina (1887, repr. 1961) 2 W.B. ANDERSON, Poems and Letters (with English tr.) (1936-65) 3 A. LoYEN,

S. A., vol. 1, Poémes, 1960, vols. 2-3, Lettres, 1970 (with French tr. and comm.) 4N.DELHEY, A. S., carm. 22, 1993 (with intr. and comm.) 5 H.KOHLER, C.S.A.S., Briefe, vol. 1, 1995 (with intr., German tr. and comm.). BIBLIOGRAPHY 6 R.E. CoLToN, Some literary influences onS. A.(2000) 7 J. Harries, S. A. and the Fall of Rome, 1994 8 Eap.,S. A. and the frontiers of romanitas in: R.W. MATHISEN and H.S. SIvan (eds.), ‘Shifting frontiers in Late Antiquity’ (1996), 31-44

9L.Loyen,S. A.

et l’esprit précieux en Gaule aux derniers jours de |’empire,1943 10R.W. MaruiseEn, Resistance and Reconciliation: Majorian and the Gallic Aristocracy after the Fall of Avitus, in: Francia 7, 1979, 597-621 11 P.RoussEAu, In Search of S. the Bishop, in: Historia

25, 1976, 356-377

12 W.SCHETTER, Zur Publikation

der Carmina minora des A. S., in: Hermes 120, 1992, 343363 (=Id., KS, 1994, 236-256) 13 C.E. Stevens, S. A.

and His Age, 1933 14K.F. STROHEKER, Der senatorische Adel im spatantiken Gallien, 1948 15 L. Watson, Representing the past, redefining the future: S. A.’ panegyric of Avitus and Anthemius, in: M. WurTpy (ed.), ‘The Propaganda of Power’ (1998), 177-198

16 M.ZELZER,

Der Brief in der Spatantike, in: WS 107/108, 1994/95, 541-551 17 S. CONDORELLI, Prospettive Sidoniane. Venti anni di studi su Sidonio Apollinare (1982-2002), in: Bollettino di studi latini 33/1, 2003, 140-174 (bibliography). GK.

Sidus (Ltd00¢/Sidods). Fortified place in the territory of Corinth near the Isthmus on the Saronic Gulf, modern

Sousaki. According to Steph. Byz. s. v. 2., either a Corinthian + komeé (cf. Hsch. s. v. LSovvtdc) or a Mega-

ran epineion/‘anchorage’ (cf. also Scyl. 55; Plin. HN

J. WisEMAN, The Land of the Ancient Corinthians, 1978, 19 f. K.F.

Sidyma (Zidvpa; Sidyma). Lycian polis in the west of the Xanthus valley (Plin. HN 5,100; Ptol. 5,3,5) with a small harbour at Calabatia; member of the Hellenistic

+ Lycian League. Remains at modern Dodurga: Classical fortification, Imperial period buildings and graves; noteworthy are the founding document of the + Gerousia (I.) (TAM II 175 f.) and a description of a syngéneia of Lycian poleis (TAM II 174; SEG 39, 1989, 1413). S. was a bishop’s see up to the High Middle Ages. S.DARDAINE

et al., Villes de Lycie occidentale:

Kadyanda I, in: Ktema 10, 1985, 211-243.

S. et MA.ZI.

Siegecraft I. Greece

II. ROME

I. GREECE A. ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL PERIODS

B. HELLEN-

ISTIC PERIOD

A. ARCHAIC AND CLASSICAL PERIODS From the beginnings of the > polis in the 8th/7th cents. BC, urban fortifications in the true sense began to appear in the Greek world. During a siege, spears, slings and bows would be used as long-distance weapons for attack and defence; hand-thrown stones were also an effective weapon of defence. Attack technology was modest: ladders for climbing walls, axes and simple battering rams for breaking open gates. Meanwhile, the city walls afforded a great advantage to the defenders by virtue of their greater height. The military superiority of defenders is therefore in general observed until the Classical period (5th/4th cents.). There was already a high standard of siege technology in the Near East by the 3rd millennium BC. For instance, in Mesopotamia, siege ramps, mobile canopies with battering rams (ram-tortoises) and the undermining of walls were all known; they are shown on Assyrian reliefs (e.g. relief of Tiglatpileser III from the central palace of Nimrad; London, BM). The Greeks became acquainted with this highly-developed siege technology during the wars in Asia Minor, esp. during the > Ionian Revolt (500-494 BC; conquest of Miletus: Hdt. 6,18). Archaeological surveys have revealed the Persian siege ramp outside Palaepaphos (498 BC) and the Greek defenders’ countermines (— Persian Wars). Greek siegecraft began to develop with this influence from the east [3]. The new siege methods spread even within the Greek homeland, promoted by the wars of the 5th cent. BC.

441

442

Siegecraft:

VAY

f

ALY

(izzavemrg/! talent of 3000 ‘holy’ heavy shekels corresponded to 10,000 drachmai

SIGISMUNDUS

and killed (Chron. min. 2,235; Greg. Tur. Franc. 3,6). 1 PLRE 2, 1009 f. 2 H. Wo_rraM, Das Reich und die WE.LU. Barbaren, *1994, 360 f.

Sigisvultus. Flavius S., under Felix [6] sent against Bonifatius [1] in Africa in 427 AD (Chron. Min. 1,472); Consul in 437, magister utriusque militiae 437-448, coastal defences against the > Vandali 440 (Nov. Valentiniani 9), 448 patricius [2. 158 f.]. Often seen as rival of Aetius [2] [3. 498-500]. 1PLRE 2, 1010 =2 T.D. Barnes, Patricii under Valentinian III., in: Phoenix 29, 1975, 155-170 3 B.L. TwyMAN, Aetius and the Aristocracy, in: Historia 19, 1970, 480-503. WE.LU.

Sigla. Sigla, earlier notae, is the Latin name for abbreviations. Since the time of the Greeks, S. for names,

titles, places etc. have been found on coins, conditioned by the small space available. In Greek inscriptions, on the other hand, S. are, at least in pre-Roman times, extraordinarily rare. This is in stark contrast to their extensive use amongst the Etruscans and above all the Romans, where some types of information — such as first names, tribus, former offices and set phrases for dedications — are almost always abbreviated. The widespread view that this was done in order to lower the costs, as the stonemasons were paid according to the number of letters, cannot be verified. The use of abbreviated set phrases was in fact subject to fashion and can therefore help to date inscriptions. Lists of S. are to be found in the indices of CIL and ILS, and again in the reference books on epigraphy (— inscriptions, > Latin inscriptions) matics (~ numismatics).

M.Avi-Yonan,

Abbreviations

and on numis-

in Greek

Inscriptions,

1940; M.C. J. Mixier, Abbreviations in Latin, 1998.

H.GA.

Siglos (Greek otyioc/siglos, oixdoc/siklos, oixdov/siklon; Latin siclus, sicel, from

+ Siqlu = shekel,

Hebrew

%pW). Ancient

or neuter Akkadian

oriental

weight, */6o of a light or heavy > mina [1], or */so of a mina among Jews (Ez 45,12) and Greeks, where 1 mina

was the equivalent of 100 drachmai. Asa coin standard, siglos was the name of various silver coins.

The autonomous large silver coins of the Phoenician cities were sigloi as tetradrachms (— Tetradrachmon),

e.g. in Sidon (units of coins from 2 down to */64 siglos) and Tyre (units of coins from 1 down to ‘/24 siglos), which were minted in the late 5th—4th centuries BC in accordance with the Phoenician coinage standard (+ Coinage, standards of); later, these sigloi corresponded to */6o or ‘/s0 of a heavy mina (Jos. Ant. Iud. 3,194; Hsch. s.v. oixdov). In Josephus, the siglos is the Attic tetradrachm of Tyre (cf. Jos. BI 2,592), about 14°55 g in weight, obverse Heracles-Melqart, reverse

(Jos.

Ant. Iud:

3,144;

17,189 £3

17;321=3233 ef.

17,146); in the NT, the ‘holy shekel’ is referred to as — stater [II] (= 2 didrachma; Mt 17,27; cf. 17,24).

A siglos as a > didrachmon was "/6o or */so of a light mina and corresponded to the amount of temple tax for an adult Jew (Mt 17,24, cf. Mt 17,27; Jos. Ant. Iud. 18,312; Jos. BI 7,218; in contrast, Jos. BI 3,194 speci-

fies a half-siglos as a heavy siglos). The Medean siglos of 7 '/2 or 8 Attic > oboloi (5-46 or 5:8 g; IG II 652 p. 43; Xen. An. 1,5,6 etc.) was a siglos as a > drachme [1] (Harpocr. s.v. Dareikos). The coins of + Croesus continued to be minted under Achaemenid rule in Sardis after 546 BC, and it was not until ca. 515 that new Achaemenid coin images were introduced [5]. The silver Croesus half stater of 5-35 g became a mass-minted Persian siglos. After the weight reform of — Darius [1] (+ Siqlu) and the increase in weight of gold dareikoi, the siglos was not increased to 5°55 g until under Xerxes [1. 618]. A silver siglos was worth "/20 of a gold siglos (+ Dareikos) of about 8-4 g (Xen. An. 1,7,18; Arr. Anab. 4,18,7: a > talent of 6000 sigloi = 300 dareikoi), i.e. the value ratio of gold to silver was 13 */;: 1 [1. 617 f.]. The obverse showed the Great King, first in profile with bow and arrow, then shooting the arrow, (from the time of Xerxes?) in Knielauf position (running with bent knees) with bow and spear or dagger from the end of the sth century BC [5]; the reverse showed an oblong — quadratum incusum. /;, */s and ‘/,, sigloi were rare. The minting of sigloi was probably restricted to Sardis; treasure finds have revealed that their main circulation area was western Asia minor. In the rest of the Persian empire, they were treated like raw silver, in which payments were usually specified there [1. 612-614, 619]. 1 A.D. H. Bivar, Achaemenid Coins, Weights and Measures, in: The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 2, 1985, 610-639 2 Y.MESHORER, 190 Years of Tyrian Shekels, in: A.HouGurTon (ed.), Festschrift L. Mildenberg, 1984, 171-179 3 L.MILDENBERG, Schekel-Fragen, in: B.SCHARLI (ed.), Festschrift H. A. Cahn, 1985, 83-88 4 K.REGLING, s.v. Siglos, RE 2 A, 2316-2322 5E.S.G. Rosinson, The Beginnings of Achaemenid Coinage, in: NC 1958, 187-193 6 SCHROTTER, 632 f. DLK.

Sigma. Semicircular dining sofa, named after the later form of the Greek letter C, which in the Roman world

449

450

gradually took the place of the > triclinium and took over entirely in the 4th and 5th cents. AD. Exactly when the sigma established itself among the Romans cannot be determined. The first archaeologically attested sigmata, which are identifiable from floor mosaics, can be dated to no earlier than the end of the 2nd cent. or the beginning of the 3rd cent. Already before that, however, this semicircular arrangement had been used for meals in the open air, under the term stibadium (ottBadtov/stibddion). As in a triclinium, by means of a place of honour on a sigma a hierarchy of guests could be established; in contrast to a triclinium, however, in general it provided room for no more than five to eight diners (Mart. 10,48,6). There have been various attempts to identify meals taken on a sigma as Christian, but numerous examples indicate that the sigma. was generally part of the furniture of a private house. The sigma motif is used in tomb paintings, to represent a — banquet and — in the Christian context of > catacombs and sarcophagi (— Sarcophagus) — the meal in Paradise. Towards the end of Antiquity, the various forms of lying down at a banquet (at the very end ona sigma) are replaced by a form of dining on benches at a long rectangular table. — Banquet; > Cena; > Table culture; > Table utensils

he turned it (signa vertere: Bell. Afr. 18). When hard

K.M. D. DunsBasin, Triclinium and Stibadium, in: W. J. SLATER (ed.), Dining in a Classical Context, 1991, 121148, fig. 1-36; A.Hus, s. v. Triclinium, RE 7 A, 92-10; A. Mau, s. v. Convivium, RE 4, 1201-1208; F. POLAND, s. v. Stibadeion, Stibas, RE 3 A, 2481-2484; G. RODENWALDT, Ss. v. S., RE 2 A, 2323 f. P.S.-P.

Sign language see > Gestures

SIGNUM

pressed by the enemy, the soldiers formed up to protect the ensign (signa conferre in unum locum: Caes. B Gall. 2,25,1). ‘Abandoning the ensign’ (a signis discedere: Caes. B Gall. 5,16,1; 5,33,6) meant flight or desertion; the loss of an ensign (signo amisso: Caes. B Gall. 2,25,1) was seen as a serious collective offence. Complex signaling techniques were employed to pass on military information over considerable distances (+ Telegraphy). W.RuiePL, Das Nachrichtenwesen

des Altertums,

1913,

13-90; A. VON DoMASZEWSKI, Die Fahnen im rémischen Heere, in: Id., Aufsatze, 1972, 1-80; M.P. SPEIDEL, Eagle Bearer and Trumpeter, in: Id., Roman Army Studies 1 (MAVORS 1), 1984, 3-44; O.SroLt, Der Adler im ‘Kafig’, in: Id., Romisches Heer und Gesellschaft: Gesammelte Beitrage 1991-1999 (MAVORS 13), 2001, 13-46; Id., Die Fahnenwache in der romischen Armee, in: Ibid., 47-58. EK.

Signature, artist’s see > Artists

Signifer see > Ensigns Signs, theory of see

> Language, philosophy and

theory of

Signum (Literally ‘sign’, pl. signa). [1] (Name) see > Supernomen

[2] (Military matters) see > Ensigns; > Signals [3] The brand mark by which the Romans identified slaves (> Slavery). It was used to prevent escape and deter theft, and for criminals in general if they were condemned to work in the mines (in metallum), thus

Signals. Greek and Roman armies used tactical signals, Latin signa (cf. Greek onueia/sémeia) for the transmission of orders in camp and on the battlefield. Vegetius lists three kinds of signal (Veg. Mil. 3,5,3; cf. Arr. Tact. 27): (a) signa vocalia, voice-signals: soldiers’ passwords (tessera) for guard duties and for battle; (b) signa semivocalia, acoustic signals with the aid of signaling instruments

(tuba, cornu,

bucina:

— Musical

instruments

VI.): musical commands to engage the enemy, to halt, to pursue or retreat (Veg. Mil. 2,22); in camp, signals for

guards to take up their posts (cf. Pol. 14,3,6). The signal for departure or for summoning a — contio of the soldiers was the classicum (Liv. 2,59,6; 7,36,9; Amm. Marc. 21,5,1; cf. Pol. 6,40,1); this was an insigne imperii (commander’s signal), and as such was sounded in the presence of the imperator; (c) signa muta, optical

(lit. ‘mute’) signals by means of flags or badges on clothing, weapons or horses, and, most important of all, the field > ensign: aquilae, dracones, vexilla. Orders were

conveyed only to the ensign-bearer, whom the soldiers had to follow unconditionally (Veg. Mil. 3,5,8). A soldier must never lose sight of the ensign of his unit (signa sequi: Sall. Iug. 51,1; 80,2; Liv. 10,5,1). To give the order to march, the bearer raised the ensign (signa tollere: Bell. Alex. 57,1); to change the direction of march,

becoming slaves. Those who had been branded in this manner could not, in the event of > manumission, be-

come Roman citizens, but merely received the status of > dediticii. The use of branding widened in Late Antiquity to include non-slaves of dependent social and economic status and soldiers. Application of the signum to a person’s face was, however, forbidden by > Constantinus [1] in AD 315 (Cod. lust. 9,47,17). Use of the signum for slaves was probably customary in Antiquity throughout the Mediterranean and the Middle East. The Greek equivalent of the signum was the stigma (in Lat. also stigma, punctum, nota, titulus). Those who

had received a brand continued to be called stigmatiai (Lat. stigmatiae) in the Roman period.

[4] (Sigillum). The seal (— Seals), used to certify > documents in particular. It was made from clay or wax, and was either set next to the signature (> subscriptio) or, more frequently, used to close the document. There were particular rules applying to the use of seals: in Roman law, for example, a will (> testamentum) had to be sealed with seven seals. Seals might also be applied to items of property, for example in the event that property was seized. — Gem cutting L. WENGER, s. v. S. (1), RE 2 A, 2361-2448.

GS.

SIGUS

Sigus. City in Numidia, 35 km to the southeast of + Cirta (It. Ant. 28,1; 34,8; 42,2), modern

Sigus in

Algeria. S. was under Punic influence in the 3rd and 2nd cents. BC. CIL VIII Suppl. 2, 19121 (castellum); CIL VII 1, 5693 et passim (respublica Siguitanorum); Suppl. 2, 19135 (magistri pagi and decuriones). In AD 411 S. wasa

452

451

see (Acta concilii Carthaginiensis anno 411

habiti 1,197; 209). Inscriptions: CIL VIII 1, 5683; 5693-5879; 2, 10148-51; 10856-10861; Suppl. 2,

19112-19196 and 19197; RIL 813. Boundary stones: Rev. Africaine 83, 1939, 161-181. AAAlg, p. 17, no. 335; E. Lip1NskI, s. v. S., DCPP, 418.

W.HU.

Sila [1] Heavily forested mountains in Bruttium (Str. 6,1,9; Plin. HN 3,74; Alfius in Fest. r50 L.; Verg. G. 219-223; Aen. 12,715-717), presumably corresponding to Aspromonte (Montalto, 1,956 m) and Serre in the south of Bruttium, but not to the modern S. [1; 3]. Abundant stock of timber, extraction of the prized Bruttian pitch ([1; 2]; Cic. Brut. 85; amphora stamp: Bruttia pix {2]). According to Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 20,15, at the end of the war with — Pyrrhus [3] the +> Bruttii (cf. Vibius Sequester, flumina 205: Sila Bruttiorum) ceded half of the S. to the Romans. 1C.TurANOo, Le conoscenze geografiche del Bruzio nell’antichita classica, in: Klearchos 17, 1975, 71-77

2 S.De Caro, Anfore per pece del Bruzio, in: Klearchos 27,1985, 21-32

3A.Rusct,s.v.S., EV 4, 846-848.

ML. [2] City in Numidia, some 35 km to the south of ~ Cirta, modern Bordj el-Ksar in Algeria. CIL VIII suppl. 2, 19198 (Respublica Silensium); CIL VII 1, 5884; suppl. 2, 19198; 19199 (magistratus, ordo and decuriones). In AD 484 S. was a see (Not. Episc. Numi-

diae 92). Inscriptions: CIL VIII 1, 5880-5932; 2, 10295; suppl. 2, 19198-19209; AE 1972, 696; 1992, 1883. AAAIg, p. 17, no. 333; Y.LE BOHEC, De S. a Gadiaufala .., in: L’Afrique dans |’Occident romain (Actes du collo-

que Rome 1987), 1990, 291-313.

1985, 37-76; F.IMHOF-BLuMER, Lydische Stadtmiinzen, 1897, 142-145; BMC, Gr, Lydia, 278-283; SNG Copenhagen, 546-553; SNG, Sammlung Von Aulock, 3166— 3181; 8263-8269; K. Burescu, Aus Lydien, 1898, 199;

L. BURCHNER, s.v. Silandos, RE 3 A, 1 f.; JONES, Cities, 81, 93; Macig, 787, 1501; MITCHELL Seay

1, 180; ZGUSTA, H.KA.

Silanion

(tAaviwv; Silanion). Bronze sculptor from Athens. According to Plin. HN 34,51 he was the height of his career in 328-325 BC. S. created statues of the mythical figures Achilles, Theseus and Jocasta, and in Olympia the > victor statues of the boxers Damaretus, Telestas and Satyrus. A ‘sports instructor’ (epistaten exercentem athletas, Plin. HN 34,82) ascribed to him can perhaps be interpreted as Connidas, Theseus’ teacher. Of S.’s portraits a statue of Plato in the Athenian Academy is recognised has been reliably identified in Roman copies. Identification is disputed, however, of the portraits of the poets Sappho and Corinna, of the sculptor and philosopher Apollodorus [16] and of the boxer Satyrus (bronze head from Olympia, NM Athens). The particular skills attributed to S. were his rendering of physical and mental states, such as Jocasta’s deathly pallor and Apollodorus’ madness (Plin. HN 34,81). The only pupil mentioned of S., who is said to be an autodidact himself, is > Zeuxiades. S. is also said to have written a manual of composition (praecepta symmetriarum, Vitr. De arch. 7 praef. 14). In the development of Greek — portraits S. presumably played a significant role. OVERBECK, Nr. 13 50-1363; CIG 2,1843, Nr. 3555; [Perg Nr. 50, 198; PICARD, vol. 3.1, 781-852; LIPPOLD, 272274; RICHTER, Portraits, vol. 1, 70, 144; vol. 2, 164-170; P. MORENO, s. v. S., EAA 7, 1966, 288-292; I. LINFERT-

RercH, Musen- und Dichterinnenfiguren des 4. und frihen 3. Jahrhundert, 1971, 65-70, 84-90; IEph 2, No. 512; A. STEWART, Greek Sculpture, 1990, 179-180, 288-

289; L. Topisco, Scultura greca del IV secolo, 1993, 108— 111; IT. LORENZ, Platon, S. und Mithridates, in: Fremde Zeiten 2, 1996, 65-73; A. STEWART, Nuggets. Mining the Texts Again, in: AJA 102, 1998, 278-280. RN.

W.HU.

Silandus (Ziitavdoc/Silandos). City in eastern Lydia, at a northern tributary of the Hermus [2] (e.g. river god Hermus in coin images). Under Domitianus [1] (AD 81-96) S. became a > civitas, issuing coins (until Severus [2] Alexander); at the same time ~ Mocadene was divided into the territories of the cities of S. and > Temenothyrae, the two cities then being called métrop6leis. S. was near modern Kara Selendi (to the west of Selendi): Bishops of S. took part in the Councils of Nicaea in 325 and Chalcedon in 451 (> Synodos II.) and are attested until the 13th/r14th centuries (Not. Episc. 1,171; 3,104; 8,183; 9,90; 10,230; 13,90). TAM 5,1, 18-25 (Nr. 47-70); CH. Naour, Nouvelles inscriptions du Moyen Hermos, in: EA 2, 1983, 107-141; Id., Nouveaux documents du Moyen Hermos, in: EA 5,

Silanus. Roman cognomen (possibly from silus, ‘snubnosed’; according to the ancient interpretation from silanus, a gargoyle in the form of a head of Silenus), in the Republican period hereditary in the family of the Tunii (Iunius [I 28-3 5; Il 29-4 1]); in the Imperial period

also in other families. DEGRASSI, FCap., 148; KAJANTO, Cognomina, 237.

K-LE.

Silarus (Siler). River in the border region between Campania and Lucania (Siler: Luc. 2,426; Silerus: Mela 2,69; Silaris: Str. 5,4,13; 6,1,4), modern Sele. At its mouth, there are remains of an archaic sanctuary to

Hera Argiva (eight-columned - pseudodipteros with 17 columns on the side wall; cf. Str. 6,1,1; Plin. HN

AY,

SILENCE

454

3,70; Solin. 2,12; Plut. Pompeius 34,3). There was a

species of horse-fly by the S. that was harmful to herds of cattle (Verg. G. 3,146).

1 G.Conrab, Der Silen. Wandlungen einer Gestalt des 2R.Rocca, F. Cairns, griechischen Satyrspiels, 1997. s. v. Sileno, in: EV 4, 1988, 849 f. T.H.

F. CorDaANo, Antiche fondazioni Greche, 1986, 1149 f.

A.BO. Silen(s) (S\Anvoc/Silénds, Leiynvoc/Seilénds; Diravoc/Silanés; Lat. Silenus, Silanus). I. MyTHOLOGY

Doric

II. ICONOGRAPHY

I. MYTHOLOGY Among the collectively acting silens or > satyrs, one silen/Silen(us) stands out as a single figure whose origin remains unclear (perhaps comparable: — Chiron among the > centaurs; > Pan in contrast to the various Pans). This figure was fleshed out in mythical stories and — satyr plays. The ‘Midas-silen’ expresses a pessimistic thought to the Phrygian king + Midas, a thought typical for the Archaic period and consistent with Dionysian ideas. Caught by Midas for his wisdom, the silen only reluctantly — probably following the model of Menelaus’s questioning of > Proteus (Hom. Od. 4,384-570) — speaks: “The best thing for humans is not to be born at all and if born, to die as soon as possible” (Aristot. fr. 65 GiGON = 44 Rose}; Theop. FGrH 115 F75b; Cic. Tusc. 1,114 f.; Ov. Met. 11,85-145). This story is probably based on a tradition of a wise silen, as is implied in the rebuke of his student > Olympus [14] (Pind. fr. 156 f.: “Oh you disastrous short-lived being, you utter fooleries when you boast to me of money”). In the early Classical period, the Phrygian — Marsyas [1] was turned into a silen (Hdt. 7,26). Silens are counted among the entourage of > Dionysus in order to forge a mythical link —as did the earlier story of the Midas-silen — between the cult of > Cybele and that of Dionysus. Alcibiades’ comparison of — Socrates [2] with Marsyas, who was also referred to as a satyr, is famous (PI. Symp. 215b-216e). This comparison was provoked not only by Socrates’ resemblance to a silen (cf. II below) but also by his contempt for all possessions and his notion of human insignificance. Vergilius too refers to a wise silen (Verg. Ecl. 6). In > satyr plays, a silen/Silen(us), with his red bald head and shaggy white dress, faced a chorus of young satyrs as their chorus leader, their father (‘Papposilenus’, Poll. 4,142) and, ultimately, as a dramatically relative independent figure. This is where Silen(us) first appears as Dionysus’ tutor, probably after the model of Chiron (Soph. Dionysiscus; Eur. Cyc. passim; equated with the Midas-silen: Ov. Met. 11,99-101). Under the influence of the satyr play, the father-silen or Papposi-

lenus was routinely counted among Dionysus’ entourage and developed into an independent figure, especially in the Greco-Roman visual arts. Silen(us) was worshipped especially in Attica (e.g. Pl. Symp. 215ab; Paus. 1,23,5-6), but his cult is known from other places as well (Malea: Paus. 3,25,2 = Pind. fr. 156; cf. Poll. 4,104; Elis: Paus. 6,24,8). — Midas; > Satyr

Il. ICONOGRAPHY

It is difficult to distinguish silens from the > satyrs in ~ Dionysus’ entourage in the vase paintings of the 6th cent. BC [1. 67 f.; 3. 9]. Silens first appear (horse-legged and ithyphallic) in the earliest representation of the — thiasus that takes > Hephaestus back to the Olympus, on the volute krater of > Clitias. A distinction between silens and the satyrs in age, appearance and cloths was probably developed under the influence of the > satyr play (see |above) and appears on vases from c. 470 BC, where S. is first depicted in the typical fleecelike robe of the ‘Papposilenus’ [7. 197 f.]; he leads the chorus of satyrs as an old satyr, usually bald-headed and big-bellied [3. 15 5-178]. A typical silen’s face (which also appears on 5th cent. Sicilian silver coins), with its snub nose, bold head and straggly hair, is presented by the portrait of > Socrates [2]. Its traits embody the demonic nature, the divine essence, in the ugly outer shell of the philosopher. The Greek original (380/370 BC) of this portrait, which has survived in numerous Roman replicas, emphasised the traits of the silen, while a later version by > Lysippus [2] (c. 320 BC) mitigated them [5; 8]. In the Dionysian iconography from the Hellenistic and Imperial period, such as terracottas, mosaics and relief sarcophagi, silens and satyrs are omnipresent, but rarely depicted individually. Preserved in several copies is an early Hellenistic silen/Silen(us) holding the infant Dionysus, an outstanding piece by an unknown artist. The early 17th cent. saw the creation of several paintings of drunken silens (RUBENS, VAN Dyck). 1P.E. Arias, s. v. Satiri e Sileni, EAA vol. 7, 1966, 67-73 2 H. BULLE, Die Silenen in der archaischen Kunst der Griechen, 1893 3 G.M.HEpDREEN, Silens in Attic Blackfigure

Vasepainting, 1992

4K.SCHAUENBURG, Silenos beim

Symposion, in: JDAI 88, 1973, 1-26

5 1.SCHEIBLER,

P. ZANKER, K. VIERNEISEL, Sokrates in der griechischen Bildniskunst, Exhibition Miinchen 1989, 33-37, 52-59 6 E.SIMON, s. v. Silenos, LIMC 8.1, 1997, 1108-1133 7 A.STAHLI, Die Verweigerung der Liste, 1999

8 P. ZANKER, Die Maske des Sokrates, 1995, 38-45. B.BA.

Silence (Greek ovyt/sigé, owsnt/sidpé and associated verbs; Latin silentium, taciturnitas, quies and associ-

ated verbs). Even though Graeco-Roman Antiquity bears the stamp of a culture of speech (> Rhetoric), many testimonies from ancient literature, religion, philosophy, medicine and general understanding betray a high awareness of the importance of silence, which had its own forms of expression and performance [2; 4; 12]. Programmatic statements on silence are found throughout Antiquity, e.g. in > Pindarus [2] (N. 5,18), who described silence as the wisest thing a person could conceive, to the famous quotation from — Boethius “si

SILENCE

tacuisses, philosophus mansisses” (Boeth. Cons. Philosophiae 2 pr. 7). For silence as a culturally determined, specifically human phenomenon in alternation with speaking, a distinction must be made between imposed silence (e.g. within a group in the sense of an obligation to be silent, omerta, [10]) and voluntary silence as well as those instances of silence resulting from a permanent or temporary inability to speak. In addition, one can be silent about something or someone, and one can fall silent, all with its various implications (the loss of the voice means the death of the poet; being silent about a person’s deeds or actions lets them be forgotten [12. 82-115]). Silence is also ascribed to animals (Plin. HN 11,95) and abstracta (Night: Verg. G. 1,247). Apart from the medical writers [5; 12. 228-232], it is primarily the ancient poets who describe a psychology and empiricism of silence. Silent figures are used to great effect particularly in epic poetry and tragedy. Silence is thus the expression of all intense emotions, e.g. amazement, wrath, contempt (thus the silence of Ajax [1], Hom. Od. 11,563 f., cf. Ps.-Longinus, De sublimitate 9,2; [8]), love or trauma, which lead to the loss of the quality which characterizes human beings, > language (the best known example is Aeschylus’ + Niobe, cf. [6]). Particularly women in tragedy go to their death in silence (+ Iocaste,

456

455

+ Deianira [12. 213-251]).

In rhetoric, speaking about silence in the form of a praeteritio or by stating that one cannot speak about something (inexpressibility topos) is an effective strategy; in trial speeches, the crime of the accused or the suffering of the victim is thus emphasized. Silence as part of a more comprehensive concept of stillness is an expression of the divine, the sacred or a specific religious/philosophical attitude [11]. The divine manifests itself in quiet and silence, for example in numinous places such as sacred > groves, where the stillness of nature correlates with the silence of human beings. Ritual silence is called for in connection or alternation with prayers (~ Prayer, > Curse) as well as in Roman > sacrifice. In Roman worship ceremonial silentium is a prerequisite for a successful augurium (> Augures). The commandment for silence, which the apostle Paul (1 Cor 14,34 f.) imposes on women in church, aims in a different direction as a means for discrimination (cf. also corresponding statements in pagan texts, for example Eur. HF 534 f.). In some religious currents, such as the mystery cults (+ Mysteries) which became increasingly popular beginning in the Imperial Period, silence is strongly emphasized as a method of inner composure and communication with the divine [1; 13]. Silence is also connected to the soundless underworld. Silence does not play a determinant role in philosophy prior to Late Antiquity, despite relevant statements by Plato (e.g. Pl. Euthd. 300b, also Pl. Symp. 2114). It gained validity in the context of hésychia (‘calm’) in late Graeco-Roman and patristic literature and in monasticism, e.g. in the concept of the ‘silent Logos’ in > Plotinus or the ‘elo-

quent silence’ in > Marius [II 21] Victorinus (cf. Aug. Conf. 9,10,23-26) [14. 1483]. -» Noise 1 L. ANGEL, The Silence of the Mystic, 1983 2H Barpon, Le silence, moyen d’expression, in: REL 21/2, 1943, 102-120 3 O.CasEL, De philosophorum Graecorum silentio mystico, 1919 (repr. 1967) 4M.G. Ciant (ed.), Le regioni del silenzio: Studi sui disagi della communicazione, 1983 (Engl. transl. 1987) Suldiyat silenzi del corpo. Difetto e assenza di voce in Ippocrate, in: [4], 159-172 6A.Garzya, Sur la Niobé d’Eschyle, in: REG 100, 1987, 185-202

7 G.KALMaRAS, Reclaiming

the Tacit Dimension: Symbolic Form in the Rhetoric of Silence, 1994 8 G.LoMBARDO, II silenzio di Aiace (de subl. 9,2), in: Helikon 29/30, 1989, 281-292 9O.LoNGo, Silenzio verbale e silenzio gestuale nella Grecia antica, in: Orpheus 2, 1985, 241-249

10 F. Maru iar, Sul concetto di omerta a partire della Grecia antica, in: Quaderni di storia 51, 2000, 77-109

11S.MENscHING, Das _ heilige Schweigen, 1926 12 S.MontaG io, Silence in the Land of Logos, 2000 13 M.J. VERMASEREN, Die orientalischen Religion im Romerreich,

1981, esp.

53, 142

14 G. WOHLFART,

J. KREUZER, s.v. Schweigen, HWdPh 8, 1483-1495.

CW.

Silentiarii (otAevticotot; silentidrioi). Guards at the Imperial Roman courts instituted by Constantine (+ Constantinus [1] I) that were named after the ceremonial silence surrounding the emperor. They were subordinate to the imperial chamberlain (praepositus sacri cubiculi). From AD 437, 30 silentiarii are documented under three decuriones at the court of Constantinople. Their rank within the court hierarchy continued to rise until the 6th cent. after which their importance decreased. The last of the silentiarii are mentioned in sources from as late as the 12th cent. A.KAzHDAN,

s.v. Silentiarios, ODB

3, 1896; R.GuIL-

LAND, Titres et fonctions de |’empire byzantin, 1976, 3346 (article no. 17, 1967).

ET.

Silenus (StAnvoc; Silénds). [1] S. from Caleacte. Greek historian, like > Sosylus in the retinue of > Hannibal [4], ‘as long as fate allowed it (FGrH 175 T 2 in Nep. Hann. 13,3). Author of an ‘official’ history of Hannibal (F 1-2) and of Sikelikd in 4 books (F 3-9). S. was used by Coelius [I 1] Antipater (F 2); perhaps Polybius’s criticism (3,47,6-48,12) of ‘a number of’ Hannibal historians concerning Hannibal’s crossing the Alps is aimed at S., in whose work dreams, omens etc. play an important role (F 2). A thesis [3; 4; 5] that the Sicilian parts of + Diodorus (B. 4-21) are based on S. can be rejected. 1 K. MeisTer, Annibale in Sileno, in: Maia 23, 1971, 3-9

2Id., Historische Kritik bei Polybios, 1975, 155-159 3 R. Lauritano, Sileno in Diodoro?, in: Kokalos 2, 1956, 206-216 4E.Mannt, Da Ippia Diodoro, in: Kokalos 3,

1957,

136-155

5 V.La

Bua, Filino-Polibio-Sileno-

Diodoro, 1966.

FRAGMENTS: FGrH 175 with commentary

K.MEI.

458

457

[2] Glossographer (Ath. 15,699e), c. 2nd cent. BC. S. is cited by > Nicander [4] of Colophon (Ath. 11,4826) and was probably used by > Cleitarchus [3] of Aegina. Of S.’s work PA@ooaV/Glossai nine fragments, primarily with dialectal expressions, survive in schol. Apoll. Rhod. 1,1299 and in > Athenaeus [3], particularly on names of drinking vessels. F. SUSEMIHL, Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur in der Alexandrinerzeit, vol. 2, 1892, 186 f. RSI.

SILIUS

1 P. Sartori, Die Speisung der Toten, 1903 2 H.EuRuicu, Zur indogermanischen Sprachgeschichte, 1910,71f. 3 WALDE/HOFMANN 2, 536 f. W.K.

Silingi. Vandal tribe originally from the area of modern Silesia (Ptol. 2,11,18: StAtyyawSilingat). In AD 406 they crossed the Rhenus (Rhine) — as did other Vandali — along with the Alani and Suebi and moved into Gallia and further into Hispania. For the year 411, the tribe is documented in > Hispania Baetica (Hydatius, Conti-

[3] Tragedian, rst cent. BC, author of the tragedy Chry-

nuatio 49, in: Chron. min. 2,18). In

ses or Chrysippos (TrGF I CAT B 1,17 = TrGF I 153).

attacked and destroyed by the > Visigoths on Roman orders.

BZ. [4] S. of Chios. Mythographer of unknown period. Of S.’s two-volume work Mythikai historiai only one thing survives: the derivation of the name of Odysseus from his mother’s taking a walk in the rain when pregnant with him (xat& tiv 680v toev) (Schol. Hom. Od. a 75). Attribution of further citations to this S. instead of S. [2] is hardly possible [3. 55]. EDITIONS: 1FGrH 27. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 2F.SUSEMIHL, Geschichte der griechischen Litteratur in der Alexandrinerzeit, 1891-1892, vol. 1, 637;vol.2,187 3F.Jacosy,s. v.S.(1-2),RE3 A

My CS

RSL

Sileraioi (ZtegatoWSileraioi). Ethnic name probably of Italic mercenaries from the region of the Sila Mountains (> Sila [1], Bruttium), who up to the death of Dionysius [1] lin 367 BC minted Syracusan bronze coins in the ‘drachma’ series with the legend SILERAION and an attacking warrior. S. GARRAFFINO, La monetazione dell’eta dionigiana. Contromarche e riconiazioni, in: Atti dell’VIII Convegno del Centro Internazionale di Studi Numismatici Napoli 1983, 1993, 191-244, especially 224; G. TAGLIAMONE, | figli di Marte, 1994, passim. GLF.

Silhouette painting see > Skiagraphia Silicernium. Term for the Roman funeral banquet ((cena fuynebris, Fest. p. 376 L.; convivium funebre, Non. P. 48,5 M.) which, like the Greek —> perideipnon (identified in CGL II 183,58), was celebrated by the next of kin immediately after the interment of the deceased at the grave, according to “ancient custom” (Varro, Sat. Men. 303, cited in Non. P. 48,6-9 M.). The idea behind it (shared by many peoples: [1. 23 f.]) was probably that the deceased took part in the meal (Donat. in Ter. Ad. 587: cena quae infertur dis manibus; implicitly in Tert. Apol. 13,7). The etymology of the word is unclear (cf. [3]). Whereas ancient explanations (from silentes, ’ those who are silent’: Paul. Fest. p. 377 L.; from silex, ‘flint’: rejected already by Nonius) are arbitrary, a connexion with siliquae (‘pulses’) [2] deserves attention, since beans in particular were considered to be among the favourite food of the dead (Ov. Fast. 5,436-440; Plin. HN 18,118; Paul. Fest. s. v. Fabam, p.77 L.; cf. generally [1. 7 f., 12, 24]). ~> Burial

TIR M 33 Praha, 1986, 78.

416-418 they were

G.H.W.

Siliqua (Greek xegatwov/— kerdtion). Seed of the carob tree, weight and coin. As a weight the smallest Roman unit, ‘/,,., > libra of 327,45 g = 0,189 g, recorded from the beginning of the 4th cent. AD [3]. As an arithmetical value '/24 of a > solidus (Isid. Orig. 16,25,9), but as a coin minted until about 360 AD not in > gold, but only in + silver, with a nominal weight of 3,41 g = */,, libra, corresponding to Diocletian’s > argenteus and Nero’s — denarius [2], after that with a nominal weight of 2,27 g='/,,,libra[4. XXVIII]. Until Honorius [3] (393423) siliquae were minted in bulk, but not to a very great extent afterwards. The great variation in weight from 2,66 g to 1,04 g shows that the siliqua is a credit coin whose value in larger payments was not by number but by total weight [5]. The most common coin images are a VOTA inscription and a seated > Roma (IV.) [5]. In the Byzantine coin system of the 5th—7th cents. there are 144 silver siliquae to the pound; in the 5th—8th cents. the s. also occurs as a nominal with half and quarter subdivisions in the coinages of the Vandals, Ostrogoths and Langobardi [x]. 1M.Amanpry (ed.), Dictionnaire de Numismatique, 2001, 552,S.v.silique 2 P.M. Bruun, RIC, vol. 7, S. 6-8 3 H. CHANTRAINE, s.v. uncia, RE 9, 621 4J.W. E. PEARCE, RIC, vol.9 5 SCHROTTER, 638, S.V. s. GES.

Silius. Name of a Roman plebeian family, documented since the first cent. BC (the name in Liv. 4,54,3 is probably a later invention). Under > Augustus the family attained the consulate, but it disappeared at the end of the first cent. AD. K.-L.E. I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD II. IMPERIAL PERIOD I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {1 1] S., P. Praetor c. 58 or 52 BC, as propraetor of

Bithynia et Pontus 51-50 BC addressee of laudatory letters from Cicero (Cic. Fam. 13,47; 61-65; cf. 7,21). S., who was regarded as an authority on Asia Minor, brought an inheritance lawsuit in 44 BC (Cic. Att. 7,1,8). His son is probably S. [II 7]. JOR.

SILIUS

Il. IMPERIAL PERIOD {If 1] C. S. Patrician, son of S. [II 3]. Cos. des. probably for the year AD 49; already so described in AD 47 (Tac. Ann. 11,5 f.). Married to Junia [6] Silana, from whom he separated in order to be able to marry his mistress > Messalina [2], the wife of Claudius [III 1] (Tac. Ann. I1,12,2; 13,19,2). In the autumn of AD 48, whilst Claudius was staying in Ostia, he and Messalina are supposed to have got married in a blatant ceremony, at which Messalina had important items, which could be understood as symbols of sovereignty, brought to S.’ house (Tac. Ann. 11,12,3; 11,35,1). Claudius received news of this, together with the announcement that S. was also taking over power (Tac. Ann. 11,30,2). At the insistence of his freedman Narcissus [1] Claudius returned to Rome and conferred on him the command over the > Praetorian Guards for a day. S. was taken prisoner and executed in the Praetorian camp after a short trial (Tac. Ann. 11,33; 11,35). The affair, which is essentially depicted as being caused by Messalina’s libidinous sexuality (cf. Tac. Ann. 11,26,1; 11,37,4), bears in this foreshortened version all the hallmarks of improbability. The marriage, which can scarcely have been performed in public, probably represents only the surface of a political struggle between various groups in the Senate and the equestrian ranks, as well as between the freedmen around Claudius. S. might have been the leading exponent of a senatorial group which, for reasons of legitimacy, formed an alliance with Messalina. See [1.64-67]. 1 B. Levick, Claudius, 1990.

[II 2] P. S. Son of S. [II 7]. Praetorian legion commander in Thrace or Macedonia, where Velleius Paterculus

served under him as a military tribune [1.1765, V 64], cos. suff. AD 3 [2.3]. 1 DEvIJVER, vol. 4

460

Any

2 DeGRAss1, FCap.

[II 3] C. S. A. Caecina Largus (on the nomenclature [tr. 97]). Probably son of S. [II 7] and brother of S. [II 2] [2. 4f.]; cos. ord. AD 13. He was a friend of Germanicus [2], under whom he acted as commander of the Upper Germanic army in Germania since AD 13. He was able to make his army swear loyalty to Tiberius in AD 14 without any rioting (Tac. Ann. 4,18,2). He took part in Germanicus’ campaigns against the Germanic tribes in AD 15 and AD 16 and was awarded the triumphal insignia (Tac. Ann. 1,72,1). In AD 16, he led forays into the territory of the Chatti. When Julius [II 126] Sacrovir revolted in AD 21, S. defeated him in front of the town of Augustodunum. In this military conflict, the legate of the Lower Germanic army, Visellius Varro, was eliminated. In AD 24, his son brought a charge against S. before the Senate concerning blackmail; S.’ wife, Sosia Galla, was also accused. S. killed himself before he was condemned by the Senate (Tac. Ann. 4,18 f.). The part of his possessions which he had received from Augustus, was demanded back for Tiberius’ > patrimonium [3.203 f.; 2.3-6].

1Syme, AA 2€Ecx, Statthalter 3 W.Ecx et al., Das senatum consultum de Cn. Pisone patre, 1996.

[Il 4] L. S$. Decianus. Son of the poet S. [II 5] Italicus; cos. suff. AD 94.In CIL XV 7302 (after AD 102) he was mentioned together with Memmius [II 5] Rufus on a fistula aquaria (> aqueducts). Their function is disputed [x. 241f.], possibly he and his colleague were curatores operum publicorum. 1 Cu. Bruun, The Water Supply of Ancient Rome, 1991.

W.E.

[II 5] S. Italicus I. Lire

IJ. Punica RECEPTION

III. TRANSMISSION AND

I. LIFE The dates of Tib. Catius Asconius S. I. —his full name is known from an inscription — can be narrowed down to c. AD 25/6 to c. AD 1o1/2. Martial mentions S. (Epist. 4,14 and 7,63). Pliny [2] the Younger provides information about S.’ career in his obituary written shortly after AD 100 (Epist. 3,7): after a successful political career as a consul in AD 68 and prosecutor and proconsul in Asia (probably AD 77) the propertied poet moved back to his estates in Campania. His ardent admiration for — Cicero and, above all, > Virgil is authenticated. He composed Punica, his only extant work, probably largely in the reign of Domitian. The news about a severe illness and his suicide by refusing food might explain the fact that the epic about the Second + Punic War in 17 volumes shows signs of not being completed; the homage to the Flavian dynasty (3,594-629) would no longer be conceivable after Trajan came to power in AD 96, and there are some inconsistencies, e.g. about the death of Regulus

(2,343f.and 6,539-44). II. PUNicA

The most important historical source for S.’ depiction of the war is — Livy’s [III 2] third Decade ([11]),

but the assumption of a further annalistic source for the last third of the work [4], possibly > Valerius Antias, is sensible. Formally and stylistically, Virgil is the main model although, linguistically, the influence of > Ovid, -» Lucan and also of the tragedies by > Seneca [2] is particularly noticeable (on > Statius’ [II 2] Thebais see [10]). S. reintroduction of the cosmos of the gods marks a departure from Lucan in the development of historical epic. This is a way of enhancing and interpreting the historical events mythically. The theory that the work had originally been drafted in 18 volumes (first of all [13]), is superseded by the suggestion of [5], which makes a design of three pentads with intermediate volumes 6 and 12 plausible. Volumes 1-5 describe how the ultimately mythical conflict between the powers of Rome and > Carthage encroaches on Italy via Spain. > Hannibal at first meets with increasing success. He faces no opponent on the Roman

462

461

side who could be taken seriously. At the end of volume 6, Fabius [I 30] appears on the scene; a retrospective view of the First Punic War and the exemplary virtue of Regulus (see > Atilius [I 21]) can be seen as a foil to his actions. In volumes 7-11, the description of Rome’s greatest peril forms the centrepiece of the work, with the battle of > Cannae as its focus and climax. Hannibal’s easy-going life-style during his sojourn in Capua finally weakens his superiority. At the end of volume 12, just as in volume 6, Jupiter proves to be the deliverer of the immediately threatened walls of Rome. Volumes 13-15 then describe Rome’s resistance until the victory of Cornelius [I 71] Scipio Africanus at Zama. S.’ basic attitude is one of conservative moral values influenced by Stoicism. This fits in with his choice not to focus on one hero but instead to present several protagonists who embody the Roman virtues — bravery, incorruptibility and patriotism. Moral decline is not only diagnosed in the enemy but also sorrowfully anticipated in the behaviour of the Romans. S. has a sceptical view of his own time, although direct criticism cannot be clearly detected [5.9-18]. Language and versification are classicistic and do not aspire to be innovative. The use of devices such as > ekphrasis (e.g. 6,65 3-697), Nekyia

(cf. > katabasis; 13,381-895) and funeral games (16,275-591) is found in the epic tradition, more specifically in that of Virgil. The battle scenes such as the river battle 4,570-703 and the battle of the gods at Cannae 9,278-10,325 display Homeric colouring. Digressions and > catalogues display erudition, e.g. the Italian troops 8,3 56-621. III. TRANSMISSION AND RECEPTION

The manuscript tradition goes back to a St. Gallen Codex, which is no longer extant but was rediscovered by Poggio BRACCIOLINI around 1417. The manuscripts originating from this codex can be divided into two classes. Numerous mixed manuscripts and important early prints exist alongside. The Punica was not read very much in the Middle Ages although the Regulus passage in particular has influenced the Waltharius epic. Nowadays it is thought improbable that PETRARCH knew S. [2.118-144]. In modern times, the Punica were appreciated mainly in England (e.g. in the work of Thomas May, 1630). The German adaptation of the scene of Scipio at the crossroads by L. UHLAND [12] is something of a curiosity. > Epic, Il. D.; > Punic Wars 1 F. Ant et al., S. Italicus, in: ANRW II 32.4, 1986, 352374 2M.v.ALBRECHT,S. Italicus,1964 3 E.G. BrucNOLI, C.SANTINI, L’Addidamentum Aldinum di Silio Italico, 1995 4E.Burck, Historische und epische Tradition bei S. Italicus, 1984 5 U.FROHLICH, Regulus, Archetyp romischer Fides, 2000 (with German translation and commentary forthe 6th book) 6 R.HaAgEussLer, Das

historische Epos von Lucan bis S. und seine Theorie, 1978 7 H.JuHNKE, Homerisches in rémischer Epik flavischer Zeit, 1972 1979

8 W.KissEL, Das Geschichtsbild des S. I.,

9J.Ktppers, Tantarum causas irarum. Untersu-

chungen zur einleitenden Bicherdyade der Punica des

SILK

S.1., 1986 10G.LoRENz, Vergleichende Interpretationen zu S. I. und Statius, 1968 11 J. NicoL, The Histori-

cal and Geographical Sources Used by S.I.,1936

12 Cu.

Reitz, Scipio and Ludwig Uhland, in: Thetis 8, 2001

13 E. BicKEL, De Silii Punicorum libris VII ss. post Domitianum abolitum editis, in: RhM 66, 1911, 500-512. EDITION: J. DELZ, 1987. TRANSLATION: H.RUPPRECHT, 2 vols., r1991.; J.D. Durr, Loeb 1934. COMMENTARY: F. SPALTENSTEIN, 2 vols., 1986 and 1990. CH.R.

[If 6] S. Nerva. Cos. ord. AD 65 according to Tacitus (Ann. 15,48,1). cf. A. > Licinius [II 19] Nerva Silianus. [II 7] P. S. Nerva. From a senatorial family. As he be-

came cos. ord. in 20 BC, he must have been amongst the closer supporters of > Augustus. Still under the supreme command of Agrippa [1] ([{1. 7]), he was a consular legate in Hispania citerior from 19 BC. From about 16-13 BC he was procos. of Illyricum, from where he fought against the Pannonians, the Noricans and other Alpine tribes. In 16 BC, his campaign against the peoples of the Alps prepared the way for the conquest of the region by Claudius [II 24] Drusus and Tiberius (Cass. Dio 54,20,rf.). At that time the Norican kingdom was broken up and the area was annexed to Illyricum, probably under a praef. Later on he was still close to Augustus with whom he played dice according to the latter’s own testimony (Suet. Aug. 71). For his sons cf. S. [II 2] and S. [II3] as well as Licinius [II 18]. 1 ALFOLDY, FH.

[II 8] P. S. Nerva. Cos. ord. AD 28, son of [II 2]. The fate of his uncle S. [II 3] did not affect his career. [II 9] S. Plautius Haterianus. Senator; quaestor of the province of Creta-Cyrenae between AD 161 and AD 169 (AE 1960, 20ob). Probably descended from the senatorial family of the Silii from Lepcis Magna [1.679; 2725 tel 1 W.Eck, s. v. S. (22a), RE Suppl. 14, 679 2 M. Corie, Les familles clarissimes d’Afrique Proconsulaire, in: EOS 2, 685-754. W.E.

Silk. Silk is the finest and most valuable natural fibre in Antiquity; like wool, silk is an animal product and is obtained from ready-made threads. The basis is a fine thread spun by moths of the Bombycidae family. The silkworm moth, Bombyx mori, indigenous to China, is considered to be its most important member. The larvae, which are about 2-3 mm long, are fed exclusively on fresh leaves of the > mulberry tree. After moulting several times the larvae begin to produce a secretion from a pair of glands through openings on their lower lips; this immediately solidifies in the air, becoming a silk thread which they use to spin a cocoon; after a few days the finished cocoon consists of a thread up to 4,000 m long. The technical knowledge of how to obtain the valuable raw silk or filament silk from the central part of the cocoon and how to de-gum and dye it

463

464

remained a strictly guarded secret of Chinese culture for a long time. The earliest fragments of silk material (early 3rd millennium BC) were discovered in China and determined to be products of the domesticated Bombyx mori. The peak of silk production was reached in the Han period (206 BC— AD 220). For centuries the Chinese Imperial house held the monopoly for the production of silk fabrics. In Europe it was probably the Greeks who were the first to come into the possession of genuine silk. The fabrics found in grave 73 of the > Kerameikos Necropolis in Athens (late 5th cent. BC) are of Bombyx mori threads. They were made from undyed silk, but some were decorated with purple stripes and fine embroidery. Silk fabrics are not mentioned in the literary tradi-

clothes of Cleopatra [II 12] shows: it consisted of Chinese silk, which had been dyed purple in Sidon and further processed in Egypt. Roman empresses and emperors (such as Gaius Caligula, Heliogabalus), as well

SILK

tion until the Principate; Pausanias (Paus. 6,26,6-8) is

the first to give an account of the ‘Silk People’ (the Chinese; Dijgec/— Séres), the rearing of silk larvae (ong/sér) and the making of clothes. The various sources show that not only finished textiles (686via oneixd/othonia sérikd; Latin vestes sericae), but also silk thread (oneima vijwata/sérika némata) arrived in the West by the sea and land routes (— Silk Road). This is also confirmed by numerous finds (206 BC — AD 220) in the necropoleis of the Syrian oasis city of + Palmyra, the trading centre which formed the connexion between the East and the West (silk always remained a prime concern of Roman long-distance trade, in addition to > amber, + ivory, > pearls, incense and — pepper; cf. for > India, trade with: Peripl. m.r. 49; 56; 64): Materials, undyed as well as dyed, also with richly woven patterns, survived there. The characteristic weaving technique demonstrates that imported Chinese spun silk was not processed until in the country. According to Procopius, in Late Antiquity garments were made from silk primarily in the Phoenician cities of — Berytus and -» Tyrus (Proc. HA 25,14). In addition to genuine Chinese silk there were other kinds, including some from the Mediterranean, particularly Cos; the raw material for its production was provided by a silkworm (bombyx) described by Aristotle (Aristot. Hist. an. 55 1b). The women of Cos knew how to break down cocoons and unravel and ultimately weave the silk threads (Plin. HN 11,76; 11,78). According to the modern view, the often mentioned —> coae vestes, clothes from Cos, are identifiable as the long transparent clothes in evidence in the statue tradition. It was usual to wear these clothes over an undergarment of thicker fabric. Silk clothes were defined as fine, lustrous, translucent and expensive; they were dyed ~ purple, occasionally even interwoven with gold. The most valuable materials, certainly, were the ones consisting entirely of silk, the holoserica. Half-silk, subserica, was considered comparatively inexpensive; it was a blended fabric, with linen, wool or cotton being used for the warp and silk only for the weft. Silk bestowed on its wearers the flair of the exclusive and luxurious, as a text by Lucan (10,141-143) on the

as members of the ordo senatorius (those of senatorial

status) wore fine silk clothing (cf. also Suet. Calig. 52; SHA Heliogab. 26,1; Tac. Ann. 2,33,1). As could only be expected, silk clothing remained a status symbol for a rich stratum of the population. Silk materials were counted among expensive luxury goods and were specified as such in the > Edictum [3] Diocletiani (23; 24). It is disputed when, where and how Chinese silkworms arrived in the West. Procopius relates that monks brought silkworms to Byzantium in AD 551 (Proc. BG 4,17,1-8). Silk cultivation spread outwards from Byzantium to many Mediterranean countries and developed into a flourishing industry. -» Lepidoptera (3.-4.); > Silk Road; > Textiles, production of; > Textile art 1 E.J. W. BarBer, Prehistoric Textiles. The Development of Cloth in the Neolithic and 2 BLUMNER, Techn. 1, 201-203

Bronze Ages, 1991 3 H.W. Haussic,

Archaologie und Kunst der Seidenstrafe, 1992 4 H.-J. Hunpt, Uber vorgeschichtliche Seidenfunde, in: JRGZ 16, 1969, 59-71 5 A.PEKRIDOU-GoRECKI, Mode im antiken Griechenland, 1989, 26-28 6G.M. A. RicHTER, Silk in Greece, in: AJA 33, 1929, 27-33 7 H. WeBER, Coae vestes, in: MDAI(Ist) 19/20, 1969/70,

249-253

8 J.P. Witp, Textile Manufacture

Northern Roman Provinces, 1970, 10-13.

in the A.P.-G.

Silk Road. Collective term for the caravan routes from China to western Asia. Used for general trade and interchange, the Silk Road acquired particular significance by bringing silk fabrics into the Mediterranean, where it was highly prized, particularly in Rome (> silk had been known there since the rst cent. BC; for evidence see > Seres). It is not known when the use of these trade

routes began — it presumably goes back to the 4th millennium BC; it is documented until the 16th cent. AD. Today’s climatic conditions — unfavourable for traffic — primarily in eastern Turkestan are of more recent date; as late as c. 200 AD on the southern border of Xinjiang between the steppe and the mountains the SR led through a lake plateau which later dried out. To the north of Xinjiang a strip 50-80 km wide was irrigable until 1500/1600. Only in the interior of the Taklamakan was there desert already 10,000 years ago. It is the thawing of the Ice Age glaciers and a decrease in precipitation that are responsible for the present situation. The SR led from Xiang through Lanzhou to the West, split into two, one to the north of the Taklamakan through Turfan and Kucha, and one to the south through Dunhuang, Cherchen and Yarkand, rejoining in Kashgar. Through Samarkand (- Maracanda), -» Merw, northeastern Iran and > Seleucia [1] the SR reached the Mediterranean at Antioch [1]. Besides this there were caravan ‘roads’ through the Fergana Valley and the forest steppes to Altai and then into Mongolia,

465

466

or those that led southwards along the western edge of

Scyl. ror; Arr. Anab. 1,26,5). A pre-Greek settlement is suggested by the place name Selyviys on coins of the 3rd

the Tianshan and then either into Iran or to India (modern Pakistan); the latter carried Buddhism to central

Asia and China. Although trade on the western part of the SR was often impaired by conflicts between the Roman Empire and the Parthian and Sassanid (> Sassanids) empires (> Parthian and Persian Wars), nevertheless trading centres on the SR such as Seleucia [1], > Dura-Europus, Aleppo (+ Beroea [3]) and Antioch [1] (> Palmyra on the branch to Cairo) profited from this trade just as the central Asian cities of Merw and Samarkand did. On the eastern part the now mostly deserted oases in Xinjiang have preserved significant cultural treasures. The most important sites are on the southern route: 1. Chotan with Indian, Sacian and Chinese inhabitants; the dominant religion was Mahayana Buddhism. In 982 the place was forcibly Islamised by Turkish Karachanids and is now Turkish-speaking. It provides rich finds of Buddhist art. 2. Miran, the capital of the state of Shanshan in the eastern Tarim basin, known from paintings in an Indo-Hellenistic style (2nd—4th century); one epigraph gives Tita (possibly Titus?) as painter’s name. The population spoke Tocharian, an ancient Indo-European language; from 670 to 842 it was under Tibetan rule, from 1035 to 1226 it was Tangut. The most significant centres on the northern route: 1. Kucha, with a population of Tocharian tribes. From the 6th to 8th century cultic and residential caves of Ming-Oi there are magnificent paintings with Buddhist content as well as Indian and Tocharian texts; paintings from the monasteries of Qyzil and Qumtara are from the 6th/7th century. 2. > Turfan. 3. Dunhuang, with inhabitants from many peoples. The ‘Caves of a Thousand Buddhas’ developed between the 4th and 14th centuries; 492 caves survive with Chinese painting and sculpture. Shortly after 1900 the Daoist abbot Wang Guolu discovered a ‘walled library’ from the beginning of the rth century with 13,500 scrolls, paintings and other works of art, now almost all in foreign countries. > Silk L.Boutnots, The Silk Road, 1966; H.G. Franz (ed.), Kunst und Kultur entlang der Seidenstafe, 1986; P. HopKIRK, Die Seidenstafe, 1986; J.P. DREGE, Seidenstafe,

°1993.

BB.

Silloi see > Timon [2].

Sillybos see > Scroll Sillyum (ZiAAvov; Sillyon). City in Pamphylia between the Cestrus (modern River Aksu) and the > Eurymedon [5] on a 230 metre-high plateau, 10 km from the coast at modern Asarkoyii. Whether the earliest traces of settlement can in fact be dated to the early Bronze Age as in + Perge [3.265] requires further study; residential building from the 5th century BC onwards, however, has been verified [3. 263], whereas the first literary mentions of S. begin only in the 4th century BC (Ps.-

SILPHION

century BC (HN 705; [1. 51]). The existence of an in-

dependent polis on the Greek model with cultic and communal buildings, portici and a corresponding communal constitution is also confirmed by the inscription [2. 167-185] ona pre-Hellenistic building. A large preHellenistic fortress presumably deterred Alexander [4] the Great from conquering S. (Arr. loc.cit.). A gymnasium and a Doric temple are probably Hellenistic; a theatre, a stadium, thermal baths and a nymphaeum are from the Roman period. In the Byzantine period S., being a metropolis, was a fortified see, which, owing to its strategically favourable location, was used by the Seljuk Turks as a fortress in the 13th century (several buildings, a mosque). 1 G.E. BEAN, Kleinasien, vol. 2, 1970, 50-57 2 C.BrixHfé, Le dialecte Grec de Pamphylie, 3 M. Kipper, S., in: AA 1996, 259-268.

1976

H. BRANDT, Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft Pamphyliens und Pisidiens im Altertum, 1990, 46 f.; K.GRAF VON LANCKORONSKI, Stadte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens, vol. 1, 1890, 65-84; V. RUGGIERI, S. NETHERSCOTT, The Metropolitan City of Syllion and Its Churches, in: Jb. der 6st. Byzantinistik 36, 1986, 133-156. W.MA.

Silo. Roman cognomen, in the Republican period of the leader of the Marsi Q. > Poppaedius S., in the Imperial period in the Larcii and Pompeii families. Decrassi, FCIR, 268; KayANTO, Cognomina, 118; 237.

K.-L.E.

Silphion (Greek otidwov/silphion, word of non-Greek origin, from oiidvsilphi or ociedvsirphi; Latin sirpe, laserpicium from lac sirpicium). An as yet unidentified plant, imported from the 6th cent. BC from > Cyrenaeca in northern Africa, and the resinous milky juice obtained from its stem and root (Latin laser, main citation in Plin. HN 19,38-46 and 22,100 f. according to Theophr. Hist. pl. 3,1,6; 6,3,13; 6,3,33 6,4). It seems to have been related to asafoetida (Ferula asa-foetida L.). The plant is supposed to have had a strong but pleasant smell. Theophr. (Hist. pl. 6,3,1) provides a good description. Cyrene drew great profits from exporting the juice in great quantity until the Hellenistic period (Plaut. Rud. 630; Catull. 7,4); in the Imperial period the wild plant, which had evidently been rendered extinct in northern Africa by cultivation of the land, was replaced by an inferior oriental relative (Plin. HN 19,40). People ate the stems and the leaves, the dried root was used to season — artichokes (cardui) preserved in vinegar (Plin. HN 19,153). In medicine the (among other properties) diuretic juice was primarily used internally and externally as a panacea (Dioscorides 3,80 WELLMANN = 3,84 BERENDES; Plin. HN 22,101-106). On coins from Cyrene and its neighbourhood [z. pls. 2,2 and 5; 3,1-2 and 4-5; 6,35; 10,r1-14] and on the Arcesilas Cup (> Arcesilaus [2]) in Paris there are several representations of silphion.

467

468

1 F.IMHOOF-BLUMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums,

taken from Veii in the course of the construction of

SILPHION

1889 (repr.1972)

2A.STEIER,S. v.S.,RE3 A, 103-114.

C.HU.

Silures. Celtic tribe in Southeast Wales from the coast to the Wye, especially in the coastal plain of present-day Glamorgan. The S. resisted the Romans from AD 44, at first under > Caratacus (Tac. Ann. 12,32 f.; 12,38-40;

14,29), but were finally subdued in AD 74-76 by + Frontinus (Tac. Agr. 17). In the 2nd cent., possibly under Hadrian, the S. were organised as civitas Silurum with the capital of Venta Silurum (present-day Caerwent). Modest villae were built in the coastal plain. In the end, the S. came to be the most Romanised tribe in Wales. V.E. NasH-WILLIAMS, The Roman Frontier in Wales, vol. 2, 1969; M.G. JARRETT, J.C. MANN, The Tribes of Wales, in: Welsh History Review 4, 1969, 161-171; A.L. F. RivET, C.SMITH, The Place-Names of Roman Britain, 1979, 459 f. M.TO.

Silurid see > Glanis [1]

Ostia under Ancus Marcius [I 3] (Liv. 1,33,9; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 3,41). NISSEN 2, 359.

G.U.

Silva Marciana. Probably a term in late Antiquity (Tab. Peut. 2,4; 4,1; Amm. Marc. 21,8,2 referring to

361 AD) for the Black Forest, which elsewhere is called ~» Abnoba mons. A. FRANKE, s. v. Marciana silva, RE 14, 1504 f.

RA.WI.

Silva Scantia. Forest in Campania, which was leased as pasture by the censores (Cic. Leg. agr. 1,3; 3,15). It is not identified; there may be a connection with Aquae Scantiae (Plin. HN 2,240). M.LG.

Silvae see > Anthology I. Silvanus [1] Male deity. I. CULT AND PLACES OF WORSHIP

II. ICONOGRA-

PHY

Silva Bacenis. Large forested mountain range forming an intra-Germanic barrier between the > Cherusci and the > Suebi (Caes. Gall. 6,10,5). Etymologically related to German ‘Buche’ (= beech), and therefore probably the Harz Mountains (possibly as far as Rh6n-Vogelsberg), which as late as the Early Middle Ages was called ‘Buchonia’. G. NEUMANN u. a., Ss. v. Bacenis silva, RGA 1, 572 f.

K.DI.

Silva Caesia. Forested area on the right bank of the Rhine in Germania (Tac. Ann. 1,50), marched through

by + ably Silva Ruhr

Germanicus [2] after the mutiny in 14 AD, probfrom > Novaesium. Presumably identical to the Heissi, mentioned in 796 AD, to the north of the between Essen-Werden and Essen-Altstadt.

G. NEUMANN u. a., s. v. Caesia silva, RGA 4, 321 f.; J. KuNow, Das Limesvorland der siidlichen Germania inferior, in: BJ 187, 1987, 63-77.

K.DI.

I. CULT AND

A. ETYMOLOGY

PLACES

OF WORSHIP

AND ORIGIN

B. ROME AND ITALY

C. THE PROVINCES

A. ETYMOLOGY AND ORIGIN Based on the etymology of the name, four hypotheses have so far been put forward regarding the origins of this god: S. is identical with the Etruscan god Selvan [4. 54-595 12. 200]; S. is an adjectival derivation of the word silva (‘forest’) and was originally an epithet of either > Faunus [14. 213] or > Mars [6. 132]; S. is a direct derivative of the Latin silva (‘forest’), with the suffix -no- adding the meaning of ‘master of the forest’ [8. 92-95]. The latter hypothesis of an Italian origin is the one most widely accepted in modern scholarship [5. 7-133 7- 153 Lo. 222]. B. ROME AND ITALY

For the Republican and Early Imperial Periods, literary sources provide all of the information that we have about S. He is described as a god of the forest (Plin.

Silva Hercynia see > Hercynia silva

there in 216 BC (Liv. 23,24,7; Frontin. Str. 1,6,4; Zon.

HN. 12,2; Cato Agr. 83; Liv. 2,7,2) and of agriculture (Verg. Ecl. 10,24; G. 1,20; Prop. 4,4,11), as the guardian of the border (Hor. Epod. 2,22) or as an antagonist of women (Varro in Aug. Civ. 6,9; 25,23). The cult was performed outdoors in the wilderness (Plaut. Aul. 674;

9,3). The consul L. Valerius Flaccus avenged him there

Cato Agr. 83) as well as within the city walls (Plin. HN

in 195 BC (Liv. 34,22,1; 42,2).

ERS77=7 8): The cult of S. reached the peak of its popularity in

Silva Litana. Forest on the right bank of the > Padus (modern river Po) on the Via Aemilia. The praetor L. Postumius [I 5] Albinus was ambushed by the > Boii

NISSEN 2, 256.

ASA.

Silva Maesia. Forest in southern Etruria to the southwest of Veii on the coastal strip to the north of the Tiber’s mouth between the sea and the lagoon. It was

Rome and the provinces in the 2nd and 3rd cents. AD. Most of the places of worship to S. of the Imperial Period (cf. [2. 312]) — templa (CIL VI 543; 30985), aedes (CIL VI 30940; 3 1024) or aediculae (CIL VI 293; 626) — were owned by the cultic associations of S. (— col-

469

470

legium [x] Silvani: CIL VI 10231, cultores Silvani: CIL VI 692); they preferred locations outside of the Aure-

a dog looking up to the god [9. nos. 2-42]. Depictions of S. clad with a tunica are comparatively rare [9. nos. 44-50]. In the provinces, the iconography was adapted to local or regional peculiarities. In Pannonia and Dacia, S. is shown wearing a tunica, a cloak and a Phrygian cap. In place of the pine branch, he is often given a lance or a shepherd’s crook; he is accompanied by three female figures, epigraphically referred to as Silvanae [9. nos. 80-91]. In Dalmatia, S. is shown as Pan [9. nos. 133-151]. Images of S. from the Gallic and Germanic sphere show him with a hammer and a small pot (olla)

lian Wall or in the outlying districts of Rome for the exercise of their cult [1. 189]. However, there were also

dedications to S. from other collegia not located in the outlying areas (CIL VI 588). In addition to this collective worship, there are numerous examples of individual dedications (e.g. CIL VI 663; 683; 2829). Almost a third of the inscriptions mention S. with the added epithet of > sanctus (e.g. CIL VI 294). The wide variety of other epithets is evidence for the broad functional range that S. enjoyed in Rome (Augustus, Salutaris, Custos, Restitutor, Castrensis, etc.) [5. 50]. S. was frequently worshipped in conjunction with the > Lares (e.g. CIL VI 671), > Iuppiter (e.g. CIL VI 30940), > Hercules (e.g. CIL VI 293), > Diana (e.g. CIL VI 30806), > Liber Pater (e.g. CIL VI 707). The followers of S. came to a large proportion from the urban underclasses; for that reason, S. had no place amongst the sacra publica (‘public cults’) in the city of Rome [3. 386]. Italian finds related to S. come almost exclusively from central and northern Italy. The form of worship hardly differed from that in Rome. Inscriptions bearing the unusual phrases of in honorem and in memoriam (e.g. CIL V 821; 822) were found in > Aquileia [1] and could point to a certain role of S. in the cult of the dead (> Dead, cult of the) [5. 53]. C. THE PROVINCES Outside of Italy, the S. cult was particularly prevalent in the Danubian provinces (Dalmatia, Pannonia, Dacia). However, there is no evidence in these three provinces of a merging of S. with an indigenous deity [5. 68-79], with the single exception of Siscia/Pannonia (S. Maglus, CIL III 3963). In Dalmatia, S. was linked with the Greek god > Pan (cf. > Syncretism). The most frequently found epithets for S. are Augustus in Dalmatia, and Domesticus and Silvestris in Pannonia and Dacia. In contrast with Rome, a characteristic feature of the cult in the Danubian provinces was a much stronger involvement of the local elites and the more central location of the temples within the urban topography. In Gallia Narbonensis and Germania superior, S. was equated with the Celtic god > Sucel(l)us [5. 59, 61] and in Britannia with Cocidius [5. 54]. Evidence of worship of S. in the remaining western provinces, the entire Greek East and in North Africa is scarce to nonexistent [3. 383] — with the exception of two cities, > Thamugadi and > Lambaesis. II. ICONOGRAPHY

The earliest extant iconographic images of S. date back to the early 2nd cent. AD with the Arch of Trajan in > Beneventum and a coin issue [9. no. 41]; the image

given to the god was soon adopted into the private sphere, too [11. 443]. In Rome and Italy S. was depicted as a naked, elderly bearded male figure, wearing around his shoulders an animal skin with pine cones and fruits. Further attributes were a sickle, pine tree or branch and

SILVANUS

[13. 49]. 1B.BOLLMANN, Ro6mische Vereinshauser, 1998 2 L. Cutorri, s.v. S., LTUR 4, 312-324 3M.Czauss, Die Anhangerschaft des S.-Kultes, in: Klio 76, 1994, 381387 4 W.Deecke, Etruskische Forschungen, vol. 4, 1880 5P.F. Dorcey, The Cult of S., 1992 6 W.W.

Fow er, The Religious Experience of the Roman People, I9II 7S.S. JENSEN, S. and His Cult, in: Analecta Romana Instituti Danici 2, 1962, 11-42 8 W.MEID,

Das Suffix -no- in Gétternamen, in: Beitrage zur Namenforschung 8,1957,72-126 9A.M.Nacy,s.v. S., LIMC 7, 763-773 10R.E. A. Pamer, S., Sylvester and the Chair of St. Peter, in: PAPhS 122, 1978, 222-247 11 E.ScHRAUDOLPH, Zur Bilderfindung des S., in: Journ. of Roman Archaeology 8, 1995, 435-446 12 SIMON, GR 13 D. Toutec, Images de S. dans l’occident romain, in: C.Auvray-Assayas

37-60

(ed.), Images

romaines,

1998,

14 G. Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Romer,

FIG)od

[2] The ‘Teachings of Silvanus’ is the title of NHCod VII,4,84-118, a pseudonymous tractate named after S., the companion of — Paulus [II 2] (1/2 Thess 1:1 and elsewhere), or written by an otherwise unknown S. (c. AD 250-320 in or around Alexandria). It contains proverbs (c.f. the aphorisms of > Sextus [1]) with ref-

erences to the OT and the NT (in allegoric interpretations), influenced by Alexandrian theology (— Philo [I 12] [12], + Clemens [3]), Stoic-Cynic > diatribes and

Middle Platonic philosophy; there are also echoes of some gnostic motifs (+ Gnosis, Gnostics, Gnosticism).

Central to S.’ teaching is the paraenesis that outer and inner purity is to be achieved through the wisdom of Christ, and the forces of evil overcome. — Nag Hammadi Y. JANSSENS, Les Lecons de Silvanos, 1983; B.A. PEARson, Nag Hammadi Codex VII, 1996; R. VAN DEN BROEK, The Theology of the Teachings of S., in: Vigiliae Christianae 40, 1986, 1-23; J.ZANDEE, The Teachings of S.,

1991.

J.HO.

(3] Claudius (?, cf. ILS 748) S., son of the Frankish general Bonitus; initially, he served under > Magnentius as tribune in command of the armaturae (> Manoeuvres), but defected to > Constantius [2] II. on the eve of the battle of > Mursa in AD 351. In reward, despite his youth (Aur. Vict. Caes. 42,15), he was made magister militum. When he learned of the many intrigues against him at the imperial court, he had himself proclaimed emperor in Cologne in August 355. However, he was

471

472

outwitted by > Ursicinus who had been dispatched to Cologne, and was murdered after a reign of only four weeks (Aur. Vict. Caes. 42,16; Julian Ep. 273 d) by his own soldiers who had been bribed by Ursicinus (Amm.

Mountains’ of the Akkadian royal inscriptions). From the late 3rd millennium BC onwards silver was the regular and general standard of value in the exchange of goods in Western Asia. The fact that its purity could not immediately be tested was seen as a problem. Until the introduction of minted — money, silver as payment equivalent could take quite different external forms: bars (discs, rods, rings, etc.), threads or hack-silver; frequent finds of hoards are an indication of accumulation or storing for melting down again or recycling. In Egypt silver was worked into beads and amulets as early as the pre-Dynastic period. Silver objects from the Old Kingdom survive in relatively large numbers; the use of sheet silver is common. From the 11th Dynasty and even more from the 18th Dynasty silver is a frequently used precious metal for making — jewellery and other decorative objects, > mirrors and vessels (> Pottery). In later times silver was used even more often in Egypt. From the late period (roth cent. BC

SILVANUS

15,5,30-31; Zon. 13,9,24). B. BLECKMANN, S. und seine Anhanger in Italien, in: Ath-

enaeum 88, 2000, 477-483; PLRE 1, 840 f.

B.BL.

Silver I. DEFINITION

II. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW

II]. THE EXTRACTION

OF SILVER

I. DEFINITION Silver (4eybeov/argyrion, deyveoc/argyros; Latin argentum) is a precious metal, which in Antiquity was extracted primarily by smelting silver-bearing ores of lead. Four different kinds occur naturally: 1. as pure silver; 2. as silver ore; 3. as a component of galena, the only economically interesting ore of lead; 4. in alloy with — gold, i.e. as electrum (> Elektron), in which the gold content can amount to less than 30 %. Pure silver is rare and its surface corrodes, so that it does not play any role of note. Nevertheless, it cannot be ruled out that, before the discovery of how to extract silver from galena, silver objects were made from found pure silver or from silver-rich gold alloys. In the Mediterranean area there were only few productive deposits of silver-bearing ores: in Greece the island of —> Siphnus (Hdt. 3,57) and the region of + Laurium in Attica (Hdt. 7,144; Xen. Vect. 4; Str. 9,1,23), and in the west silver was mined primarily in southwestern Spain (Str. 3,2,3; 3,2,8-10; cf. also Diod. Sic. 5,3 5-38). Silver was worked only rarely in its pure form; alloys, primarily with — copper, gold and zinc were more common. Silver and silver alloys can be worked both by casting and by cold deformation (repoussage), so that in Antiquity they could be used in various ways for making decorative objects, vessels (— Pottery), statuettes and coins ( Coin production). II]. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW A. ANCIENT ORIENT B. PHOENICIA C. CELTO-GERMANIC AREAS D. GREECE E. ROME F. THE USE OF SILVER IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

onwards) even silver coffins have been found. In the rst

millennium BC silver working in the Near East particularly flourished in > Urartu; later (3rd—7th cents. AD) also among the > Sassanids. + Money 1 A.Luca, J.R.Harries, Ancient Egyptian Materials in Industries, 1962 2 J.MisHara, P.Meyers, Ancient Egyptian Silver, 1973, 29-45 3P.R.S. Moorey, Ancient Mesopotamian Materials in Industries, 1994, 232-

240 4C.C. Patterson, Native Copper, Silver and Gold Accessible to Early Metallurgists, in: American Antiquity 36, 1971, 286-321.

JOLR.

B. PHOENICIA

Since the late 2nd millennium BC silver had been of considerable significance to the economic development of the Phoenician cities and was pressingly needed not only as a raw material for making the Phoenician silver tableware that was highly prized as luxury goods in the East and the West, but also for tribute to the Neo-Assyrian Empire. The silver deposits in Etruria, on Sardinia and in southern Spain were a goal of Phoenician transMediterranean expansion [r]. + Colonization; > Phoenicians, Poeni 1 H.G. Niemeyer, The Early Phoenician City-States on the Mediterranean, in: M.H. Hansen (ed.), A Comparative Study of Thirty City-State Cultures (Kongelike Danske Videnskabernes Selskab, Hist.-fil. Skrifter 21),

A. ANCIENT ORIENT The earliest verified silver finds from the Ancient Orient are from the 4th millennium BC, e.g. a small

M.E. AuBet, Tiro y las colonias fenicias de Occidente, 1994, 78-84; J. FERNANDEZ JURADO, La metalurgia de la

silver ring from Beycesultan in western Anatolia or

plata en epoca tartésica, in: C.DOMERGUE (ed.), Mineria y

smaller sheet works from Tappe Sialk in Iran. From the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC silver objects were in use throughout the Near East. Rich finds recovered from the royal tombs of Ur from the middle of the 3rd millennium BC convey an impression of silver objects made in this period in the Ancient Orient. There were significant silver (and lead) ore deposits chiefly in Iran and in Anatolia (the Taurus Mountains are the ‘Silver

2000, 89-115, esp. 96-99.

metalurgia en las antiguas civilizaciones mediterraneas y europeas (Coloquio Madrid 1985), vol. 1, 1989,

157-164.

H.G.N.

C. CELTO-GERMANIC AREAS In contrast to > gold, in the Celtic areas silver played a subordinate role, e.g. because in Central Europe silver occurs only mineralized with > lead or > copper and

473

474

was not extracted intensively until the early Middle Ages. During the Celtic period (6th—1st cents. BC) silver was sporadically worked into rings and brooches, as well as occasional quite valuable silver vessels and other objects, e.g. a silver cup in the grave of a princess from

collected reliefed silver and as a praetor in Sicily unlawfiully appropriated a large number of vessels (Cic. Verr. 2,4,30-70). What significance table silver had as a status symbol is also shown by wall paintings in Pompeli, in which silver tableware is depicted (e.g. in the grave of C. Vestorius Rufus). For silver vessels by notable artists, extremely high prices were paid; L. Licinius [I 10] Crassus (cos. 95 BC), for instance, purchased two goblets from Mentor for 100,000 HS (Plin. HN 33,147). Some dishes had a weight of more than 100 librae/pounds (32.745 kg; Plin. HN 33,145); Silver tableware found in the house of Menander, which probably belonged to the Poppaei Sabini family, consisted of 118 pieces. Table silver therefore had considerable value and demonstrated the > wealth of a noble family. Rich treasure finds in + Pompeii and its environs, in Germania, the Germanic provinces and Britain (Pompeii, House of Menander: Naples, NM; Boscoreale: Paris, LV; Hildesheim > Silver hoards: Berlin, SM; Kaiseraugst Treasure, 4th cent. AD, cf. > Augusta [4] Raurica; Mildenhall Treasure, Suffolk, 4th cent. AD: London, BM) convey an impression of the high standard of processing silver for household utensils. Silver was also an important coinage metal for Rome; after 150 BC the silver > denarius became the Roman currency standard, which continued until the debasement of coins (-* Coins, debasement of) in the 3rd cent. AD and was not replaced by a gold coin (> Solidus) until under Constantinus [1] J. JOR.

+ Vix, the torque (— Torques) from Trichtingen and the > Gundestrup cauldron, each of which reveals its non-Celtic character and its origin in silver-rich Mediterranean and adjacent (Balkans, Iberian peninsula) regions. Typically Celtic silver coins more often come to light as southern Gaulish mintings in the 2nd/rst cents. BC. In the Germanic areas precious metal is altogether much rarer and silver and gold are more or less in balance. In addition to rings, brooches and chain jewellery, which were mostly made from Roman silver coins, in rich Germanic — princes’ tombs imported Roman silver vessels play an important part. +> Celtic Archaeology; + Germanic Archaeology; + Mining P. ROGGENBRUCK, Untersuchungen zu den Edelmetallfunden der rémischen Kaiserzeit zwischen Limes, Nord- und

Ostsee (British Archaeological Reports, International Ser. 449),

U.ZIMMERMANN

(ed.), Alter

Bergbau in Deutschland, 1993, esp. 16-20.

1988;

H.STEUER,

V.P.

D. GREECE The knowledge of silver and silver working reached Greece from the Near East and Anatolia in the 3rd millennium BC, with > Troy representing an important link to the cultures of the East. Rich finds of silver have survived from as early as Troy II (2300-2100 BC); from the Mycenaean period onwards the processing of silver spread farther in Greece. Until the rst millennium BC the influence of technological developments in the East and the importation of metal products from Asia Minor can still be traced here. In the first half of the rst millennium BC silver working distinctly increased, with a growing proportion of the silver mined being used for — minting from the late 6th cent. BC onwards. The most important denomination was the silver — drachme. E. ROME In Rome the working of silver reached a peak; in addition to the deposits in Spain numerous smaller deposits in the northwestern provinces, Sardinia, the Balkans and northern Africa were also mined. The techniques of working silver continue seamlessly from the Greek and Etruscan working of precious metals. From the 2nd cent. BC onwards reliefed silver tableware was among the — status symbols important to Roman nobility (Plin. HN 33,139-157; Tac. Ann. 3,53,4). At feasts the table silver was displayed to the guests (Cic. Verr. 2,4,33f.; > Table utensils), and Horatius [7] mentions explicitly the tableware prepared for a > banquet (Hor. Carm. 4,11,5 f.; Hor. Epist. 1,5,23 f.). If silver vessels were lacking in a senator’s household, this would be remarked on critically (Cic. Pis. 67). C. Verres

SILVER

F. THE USE OF SILVER IN CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

In Graeco-Roman Antiquity silver was used for gifts for the gods, jewellery, coinage metal and hoarding (— Silver hoards). Reworking and melting down were common; the material record is therefore uneven. In the Cycladic and Minoan/Mycenaean cultures vessels and parts of weapons were punched out of silver, damascened or decorated with niello. In accord with the account in Homer silver appears in Greece from the 8th cent. BC. Vessels and > mirrors of silver were common in private use from the Classical period. Predominantly, however, they were produced for sanctuaries, as inscriptional inventories (Delos) record. There was an increase in silver utensils in the Hellenistic period, primarily at rulers’ courts. Under the influence of Hellenism, silver was increasingly used in Rome from the 2nd cent. BC. In Martial and Plin. HN 33 there are copious notes on the art collecting trade in works of Greek — toreutics and forgeries. In addition to figuratively decorated vessels, appliques for furnishings, > lamps, candelabra and toiletry items appear. Three-dimensional silver sculpture is quite frequently mentioned in literature; from the Imperial period few portraits or statuettes have been preserved. In the societies of Late Antiquity the prestige and negotiable value of silver increased, resulting in the accumulation of — Silver hoards. Churches also accumulated hoards of silver liturgical inventory. There has been little study of the location of workshops; in Gaul local sites of production

SILVER

475

476

can be identified, in Asia Minor and Syria they are documented in written sources. The techniques varied with the style of decoration; in the Hellenistic and early Imperial periods figurative decoration was worked in embossed appliques (— crustae), in the 2nd—3rd cents. AD cast in reliefs and chased. In the late Imperial period the niello technique and colouring effects were developed. + Metallurgy

B. ASSAYS Numerous assays provide information on the com-

M.CaGIANO

DE AZEVEDO,

s. v. argento, EAA

1, 1958,

621-623; C. VERMEULE, Greek and Roman Sculpture in Gold and Silver, 1974; H.A. CaHNn, A. KAUFMANNHEINIMANN, Der spatromische Silberschatz von Kaiseraugst, 1984; G. CLarK, Symbols of Excellence. Precious Materials as Expressions of Status, 1986; F.BARATTE (ed.), Argenterie romaine et byzantine (Actes de la table ronde, Paris 1983), 1988; L.Prrzio BiROLI STEFANELLI, L’argento dei Romani. Vasellame da tavola e d’apparato, 1991; F.BARATTE, s. v. argento, EAA Secondo suppl., 1, 1994, 382-388; J.-M. Carrié (ed.), L’argenterie romaine de l’antiquité tardive (Table ronde, London 1995 = Antiquité tardive 5), 1997, 25-167; H.-H.v. PRITTWITzZ UND

GaAFFRON, H. MIELSCH (eds.), Das Haus lacht vor Silber (Exhibition Rheinisches Landesmuseum Bonn), 1997.

RN. II. THE EXTRACTION A. Process

OF SILVER

B. Assays

A. PROCESS Lead ore from > Laurium contains about 1-4 kg a tonne (= 0.1-0.4 %) of silver. Silver can be extracted from lead ore by cupellation. For this the lead sulphide ore was roasted by heating to convert it to lead oxide. The lead oxide was reduced to metallic lead with charcoal. To extract the silver this > lead was reoxidized by heating it under a flow of air. The lead oxide, which floats on molten lead, was skimmed off or absorbed by the porous materials of the furnace; in this way the silver became concentrated in the molten lead. The process was continued until all the lead had been removed and pure silver remained. In the Greek period this separation procedure was still not perfected, so that in the Roman period the material of old slag heaps could be smelted again to extract the silver (Str. 9,1,23). Silver was also extracted from silver ores by sucha cupellation process, by mixing the silver ore with lead ores. Furnaces used for smelting silver-bearing lead ores have survived in large numbers in Laurium, southern Spain, the Pyrenees and in Britain. Silver could be worked by casting according to the usual method, in a cold state in sheets or threads, or minted into coins. In the early period silver was added in high proportion to > copper; from the Roman period onwards high proportions of zinc can also be detected; in this case the silver was not being alloyed with pure copper but with brass. The processes used in Antiquity for extracting silver are presented in detail in Pliny (Plin. HN. 33,95-110; 33,126-157).

position of ancient silver objects. Alloys are pronouncedly heterogeneous, since besides objects of almost pure silver there are all sorts of electrum (> Elektron), i.e. blends of silver and gold, up to pure + gold. In addition to alloys of silver with gold there are alloys with copper, in which the copper content can amount to as muchas 25%. Here there is no connexion between the kind of object or the place or time of production and the composition of the silver alloy. In the Greek areas various kinds of electrum with a limited proportion of copper are usual. In Roman hoards the silver is relatively pure with a copper content of 5s—10%, exceptionally up to 15%. The gold content is less than 2%. Occasionally the amount of lead remaining in the silver after the smelting process is as much as 1-2%. In late Antiquity there are silver objects with an extremely high copper content of up to 60% and sometimes an unusually high zinc content of up to 15%, which therefore hardly consist of silver. There are numerous assays of ancient coins; they provide important information on the origin of the coinage metal and the debasement of coins (+ Coins, debasement of) primarily in the Roman Principate. Analysis of lead isotopes has also yielded important indications of ancient sites of silver deposits and the silver trade. -» Coin production; > Lead; > Metallurgy; > Mineral resources; +> Mining; > Money, money economy 1B. ANDREAE, ROmische 2 BLUMNER, Techn. 4,

Kunst, 28-38;

1973, fig. 291-309 142-162; 302-321

3 C. DOMERGUE, Les mines de la péninsule ibérique dans Pantiquité romaine, 1990 ©=4.J. F. Hearty, Mining and Metallurgy in the Greek and Roman World, 1978 5 L.KerscuHac1, Silber, 1961 6 G.Lupwic, G. WERMuscH, Silber. Aus der Geschichte eines Edelmetalls,

1986 7J.RAmMiIN, La technique miniére et métallurgique des Anciens, 1977 (coll. Latomus 153), 145-158 8 J.RIEDERER, Archaologie und Chemie, 1987, 91-98 9 D.SHERLOCK, Silver and Silversmithing, in: STRONG/ BROWN, 11-23 10 E.Simon, Augustus: Kunst und Leben in Rom um die Zeitenwende, 1986, 139-150.

JO.R.

Silver hoards. Compound hoards composed predominantly of ancient silver objects. As treasure these were hidden to protect them from theft or plundering (known as hoarding). As grave goods or thesauroi in sanctuaries or church treasures the treasure was collected and deposited in fact or ideally as an investment. In the private domain at all times and generally it acted simultaneously as both house contents and an investment. SH were predominantly composed of valuable eating and drinking utensils. Their importance to scholarship lies in possibilities of dating items, which are mostly of high artistic value, and their power to express the history of economic and trade activity. Particularly in Late Antiquity, because of a heightened need for security and to achieve more stable capitalization, the deposits of treasure, and therefore the silver finds in-

477

478

crease. From the 5th cent. AD, late antique silver is often provided with an Imperial control stamp, is accompanied by ingots and minted gold or is worked into hack-silver. > Silver

Silvester. Bishop of Rome (31 January 314-31 December 335; the anniversary of his death is still named after him), probably a confessor in the persecution under + Diocletianus. He received written communication of the resolutions of the first synod of Constantine

umned buildings, the sima was a favourite location for architectural decoration; it is part of the roof and has no essential static function. Initially — probably in the tradition of wooden buildings — terracotta simae were predominant; they were superimposed on the supporting architecture. Simae were used to display splendour in a lavish manner, both figuratively and ornamentally, in relief and coloration (— Polychromy), especially in western Greece (e.g. at the temples of > Metapontum and — Paestum and the Treasury of Gelon at > Olympia), but also in Greece proper (e.g. > Thermus). Even on archaic stone buildings, the sima was sometimes made from marble and richly painted (— Athens II.r., ancient Temple of Athena), as was usual from the 4th cent. BC onwards. The waterspouts are for the most part in the form of lions’ heads and belong to > architectural sculpture; in terms of definition and building technique the > akroterion belongs to the sima.

(> Constantinus [1] I) in Arles (1 August 314; > Syn-

— Ornaments III.; > Column

E. CRUIKSHANK DopD, s. v. tesori, EAA 7, 1966, 753760; H. A. Cann, A. KAUFMANN-HEINIMANN, Der spatro-

mische Silberschatz von Kaiseraugst, 1984; F. BARATTE, s. v. argento, EAA Suppl. 2.1, 1994, 382-388; K.HiTzy (ed.), Der Hildesheimer Silberschatz. Exhibition Freiburg, 1998; M.A. GuGGIsBERG, Der Goldschatz von Erstfeld, 2000.

R.N.

odos II.); in ita Roman bishop is addressed for the first time as papa. Under S. the churches of Saint John Lateran and of Saint Peter came into being. He sent to the Synod of Nicaea [5] (325) only two priests (Vito/Victor and Vincentius). S. gained historical significance in legends: in the first half of the 5th century the Actus Silvestri (with a later appendix) appeared in Rome, their author claiming for S. the conversion and baptism of Constantine. The Actus Silvestri are also the basis for the Constitutum

Constantini (‘Donation of Constan-

tine’) of before c. 760. TH. BOuM, s.v. S., LThK? 9, 587.

S.L.-B.

Silvius. Son of > Lavinia [2] and > Aeneas [1] (Verg. Aen. 6,760-766), who at the time of S.’ birth is very old (ibid. 6,763-764) or already dead (Gell. NA 2,16,310). Lavinia has to flee from Ascanius (> Iulus) into the woods. There S. is born and raised by shepherds. After the death of Ascanius, S. prevails in a popular vote against Ascanius’ son Iulus and becomes king of > Alba Longa (Diod. Sic. 7,5,8; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1,70,1-3; Origo gentis Romanae 17,4). The birth in the forest is also mentioned in Verg. Aen. 6,765; Liv. 1,3,6; Ov. Fast. 4,41. The shepherd Tyrrhus is named as his tutor (Serv. Aen. 6,760; Origo gentis Romanae 16,1). S. is also sometimes considered to be the son of Iulus (Ov. Fast. 4,41-42) or of Ascanius (Liv. 1,3,6). His son and successor is Aeneas (Verg. Aen. 6,769; Liv. 1,3,7; Diod. Sic. 7,5,8), but according to others > Latinus [2] (Ov. Fast. 4,43; Ov. Met. 14,611) or Tiberius (Origo gentis Romanae 18,1). All later kings of Alba Longa bear the cognomen S. (Verg. Aen. 6,763; Liv. 1,3,8). Sima (eaves). Upturned edge of the roof (together with the waterspouts needed to carry water off the roof) of a Greek columned building on the slopes of the pediment and the long sides of the roof. The name is recorded as a Latin technical term in Vitruvius (3,5,12 et passim) [1; 2]. In archaic architecture, particularly in Doric col-

1 EBERT, 43-45 (with sources)

SIMA QIAN

2 H.Noutz, Index Vitru-

vianus, 1876, 121s. v. S.

J.F. BoMMELAER, Simas et gargouilles classiques de Delphes, in: BCH 102, 1978, 173-197; P. DANNER, Figuren an Sima-Ecken, in: J.Des Courti1, J.C. Moretti (Eds.),

Les grands ateliers d’architecture dans le monde égéen du VIF siécle a. J. C. (Congr. Istanbul 1991), 1993, 253-260; E.Hostetrer, Lydian Architectural Terracottas, 1994;

M. Mertens-Horn, Die Loéwenkopf-Wasserspeier des griechischen Westens im 6. und 5.Jahrhundert v. Chr., 1988; W.H. SCHUCHHARDT, Die Sima des Alten AthenaTempels der Akropolis, in: MDAI(A) 60/61, 1935/36, 1-111; W. von Sypow, Spathellenistische Stuckgesimse in Sizilien, in: MDAI(R) 86, 1979, 181-231; N.A. WINTER (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Greek Architectural Terracottas of the Classical and Hellenistic Periods (Hesperia Suppl. 27), 1994; Id., Greek Architectural Terracottas from the Prehistoric to the End of the Archaic Period, 1993; C. WIKANDER, Sicil-

ian Architectural Terracottas. A Reappraisal, 1986; U. WaLLaT, Ornamentik auf Marmor-Simas des griechischen Mutterlandes, 1997. C.HO.

Sima Qian (Sima Oian). C. 145 — c. 85 BC, author of the first Chinese dynastic history, the Shiji, which contains, primarily in chapter 123, important information on central Asia and Iran (e.g. on the decline of the Graeco-Bactrian kingdom and characteristics of the Parthian Empire). S. was born in Longmen (modern province of Shanxi, near Chang’an, the capital of the time). After early travels through the whole Empire he later held office at the court of the Han emperor Wu (140-87 BC) as court astrologer and as such had access to the archives and the imperial library. In 104 BC, he and others put their names to a calendar reform which remained in force until the beginning of the 2oth cent. AD. Temporarily fallen into disgrace, from 96 BC S. held the post of ‘Supervisor of Palace Scribes’. In his work, a mostly annalistic overview of Chinese history from the mythical period until the reign of the emperor Wu, there are also tables of fiefdoms and offices, treat-

479

480

ises On music, rites, calendar systems, sacrifices, river

Simia (Greek forms i.a. Znueta/Sémeia, Lnuéa/Seméa, Liwa/Sima, Aramaic smy’), in the past often interpreted as a Syrian goddess, is the deified divine standard of ancient Oriental origin, usually with a crescent moon at the top, often assimilated to Roman signa. The etymology could be Aramaic [1] but the word was linked to Greek onuetov/sémeion (sign, standard) early on. Lucianus (De Syria Dea 33) describes the Séméion of Hierapolis [2]/> Bambyce, where it is placed, as in

SIMA QIAN

and canal regulation and economics, as well as genealogies of the most important princely families and biographies of outstanding personalities (including nonChinese ones). + Graeco-Bactria 1 W.Poscu, Baktrien zwischen Griechen und Kuschan,

1995, 53-100.

JW.

Simaristus (Lywice.otoc; Simdristos). Alexandrian from a respected family extending back to the 3rd century BC; in 58 BC he led an Alexandrian — hetairia against Ptolemaeus [18] XII (Dion Chrys. Or. 32,70). F. ZUCKER, Zwagrotevot, in: Philologus ror, 1957, 164166,

W.A.

+ Dura-Europus, between Atargatis (> Syria Dea) and Hadad (relief, coins). S. is identified (i.a.) with Sin/Dionysus (Harrjust an) and Barmaren. 1H.J. W. Drivers, Cults and Beliefs at Edessa, 1980, 90-96 2 W.FauTH, s. v. S., RE Suppl. 14, 679-701 3 J.Tupacn, Im Schatten des Sonnengottes, 1986, 184-

209.

K.KE.

Simias (Susiac/Simias) or Simmias (Zypiac/Simmias) of

Simbruinus ager. Territory (Frontin. Aq. 15,1) of the ~» Aequi at the foot of the colles Simbruini (Tac. Ann. 11,13,2) in the valley of the upper Anio which was blocked by reservoir dams to create the “stagna Simbruina” (“the Simbruine Lake”, Tac. Ann. 14,22; cf. Sil. Pun. 8,368 f.) for Nero’s villa at Sublaqueum (modern

Subiaco). M.G. Fiore CAVALIERE, Sublaqueum — Subiaco, 1994.

G.U.

Simeon Stylites (yuewv Vrvditync/Simeon Stylités). Syrian ascetic and first of the > stylites, b. at > Sisium in Cilicia, d. AD 459. S. first became a monk at the monastery of Eusebona near Tall ‘Ada (between > Antioch [1] and + Beroea [3]/Aleppo), but his ascetic practices did not endear him to the other monks, and eventually he moved to nearby Telanissus, where he took up a life on top of a pillar. This was increased in height as his extraordinary lifestyle attracted more and more visitors and pilgrims from all walks of life who came to consult him. After his death, a large pilgrimage church with baptistery was built (AD 476-490) around his column, and much of the building is still standing (Qal‘at Sim‘an). It is disputed whether or not the inspiration for his stylite life came from the phallobatai at Hierapolis [2]/> Bambyce (Lucian. Syr. D. 29). His life is rather well documented: a contemporary account is given by + Theodoretus [1] (Theod. Historia religiosa 26); a Greek account of unknown date is attributed to his disciple Antonius, and a Syrian panegyric in three recensions was written before 473. A few short texts claim his authorship. S. should be distinguished from Simeon Stylites the Younger (6th cent.), whose pillar and monastery was on the mons Admirabilis, a little to the west of Antioch. H.LietzMann, Das Leben des heiligen S. Stylites, 1908;

R.Doran, The Lives of S. Stylites, 1992; D.STIERNON, Bibliotheca Sanctorum 11, 1979, 1116-1138; M. GEERARD, CPG 3, 1979, 6640-6650. S.BR.

Rhodes, Alexandrian poet and grammarian c. 300 BC (Suda s.v. =. ‘Podi0s). Among his most important works are the [A@ooaV/Gléssai (‘Glosses’, 3 books) and a collection of poetry (Moujpata Siadoga/Poiémata didphora, 4 books), both surviving in only few fragments. S. is considered to be the inventor of > technopaignia and several lyric metres. For his explanations in his ‘Glosses’ of difficult poetic passages Str. 14,655 describes him as a grammatikos. The poetry collection shows S. as a typical Alexandrian scholar, playing with metres and genres and making use of an artificial Doric dialect and an affected style [6. 243-250]. Among the 30 fragments, besides an equestrian poem there are two aetiological poems, probably in elegiac metre: Gorgo (Toey®/Gorgo) and the Months (Mfjvec/Ménes). The epic Apollo (Ax6)\Awv/Apollon), a coherent piece of 13 hexameters (preserved in Tzetz. Chil. 7,687-699) describes a phantastical journey by the narrator to fabulous islands and peoples [5; 2. 257-260]. Presumably because of their novel metre [7. 112] the initial verses of several hymns have survived. The three technopaignia preserved in Anth. Pal. 15,22, 24 and 27, Axe (Iléhexuc/Pélekys), Egg (Qu6v/ Oién) [3] and Pair of wings (Itegvyvov/Pterygion) [1. 58-74; 9. 67-89], represent a group within the collection forming its own genre in which the subject is depicted by the arrangement of the verses. To this end S. created a new, mixed metre (Hephaestion [4], Metre 9,4) [1. 50; 6. 218; 4. 145, 151 f.]. The technopaignia contain Orphic ideas, although the suggestion that taken together they form a triptych of an Orphic cosmogony [8. 87-90] is problematic [x. 73 f.]. — Glossography BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1 U.ErRnstT, Carmen Figuratum, 1991

2 R. MERKELBACH, Uber zwei epische Papyri, in: Aegyptus 31, 1951, 254-260 31d.,S.’ Ei 1-4, in: MH 10, 1953, 68-69 4M.L. West, Greek Metre, 1982 5 H.WuiTE,

On a Fragment of Simias of Rhodes, in: Corolla Londiniensis 2, 1982, 173-184 6 U.voN WiLaAMowiITz-MOELLENDOREFF, Textgeschichte der griechischen Bukoliker, 1906 7Id., Hellenische Dichtung, vol. 1, 1924 8 G. WoyaczeEK, Bucolica Analecta, in: WJA 5, 1979, 81— 90 69 Id., Daphnis, 1969.

481

482

SIMON

EDITIONS: H.FRANKEL, De Simia Rhodio, 1915; E.Dient, Anthologia Lyrica Graeca, vol. 2, 1942, 140—

in Ath. 14,620d). According to Aristocles, simdidia was a newer term for hilardidia (Ath. loc.cit.), which had

157; CollAlex 109-120; SH 906.

become popular with some because of the fame of Simus in comparison to earlier hilardidoi. It is related by Strabo to lysididia (‘play with female characters in male attire’) and magoidia (‘rude pantomime’; Str. loc.cit.; cf. Ath. 14,620e) as well as to kinaidologein

MB.

Simitthus. City in Africa Proconsularis (Plin. HN 5,29; Ptol. 4,3,293 It. Ant. 43,3; Tab. Peut. 4,5) in the valley of the Bagradas to the southwest of > Bulla Regia, modern Chemtou in Tunisia; famous for its marble quarries (Plin. HN 5,22; 35,3; 36,49; Isid. Orig. 16,5,16). After

148 BC > Micipsa built at S. a hilltop sanctuary for his father > Massinissa, which in the Roman Period was converted to a temple of — Saturnus. Archaeology:

many finds from the Numidian and Punic Periods (e.g. about 300 rock reliefs), for the most part unpublished. From the time of Augustus onwards S. was Colonia Iulia Augusta Numidica (CIL VIII 1, 1261; Suppl. 1, 14559; 14611 f.; 3,22196 f.). Inscriptions: CIL VIII 1, 1261-1265; 2567f.; 2, 10592-10601; Suppl. 1, 14551-14685; 2, 18068; 3, 22195-22203; 4, 25629-

25701; [1; 2] AE 1957, 66; 1979, 673; 1989, 882; 1991, 1681; 1992, 1820-1824; 1994, 1848-1886; RIL

YOR GPA, 1 Bulletin Archéologique du Comité des Travaux Historiques,

1928-1929,

2 A.MeRLIN

380;

1932-1933,

(ed.), Inscriptions

Latines

476

and

509

de la Tunisie,

1944, 1254. AATun 050, plate 31, Nr. 70;

(‘talk of obscene things’); cf. Ath. 14,620e-621b, where iénika poiemata are also discussed. In more recent scholarship, these genres have been classified as — mime [5. 231-237; 2. 5]. With the possible exception of a paraklausithyron fragment [2. 36-38], nothing of this sub-literary lyric verse survives. Athenaeus gives some information on its performance (14,620¢e; 621 b-d); furthermore, Aristoxenus [1] comments that “hilarOidia, since it is serious (semme), stands alongside (pard) tragedy, and magoidia alongside comedy” (Ath. 14,621C), which gave rise to speculation on its content and style [3. 68-70; 6. 230-232; 2. 6]. 1 A. BarKER, Greek Musical Writings, vol. 1, 1986, 278280 21.CUNNINGHAM (ed.), Herodas, Mimiambi, 1971 3 E.HILLer, Zu Athenaeus, in: RhM 30, 1875, 68-78 4P. Maas, s. v. Syuwmdot, RE 3 A, 159-160 5 H.REICH, Der Mimus, vol. 1, 1903 (reprint 1974) 6U.v. WiLa-

MowlITz, Des Madchens Klage, in: Nachrichten von der kéniglichen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu G6ttingen, 1986, 209-232.

RO.HA.

A.BESCHAOUCH et al., S.,

vol. 1, 1993; F.Rakos, S., vol. 2, 1994; Id., Chemtou, in: Antike Welt 28, 1997, 1-20; Id., F.Kraus, Chemtou, in: DU-Die Zeitschrift fur Kunst und Kultur 39, 1979.3, 48-

54 and 60; J.-M. LassERE, Remarques sur le peuplement de la colonia Iulia Augusta Numidica S., in: AntAfr 16, 1980, 27-44; E. LipPINskI, s.v. Chemtou, DCPP, 103 f.

W.HU.

Simmias (=uias). [1] S. from Thebes. Friend of > Socrates [2] (Plat. Crit. 45b; Plat. Phdr. 242b; Xen. Mem. 1,2,48; 3,11,17); he and his companion > Cebes were Socrates’ main interlocutors in Plato’s Phaidon. According to Plat. Phd. 61de, before his stay in Athens S. met the Pythagorean + Philolaus [2] in Thebes, but he himself was not a Pythagorean [1]. Plutarchus [2] has the conversation which is central to his work The Daimonion of Socrates (Ilegi tot Lwxedtovs Sawmoviov/Peri tou Sokrdtous dat-

moniou) take place in Thebes at the house of S., who is suffering from an injury. The assertion that S. accompanied Plato on his Egyptian journey can be attributed to the Plato legend (Plut. De genio Socratis 7,578f). In Diog. Laert. 2,124 the titles of 23 dialogues written by S. are enumerated. 1 TH. EBERT, Sokrates als Pythagoreer und die Anamnesis in Platons ‘Phaidon’, in: AAWM 1994 Nr. 13, 8-10. KD.

[2] S. of Rhodes. See > Simias.

Simodia (owwédio/simoidia). A Hellenistic genre of ‘low’ lyric poetry, named after its most important representative, Simus of Magnesia (Str. 14,1,41; Aristocles

Simois (woes). Tributary of the + Scamander in the Troas, modern River Diimrek. The plain formed by this river was where the battles for Troy took place (cf. Hom. Il. 4,475). W. Lear, Strabo on the Troad, 1923, 158-164, 173-1773 J.M. Cook, The Troad, 1973, s.v. S.; J.V. Luce, Die Landschaften Homers, 1999, s. v. S. E.SCH.

Simon (Zipwwv/Simon). [1] Sculptor in bronze from Aegina. S. participated with a horse and a charioteer in the votive offerings dedicated by Phormis at Olympia; accordingly, his period of artistic activity is around 480-460 BC. The base which belonged to it has been identified. A dog and an archer by S. (Plin. HN 34,90) probably formed a further group. OVERBECK, nos. 402, 437; M. Zuppa, s.v. S. 2, EAA 7, 1966, 315; F.Ecxste1n, Anathemata, 1969, 43-49; E. WaALTER-KarRYpDI, Die Aginetische Bildhauerschule,

1987, 39-43. RN. [2] Author of a text [egi immxtice/Peri hippikés, which

Xenophon used for his own account of > horsemanship. According to Xenophon, S. had the bronze statue of a horse put up in the Eleusinion in Athens; his achievements were recorded on its base (Xen. Eq. 1,1). The question whether the author and the S. mentioned in Aristophanes (Aristoph. Equ. 242) are one and the same is unlikely to be resolved. As S. criticized the painter + Micon on account of his depiction of a horse’s eye, the work can be dated to between c. 450 BC and c. 365

483

484

BC. Still extant is the beginning, in which he deals with the appearance ofa horse suitable for riding. Xenophon

paigns (1 Macc 5,17-23; 9,64-69; 11,65 f.; 12,38), he

SIMON

quotes S. in the section about the hooves (Xen. Eq. 1,3),

and agrees with the fundamental statement that a horse should never be treated cruelly during its training, for what a horse does under constraint it does without grace (ot xaAd/ou kald) (Xen. Eq. 11,6). K. Wippra (ed.), Xenophons Reitkunst, 1965, 9-15.

H.SCHN.

[3] S. the shoemaker. Diog. Laert. 2,122-123 reports that S. had kept a record of the conversations which he had held with > Socrates [2] during the latter’s visits to his workshop. S. wrote the ‘shoemaker dialogues’, which arose out of these conversations, and Diog. Laert. 2,122-123 names 30 titles of such dialogues. S. was the title character of one of the two dialogues of ~ Phaedo of Elis. The workshop of a shoemaker named S., which was discovered some time ago on the edge of the Athenian Agora, might have been that of Socrates’ friend [3]. Ep1Tion: 1SSR VIB 87-93. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 2F.Hock, S. the Shoemaker as an Ideal Cynic, in: GRBS 17, 1976, 41-53 (also in: M. BrtLERBECK (ed.), Die Kyniker in der modernen Forschung,

1991,259-271) 3D.B.THompson, The House ofS. the Shoemaker, in: Archaeology 13, 1960, 234-240. K.D.

[4] He was the commander of his brother-in-law’s army, the Thracian hereditary ruler Amadocus [2], and was awarded Attic citizenship. In the 360s BC, he and Bianor helped Amadocus to defend his part of the kingdom, whilst + Berisades and > Cersobleptes were supported by Athenodorus [1] and Charidemus [2] (Dem. Or. 23, 10;i2s 17-3923. Sonn89)):

UP.

[5] Two > Zadokid high priests at the temple of Jerusalem, by the name of S., are documented in Josephus: S.J (Jos. Ant. Iud. 12,2,5; beginning of the 3rd cent. BC) and S.II (Jos. Ant. Iud. 12,4,10; end of the 3rd cent. BC), the son of Onias [1] I. The epithet of ‘just’, conferred on S. Lin Josephus, is probably intended for S.II, who was on the side of the > Seleucids in the Ptolemaic-Seleucid conflicts. After the victory of Antiochus [5] III (198 BC) the Seleucids rewarded this conduct i.a. with pro-Jewish decrees. In competition with the Hellenistic family of the > Tobiads who had influence over matters relating to economic policy, S. succeeded in bestowing greater political importance once again upon the office of high priest by means of a coalition with the conservative factions. His period in office is described extremely positively in the book of > Sirach (cf. also 3 Macc 2,1; Mischna Avot 1,2). 1 M.HENGEL, Judentum und Hellenismus, 31988, 44-49, 492-495 2J.NEuSNER, The Rabbinic Traditions about the Pharisees before 70, vol. 1, 1971, 24-59 3 SCHURER

1,359 f.

LWA.

[6] Brother of the Jewish high priest Jonathan (> Hasmonaeans, with stemma) and his successor 143-135

BC. As a proven commander of the Maccabees’ camwas appointed as the Seleucids’ strategos of the Palestinian coastal plain in 145 BC by > Antiochus [8] VI. In 143 BC, the Jewish national assembly appointed him as Jonathan’s successor after the latter was taken prisoner and murdered by Diodotus Tryphon. He renewed the alliance with Rome (x Macc 14,16-24; 15,16-24; Jos. Ant. Iud. 14,145-148: the dating and authenticity of the documents are disputed) and transferred his allegiance to > Demetrius [8] II. The freedom from taxation, granted by the latter, gave rise to the start of an era of freedom for the Jews in 143/2 BC (1 Macc 13,41f.). S. conquered Gazara and the Seleucid stronghold of Akra in Jerusalem (May 141 BC). On the basis of his successes the Jewish national assembly confirmed his office in Aug./Sept. 140 BC, ‘until a faithful prophet should arise’ (x Macc 14,27-49). After Demetrius II was taken prisoner by the Parthians, his brother > Antiochus [9] VII Sidetes renewed the concessions of his predecessor in 139/8 BC, however he retracted them when he gained the upper hand over the usurper Diodotus Tryphon, and demanded the return of Ioppe, Gazara and Akra as well as taxes for areas outside Judaea, or rather a high lump-sum redemption. However, when the demand was rejected, the attempt to implement it by force failed. At the beginning of 135 BC, S. and his two sons were murdered in the proximity of Jericho by his son-in-law Ptolemy [57], who wanted to take his place. Sources: 1 Macc 13,31-16,22; Jos. Ant. lud. 13,194-229. SCHURER I, 189-199.

K.BR.

[7] S. ben Setah. Important representative of the Jewish Pharisees (1st cent. BC; + Pharisaei), belonging to one of the so-called ‘five pairs’ (zugot; cf. mAvot 1,18) in the rabbinic chain of tradition which hands down the Law of Moses (-> Pentateuch). §. appears as the opponent of Alexander [16] Iannaeus (103-76 BC), who pursued the Pharisees and had many of them killed. Whilst some Pharisees fled to Egypt, $. was hidden by the queen + Alexandra Salome, who is said to have been his sister (bSan 107b). S. is supposed to have finally restored the Torah again (probably according to Pharisaic exegesis) and thus introduced a period of prosperity (bQid 66a). Tradition credits him with the establishment of schools. M.HENGEL, Rabbinische Legende und friihpharisdische Geschichte Schimeon ben Schetach und die achtzig Hexen von Askalon, 1984.

B.E.

[8] S. Magus. According to Acts 8,9-24 S. ‘the Magician’ performed miracles in > Samaria and was worshipped as “the power that is called great” (Aramaic hl; is masculine). He was baptised by the deacon Philip and wanted to buy from — Peter the ability to confer the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands (hence the act of paying for a position in the Church is described as ~ simony). Justin [6] (or his source) mistakenly equates him with the god Semo > Sancus Dius; he says that S.’s

485

486

followers regarded him as the ‘first god’ and his companion Helena as the god’s ‘first thought’ (é2noia) (Justin. Apol. 1,26). In Irenaeus [2] S. becomes the prime father of all heretics: according to his teaching,

Simonides (Zuwwvidnc/Simonides). [1] (the iambographic poet) see Semonides [2] Greek lyric poet, 6th/5th cents. BC I. Lire

the émnoia, in accordance with the will of the father,

ANTIQUITY

created the angels and powers which brought the world into being, but has been captured by them and even enclosed in a human body, e.g. as Helen of Troy; she ends up ina brothel and is freed by S. In Samaria he has appeared as the Father, in Judaea as the Son and to everyone else as the Holy Ghost (Iren. Adv. haereses 1,23,1-4; cf. Tert. De anima 34). Hippolytus [2] quotes the Apophasis megdlé (or a paraphrase of the same), which S. allegedly wrote (Hippolytus, Refutatio 6,918).

These sources do not offer an insight into the historical person; they merely testify that Christian and heretic groups in the 2nd cent. have linked their cosmogonic Redeemer myth with the figure of $. who was worshipped in Samaria as a miracle worker and now took the place of Christ (in the 3rd cent., Origen’s Contra Celsum 1,57 knows of only very few Simonians in Palestine). In the apocryphal Acts of the Apostles (Acta Petri, > Pseudo-Clementine Literature) S. appears as a charlatan and opponent of the Apostles: his flight over Rome is ended by Peter’s prayer. — Gnosticism; > Heresy R. BERGMEIER, Die Gestalt des S. Magus, in: ZNTW

77,

1986, 267-275; K. BEYSCHLAG, S. Magus und die christliche Gnosis, 1974; J. FRICKEL, Die ‘Apophasis Megale’ in Hippolyts Refutatio 6,9-18, 1968; G. LUDEMANN, Untersuchungen zur simonianischen Gnosis, 1975; K.Ru-

DOLPH, S. — Magus oder Gnosticus, in: Theologische Rundschau 42, 1978, 279-359. J-HO.

[9] S. bar Giora (Aramaic ‘son of a > proselyte’; 6 tod Tiwea/ho tou Gidra, Jos.; Cass. Dio 66,7,1: Bagyweas/

Bargioras; Tac. Hist. 5,12: Bargiora, falsely with proper name Johannes). One of the most radical leaders of the + Zealots (Jos. BI 2,251; 652ff.; books 4-6 passim) in the Jewish-Roman War (AD 66-74). From AD 68 onwards, S., as the leader of bands of rapacious looters, had the land to the south of Jerusalem under his control and ruled from the spring of AD 69 alongside Johannes [2] of Gishala and Eleazarus [11] in Jerusalem. He was taken prisoner there in AD 70 after the destruction of the city and the temple and in AD 71 was executed in Rome during the triumph of Titus and Vespasian (Jos. BI 7,154). Messianic ambitions were typical of S.; these must be understood in the context of the social upheaval in Palestine under Roman rule. Amongst his followers were freed slaves and peasants, but also “an impressive amount of citizens who obeyed him as a king” (Jos. BI. 4,510). 1 S. Fuxs, Some Remarks on S. bar Giora, in: Scripta Classica Israelica 8-9, 1985-1988, 106-119

2R.HORSLEY,

J.S. Hanson, Bandits, Prophets and Messiahs. Popular Movements at the Time of Jesus, 1985 3 SCHURER I, 499-510. LWA.

SIMONIDES

I. Worxs

II]. REPUTATION IN

I. LIFE S. was born in Ioulis on > Ceos [1], the son of

Leoprepes, uncle of > Bacchylides. Of the two birth dates given in the Suda — the 56th Olympiad (556/553 BC) and the 62nd Olympiad (532/529 BC), the earlier is generally accepted. According to the Suda, S. died in the 78th Olympiad (468/465 BC) at the age of 89. His tomb was shown at Acragas (Sicily) (Callim. fr. 64,4). His most securely datable work is from the period of the > Persian Wars. According to PI. Hipparch. 228b-c and [Aristot.] Ath. pol. 18,1, it was > Hipparchus [1], the son of Peisistratus, who brought S. and > Anacreon [r] to Athens. It was supposedly thanks to S.’s presence on Sicily that > Hieron [1] l of Syracuse became reconciled with > Theron of Acragas in the 470s (Pind. Ol. 29d = Tim. FGrH 566 F 936). Anecdotes also connect S. with Themistocles and Thessalian dynasties (esp. the > Scopadae and the > Aleuadae). Il. Works S. is the only one in the Alexandrian > canon of nine

lyric poets for whom no exact number of books is given. The Suda speaks of dirges (thrénoi), encomia, epigrams, tragedies and ‘other works’. No trace of tragedies survives, or of the dithyrambs with which S. won 57 victories (cf. Anth. Pal. 6,213). We know in adition that he wrote epinician poetry, hymns (576; 589 PMG), a propemptikon (580 PMG), ‘prayers’ or ‘curses’ (Rateuchai,

5373 538 PMG) and probably elegies for performance at symposia (19-33 IEG, vol. 2). Mention of a category called ‘compound’ or ‘miscellaneous’ (symmikta, 540 PMG) seems to indicate Alexandrian confusion in the classification. S. wrote Epicinian — odes for victors in

the games (506-519 PMG; — epinikion). The fragments show frequent reference to the > Dioscuri and ~ Heracles [1]. An anecdote in Cic. De or. 2,86,351353 and Quint. Inst. 11,2,11-16 (= 510 PMG) further emphasizes the importance of the Dioscuri in S.’ praisepoetry, though the purpose of the story is to emphasize the mnemonic skill for which S. was famous. Sources emphasize that S. was the first poet to write for a fee (Schol. Pind. I.2,9a): he was a paid professional, composing upon commissions from his patrons.

The two longest surviving passages of S.’ works (542; 543 PMG) are reconstructions in poetry from the

prose of the authors who quote them. 542 PMG (from Pl. Prt. 339a-346d) is an address to Scopas discussing what it means to be good and commending the man who of his own free will does not act basely. Vocabulary of praise is prominent in this poem. It may have been an > enkomion, > epinikion or > skolion. Other fragments emphasize the difficulty or inaccessability of virtue (541?, 579) and human helplessness (520-527),

SIMONIDES

488

487

often with highly pessimistic statements. 543 PMG, quoted by Dion. Hal. Comp. 26 to prove that triadic composition (strophe — antistrophe — epode) is not easily distinguishable from prose, is the prayer to Zeus of +» Danae, cast adrift by night with the infant Perseus, and is famous for its tenderness and pathos. Poetry for the Persian Wars includes the enkomion for those fallen at > Thermopylae (531 PMG), a lyric poem (532-535 PMG) for the battle of + Artemisium [1], an elegy for Artemision (1-4 IEG), and an elegy for > Salamis (5-9 IEG). The Suda states that S$. composed in a Doric dialect; this is evident in the lyric fragments, while the elegies are in the Ionic tradition. Extensive papyrus fragments reveal an elegy on the Battle of > Plataeae (10-14 IEG). The prooemium is an invocation of > Achilles [1], with a description of his death and burial with Patroclus. Homer is mentioned as the poet who gave glory to the warriors who fought at Troy and the poet then summons the Muse to assist him in celebrating the warriors of Plataeae (> Muse, invocation of the). There is considerable detail about the

Mor. 346 f.) was the starting point for Lessine’s Laokoon. 1J.M. BELL, KiupiE xai ooddc: S. in the Anecdotal Tradition, in: Quaderni urbinati 28, 1978, 29-86 2D.E. GrrBER, Greek Lyric Poetry Since 1920, in: Lustrum 36, 1994,

129-152 3J.H. Moryneux, S.: A Historical Study, 1992 4E.L. Bowie, Early Greek Elegy, Symposium and Public Performance, in: JHS 106, 1986, 13-35 5 D.BOEDEKER,

D.SIDER

(Eds.), The

New

S., 2001

6 O. PotTerA, Le langage de Simonide, 1997. EDITIONS: FGE; IEG; PMG; D.A. CAMPBEL, Greek Lyric, vol. 3, 1991 (with Eng. transl.); M.L. West, Greek Lyric Poetry, 1993, 160-172. E.R.

[3] According to Diog. Laert. 4,5, the author of a historical work, dedicated to + Speusippus, on the ‘Deeds of Dion’ of Syracuse and of ‘Bion’ (Bimvog prob. corrupted; deleted by [2], cf. [3]). The name S. has been corrected to Tywwwvidye, the historian Timonides of Leucas, on the basis of Plut. Dion 35,4 [4]. 1FGrH 561

2 MULLER, FHGII, 82-83

s. v. Diogenes Laertios, RE 5,742. pus of Athens, 1981, 199.

3 E.ScHwarz,

4 L.TaRAN, Speusip-

battle. This poem supports the theory that extended elegies were performed on public occasions and in contests, like tragedies [4]. S. held undisputed pre-eminence in the composition of elegy and epigram. From his lifetime to the compilation of the Anthologia Palatina (Hellenistic period and later), epigrams were attributed to him indiscriminately. Of the three quoted in Hdt. 7,228, only the one to Megistias is accepted by all authorities, though many also accept the authenticity of the famous couplet,

[4] Epic poet from > Magnesia [3] in Lydia. According to the Suda (IV 362, 21-23 ADLER = SH 723), he lived “in the time of Antiochus the Great”, writing of that king’s deeds and of the war with the Galatians. However, since it was > Antiochus [2] I Soter (281-261) and not — Antiochus [5] III Megas (223-187 BC) who defeated the Galatians in the famous Elephant Battle (cf. [5]), the epithet tod MeycAov was deleted from the

translated by e.g. Cic. Tusc. 1,101 and F. Schiller, in

Suda text (cf. FGrH 163, comm. II B, 594). Nonethe-

which the dead of Thermopylae ask the passerby to bring the news of their obedience to Sparta (cf. > Leonidas [1]). After Herodotus there is no writer before Aristotle (+ Aristoteles [6], 4th cent.) who ascribes an epigram to S. Greek distichs do not normally contain the name of their author, while in some cases the attributions are clearly impossible. When > Meleager [8] c. 100 BC put together his ‘Garland’ (Stephanos) he drew on a collection ascribed to S., probably in the late 4th cent. BC.

less, the possibility cannot be excluded that S., even if he lived at the court of Antiochus III, may have sung epics celebrating the deeds of the former king (cf. [4]; on the subject cf. also the elegiac papyrus fragment SH 958). EDITIONS: 1SH723 2 FGrH 163. Lit.: 3 E.Pacx, Antiochia, in: G. CAMBIANOet al. (Eds.), Lo spazio letterario della Grecia antica, vol. 1.2, 1993,

746 4B.Bar-Kocuva, On the Sources and Chronology of Antiochus I’s Battle against the Galatians, in: PCPhS 199, 1973, 1-8 5J.Ma, Antiochos III and the Cities of Western Asia Minor, 2000, 34.

II]. REPUTATION

S.FO.

IN ANTIQUITY

There is a rich anecdotal tradition about the venality and miserliness of S., though the stories are stereotyped and not likely to reveal biographical truth. His particular ‘wisdom’ (sophia, Pl. Rep. 33 1d-e; 33 5e) may derive from his association with the ruling class of his time, for there is a long tradition of associating sages with rulers in Greece. The new situation in which the poet was paid a fee for his services inevitably led to his being seen as a ‘proto-Sophist’ by modern scholars (cf. — Sophists). His services were in demand throughout Greece, and the variety of his patrons, including tyranny and democracy, is proof of his stature, not of particular political loyalty. S. was much admired in Antiquity for his pathos (Quint. Inst. 10,1,64). His saying that painting was silent poetry, poetry painting that speaks (Plut.

Simonius. D.S.Proculus Iulianus, senator, homo novus with a career under 7 emperors, probably from Italy, property in the Po Valley and a villa in Rome. S. was c. AD 234-235 iuridicus per Transpadum, in 236 governor of Thrace (IGR I 691-693), 237-238 legatus Augusti pro praetore provinciae Arabiae (CIL II 14149, 33; AE 1904, 67) and in 238 probably cos. suff. [1. 66; 2. 232]; governor, perhaps of Pannonia inferior c. 238/9-240, then of the Tres Daciae 241-243 (CIL III 1573; VI 1520 = ILS 1189; [3. 206 f.]); 244-245 leg. Aug. pro praetore provinciae Syriae Coeles (CIL VI 1520 = ILS 1189), 245-247 (?) praef. urbi (CIL XV 7528; ILS 8627). 1 Decrassi, FCap.

2 M.LEuntssen, Konsuln und Kon-

sulare (180-235 BC), 1989

3FPDI

4PIRS

529

490

489 5 K. Diez, Senatus contra principem, 228-231, no. 79. T.F.

SIMPLICIUS

réforme de |’Eglise Gauloise, in: Gregorio magno e il suo tempo, vol. 1, 1991, 109-128 7 R. SCHIEFFER, S.vV. Simonie, TRE 31, 2000, 276-280.

Simony. The term simony derives from > Simon [8] Magus, who tried to buy from the Apostles the miraculous power of the Holy Ghost (Acts 8,18—25), and correspondingly describes the illicit trade in clerical titles and particularly material benefits in the purchase of benedictions and offices. Corresponding practices, together with resistance to them within the Church, can be observed from the beginning of the 4th cent. (AD 306: Synod of Elvira, canon 48 [1.305 f.], against charges for > baptism), when, owing to the growing wealth of the Church on the one hand and the granting of privileges to clerics under Constantinus [1] I on the other, taking clerical office brought with it material and other advantages (exemption from military or curial service: Basil. Epist. 53. Pall. Vita Chrysostomi 13,172 ff.; 14,50 ff. MALINGREY). Initiatives to prohibit simony often proceeded from the ruler: the Council of Chalcedon condemned it in 451 at the request of > Marcianus [6] (canon 2 (2. 354]). From then on regular conciliar condemnations of simony followed (cf. in the West the Council of Arelate II, canon 54): in about 459 Gennadius I of Constantinople convened a synod on the problem of simony of offices (synodal letter: PG 85, 1613-1621), and in Rome synods on the theme took place in 499, 5o1 and 502. Imperial legislation against simony, particularly in the appointment of bishops (against bribery and corruption), began in 472 under the emperor Leo [4] (Cod. Iust. 1,3,31). The regularity of simonistic practices shows itself in the development of established customary-law insinuativa, which newly appointed clerics had to pay to their church; for being elevated to bishop exorbitant consecration fees, explicitly permitted by Iustinianus [1], were usual. Their magnitude was determined by the revenue of the diocese to be occupied (Nov. lust. 56 and 123,16; [2. 457]; Nov. lust. 123,3). In the West, where, particularly in Gaul and Germany, proprietary Church structures determined the laiety’s power of disposal of Church titles, Gregorius [3] the Great battled with decidedly simonistic malpractice: he condemned it as > heresy, called for ordination non praemiis aut precibus (“not based on rewards or petitions”, Greg. M. Epist. 5,16) and developed a broad concept of simony (Greg. M. In euangelia homiliae 1,4,4), which even encompassed flattery and obsequiousness

(munera a lingua, a obsequio) and also in-

cluded advance payments for consecrations and funerals. EpITIONs: 1J.D. Mansi (ed.), Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, vol. 2, *1903 2 E.ScHwartz (ed.), Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum, vol. 2.1, 71990. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 3 R.BoninI, Alcune note sulla venalita

delle cariche ecclesiastiche, in: Subseciva Groningana 4, 1990, 39-50 4JONES,LRE,909f. 5R.A. Markus, Gregory the Great and His World, 1997, 171-174 6 L. Prerri, Grégoire le Grand et la Gaule: le projet pour la

JH.

Simplicinius Genialis. M. S. G., an equestrian who, in AD 260, governed the province of Raetia as vir perfectissimus in place of a senatorial governor (agens vice praesidis). He was specifically sent to Raetia for this purpose. On 24/25 April 260, he defeated an army of Semnones near Augsburg and built a victory altar there in September of the same year ([1] = AE 1993, 1231b). He may have been born in the province of Germania inferior (cf. recently [2; 3. 226 f.; 4]). 1 L. Bakker, Raetien unter Postumus, in: Germania 71, 1993, 369-386 2M.CurisTOL, M.S. G.: ses fonctions,

in: Cahiers du Centre G. Glotz 8, 1997, 231-241 3 §.DEMouGIN, Nouveautés pour les procurateurs des Gaules et de Germanies, in: s. [2] 9, 1998 4M.JEHNE, Uberlegungen zur Chronologie der J. 259 bis 261 n. Chr. im Lichte der neuen Postumus-Inschrift aus Augsburg, in: Bayerische Vorgeschichtsblatter 61, 1996, 185-206.

W.E.

Simplicius (Zyimhixoc/Simplikios, Latin Simplicius; c. AD 490-560). Neoplatonic philosopher, from Cilicia, according to Agathias (Historiae 2, 30, 3-31,4 KeEyDELL). Pupil of the Neoplatonists ~ Ammonius [12] and - Damascius. One commentary survives, on the Encheiridion (‘Handbook’) of > Epictetus [2], along

with commentaries on writings of Aristotle (— Aristoteles [6]): on the Categoriae, the Physica, De caelo and De anima. The authenticity of the last commentary has been disputed by C. STEEL [1. 105-140], without sufficient reason [2]. The commentaries on the first book of > Euclides’ [3] ‘Elements’, Aristotle’s Metaphysica and Meteorologica, > lamblichus’ [2] treatise on the Pythagorean sects and — Plato’s [1] Phaedo [3.5-7; 4], and an epitome of the ‘Physics’ of Theophrastus (or, as [5.10] suspects, a commentary of S. on Theophrastus’ epitome of his own ‘Physics’) are all lost. According to Agathias (Historiae 2,30,3-31,4 K.), S. belonged to a group of prominent Greek philosophers who, led by Damascius, sought asylum with the Persian king > Chosroes [5] I from the ‘anti-pagan’ measures of the emperor Justinian (— Iustinianus [1] I). Agathias

reports that the philosophers remained there until the peace concluded between Chosroes I and Justinian in 531, when a clause in the peace treaty (introduced by Chosroes) assured them of immunity from persecution on their return to Byzantium. The supposition, long regarded as credible, that the philosophers returned either to > Alexandria [1] or to Athens has proved untenable [3. 8-28]. According to [6; 7; 8] (cf. also [9]), S. took up residence, together with all or some of the other philosophers mentioned by Agathias, at > Harran, a city which belonged to the Byzantine empire, but lay on the Persian frontier, within the sphere of influence of the Persian king, and which remained largely loyal to the old cults. Here they were either taken into an exist-

SIMPLICIUS

492

491

ing Neoplatonist school or founded such a school themselves. Traces of this school are still demonstrable in the roth cent. AD [6]. The commentaries of S$. were probably all written there. All works of S. were written under the influence of the philosophical system of his teacher, Damascius, including the commentary on Epictetus’ ‘Handbook’, in which K.PRAECHTER erroneously claimed to detect Middle Platonist elements [10; 11; 12; 3. 61-113]. His evaluation of the philosophy of this commentary (and of Alexandrian Neoplatonist philosophy in general) does not take account of the pedagogical system of the Neoplatonists which, progressing in steps, closely considered the level of the listener or reader, as is shown in the introductions to the Categoriae commentaries of + Ammonius [12], Philoponus, > Olympiodorus [4], + David [2] of Armenia (Elias) and S. [13]. According to this system, which harmonizes Aristotelian and Platonic philosophy, the commentary on Epictetus’ ‘Handbook’ is of a purely propaedeutic character [12. 147165], and S.’ Categoriae commentary is at the very beginning of the philosophical curriculum, which is divided into Aristotelian and, later, Platonic courses [14] (+ Philosophy, teaching of). Metaphysical explanations have thus no place in this commentary; the can only be included at the end of the Aristotelian course, in the commentaries on Aristotle’s Metaphysica (S.’ commen-

tary on which does not survive), and especially in the Platonic cycle, in the interpretations of the Timaeus and Parmenides. S.’ commentaries on Aristotle’s De caelo and Physica are aimed at students already at a fairly advanced level. This applies even more to the commentary on the Aristotelian treatise De anima, which to the Neoplatonists formed the transition from the Physica to First Philosophy (cf. S., on Aristot. An. 3,14 ff.). These commentaries of S., both on the Stoic texts and the Aristotelian treatises, are in no way objective, but are entirely Neoplatonist interpretations. They are distinct from one another only in that, in commentaries on Aristotelian logic the distortion of ideas when compared to the object in question is not as striking as in commentaries dealing with ontology, such as the commentary on De anima. For these reasons, it cannot be expected that a complete depiction of S.’ metaphysical system is to be found in his surviving commentaries, even though more such details are found in the commentaries on the Physica, De caelo and De anima than in those on the Categoriae and Epictetus’ ‘Handbook’. Even in the last of these, however, characteristic references are to be found to the philosophy of S.’ teacher Damascius, e.g. the definition of the skopos (‘purpose’) of the Platonic ‘First Alcibiades’ [3. 69], the level of being of hen panta pro panton (‘the all-as-one before all’) [12. 47-65] and the doctrine of the alterability of the ~» substance of the rational human soul (-> soul, theory of the) [3. 70-113]. On these subjects, as on many others, Damascius opposed > Proclus [2], instead having recourse to the teachings of lamblichus. This tendency of his teacher explains the fact that S., in his commen-

taries on the Categoriae and De anima, explicitly draws on the support of treatises of Iamblichus. + Damascius; > Neoplatonism Epit1ons: CAG VII, 1894; VIII, 1907; IX, 1882; X, 1885; XI, 1882; I. Hapor (ed.), Simplicius, Commentaire

sur le Manuel d’Epictéte, 1996. BIBLIOGRAPHY:

1P.HuBy, C.STEEL (eds.), Priscian —

On Theophrastus, On Sense-perception with “Simplicius” — On Aristotle, On the soul, 1997 (transl.) 21.Hapot, Priscianus or Simplicius, in: Phronesis 54, 2001 31d., Simplicius - Commentaire sur le Manuel d’Epictéte, 1996 (ed.) | 4Id., Recherches sur les fragments du commentaire de Simplicius sur la ‘Métaphysique’ d’Aristote, in: Id. (ed.), Simplicius — Sa vie, son ceuvre, sa survie (Actes du colloque international de Paris 1985),

1987, 225-245 5 P.STEINMETZ, Die Physik des Theophrast (Palingenesia 1), 1964 6 M.Tarpieu, Sabiens coraniques et “Sabiens” de Harran, in: Journal Asiatique, 274,1986,1-44 7 Id., Lescalendriers en usage a Harran d’aprés les sources arabes et le commentaire de Simplicius a la Physique d’Aristote, in: .Hapor (ed.), see [4], 40-57 8Id., Les paysages reliques. Routes et haltes syriennes d’'Isidore a Simplicius, 1990 9 R. THIEL, S. und das Ende der neuplatonischen

Schule in Athen

(AAWM,

geistes-

und sozialwissenschaftliche Klasse 8), 1999 10 K. PRAECHTER, s.v. S., RE 3 A, 204-213 = 11 Id., Rich-

tungen und Schulen im Neuplatonismus, in: Genethliakon C. Robert, 1910, 105-156 121.Hapor, Le probléme du néoplatonisme alexandrin: Hiéroclés et Simplicius, 1978

13 Id., Simplicius

- Commentaire sur le Manuel d’Epic-

téte, 2001, XLV-LXXII

14 Id. et al., Simplicius

- Com-

mentaire sur les Catégories I (Philosophia Antiqua 50), 1990. PHA.

Simpuvium (simpulum, simpuium). Short-handled ladle of Roman priests and Vestal Virgins, usually of clay (Plin. HN 35,158); it was used to pour the wine needed for a > sacrifice (with ill.) on the sacrificial bowl. There are several representions of simpuvia on coins and in reliefs. In everyday life the simpuvium was replaced by the long-handled Greek kyathos (Varro Ling. 5,124). E. ZWIERLEIN-DIEHL, Simpuvium Numae, in: H. A. CAHN (ed.), Tainia. Festschrift R. Hampe 1980, 405-422 (with notes 58 and 69 on the form simpuium). R.H.

Simus (Zipo¢/Simos).

[1] Representative of a group of > Aleuadae, ruler in + Larisa [3] (Aristot. Pol. 1306a 26-30) about 358— 344 BC; his name appears on coins of the city (HN p. 299). He gained his position from being a mediator (Gexwv peocidvoc/archon mesidios, ‘mediator plenipotentiary’) in the oligarchic conflict, an example for Aristotle

(contra

[1. 503;

2.295,

672;

3.196;

4.364-

366]). The cruelty of his reaction to the killing of his brother was proverbial (Aristot. fr. 166 R.; Callim. fr. 588; schol. Hom. Il. 22,397; schol. Ov. Ib. 331 f.). The Aleuadae and S. called on > Philippus [4] II (more than once?) against the tyrants of —> Pherae (Diod.. Sic. 16,14,2; Suda s.y. S.). This ultimately cost them their power (Dem. Or. 18,48; schol. Dem. Or. 1,22; Diod. Sic. 16,69,8; Polyaenus, Strat. 4,2,11).

494

493

SINDI

1 E.GRUMACH et al. (eds.), Aristoteles, Politik, vol. 4-6, 1996 (with Germ. transl. and comm.) 2H.BeErve, Die

same mountain. From its theophanic references poetic evidence for S. in the Old Testament (Dt 33,2; Judg 5,5;

Tyrannis bei den Griechen, 1967 3 H.-J. GEHRKE, Stasis, 1985 4M.Sorpi, La lega tessala fino ad Alessandro Magno, 1958. J.co.

Ps 68,9; 68,18) suggests an elevated region. Gabal

[2] S. of Magnesia. See > Simodia. Simylus (Zipvdoc/Simylos). [1] Poet of the New ~ Comedy, victorious at the Lenaea in 284 BC with his play Edeoia/Ephesia (‘The Girl of Ephesus’) [1. test. 1]. Pollux also lists the comedy Meyagtxt/Megarike (‘The Girl of Megara’), which according to an uncertain expansion of the list of Dionysia victors was supposed to have been performed in 185 as ‘Old Comedy’ [1. test. 2]. It is equally uncertain whether two and a half iambic trimeters cited by Theophilus of Antioch are attributable to the comic poet S. eptnee2 |a(cla Sai): 1 PCG VII, 1989, sor f.

T.HI.

[2] Poet to whom the Et. Gen. s.v. doyavOmvetav/ arganthoneian (cf. EM 135,26 ff.) attributes one hexameter, and Plut. Romulus 17,6 two elegiac distichs on — Tarpeia’s betrayal of the Roman Capitol (in S.’ version to the Celts) and two more on Tarpeia’s execution. The subject matter suggests that S. probably did not live before Augustus. It is uncertain whether iambic trimeters on the five senses (Stob. 1,51,1) and the antithesis of nature and culture (Stob. 4,18a 4) are by S. or S. [x]. SH 724-727.

E.BO.

Masa (2244 m) is traditionally identified with Mount S. The 4th-cent. Grotto of Elijah, and the identification of S. with Horeb and with Masa led emperor Justinian (Proc. Aed. 5,8) to establish the ‘Monastery of the Transfiguration’ (also St. Catherine’s Monastery) at the foot of Gabal Misa. 1 J.WELLHAUSEN, 71883 (repr. 1981)

Prolegomena

zur Geschichte

Israels,

2R.SoLzBACHER, Monche, Pilger

und Sarazenen. Studien zum Frithchristentum auf der siidlichen Sinaihalbinsel, 1989. K.SA.

Sinai Inscriptions see > Proto-Sinaitic Script Sinai script. Two 9th/roth-cent. Latin liturgical codices, not rediscovered until the beginning of the 1960s in the library of the Monastery of Saint Catherine in Sinai, exhibit a remarkably strong similarity to the > Visigothic script and influences from Arabic and Byzantine bibliology. They presumably originate from one and the same > scriptorium, which was exposed to oriental influences but also maintained Latin traditions. It was probably situated in the Syro-Palestinian area; a location in the Sinai peninsula, under Islamic rule since the 7th century, however, cannot be excluded. A third Latin liturgical 9th-cent. manuscript from the same monastery is written in a very tight and right-sloping cursive, reminiscent of the Greek minuscule of the Codex Vaticanus Graecus 2200 (and other Greek MSS from Sinai).

Sin see

~ Moon deities

Sinae (Zivat; Sinai). People in eastern Asia (Ptol. 1,17,5 and several times in Ptol. 7,3) with capital Thinai, Latin Thinae (Ptol. 7,3,6, Peripl. m. r. 64); also a term

for southern China, which people visited by sea, whereas northern and eastern China were approached by way of the central-Asian caravan routes and was known as Serica, the land of the > Seres, or the ‘Silk Land’. S. and Serica were never associated with one another. The name S. is from the name of the Chinese Qin dynasty (3rd cent. BC), probably by way of the Old Indian Cina. + China J. FeERGusoN, China and Rome, in: ANRW II.9, 581-603.

NK

Sinai (Sw4/Sind, Xwa/Sind, Dews/Seind, later also Dwat/ Sinai, Latin Sina; Hebrew sinay). Mountain in the wilderness of the same name, where the Covenant between

— Yahweh and Israel was made. S. is primarily attested in the Old Testament; in the New Testament =wé occurs only in Acts 7,30 and 38 and Gal 4,2; the etymology is debatable. Presumably S. is derived from the Hebrew root sy, ‘shine’ [1. 52033]. S. often occurs with the later additions ‘Mount’, ‘Desert’. Euseb. On. 172,9 f. distinguished S. from Mount Horeb (Xwenf/Choreb), for Jerome (ibid. 173,15 f.) the two names describe the

B. BiscHOFF, Latin Palaeography: Antiquity and the Middle Ages, transl. by D. Croinin & D. Ganz, 1990, 96-100; E.A. Lowe, Palaeographical Papers 1907-1965, 1972, vol. 2, 417-440, 520-545, 546-574. P.E.

Sinatruces see > Sanatruces [1] Sindi (twédot/Sindoi). Population of > Sindice on the

Taman peninsula to the north of the river Hypanis between the Toretae, the Dandarii and the Psessi with capital Sindus (or Sindicus Limen: Str. 11,2,14; Ps.Scymn. 888; cf. Hdt. 4,28; Hellanicus FGrH 4 F 69). Their culture exhibits considerable Scythian elements. Because of their strong relations with the > Regnum Bosporanum they became intensively Hellenized at an early stage. Kings and coins are known from the 5th century BC onwards. The king Hecataeus, banished by the S., was enthroned again by Satyrus [2] I, who gave him his daughter in marriage (Polyaenus, Strat. 8,55). Under Leucon [3] I the S. allied themselves with the Regnum Bosporanum. V.F. Gaypukevi¢, Das Bosporanische Reich, 1971, 59 f., 71 f., 226-229; M.RosrovizerF, Skythien und der Bosporus, vol. 2 (Historia ES 83), 1993, 78, 98 f. (ed. by H. HErNen); A. DILLER, The Tradition of the Minor Greek

Geographers, 1952, 130; J.G. F. Hip, Greek and Barbarian Peoples on the Shores of the Black Sea, in: Archaeological Reports 30, 1983/84, 71-97, here 90 f. Ly.B.

SINDICE

495

Sindice (Swdixr/Sindike). Probably originally the combined territory of the peninsula and island group of Taman to the north of the Hypanis [1]/Bug (Ps.-Scyl. 72), named after the > Sindi; later it was probably only the southern part of the peninsula that bore this name (Str.

11,2,10). S. was also settled by other tribes, e.g. by

the Aspurgiani (Str. 11,2,11; 12,3,29). S. was an agri-

496 see. In the early 7th cent., S$. came under the rule of the Avares. The emperor Iovianus was born in S. (Ps.-Aur. Vict. Epit. Caes. 44,1). Surviving as archaeological remains are a camp, a civilian settlement, necropoleis; a pontoon bridge over the Savus has been demonstrated. A.Mocsy, Gesellschaft und Romanisation in der romischen Provinz Moesia superior, 1970, 126-130. PICA.

culturally significant region with a dense network of settlements. In the 6th cent. BC Greek colonies (Hermonassa, Apatouron) developed on the coasts. The true

capital was Sindikos Limen (later Gorgippea), which was also called S. (Mela 1,110). From the time of Leucon [3] I, S. was annexed to the + Regnum Bosporanum, was later subject to Mithridates [6] VI, only in the Roman Period to belong once again to the Regnum Bosporanum (IOSPE 2,36). V.F. GaJDUKEvI¢, Das Bosporanische Reich, 1971, 4043, 71 f., 208, 226-229. Lv.B.

Singara (modern Singar), on the southern edge of the Gabal Singar in northwestern Iraq [1]. It is first mentioned in an Assyrian letter from the 9th century BC as Mat Singara [2. 155 f.] and was part of the province of Rasapa. As an important intersection of the routes from upper Habir to the Tigris and from + Nisibis to > Hatra [1] S. is also noted in the > Tabula Peutingeriana as Singara [2; 3]. At the end of the 2nd cent. BC, S. was

part of the Severan frontier between the upper Al-Habur and the Tigris (+ Limes VI.). In the 3rd cent. AD S. briefly became Colonia Aurelia Septima Singara; in the 4th cent. S. is recorded as the garrison of the legio I Parthica, which was taken into captivity in 360 when conquered by > Sapor [2] IJ (Amm. Marc. 20,6, 1-9). S. achieved its greatest extent under the Atabeg princes of Mosul in the r1th—r2th cents. Archaeologists have identified the greater part of the city walls together with towers and a gateway (4th cent.) [3. fig. 8-12]. 1 P.-L. Gatigr, T. SINCLAIR, Karte 3 D2; 89 D4, in:R.J. A.

TALBERT, The Barrington Atlas of the Greek and Roman World, 2000 2K.KeEssLerR, Untersuchungen zur historischen Topographie Nordmesopotamiens, 1980 3 D. Oates, Studies in the Ancient History of Northern Iraq, 1968, 97-106 4J. WAGNER, Weltkarten der Antike, TAVO B S 1.2 Tabula Peutingeriana (parts VIIIXII, revised ed. by Konrad Miller), 1984 5 E. WEBER, Tabula Peutingeriana, 1976.

Singidunum (wyidouvov/Singidounon). City where the Savus flows into the Istrus [2] (Ptol. 3,9,3; It. Ant. 132,1) with a river port, modern Belgrade in Serbia. The site was settled from the Neolithic onwards, later occupied -by the Romans, after AD 86 the headquarters of the legio IV Flavia Felix. S. was situated in the proyince of Moesia superior, after 169 it became a municipium, 238 a colonia. Inscriptions (CIL II 1660; 6307 f.; 64523 14534") mention ordo, duoviri, decurio, Augustalis. Tustinianus [1] I had S. fortified (Procop. Aed. 4,5,12-15); from the 4th cent. it was a bishop’s

Singulares were Roman soldiers specially selected to serve as aides or orderlies to high-ranking officers (P. Oxy. 7.1022; CIL Il 7334). Singulares are found serving in the officia of the > praefectus praetorio, the tribunes of the praetorian and urban cohorts, senatorial military tribunes, and the > cavalry prefects. The singularis of the praetorian prefect ranked below the + tesserarius and belonged to the > principales. ~» Equites singulares J.CA. Singus (iyyoc/Singos). City on the gulf named after it, on the isthmus of > Sithonia at modern Agios Nikolaos. After its mention during the campaign of + Xerxes I (Hdt. 7,122), it appears in the Athenian tribute lists, usually with two talents (ATL 1, 402 f.). In 432/1 BC the city seceded from Athens and lost the greater part of its inhabitants to > Olynthus. After fighting took place in its territory (IG P 1184), it was regained by the Athenians and in the Peace of Nicias in 421 (> Peloponnesian War D.) was declared independent (Thuc. 5,18,6). There are no other accounts. M. ZaAHRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 226-229. M.Z.

Sinis (Greek Sivic/Sinis, robber). One of the scoundrels who are killed by — Theseus in their own vicious manner (e.g. Bacchyl. 18,19-22): S., a son of Poseidon with the cognomen Pityokamptés (‘spruce bender’), is a brigand on the Corinthian Isthmus who ties the arms and legs of travellers to spruce trees that he bent down before. When he lets the trees shoot up, the victims are torn apart. He dies in the same fashion following the principle of > talion law. B.Z.

Sinnaces. Son of > Sirén — Abdagaeses, centre of a conspiracy against the Parthian king + Artabanus [5] II. At his instigation, in AD 35 a Parthian legation obtained from Tiberius the dispatch of prince Phraates to be pretender to the throne. After his death, Phraates’ son or nephew > Tiridates was installed as his successor in the Parthian Empire by L. Vitellius, the legate of Syria. S. took Tiridates’ side, taking with him his own troops (Tac. Ann. 6,31 f.; 6,36 f.). S.’ subsequent fate is unknown. M.SCH.

Sinnius Capito. Latin grammarian of the rst cent. BC, a younger contemporary of Varro; his scholarly writings were a source for > Verrius Flaccus, > Gellius [6] and others. His known works include: a treatise on syl-

497

498

lables (the first such work attested in Latin beyond the Liber de litteris syllabisque wrongly attributed to the poet Ennius, Suet. Gram. 1,3); letters (> Epistle) with philological content (Gell. NA 5,20,2; 21,9f. notes one addressed to the scholar > Clodius [III 4] Tuscus, another addressed to Pacuvius Antistius [I 13] Labeo, father of the Augustan jurist Antistius Labeo); and antiquarian tracts (Lactant. Div. inst. 6,20 cites Libri spectaculorum (‘On Games’); Jer. Quaest. Hebraicae in Genesim p. 15,10 LAGARDE more generally refers to De antiquitatibus libri, apparently with geographic or ethnographic content).

7,21,2), rulers of the Mithridatid dynasty captured S. in

GRF 457-466; HLL vol. 2, § 283.

RAK.

SINUESSA

183 BC and transferred their residence there (Pol. 23,9523 Str. 12,3,11). S. was freed from monarchic rule in 70 BC (city era attested on coins and inscriptions). Pompey, who had Mithridates [6] VI buried in S. in 63 BC (App. Mithr. 113), integrated S. into the partial province of Pontus (— Bithynia et Pontus), in 46/45 BC, Caesar established the colonia Iulia Felix there (Str. loc. cit.; coins). In the Imperial Period, S. gained importance once again as a trading town in competition with Heraclea [7], Amastris and Amisus. Natives of S. were Diogenes [14], Diodorus [10], Dionysius [31] und > Marcion. 1 N. EHRHARDT, Milet und seine Kolonien, 1983, 55-58.

Sinon (Greek Livwv/Sinon, ‘pest’). In Greek myth the

son of Aesimus and cousin of + Odysseus. According

D.M. Rosinson, Ancient S., in: AJPh 27, 1906, 245-279.

125-153, C.MA.

to Verg. Aen. 2,57 f. a Greek hero in the Trojan War. He

intentionally allows himself to be taken prisoner by the Trojans while the Greeks pretend to retreat. Interrogated by king > Priamus, he presents himself convincingly as a relative of Odysseus’ enemy > Palamedes [1] fleeing from Odysseus and gets the Trojans to make a breach in their wall in order to pull the Trojan Horse into the city.

II]. LATE ANTIQUITY AND BYZANTINE PERIOD

Beginning in the 4th cent. AD, S. belonged to the province of Helenopontus “(suffragan diocese of -» Amasia), from the 7th cent. to the thema Armenia-

con. Documented bishops were, among others, Antiochus (451), Aelianus (457/8) and Pythagoras (518) [1. 286]. Aside from short interludes (Seljugs in 1081 and 1214), S. remained in the Byzantine or Trebizond

Sinope (Zwemn/Sinopée). I. LocATION, Earty History II. CLAssIcaL TO ROMAN Periops III. LATE ANTIQUITY AND ByzANTINE PERIOD I. LOCATION, EARLY HISTORY

City on the southern coast of the Black Sea (> Pontos Euxeinos) with an excellent harbour, pres-

ent-day Sinop, founded in the 7th cent. BC on the eastern edge of the cape that reaches far into the sea (the northernmost cape of Anatolia, present-day Baskaya Burnu). The archaic history of settlements which had already been represented in an inconsistent fashion as early as in Antiquity (Ps.-Scymn. 986-997 D.: S. as a

Thessalian — apoikia, destroyed by the > Cimmerii, newly founded by Miletus [2]; Hdt. 4,12: originally a Cimmerian settlement; Xen. An. 6,1,15 and later literature, cf. Str. 12,3,11: Milesian settlement) could not be clarified completely through excavations (1951-1953), but evidence for a Milesian heritage can be found in cults and institutions [1. 57 f.]. II. CLASSICAL TO ROMAN PERIODS In the Classical to the Early Hellenistic Periods, S. was the most important city of maritime trade on the Pontus Euxinus (cf. the abundance of stamped amphora handles). The foundation of several secondary cities such as — Cotyora, ~ Cerasus and > Trapezus took place asa result of strategic trade policy. S. was the most important trans-shipment centre for goods from Asia Minor, the Caucasus and the Chersonesus [2] (Crimea) on their way to the Mediterranean. The Persians took possession of S. in the 4th cent. BC (Polyaenus Strat.

imperial federation until its capture by the Ottomans in 1461. The harbour’s continued importance is evidenced by the trade fair on the feastday of St. Phocas and by the presence of Italian merchants (from the 13th cent.). 1 R.ScHIEFFER, Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum 4,3,3, 1984 (index volume).

K.BELKE, s.v. S., LMA

7, 1931; Id., Paphlagonien und

Honorias (TIB 9), 1996, 316 (index);

A. BrYER,

D. WIN-

FIELD, The Byzantine Monuments and Topography of the Pontos, vol. 1, 1985, 69-88; C.F. W. Foss, s.v. S., ODB 3, 1904; W.RuGE, s.v. S. (1), RE 3 A, 252-255. E.W.

Sinti (Swtoi/Sinto). Thracian tribe on the western bank of the Strymon, probably between the mountains MalaSevska and Ograzden, possibly somewhat more in the south; western neighbour of the Illyrian Dardani (Str. 7a,1,36; App. Mithr. 55); the westernmost tribe of the kingdom of the > Odrysae (cf. Thuc. 2,98,1 on Sitalces’ [1] campaign against Macedonia in 429 BC). The main centre of the S. was Heraclea Sintica, which has not yet been located (Diod. Sic. 31,8,8; Liv. 45,29,6). The Sinties in Hom. Od. 8,294 are not the same as the S. T.SPIRIDONOYV, Istoriceska geografija na trakijskite plemena do III v. pr.n.e., 1981, 53 f., 119; F. PAPAZOGLOU,

Les villes de Macedoine a l’€poque romaine, 1988, 366368.

Lv.B.

Sinuessa (Zwotoon; Sinoéssé). City in the south of Latium (Zevoeoavoi/Senoesanoi, Pol. 3,91,4; Str. 5,2,1;

3,4-93 4,3 f.5 6,3,73 It. Ant. 108,4; Tab. Peut. 6,3), established as a Roman colonia maritima in 296 BC during the Third Samnite War (+ Samnites, Samnium) in

499

500

the saltus Vescinus west of Mons Massicus on the » Mare Tyrrhenum. The previous settlement is claimed to have been a Greek city with the name of Sinope (Liv.

Sinus Terinaeus (Teotwvaioc xdAmoc; Terinaios kélpos). Bay named after the port of + Terina on the Tyrrhenian coast of Bruttium (Thuc. 6,104,2; Plin. HN 3,72; 95), modern Golfo di Santa Eufemia. Possibly identical [1] with the Kélpos Napétinos (Antiochus FGrH 555 F 3; 5), Lamétikos (Aristot. Pol. 1329b) or Hipponidtes (Str.

SINUESSA

TO ;205 S562 2a ded

eVellsePatemrel Assos elinien EIN E3550).

Remnants are extant at Perticale: city wall made of pseudo-polygonal masonry, aqueduct, thermal baths (aquae Sinuessanae at Bagnole, Liv. 22,13,10), amphitheatre, port installations. M.Pacano, S., storia e archeologia di una colonia romana, 1990; Id., Nuove osservazioni sulle colonie romane di Minturnae e S., in: Rendiconti dell’Accademia di Acheologia, Lettere e Belle Arti di Napoli 65, 1995,

51-71.

6,1,4). 1 G.De Sensi SestiTo, Tra l’Amato e il Savuto, vol. 1, 1999, 63-68, 214, 227-229.

MLL.

Sinus Thermaeus see ~ Thermaios Kolpos

M.M.MO.

Siphae (Zidai; Siphai). Boeotian port on the Gulf of Sinuhe (Egyptian z}-vh.t). Hero of an Egyptian story, generally regarded as a masterwork of Egyptian literature. The text has come down to us in various papyri and ostraca from the period of c. 1800 to 1100 BC. The original probably dates from the time of > Sesostris I. In the story, S. is a liegeman to the crown prince Sesostris. On the way back from a campaign in Syria, Sesostris learns of the death of his father and sets out for the residence with his retinue. S., who overheard these news unobserved, deserts and flees to the Near East. He is

taken in by a tribal chieftain, becomes his son-in-law and has a successful career as a military expert. He proves his courage in a victorious single combat against a local hero. After being pardoned by the Pharaoh, he is able to return to Egypt, where he dies as a well-respected courtier. The distinctive style of the work is due toa masterly combination of heterogeneous oral traditions. ~ Autobiography; > Literature II.B. 1 A.H. Garpiner, Notes on the Story of Sinuhe, 1916

2 R.Kocn, Die Erzahlung des Sinuhe, 1990 3 M.LicHTHEImM, Ancient Egyptian Literature, Vol. 1, 1973, 222-235. 4R.B. Parkinson, The tale of Sinuhe and other ancient Egyptian poems 1940-1640, 1999, 21-53. 5S.QuiRKE, Egyptian Literature 1800BC, 2004, 58-70.

Av.L.

Corinth (> Boeotia, with map). In the 5th cent. BC, S. was a port (extvetov/epineion) dependent on > Thespia (Thuc. 4,76,2 f.; 77,13 89,1 f.; SEG 24, 361), from the Hellenistic period onwards it was an autonomous

member of the Boeotian League with close relations with + Aegosthena (IG VII 207). In the Roman period S. was called Tida/Tipha; the inhabitants thought of themselves as particularly skilful sailors (Paus. 9,32,4). The helmsman of the + Argo, Tiphys, is supposed to have been from S. (Apoll. Rhod. 1,105). It is possible that Aphormium was another port near S. (Steph. Byz. s. v. Adoeutov). Remains of the fortified city site survive to the south of modern Aliki in the Bay of Domyréna [1]. The town was settled from the Mycenaean period onwards [2] (cf. Aristot. Hist. an. 504b 32; Scyl. 38; Plin. HN 4,8; Ptol. 3,15,5; Steph. Byz. s. v. 2.; Hsch. S. V. Lida). 1 E.-L. SCHWANDNER, Die Bootische Hafenstadt S., in: AA 1977, 513-551 2 FOSSEY, 167-176.

K. FreitacG, Der Golf von Korinth, 2000, 159-164.

K.F.

Siphnos (Zidvoc; Siphnos). Island in the western > Cyclades (89 km’; Str. 10,5,3; Ptol. 3,15,30; Plin. HN 4,66; 36,159), rising to 696 m (Prophitis Elias), with

many bays especially in the south and west; rich in slate Sinus (Zivoc; Simos). City in — Bottice, known

only

from the Athenian tribute lists, where it appears four times between 434/3 and 421/o BC (ATL 1,406 f.). A document from the time of > Cassander found in Potidaea (Syll.> 332) mentions estates in the area of Sinaea. M.B. HatzopouLos, Une donation du roi Lysimaque, 1988; M.ZAnHRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 230 f. M.Z.

Sinus Euxinus see > Pontos Euxeinos Sinus Ionius see > Ionios Kolpos

Sinus Niger see > Melas Kolpos Sinus Saronicus see > Saronikos Kolpos

and marble, it also produced gold, silver, iron and lead; still known as S. today. Poetic epithets: Merdpé or Mer-

opia and Acis (Steph. Byz. s.v. =.; Plin. HN 4,42). Traces of settlement from the 3rd millennium onwards; silver and galenite were mined in the early Cycladic period (early Cycladic settlement south of Apollonia, fortified in the Mycenaean and again in the Geometric period); around 1000 BC S. was occupied by Ionians from Attica (Hdt. 8,48). The ancient polis, attested from the 8th cent. BC, was situated on the east coast near modern Kastro; a line of wall (4th cent. BC) and further remains survive. In the 6th cent. BC S. was thought to

be the wealthiest of the Cyclades (treasury in > Delphi 530/525 BC: Hdt. 3,57 f.; Paus. r0,r1,2). Coin minting, attested from the 6th cent. BC, bears witness to, among other things, the cult of > Apollo. S. opposed the Persians and in 480 BC took part in the battle of Salamis [1] (Hdt. 8,46; 48; Syll.3 31 line 32). S. was a member of the Delian League (cf. ATL 1,406 f.) and

502

sol

from 375 of the > Attic League (Syll.3 147 line 126). By the 4th cent. BC the mines were partially exhausted and on the north east coast (Hagios Sostis) they were flooded. S. was a naval base under Alexander [4] the Great

SIRACH

Der, vol. 1, 1971; vol. 2, 1978; vol. 3, 1980; vol. 4, 1984.

HIN.

(Arr. Anab. 2,2,4; 2,13,4). Archeology: ancient remains of settlement also in the south west and west; watchtowers to protect from pirates in the north east, south east and south west (cf. Diod. Sic. 31 fr. 56); finds from

Sipylus (Zimvioc/Sipylos). Mountain range in Lydia (modern Manisa Dag1), extending between the Hermus [2] and Smyrna and about 30 km inland. Lake Saloe, in which the city of S. and its predecessor Tantalis are supposed to have been submerged, are presumed to be on

Roman tombs. Inscriptions: Syll.3 153, line 12 f. and 113; 294; 359; IGIV, 839; XII 5, 480-508; Suppl. 227-

the mountain range of S. (Plin. HN. 2,205; 5,117; Paus. 7,24,13; > Tantalus). At the S. some 100 m above the

230. Coins: HN 4ot.

Hermus valley, near two Hittite graffiti there is a rock sculpture the interpretation of which has been discussed since Antiquity [r].

N.G. Asyton, S. Ancient Towers, 1991; PHILIPPSON/ KIRSTEN 4, 76-79; A.G. TROULLOS, S., 1976; G.A. WacNER, G. WEISGERBER (eds.), Silber, Gold und Blei auf S., 1985; H.KaLetsc, s. v. S., in: LAUFFER, Griechenland, 619 f. AKU.

1 B. ANDRE-SALVINI,

M.SALVINI, Fixa cacumine montis,

in: H. GascHE, B. Hroupa (eds.), Collectanea Orientalia,

1996, 7-20.

E.O.

Siphon (water pipe) see > Water supply Sipontum. City on the Adriatic coast to the south of Berges Garganus, modern Siponto. Of Daunian origin,

according to Str. 6,3,9 founded by Diomedes [1], in 330 BC occupied by Alexander [6] (Liv. 8,34), in 194 BC a Roman colonia (Liv. 34,45), in 185 BC renewed colonisation (Liv. 39,23). Port significant to the trade in grain (Cic. Att. 16,7,1; Str. 6,3,9). Remains of the city

have been found in two different zones: the pre-Roman period (roth—3rd cents. BC) is documented in the area of Cupola-Beccarini, the Roman and mediaeval periods near the church of Santa Maria di Siponto. Archaeology: numerous stelai (graffiti and dipinti) from the Iron Age. The city layout ringed by walls and architectural as well as epigraphic evidence are from the Roman period, primarily from the rst cent. BC/beginning of the rst cent. AD. Remains of an early Christian basilica and late Antiquity hypogaea outside the city walls. BTCGI 7, 47-50 (s. v. Cupola); M. MazzEI, s. v. Siponto, EAA Suppl. 5 (1997), 270 f. MG.

Sippar full name S.-Yahrurum [1; 2], modern Abu Habba. One of the most significant cities of northern Babylonia, counted among the cities ‘before the flood’ in the Sumerian — kings’ lists. Main cultic site of the > sun god Sama’. With origins going back to the 4th millennium BC; it reached its zenith in the 2nd and

rst millennia. The nearby twin city of S.-Amnanum (modern Tall al-Dair) can also be designated S. Supplementing the results of r9th and late 2oth cent. excavations are rich finds of texts from the first half of the 2nd millennium and from the 7th/6th cent. BC. Of particular significance was the discovery in 1985 of a library in S. containing hundreds of 6th cent. BC clay tablets still present in shelves built into its walls. They are primarily copies of older literary and historical cuneiform texts. 1 H.GascHe,

C.JANSSEN,

s.v.

S., in: E.M.

MEyERs

(Hrsg.), Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East, vol. 5, 1997, 47-49 2L.pE Meyer (ed.), Tell ed-

Siqlu. Akkadian word for an ancient oriental weight from which the Hebrew term shekel and siglos (— Siclus) derive, ‘/eo of the mani (> Mina [1]) and /;600 of a biltu (- Talent). The Siqlu is recorded in

hundreds of cuneiform accounts from the 3rd mill. BC onwards. In the Mesopotamian system of weights the manu weighed 499.98 g, the Siqlu 8.333 g [3. 510]. A shekel of 11.4 g, corresponding to the Phoenician shekel [2. 21], is recorded in Judaea and Samaria in c. 738 BC [1. 612]. The Persians adopted the Babylonian system; under Darius [1] I, the man# was increased to 504 g, and the siqlu to 8.40 g. The new standard can be inferred from Herodotus (3,89), according to which 1 Babylonian talent corresponded to 70 Euboean (i.e. Attic) mina [1. 623] in the Persian period. Surviving weights turn out to be somewhat lighter [1. 624]. The Siqlu was minted in gold as a > dareikos. The Attic > tetradrachmon was counted as 2 sigla and became widespread in the Achaemenid Empire [1. 615 f.]. For Siqlu as a silver coin cf. > siclus. As often found with ancient oriental weights, the mand and therefore also the siglu occur with double weight under the same names (16.66 g) from the late Assyrian period (7th cent. BC) onwards. Epiphanius specifies the weight of a Hebrew shekel as */, of a Roman > uncia = 6.66 g (further passages: [4. 2317 f.]). —+ Money 1 A.D.H. Brvar, Achaemenid Coins, Weights and Measures, in: The Cambridge History of Iran, vol. 2, 1985,

610-639 2J.and A.G. Exayi, Recherches sur les poids phéniciens, 1997 3 M.PoweEL1, s.v. Mafse und Gewichte, RLA 7, 457-530 2 A, 2316-2322.

4 K.REGLING,s. v. Siglos, RE DLK.

Sirach (Zopia Dieax/Sophia Sirach). The apocryphal book of Jesus son of Sirach (Hebrew Ben Sira), one of the most significant works of > wisdom literature, was written in Hebrew in about 190 BC by S., a Jewish scribe from Jerusalem, and later translated into Greek by his grandson (cf. the preface). The earliest Hebrew fragments were found in > Qumran and > Masada;

503

504

two thirds of the Hebrew text were discovered in MSS of the Cairo > Genizah. Although not adopted into the canon of the Jewish tradition, S. is cited in the Talmud (> Rabbinical literature) as a canonical book. S. consists of individual aphorisms, which — without any clear structure — refer to quite diverse themes: the fear of God, forbearance and self-control, duty to parents, humility, love for the poor, the dangers of wealth, warning against female strangers, ruling in the right way. The ideal of the wise man, who dedicates his whole existence to the Torah (39,1-11), is linked to a high esteem of the cult and its priests (45,6 ff.; 50,1-21). One section comprehends the glorification of the Patriarchs (44,1-50,26); in it, in a kind of review of history, the great figures of biblical history from ~» Henoch to > Nehemiah are mentioned. Appended to it is a eulogy of the high priest Simon (50). The concept of reward plays a significant part as to the right course of action ~as it had in early aphoristic wisdom - (cf. e.g.

Sirbonis (LioePwvic Aiwvn/Sirbonis limneé). Coastal lake east of > Pelusium on the northeastern border of Egypt, separated from the Mediterranean by only a narrow strip of land, west of Mount -» Casium. According to Strabo, it was 200 stadia long, 50 stadia wide and rather deep (16,2,32; 16,2,42). The lake was claimed to be dangerous due to marshiness (cf. Diod. Sic. 1,30; 16,46) and to seaquakes (Str. 16,2,26). KJ-W.

SIRACH

1,13 ff.; 2,7 ff.; 7,1 ff. et passim; cf. in contrast the ‘crisis’ of wisdom in > Qoheleth). What is relevant to the history of ideas is the unification of wisdom and the Torah (24), which underlies the universality of the Torah. S. also stresses the perfection, purposiveness and rationality of the creation (39,24-34). S.’s discussion on the one hand shows clear influence of Greek — popular philosophy and gnomics (~~ Gnome), but with his emphasis on devotion to the Torah he appears to set himself against the increasing Hellenization of Judah and Jerusalem: He counters admiration of Greek culture with the glorious history of his own people and praise for the Patriarchs. M.HENGEL, Judentum und Hellenismus, 1988, 241-275;

J.Marpock, s. v. S./S.buch, TRE 31, 307-317 (bibliography); G. SAuER, Jesus S., 1981.

B.E.

Siraci (Zieaxoi/Sirakot, Latin Sirachi). Sarmatian tribe, which inhabited the steppe regions to the west of the Caspian Sea between the Maeotae and the Thatei (Mela 1,114). Under their king Ariphanes they supported Eumelus [4] against his brothers (Diod. 20,22: here Ooaxec is better read as ¥.). From the rst cent. AD

onwards the S. expanded southwards, where they are recorded on the Hypanis [1] (Ptol. 5,9,17: Leoaxd). Their cavalry supported Pharnaces [2] II (Str. 11,5,8) and, under their king Zorsines in 49 AD, Mithridates [9] VIII against Cotys [II 1] and C. Iulius [II 16] Aquila. In these conflicts their city of Uspe fell (Tac. Ann. 12,1 521; for the site of the city cf. [1]). In the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD they were among the strongest of the Sarmatian tribes, who continually caused unrest in the ~ Regnum Bosporanum (IOSPE 2,423). ~ Sarmatae 1 H. TREIDLER, s. v. Uspe, RE 9 A, 1092 f. V.F. GaypDuKEvi¢, Das Bosporanische Reich, 1971, 85 f., 324, 342, 356.

Lv.B.

Sirens (Zeofvec/Seirénes; Latin Sirenes, Sirenae). I. MytHoLocy

II. ICONOGRAPHY

I. MYTHOLOGY

Sirens are mythical beings (in Greek myth female) in ancient sailors’ tales (the earliest evidence — admittedly without context — extends back to the Mycenaean period [1]). Their seductive song makes sailors forget their home (cf. — Lotophagi) and perish. Instructed by + Circe, > Odysseus outwits the Sirens: he stops the ears of his companions with wax and has himself tied to the mast with instructions that under no circumstances he is to be freed. The Sirens’ alluring call —- they promise a song about Troy, Odysseus’ greatest feat, and omniscience — dies away, not unheard but without effect (Hom. Od. 12,39-5 4};12,15 8-200). In the legend of the -» Argonauts the Sirens are not outwitted, but literally ‘outsung’ by — Orpheus (Apoll. Rhod. 4,891-919; 4,1264-1290). The relationship between the two variants of the legend is disputed (most recently [2], with bibliography). The Sirens’ committing suicide because of the defeat is not found in literature before the Hellenistic period (Lycophr. 714). Early sources comment either not at all or only vaguely on their appearance (chimeras of birds and humans first in pictorial representations (see II), later Apoll. Rhod. 4,898 f.), origin (Soph. fr. 861 TrGF mentions > Phorcys [1] as their father) and number (two: Hom. Od. 12,52; three: Hes. Cat. 27; eight: Pl. Resp. 617b). The Sirens’ bewitching song forces comparison to singers (Hom. Od. 12,183196) and the > Muses (Alcm. fr. 30 PMGF). From there

it is but a step to the Sirens as a symbol of seduction (PI. Symp. 216a; Alexander [21] Aetolus fr. 7 CollAlex), often with negative connotation. In Roman literature there are no substantial representations apart from Ov. Ars am. 3,3 11-314; Mart. 3,64. 1H. MUu_estTEIN, Sirenen in Pylos, in: Glotta 36, 1957, 152-166 2G.Danek, Epos und Zitat, 1998, 252-255. G. WEICKER, s. v. Sirenen, ROSCHER 4, 601-639; A. HEU-

BECK et al., A Commentary on Homer’s Odyssey, Books 9-16, 1989, 118-120 (with bibliography). REN.

Il. ICONOGRAPHY Sirens are depicted as a chimera of birds and humans, in the earliest — from the second quarter of the 7th century onwards — sometimes male, even bearded (esp. in Corinthian objets d’art [4; 5. 1103; 6; 7]). The Sirens were among the elusive daemonic forces that appear in the early period, with no concrete myth con-

506

325

SIRMIUM

nected to them, individually or antithetically on numer-

P. Devos, Saint Sirin Martyr Khosrau I“ AvroSarvan, in:

ous vases [7]. After the middle of the 6th century the

Analecta Bollandiana 64, 1946, 87-131.

bird body disappeared, and female breasts and arms appear, holding instruments, fans, and pomegranates. Fertility is suggested by means of a > polos [3], tendrils, plants or Dionysian scenes [5. 1103]. On numerous vases and funerary monuments, however, Sirens are presented as daemons of death [2. 36 f.; 3; 4. 243-248; 5. 1099 no. 73]. Depictions of + Odysseus’ adventures with the Sirens start appearing on vases some hundred years after the composition of the epic [1. 288-302] and are also popular on Roman sarcophagi (— Sarcophagus) [8. 172-176, 253]. The menacing daemonic element disappeared at the end of the 5th cent. BC, when music-making or threnodic Sirens, now beautiful women with avian traits, became typical figures in cemeteries of the classical period, both as statues and in funerary reliefs [4. 151-186; II. 134-140; 12. 91-99]. These helpers and performers of lamentation for the dead were also widespread in the Hellenistic period; they were often represented in pairs, both clothed and naked; they were adopted into Roman wall painting and provincial Roman sculpture. In Christian late Antiquity, in the Middle Ages and in the modern period, Sirens symbolise the temptations of the world (often as a counterpart to an angel blowing a trombone) [ro]. 1B. ANDREAE, Odysseus. Mythos und Erinnerung (exhibition catalogue Munich), 1999 2 E.BuscHor, Die Musen des Jenseits, 1944 3 H.GROPENGIESSER, Sanger und Sirenen, in: AA 1977, 585-610 4E.HOFSTETTER, Sirenen im archaischen und klassischen Griechenland, 1990 Sl1d.,s. v. Sirenes, LIMC VIII 1, 1997, 1093-1104

6 U. Kopr-WENDLING, Die Darstellung der Sirenen in der griechischen Vasenmalerei des 7., 6. und 5. Jh. v. Chr., 1989 141

7E.Kunzg, Sirenen, in: MDAI(A) 57, 1932, 1248H.-I.Marrou, Mousik6s anér, 1938

9J.PoLLaRD,

Birds

in Greek

Life and

Myth,

1977

10 W.SALMEN, Musizierende Sirenen, in: F.KRINZINGER (ed.), Forschung und Funde. Festschrift B. Neutsch, 1980, 393-399 11 U. VEDDER, Untersuchungen zur plasti-

schen Ausstattung attischen Grabanlagen des 4. Jh. v. Chr., 1985 12 D.WoyscH-MéautTis, La représentation des animaux et des étres fabuleux sur les monuments funéraires grecs, 1982.

B.BA.

Siricius (Zigixoc/Sirikios, Latin Siricius). 4th century AD sophist from Neapolis [11] in Palaestina, pupil of Andromachus (cf. [1]). S. taught for a while in Athens and wrote Progymndsmata and Melétai (Suda, s. v. Lioeixioc; Nicolaus of Myra, Progymndsmata, in: [2]). 1L.Coun,

s.v.

Andromachos

2 SPENGEL 3, 465 (Kap. 4).

[20],

RE

1.2,

2154 SLA.

[2] See > Shirin. Siris (Xtotc; Siris). City to the north of the mouth of the river of the same name (modern Sinni) at modern Policoro on the Ionios Kolpos (Gulf of Taranto), surrounded by fertile land (Archil. fr. 18 D.; Timaios FGrH 566 F 5rf.; Aristot. fr. 584 R.). Mythical founding by Trojans, historical founding c. 670 BC on top of a previous epichoric settlement by Colophon (under the name Polieion: Str. 6,1,14). S. was destroyed in about the middle of the 6th century BC by a coalition of Achaean colonies (Lycophr. 978-992; Just. Epit. 20,2,3-9). Archaeological, numismatic and literary sources, however, suggest that the centre of the city of S. persisted (Hdt. 8,62,25 Str. loc.cit.). On the territory of S. there arose in 433 BC Heraclea [ro], the colony of Taras and Metapontum, for which S. functioned as a port. The remains of the centre of S. have been located on Policoro Hill. Necropoleis demonstrate coexistence of Greek and indigenous people. Connections with Asia Minor can be discerned in the cult of Athena Ilias and of Calchas (Lycophr. 979-983). On the slopes of the Castello Hill there are traces of a chthonic sanctuary. A. DE SIENA (ed.), S.-Polieion, 1986; S. e l’influenza ionica

in Magna Grecia (Atti del 20. convegno di studi sulla Magna Grecia, 1980), 1987;

L.Moscati CASTELNUOVO,

S., 1989; G.Camassa, I culti delle poleis italiote, in: V.Marcui (ed.), Storia del Mezzogiorno, vol. 1, 1991, 467-471; E.GRECO (ed.), Siritide e Metapontino, 1998.

A.MU.

Sirius see > Constellations

Sirmio. Township and peninsula south of — Lacus Benacus (Catull. 31; Paulus Diaconus, Historia Langobardorum 3,31: Sermiana), modern Sirmione on

Lake Garda. It has been shown that there were Bronze Age stilt-house settlements on the peninsula. In S. Catullus [rt] owned a villa, but probably not ‘Le Grotte di Catullo’, a villa from the beginning of the rst cent. AD with — wall paintings (reminiscent of the Third Pompeian Style); the station S. on the road from Brixia to Verona may have been farther south (It. Ant. T27o:)s

R.Boscui, Sirmione, 1987; E.RoFFIA, Nuove richerche sulla villa romana di Sirmione, in: Archeologia e architettura romanica nel Basso Garda bresciano, 1991, 7-18; N.Criniti

(ed.), Societa e cultura della ‘Cisalpina’ tra

tarda antichita e altomedioevo, in: Giornata Catulliana di Sirmione, 1995; TIR L 32 Mediolanum, 1966, 124.

M.M.MO.

Sirin

K.SA.

[1] (2ton; Sire). Persian martyr, died AD 559. S. was the

daughter of a respected Persian magus, who after her conversion to Christianity was publicly executed by hanging under the Persian king Chosroes [5] I.

Sirmium. Pannonian city with a port on the Savus to the northwest of > Singidunum, modern Sremska Mitrovica. Around S. lived the indigenous Amantini (cf. App. Ill. 63 for the period before the Roman conquest in

507

508

35 BC: “They live not in cities, mOAetc, but in fields or villages in family units, xd®uac xata ovyyévevay; they did not meet in assemblies and had no officials either”). Under the Flavians S. was colonia, tribus Quirina (CIL Ill 4991); there is inscriptional evidence of duumviri, decurio, ordo, quaestor. S. was an imperial residence under Licinius [II 4]. In S. Decius [II 1] was born, Claudius [III 2] II died of plague in 270 AD, Probus [1] was born and in 282 killed. There are archaeological remains of an imperial palace, a hippodrome, two large necropoleis, a horreum (‘granary’), and imperial baths.

coins, clay bullae) and by references to the temple in late

SIRMIUM

A. Mocsy, Die Bevélkerung von Pannonien, 1939, 77-973 M.Mirkovic, S., 1971; TIR L 34, Aquincum — Sarmizegetusa — Sirmium, 1968, 103; V. Popovic (ed.), S., 2 vols., 1971/2. PI.CA.

Siron (Ziewv; Sirén). Epicurean philosopher, rst cent.

BC, who lived and worked in Neapolis. Known only from sparse testimonies [1]. It is uncertain whether he wrote at all. S. was an acquaintance of > Philodemus (fr. 1) and a friend of > Cicero (fr. 2-5). His most famous student was doubtlessly the Roman poet + Vergilius who in his youth had studied Epicurean philosophy with him and remained close to him throughout his life (fr. 6-13). 1 M. GrcantTeE, I frammenti di Sirone, in: Paideia 45, 1990,

175-198.

TD.

Sirona. Celtic goddess of springs and healing, cult partner of > Apollo Grannus. There are presently nine epigraphically supported individual dedications to (predominantly Dea) S. against 15 for Apollo (Grannus) and S. Further indicators of the functions of S. in Imperial Period representations are the iconographic adoption ofa snake coiled around her arm, an attribute of - Hygieia/— Salus, a second type of image with a branch or fruit and the sites where votive offerings are found, viz. at (healing) springs and spas. Outside Gallia Belgica and Germania superior, inscriptional dedications to S. alone can be found sporadically in Gallia Celtica, Aquitania and Lugdunensis. Apollo/S. dedications, in contrast, did not make their way into western Gaul, but are documented in Raetia, Noricum, Pannonia, Dacia and in one case in Rome. A.M. Nacy,s.v. S., LIMC 7.1, 779-781 (bibliogr.).

ME.

Sis. Place in Azerbaijan mentioned by Moslem authors. In the middle of the limestone interplateau projecting slightly over the plain was a more than 60 m deep (lifeless) lake. $. is located about 30 km to the north of Takab and identical with Taht-e Soleiman. During the Sassanid period, it was the location of one of the three main fire temples of the empire (AzurguSnasp). The close relationship between this place and the Sassanid kings of the sth-7th cents. (+ Sassanids) is documented by its autonomous administrative status, by archaeological finds (walls, temple complex,

altars, vessels,

Sassanid literature and in Ferdowsi’s Sabname (mostly in the context of royal visits and gifts) [1; 3]. In AD 624, §. was destroyed by the emperor — Heraclius [7]

[4.315 ff.; 2. 16 f.], but later it was rebuilt and used again. In the second half of the 13th cent., the ilhan Abaga built an enormous hunting palace over the ruins of the temple (primarily the southern half). 1M.Boyce,

s.v.

Adur

Gu8nasp,

Enclr

1, 475-476

2 J.HowarD-JoHNSTON, Heraclius’ Persian Campaigns, in: War in History 6, 1999, 1-44. 3 R. Naumann, Die Ruinen von Tacht-e Suleiman und Zendan-e Suleiman, 1977 4K.ScHIPPMANN, Die iranischen Feuerheiligtiimer, JW.

1971, 309-3 57-

Siscia. Roman settlement in — Pannonia superior (‘Sicce’, Geogr. Rav. 4,20; eyeownn/Segestiké, Str. 7,5,2) at the confluence of the Colapis (modern Kulpa) and Savus (modern Sava), modern Sisak in Croatia. The region had already been settled in the preRoman period. In 35 BC it came under Roman rule. In the rst cent. AD the Legio IX Hispania was stationed there until 42/3. Under Vespasian, S. was elevated to a colonia, under Septimius [II 7] Severus designated Colonia Flavia Septimia. Officials mentioned in inscriptions

are

—decurio

[1],

— duoviri,

— praefectus,

flamen (-> Flamines) and Augustalis [1]. S. was connected by road with + Emona, > Poetovio and > Sirmium. The river port was exploited economically and militarily. Remains of buildings, an aqueduct, production of ceramic and metal goods, as well as inscriptions and coins survive. S was also significant in Late Antiquity as the site of a mint and the base of a river fleet. TIR L 33 Trieste, 1961, 67 (sources and bibliography); J. Sa8EL, s. v. S., RE Suppl. 14, 702-741. J.BU.

Sisenna I. Lire

Il. Worxs

I. LIFE

L. Cornelius S., from a senatorial family probably of Etruscan origin, born no later than 118 BC, performed military service in the Social Wars (probably under > Cornelius [I 90] Sulla). It is unclear whether in the 80s he was in Rome (as [2] believes) or in the East with Sulla [3. 215]. Praetor in 78 [7. 22] and after that

probably governor of Sicily (Cic. Verr. 2,2,110: MRR 2, 90); in 70 BC, he was involved in the defence of > Verres (Cic. Verr. 2,4,43); as legate of Cn. > Pompeius [I 3] in 67, he was commander in Greece during the campaign against the pirates (App. Mithr. 95,435) and died of a disease in Crete (Cass. Dio 36,19,r). Il. Works Asan orator, S. was competent but not brilliant (Cic. Brut. 228; Leg. 1,7). Because of Ov. Tr. 2,443 f., a Latin translation of the Milésiakd of > Aristides [2] is ascri-

bed to him ([6. 331-333] is skeptical). His Historiae

510

509

were widely appreciated, a historical work on the Social Wars, the rule of the Mariani and the dictatorship of Sulla; it contained more than 13 books, of which some 140 (for the most part very short) fragments survive. Although the last datable fragment deals with November 82 BC (HRR 1, 295, no. 132), the work probably continued as far as 79/8, so the Historiae of > Sallustius [II 3] would have followed on immediately. Its detailed presentation comprised military events as well as domestic politics and made use of the dramatic means of Hellenistic historiography (dreams; ~- speeches); Cicero (Leg. 1,7) criticized its one-sided dependence on

~ Cleitarchus [2]. The language of his Historiae combined pre-classical versatility with influences from the doctrina of his own time (analogical forms and neologisms; rhetorical figures in the speeches). Its pro-Sullan approach (Sall. lug. 95,2) did not affect the appreciation of the work. According to Cicero (Brut. 228), S. excelled all his antecedents; his work was used by Sallust and > Livius [III 2] (Liv. Per. 79; see HRR 1, p. 294 no. 129). The archaists of the Imperial period naturally drew on his works (Tac. Dial. 23,2; Gell. NA 12,15,1). 1 E. BAp1AN, The Early Historians, in: T. A. Dorey (ed.), Latin Historians, 1966, 25 f. 2Id., Where was S.?, in: Athenaeum 42, 1964, 422-431 3 E.CANDILORO, Sulle Historiae di L. Cornelio S., in: Studi Classici e Orientali I2, 1963, 212-226 4 P.FRASSINETTI, S. e la guerra sociale, in: Athenaeum 50, 1972, 78-113 5 W.D. LEBEK, Verba Prisca, 1970, 267-286 6E.Rawson, L.

Cornelius S. and the Early First Century B. C., in: CQ N. S. 29, 1979, 327-346 (= Rawson, Culture, 363-388) 7 SHERK. FRAGMENTS: HRR 1, 276-297; G.BARABINO, Frammenti delle Historiae di Lucio Cornelio S., in: Studi Noniani 1, 1967, 67-251. W.K.

Sisium (Siovov/Sision, Dicovov/Sission). Town in Cilicia

Pedias, modern Kozan. A 7th-cent. BC king of Kundi (Kyinda) and Sizu is documented here [1. 57 f.7*]. S. was a border fortress of the Byzantines and the Arabs in the 8th-roth centuries, capital of the kingdom of Little Armenia (until 1375), an Armenian archbishopric. 1 A. ErZEN, Kilikien bis zum E. der Perserherrschaft, 2 H1LD/HELLENKEMPER, Ss. V. S.

1940 F.H.

Sistrum (Greek oioteov/sistron). Egyptian musical instrument, a bronze rattle, used particularly in the cult of > Isis. Two forms are known: 1) stirrup sistrum: grip or handle with a U-shaped frame; between the arms three moving cross-pieces, on which in an earlier period metal rings were threaded. 2) naos sistrum: in the form of a temple gate, i.e. between rectangular and slightly trapezoidal. Statue representing Isis with a sistrum cf. [x. 128, cat. no. 51]. With the spread of the Isis cult in the Greek and Roman worlds the sistrum also spread, including as a votive gift in Greek sanctuaries [2]. 1 J. EINGARTNER, Isis und ihre Dienerinnen in der Kunst der romischen Kaiserzeit, 1991

2 A.LAMBROPOULOU, A

SISYPHUS

Bronze S. from the Sanctuary of Syme/Crete, in: AA 1999,

514-521.

N. GENAIBLE, S.v. S., LA 5, 959-965.

AVS.

Sisygambis (Siovyaupic/Sisygambis, in Diodorus mostly Diovyyaupeic/Sisyngambris). Daughter of Ostanes, a brother of > Artaxerxes [2] II, sister and wife of Arsames [2] (Diod. Sic.17,5,5), as well as the mother of > Darius [3] III. In 333 BC, after the battle of Issus she fell into the hands of Alexander [4] the Great (Arr. Anab. 2,11,9; Plut. Alexander 21; Curt. 3,11,24) and was treated with deference by him (cf. her rescue of the rebellious Uxians: Curt. 5,3,12ff.). She stayed behind with Prince Ochus and her granddaughters — Stateira [3] and Drypetis in 33 1 BC in Susa (Diod. Sic. 17,67,1); there, she also probably received the body of her son (Plut. Alexander 43). After Alexander’s death she is said to have starved herself to death because of her grief (DiodauSicuananncsac Gurtemnons.2 Mite UStmee pits LASTS) 2 . 1 BervE, Vol. 2, Nr. 711.

jw.

Sisyphus (Ziovdoc; Sisyphos). Mythical fraudster and penitent in the Underworld. Son of > Aeolus [1], father

of + Glaucus [2], grandfather of -— Bellerophon, founder and king of Corinth (+ Corinthus), legendary and proverbial fraudster, who as a punishment in the + Underworld has to roll a rock up a mountain, but every time just before reaching the summit it rolls back down into the valley (Hom. Od. 11,593-600). S. earns the punishment by conquering death (i.e. abandoning the boundaries placed on humans, cf. > Asclepius), for which sources give differing versions: (a) S. escapes from the Underworld (Alc. fr. 38a VorcT), by cajoling + Persephone (Thgn. 702-712). (b) S. informs the river god Asopus of the abduction of his daughter > Aegina by > Zeus, who sends > Thanatos (Death) to punish him. S. puts Thanatos in chains and for that reason humans no longer die. + Ares sets Thanatos free and hands over to him S., who has forbidden his wife ~» Merope [1] to perform the customary death ritual, however. Ostensibly to rebuke her S. returns to the Overworld — and, of course, remains above (Pherecydes FGrH 3 F 119). The sources continue: S. convicts the notorious thief > Autolycus [1] of cattle rustling by pre-emptively marking the hooves of his cattle (Polyaenus, Strat. 6,52; Hyg. Fab. 201; subject of Euripides’s satyr play Autdlykos). Furthermore, S. is supposed to have seduced Autolycus’s daughter > Anticlea before her wedding to —> Laertes, making S. the father of ~» Odysseus (Aesch. fr. 175 TrGF; Soph. Phil. 1311; Eur. Iph. A. 524). In this story the primary point seems to have been to vilify Odysseus. Finally the founding of the Isthmian Games (— Isthmia) is ascribed to S. (Pind. fr. 5; Apollod. 3,29; Paus. 2,1,3). S. was a favourite subject on the Attic stage. Aeschylus [1], Sophocles [1], Euripides [1] and Critias (?) wrote on the subject to

511

512)

some extent several times (obviously mostly in satyr plays, but Aristot. Poet. 1456a 19 describes S.’s punishment as a subject suitable for tragedy). In pictorial representations the rock-rolling predominates. > Underworld

43,3), and secretaries (+ grammateis) and other officials ate with them [1.7-20] (these officials are called ~ aeisitoi, ‘regular eaters’; [1.86,84]). The archons (> archontes) ate in the thesmotheteion (Schol. Plat.

SISYPHUS

E. WILIscH, s. v. S., ROSCHER 4, 958-972.; J. H. OAKLEY, s. v. S. (1), LIMC 7.1, 781-787. REN.

Sitalces (itdAxye/Sitalkés). {1] King of Thrace in the second half of the 5th cent. BC,

son of > Teres, the founder of the Odrysae kingdom, brother of + Sparadocus. The Thracian-Scythian conflict with his nephew > Octamasades was resolved by S. handing over > Scyles. In 431 BC his brother-in-law Nymphodorus from Abdera mediated a treaty between S. and Athens and one between Perdiccas [2] and Athens (Thuc. 2,29; cf. Aristoph. Ach. 141-153; Diod. Sic. 12,50,3; StV 165). S.’ son, Sadocus, was given Attic

citizenship (Thuc. 2,29,5; 2,67,2). In 429 S. fought against the Macedonians and Chalcidians, but retreated on the advice of his nephew and successor Seuthes {1] (Thuc. 2,95-101; Diod. Sic. 12,50,4-7; 51,2). He died in a battle against the Triballi in 424 (Thuc. Aa LOls5)s

Cu. M. Danov, Altthrakien, 1976, 292-317; Z. H. ARCHIBALD, The Odrysian Kingdom of Thrace, 1998, 102-125.

(2] Thracian troop leader, in Alexander’s [4] army from no later than 333 BC and involved in the killing of + Parmenion [1] in 330. Because of complaints from his subordinates Alexander had him executed in Media [3 2/5(Amre Anabeins 2854-125 54.05)249395155h 254513520535

Gea 7nahte)s BERVE 2, 712; HECKEL, 334.

UP.

Siteresion (ovtneéovov/sitérésion, ‘maintenance money’). In Greece from the middle of the 5th cent. BC money was paid out for maintenance to citizens serving as equestrians, foot soldiers or oarsmen on warships. Hence the terms 1006c/misthds, toopt/trophe, oitoc/ sitos and siteresion were used synonymously in the sth century BC. From the 4th cent. BC onwards a clearer distinction was made between > soldiers’ pay and contributions for maintenance (= siteresion) (Xen. An. 6,2,4; Dem. Or. 4,28 f.; 50,53; Aristot. Oec. 13.534 19-23). 1 V.GaABRIELSEN, Financing the Athenian Fleet, 1994, t1o-114 2G.T. GriFFiTH, The Mercenaries of the Hellenistic World, 1935, 264-307. 3M.Launey, Recherches sur les armées hellénistiques, repr. 1987, 725-7353 TS Smafi52

Phd. 235d; location unknown). (b) Recipients of major honours were given the permanent right of sétesis, in Athens in the > prytaneion (e.g. Dem. Or. 20,120) [2: 275-78]. (c) Envoys from foreign states (e.g. Dem. Or.19,234f.) and citizens who had served as envoys to foreign states (e.g. Dem. Or. 19,31f.) were entertained on a single occasion. A similar invitation could be issued to lesser honorands [2.262-75]; this invitation was to xénia (‘hospitality’) for foreigners, to deipnon (‘dinner’) for citizens — probably the same entertainment. For epigraphic instances outside Athens see

[3392-3945 4,518]. 2 A.S. Henry, Honours and Privile1 Agora 15, 1974 3 W.LaRFELD, Griechiges in Athenian Decrees, 1983 sche Epigraphik, 1914, 392-394 4Id., Handbuch der griechischen Epigraphik, vol. 1, 1907, 518 f. 5 P.J. RHODES, Commentary on the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia, 1981, 308f. 6Id., Evia and detnvov in the Prytaneum, in: ZPE 57, 1984, 193-199. PJ.R.

Sithon (ZiOwv/Sithon). Thracian king (Tzetz. on Lycoph. 583; 1161; 1356), prince of the > Odomanti (Parthenius 6) or of the + Chersonesus [1] (Conon

FGrH 26 F ro). Eponym of the > Sithones. Son of — Ares (Tzetz. l.c.) or > Poseidon and Ossa (Conon l.c.). With Mendeis (Conon l.c.) or Neilus’ daughter

Achiroe or Anchinoe (Tzetz. l.c.), he had daughters -» Pallene [2] (Parthenios |.c.; Conon I.c.) and Rhoetea

(Tzetz. l.c.). S. has the suitors of Pallene fight one another, until only > Dryas [4] and > Cleitus [4] remain. He also does not intend to give his daughter to Cleitus, who is victorious with her help, but, on the contrary, to kill him. By divine intervention, however, the murder is prevented (Parthenius l.c.; Conon l.c.). According to Nonnus (Dion. 48,90-237) > Dionysus kills S., taking Pallene as his wife. Sithones (LWWdvec/Sithones, LiOwvec/Sithones). The S., counted by Str. 7a,1,11 as a group of the > Edones in Thrace, may have been the original inhabitants of ~ Sithonia and its hinterland, driven back by Chalcidians from — Euboea [1] colonising the region. Their relationship to the Sithoni mentioned in Plin. HN 4,41 on the coast of the Black Sea is unknown. M.B. Harzopoutos, Actes de vente de la Chalcidique centrale, 1988, 52 f.; Id., Grecs et barbares dans les cités de l’arriére-pays de la Chalcidique, in: Klio 71, 1989, 60— 65.

M.Z.

WS.

Sitesis (citnoic/sitésis). Provision of food at public expense, on a particular occasion or regularly. There were three categories of recipients [5.3.08f.]: (a) Officials had the right of sitesis during their term of office; in + Athens the > prytdneis ate in the tholos (Ath. Pol.

Sithonia (XWwvia/Sithonia). Middle finger-like promontory of the Chalcidian peninsula, which, together with its hinterland, was the settlement area of the Chalcidians. The cities of > Olynthus, > Mecyberna, - Sermylia, Pilorus, > Assera and possibly > Stolus can be located to the north of the isthmus where > Singus was

514

513 and Gale, Torone and — Sarte to the south of it. These cities are in the Athenian tribute lists, some from 454/3 BC, some not until shortly before 432, when, except for Torone and Sarte, they seceded from Athens, some losing their inhabitants to Olynthus; in 42.4/3-422 Torone had temporarily also seceded. The peace of Nicias (> Peloponnesian War D.) specified a return to the circumstances of the pre-war period (Thuc. 5,18), but it is not known to what extent the Athenians were able to enforce it. In the first half of the 4th cent. the cities of the peninsula were sporadically members of the Chalcidian League, before becoming Macedonian in

SITOU DIKE

tria in the Zenon Archive, in: Bulletin of the American

Society of Papyrologists 25, 1988, 13-98.

W.A.

Sitones. People neighbouring the Suiones, ruled at the time of Tacitus (Tac. Germ. 45,6) by a woman. Their area of settlement cannot be ascertained, possibly in modern Finland. A.A. Lunp (ed.), P. Cornelius Tacitus, Germania, 1988, 237 f.; G. PERL, Tacitus, Germania, in: J. HERRMANN (ed.),

Griechische und lateinische Quellen zur Frithgeschichte Mitteleuropas ..., vol. 2, 1990, 257 f.; J.B. Rives, Tacitus, Germania, 1999, 321. RA.WI.

349/8. F.Papazoc.Lou, Les villes de Macedoine a l’€poque romaine, 1988, 429-431; M.ZAHRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 229 f.

M.Z.

Sitifis. City in Mauretania Caesariensis, modern Sétifin Algeria (Zitipo/Sitipha, Ptol. 4,2,34; Sitifi, It. Ant. 24,7), from the time of Nerva colonia Nerviana Augusta Martialis veteranorum Sitifensium (cf. CIL VIII 2, 8473 et passim). Before AD 288 S. was a centre of the newly created province of Mauretania Sitifensis. A population of a Punic character also lived in S.. In AD 372 S. was the headquarters of the imperial troops in the campaign against Firmus [3]. Under Iustinianus [r] I S. was the capital of the province of Mauretania Prima (Procop. Vand. 2,20,30) with new fortifications (Procop. Aed. 6,7,9). Inscriptions: CIL VIII 1, 4692; 2, 8422; 8432-8654; 10337-10368; suppl. 2, 18602; 3,

20340-20416; 22403-22409; 22543; AE 1955, 573 1969-1970,

718;

1972,

743;

1992,

1908;

1993,

1777 £.; 1995, 1780 f. Archaeological remains: temple, theatre, amphitheatre, circus, hippodrome, necropoleis, two Christian funerary basilicae, water tower, traces of streets with ground-plans of houses. AAAIg, Plate 16, Nr. 364; N. BENSEDDIK, Nouvelles inscriptions de Sétif, in: Bull. d’Archéologie Algérienne 7 (1977-1979), 1986, 33-52; P.-A. FEvRIER, Inscriptions de

Sitophylakes

(oitodviaxec/sitophylakes,

‘grain-over-

seers’). It was their function in Athens to monitor the

price of unmilled > grain, and to ensure that millers sold flour in accordance with the price of barley, and bakers bread in accordance with the price of wheat. They also inspected the weight of the bread (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 51,3), and had to ascertain that the grainmerchants respected all the rules governing their trade (Lys. 22,16). The sitophylakes kept precise lists stating the amount and origin of imported grain (Dem. Or. 20,32). Although sitophylakes are attested only for Athens, it is to be assumed that the grain trade was also controlled in other poleis (ML no. 30 on > Teos; functionaries similar to sitophylakes are attested for > Tauromenium: Syll.3 954,25; 65; 97; ottouéteasitomeétrai:

Aristot.

Pol.

1299a

23;

— Sitometria).

In

Athens, initially five sitophylakes were annually chosen by lot for the city, and five for the port; at an unmentioned date, probably c.325 BC, their number was increased to 20 for the city and 15 for the port (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 51,3). + Grain Trade, Grain Import 1 GARNSEY, 139-142 27.J. FiGuerRa, Sitopolai and S. in Lysias’ Against the Graindealers, in: Phoenix 40, 1986, 149-171

3 RHODES,

577-579

4R.SEAGER, Lysias

Against the Corndealers, in: Historia 15, 1966, 172-184. S.v.R.

Sétif et de la région, in: Bull. d’Archéologie Algérienne 4

(e.g. Hyp. F 271a Biass; Aristot. Pol. 1299a 23; documented as late as the Roman Imperial Period) and from a special store (cf. + rations for > mercenaries). S. could also mean a daily or monthly payment, in money, from the state or from a private source. Such payments were not necessarily regular or tied to the status of the recipient.

Sitou dike (citov dixn; sitou diké). Literally a ‘claim’ for maintenance in the form of ‘grain’ or ‘bread’. In ancient Athens, a man who, after > engyésis (establishment of husband’s rights) but before cohabitation (> ékdosis [x]) with the woman concerned, had already received the dowry (> prox), or retained the dowry after dissolution of the marriage, had to pay the woman annual maintenance amounting to 18 % of the value of the dowry (1.5 % per month). The > kyrios (‘head of household’) might levy sitou dike for a woman in his charge, or take up dixn mooixdg (diké proikos, ‘dowry proceedings’; Dem. Or. 59,52). According to the lexica (Anecd. Bekk. 238; Harpocr. s. v. oitos), sitou dike might also be granted against the — epitropos [2] (‘guardian’) of a ward (cf. Aristot. Ath. Pol. 56,7).

H.DrrscHerL, Die Sitonia von Oxyrhynchos: Menge, Kosten, Finanzierung, 6konomische Bedeutung und Dauer (MBAH 18,1), 1999, 72 f.; G.F. FRANKO, Sitome-

A.R. W. Harrison, The Law of Athens, vol. 1, 1968, 57-66, 104; G. THUR, Armut, in: D. Simon (ed.), Eherecht und Familiengut in Antike und Mittelalter, 1992, 121-132

(1970), 1972, 319-410; M.LEGLay, Monuments, vol. 2, 1966, 265-285;

Saturne Africain. C.LEPELLEY, Les cités de l’Afrique romaine ..., vol. 2, 1981, 497-503; E. LiPINSKI, s.v. Sétif, DCPP, 407; A.MoHaMepr et al., Fouil-

les de Sétif (1977-1984), 1991.

W.HU.

Sitometria (o.touetoia; sitometria). The ‘allotment’ of

grain to the citizens of Greek states through a sitométrés

(esp. 127).

G.T.

SITTACE

516

515

Sittace (Diwtdun/Sittake, cf. Hecat. FGrH 1 F 285). City

Situla

in and eponym of the region of Sittacene (in Mesopotamia), later called Apolloniatis. Antiochus [5] Ill won a victory over the rebellious Molon [1] there in 220 BC (Pol. 5,53,2 ff.) and established his own administrative district. In the Parthian Period the border between Apolloniatis and Babylonia ran near Seleucia [x] (Isidorus from Charax, Stathmoi Parthikoi 2). If Xen. An. 2,4,13 and 2,4,25 confused S. and Opis [3] (modern Tulul al-Mugaili‘), S. would probably be identifiable with Imam al-Saih Gabir (1. 114 ff.]. After the battle of > Gaugamela the Carians and the Sittacenes were deported (Arr. Anab. 3,8,5).

I. IraALic, CELTIC AND GERMANIC II. GRAECO-ROMAN

1 O.LENDLE, Kommentar zu Xenophons Anabasis (bks. I-7), 1995.

j.W.

Sittas (Littac, Ztittac/Sittas, Ztittas; Latin also Zetas and the like: [1. 1160]). Magister utriusque militiae in AD 530-538/9; doryphoros of — Iustinianus [1] even before the latter’s elevation to emperor. First magister militum

per Armeniam

in 528

(Cod.

lust.

1,29,5;

[2. 266 f.]). Married a sister of > Theodora (Ioh. Mal. 430). Magister utriusque militiae praesentalis in 53053 8/9; killed in an ambush in 538/9 in a battle against the Armenians (Procop. Pers. 2,3,19-26). 1 PLRE 3, 1160-1163 nians, vol. 1, 1960.

2 B. Ruin, Das Zeitalter Justi-

WE.LU.

Sittius (also Sitiuvs). Italian personal name, originally Campanian [1. 232].

[1] S., P. Son of a citizen of Nuceria [1] who in 91-88 BC was loyal to Rome (Cic. Sull. 58), an entrepreneur with an estate in Campania, engaged in the grain trade with the Mauretanian kings, until the Civil War a friend of Cicero. In 63 S. recruited troops in Spain, probably for > Catilina; when the conspiracy failed he fled with them to northern Africa in order to avoid prosecution. P. Cornelius [I 89] Sulla financed this undertaking by selling S.’ land. A later judgment banished S. from Rome [2]; in 51 he appears as a potential supplier of panthers for games (> Venatio; Cic. Fam. 8,2,2; 8,4,5 et passim). In 46 S. joined Caesar’s side together with Bocchus [2] II of Mauretania, invaded Numidia with his private army and took Cirta, the capital of Iubas [1] I (Cass. Dio 43,3,1-4; Bell. Afr. 25,2 f.); after a victory over — Saburra he took possession of the country (Cass. Dio 43,4,6; 8,4), for which Caesar gave him Cirta together with the land around it, where S. settled his soldiers like regular veterans (App. Civ. 4,233; Plin. HN 5,22; [3. 65-77]). In the spring of 44 he was killed by Arabion, the son of > Massinissa (App. Civ. 4,234), and this was now almost welcomed by Cicero (Cic. Att. TG)

=

1SCHULZE

2 J.HEuRGON, La lettre de Cicéron a P. S.

(Ad Fam. 5,17), Latomus 9, 1950, 369-377

3 L. TeutscH, Das romische Stadtewesen in Nordafrika, 1962.

JO.F.

I. ITALIC, CELTIC AND GERMANIC

Bucket-shaped vessel, as a rule metal, for the carrying and short-term holding of liquids. The shape is generally conical, with flat shoulders and a wide opening, on which a carrying handle was often also fixed with eyelets. The bottom, body and rim were mostly fashioned separately, then riveted together. In Etruria situlae are recorded from the 9th cent. BC onwards and were widely distributed there from the Orientalising Period on. Situlae had far greater significance, however, in the eastern Hallstatt area (> Hallstatt culture) and the bordering regions from southeastern Germany through Austria and Slovenia to Hungary, just as in the areas of the > Golasecca and - Este cultures and the eastern Po Valley. Situlae were among the most significant bearers of decoration there and were produced until the 3rd cent. BC. This ‘situla art’ reflects the processing of cultural influences from central and southern Italy, since, although artists modelled their work after Etruscan and Greek originals, they depicted people with clothing and objects from their own sphere. The motifs of situla art are also found on helmets, belt hooks and other objects. Aristocratic life, war activities, festival processions and symposium scenes alternate with representations of animals, primarily birds. The repertory is for the most part represented in horizontal bands on the decorated surface. In the later Iron Age (5th—1st cent. BC), among the Celts to the north of the Alps, as later also among the Germanic peoples of the first cents. AD, situlae occur as Mediterranean imports (luxury crockery). In scholarly literature, the term situla is also transferred to particular Germanic clay vessels, of the period around the birth of Christ, that are characterised by a significantly drawn-in lower part. They form an important part of Germanic burial ceramics in certain regions, e.g. among

the Germans of the Elbe. + Etrusci, Etruria; -» Germanic archaeology map); > Toreutics; > Villanova culture

(with

O.-H. Frey, Die Entstehung der Situlenkunst, 1969;J.KaSTELIC, Situlenkunst, 1964; W.LucKE, O.-H. Frey, Die Situla. in Providence, 1962; R. MULLER, Grabfunde der Jastorf- und Laténezeit an unterer Saale und Mittelelbe, 1985, 102 f.; R.von Ustar, Westgermanische Bodenfunde, 1938. C.KO.

Il. GRAECO-ROMAN Bronze buckets with carrying handles were widespread, particularly in Greek lower Italy, and were also often imitated in ceramics there. Since they were often used for transporting wine, they are often depicted in Dionysian pictorial art. In Roman culture situlae, or situli, were produced in various materials (bronze, glass, wood, brass or silver), were also used to transport water and wine, and furthermore to collect rainwater

517

518

(Cato Agr. 10,2) and for bailing (Vitr. 10,4,4). Striking

10,76), a drinking vessel (Ath. 11,475c; related to the skyphos, Ath. 11,499f; in Plut. Cleomenes 13,4 probably a phiale) or a scoop (Athen. 11,501e) could be called a skaphé; part of a water clock (Vitr. 9,8,5) and

examples are the silver ostentation pieces of the Roman Imperial period, e.g. from the — silver treasures of Hildesheim. W.Hicers, Lateinische GefafSnamen (BJ, 31. Beiheft), 1969, 77-79, 282f. Nr. 340; G.ZAHLHAAS, Grofgriechische und rémische Metalleimer, 1971; A. KossaTz-

DEISSMANN, Eine neue Phrygerkopf-S. des Toledo-Malers, in: AA 1990, 505-520. RH.

the concave dial face of a sundial (> Clocks) was called

a skaphé. In the festive procession of the Panathenaea, metoikoi in red chitones carried skaphai filled with honey or wax (e.g. Ael. VH 6,1; Harpocr., Hsch., Suda s. v. oxagnpooor; cf. Ath. 8,33 5b). Such skaphéphoroi have been recognised on the panels of the northern and southern

Situlus see > Situla Siwa see Ammonium

Six Hundred (to tén hexakosion synédrion). From the death of + Timoleon in 337 BC until > Agathocles’ [2] coup d’état in 316 the oligarchy of the Six Hundred played a prominent part in the politics of > Syracusae. Owing to the disparate sources, the origins, competence, composition and statutory status of the SH are unclear (cf. summary in [r]). > Diodorus [18] (19,5,6), for instance, describes the SH sometimes as a regular constitutional body and sometimes as a political faction (> Hetairia [2]), which has led to different views among modern scholars as well, on this question in particular (cf. [2]). According to the probably correct view of [1] and [3. 79] the SH had been established by Timoleon during his constitutional reform as a legal council to which the most prominent and richest Syracusans belonged. From c. 330 onwards the SH were under the leadership of Sosistratus [1] and Heraclides and increasingly came into conflict with the democrats under Agathocles, who opposed them at first with varying success (Diod. Sic. 19,3,3-4,4) but with his coup d’état in 316 eliminated them definitively (Diod. Sic. 19,5,4-

6,6). 1S.N. ConsoL_o LaNGHER, Le istituzioni di Siracusa in

eta arcaica e classica. Il problema del Consiglio dei Seicento, in: Id., Siracusa e la Sicilia Greca tra eta arcaica e alto ellenismo, 1996, 255-315 (=Id., in: Helikon 9/10, 1969/70, 107-143) 2H.BeERVvE, Die Herrschaft des Agathokles (SBAW 1952.5), 21-45 with note 17 3 M.Sorp1, Timoleonte, 1961.

SKENE, SCAENA

K.MEI.

Sixtus see > Xystus [3]; > Xystus [4]

Skaphe (oxdn, oxadis, oxddrov, oxddoc/skaphé, skaphis, skaphion; Latin scapha, scaphium). Frequently used term for a basin, tank, vat, trough (or a small boat) or a wood or metal tub, a receptacle used agriculturally (Hom. Od. 9,223; cf. Theoc. 5,59) and domestically (Aristoph. Eccl. 738-739, cf. Anth. Pal. 6,306). A woman’s > chamber pot could also be called a scapha. According to Hdt. 4,73,2 the Scythae threw hot stones into a skaphé to make a cleansing ‘steam bath’. Romulus and Remus are supposed to have been exposed in a skaphé (Plut. Romulus 3; in Soph. Fr. 574 N a cradle), but similarly a grave is called a scapha (BCH 24, 1900, 393 f. no. 60-62). In addition to these a spittoon (Poll.

friezes of the > Parthenon, as well as a number of vase paintings. Sképhai are listed in temple inventories among the notyua/poteria (drinking vessels) (IG XI 4, 1307, 16 ff.). Lastly, a hairstyle of hair cut short in a circle around the head is called a skaphé (Aristoph. Av. 805 and Aristoph. Thesm. 838, and with reference to that Hsch. s. v. oxduov and Poll. 2,29). E.Stmon, Festivals of Attica. An Archaeological Commentary, 1983, 65 f., 70.

R.H.

Skapte Hyle (xanty trn/Skapté Hylé, Sxantynovdr/ Skaptésylé). Unlocated township in the > peraia of ~ Thasos in the Pangaeum mountains with gold mines from which Thasos extracted 80 talents a year before the Persian Wars (Hdt. 6,46; Thuc. 1,100,2). The historian > Thucydides had estates and also died there (Plut. Cimon 4,3; Markellinos, Vita Thucydidis 19,25,47). P. PERDRIZET, Skaptésylé, in: Klio 10, 1910, 1-27; MUt-

LER, 100 f.

Lv.B.

Skardon oros (Zxdedov Seoc/Skardon 6ros; Latin mons Scordus). High mountains, placed by Str. 7a,1,10 in the chain of mountains bounding Macedonia in the north beyond Bertiscus (nowadays in Montenegro) and this side of Orbelus, Rhodope (modern Rhodope, Rila and Prin) and Haemus (modern Stara Planina). According to Liv. 44,31,4 f. (cf. 43,20,1; Pol. 28,8,3, in connexion with the third of the > Macedonian Wars) SO is

surrounded in the east by Dardania, in the south by Macedonia and in the west by Illyricum. Thus SO is generally identified with modern Sar Planina. TIR K 34 Naissus, 1976, I15.

Skene, scaena (oxnvi/skéné; Latin scaena) means a tent (Eur. Hec. 1289), or an awning on a vehicle (Xen. Cyr. 6,4,11). The term was particularly used in ancient

architecture for the stage building of a > theatre (e.g. IGII*, 161 A115; cf. also Vitr. De arch. 5,6,1 et passim; also [1]). The earliest stone skene was that of the Dionysus Theatre in Athens (+ Athens, with plan of the Acropolis), which was dedicated by Lycurgus [9] in about 330 BC. It was a paraskenion-skene with wings projecting beside the lower stage (paraskénia). In about 300 BC a second type of Greek skene, the proskenionskene, developed, in which the rectangular skene had a high acting stage (proskénion) in front of it. Painted

519

520

wood panels (pinakes) were fixed between the supports. Besides proskenia with rectangular groundplans, we know of trapezoidal ones and ones with ramped side access. The earliest Roman scaenae were of wood. The scaena M. Aemilius [I 38] Scaurus had built in 58 BC

record of further skeuothekai from Miletus and Pergamum. + Harbours, docks

SKENE, SCAENA

(Plin. HN.

36,5,50) was

particularly splendid. The

Roman scaena and the > cavea form a unified freestanding structure; the stage is low and wide. A characteristic of the Roman scaena is the multi-storeyed scaenae frons with a structured architectural facade. To the sides of the stage are parascaenia and basilicae, and a postscaenium behind. —+ Odeum; — Theatre 1H.

Nou 1, Index Vitruvianus, 1876, 116 S.v. scaena.

H.P. IsLer, Das griechische Buhnengebaude, in: P. C1aNcio Rossetro, G. Pisani SARTORIO (eds.), Teatri greci e

romani alle origini del linguaggio rappresentato, vol. 1-3, 1994, 99-107. HI.

Skenikoi agones see -- Competitions, artistic (vol. 4, addenda)

Skeuophylax (oxevodvrak; skeuophylax). Clerical post in the Byzantine Church, responsible for liturgical equipment, sanctuaries and ecclesiastical ceremonies, associated with the headship of an office and highly prestigious. At major churches such as > Hagia Sophia at Constantinople. P. MacpDALino, A.M. TaLBor, s.v. S., ODB 3, rg909f.

FT.

Skeuotheke (oxevoOhxn; skeuotheké). Epigraphically documented Ancient Greek term for a store, arsenal or hall for storing the rigging of warships (esp. IG II’ 1668 for a skeuotheke in Peiraeus near Athens). Skeuothekai belong to the Greek publicly funded sphere of useful architecture, which in the 4th cent. BC acquired an increasingly representational character; existing functional buildings of wood were sometimes lavishly rebuilt in stone. Typologically the skeuotheke largely corresponds in its construction to the ship-shed (neorion), which is accessed by way of slipways; both are oblong buildings, often with several aisles and occasionally with a second storey. Skeuothekai were always used for the secure storage of weapons and = rigging, however, not the ship itself. There is an archaeological

O

O.H6cKMann, Antike Seefahrt, 1985, 147-152; W. HoEPENER, E.L.SCHWANDNER, Haus und Stadt im klassischen Griechenland, *1994, 44-50 (bibliography: n. 85); A. LINFERT (et. al.), Die S. des Philon im Piradus, 1981; W.MULLER-WIENER, Griechisches Bauwesen der Antike, 1988, 172 f.; A.v. SZALAy, E. BOEHRINGER

(ed.), Alter-

tiimer von Pergamon, vol. ro: Die hellenistischen Arsenale, 1937. C.HO.

Skiagraphia (oxtayeadia/skiagraphia). Ancient > painting technique, first developed in the last quarter of the sth cent. BC by Greek artists and used with increasing perfection in the course of the following century. A sophisticated selection of hues and tints and their precise placement allowed a three-dimensional modelling of the images and, as a result, their spatial effect on the image area. In the history of styles, this new use of colours (+ Pigments) was a breakthrough in the development of painting, a fact which was appreciated as such even in Antiquity (Plin. HN 35,29). Probably a representative of the still experimental phase of the new technique was the inventor > Apollodorus [15] (Plut. De gloria Atheniensium 2, 346A), a phase which + Zeuxis surmounted as early as at the start of the 4th cent. (Plin. HN 35,60 ff.). The Late Classical/Hellenistic masters + Pausias, > Apelles [4] and > Nicias [3]

added many variants to the technique through special colourist effects (Plin. HN 35,92; 127; 131). Roman Campanian wall frescoes show this painting technique as well (> Fresco technique). Despite the grave loss of almost all originals from that period — aside from a few funerary paintings from Vergina and the rest of Macedonia — the technique can be reconstructed rather well on the basis of literary sources (e.g. Poll. 7,126) and secondary records by painters, although the actual effects of the images are unknown. Particularly expressive are the polychrome scenes on white-ground pottery, esp. on lekythoi from the last decade of the sth cent. BC and from the period shortly after 400, as well as on contemporaneous and later vases from Lower Italy, and even on Hellenistic painted funerary steles from > Demetrias [1]. The technique probably began to be developed through a partially darker shading on a completely coloured base area, be it through broad brush strokes or

O D 0.0 0 0000000000 c000000 0000

Piraeus: Skeuotheke of Philo

(c. 330 BC; hypothetical reconstruction).

521

522

fine hatching, in order to heighten an object’s plasticity. It is possible that the shading was already part of the preparatory or base drawing. Later, the artists integrated the modelling effect of the light that shines on the representation and, in the sense of a contrasting light and shade painting (lumen et umbrae; Plin. HN 35,131), to arrive at a contrasting light and shade painting (lumen et umbrae; Plin. HN 35,131), further brightened various particles of the image through brighter tones or pure white. The transitions between these areas were either blended in harmonically or starkly contrasted. Furthermore, the painters applied highlights (splendor; Plin. HN 35,29) and hard shadows. All of these measures combined with the means of linear-perspective drawing (— Perspective) heightened the threedimensionality of the paintings and the plastic volume of their individual! elements. S. was therefore a constitutive element in the highly esteemed ‘imitation of nature’ which painters aspired to in this period. > Painting V.VON GRAEVE, F.PREUSSER, Zur Technik griechischer Malerei auf Marmor, in: JDAI 96, 1981, 120-156; N. Ho-

ESCH, Bilder apulischer Vasen und ihr Zeugniswert fiir die Entwicklung der griechischen Malerei, 1992, 156 ff.; N. J. Kocu, Techne und Erfindung in der klassischen Malerei, 2000, 137-160; U.KOCH-BRINKMANN, Polychrome Bilder auf weissgrundigen Lekythen, 1999, ros ff.; A.ROUVERET, Histoire et imaginaire de la peinture ancienne, 1989, ch. 1; I. SCHEIBLER, Griechische Malerei der Antike, 1994. N.H.

Skolion (oxddov; skdlion). A Greek song at a symposium (> Banquet). Unlike > elegy, also sung at the symposium, it was accompanied by the lyre and was in lyric metre. The origin of the term is most likely the practice of holding a myrtle branch, which singers passed to each other in haphazard fashion (cf. Aristoph. fr. 444 PCG vol.3.2), though other far-fetched derivations were advanced, in particular from dyskolon (‘difficult’), because inferior or drunken singers could not manage them (cf. Schol. Pl. Grg. 451e, Ath. 15,693f.694Cc). First mention is in Pind. fr. 122,14, classified as an ‘encomium’ by Alexandrian editors. The practice of singing at a banquet is mentioned several times by Aristophanes: fr. 235, from the Daitalés (Banqueters) mentions sk6élia of > Alcaeus and > Anacreon; Nub. 13 5 5f. refers to a song of — Simonides [2] of Ceos sung to the lyre after dinner, and Vesp. 1216-50 gives the beginnings of several songs. Athenaeus (l.c.; 884-916 PMG) gives a collection of 25 Attic s. that belong mostly to the late 6th and early sth cents.; the term s. generally refers to such Attic songs, which include anonymous verses and poems attributable to poets such as Alcaeus. Most are in 4-line Aeolic stanzas. The best-known have political content, e.g. the dead at > Leipsydrium (907) or the tyrannicides Harmodius and — Aristogiton; several praise loyal friendship among men (889, 892, 903, 908). There are none from the 4th cent., but three exist on a papyrus from the 3rd cent. (917 PMG). > Songs

SKYLITZES,

LOHANNES

BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1R.REITZENSTEIN, Epigramm und S., 1893 2D.E. Gerber, Greek Lyric Poetry Since 1920, in: Lustrum 36, 1994, 180-184. EpiTions: PMG, 884-917; D.A. CAMPBELL, Greek Lyric 5, 1993, 270-303 (with Engl. transl.). E.R.

Skolopoeis

(Zxodondets; Skolopéeis). Place on the

coast between Priene and at the southern with a sanctuary to modern Domatia [1.

and Thebae on the River Gaeson foot of the > Mycale mountains Eleusinian Demeter (probably at 17]), where in 479 BC the Greeks

won a victory over the Persians (Hdt. 9,97;

> Persian

Wars [1]). Border with Thebae: IPriene 361. 1TH. WIEGAND, Priene. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Untersuchungen in den Jahren 1895-1898, 1904.

H.LO.

Skorpios

(Scorpio)

s.

+ Constellations

(vol.

4

addenda)

Skylitzes, Johannes

(Zxviittyc/Skylitzés).

Byzantine

historian (second half of the r1th cent. AD), high court

official in Constantinople, probably identical to a Iohannes Thracesius mentioned there in 1092 [6]. His so-called Synopsis Historiarum (Xbvowts totoeidv/ Synopsis historién) appeared after 1070. It extends from 811 until 1057 and is conceived as a continuation of the Chronicle of Theophanes, whom in the foreword he singles out for praise in comparison with other historians (e.g. > Psellos). Among his sources are e.g. ‘+ Theophanes Continuatus’ and > Leon [11] Diakonos. His phrasing and narrative style vary, depending on the source, between a list of events organised by year in the manner of a chronicle and a presentation of historical relationships without clear chronological data in the manner of a work of history. It is unclear whether a continuation of the work up to 1079, traditionally under the name of S., is by him. At the beginning of the 12th cent. the Synopsis Historiarum was taken over completely and verbatim into the chronicle of > Kedrenos. Among the numerous manuscripts of the Synopsis Historiarum a manuscript illustrated with 574 miniatures now kept in Madrid is outstanding (Biblioteca Nacional vitr. 26-2; written in the mid—r2th cent. probably in Norman southern Italy [7]). It is the only surviving example of an illustrated manuscript of a Byzantine chronicle and despite its origin in a region outside the Empire represents a significant source of depictions of the clothing, weapons and means of transport of the period. EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS:

1H.THuRN, Ioannes

Scylitzes, Synopsis historiarum, 1973

2Id., Byzanz,

wieder ein Weltreich, 1983 (Germ. transl.) 3 A. TsELIKAS, Joannis Scylitzae Synopsis Historiarum, 2000 (facsimile of theMadrid MS.) 4 B. FLusIn (transl.),

J.-CL. CHEYNET (comm.), Jean Skylitzés, Empereurs de Constantinople, 2004. BIBLIOGRAPHY:

5 A.GRABAR, M.Manoussacas,

L’il-

lustration du manuscrit de Skylitzés de la Bibliothéque

SKYLITZES,

IOHANNES

523

Nationale de Madrid, 1979 ~—6 J. SeiBT, Ioannes S. Zur Person des Chronisten, in: Jb. der Ost. Byzantinistik 25, 1976, 81-85 7 1.SEVCENKO, The Madrid Manuscript of the Chronicle of S., in: I.Hurrer (ed.), Byzanz und der

Westen, 1984, 117-130 8 J.SHEPARD, A Suspected Source of Scylitzes’ Synopsis historiarum, in: Byzantine and Modern Greek Studies 16, 1990, 171-181. ALB.

524 Slave revolts. The great slave revolts in Roman Antiquity occurred within a comparatively narrow time span, in the 2nd and early rst cents. BC; geographically, they centred around Sicily and southern Italy. The extent of these great revolts remains unique; bands formed by fugitive slaves never reached the same level either before or later, nor were they comparable with these revolts (Chios: Ath. 6,265d-266e; > Bulla Felix

Skyphos (6/10 oxb¢oc; ho/td skyphos). Tall but stable drinking cup with two handles usually attached horizontally, originally a rustic wooden beaker (Ath. 11,498-500). The synonym xotvAr/kotylé is generally used as a term for a cup of no fixed typology. The capacity of a skyphos was between a > kotyle [2] and a — chous [1]. As a wine vessel, it is attested more frequently for komasts than for symposiasts. F. LEONARD, s. v. Kotyle (1), RE 11, 1542-1546; B.A. SpARKES, L. TaLcott, Black and Plain Pottery (Agora 12), 1970, 81-87, cf. 109-124; I. SCHEIBLER, Attische Skyphoi fiir attische Feste, in: AK 43, 2000, 17-43. 1S.

Skytale (oxutadn; skytalé) is the general term, particularly in the pre-Hellenistic period, for a staff which was principally part of the equipment of official messengers [3]. It is not until the Imperial period that the authors Plutarchus (Plut. Lysandros 19) and Gellius (17,9) describe the skytale as a Spartan method of conveying secret messages (— Cryptography). For this leather straps were wound round the staff, written on across the turns, unwound and dispatched. To decipher it the receiver had to have a staff of the same size. 1 T.Kexty, The Spartan S., in: J. W. Eapre, J. OBER (ed.), The Craft of the Ancient Historian, 1985, 141-169 2 W.Suss, Uber antike Geheimschreibemethoden und ihr Nachleben, in: Philologus 32, 1923, 142-175 3S. WEsT, Archilochus’ Message Stick, in: CQ 38, 1988, 42-48.

AK.

Skytalismos (oxutadtowdc; skytalismos). The killing of 1,200 (Diod. 15,57,3-58,4; in Plut. Mor. 814B: 1500)

rich citizens in Argos (in the autumn of 370 BC) by beating them with clubs (skytdlé: ‘stick, club’). The occasion was an attempt by an oligarchic group, with the help of mercenaries, to gain power in order to prevent a radicalization of democracy in Argos, probably after the defeat of Sparta at > Leuctra (in 370 BC). The attempt was betrayed (Aen. Tact. 11,7-10) and 30 respected citizens were executed; the ensuing atmosphere of turmoil resulted in the skytalismos, to which even the democratic leaders ultimately fell victim, perhaps because of their wealth. Presumably it was the scale of this form of execution, which was in itself normal and was called anatympanismos, that led to the term skytalismos. H.-J. GEHRKE, Stasis, 1985, 31-33.

W.ED.

in Italy: Cass. Dio. 77,10). Even though these rebellious movements of the unfree have to be seen as a reaction to their exploitation in > agriculture, they are clearly located within the historical and economic framework of the 2nd and rst cents. BC. The SR were caused by a series of specific preconditions and cannot be taken as a structural feature of ancient — slavery. Two facts were crucial for the SR: first, the period following the Second > Punic War saw a great number of slaves from the East arriving in Sicily; these people had come into slavery in their youth or adulthood and thus had clear memories of the freedom they had lost. As many of these slaves shared the same linguistic and cultural background, they were able to communicate and take united action. The second factor was the wide spread of animal > husbandry on Sicily and in southern Italy. The summer grazing grounds for the large herds were in the mountainous regions and the slave herdsmen thus largely removed from direct supervision by their owners. As herdsmen were required to walk large distances as part of this grazing routine, most of them were well-trained men of great stamina; in addition, they carried weapons, because they had to be able to protect their herds from wild beasts or cattle thieves (cf. Varro Rust. 2,10). Given these conditions, the slaves represented a latent danger; all that was required was a cause to spark off their armed resistance. The banditry of such herdsmen seems to have been the first step towards an open revolt. When in 185 BC bands of herdsmen in Apulia posed an ever greater threat to the safety of land and roads, it had still been possible to quell this slave movement (motus servilis) by swift action; nonetheless, this action had required the dispatch of a praetor to proceed against the slaves, and the extent of the uprising is evident in the 7,000 sentences passed subsequently (Liv. 39,29,8-10). On Sicily, where — latifundia were owned not only by members of the Greek elite, but also by Romans, living conditions for slaves seem to have been extremely harsh. As the result of the extended period of peace, the island enjoyed economic prosperity, with the result that landowners purchased large numbers of slaves from the East, without then supplying them with sufficient food or clothing. This caused the slaves to band together and mount violent attacks on the island’s inhabitants and travellers (> Brigandry). The first revolt (bellum servile) erupted when slaves in Enna took revenge against > Damophilus [2], a particularly brutal landowner; they sacked the city and proclaimed - Eunus king, a Syrian with a reputation for performing miracles and predicting the future. Ini-

oP)

526

tially, the Romans were unable to quell this uprising by military means; for that reason, the slaves succeeded in extending their influence to the country surrounding Enna and to capture other cities, such as > Tauromenium. Eunus assumed the royal name of Antiochus, wore a diadem, appointed a council and ruled like a Hellenistic king. He was joined by > Cleon [4], a slave from Cilicia; upon the news of Eunus’ success, he had started his own revolt and taken control of the city of Agrigentum (— Acragas). Despite initial victories over Roman praetors, the slaves were in no position to defend their achievements in the long run. In 132 BC, the consul — Rupilius [I 1] P. captured both Tauromenium and Enna; it is said that in excess of 20,000 slaves had died in the fighting (Diod. Sic. 34/3 5,2,20 f.; Flor.

and > Teutoni, and even at the time of the Spartacus uprising, there were no significant military reserves. For that reason, it is understandable that the initial Roman attempt had been throughout to defeat the slaves with only a minor military force and that it was only as the result of being defeated that the Romans mobilized all available forces in the war against the slaves. Poor free citizens also took part in the SR, but did not exert any significant influence on the uprisings and their military development. Only for Sicily is there evidence of poor free citizens plundering the estates of rich landowners out of resentment. The aims of the SR are not clear; it is possible that on Sicily the plan had been to maintain a kingdom of their own. Followers of Spartacus, by contrast, probably attempted to leave Italy in order thus to regain their freedom. In view of the social conditions at the time, it is unlikely that these ancient SR pursued a truly political aim; the complete abolition of slavery as a whole was an unthinkable concept. Nevertheless, the SR in Sicily had a noticeable impact on other Mediterranean regions. Slave uprisings following the initial victories by Eunus were reported from Rome, Attica and Delos (Diod. Sic. 3.4/35,2,19), but in all of these cases, the authorities succeeded in quickly quelling these revolts. In assessing the SR, it cannot be denied that the slaves had some justification to their resistance in view of their brutal exploitation. Furthermore, it should be noted that the Roman Republic, too, could only react to these revolts with military repression; it was unable to impose measures for improving the living conditions of slaves. Only much later, under the Principate, laws were passed to curb the excesses of cruel slave owners and to provide slaves with some — albeit limited — rights against their owners. -» Slave trade; + Slavery; > SLAVERY

Bpit. 257)

About thirty years later (104 BC), a second revolt was sparked off by a senatorial decree that all slaves from allied countries who had been sold to the provinces were to be set free (» Manumission). As a result, the praetor in Sicily released about 800 slaves into freedom within a very short period of time. This raised hopes of impending freedom amongst the remaining slaves; however, possibly due to pressure by the rich estate owners, the praetor did not release any more slaves. Disappointment in their expectations led the slaves to revolt. Following their initial successes, they proclaimed — Salvius [I r] their king, a flute-player and soothsayer. A simultaneous uprising in the west of the island was led by the Cilician > Athenion [2]. However, the slaves did not succeed in capturing any of the island’s larger cities. Salvius called off his unsuccessful siege of > Morgantina, while Athenion retreated from — Lilybaeum. The two armies — 30,000 men under Sal-

vius and 3,000 men under Athenion — met up near + Triocala in the west of the island. Following the examples of Hellenistic rulers, Salvius assumed the byname > Tryphon and made Triocala his royal residence. Tryphon wore Roman insignia, a toga with purple border (toga praetexta) and was accompanied by lictores, thus absorbing both Hellenistic and Roman traditions. A Roman siege of Triocala failed. The slaves were only finally defeated after the dispatch to the island of M. > Aquillius [I 4], consul of ror BC (Diod. Sic. 36,1-11; Flor. Epit. 2,7). The third of the great SR was led by the gladiator ~ Spartacus in Italy itself from 74 to 71 BC. The participation of herdsmen is documented for this uprising, too (Plut. Crassus 9). The focus of the uprising was once again in areas dominated by animal husbandry. On the whole, the followers of Spartacus seem to be a less homogenous group than those of the Sicilian slave kings Eunus and Salvius; this disunity may have contributed towards their ultimate defeat. The initial military success of the SR can also be explained by the fact that they occurred at times when Rome was militarily extraordinarily stretched. In 135 BC, Rome was involved in a campaign in Spain, in 104 BC Italy was under threat of invasion by the > Cimbri

SLAVE TRADE

1K.R. BRADLEY, Slavery and Rebellion in the Roman World 140 BC-70 BC, 1989 =2 T. GRUNEWALD, Rauber, Rebellen, Rivalen, Racher, 1999 3 W.Z. RUBINSOHN,

Die grofen Sklavenaufstande der Antike. 500 Jahre Forschung, 1993.

H.SCHN.

Slave trade I. GENERAL REMARKS II. PIRACY AND WAR III. CENTRES OF THE SLAVE TRADE, SLAVE TRADERS IV. BUYING AND SELLING V. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SLAVE TRADE

I. GENERAL REMARKS There are no easily accessible datasets for the ancient ST, as there are for the Atlantic slave trade of the early modern and modern eras [5]. Nor can we speak authoritatively of the factors affecting > mortality in the ancient trade as we can of those (such as the process of capture, the march to the West African coast, time spent on the coast before sailing, time spent at port of arrival, and acclimatization and acculturation at point of destination) which contributed to an Atlantic trade mortality estimated at between 50 and 70 per cent. We

527

528

rely instead on an unsatisfactory combination of sporadic literary allusions [9], uneven epigraphical data ({ro], [12], [14]), and a few iconographic snapshots ({4], [6]), interpreted with large amounts of theory, especially the use of — inevitably controversial — hypothetical models ([12], [14]) and comparative evidence ([5], [13]). One of the most controversial issues concerns the extent to which the Greeks’ and Romans’ chattel slaves were (re)produced endogenously by various means (deliberate breeding, self-sale into > slavery, official punishment for public offences) or had to be imported from outside ([{12], [14]). But the evidence fails us. For example, reproductivity depends crucially on gender-ratio, and census-records from Egypt in the Roman period appear to indicate a decisive preponderance of females over males [1] (which would seem to reverse the pattern apparently prevailing throughout the rest of the Roman empire). At all events, no crisis in slave numbers is detectable in the central periods of either Greek or Roman history.

their slaves. Athenian debt-slaves, e.g., were sold into

SLAVE TRADE

Il. PIRACY AND WAR

Already in the Homeric poems, there appears one of the most characteristic sources of external slaves, the

capture and sale of individuals by pirates ({4]; — Piracy): the fate of + Eumaeus, a swineherd on Ithaca (Hom. Od. 15,403-484), is in this respect exemplary, as is the negative image of the Phoenician pirates. Mass enslavement after warfare [16], of women and children as well as men, was a later phenomenon, dependent on the development of a true market in chattel slaves beginning in the years around 600 BC [16]. In the > Peloponnesian War, women and children of conquered cities were sold into > slavery by both Athens and Sparta, as were > prisoners of war (Thuc. 3,68,3; 5,116,4; 6,62,3 f.; Dem. Or. 57,18). During the Roman

expansion from the 3rd to the rst cents. BC, people in conquered territories were also enslaved in large numbers (Tarentum, 209 BC: Liv. 27,16,7; Epirus, 167 BC: Liv. 45,34,5). In the late Republic, Cilician bandits were active in the ST (Str. 14,5,2); prisoners of war were normally sold at the site of the fighting (Cic. Att.

5520, 5). III. CENTRES OF THE SLAVE TRADE, SLAVE TRAD-

ERS Most slaves living in Greece were from Thrace and Asia minor (Phrygia, Caria), rather than the Black Sea region ([{2], [8]). The Chians, according to the Chian historian Theopompus (in Ath. 6,265b; cf. Hdt. 8,105), were allegedly the first (Greeks) to procure slaves through market purchase, and their island was perhaps one of the first true slave-entrepots in the Greek world. Later Delos (Str. 14,5,2), and later still Ephesus, came to acquire a comparably important position. Slaves from the Balkan region arrived in Italy by way of Aquileia (Str. 5,1,8); the Romans also imported numerous slaves from Gaul (Diod. Sic. 5,26,3). The Greeks tried, as later the Romans did, to avoid making fellow citizens

other territories, and the law of the Twelve Tables provided that enslaved Romans should be sold in the territory on the other of the Tiber (Aristot. Ath. pol. 12,4; Lex XII tab. 3,5). Professional slave traders (&vdganodvotai/andrapodistai or avdganodoxannhovandrapodokdpeloi, later owpatéumogoVvsomatémporoi) were regarded with ambivalence: their trade was as indispensable as it was despised, especially when (as often was the case) the human traffic was in fellow-Greeks. For Roman ST in the period between 200 BC and AD 100, we have much richer data [ro], including pictorial representations such as the funerary relief of Aulus Caprilius Timotheus; it shows eight slaves, chained to one another, who had probably been exchanged for wine (AE 1946,229; Amphipolis, rst cent. AD; cf. also the funerary stele of M. Publilius Satur, Capua). There is epigraphic evidence of a slave trader (mango) in Cologne (CIL XII 8348).

IV. BUYING AND SELLING Buying and selling slaves was regulated by law. Plato gave precise prescriptions under which circumstances the sale of a slave could be revoked (PI. Leg. 916a-c); in Rome, illnesses or legal offences of a slave were to be declared by the seller (Gell. NA 4,2,1). Contracts from Egypt for the sale of slaves have survived (P Oxy. 95, AD 129). There was extraordinarily great variation in the prices of slaves depending on period and region (prices in Athens for 415 BC: Syll.} 96). Hence it remains a purely academic question whether the average price for an ordinary slave was either high or low. Slaves were sold under degrading conditions: the naked body of a slave was exhibited for potential purchasers (Sen. Ep. 80,9; cf. Mart. 6,66). V. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SLAVE TRADE In many respects, our picture of the ancient ST

remains vague and hypothetical. Nevertheless, the ST certainly had extreme significance not only for supplying > agriculture and > crafts with a workforce, but also for > prostitution, since many women sold as slaves were forced into prostitution (Sen. Controv. 1,2,3; Dion Chrys. 7,133). Doubtless many prostitutes in Rome were from the East (Juv. 3,62-65). In any case it is clear that the Greek and Roman societies were slave societies and that the ST performed an important function in maintaining these societies. ~ Piracy; — Slave revolts; > Slavery; > SLAVERY 1R.S. BAGNALL, B. W. Fr1ER, The Demography of Roman Egypt, 1994 2 D.Braunp, G.TSETSKHLADZE, The Export of Slaves from Colchis, in: CQ 49, 1989, 114-125 3 P. DE Souza, Piracy in the Graeco-Roman World, 1999 4H.Ducuéng, Sur la stéle d’Aulus Caprilius Timotheos, sOmatemporos, in: BCH 110, 1986, 513-530 5 D.ELTIS et al. (ed.), The Atlantic Slave Trade, 1999 6 M.I. FinLEY, Aulus Kapreilios Timotheos, Slave Trader, in: id., Aspects of Antiquity: Discoveries and Controversies, *1977, 154-166 71d. (ed.), Classical Slavery, *1999

529

SLAVERY

33° 8 Id., The Black Sea and Danubian Regions and the Slave

Trade

in Antiquity,

in: Fintey,

Economy,

167-175

9 W. FITZGERALD, Slavery and the Roman Literary Imagination, 2000 ~=3=—.10 M.L. Gorpon, The Nationality of Slaves under the Early Roman Empire, in: M.I. FINLEY (ed.), Slavery

in Classical

Antiquity,

1968,

171-189

11 W.V. Harris, Towards a Study of the Roman Slave Trade, in: D’ARMs/KoprF, 117-140 12 Id., Demography, Geography and Sources of Slaves, in: JRS 89, 1999, 62-75 13 W.JoHNsON, Soul by Soul. Life inside the Antebellum Slave Market, 1999 14 W.SCHEIDEL, Quantifying the Sources of Slaves in the Early Roman Empire, in: JRS 87, 1997, 156-169 15 L.SCHUMACHER,

Sklaverei in der Antike, 2001, 44-65 16H. VOLKMANN, Die Massenversklavungen der Einwohner eroberter Stadte in der hellenistisch-r6mischen Zeit, *1990. PC.

Slavery I. ANCIENT NEAR East II. Ecypt III. GREECE IV.RomMeE V.ByzantTium VI. EARLY MIDDLE AGES

I. ANCIENT NEAR East Mesopotamian cuneiform texts attest to slavery in the ancient Near East from the early 3rd millennium BC [x]. However, at no time were slaves the essential producers in the structure of the total economy [2]. From the 3rd—1st millennia BC, slaves were primarily deployed in private households, and to a lesser extent in institutional households (— Palace, + Temple). The main sources thus mostly come from the field of private law and governmental legislation [3]. Some of the slaves in the institutional economic units were — prisoners of war and deportees [4; 5. 226 f.], but in private households they were usually born into the house or purchased, or else enslaved in consequence of a misdemeanour (of their own doing or of a family member for whom they were responsible) or debts [6; 7. 67-468]. In addition to the (largely unspecified) use of slaves as personal servants, and of female slaves as wet-nurses and nannies, there is evidence of their use as a specialist or auxiliary workforce in artisanal production, agriculture and horticulture [5. 223 f.; 7. 246-307; 8. 222 f.]. Slaves, as the property of their master, could be sold, leased out, pledged, given as gifts, bequeathed or manumitted [8]. However, the owner did not have the right to kill a slave, though there probably was a right of punishment. It was to some extent forbidden to sell native slaves abroad. Slaves could be marked by brands, other markings or coiffure [5.225 ns. 1243-1245]. If they fled [9], it was punishable to take them in. However, slaves were also to some extent legally competent, capable of holding rights and actionable [5. 220-222; 8. 225], as is shown esp. in the New and Late Babylonian sources (7th—4th cents. BC) [7. 308-437] and may also be assumed for the Hellenistic period in Babylonia [x0. 120-124]. Slaves in the New and Late Babylonian periods could own a peculium [11], and out of the incomes from business they conducted independently on their own account, they paid a special fee (Akkadian mandattu) to their master [12. 108 f.].

1 J.J. GELB, Terms for Slaves in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: Societies and Language of the Ancient Near East. Festschrift I. M. Diakonoff, 1982, 81-97 2 Id., Quantitative Evaluation of Slavery and Serfdom, in: B.L. EICHLER (ed.), Kramer Anniversary Volume, 1976, 195-207 3 I. CARDELLINI, Die biblischen Sklaven-Gesetze im Lichte 41.J. GELB, des keilschriftlichen Sklavenrechts, 1981 Prisoners of War in Early Mesopotamia, in: JNES 32, 1973, 70-98

5 K.RADNER, Die neuassyrischen Privat-

rechtsurkunden, 1997. 6 R. WESTBROOK, Slave and Master in Ancient Near Eastern Law, in: Chicago-Kent Law 7 M.A. DANDAMAEV, Review 70, 1995, 1631-1676

8 H. NEuMANN, BemerkunSlavery in Babylonia, 1984 gen zur Freilassung von Sklaven im alten Mesopotamien, 9D.C. in: Altorientalische Forsch. 16, 1989, 220-233 SNELL, Flight and Freedom in the Ancient Near East, 2001 10 J.OELSNER, Recht im hellenistischen Babylonien, in: M.J.GELLER, H. MAEHLER (eds.), Legal Documents of the Hellenistic World, 1995, 106-148 11 M.A. DanpDaMAEV, The Economic and Legal Character of the Slaves’ Peculium in the Neo-Babylonian and Achaemenid Periods, in: D.O. Epzarp (ed.), Gesellschaftsklassen im Alten Zweistromland und in den angrenzenden Gebieten, 1972, 35-39 12H.PEtscHow, Neubabylonisches Pfandrecht, 1956.

H.N.

II. Ecypr Terminological and legal ambiguities prevent more thana partial understanding of the institution of slavery in Pharaonic Egypt. However, its economic importance

was negligible. A plethora of terms is used for slaves, servants and other dependents. From the 18th Dynasty, hm becomes established as the term for slavery. Slaves can also appear in texts without being designated as such. However, where individuals are explicitly described as things or sold, they are slaves. The main reasons for enslavement were capture in war and the carrying off of defeated populations. There are cases of exigency in the Late Period (c. 1085-330 BC) where individuals sold themselves into slavery,

which also affected their descendants. Slaves were also offered for sale by professional agents. There is no evidence that exposed children were enslaved in Egypt. Slaves might belong to governmental institutions, temples or individuals. Public slaves, mostly > prisoners of war, were branded and deployed on construction projects or transferred to temples, where they were also employed in agriculture. Women, esp. Syrians, worked mostly as weavers, but could also serve private individuals in various capacities. Private slaves were mostly used in the domestic environment and were mostly women. Men worked in manual trades and livestock farming. The numbers of such slaves per household were low, generally fewer than ten, often only two. Prices fluctuated, e.g. around several hundred grams of silver, the equivalent value to a few cattle. Slave labour could be shared by several people [4]. There is evidence of marriage between slaves and free (wo)men. Children inherited the status of their mother. Slaves could own and sell land and other property. There are occasional records of escapes and manumissions.

oF

532

Slavery in Ptolemaic Egypt did not differ greatly from that in Pharaonic Egypt. The Greek also presents

slaves by nature, and that this applied in particular to

SLAVERY

terminological ambiguities. The commonest terms are

doulos and pais. The main source of slaves was origin by birth, in the 3rd cent. BC also capture in war. There were always debt slaves, but such enslavement was often only temporary. The import and export of slaves was Officially monitored. There is no record of public or temple slaves. Private slaves mainly worked in the domestic sphere, and played no significant role in agriculture. The purchase price approximated to a year’s top wage [5. 140], and it is probable that slaves were taxed. The commonest term in the Roman period is doulos. The main sources of slaves were birth to a slave and exposed children. All other types went into decline and there is no evidence of self-sale. As well as Imperial slaves, there were esp. private slaves in the domestic sphere. Their prices differed greatly [6. 906-911]. There was no tax on owning slaves, but change of ownership was taxed, as was > manumission, which was generally by testament. The proportion of slaves in the total populace was around ro %, more in the cities than the countryside. 1 A.M. Baxir, Slavery in Pharaonic Egypt, 1952 (repr. 1978) 2 I. BrezuNskKA-Ma.owlst, L’esclavage dans Egypte gréco-romaine,vol r: Période ptolémaique, 1974; 3 B. MENu, Recherches vol. 2: Période romaine, 1977 sur lhistoire juridique, économique et sociale de l’ancienne

Egypte,

vol.

2,

1998,

209-223;

369-383

4 R. NavaILtes, F. NEVEU, Qu’ entendait-on par ‘journée

d’esclave’ au nouvel empire?, in: Rev. d’Egyptologie 40, 1989, 113-123 5 R.SCHOLL, Sklaven in den Zenonpapyri, 1983 6J.A. Srraus, L’esclavage dans l’Egypte romaine, in: ANRW II 10.1, 841-911.

III. GREECE A. DEFINITION

DEVELOPMENT

AND EVALUATION

B. HISTORICAL

(C. STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS

A. DEFINITION AND EVALUATION A particularly rigid form of personal dependence developed in ancient Greek slavery (SovAeia/douleia).

In contrast to other forms of bondage and serfdom, this was chattel slavery. Slaves (S0tAoc/doilos; also a&vdeanodsov/andrapodon, literally ‘walking on human feet’; Oegdnwv/therdpon or Seodanawa/therdpaina, ‘(male or female) servant’; oixétyc/oikétés, ‘house slave’; naic/pais, literally ‘boy’ or ‘girl’; o@wa/séma, literally ‘body’) were legally and economically at the complete disposal of their master (> kyrios), who was from a legal perspective their owner. Slavery was complementary to the political concept of > freedom and the socio-economic concepts of availability and — leisure, which were normatively exaggerated. Hence, slavery at an early stage was already linked with a conception of physical and moral inferiority to free men and esp. the aristocracy (Hom. Od. 17,320 ff.; Thgn. 535 ff.; cf. later also Pl. Leg. 776e-77724). In spite of dissenting voices among the > Sophists (schol. Aristot. Rh. 1373b 18), in Classical philosophy this led to the view that there were

» barbarians (Pl. Plt. 309ab; Aristot. Pol. r252b 5 ff.; 1253b 15 ff.). Concepts of the essential equality of human beings and the ethicization of slavery in the Cynic-Stoic philosophy did little to change the system. Where freedom and slavery became an issue of moral quality, overshadowing the actual legal and social position, the circumstances of a slave could in the final analysis appear immaterial.

B. HIsTORICAL DEVELOPMENT Although there were equivalents for the Greek terminological pair &hevOeQoc/elevtheros (‘free person’) and S0thoc/doiilos (‘slave’) in Mycenaean (e-re-u-te-ro and do-e-ro), it is not clear whether the harsh form of

slavery already existed by the Mycenaean period. The Linear B texts primarily attest to ‘slaves of deities’ or temple slaves (te-o-jo do-e-ro or do-e-ra), who could

even conduct legal transactions, artisanal slaves (smiths) who worked with their masters, and some female labourers. It is probable that these were looser forms of servitude [5. 16-18]. In the Homeric period, the terminology (as well as doulos esp. dud¢/dmos, oixevc/oikeus and &udinodoc/amphipolos are attested) at first suggests a differentiated picture. However, already here there are clear indications of the specific development of the full power of disposal. It is true that slaves were mostly found in the domestic sphere, and that there is accordingly evidence of heartfelt and loyal relations, but the coercive character of slavery reveals itself in that the recruitment of slaves was coming not only from human trafficking but also esp. spoils of war, and that it was women in particular who were affected, being completely (also sexually) in the power of the victor. While slaves were for this reason often foreign (cf. Archil. fr. 79a D), debt bondage in the Archaic period not infrequently meant being sold into slavery [8. 2628]. As the aristocratic disposition rose to extraordinary prominence during this period and the consequent need arose for labour, the pressure esp. on smallholders had grown, while conversely in various poleis — esp. Athens under > Solon [1] — enslavement by way of debt bondage was prevented. The labour force was henceforth composed of ‘true’ slaves [5. 57 f.], and in the emergent polis, the citizen defined himself by his freedom from slavery. The status of the free citizen and of the man available for ‘nobler’ activities formed the counter-image to slavery, which was correspondingly widespread. By the 6th cent. BC, ‘slavery’ could already be used as a political slogan against the > tyrannis. Defence against the Persians in the 5th cent. was understood as the fight against the threat of slavery [7. 65125]. However, various forms of dependence survived alongside chattel slavery, and here there were sometimes considerable distinctions between the individual poleis and regions.

S¥315)

534

C. STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS As before, numerous slaves worked in the house or household (- oikos), as servants and menials, but also bringing up children, e.g. as wet-nurses and > paidagogoi. Mostly, however, they were deployed in all areas of the economy as a labour force. In political theory, a slave was regarded as a tool (deyavov/ Organon) fulfilling the tasks of many tools (Aristot. Pol. 1253b). We find slaves in > agriculture, esp. livestock farming, as artisans (+ Crafts, Trade) in various processing enterprises, but also as agents in banking (> Banks) and trading operations [7. 163 ff.]. Depending on the wealth of their master, and depending on his lifestyle, they might work together with their master as servants, assistants or waged workers (for the same pay), or in their master’s absence under the supervision of a foreman, who would also bea slave, while the slave owner in such a case could lead the life of a man of leisure as e.g. a major landowner or operator of a major manufacturing operation. Nine or ten slaves worked in an > ergasterion belonging to Timarchus; it manufactured > shoes (Aeschin. In Tim. 97), and the father of ~ Demosthenes [2] had a workshop in which swords were made, using 32 or 33 slaves, anda furniture workshop using 20 (Dem. Or. 27,9). Particularly wealthy individuals even made a profit from hiring out their slaves. For instance, Xenophon mentions that — Nicias [t], Hipponicus and Philemonides hired out a great number of slaves to lessees of mines in > Laurium (Xen. Vect. 4,14 f.; > Mining). Injustice in dealing with slaves was always to be avoided, but punishments were more severe than for free men (PI. Leg. 777b-778a). Individual slaves could assume considerable responsibilities, esp. in money matters, even managing a bank for their owner like > Pasion [2]. Activities requiring a particular speciality or which were regarded as hard or contemptible work were particularly often practised by slaves. On the one hand, public slaves took on important tasks in administration and in the sphere of public safety and security (Scythian slaves acted as a kind of ‘+ police’ force at Athens [7. 180 ff.]), and on the other hand slaves were used for the heaviest work in the mines, where they were nonetheless at the same time valued and coveted as specialists. Last but not least, slaves were widespread in the sphere of > prostitution

status of a > metoikos. Manumission very often took place by a formal transfer to a deity or a sanctuary, which then guaranteed the new status of the former slave. It was also often linked to a provision whereby the slave remained obliged to carry out services for the manumitting master until the latter’s death (magapovt/ paramone; > paramone). There was no legal claim to manumission, although slaves were permitted to buy their freedom. Generally, manumission served as a stimulus to behaviour consonant with the expectations of the slave owner. This also applied to emancipation (promised in gravest military crisis) in case of participation in hostilities. Fugitive slaves were relatively rare, not least because escape meant no real chance of freedom and was generally harshly punished. For the same reasons, there were no — slave revolts (Ath. 6,265c— 266c), and only in wartime is there evidence for mass

(Dem. Or. 59,18-32).

Many slaves were so from birth, as the children of a slave woman generally took the status of their mother. Otherwise, slaves were acquired by purchase, to which — prisoners of war in particular were subjected. Exposed children, too, were not infrequently enslaved (> Child exposure). The purchase price of slaves naturally depended on their bodily constitution, but esp. on their abilities and knowledge, which enabled them to be used in different ways. According to these criteria, prices could differ considerably [7. 47 f.]. The + manumission of slaves was possible, but did not lead to full integration into the body of citizens. At Athens, for instance, > freedmen only acquired the

SLAVERY

escapes (Thuc. 7,27,5).

Although emotional relationships not infrequently developed in the cohabitation of masters and slaves (e.g. between nurses and their charges), and slaves in

public institutions or employed as specialists in particular professions could become influential, and although in many religious contexts (e.g. in the sphere of the ~» Mysteries) the boundaries between slaves and free men were temporarily erased, slavery as a fundamental social institution remained a structural relationship of coercion. Slaves had no rights and generally were not able to marry. Families which entered slavery could consequently be ripped apart at any time. In the end, slaves were at the absolute disposal of their master and could be sold or pledged. Nor had they any claim to bodily inviolacy. They were subjected to corporal punishment and > torture before the courts. Data on the numbers of slaves and the proportion of slaves to free citizens are rare and mostly lack credibility (Ath. 272cf.). Even in Classical Athens, members of the elite still seem only exceptionally to have owned large numbers of slaves (over 100 and up to 1,000; [7. 48 ff., 94]). Even modestly wealthy farmers and craftsmen owned some few slaves. Slavery, then, was entirely ubiquitous, and not merely as a counter-image to the free polis citizenry. It is thus justified to speak of Greek society as a ‘slave society’ [3. 67-92]. + Civil law; — Freedmen; — Freedom; -» Human rights; > Slave revolts; > Slave trade; > Work; > SLa-

VERY 1 N. BRockMEYER, Antike Sklaverei, 71987

2 E. HERRMANN, N. BROCKMEYER, Bibliographie der antiken Sklaverei, 2 vol.,1983 3 M.I. FIney, Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology, 1980, *1998 4 Y.GARLAN, Les esclaves en gréce ancienne, 1984 5 F.GSCHNITZER, Griechische Sozialgeschichte, 1981 6 LAUFFER, BL

7 K.RaaFLaus, Die Entdeckung der Freiheit, 1985 8 L.SCHUMACHER, Sklaverei in der Antike. Alltag und Schicksal der Unfreien, 2001 9 K.W. Wetwet, Unfreie im antiken Kriegsdienst, 3 vol.,1974-1988 10TH. WiEDEMANN, Slavery, *1997.

H.-J.G.

535

536

IV. ROME A. MONARCHY AND EARLY REPUBLIC B. LATE REPUBLIC AND AUGUSTAN PERIOD C. PRINCIPATE TO DIOCLETIAN D. LATE ANTIQUITY

If Roman slavery was of a rather patriarchal nature in the early period, in the 2nd and rst cents. BC it became a factor in the capitalistic quest for profit. Cato’s De agri cultura makes this shift clear. Alongside farm

SLAVERY

animals, buildings and tools, bonded labour is listed as

A. MONARCHY AND EARLY REPUBLIC The etymology of the Latin servitus is unclear. The word may derive, via an Etruscan loan-word, from the IE soru-, ‘booty’. Accordingly, servus (‘slave’) would = ‘looted one’. Slavery is encountered in the tradition even in the earliest times at Rome. The asylum of ~ Romulus [1] was also open to escaped slaves, and Servius — Tullius was said to have reached Rome with his mother as a child captured in war (Liv. 1,8,6; 1,39). Both narratives attest to the capacity of Roman society, striking even in antiquity, to integrate foreigners and slaves who came to Rome (Cic. Balb. 24; cf. Syll.> 543, 33 ff.). This openness was nurtured at first by the ethnic closeness to prisoners of war from the peoples of Central Italy, and later by the cultural orientation towards the Graeco-Hellenistic East. The number of Roman slaves in the period prior to 200 BC was probably not very great, esp. since institutions existed in the + nexum (debt slavery) and the clientela (— cliens) which were connected with work obligations of large sections of the population. These social dependences already relativized the importance of early Roman slavery. Slaves belonged to the familia of their owner and were subject to the authority of the + pater familias [15. 175-196]. With his consent, they had at their disposal legally precarious separate assets of money and valuables (— peculium), which could be used to buy their freedom. > Manumission, with the acquisition of Roman citizenship (— civitas B.), generally meant the transfer from the familia to the clientela of the former dominus, who thus became the

a mere production factor (Cato Agr. ro f.; cf. also Plut. Cato Maior 21 and, for the rst cent. BC, Varro, Rust. 1,17,1). This mental fixation on pure economic gain was partly responsible for several major uprisings, mostly among slaves deployed in agriculture. Between 140 and 70 BC [12. 95 ff.], > slave revolts shook Sicily and southern Italy. However, there was no general rebellion which also included slaves in the cities. Of decisive importance here were the personal aspirations of slaves, who, if they behaved impeccably, could hope to be manumitted and accepted into the Roman citizenry [2. 162 ff.; 3]. In particular, slaves and > freedmen who belonged to the educated elite were treated with appropriate respect and their skills were thoroughly recognized [5]. For average domestic slaves of less educationally-minded owners, however, there must have been considerable restrictions. In times of political instability, there were mass escapes of slaves. One Roman magistrate mentions on an inscription that he returned 917 escaped slaves to their owners during his praetorship (2nd cent. BC; ILS 23), and after 43 BC, fugitivi (‘fugitive slaves’) made up a large part of the crews of oarsmen under Sex. Pompeius {I 5], later provoking Augustus to term this war the bellum servorum (‘War of the Slaves’) (R. Gest. div. Aug. 25,1). It is not impossible that many of these fugitivi came from urban backgrounds. The survivors were passed to their domini for execution or were immediately

crucified

(Cass.

Dio

49,12,4f.;

cf. — crux;

~ Death penalty) as had once been the fate of the followers of > Spartacus.

> patronus.

B. Lare REPUBLIC AND AUGUSTAN PERIOD From the 2nd — Punic War on, the number of slaves imported into Rome and Italy dramatically increased, a tendency which can be traced to the restructuring of Roman > agriculture from a peasant economy to extensive livestock farming and an estate economy specializing in the production of wine and olive oil [12. 96 ff.]. The qualified labour force necessary for this came, from the 2nd cent. BC, mostly from the Greek East. They reached Italy primarily as a result of wars [16; 19] and —piracy (often via Delos: [12. 51 ff.]). The expansion of Roman rule also created an increase in the need for bonded servant labour, e.g. among the societies of the > publicani and the long-distance traders and in the financial business [6. 69-76]. The increasing representational aspirations of the Roman elite meant that more slaves were used in households [6. 51-62], and that they were now allotted highly specialized tasks (cf. e.g. Sen. Epist. 47,5—-8). Many slaves also worked in — crafts, although only a few large workshops emerged, e.g. in the field of > pottery production [11].

C. PRINCIPATE TO DIOCLETIAN The post-Augustan peace had a negative effect on the supply of slaves. This was now increasingly based upon the sale of slaves born in the household [8] and on the > slave trade with regions beyond the imperial frontiers [6. 23 ff.]. The wars from the time of > Claudius [III 1] in Britannia, in AD 66-70 in Judaea, and against the Dacians (~ Daci, Dacia) and in the East under Trajan may also have eased the supply problem at times. Large areas of the Imperium Romanum which were not as yet thoroughly Romanized, or in which traditional forms of dependence still existed, had a much weaker demand for slaves than Italy (general: [4; 10; 14]), and even there, the latifundium economy had passed its zenith. Generally, work in households, industry, services and urban, provincial and imperial administration — even in agriculture — required qualified slaves, who were hardly obtainable by import, but much more readily by educating and training slave children born in Roman households (vernae). They accepted slavery, having been born and trained in bondage, they were culturally acclimatized to Rome and, be-

537

538

cause of their value, they were better treated [8]. This, too, led to a partial humanization of slavery, although this sometimes had to be enforced or secured by imperial sanction [6. 120 ff.]. Philosophy and religion were also emitting impulses contributing to levelling out the distinctions between > freedom and bondage. The respecting of slaves’ family ties [6. 52 ff., 160 ff.] brought further mitigations.

+ Gregorius [3] of Nazianzus effectively sanctioned slavery (cf. on the position of the Apostles also 1 Tim

D. LATE ANTIQUITY

The tendencies inherent during the Principate continued to develop in the Diocletianic-Constantinian period. Slavery may have retreated further in conjunction with the impoverishment of large sections of the population. However, this made no difference to the slave retinues of senatorial families. In agriculture, slave labour was increasingly taken over by free tenants (coloni, cf. > colonatus), who were tied to the land by imperial disposition and thus entered into a state of bondage [12. 97 ff.]. Urban artisans, too, were subject to hereditary constraint on their choice of trade. Such alternatives made slavery largely superfluous without entirely superseding it. + Colonatus; > Family;

> Manumission; > Prisoners

of war; > Slave revolts; > Slave trade;

> Work; > SLa-

VERY 1 H.BELLEN, Studien zur Sklaven-Flucht Kaiserreich, 1971 2K.BRADLEY, Slavery Rome, 1994 31d., Slaves and Masters Empire, 1984 4 A.CARANDINI, Schiavi in

im rémischen and Society at

in the Roman Italia. Gli strumenti pensanti dei Romani fra tarda repubblica e medio impero, 1988 5 J. CHrRisTEs, Sklaven und Freigelassene als Grammatiker und Philologen im antiken Rom, 1979 6 W.Eck, J. HEINRICHS, Sklaven und Freigelassene in der Gesellschaft der romischen Kaiserzeit, 1993 7 W.EDER, Servitus publica, 1981 8 E. HERRMANN-OTTO, Ex ancillanatus,1994 9 Id. etal., Bibliographie zur antiken Sklaverei, 1983 10 L.P. Martnovicet al. (eds.), Die Sklaverei in den 6stlichen Provinzien des romischen Reiches,1992 11 G.PRACHNER, Die Sklaven und Freigelassenen im arretinischen Sigillatagewerbe, 1980 12 L.SCHUMACHER, Sklaverei in der Antike, 2001 13 P.P. SPRANGER, Historische Untersuchungen zu den Sklaven-Figuren des Plautus und Terenz,*1984 14E.M. STAERMANet al. (eds.), Die Sklaverei in den westlichen

Provinzen des rémischen Reiches im 1. bis 3. Jahrhundert, 1987

15 VITTINGHOFF

16H.VOLKMANN,

Die Mas-

senversklavungen der Einwohner eroberter Stadte in der hellenistisch-r6mischen Zeit, 71990 17 A. WATSON, Roman Slave Law, 1987 18R.P. C. WEAVER, Familia Caesaris, 1972 19 K.-W. WELWwEI, Sub corona vendere, 20 Id., Unfreie im antiken Kriegsdienst, vol. 3: 2000 Rom, 1988.

JO.H.

V. BYZANTIUM

The principle of slavery (SovAgia/douleia) was never questioned from any direction in the Byzantine Empire. The only ostensible exception is the critical attitude of the Church Father > Gregorius [2] of Nyssa (v. Homily 4 on Ecclesiastes), but this remained without practical consequences. He, — Basilius [1] of Caesarea and

SLAVERY

6:1 f.; Tit 2:9 f. and x Petr 2:18—25), but often clearly pointed out negative epiphenomena of it, condemned violence against slaves and encouraged brotherly dealings with them. Basilius even allowed monasteries to take in slaves who had been compelled to act against their religious consciences, thus removing them from the control of their masters. Even later, certain leaders of the Orthodox Church (e.g. > Eustathius [4] of Thessalonica) were still expressing similarly differentiated criticism of slavery. Although slavery in Byzantium as a whole was probably declining, esp. from the rrth cent., it continued to exist, albeit ever more often modified by law after Justinian I (> Iustinianus [1]), until the fall of the Empire in the rsth cent. In Byzantium, too, the usual consequences in connection with slavery are widely attested: enslavement (mostly of > prisoners of war; sometimes also in legal punishment), slave escapes, the — slave trade (legally fixed price between 20-72 nomismata) and —manumission (dmehev0éqwots/apeleuthérosis). This last was mostly by testament or in advance with the consent of the master according to fixed, legally regulated conditions, and over time the influence of the Church led to the possibilities of manumission being extended. Slavery is rendered most tangible to us by the Imperial instruments of legislation (e.g. in the Basilika, the — Ecloga [2], the > Novellae, esp. those of Leo VI),

contracts and other regulations (Book of the Eparch, Nomos georgikos, s. also [4. nos. 161, 230, 239, 253,

305, 356, 359, 556, 563, 647, 678, 679, 754, 1177]), and in Church canons. Research into slavery, however, is hampered by the sometimes ambiguous, sometimes unclear terminology and by the at best sporadic interest of historiographers and other narrative sources in slavery. The terminological ambiguity is seen, for instance, in the word Sotho, fem. dovAn (dotlos, doulé), which can refer either to a slave or to a free servant. Other terms for slavery, often merely synonyms and mostly ancient, included &vdednodov/andrapodon (literally ‘walking on human feet’), OeQdnwv/therapon, Oeodnawol therdpaina (‘servant’ m/f), oixétnc/oikétés (‘domestic slave’), maic/pais (literally ‘boy’ or ‘girl’), wuxcae.ov/psycharion (literally ‘little soul’) and opa/ s6ma (literally ‘body’); oxA&Boc/sklabos in the sense of ‘slave’ is first attested in a document in the Byzantine sources in 1061. The most revealing are texts from the practice of jurisprudence, such as the Peira, deeds (including papyri into the 7th/8th cents.), wills and saints’ vitae. The main owner of slaves at Byzantium, including many —eunuchs, was the Imperial Court, which employed them in its palaces, workshops and estates. However, they were also found in wealthy households, in (luxury) trades and even in the army. Their part in the labour force in > agriculture seems to have declined dramatically from at least the 6th cent. The centres of

SLAVERY

the Byzantine -> slave trade, or the slave trade conducted via Byzantium, were Constantinople and the Crimea. Legally speaking, slavery meant the almost complete subjection of the slave to the authority of the master, who could sell, bequeath and pledge his slaves, but also free them. However, and in spite ofJustinian’s abolition of all their former legal disadvantages, freedmen never achieved full social recognition because of their past. Justinian had also ruled that a female slave whom her master formally married would thereby attain freedom, and that children of this union were legitimate.

However, slaves could not formally marry among themselves. Even the church blessing of a slave marriage which Emperor Alexius I granted in 1095 [4. no. 1177] did nothing to change this. + Manumission; — Slave revolts; > Slave trade 1 P.Boumis, L’affranchissement des esclaves, in: Kanon 15,1999, 59-71 2 W.BRANDES, Studien zur byzantinischen Steuer- und Finanzverwaltung vom ausgehenden 6. bis zum beginnenden 9g. Jahrhundert. (unprinted habilitation, Cologne 2001) 3 A.DEMANDT, Die Spatantike, 1989, 288-296 4F.D6.LGER, P. WirTH, Regesten der Kaiserurkunden des ostromischen Reiches von 565-1453, 5 vols. (vols. 2 and 3 have been revised), 1924-1995 5 A.J. E. HooGenpyjk, Byzantinischer Sklaven-Kauf, in: APF 42, 1996, 225-234 6M.Kapian, Les hommes et la terre 4 Byzance du Vle au Xle siécle, 1992,

275-277

7 R.K EIN, Die Haltung der kappadokischen Bischéfe Basilius von Caesarea, Gregor von Nazianz und Gregor von Nyssa zur Sklaverei, 2000 8 H.KOpsTEIn, Zur Sklaverei im ausgehenden Byzanz, 1966 9Id., Zum Bedeutungswandel von 2xhuBoc/Sclavus, in: ByzF 7, 1979, 67—88 10Id., Sklaverei in der Peira, in: L.BURGMANN (ed.), Fontes Minores 9, 1993, I-33 11 T.G. KoLias, Kriegs-

gefangene, Sklaven-Handel und die Privilegien der Soldaten, in: Byzantinoslavica 56, 1995, 129-135 12 M. MeELtuso, La schiavitt nell’eta giustinianea, 2000 13 F.TINNEFELD, Die friihbyzantinische Gesellschaft, 1977, esp. 56-58; 142-146 14 F. WINKELMANN (ed.), Volk und Herrschaft im frihen Byzanz, 1991

15 P. YANNOPOULOS,

540

539

La société profane dans |’Empire

There

is a consensus

among

scholars

that the

number of servi increased with the wars, raids and cam-

paigns of plunder, subjections and land annexations of the Germanic gentes, and that treatment of the servi became harsher. Slaves (captivi) generally came from the north east, being brought to the south by trade and even sold on into the non-Christian Mediterranean region. However, this did nothing to alter the gradual, regionally uneven decline of domestic, industrial and agricultural slavery. The extent and chronology of this process remain disputed. Its contours can be discerned by taking a medievalist-formative view of the genesis of feudal serfdom, in particular in the processes of ecclesiasticization, dominial ties, ruralization and the parcelling of authority. In the long term, all those in bondage were integrated into the Christian, ecclesiastical context of authority and redemption (conversion, baptism). With this arose a close association of personal and property ties of those in bondage (peonage and bondage to the land), and in the course of ruralization there emerged a new and broad process (emergence of servi casati and of the mansus-based land-use system), in which the partial independence of domestic and farm slaves was asserted and manumissions took place. Finally, opportunities for group representation of those in bondage emerged as the masters acquired formerly public authorities (iustitia, militia, mercatus), which could be co-opted by the unfree. The extent to which these tendencies won through on a regional level determined how far slavery remained decisive to social relationships. However, it is certain that the disappearance of slavery can be shown to have come earlier in the central regions of the Frankish Empire than in the Mediterranean, Slavic and Nordic regions. 1P.BoNNASSIE, From Slavery to Feudalism in SouthWestern Europe, 1991 2 H.GrieseEr, Sklaverei im spatantiken und frith-mittelalterlichen Gallien, 1997 3 H. NEHLSEN, Sklavenrecht zwischen Antike und Mittelalter, 1972. LU.KU.

byzantine des VIle, VIIle et [Xe siécles, 1975, 267-299.

VI. EARLY MIDDLE AGES Because of imprecise terminology in the sources, scholars have yet to make a valid definition of slavery, the harshest relationship of social dependence in antiquity and the early Middle Ages, for the period from the 4th to the 9th cents. Apart from the terms mancipium, servus and ancilla, all other words used to denote social dependence are imprecise. The most important sources for slavery are tribal laws, conciliar records, royal ordinances, deeds and formulae, wills, lists, vitae, dogmatic, hagiographic and narrative writings. In other words, there is no shortage of sources, but it is essential clearly to ascertain the dimensions of dependence, e.g. limitations on > mobility, identity (name), trade and choice of spouse, consumption (household), property provisions (ownership, inheritance), generational provisions (marriage, children), representation towards others (confession, witness, appeal, punishment) and social behaviour outside the house of the master.

Slavonic languages. The SL are a language family that emerged from the Indo-European proto-language via Proto-Slavic (c. 500 BC to AD 500) and Proto-BaltoSlavic (debated). On its genetic relationship, cf. Old Church Slavonic (OCS) mati, Greek whtmo/meter, Latin mater < Proto-Indo-European (PIE) *méh,té(r); OCS trbje, Greek tgeic/treis, Latin trés < PIE “tréies. It is divided into South Slavonic (Bulgarian, Macedonian, Serbo-Croatian, Slovenian), West (Slovak, Czech, Sorbian, Polish) and East Slavonic (Russian, Belarusian, Ukrainian). Other SL include Polabian (which became extinct in the 18th cent.), Pomeranian (now living on in Kashubian), and OCS (related to Bulgarian), into which the

earliest extant longer text (the Aprakos Gospel) was translated in AD 863; even today, OCS texts are the basis of the liturgical language of orthodox Slavs. The textual tradition sets in on Slovenian (Freising Manuscripts) and Moravian soil (Kiev Folia), recorded in Greek script in the territory of the Eastern Roman Em-

541

542

pire and in Latin script in the Western Roman Empire,

Europe (Bulgaria, Serbia, even Poland); above all the

and finally in the > Glagolitic script which had been invented for the translation in AD 863, before a Greek and Semitic background (Cyrillo-Methodian mission and tradition). Through a combination of the Greek and Glagolitic traditions, the Cyrillic script arose. Unlike Greek and Latin, the SL are > satem languages. They are intimately linked to the > Baltic languages (with which they share a post-PIE source), and are furthermore close to Germanic (case morphology containing m) and Indo-Iranian (change of *s after *7, u, r, k). They provide important evidence for the PIE origin of systematic features (augment) and specific correspondences between the classical languages (Church Slavonic -véstb, Vedic dvaksam, Latin véxi, Cypriot tFeEe/éwekse as continuants of the PIE sigmatic aorist *e-ueg’-s-). Exclusive parallels with Greek in early times (OCS mpgla, Greek d6piydn/omichle < PIE *b,mig'éh,) are rare and ambiguous; they appear to be missing for Italic. Only after their expansion to the west and south in the s5th/é6th centuries did the Slavs come into contact with the classical languages. Up to the onset of the written tradition, and partly by way of contact with Germanic languages, especially the Christianization of the Slavs yielded a number of loanwords (Old Slovenian krst ‘baptism’, OCS krsst& ‘cross’ Cyrillus [8]; + Methodius [4]; + Slavs, Slavonization;

SLAVONIC LANGUAGES

H. ANDERSEN, Lingue slaviche, in: A.G. and P. RAMAT (eds.), Le lingue indoeuropee, 1993, 441-480; B. PANZER, Die slawischen Sprachen in Gegenwart und Geschichte, 31999; W.PorziG, Die Gliederung des indogermanischen Sprachgebiets, *1974, 169-174, 204-209; P.REHDER (ed.), Einfiihrung in die slawischen Sprachen, 31998. H.KO.

Slavs, Slavonization. The S. (=xiaBnvoi/Sklabénoi since the 6th cent. AD; Lat. Sclaveni in Iordanes [1], from the early Slavic slovéne; =xdGBoc/Sklabos first in the High Middle Ages, from which ‘slave’, Arabic saqaliba) are the youngest of the major linguistic groups of Europe; they first appear on the horizon of the Graeco-Roman culture in Late Antiquity. To date, the study of this process and the multifaceted acculturation processes between the S. and the ancient Mediterranean cultures, which occurred after c. AD 500, has been determined by the initial conditions of Slavic studies around r8oo: at the beginning of the roth cent., only Russia remained of the pre-national Slavic states in

SLAVS, SLAVONIZATION

South Slavs lived for centuries under Austrian or Ottoman rule. Therefore, the dominant focus was a combi-

nation of Slavic national consciousness with the study of Slavic antiquities (exemplary in [2]; for the influence of Herper cf. [1]). However, the definition of who is a S. [3. 13 ff.5 4. § ff.] is difficult particularly for the early historical processes of the Slavonization of Eastern Europe; especially the criterion of language, considered crucial already by HERDER, can scarcely be verified for earlier periods. As in comparable cases (+ Germani, Germania), the methodical combination of written sources (see below), archaeological finds and linguistic material (primarily place names) is complicated: archaeology has shown [5] that the identification of certain find groups (Prague-Koréak type, Penkovka) with early S. is only possible from the 6th cent. on, that is at a point when the ethnogenesis (in the sense of [6]) was largely concluded and the expansion from the original homeland had long since begun. But even this material does not permit a connection with the linguistic division into West, East and South S. Written sources in Slavic languages are first available with the work of the apostles to the Slavs Cyrillus [8] and + Methodius [4] (final third of the 9th cent.). The exclusively ecclesiastical character of this Old Church Slavonic literature (numerous translations) [7; 8] makes the study of early Slavic history strongly dependent on late Roman writings in Latin (> Iordanes [1], Getica) and Greek (Ps.-Caesarius; + Procopius [3]; Ps.-Mauricius, > Taktikén). However, the excursus about the S.

in Procopius (Goth. 3,14,22-30) in particular makes clear, through its imitation of éthnos excursuses since > Herodotus [1], how hard it is to tell the literary stereotypes of ancient ethnography from historical reality. Thus, the search for an original Slavic homeland has proven to be difficult (maximum spread in [2] compared to a radically minimized territory in [9]; no S. demonstrated south of the Carpathians in ancient times). While linguistics roughly outline the locations of the early S. and the character of their language in connection with pre- and early history, attempts to deduce a Slavic religion, social structure or material culture ({2]; cf. last [r0]) must be considered to have failed [11];

on the contrary, the regional differences were probably large, especially since, in their early period, the S. were mostly under the political rule of, for example, the + Avares and > Goti, by whom they were demonstrably strongly influenced on every level. Below, the focus is primarily on the South Slavs. While the Venedi (originally the non-Slavic + Veneti, cf. Wends, German Windische, etc.) mentioned by Plin. HN 4,97, Tac. Germ. 46 and Ptol. 3,5,15 and 35,20 NOBBE were probably S., the first direct contacts between the late Roman empire and the S. were at the beginning of the 6th cent. Central here was the Danube border [12], which Byzantium was able to hold until toward the end of the 6th cent. The S. spent the winter in the territory of the Byzantine empire for the first time

543

544

in 5 50/1, but increased immigration only began at the start of the 80s; in 582, > Sirmium fell to the S., in 583

14 M.VasMer, Die Slawen in Griechenland (Abh. der Preuf. Akad. der Wiss., Philol.-histor. Kl. 12), 1941,

SLAVS, SLAVONIZATION

~» Singidunum (Theophylactus Simocrates 1,4,1-3); in

586, they methodically besieged > Thessalonica for the first time; at the end of the 6th cent., the S. came under the rule of the Avares for a longer period, having to submit to the latter’s military leadership. The — Monemvyasia Chronicle reports that Byzantium had lost the rule of Hellas for 218 years, which indicates the end of the 6th cent. (c. 587). The Romanized population of the northern Balkans fled in part to the south (e.g. to Thessalonica, cf. Miracula Sancti Demetrii 2,2,196 f. LEMERLE), in part to the high plains of the Balkans; here lies the origin of the Vlachs, who to this day call themselves Armani, ‘Romani’ (in contrast to the S.). The > Sclaviniae, former territories of the empire under Slavic rule, were gradually eliminated by Byzantium; however, in the north west, in Dalmatia for example, they were the starting point for state formation in the High Middle Ages (— Serbs), in the northeast, the southern expansion of > Bulgaria was the prerequisite for the first Slavic-Byzantine synthesis, which would also culturally influence Serbia and Russia [13]. Since then, the Slavic world has had two cultural zones, the Byzantine-influenced Orthodoxy and the central European influenced Catholicism. In Greece, the S. were under the rule of > Constantinople from c. 800 and underwent a progressive process of Hellenization, which, however, was still not concluded in remote areas in the rsthcent. [14]. Although the land acquisition had been violent, afterwards there was a peaceful cohabitation with the Greek population, so that today only Slavic place names [15] and isolated loanwords in modern Greek (oBdeva, ‘harrow’; oavoc, ‘hay’) indicate that large parts of Greece were Slavonized in the early Middle Ages [16]. + Balkans, languages (with map); > Byzantium (with map); > Church Slavonic; > Slavonic languages 1 H.SUNDHAUSSEN,

Der Einfluf$ der Herderschen Ideen

auf die Nationsbildung bei den V6lkern der Habsburger Monarchie, 1973. 2 L. NiEDERLE, Manuel de I’antiquité slave, 2 vols., 1923/1926 3 P.Drexs, Die slawichen Volker, 1963 4R.TRAUTMANN, Die slawischen Voélker und

Sprachen, 1948 5 K.W. Srruve, Die Ethnographie der Slawen aus der Sicht der Vor- und Frihgeschichte, in: W. BERNHARD, A. KANDLER-PALSSON (eds.), Ethnogenese

europdischer Vélker, 1986, 297-321 6 W.PoHL, Die Awaren. Ein Steppenvolk in Mitteleuropa, 1988 7A.P. ViasTo, The Entry of the Slavs to Christendom, 1970 8 F. Dvornik, The Slavs: Their Early History and Civilisation, 1956 9J.UDoOLPH, Zum Stand der Diskussion um die Urheimat der Slawen (Beitr. zur Namenforsch.

N. F. 14), 1979, wischen Volker. 11 L.MoszyNkx1, im Lichte der

1-22 10 Z.VANa, Mythologie der slaDie geistigen Impulse Ost-Europas, 1992 Die vorchristliche Religion der Slaven slavischen Sprachwissenschaft, 1992

12 G. SCHRAMM, Ein Damm bricht. Die romische Donau-

grenze und die Invasionen des 5.-7. Jh. im Lichte von Namen

und Wortern, 1997.

= 13 L.WALDMULLER,

Die

ersten Begegnungen der Slawen mit den christlichen V6lkern vom VI. bis VIII. Jahrhundert, 1996

1-350

15 PH. MALINGOUDIS, Studien zu den slawischen

Ortsnamen

Griechenlands,

1981

16 M. WEITHMANN,

Die slawische Bevélkerung auf der griechischen Halbinsel, 1978.

A.M. SCHENKER, The Dawn of Slavic, 1995.

JN.

Sleep see > Dreams; > Somnus Slinger. Among the military forces of Greek cities there were slingers (odevdovitta/sphendonétai), who, with the aid of a simple strap of leather, linen or horsehair, shot small stones, or lead, bronze or clay spheres in a straight trajectory and with great momentum (Syracuse 480 BC: Hdt. 7,158,4; Sicilian expedition 415 BC: Thuc. 6,22,1; 6,25,2; 6,433; Sparta 394 BC: Xen. Hell. 4,2,16). Plato mentions slingers in the army of the island of Atlantis (Pl. Criti rr9b). Slingers were used particularly to defend against a superior ~ cavalry (Thuc. 6,22,1). In battles with the Greeks in 401 BC, the Persians also deployed slingers who were superior even ton Gretanearchers |(XenaeAmen3.35

6335405

suiso4e2s

4,329). In this period — slingers’ lead bullets were already being used by the Rhodians instead of stones (Xen. An. 3,3,16 f.). Slingers (> funditores) also fought in the Roman army. Tu. VOLLING, Funditores im rémischen Heer, in: Saalburg Jb. 45, 1990, 24-58. S.L.

Slingers’ lead bullets (uoduBdic/molybdis, pokboBdawa/ molybdaina, glans). Slingers’ lead bullets were the most advanced type of ancient sling shot; they are mentioned several times in sources and thousands of examples survive. > Lead (uddvBdo0c/molybdos) shot of the desired shape and calibre was relatively easy to make on the spot (in half-moulds, in sets of up to nine at once [7. 40;

8. 153]). The special ballistic characteristics of SLB are founded primarily on the high density of the material. In 401 BC SLB, which had certainly already been tried in the > Peloponnesian War, were still a weapon peculiar to the Rhodians (Xen. An. 3,3,6-18). They quickly became a standard weapon in the Aegean [3]; there are, for example, numerous SLB of various combatants in Olynthus, which was destroyed in 348 BC, even with the name of Philip II [6]. SLB were also deployed as a weapon in warfare by the Romans. The ideal shape of Greek SLB was consistently that of a large olive or a bulbous kernel with more or less pointed ends. Shape and material influenced optimal ballistic characteristics and made them far superior to other sling shot both in range (probably about 300 m) and in impact energy [1]; the effect of the projectiles was feared [7. 43]. The bulk of Greek SLB weigh, for a length of 28-35 mm, between about 30 and 45 g. The moulding technique made it possible to give them inscriptions or symbols. Many bear short inscriptions, monograms or pictorial symbols on one side or both,

545

546

including ethnica and symbols of cities or religions (e.g. a star for Miletus, a boukranion for the Phocians; bolt of lightning), weapons (e.g. point of a spear), also the evocation of victory (NIKH/NIKE), of protective deities and generals [5], and sarcastic message for the enemy, e.g. AEZEAI/DEXAI (‘Take that!’). By far the most common are personal names (mostly in the genitive)

mercenaries) more than those of the economy; the mint-

such as AHMOKAEOS/DEMOKLEOS, MENQNOX/ MENONOS, EYBOYAIAAX/EUBOULIDAS, | of which more than roo are known. Although many Greek SLB are, or have the intention of being, strikingly eloquent, even when the findspot is known it is only in rare cases that there has been any success in placing them in the context of particular battle activities or determining the identity and military status of the people (cf. [8]; for examples of success see [2; 3; 5]). It is notable that there is an almost complete absence of names of Hellenistic kings. The Romans [7] came into contact with this Hellenistic standard weapon through their military conflicts with the Greeks. Roman slingers used SLB no later than from the middle of the 2nd cent. BC (in the second Sicilian slave rebellion the rebels did, too [5]). Roman SLB, glandes (plumbeae; ‘lead acorns’), were more varied in shape and tended to be heavier (up to about 150 g and 60 mm long). Until the end of the Civil Wars they often bore inscriptions, e.g. names of generals and legions, some with lightning symbols, in the Perusinian War (41/40 BC, — Perusia) also coarse sayings such as Octavia(ni)

culum peto (‘J am

aiming at Octavian’s

backside’), Fulviae [la]ndicam peto (‘lam aiming at Fulvia’s clitoris’) [9. 55-56]; in this context there are also

SLB with phalluses. SLB remained in use (but tending to decrease) in the Roman army until Late Antiquity, from the late 2nd cent. AD in the shape of lead spheres. + Funditores; > Slinger 1D. Baatz, Schleudergeschosse aus Blei, in: Saalburg Jb. 45, 1990, 59-67 2 C.Foss, Greek Sling Bullets in Oxford, in: Archaeological Reports 21, 1975, 40-44

3 Id., A Bullet of Tissaphernes, in: JHS 95, 1975, 25-30 4 G. FouGERES, s. v. Glans, DS 2, 1608-1611

5 G.MANGANARO, Monete e ghiande inscritte degli schiavi ribelli in Sicilia, in: Chiron 12, 1982, 237-244 6 D.M. Rosinson, Excavations at Olynthus 10, 1941, 418-443 7 T.VOLLING, Funditores im romischen Heer, in: Saalburg Jb. 45, 1990, 24-58 8 P. Wess, Schleuderbleie und Marktgewichte, in: V. VON GRAEVE, Milet 19941995, Vorbericht, in: AA 1997, 143-153 9 C. ZANGEMEISTER, Glandes plumbeae (EEpigr 6), 1885. P.W.

Small coins, shortage of. In the early period of the history of Greek money, despite the limited number in circulation, there was no shortage of small coins, since to a great extent everyday dealings were probably still

conducted without coins. A shortage arises in developed money economies when the minting or supply of small coins fails. This could happen more easily in ancient economies than in the present day since > minting served the needs of the state (seigniorage, payments to

SMALL COINS, SHORTAGE

OF.

ing of small coins yielded little profit. We can grasp the phenomenon of shortage of small coins only by way of various emergency measures such as halvings, forgeries (counterfeits), + countermarks, or overstrikes. They were increasingly common in antiquity, becoming mass

phenomena several times in the Roman Imperial period. In the rst centuries BC and AD, inadequate minting of small coins smaller than an — as led to a shortage particularly of those coins of the smallest denomination.

In Italy towards the end of the Republic, shortage of small coins continued to increase after aes minting ceased in the early rst century BC, so heavily clipped old asses were halved and quartered. In Gaul too, in the time of Augustus and Tiberius, Republican asses were halved and quartered, as well as those of Lugdunum, Vienna and Nemausus. Apparently, these shortages occurred after the Gaulish small coins of the Aduatuci and the Remi had largely disappeared from circulation. Most coins may already have been divided in the Augustan period; they circulated until the end of the rst century AD [5. 11-12, 17-21; 6. 25-33]. In Gaul around AD 50-64, the mint at > Lugdunum was closed under Caligula, followed by quite a long interval (54-64) of no minting of bronze coins under Nero. This apparently led to a shortage of small coins in Gaul and triggered the production of local counterfeits. It is debatable whether the disappearance of Gaulish and halved coins was connected to these forgeries, since they were certainly meant to be asses and not smaller values. It was primarily Claudius’ asses with Minerva and Libertas that were counterfeited [6. 39f.; 8; RIC I? 114-115]. They ranged from full weight to very light coins and from a high technical standard to heavily barbarized coins. For a long time, the Claudius coins remained in circulation under Nero, often being very clipped and underweight. Counterstamps such as C(aesar) A(ugustus) PR(obavit) or P(opulo) R(omano), PRO(batum) and BON(um), mostly on sesterces, were used to prolong circulation. Counterstamps such as DVP(ondius) and AS reduced the face value of clipped coins. It is somewhat debatable to what extent the counterstamps of the Julio-Claudian period were due to economic causes (shortages in the money supply) or political and military causes (donations) [2. 47-493 9; Il. 43-50]. In Gaul from AD 272/274 onwards, large quantities of Antoniniani (> Antoninianus) were imitated, which had diminished to small coins because of inflation in the 3rd century. 85-90% were imitations of coins of Tetricus I and Tetricus II (+ Esuvius). The reverse types used are the most common in regular minting; the most easily copied types were preferred [15. 61]. The cause of the emergency issues was the closing of the mints in Cologne and Trier in 274 after the end of the Gallic empire [3. 117; 7. 10; 17. 77]. Due to political and economic uncertainty in this part of the Roman empire, the transportation of money over larger distances, i.e., the

SMALL COINS, SHORTAGE

OF.

548

547

delivery from the mints in Lugdunum and Italy, was initially made impossible. Large-scale imitation (according to finds, sporadically from as early as the reign of Tetricus) began in 274. They were to some extent greatly barbarized and make up a considerable portion of the treasure finds of this period. In the course of their development, they became smaller and smaller (hence their designation as minimi) and stylistically poorer and poorer, since evidently to some extent coins which had already been copied were copied again [3. 115ff.; 13. 59]. In English they are also called ‘barbarous radiates’. In around 274-283, these minimi were the main coins circulating in the north of Gaul, in Britain and Germany. Some treasure finds consist almost exclusively of minimi. Minimi found in England could also be demonstrated to be from the production of Gaulish workshops, due to links between stamps [7. 10; 13. 71]. A number of British minimi finds also contained raw materials for minting and therefore must have been material from a workshop [14. 25; 16]. Emergency issues from British and Gallic mints ceased in about 283 [3; 13. 55]. The consecration coins of Claudius II with an altar on the reverse were imitated in quite large numbers in southern Germany at the beginning of the 270s, and in Gaul only at the end of the 270s, with the heavy influx of coins of the emperors recognized in Rome [15. 56].

In north-eastern Gaul and the Rhineland around AD 330-359, there were imitations of Constantinian coins showing Gloria Exercitus on the reverse, and of Urbs Roma and Constantinopolis coins [4; 15. 102-106]. A significant proportion of these may have been produced to counter inflationary tendencies at the end of the 3308, as settlement and treasure finds imply [ro. 86; 15. 196]. In the period between the death of Magnentius in 3 53 and the beginning of the Valentinian dynasty in 364, northern Gaul suffered another shortfall in the supply of money [15 4. 296; 15. 106] with a subsequent shortage of small coins. Counterfeits of the 3 30s were in

1981, 239-250 10C.KtNnG, The Value of Hoards and Site Finds, in: Studien zu Fundmiinzen der Antuke 1, 1976, 79-89 11P.Kos, A.SEMRov, Roman Imperial Coins and Countermarks of the 1** Century (Situla 33), 1995 12 J.LarauRIE, Trésor monétaire trouve a Epernay (Marne), in: Bulletin de la Société Francaise de Numismatique 1957,157f. 13 J. LALLEMAND, M. TurRIoNn, Le trésor de Saint MardI, 1970 14 H.B. Marrincty, M.]J. Doty, A Hoard of Barbarous Radiates and Associated

Material from Sprotborough, in: NC 1982, 21ff.

15 H.-

J.ScHuLzx1, Die Fundmiinzen der rémischen Strafenstation Flerzheim, 1989 16R.J. ZEEPVAT et al., A Roman

Coin Manufacturing Hoard from Magiovinium, in: Bri17 R. Z1EGLER, Der Schatzfund DLK. von Brauweiler, 1983. tannia 25, 1991, I-19

Smerdis see > Bardiya [2] Smertrios. Celtic god, connected with the Roman > Mars. Only a building inscription on a temple in the territory of the Treveri (CIL XIII 11975) has preserved the complete name: Marti Smertrio. The reading Smert[riJos on a relief on the Nautae Parisiaci monument (CIL XIII 3026c; [1]) is generally accepted; it shows a bearded god naked to the waist, holding a club in his raised right hand and a bow, rather than a snake, in front of himself. The inscription CIL XIII 4119 from Mohn, which was formerly ascribed to S., [2] reads Marti Sme[rtuli]t(a]no. The syllable Smer is also part of the name of the goddess > Rosmerta. A proposed linking of + Dis Pater and S., based on a supplemented inscription from Karnten [D]Jiti Smer[trio] Aug(usto) [3] has not been confirmed. 1 P.-M. Duvat, Travaux sur la Gaule, vol. 1, 1989, 451 f. 2 W. BINSFELD, Zur Marsinschrift aus dem Heiligtum von Mohn, in: TZ 46, 1983, 153-155 3P.-M.Duvat, Le dieu S. et ses avatars gallo-romains, in: Etudes celtiques 6,

1953-1954, 219-238 H. MERTEN, Der Kult des Mars im Trevererraum, in: TZ 48, 1985,98 f. M.E.

circulation, as well as imitations of FEL TEMP REPA-

RATIO coins of 346-360 and even minimi of the 3rd century [4. 96f., 28rf.]. — Minting; + Money, money economy 1 M.R.-ALFOLDI, Die Minzen aus einer Brunnenverfiillung in Koln, in: Kolner Jahrbuch fiir Vor- und Frithgeschichte 5, 1960-61, 80ff. 2. BERGER, Kalkriese 1, 1996

3G.C. Boon, Counterfeit Coins in Roman Brit-

ain, in: Coins and the Archaeologist, British Archaeological Report 4, 1974, 115-121

4J.P. CaLtu, J.P. Gar-

NIER, Minimi constantiniens trouves a Reims, in: Qua-

derni Ticinesi 6, 1977, 281ff.

antiken

Fundminzen

| 5 H.CHANTRAINE, Die

der Ausgrabungen

von

Neuss

(Novaesium 3), 1968 61d., Die antiken Fundmiinzen von Neuss (Novaesium 8), 1982 7 J.-B. G1arD, La mon-

naie locale en Gaule a la fin du III siécle, in: Journal des Savants 1969, 5ff.

8 Id., La pénurie de petite monnaie en

Gaule au début du Haut-Empire, in: Journal des Savants 1975, 81ff. 9E.ERCOLANI CoccHl, Orientamenti per una ricerca sul significato delle contromarche in epoca Giulio-Claudia, in: Rivista Italiana di Numismatica 83,

Smila (yiha; Smila). City in > Crusis (Hecat. FGrH 1 F 148; Hdet. 7,123,2; ATL 1, 410 f., until 421 BC). M. ZauHrRntT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 236.

M.Z.

Smilis (Zyiduc/Smilis). Son of Euclides, a sculptor from Aegina, probably 6th cent. BC. Pausanias (5,17,1) saw S. enthroned > Horae in the temple of Hera at Olympia and gives an account of his cult image of Hera in Samos (7,4,4). A late source (Athenagoras, Legatio pro Christianis 17,4 SCHOEDEL) ascribes to S. a cult image of Hera in Argos. Ancient tradition places him among the mythical artists of the period of > Daedalus [1]; Plin. HN 36,90 ascribes architectural marvels to him. His name can be derived from opidy (smilé, ‘chisel’). Speculation on S.’ technical inventions in casting bronze, however, must remain hypothetical since noth-

549

550

ing is known of the appearance of his works. It is unnecessary to correct his name to Scelmis or Celmis, one of the > Telchines of Crete.

Nemesis goddesses, Egyptian and Syrian cults and ruler cults). On Judaism cf. [11. on no. 295 with vol. 2,2, 372]. For early Christianity in S., one of the seven churches of the Revelation, the bishop > Polycarpus (second half of the 2nd cent. AD) and the priest Pionius (250 AD), both martyrs, are noteworthy [12]. G.PE.

OVERBECK, no. 283, 331, 340-343; M. ZUFFA, s.v. S., EAA 7, 1966, 363; E. WALTER-KaryDI, Die aginetische Bildhauerschule, 1987, 12-13; FUCHS/FLOREN, 309, 357. RN.

SNAILS AND SLUGS

Il. BYZANTINE PERIOD

Smintheus see > Apollo Smyrna (Zmyrna; Luveva/Smyrna, ZuvbevalZmyrna, Zuvevyn/Zmyrné). modern Izmir.

Cubevyn/Smyrne, City in Aeolis,

J. FROM EARLY TIMES UNTIL THE HELLENISTIC PE-

RIOD II. BYZANTINE PERIOD CAL FINDS

III. ARCHAEOLOGI-

I. FROM EARLY TIMES UNTIL THE HELLENISTIC PERIOD

On a hill near Bayrakli north of the Gulf of Izmir, settled since the 3rd millennium, the Aioleis settled late in the rrth cent. BC (mud brick houses). In c. 700 BC (?) the Iones from Colophon took S. over (Hdt. 1,150; [3. 66 f.]). Archaeological excavations have yielded evidence of developed construction: grid street system, temple (probably of Athena) [1. 63-98; 6. 98-100]. In c. 600, Old S. was conquered and destroyed by > Alyattes (Hdt. 1,16). Individual village settlements developed on the former city area (Str. 14,1,37). In the first half of the 4th cent. BC one of them regained the status of a city [4. 435]. The re-foundation can be traced back to Antigonus [1] and Lysimachus [2] [11. on nos. 577, 647]. S. was (cf. the founding oracle from Clarus: Paus. 755533 epigraphic record [7. no. 05/o1/o1; 11. no. 647]) on the other side of the river Meles (identified in the Imperial Period with the modern river Halka Pinar) near the acropolis fortress of Pagus (modern Kadifekale) on the site of the nucleus of the modern city of Izmir. S. was accepted as the 13th member in the city league of the Iones [3. 67 f., 105; 11. on no. 577] and blossomed, becoming the ‘ornament of Ionia’ (as in the city’s title). It was repeatedly afflicted by wars, epidemics (cf. [1z.no. 766]) and earthquakes. Donations helped with magnificent decoration (e.g. [11. no. 697]) and reconstruction (— Euergetism). Inscriptions, literary sources, coins [5; 8] and burial finds throw light on: (a) political history (cf. the sympoliteia treaty [11. no. 573] between S. and Magnesia [3] c. 245 BC, bulletins from Roman authorities, honours); (b) institutions and offices; (c) associations, e.g.

gold and silver smiths; (d) cultural life, e.g. the worship of + Homerus

[1] and + Mimnermus, a mouseion ({xz. on no. 191, 17]; cf. SEG 45, 1598), the > Second Sophistic with Polemon [6], Aristides [3], late poetry (Quintus [3] of S.); (e) agonistics (e.g. games such as the Nemeseia, the Olympia, and the Hadriana Olympia); (f) religious life (e.g. worship of Apollo Kisauloddenos, of Dionysus — Briseus [2] with related associations of mystai and technitai, of Meter Sipylene and of two

S. was attacked by the Arabs in AD 654 and in 672/3 was temporarily occupied by them. In the Middle Byzantine Period the city increased in significance as a trade and naval port instead of + Ephesus, whose harbour had been made unusable by silting. From 1o8r until 1097 and then again from 1317, S. was in Turkish hands and later, 1344-1402, occupied by western European crusaders [13; 14]. ALB. II]. ARCHAEOLOGICAL

FINDS

Since S. has been built over in modern times, archaeological excavations have been carried out only in Old S. (s. above and [9]) and in parts of the agora of the Hellenistic Roman city (two-storied colonnades, some with shops beneath; [10. 75-91, 106-114]). Further

remains permit only a rough determination of the city topography (cf. [10. 70-75; 11]). 1 E. AxurGAt, Alt-S., vol. 1, 1983 2 L.BURCHNER, s.v. S., RE 3 A, 730-764 3C.J. Capoux, Ancient S., 1938 4 J. Ketz, Review of [3], in: Gnomon 15, 1939, 432-437

5 D.O. Kiose, Die Miinzpragung von S. in der romischen Kaiserzeit, 1987 6 F. KOLB, Die Stadt im Altertum, 1984 7 R. MERKELBACH, J.STAUBER, Steinepigramme aus dem griechischen Osten, vol. 1, 1998 8 J.G. MILNE, in: NC (4. ser.) 14, 1914, 273-298; NC (4. ser.) 16, 1916, 246250; NC (5. ser.) 3, 1923, 1-30; NC (5. ser.) 4, 1924, 316-318; NC (5. ser.) 7, 1927, 1-107; NC (5. ser.) 8, 1928, 131-163,

164-171

chaeology in Asia Minor

Reports

for

1998-99,

10 R. NAUMANN,

(Index)

9S.MITCHELL,

1999,

125-191,

S.KantTArR, Die Agora von

Forsch 17, 1950, 69-114

Ar-

1990-98, in: Archaeological

esp.

147

S., in: Ist-

11 G.PeETZzL1, Die Inschriften

von S., vols. 1-2,2 (IK 23-24,2), 1982-1990

12 L.RoBeErT, Le martyre de Pionios prétre de Smyrne (edited by G.W. Bowersock, C.P. JONES), 1994

13 H. AHRWEILER, L’histoire et la géographie de la région de Smyrne entre les deux occupations turques (1081— 1317),

in:

Travaux

et

Mémoires

1,

1965,

1-204

14 W. MULLER-WIENER, Die Stadtbefestigungen von Izmir, Sigacik und Candarh, in: MDAI(Ist) 12, 1962, 6096.

G.PE.

Snails and slugs. Not distinguished by the Greeks as a sub-order with their own collective name from other shelled molluscs (xoyybAvo/konchylia, Latin conchylia or conchae). Aristotle (Hist. an. 4,4,528a 11-13), however, contrasts SAS with bivalve (8i9vea/dithyra) Ooteaxddequa/ ostrakédderma (+ Mussels) as uovobvea/mondthyra. Many species did have their own names: 1. The sea-snail xfjeve/kéryx, Latin bucinum, commonly Triton’s trumpet or trumpet shell, Tritonium nodiferum Lam. Aristotle describes its bodily parts

SNAILS AND SLUGS

551

552

(Hist. an. 4,4,528a 1-11; 528a 33-b 13; 528b 17-529a 24), reproduction and life habits (544a 15 f.; 23 f.; 5515,546b 25-29; 547b 1-10). In many respects, in both Aristotle and Geop. 20,22, it is reminiscent of the snail described under 5. It is mentioned as a culinary delicacy by Clearchus (fr. 90 WEHRLI) and Alciphron (Epist. 4,13,16). It was prescribed, e.g. against impo-

lepus marinus), is a poisonous sea slug, which Aelian (NA 2,45; cf. Plin. HN 9,155) warns against eating. Plutarch (De sollertia animalium 35 = Mor. 983f), Aelian (NA 9,51) and Pliny (HN 32,8 and 70) are unanimous in declaring its flesh poisonous. Nicander (Alex. 465 ff.) and Dioscorides (2,164,1 WELLMANN =

tence. Dioscorides (2,4 WELLMANN

used for depilation (Plin. HN 32,70; Dioscorides 2,18 WELLMANN = 2,20 BERENDES; Dioscorides, Euporista 1,97 WELLMANN). For external use, Pliny recommends the slime against mouth ulcers (Plin. HN 32,88), the

= 2,5 BERENDES)

recommends keryx roasted with salt as a tooth-cleaning agent and a poultice for burns. He also mentions that lime was extracted from their shells. It was known as toitwv (triton; Latin triton) because its shell (cf. fish mosaic from Pompeii [1. fig. 124, behind 392]) was sometimes used as a trumpet (Theoc. 22,75; Verg. Aen. 6,172f. and 10,209). One type of sea deity, for instance, who blew on these shells, were called > Tritons by Theognis (1231) and Cicero (Nat. D. 1,78). 2. The typical snail (family Helicidae; xoyAia/ kochlia, Latin cochlea, or egéowxoc/pheréoikos, “housecarrier”, in Hes. Op. 571) is described by Athenaeus (10,45 5e) in two cited hexameters. Land-dwellers of varying sizes (Varro, Rust. 3,14,4), they grow together

with their shells (Aristot. Hist. an. 4,2,525a 27f.; 4,4,528a 7-9) and have feelers instead ofeyes (Plin. HN 9,101; 11,140; cf. Aristot. Hist. an. 4,4,528b 24; in fact, the eyes are on the ends of the ‘feelers’!) and small, sharp grinding teeth (ibid. 528b 28; Plin. HN 11,164). Aristotle (Gen. an. 3,11,762a 33) reports that these are the only testaceans in which mating has been observed. According to Aristot. Hist. an. 5,12,544a 23 f., they gestate in winter and spawn in spring (Plin. HN 9,164). These snails were unwelcome in fields and gardens, being a pest to e.g. fig-trees (Theophr. Hist. pl. 4,14,3; Plin. HN 17,223). Lizards (Plin. HN 8,141), birds and pigs were known to devour them (Aristot. Hist. an. 9(8),37,6214 rf.). Then as now, the garden snail (Helix adspersa) belonging to this family was eaten as a delicacy (e.g. Aesop. Fab. 54 Perry; Anth. Pal. 11,319,4; Alci. 4,13,16): among the Romans, Plin. HN 9,173f. reports, after Varro, Rust. 3,14,4f. (without reference by name), the introduction of their farming in special containers (vivaria) by Q. Fulvius Lupinus (c. 50 BC). They were also regarded as an aphrodisiac (e.g. Ath. 2,64a; Theoc. 14,17; Petron. Sat. 130). Galen (de facultatibus alimentorum 3,2) praises the meat, which, though tough, is nourishing: it should be boiled thrice, the water renewed each time. The 20 or so species, named after their area of origin and used in different medical applications, are undefinable today. Their slow propulsion (on the excreted bed of slime) was already proverbial in antiquity (Plaut. Poen. 531; Rhet. Her. 4,62). Dioscorides gives an account of medicinal use (2,9 WELLMANN = 2,11 BERENDES).

3. Koyhoc/kochlos denotes species of prosobranches (Prosobranchia) in Aristotle (Hist. an. 4,4,528a 1-530a 31, scattered references, and Part. an. 4,5,678b 23-

679b 14). 4. Aplysia depilans Gmelin, common on the coasts of the Aegean (Aaya Saddttioc/lagos thalattios, Latin

2,193

BERENDES)

mention

antidotes.

Its ashes were

whole animal pulverized with honey against hernias (32,104) anda freshly pulverized animal as an ointment against podagra (32,110). Plin. HN 9,155 and Ael. NA 16,19 mention a particularly large species native to the seas around India. 5. Aencic/lepas, Latin lopas, seems to denote a genus of limpets (esp. Patella scutellaris L., cf. Ath. 3,86d) which cling to rocks (Aristot. Hist. an. 4,4,530a 18f.; cf. the exaggerations of Ael. NA 6,55 on the impossibility of tearing them loose). Aristotle describes their appearance and their habits (Hist. an. 4,4,528a 13f.; b 1; 529a 31 and 7(8),2,590a 32f.). According to Athenaeus (3,91e), they are edible. 6. Hoedtvea/porphyra (xddyn/kalché: Nic. Alex. 391), Latin purpura or ostrum (concha: Lucr. 2,501), is

the name of the economically very important purple snail (Purpura patula L.). Aristotle offers much information on this mollusc, which lives esp. along the Palestinian coast of the Mediterranean, e.g. its long, hard tongue (Hist. an. 4,7,532a 9 and 5,15,547b 5-7; cf. Plin. HN 9,128; Ael. NA 7,34), the depositing of its spawn (Aristot. Hist. an. 5,15,546b 18-25), its rapid growth to a weight of approx. 375 g and its life span of up to 6 years (ibid. 547a 1-b 11; cf. Plin. HN 9,125 and 128), its sensitivity to fresh water and mutual grazing off of plant material growing on the shell (Arist. Hist. an. 9(8),20,603a 13-15; Plin. HN 9,132: baiting with

mussels). The techniques of catching in bow nets and preparing the red dye broth (Plin. HN 9,133f.) were known all round the Mediterranean (— Purple; > Pigments). 70 catch sites and workshops are known. The liver and ashes in particular were used in medicine (Plin. HN and Ath. 3,87e). The chalky shells were burned to make tooth powder (Dioscorides 2,4 WELLMANN = BERENDES). The Romans did not shrink from fattening up even these snails (Lucil. 3,132; Columella 8,16,7 hinting at breeding on a muddy surface, cf. 3,15,1; Macrob. Sat. 3,13,12). Purple parchment and purple ink only appeared in Late Antiquity [1. 537f.]. 7. Another snail important for the extraction of > purple (Murex brandaris L.) was only to some extent distinguished linguistically from 6. (murex: Plin. HN 5,12; 22,3). Cato [1] wanted to pave the Roman Forum with its hard, spiny shells (ibid. 19,24). This snail, too, produced red dye (e.g. Tib. 2,4,28; Hor. Carm. 2,16,136; Ov. Met. 1,332). 8. XteaPydod/strabélos (otedfiroc/strobilos: schol. Aristoph. Pax 864) or oteduBoc/strombos was the name

SNAKE

553

554

given to all spiral-shaped snails living on Sicily and around the Bosporus (Theoc. 9,25; Ael. NA 7,32)

Gen. an. 1,7,718a 27 f.). Their feeding behaviour (with long periods without eating), their hibernation and their moulting (Aristot. Hist. an. 7(8),17,600b 27-6014 1; Ael. NA. 9,16) were also known. For Roman poets their ‘hissing’ (Aristot. Hist. an. 4,9,536a 6) was characteristic. Despite familiarity with non-poisonous snakes (e.g. Luc. 9,727) they were usually described as dangerous, poisonous and insidious (e.g. Hom. II. 3533 £.322,93-95; Cic. Acad. 2,38; Verg. G. 3,425; Aen. 2,379-82). The effectiveness of their poison (cf. the legend of > Philoctetes: Hom. Il. 2,723; Soph. Phil.; Ov. Tr. 5,2,14) is often enormously exaggerated (Aristot. fr. 334; Paus. 9,28,1; > Nigidius in Plin. HN 29,69; Ael. NA. 8,7), but its lack of effect is also mentioned.

which were used as bait for murex shells (Aristot. Part. an. 2,17,661a 21-23; Ael. NA 7,34). Xenocrates (De

alimentis 56) advised against eating them (Theoc. 9,27). Aelian (NA 15,8) and Strabo (17,2,4) mention a large Indian species. 9. Xoteivn/choiriné, cowries (Cypraea vitellus L.), whose shells were used by the Athenian judges as voting pieces (Aristoph. Equ. 1332 and schol.; Aristoph. Vesp. 333 and 349). Because of their shape (cf. Plaut. Rud. 704 concha = cunnus, female pudenda), they were an erotic symbol (Hsch. s. v. Oardooun phpovthaldssiai pséphoi) worn on amulet chains [1. 5 42, fig. 156]. Almost all snails are found on ancient coins and gems (e.g. [2. plates 23,29; 24,42/43]). 1 KELLER 2, 519-545

2 F.IMHOOF-BLUMER, O.KELLER,

Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972). H. Gossen, A.STEIER, s. v. Schnecke, RE 2 A, 585-614. C.HU.

Snake ‘O dqic/ho Sphis, as early as Hom. Il. 12,208; Latin anguis or, from its creeping way of moving, serpens; sometimes also generally 6 d5eaxwv/ho drakon (v.i. B. 3.; = 6phis in Hom. Il. 12,202; Hes. Theog. 322 and 825), f txiéva/hé échidna (Hdt. 3,108; also as the snake-like monster > Echidna and in a metaphorical sense for ‘traitor/traitress’, e.g. Aesch. Cho. 249), } x£0ovdeoc/hé chérsydros (e.g. Nic. Ther. 3 59); Latin vipera (first at Cic. Har. resp. 50), coluber, colubra (from Plautus to Petronius only poetic).

I. Zootocy

Il. MYTH AND RELIGION

I. ZOOLOGY

A. GENERAL

B. INDIVIDUAL

SPECIES

A. GENERAL

The absence of snakes on certain islands — Crete and the Balearic (> Baliares) and Pine (-> Pityussae) Islands

—and of poisonous snakes on Sicily has been remarked on since Aristotle. By contrast, they were considered a common occurrence in India (e.g. Str. 15,1,45; Megasthenes fr. 47) and Africa (Diod. Sic. 3,36). Widespread fear of snakes gave rise to careful study, but there were errors (e.g. that its sperm came out of its spine: Aristot. Hist. an. 2,17,508a

12 f. and 3,1,509b

16-19; that

snakes had 30 ribs: Aristot. Hist. an. 2,17,508b 3; Plin. HN 11,207).

Accurate

morphological

observations:

scaly skin

(Verg. G. 3,426), cartilaginous bones (Aristot. Part. an. 2,9,65 §a 20), variety of teeth (Aristot. loc.cit.; Plin. HN 11,163), a long tongue divided into three (Aristot.

loc.cit.; Plin. HN 11,171: tenuissima ... et trisulca; Verg. G. 3,439), one lung (Aristot. Hist. an. 2,17,508a

32 f.), one ovary and - soft-shelled — eggs (Aristot. Hist. an. 2,17,508a 10; 5,34,558a 26f.) and their way of

mating (Aristot. Hist. an. 5,4,540a 33-b 3; Aristot.

B. INDIVIDUAL SPECIES With reservations, 11 species (15 species in the catalogue of snakes in Luc. 9,700 ff.) can be distinguished: 1. Aonic/aspis, Latin aspis, the Egyptian Cobra (Naja haje L.) in Egypt., described by > Phylarchus [4] (e.g. Philumenus 16; Ael. NA 10,31 and 17,5; Paus. 9,21,6). This c. 1.5 m long grey-yellow snake is particularly dangerous to the > ichneumon (see Pompeii mosaic, [1. fig. 57]); it was used for painless execution in Egypt owing to its deadly poison (Ael. NA 10,31). With its poison > Demetrius [4] of Phalerum and — Cleopatra [II 12] VII committed suicide. It is possible that it could be trained as early as in Antiquity (Ael. NA 4,54; 17,5 and 9,62; Ex 4:3 and 7:15). Pharaohs had an image of it as a divine symbol in their diadems. 2. Aupac/dipsds, Latin dipsas, probably the Avicenna Viper (Cerastes vipera L.), which Nicander (Ther. 334), in its first mention, describes as similar to no. 5. Lucian dedicated a monograph to it (Peri Dipsadon). Philumenus (20,1) describes it as a snake 0.5 min length, with a powerful poison and living in Arabia and Africa (20,2; cf. Luc. 9,722). 3. Agaxwv/drakon, Latin draco, the Indian Rock Python (Python molurus L.), on which > Nearchus [2] was probably the first to give information (Arr. Ind. 15; Str. 15,1,45; cf. Cleitarchus in Ael. NA 17,2). Ancient data on the size of this non-poisonous constrictor range between 4.2m and 7.4m or even more (e.g. Paus. 2,28,1; Megasthenes fr. 47; Onesicrates in Str. 15,1,28). Its main enemy is supposed to be the Indian ~ elephant (Plin. NA 8,32 f.; Ael. NA 6,21 f.). Touching stories of its helpful love of humans are given in Plin. NA 8,61; Ael. NA 6,17 and 63. 4. The African Rock Python (Python sebae Gm.) from Ethiopia and Libya (Philumenus 30; Nic. Ther. 441 ff.) with an alleged length up to 17 m (Alexandri Periplous in Ael. NA 17,1). Diod. Sic. 3,36 (cf. Ael. NA 16,39) embellishes wildly a hunt by the court of Ptolemaeus [3] IJ for these animals represented as dangerous behemoths; it is even supposed to strangle African elephants. There are also exaggerations in Liv. 21,22; Prop. 4,8,3 and Ael. NA 11,16 f. 5. “Eytdvaléchidna, éyic/échis, the poisonous (Philumenus 17,1 f.; Nic. Ther. 235 ff.) Sand Viper (Vipera

SNAKE

555

ammodytes L.) from southern Europe and Asia Minor, difficult to distinguish from the Italian Asp Viper. Its viviparousness is described in Aristot. Hist. an. 3,1,511a 16 f. and 5,34,558a 25-31 (cf. Aristot. Gen. an. 2,1,732b 21 f.), other characteristics: Nic. Ther.

209 ff. and 223 ff. Allegedly after the snake has drunk wine it can be caught hold of (Aristot. Hist. an. 7(8),4,594a 9-12). They are supposed to mate with the >» moray eel and discharge their poison before sliding into water (Plin. HN 9,76; Opp. Hal. 1,5 54-579; Ael. NA 1,50 and 9,66; cf. Aesch. Cho. 994; Aesch. Supp. 896). Like no. 1 (Opp. Kyn. 3,410 f. and 433-448) they fight with the > ichneumon (Str. 17,1,39). Their skin and dried flesh were considered a panacea (e.g. as a constituent of theriac; Hippoc. De mulieribus 2; Dioscorides 2,17 WELLMANN = 2,19 BERENDES; Plin. HN 29,70). 6. Keoaotne/kerdstés, Latin cerastes, known, be-

cause of the two characteristic horn-like appendages on its head, as the Horned Viper (Cerastes cornutus Forsk.), which is first mentioned by Hdt. 2,74 and 4,192 and by Aristot. Hist. an. 2,1,500a 4 f. Philumenus 18,1 (cf. Ael. NA 1,57) gives a good description of the 450-900 mm long snake, which often lurks hidden in the sand in order to deliver its deadly bite with lightning speed (cf. Philumenus 18,2 ff.; Nic. Ther. 272 ff. with the antidotes). 7. Tlageiac/pareias, the harmless Aesculapian Snake (Elaphe longissima Laur.), possibly = Latin parias, cited from Luc. 9,721 onwards in Isid. Orig. 12,4,27, cf.

Hor. Sat.1,3,27 (serpens Epidaurius because of its significance in the cult of + Asclepius in + Epidaurus, cf. Paus. 2,28,1). It was spread from the eastern Mediterranean by the Romans’ worship of the god of healing (Ov. Met. 15,626-744; Val. Max. 1,8,3). This yellowbrown snake, up to 2 m long, can be tamed easily (Philumenus 32,1; Plin. HN 29,71; Ael. NA 8,12) and is often depicted on the god’s staff. Replicas were used as bracelets [1. Fig. 113]; it can also be found on coins and gems ([2. pl. 23,1] in connexion with > Hygieia). 8. Unnedmv/sepedon (omp/séps), Latin seps, which can be mistaken for a > lizard. According to Philumenus 23 and Ael. NA 15,18 (cf. Nic. Ther. 320-23) it is about 900 mm long and brightly speckled. Its body is supposed to taper itself significantly. Since its name appears to be derived from the putrefaction (sepsis) caused by its poison, it may be entirely fictitious. 9. °Ydea/hydra or tdgoc/hydros, Latin hydra, natrix or simply colubra, describes the Grass Snake (Natrix natrix L.), native also to central Europe, which lives by and in water on e.g. frogs, mice and birds and is 1.5 to 2 m long and blackish with a yellow head. Its amphibious way of life gave rise to wondrous assertions, e.g. that when the marshlands dried out it changed into an échis (no. 5.; Aristot. fr. 328; Theophr. Hist. pl. 2,4,4; Plin. HN 32,53). It has a powerful bite, but —in contrast to its presentation in Verg. G. 3,425 —is not poisonous (Ctesias in Ael. NA 16,42).

556

10. “Ydoo¢/hydros or yéeovdeos, Latin chersydrus,

is supposed to be identifiable with the Banded Sea Snake (Laticauda laticauda L.) (cf. Ael. NA 16,8). This water snake, similar to no. 1, from the coast of the

Indian Ocean (Serv. Georg. 3,415) is poisonous (Philumenus 24, cf. Ael. NA 4,57 and 8,7; Nic. Ther. 359 ff. confuses it with no. 9). 11. Vipera, probably the small, up to 750 mm long, Italian Asp Viper (Vipera aspis L.). It was known for its preference, shared with the adder, for darkness (Verg. G. 3,417; Mart. 3,19). It can be tamed (Manil. 5,190; Mart. 1,41,7).

Snake poison was used to make poison arrows (Nep. Hann. ro; Sil. 1,322), and possibly also as medicine. Its fat, skin, heart, bones and teeth, etc., were used for

organotherapy, e.g. for stomach, ear and tooth aches, and the skin also for animal (Plin. HN 30,148) and tree diseases (Pall. Agric. 4,10,3 and 12,7,4). The flesh was also eaten (Aristot. Mir. 24,832a 18-20; Plaut. Stich. 321; Plin. HN 7,27); Jews rejected it, however, as unclean (Mt 7:10; Lk 11:10). + Poisons 1 KELLER 2,284-305

2 F.IMHOOF-BLUMER, O. KELLER,

Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972) 3 TOYNBEE, Tierwelt, 217-223. C.HU.

Il. MyTH AND RELIGION

Owing to their venomousness and ability to moult/rejuvenate, snakes occupy an ambivalent position in Greek and Roman culture. In Minoan and Mycenaean Greece they were primarily guardians of houses [1. 30, 48] — a role they also played in later periods [2]: thus in Athens the Acropolis was guarded by a snake in the temple of > Erechtheus (Hsch. O 270), fed with honey cakes by the priestesses of > Athena Polias (Hdt. 8,41; Aristoph. Lys. 759; Plut. Themistocles ro). A snake could also be the guardian of a sanctuary (Soph. Phil. 1327), a well (Soph. fr. 226 Rapt), the golden apples of the > Hesperides (Apoll. Rhod. 4,1398) or the Golden Fleece (Pherecydes FGrH 3 F 31); even > Zeus Ktesios in his function as protector of property could, like other gods and heroes, appear as a snake [6]. Other aspects also appear in the Archaic period [3; 4]: from Homer onwards snakes are awe-inspiring animals (Hom. Il. 3,33-35; 22,93-95) used to decorate weapons (Hom. Il. 11,39; Pind. P. 8,44-47; Aesch. Sept. 493-496; Paus. 10,26,3). This may explain their close iconographic connexion with heroes [5. 253-255; 6]. In Hesiod on the other hand, under Near Eastern influence, the snake figure is one of the appearances of monsters (Hes. Theog. 299: > Echidna; 313: > Hydra; 322 f.: » Chimaera; 825: > Tryphoeus; [8. 302, 366 f.,

461}). Being bitten by a poisonous snake is a common cause of death in myth (Paus. 8,4,7; Apoll. Rhod. 4,1502; Apollod. Epitome 6,28; Verg. G. 4,457). Sometimes snakes are sent by gods, as to > Laocoon [1] (Apollod.

557

558

Epitome 5,18) and the baby > Heracles [1] ({7]). From this the idea developed of snakes as evil animals, common in poetry (Thgn. 599-602), tragedy (Clytaemnestra as a viper: Aesch. Ag. 1233; Aesch. Cho. 994; 1047) and fable (e.g. Aesop. 33; 8x f.; 115-117 CHAMBRY). Dreaming of snakes was a sign of sickness and

the guardian spirits of places or houses (further conjectures on snakes as representations of a man’s > genius in [14. 60 f., 367, 502 f.]). Greek influence manifests itself no later than the period of Augustus [15. 366381]. The view of snakes in early Judaism and in Christianity was also ambivalent. On the one hand it greatly influenced their image negatively that in the biblical creation myth a snake leads Eve to awareness and so to

hostility (Artem. 2,13).

The Greeks connected the origin of their tribes and founding kings with snakes, ‘children of the earth’ (Hdt. 1,78,3): cf. the > Ophi(on)eis (Thuc. 3,94,5; Str. 10,2,5), the Ophiogeneis (Str. 13,1,14; Ael. NA 12-39),

+ Cecrops of Athens, above the belly a human and below a snake (Eur. Ion 1163-1164; Aristoph. Vesp. 438), and Cychreus of Salamis (Paus. 1,36,1; Apollod. 3,12,7). The connexion of snakes with the earth and

caves may also explain their closeness to > divination (sometimes performed in caves). Snakes were connected with the > Oracle of > Trophonius (schol. Aristoph. Nub. 508; Suda T 1065) and an unidentified Oracle of Apollo in Epirus (Ael. NA 11,2). They fed the infant ~ Jamus (Pind. Ol. 6,45 ff.) and licked at the ears of the seers — Cassandra and — Helenus (Anticlides, POxy. 56,3 830; rationalizing reinterpretation in Arrian FGrH 156 F roz) and Melampus (Apollod. 1,9,11); cf. Apollo’s founding of the Oracle of Delphi after annihilating the snake (drakon) Python [1] ({16]). Connexion with the earth also explains the enmity between snakes and eagles — ‘below’ against ‘above’ — in Greek literature (from Hom. Il. 12,200-229 onwards), science (Aristot. Hist. an. 9,1; Ael. NA 17,37) and iconography [9]. From the late Classical period onwards snakes play a part both in some non-official cults and in > mysteries. + Maenads of > Dionysus have snakes in their hair, and snakes occur in the cult of + Sabazius and in the Eleusinian > Mysteria ([10. 362-365]; SEG 46,1342). They may denote divine protection; cf. the early Christians, who were promised that they could handle snakes without suffering harm (Mk 16:18; [10]). In Late Antiquity Pythagoras [2], too, was considered immune to snake bites (Iambl. VP. 28). The last important appearance of a snake in ancient religion is the ‘invention’ of the snake god — Glycon [3] by > Alexander [27] of Abonutichus (Lucian. Alexander; in resort to the snake figure in the cult of > Asclepius: e.g. Paus. 3,23,6 f.; cf. SEG 30,1388). The snake form of gods also leads to legends of people being fathered by snakes, e.g. Alexander [4] the Great, P. Cornelius [I 71] Scipio Africanus and even Augustus (Liv. 26,19,7; Gell. 6,1,3; Suet. Aug.

94,4). In Italy, Faliscan and Tarquinian priests are said to have worn snakes, to impress the Romans (Liv. 7,17,1 f.); the > Marsi [1] were considered snake handlers [11; 12. 167-172] and the > Iuno of Lavinium was connected with a snake (Prop. 4,8,3-14; Ael. NA 11,16). The Romans viewed snakes as good (Liv. 1,56,4; 26,19,7; Plin. HN 8,153) or bad (Ov. Fast. 2,711; Plin. HN 29,4; 22; Val. Max. 1,6,9) omina. In literature (Verg. Aen. 5,84-96; Pers. 1,113) and picto-

rial representations [13] snakes appear as genii loci and

SNAKE COLUMN

the Fall (Gn 3:1); they are considered sly and are used as

an instrument for God’s punishment (Nm. 21:4-9; I Cor. 10:9; Apc. 9:19). On the other hand the tale of the brass serpent (Nm 21:4-9) which rescues the Israelites in their exodus from Egypt (the pole is interpreted metaphorically by Christians as the Cross of Christ, e.g. Jo 3:14) also attests to their positive power. The gnostic > Naassenes — their name derives from Egyptian nahas, snake, also identified by Greek authors with the + Ophites (from dtc, 6phis) — wholly inverted the negative image into a soteriological significance [16]: snakes are the medium of awareness that leads to salvation (Orig. Contra Celsum 6,24 ff., Hippolytus, Refutatio 5,6-28; Epiphanius, Panarion 37). + Asclepius; ~ Echidna; — Chimaera; > Gorgo; ~ Hydra; > Typhoeus; > Python 1 BuRKERT

2R.LOPEZ MELERO, La serpiente guardiana

en la antigua Grecia, in: J.ALVAR et al. (ed.), Héroes, semidioses y daimones, 1992, 11-31 3 M.L.SANCASSANO, Il serpente e le sue immagini, 1997 4 Ead.,‘O deaxwv xot-

xidtoc. Beobachtungen zum Schlangenmotiv in der altesten griechischen Dichtung, in: WJA 21, 1996-97, 79-92 5 G. SALAPATA, Hero Warriors from Corinth and Lakonia, in: Hesperia 66, 1997, 241-260 6E.MITROPOULOU, Deities and Heroes in the Form of Snakes, 1977 7 J.-

M. Moret, The Earliest Representations of the Infant Herakles and the Snakes, in: B.K. BRASWELL, A Commentary on Pindar Nemean One, 1992, 83-90 8 M.L. West, The East Face of Helicon, 1997. 9 M.SCHMIDT,

Adler und Schlange, in: Boreas 6, 1983, 61-71 KELHOFER, Miracle and Mission, 2000

10J.A.

11 G. PiccaLuGa, I Marsi e gli Hirpi, in: P. XELLA (ed.), Magia, 1976, 207-231 12 B.DE GAIFFIER, Receuil d’hagiographie, 1977. 13 G.K. Boyce, The Significance of the Serpent on Pompeian House Shrines, in: AJA 46, 1942, 13-22 14 DuMEziL_ 15 J. BAYET, Croyances et rites dans la Rome antique, 1971 16 M.G. LANCELIoTti, The Naassenes, 2000, 37-88, 353-358 17 J. FONTENROSE, Python, 1959. E.P. Hamp, Agaxov, in: Glotta 74, 1997, 57; E. KUSTER,

Die Schlange in der griechischen Kunst und Religion, 1913. jB.

Snake Column. Votive gift of the Greek states that were taking part in the > Persian Wars against Xerxes to Apollo of > Delphi in the form of a bronze column of three snake bodies intertwined like a rope, with their heads bearing a gold tripod-type cauldron. On their coils are inscribed in the Doric dialect the names of 31 Greek states, beginning with the Spartans (Laked{aimonioi|). The gold cauldron was stolen in the third of

Sypyed

560

BC) by the Phocians

was S. of Sedet (Crocodilopolis, from 256 BC > Arsinoe [III 2], modern Madinat al-Fayyam). His cult was widespread; a temple to him (together with Haroeris) in Kom Ombo is particularly well-known. S. was considered the lord of the North. The goddess + Neith is mostly named as the mother of S., and occasionally in the Faiyum the ephemeral crocodile deity Senui (sw,

SNAKE COLUMN

the + Sacred Wars (356-346

(Paus. 10,13-19), the column was taken by the emperor Constantinus [1] to Constantinople, where it still stands (since 1700 without the heads of the snakes) in

the Hippodrome. — Persian Wars, Monumental columns; > Votive offerings StV II 130; ML 27, 57-60; K.BRODERSEN et al. (eds.), Historische griechische Inschriften in Ubersetzung, vol. r, 1992, No. 42.

W.ED.

So(h)aemias see > Iulia [22] Soanes (Lodvec/Sodnes, Latin Suant). First mentioned in Str. 11,2,14; 11,2,19, which locates them in the west-

ern Caucasus together with the Phtheirophagi (‘fir-cone eaters’) above the Colchi (— Colchis) and counts them

among the tribes who trade in > Dioscurias; they were a war-like people who extracted gold from mountain streams (as also in Plin. HN 6,14; 6,30). In the 6th cent. AD the S. came under the sovereignty of > Lazica (Procop. Goth 4,16,14; Agathias 4,30; Men. Protektor fr. 3 [1. 177,15-188,10]) and hence into the sphere of influence of the Persian-Byzantine conflicts. Now the province of Svanet’i in Georgia, capital Mestia. 1 C.pE Boor, Excerpta de legationibus, 1903. B. SCHRADE (ed.), Die Kunst Swanetiens, 2001.

A.P.-L.

Soap. Solid soap in the modern sense was unknown in Antiquity. For cleaning their bodies people used pumice, bran, bicarbonate of soda, oil, soda or clay — Cimolian earth was particularly well known (Aristoph. Ran. 712) —and water. The Greeks called these cleaning materials Ovupa/rhymma or outyua/smégma (there is no corresponding Latin term). In public bathing facilities washing materials were available on request from attendants (Aristoph. Lys. 377; Ath. 8,351e), or people brought them from home. As with modern soap, ancient washing materials were also mixed with pleasantsmelling essences (e.g. Ath. 9,409d). To keep the skin white and soft genteel, Roman women also used asses’ milk (Plin. HN 11,238; 28,183). For washing textiles, primarily water was used (from wells, rivers, lakes or the sea, cf. Hom. Od. 6,58-59; 6,90-95), as well as soapwort (Plin. HN. 19,48: radicula; 24,96 struthion, Saponaria officinalis L.), soda and potash, and urine collected in buckets, which developed cleansing ammoniac when stored. The washing was placed in tubs and trodden or kneaded. + Hygiene, personal R.J. ForBEs, Studies in Ancient Technology, vol. 3, 1955, 174-181.

Graecised as Voovauc/Psosnaus:

SB 6154,7 = 58273

[5. 84 f.]) as his father. Only seldom is a spouse attested, but S. was considered sexually very active. He was identified with + Horus; as a crocodile he is supposed to have carried the dead body of > Osiris out of the Nile. In addition, he is often connected with other gods, e.g. the god Geb, and numerous > Kronos cults in the Faiyum are attested from the Graeco-Roman period. A syncretistic form S.-Re (> Re) is particularly common. One of the most important sources for myths connected with S. is the ‘Book of the Faiyum’ [1]. Incidentally preserved papyri contain much evidence in the form of hymns and rituals for S.: apart from PRamesseum VI [4] from the Middle Kingdom, Egyptian sources (for the most part from Tebtynis and > Soknopaiou Nesos) date primarily to the Roman period. There is also abundant evidence of S. in Greek papyri from the Faiyum [5.241 f.]. The Middle Kingdom (2040-1785 BC) represents a flourishing period for his cult, when the residence was in the Faiyum; in the late Middle Kingdom and in the Second Intermediate Period (1783-1551 BC) several kings bore theophoric names containing S. 1 H. BeInuicH, Das Buch vom Fayum, 1991

2 E.BrovarskI, s. v.S., LA 5, 995-1031 IldioS.,1961

3 C.DOLZANI,

4 A.H. Garpiner, Hymns to S., in: Rev.

dEgyptologie 11, 1957, 43-56 5 W.J. R. RUBsAM, Gotter und Kulte im Faijum wahrend der griechischromisch-byzantinischen Zeit, 1974. Av.L.

Soccus. Slipper-like, light half-shoe (Catull. 61,10), probably adopted by the Romans from Greek areas (perhaps ovxyoc/sykchos or ovxyic/sykchis, Anth. Pal. 6,294). Originally a woman’s shoe, it was also worn by ‘effeminate’ men (Suet. Cal. 52). Later Diocletian’s Price Edict distinguished between socci for men and women, in various colours. The soccus was also considered to be a comedy actor’s shoe (cf. Hor. Epist. 2,1,174; Hor. Ars 79 f.), so that soccus became a synonym for comedy (as > cothurnus for — tragedy). Illustration of a soccus under —> shoes. RH.

Social conflicts I. DEFINITION IJ. GREECE III. ROME IV. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS III. GREECE IV. ROME V. EARLY MIDDLE AGEs _ VI. BYZANTIUM

RH.

I. DEFINITION SC are in the following understood as conflicts conSobek (sbk, Graecised as Lotyoc/Sotichos, cf. Damascius, Vita Isidori P 99) was the crocodile-headed chief

god of the > Faiyum. The most important local form

ducted between different social groups, in the course of which various forms of violence or threat arise. Attempts to collate ancient SC under generalizing hea-

561

562

dings such as ‘Struggle of the Orders’ or — primarily in Marxist scholarship — ‘class struggles’ [13] remain controversial [4; 8].

debt had at the same time largely been banished. Hence, SC took a different form in the Classical period. The polarities were less socio-economic than they were political, and esp. regarding the issue of the extension of political codetermination. The defenders of democracy wished to extend it to all free male citizens, while the proponents of oligarchy sought to keep it to a more or less restricted sphere. Although there were gradations and transitions within democracy and _ between + démokratia and > oligarchia, it was from these divergent interests that often bitter SC broke out esp. in the sth and 4th cents., leading often to civil wars (otdouc/stdsis) [4; 8], a phenomenon that became a characteristic feature of Greek history. Generally, small, highly coherent groups of political activists opposed one another and won followers among the citizenry of the polis concerned by offering political participation or the assurance of privileges. Economic interests could also play a part in this process. It added especially to the explosiveness of the political situation that SC usually had a foreign policy component, as major powers exploited the highly competitive mentality and the resultant conflict structures in their own interests [4. 268-308]. Through the sth cent. BC, then, the dualism between Athens and Sparta resolved itself into an orientation of democrats towards Athens and oligarchs towards Sparta. Thucydides gives an exemplary description and analysis of such struggles on Corcyra during the > Peloponnesian War (Thuc. 3,70-84). The hegemonial wars of the 4th cent. BC further reinforced this dynamic, which also facilitated the expansionism and supremacy of the Macedonians under Philip (> Philippus [I 4]) Il and > Alexander [4] the Great. The Hellenistic kings proceeded no differently. The interest of the great power itself constituted a stabilizing element: the Hellenistic kings sought to prevent political and social reversals in their own spheres of influence. They therefore promoted elements of mediation across polisboundaries. None the less, SC in the manner of stasis still occurred in the Hellenistic period, and these occasionally blended with socio-economic tensions and changes, e.g. in 3rd-cent. BC Sparta under the ‘Reformer Kings’ > Agis [4] IV and > Cleomenes [6] III. Under Roman rule, tensions increased because of increasing economic exploitation and the accelerating process of mass enslavement, with the result that not only did major > slave revolts — even wars — break out on Sicily, but there were also revolts against Roman rule (rebellion of > Aristonicus [4], 133-129 BC) with distinct traits of social revolution.

Il. GREECE There is no explicit evidence of SC in the Mycenaean period — they are merely hypothetically postulated in the context of attempts to explain the catastrophe that befell the Mycenaean palace culture. The subsequent “+ Dark Ages’ (12th-9th cents. BC), a period of great

instability and largely without political control, and the Homeric period that followed them (8th cent. BC), allo-

wed the owners of large ofkoi (houses, farms) in particular — that is, lords able to operate independently in economic matters — considerable scope for amassing ~> wealth, power and prestige. Among them, an extremely competitive (‘agonal’) mentality held sway, while the principle of reciprocal solidarity was nurtured in the primarily village-like structures of communities [5. 453-455; 12]. Power struggles increasingly developed within the stratum of the rich (which was developing into an aristocracy) and their respective retinues

(— hetairia [2]); such struggles were intensified by the strict rules of requital in both positive and negative (+ Revenge) senses. The pressure was also increasing on small farmers in the 7th and 6th cents., because the wealthy aristocrats were increasing the number of their properties, esp. estates, and were dependent on an increasing rural labour force for the farming of their fields. By this process, small farmers specifically passed by way of bonded labour into a condition of servitude and even to enslavement (> Slavery). A critical situa-

tion thus developed in many Greek poleis of the Archaic period, with the potential of violent SC. At Athens, Aristotle (— Aristoteles [6]) saw the decisive causative factor for the crisis of the pre-Solonic (+ Solon [r]) period in the link between laws of obligation and unequal land distribution (Aristot. Ath. pol. 2; 5 f.). Yet outside Attica, too, demands for land distribution (yij¢ &vadaoudc/gés anadasmos) and debt redemption (yeea@v &toxomn/chreon apokope; > Debt, Debt redemption) were widespread. At the same time, in line with the co-operative values of village society and in connection with the participation of not a few —> farmers as — hoplitai in warfare, calls for political participation were being made. This revolutionary situation was fertile soil for the > tyrannis, as power-conscious and influential nobles, lent impetus by the potential for unrest, sought to appoint themselves rulers of their communities. Socioeconomic and political polarities thus formed a constellation of conflict between tyrannis and community, and SC struggles for or against the tyrant. Systems of order largely prevailed in this environment in the Greek poleistowards the end of the 6th cent. BC by which the tyrannis was abhorred and participants regulated their own affairs, often by means of laws and resolutions laid down in written form. The desire for participation had thus won through, and the danger of falling into personal dependence because of

SOCIAL CONFLICTS

III. ROME

The first 200 years or so of the Roman Republic were overshadowed by the > struggle of the orders, in the course of which the res publica attained its definitive form [11]. The poor state of the sources hardly allows these SC to be reconstructed. Confrontations between patricians and plebeians (— patricii; > plebs) were con-

stantly flaring up. The patricians, the traditional > ari-

SOCIAL CONFLICTS

563

564

stocracy, which had become the ruling class at Rome by virtue of the expulsion of the kings, were challenged by

was asserting its own positions or was first and foremost being used as an instrument [2; 10]. There were also other points of dispute, esp. the conflict over the integration of the Italian peoples. The land problem remained unresolved. It was deferred by the admittance of proletarii into the army under C. > Marius [I x]. The provision of land to > ve-

those not of noble birth (plebeians), who were not all linked with the aristocracy as clients (+ cliens) and who

strove for political codetermination not least because, as soldiers, they formed the bulk of the army. Through these struggles, which also took violent turns, the patricians extended the military authority of command (— imperium) into the political sphere, while the plebeians created their own organization and defended themselves with their people’s tribunes (— tribunus plebis) whose protection their solidarity assured. The first accommodation was probably reached in the mid sth cent.: this provided for codetermination in important political issues in the centuriate assemblies (> comitia centuriata), voting weighted according to property. The second phase saw leading plebeians admitted to the Senate (> senatus) and senior offices, with the result that a new ruling class formed in place of the patricians, the nobility (+ nobiles; [6]). The reconciliation of the orders was thus accomplished, a process definitively completed by the integration of the plebeian organization into the res publica (lex [D.2.] Hortensia, 287 BC). The abolition of bonded servitude was also part of this reconciliation (lex Poetelia, 326 BC; > nexum). Otherwise, the social and economic disparities at Rome were less important than in Greece, because Roman expansion constantly provided opportunities for providing poorer citizens with conquered or annexed land. The stability achieved by this reconciliation came under threat precisely because of the successes of the Romans that resulted from it. Expansion had brought dramatic changes in economic resources and in the mentality of the upper class. After the 2nd —> Punic War, the distribution of newly conquered land was abandoned, and public land appropriated as — war booty was made available as ager occupatorius to private individuals. The senatorial aristocracy was the main beneficiary of this, and it found itself once more needing increasing amounts of labour. + Slavery consequently became mass slavery, and was brutalized, esp. on large estates (latifundia; — Latifundia/Large estates), in part causing the aforementioned slave wars. Poorer farmers could not keep pace with this development. Many sought refuge in Rome (- Rural exodus), became > proletarii, and the recruitment pool for the Roman army therefore shrank. The attempt of people’s tribune Ti. + Sempronius [I 16] Gracchus to amend this state of affairs in 133 BC heralded an era of SC which is considered a period of ‘Crisis’ or even ‘Revolution’, and which ended with the establishment of the monarchy by the younger Caesar (+ Augustus; 31/27 BC; [2; 9]). This crisis arose on the one hand and primarily because the consensus in the senatorial aristocracy disintegrated. Fundamentally, the representatives of the old oder and the primacy of the Senate (— optimates) stood against the populares who drew rather on the support of the people and people’s committees. Scholars here dispute whether the plebs per se

terans fostered the militarization of SC, which set in with the > Social War [3] (91-89 BC). Close relations developed between the soldiers - who expected to be provided with land — and their commanders: such loyalties could override that to the res publica. SC were now played out between the great potentates: between Marius [I x1] and Cornelius [I 90] Sulla; between Pompeius [I 3] and Caesar, M. Antonius [I 9] and the younger Caesar (> Augustus), and between their supporters and armies. The result was devastating civil wars, until the ultimate victor and first Emperor, Augustus, supported towards his imperium by the vast demobilizations of his soldiers and the redistributions of land these entailed, formed the basis of a pacification that extended to the socio-economic sphere (— pax). The order of the Imperial period remained socially stable at least until well into the 2nd cent. AD. Occasional conflicts arising from specific emergencies (> Food) remained restricted in area and duration. A change emerged in the final third of the 2nd cent. by reason of increasing economic and foreign policy pressure, though its impact is disputed. The traditional position, assuming an increasing discrepancy between older and newer (administrative) elites (military-administrative complex) with a concurrently increasing levelling of impoverished underclasses after the ‘crisis’ of the 3rd cent. and an increasing tendency towards SC in Late Antiquity [1], is increasingly challenged [14. 22; 7. 429-432] or subjected to modification. However, esp. when the conditions of the High Imperial period are compared with those of the Late Imperial period, it must be questioned to what extent risings such as those of the > Bagaudae and > Circumcelliones were mere ‘exceptional cases’ [7. 431]. What is certain, however, is that the transformation of the ancient world was accompanied by SC, though no single cause can explain this.

IV. GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS SC cannot of a piece be subsumed into concepts such as class struggle or the struggle of the orders. The various > social structures and particular historical conditions differ too much. Two configurations are often encountered: on the one hand, discrepancies between rich and poor, where these escalate to the principal discrepancy between creditors and debtors, i.e. assuming elements of class confrontation. Secondly, the struggle for political power, in which SC then exhibit a particular dynamic when linked with foreign policy interests. + Poverty; — Social structure; > Struggle of the orders; ~ Violence; > Wealth

566

565 1G.ALFOLDY, Soziale Konflikte im rémischen Kaiserreich, in: H. SCHNEIDER (ed.), Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte der rémischen Kaiserzeit, 1981, 372-395 2 P. A. Brunt, Der romische Mob, in: H. SCHNEIDER (ed.),

Zur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte der spaten roémischen Republik, 1976, 271-310 3 K. CurIsT, Krise und Untergang der romsichen Republik, 31993 4H.J. GeuRKE, Stasis. Untersuchungen zu den inneren Kriegen

in den

griechischen

Staaten

des

5. und

4. Jahrhun-

derts v. Chr., 1985 5 Id., La stasis, in: $.SeTTis (ed.), I Greci, vol. 2.2, 1997, 453-480 6HOLKESKAMP 7J.U. Krause, Die Spatantike (284-565 n.Chr.), in: H.J.GEHRKE, H.SCHNEIDER (ed.), Geschichte der Antike, 2000, 377-447 8 A.Linrorrt, Violence, Civil Strife and Revolution in the Classical City, 1982 9 CH. MEIER, Res publica amissa, *1980 10 F.Mrtiar, The Crowd in

Rome in the Late Republic, 1998

11K.A. RAAFLAUB

(ed.), Social Struggles in Archaic Rome, 1986

12 W.ScHmitz, Nachbarschaft und Dorfgemeinschaft im archaischen und klassischen Griechenland, in: HZ 268,

1999, 561-597. 13G.E. M. DE STE. Crorx, The Class Struggle in the Ancient Greek World, 1981 14 Cu. WirSCHEL, Krise — Rezession — Stagnation? Der Westen des romischen Reiches im 3. Jahrdundert n. Chr., 1999.

H.J.G.

Social politics. In modern industrial societies, the function of SP is to set up systems to prevent the occurrence

of cases of hardship, and to protect individual citizens and groups of citizens from defined risks. A vital instrument of SP is social insurance, of the kind created in the German Empire between 1883 and 1889 (health insurance, accident insurance,

old-age insurance);

unem-

ployment insurance followed during the Weimar Republic. Since that time, the actual concern in SP has been, on the one hand, the elaboration of a social-insurance system, and, on the other, the adjustment of that

system to new social and economic conditions. At the same time, other fields of politics have social elements (family politics, financial politics). The prior condition for modern SP is a structure in which most of those capable of work are in stable employment and in receipt of wages or salaries; thus unemployment, sickness and accidents are perceived as fundamental social problems. On account of the entirely different — social structure, SP in the modern sense were unknown in the an-

cient world. If, on the other hand, by SP in general we mean political measures whose purpose is to remedy social hardship, it is entirely possible to speak of socialpolitical activities in the ancient world, in the sense that institutions were created with the purpose of providing social benefits for the population. The scope of SP in the ancient world was different from that obtaining in modern industrial society, for there were different hardships to be addressed; we may consider the most important social problems in ancient times to have been + poverty, hunger (+ Malnutrition, Famine) and indebtedness (> Debt, Debt redemption).

Early initiatives of social policy were primarily concerned with the problem of debt; - Solon [1] of Athens

SOCIAL POLITICS

(rst half of the 6th cent. BC) enacted the prohibition of

debt bondage and a system of debt relief (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 6,1 f.; > Seisachtheia). In Rome, too, debt bondage was abolished during the Early Republic (lex Poetelia 326 BC; Liv. 8,28; cf. > nexum); there were repeated demands for debt relief from the 4th cent. BC onwards in Greece (yoe@v &noxomt/chredn apokope lit. ‘cutting off of the debts’); + Catilina’s programme also contained such a demand (tabulae novae; Sall. lug. 21,2; Cic. Off. 2,84). Measures of land distribution were designed to restore impoverished citizens to property-ownership, and so secure their basic livelihood; efforts were allegedly made to distribute the estates of the nobility among poor Citizens as early as the time of Solon (Aristot. Ath. Pol. 12,3); the problem of the unequal distribution of land — often in association with the problem of debt — was discussed from the 4th cent. BC onwards, and demand made for ‘distribution of land’ to the poor (yf avadaopoc/— gés anadasmos). The authorities in Athens sought to assure grain supplies to the population by means of laws governing the —> grain trade, as well as by price-restrictions (Lys. 22,58). The first meaningful social-political initiatives of the Late Republic in Rome go back to Ti. and C. Sempronius [>116; >I11] Gracchus. The politics of the Gracchi represented a reaction to the displacement of small farmers by large landowners (— Latifundia/ Large estates), and increasing use of slave labour on the large estates, as well as to growing difficulties in supplying Rome (> Rome II. C.), and the associated increase in the price of grain. The agrarian laws of Ti. Gracchus were calculated to transfer land belonging to large-scale owners to the > ager publicus, and distribute it to unpropertied citizens. The purpose of the > grain laws of C. Gracchus was to assure grain supplies to the population of the city of Rome; they envisaged a fixed + price, subsidized by the Republic. During the following decades, populist politicians sought to enact agrarian and grain laws in the tradition of the policies of the Gracchi. P. + Clodius [I 4], in a lex frumentaria of 58 BC, introduced cost-free distribution of grain to Roman citizens living in Rome. SP were a subject of dispute during the Late Republic; the Senate decisively rejected populist laws on financial grounds, and Cicero himself saw social measures as distributive policies that disregarded the property rights of Roman citizens (Cic. Off. 2,72-85; cf. also Cic. Sest. 103). Augustus retained the essential impulses of populist politics, and in particular maintained the distribution of free grain to the plebs frumentaria (Suet. Aug. 40,2). Although, after the > proscriptions and measures of land distribution to the > veterans, no more lands in Italy were distributed to soldiers or unpropertied citizens, policies of settlement continued with foundations of colonies in the provinces (— coloniae); eventually, veterans received a considerable settlement upon retirement, sufficient to assure their existence. New institutions were finally created under Augustus, with respon-

567

568

sibility for carrying out the distribution of grain in Rome (— cura annonae) and financing payments to veterans (aerarium militare). The > alimenta introduced by Nerva and Trajan, designed to support parents in providing for the needs of their children, and borne by landowners, also belong in this context. Besides measures of SP undertaken by the cities, mention should also be made of the activities of rich citizens and Hellenistic rulers, who provided aid during particular emergency situations, for example by donations of grain. An additional motivation for this form of > euergetism was the acquisition of social prestige with the population of one’s own city or of other important cities. + Agrarian laws; — Alimenta; — Cura annonae;

From the end of the fourth millennium BC onwards the sources indicate at first in Babylonia, then in Egypt that there was a numerically small upper stratum (the

SOCIAL POLITICS

~ Debt, Debt redemption; > Ges anadasmos; > Grain laws; > Seisachtheia 1P.A. Brunt, Social Conflicts in the Roman Republic, 1971 2GarnseY 3H.Kzort (ed.), Sozialmafnahmen

und Fursorge. Zur Eigenart antiker Sozialpolitik (Grazer Beitrage Suppl. 3), 1988. H.SCHN.

Social structure I. ANCIENT NEAR East IJ. EcGypr III. GREECE IV.ROME V. EARLY MIDDLE AGES VI. BYZANTIUM

I. ANCIENT NEAR EAST Social structure in the ancient Orient was determined by who controlled the fundamental means of production in an agrarian society, the arable land. The usual form of government in such societies was a patrimonial monarchy. > Palaces and —> temples were the institutional centres dominating the economic and social structures and developments, especially in Egypt and Mesopotamia; all parts of society were directly or indirectly incorporated into this system. The existence of representative bodies (assemblies) reflecting premonarchic or tribal arrangements has been established — at varying times in varying regional forms — among others in Assyria, Babylonia and Palestine (OT). These bodies acted mostly as courts of arbitration and jurisdiction at the level of urban districts and village-type settlements. The non-sedentary populations who lived in the arid steppes outside Egypt and outside the cultivated areas of Mesopotamia, Syria and Palestine were organized as tribal societies. Esp. in the Near East groups of — frequently nomadic (> Amurru) -people from the steppes or from the Eastern mountain

regions (— Hurrians, — Cossaei, > Mittani) — would regularly invade the cultivated areas, in most cases taking over the institutions of the conquered territories in the process. This led to assimilation with the sedentary population. Egypt remained largely untroubled by such invasions, the only exception being the reign of the Hyksos in the middle of the second millennium BC and the reigns of Libyan tribal chieftains and Nubian kings in the first millennium BG

ruling class), who were predominantly concentrated in

the cities in Babylonia, and a lower class (subjects) which comprised the majority of the population. External clues to an individual’s status are provided by archaeological findings ( Funeral); types of behaviour and speech habits specific to the ruling or the lower classes can up to a point be identified from texts. The relation to the > rulers was usually expressed by the term ‘slave’. There was only a very limited number of slaves (> Slavery) in the sense of Roman law, i.e. absolutely without rights individuals who were the property of a person or institutional household. For that reason this kind of slaves was at no time economically relevant for the economy. Society was organized along the lines of profession and function. Mesopotamian > scribes recorded an inside view of their society in learned > lists (3rd—1st millennia). It was structured hierarchically based on administrative and sacerdotal offices, crafts and classes. Posts and offices within institutional households (palaces and temples) remained within the same family. There was hardly any social mobility, although there are known cases of favouritism by rulers. The > family, which was mostly monogamous, patriarchal and patrilineal, was the nucleus of society; + women’s rights as legal and contractual subjects varied depending on place, time and status. A general duty for members of all social classes, upper and lower, to provide services to their rulers was characteristic of ancient oriental societies. To the majority of subjects in areas with an irrigation-based agriculture it consisted mainly of labour on the estates run by the institutions, work in their provision fields, which entailed being on call for work for the palace or the temple, or on tenanted land, which meant taxes in kind. The members of

the upper class who fulfilled administrative duties in the institutional households were — like the humble labourers — remunerated with agricultural products (— Rations). In these regions private ownership of land and the measure of independence from the ruler that goes with it were almost unheard of. Its rudiments can mostly be found in Babylonian documents from the 6th and sth cents. BC. Owing to a lack of relevant sources we are left in the dark about the situation in Babylonia during the Graeco-Hellenistic age. In areas of rain-fed agriculture (Syria, Palestine, Anatolia) a tendency can be observed, e.g. in Assyria from the middle of the second millennium, which is typical of an agrarian society sustained by small-scale subsistence farming: the village communities — who controlled the land, but were obliged to provide payment in kind and services for the ruler — were gradually forced by individual and collective debts to cede their land to big landowners, who usually belonged to the city-dwelling upper class. The members of the village communities became bondservants or serfs (glebae adscripti, ‘tied to the soil’). Similar conflicts can also be

569

570

observed in 8th-cent. BC Judah (> Judah and Israel);

their disposal [5. 127-141]. Foreigners held a a great variety of positions; depending on their status these could range from prisoner of war or slave to artisan and even member of the royal court [2]. Over the course of Egyptian history their numbers increased continuously. The Egyptian terminology describing individual strata — such as p‘t ‘upper class’, rhy.t ‘lower class’, nmbh.w ‘freemen’ and nds.w ‘commoners’, then ‘citizens’ — which was moreover subject to change over time permits only very limited conclusions as to the social affiliations of the persons thus described. + Egypt; > Family; > Slavery; > State; > Woman

they provide the backdrop for the prophetic messages of Amos and Micha in the OT. In the Ancient Orient, social imbalances never resulted in radical changes of the social conditions. Attempts by the rulers of southern Babylonia (x19th—-17th cent. BC) to solve debt crises did not succeed in the long run. The affected individuals frequently chose flight as the only way out. ~ Agriculture; > Iran; > Judah and Israel; + Mesopotamia;

-— Oikos

economy;

~— Rulers;

— State;

+ Temple; > Work

SOCIAL STRUCTURE

1 R.S. BAGNALL, B. W. FrieR, The Demography of Roman

B.J. Kemp, Ancient Egypt — Anatomy of a Civilization, 1989; N.J. Postcate, Early Mesopotamia — Society and Economy at the Dawn of History, 1992; J. RENGER, Flucht

Egypt, 1994 2E.Bresciani, Der Fremde, in: S. DoNaDONI (ed.), Der Mensch des Alten Agypten, 1992, 260-

als soziales Problem in der altbabylonischen Gesellschaft, in: ABAW (new series) 75, 1972, 167-182; Id., Institu-

295 3A.McDoweE Lt, Legal Aspects of Care of the Elderly in Egypt to the End of the New Kingdom, in:

tional, Communal, and Individual Ownership or Posses-

M.STOL, S.P. VLEEMING (eds.), The Care of the Elderly in

sion of Arable Land in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: Chica-

the Ancient Near East, 1998, 199-221 4J.E. RicHarps, Mortuary Variability and Social Differentia-

go-Kent Law Review 71, 1995, 269-319.

J.RE.

II. Ecypr The core of Egyptian society was the nuclear family with an average of just over two children, as the infant mortality rate was considerable. The marriage pattern was patrilocal; there are scattered instances of polygyny, especially among the wealthy. Elderly widows would frequently live with their children [3]. In addition households would comprise only a few servants or slaves (— Slavery); rural households as a rule were bigger than urban ones [1. 66-69]. High officials surrounded themselves with a clientele. This also finds an expression in the positioning of their tombs in the necropoleis. There is archaeological evidence of the existence of a diversity of social classes from early history. They can be identified by their burial inside a certain necropolis, the size and location of the tomb and the burial objects [4; 6]. As a rule there is a close link between funerary expense and worldly wealth. Membership of the upper class, however, was not primarily determined by wealth, but by membership of a profession. Professions requiring the ability to read and write were more prestigious than those which involved physical labour. There is no evidence of the existence of professional guilds before the Late Period (c. 750-333 BC), when especially a connection with cult and ritual can be established. Ideally a son would take over his father’s position and profession, but there were cases of vertical social mobility, which were criticized in the texts (Middle Kingdom) of the upper class as a symptom of social upheaval [7]. A lowering of the social status was used as a sanction. Esp. in the Late Period high-ranking descent was documented in long family trees to legitimize claims to high social standing. ~ Women had no part in political leadership, but were legally almost on a par with men. Female members of the upper strata were, however, able to exert indirect political influence, especially if they had possessions at

tion in Middle Kingdom Egypt, Women in Ancient Egypt, 1993

1992 5 G.RoBINs, 6 S.J. SEIDLMAYER, Funerarer Aufwand und soziale Ungleichheit, in: Géttinger Miszellen 104, 1988, 25-51 7 P. VERNUS, Quelques exemples du type du parvenu dans |’Egypte ancienne, in: Bulletin de la Société Francaise d’Egyptologie 59, 1970, 31-47. 8T.A.H. WiLxkinson, Social Stratification, in:

The Oxford Encyclopaedia of Ancient Egypt 3, 2001,

301-305. III. GREECE A. THE MyYCENAEAN AGE B. THE FARMERS C. THE OIKOS AND SOCIAL RELATIONS D. THE

SOCIAL CLASSES

A. THE MyCENAEAN AGE Mycenaean society does not offer a coherent picture (> Mycenaean culture). On the one hand, there are hierarchies largely determined by central administration; this is represented by the ruler (> wanax, wa-na-ka, avaé/anax) and by the high dignitaries surrounding him along with other officials within the palace administration; among his staff were also soldiers and artisans (esp. smiths) and female labourers, some of them slaves, mostly manufacturing textiles. The social ranking of such a position was largely determined by its administrative function. On the other hand, there were groups and ranks, e.g. at the level of the village community and probably within the network of military allegiance, which were only indirectly linked with this central government. The scarcity of sources makes it impossibile to determine more closely the relations between these different categories of social organization. B. THE FARMERS The age that followed the collapse of the Mycenaean palace culture was largely free from government. It was then that a class of free farmers came into being who were to become the mainstay of Greek society. The farmers’ lives revolved around their farmstead (otxoc/ oikos + Oikos); they farmed independently, usually did

SOCIAL STRUCTURE

571

their share of physical labour (abtoveyoi/autourgot) and were free men. Even when there was growing economic differentiation, e.g. through the development of special crafts, the focus on independent husbandry and individual freedom remained defining features, and the oikos remained the nucleus of the social order. C, THE OIKOS AND SOCIAL RELATIONS This society may be described in terms of two categories of order, horizontal and vertical. The horizontal structures were placed around the —> otkos like concentric circles. At the centre was the nuclear family, consisting of parents and their children; elderly people usually lived in separate quarters close by on reserved property. The man- and maid-servants completed the household. They were slaves over whom the master had absolute power. The family was ruled over by the head of the household (xve.oc/kyrios > kyrios), who — as father, brother, uncle or husband — was at the same time the legal representative of the + women of the household. But since the oikos was more than just a legal entity, the women were not without influence in economic affairs, in matters of religion and ritual, and esp. as the bearers of legitimate offspring, even if their scope in public and political life was strictly limited. There were close family relationships around the nuclear family, but this did not lead to the formation of tribal or clan structures. Typically, the master’s relationships with neighbours and friends were on a par with the family ones and were guided by clear rules of mutual solidarity. The same rules defined the village community, which was the next level above the oikos. It was the most important form of communal organization, which in the 6th cent. BC developed into the polis in many regions of Greece, i.e. into a self-organizing

form of civic political order. Alongside the central town the larger poleis still comprised villages as well. As social life was characterized by numerous contacts, and occasions as well as spaces were created to facilitate them

(— Symposium,

> Agora,

> Gymnasium),

the

Greek communities became a classic case of ‘face-toface-societies’. Through the ages the polis alongside the oikos remained the essential point of reference. This did not exclude the existence of close relationships (> Hospitality) transcending that framework.

D. THE SOCIAL CLASSES The vertical structures in Greek society developed in essence in the Homeric and the Archaic ages. An elite emerged that primarily differed from the self-employed farmers in that its members did not have to perform physical labour (+ Work), i.e. were free for other pur-

suits — which they emphasized as a status symbol (> Leisure). An aristocracy came

57%

an increasingly dependent work force met with resistance — which in the last resort prevented the development of a society which would have consisted exclusively of a strong aristocracy and a population mainly comprising bondsmen. The strict separation of free men and slaves was a salient feature of classical Greek society, even though a slave could achieve the status of a metic (+ Metoikos) through + manumission (— Slavery). Within the group of free men the social differences were only gradual. The > aristocracy was not a hermetically exclusive class. In cases of growing > wealth or pauperization, social rise or decline were possible, although established aristocrats tended to keep nouveau riche upstarts at bay, if only for one generation in most cases. Apart from the categorical distinction between free people and slaves and the gradual differentiation of elites as well as middle and lower classes, the various professional activities were socially relevant. This goes particularly for the distinction between farmers, artisans and merchants (— Crafts, Trade; > Commerce). Frequently artisanal and mercantile work was considered inferior to agriculture; this is why farmers were accorded a higher social status. The reason for this may partly be found in the bias of our sources and should have differed from one polis to the next — depending on the economic situation. The Hellenistic Age witnessed an increase in the power of the elites, whose growing wealth and use of considerable sums for public projects (+ Euergetism) gave them additional clout in the poleis and enabled them to finance an ever more prestigious life style. Nevertheless, the honours bestowed upon them by the community show that the elites had to prove their worth first. However, they continued to shore up their position and, not least under Roman influence, developed in the direction of a hereditary aristocracy. +Family; Friendship; — Kinship, Relatives; + Neighbours, Neighbourhood; — Oikos; > Polis; ~» Slavery; > Social conflicts; > Woman [II] 1M. Austin,

P. VipaL-Naquet,

Economic

and

Social

History of Ancient Greece, 1977. 2 GEHRKE, 18-31 3 F.GscHNITZER, Griechische Sozialgeschichte, 1981 4 F.Quass, Die Honoratiorenschicht in den Stadten des griechischen Ostens, 1993 5 RosTovTzEFF, Hellenistic World 6 E.Srerin-HOLKEsKAmP, Adelskultur und PolisGesellschaft, 1989 7K.W. Wetwel, Die griechische Pol-

is. Verfassung und Gesellschaft in archaischer und klassischer Zeit, 71998. H.-J.G.

IV. ROME A. INTRODUCTORY

REMARK B. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT C. ROMAN AGRARIAN SOCIETY D. SOCIETY AND THE POLITICAL SYSTEM

into being, whose

members strove to distinguish themselves from the lower classes by a specific set of manners and elitist practices and ideas. At the same time they got embroiled in fierce internal power struggles (— Social conflicts). Their attempts to recruit from the ranks of free farmers

A. INTRODUCTORY REMARK In the course of its history from the early years of the city (+ Rome

I) to Late Antiquity Roman society underwent fundamental changes caused by political, economic and cultural developments. While this pro-

573

574

cess was going on it integrated not only Etruscan and Greek societies into the Roman Empire, but also Celtic and Germanic tribes in the west, the Phoenicianized society of the North African cities as well as the societies of Asia Minor and the Orient. This means that social conditions at the time of the Principate were vastly different from those in the early years of Rome or of Late Antiquity; it also means that because of the multitude of social, cultural and religious traditions in the different parts of the empire, society did not present itself as a homogeneous entity. Nevertheless legal, political and social structures were closely interrelated throughout the Roman Empire.

As there was a considerable demand for agricultural labour and the crafts in Roman society, there was a rise in the slave-labour segment of the economy from the 3rd cent. onwards: from the periphery of the Roman Empire (Gaul, Germany, the areas along the Danube and the East, especially Asia Minor) slaves were taken to Italy, where they were employed on big landed estates growing cash crops or herding cattle; alternatively they were employed as craftsmen in urban workshops. It was especially slaves who were skilled craftsmen who had a realistic chance of eventual manumission; —> freedmen usually continued to work in the same trade and through their striving for economic success and social recognition became an invigorating element within the urban economy. Slaves and freedmen also acted as doctors, librarians, secretaries, actors, etc. Under the Principate the membership of the social classes (ordo senatorius; ordo equester) was regulated by precise legal rules; membership of the senatorial class became de facto hereditary— as long as the fortune did not drop below the minimum level of a million sestertii. The social rise of the ordo decurionum (> Decurio, decuriones [1]) was an especially significant development for the period in general, for the local upper class promoted cultural development and the > Romanization of the provinces. In Late Antiquity the Senate lost for good what political influence it still had when Constantinus [1] ordered the removal of the capital to Constantinopolis. The Roman senators did remain landed magnates, but no longer participated in the running of the Roman Empire. The members of the newly created senate of Constantinopolis, on the other hand, no longer had the social standing to face the Emperor as a self-confident force in its own right. Within the leading elite a process of strict hierarchization between the differerent ranks set in, and each class received its exclusive kind of of honorific (> Vir clarissimus; > Illustris vir). The fundamental dichotomy of society was captured by the conceptual opposition of + honestiores/humiliores. In many regions small-scale tenancy farming emerged as the predominant form of agriculture; slavery had lost its central role in agrarian production. In addition the decay of the cities in many parts of the Roman Empire, the waning importance of silver currency and the concomitant decline of money economy, the occupation of large areas in the west by barbarians and Christianization set the scene for a fundamental social change as well as a change of mentalities. At the same time the > patrocinium resulted in new forms of social and political dependencies.

B. HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT The society of the early Republic exhibits archaic structures; the aristocracy (the > patricii) owned large tracts of land, could call on the services of numerous retainers (— Cliens, Clientes) and as office holders and

members of the Senate (—> Senatus) were in a position to monopolize political power; the — plebs, a class of free men, were on the whole denied any share of political power. In the army the plebs manned the infantry, while the aristocrats fought on horseback (— Equites Romani). The > slavery of those days can be described as patriarchal with the slaves being socially integrated into the household. Individual plebeians did have a chance of acquiring — wealth which enabled them to fight for participation in power. With the emergence of a new leading class (-» Nobiles), which comprised patricians and rich plebeians, the patricians lost almost all of their political privileges. The high officials and the leading members of the Senate were regularly chosen from the ranks ofthe nobility; some noble families were thus able to exert considerable influence on Roman politics generation after generation. Access to high offices and to the Senate was tied to a defined amount of wealth, which excluded the vast majority of citizens (~ Census). Roman

society was

anything but static. It was characterized by a considerable dynamism, which was largely created by the ruling aristocracy. The urbanization of Italy, the development of + commerce, the crafts (> Crafts, Trade) and a money economy (— Money, money economy) as well as the restructuring of — agriculture, which increasingly served the urban markets, brought about a comprehensive social differentiation: while the leading senators belonged to the class of big landowners (> Latifundia/ Large estates), equestrians (wealthy citizens who were not members of the Senate) frequently acted as administrators of the public properties, which had expanded enormously, or as tax collectors, with the republic as a rule leasing these positions out to entrepreneurs (> Publicani). At the same time numerous Italians and Romans engaged in Mediterranean long-distance trade, selling their merchandise in Gaul, North Africa, Greece and Asia Minor. The crafts reflect social differentiation with a growing number of professions and increasing specialization.

SOCIAL STRUCTURE

C. ROMAN AGRARIAN SOCIETY In spite of the growth of the cities and the importance of trade and crafts Roman society throughout remained a pre-modern, pre-industrial agrarian society. Far more than two thirds of its populations lived and worked in the country to produce food for themselves and the urban population. The farming family was the

SOCIAL STRUCTURE

575

foundation of Roman society. The expansion of large landholdings and the displacement of small farmers in many areas did not do much to change this fact, because the farmers returned to the land as coloni—even though they were no longer the owners, they farmed it as tenants (> Colonatus). The wealth of the upper class came primarily from landed property, numerous estates in Italy and from the Principate onwards also in the provinces. Compared to that, urban real estate and a share in trading or handicraft production played a relatively minor role. Trade and handicrafts certainly enabled local elites to acquire a certain amount of wealth, but it could not compare to the riches of the senators. In its system of values Roman society always remained rooted in the countryside; owning landed property remained a social and an economic ideal, which was reinforced by the upper class looking at countrylife as a pleasant experience (— Recreation; — Leisure).

D. SOCIETY AND THE POLITICAL SYSTEM The close nexus between social stratification, political system and laws regulating the membership of the respective classes was a fundamental characteristic of Roman society. Membership of the Senate as well as classification as an eques was based on clear-cut legal regulations stipulating a minimum amount of wealth for both groups. During the early Principate senators and equites acquired the legal status of ordines (social orders), and political elites became social elites. At the city level there was a similar development: a seat in the curia was only attainable for those who could prove their wealth to be above a certain amount, depending on the size of the city. The plebs on the other hand was defined negatively, i.e. by exclusion: all citizens who did not qualify for membership of the ordo senatorius, the ordo equester or the curiales (> Curialis, Curiales [2]),

were lumped together as > plebs. In the Roman Empire, legal > status as a Roman citizen also entailed considerable political, legal and social advantages. The legal distinction between Roman citizens and the provincials who did not have civic rights (> Citizenship; > Civitas) in this way reinforced social distinctions. Granting Roman citizenship became an important tool to facilitate the integration of provincials into Roman society. This goes both for the local elites, who could attain citizenship by participating in the administration of their town, and for the Roman army, which also comprised provincials who would become Romans when they had completed their military service. It was only with the > Constitutio Antoniniana of AD 212, when almost all free men with-

in the Roman Empire received citizenship that the opposition between Roman citizens and provincials was overcome. Servitude was also a legal status. This cemented the fundamental principle of opposition between free men and bondsmen (slaves), which determined Roman society in many areas. -» Rome (I and II); > Social conflicts; > Social politics

576 1 G.ALFOLpy (ed.), Bibliographie zur rémischen SozialGeschichte, 1992 ff. 2ALFOLDY,RG 3 ALFOLDy, RS 4 GARNSEY/SALLER 5 R.MacMuLtLen, Roman Social Relations 50 BC to AD 284, 1974 6 ROSTOVTZEFF,

Roman Empire 7 F. ViTrINGHOFF, Soziale Struktur und politisches System der hohen rémischen Kaiserzeit, in: HZ 230, 1980, 31-55 8 VITTINGHOFF H.SCHN.

V. EarLty MIDDLE AGES Due to the varied, disparate locations and the contradictory sources, the social developments of the post-Imperial age in the West (AD 476-800) can only be presented in a sketchy outline. Apart from the enormous scale of material destruction and the plague epidemics (which lasted almost to AD 750) political fragmentation was the dominant process. In the West, the Roman Empire was succeeded by a large number of barbarian regna (kingdoms), which frequently proved ephemeral. At the same time the various dogmatic lines of thought of Christianity (Catholicism, > Arianism, + Mani, Manichaeans) were shaping into churches. Alongside the parishes which were integrated into dioceses numerous groups of ascetics came to the fore. From the dissolution of the distribution systems, which had been run by the imperial court, by the elite class of officials and by the army, new regional supply patterns emerged. The classical symbiosis of town and countryside began to change, for the senatorial aristocracy and the warrior elite as well as the new religious elites preferred landed property. The landed estates developed into a manorial system, their proprietors became aristocrats sui iuris; whose dependants were turned into familiae of serfs whose status was determined by birth; they had to pay rent and to perform corvée labour. There is controversy if this was an improvement of the legal status of slaves (mancipia); but the so-called leges barbarorum (Early Germanic Law, > Volksrecht) seem to indicate that their situation had deteriorated. Many cities shrunk to the size of castle-like conglomerates, which contained churches, monasteries, residences, craftsmen’s workshops, trading points and farms. Craftsmen and merchants were frequently employed or protected by local lords. Diocesan towns (in Gaul and Italy), monasteries (Ireland) and aristocratic residences (palatinates) became the new centres of regional government. Simultaneously relationships based on mutual obligations such as protection and subordination (— Patrocinium, > Beneficium, > Colonatus) and feudal patterns (clannishness, feuds, vassalage, patriarchal — slavery) determined social development, especially in places where conquest turned into settlement and permanent rule (Gaul, Britain). The social views of the Early Middle Ages were decisively influenced by Christianity. Combining the social metaphors of the OT and the NT and Platonic and Aristotelian ideas, the Church Fathers formulated concepts of society as a comprehensive unit. Augustine introduced the complementary terms of orbis and ecclesia. This made ecclesia, domus dei and christianitas

S77

578

important patriarchal-ecclesiological hermeneutic figures. Widely used bi-polar patterns (free men-slaves; potentes-pauperes; clerici-laici, clergy-laymen) became tripartite (clergy, monks, laymen). In the 9th cent. this was transformed into the function-based social triad of oratores, bellatores und laboratores (men of prayer, warriors and labourers), the ‘world picture of feudalism’ (according to [3]). The social transition to the Early Middle Ages should on the whole neither be reduced to a revolutionary socio-economic change of structures nor be seen as a continuous process, but be analyzed as a complex package of social developments resulting in a ‘feudal society.’ ([2]).

the allies, this did not lead to the dissolution of the

1 A. ANGENENDT, Das Frith-Mittelalter, 1990 2M.Biocn, La société féodale, 1939-40 (Eng. transl. ‘Feudal Society’ by L.A. Manyon 1961) 3 G.Dusy, Les trois ordres ou limaginaire du féodalisme, 1978 (Eng. transl. “The Three Orders’ by A. Goldhammer 1980) 4 M.HEINZELMANN, Gregor v. Tours. Historiographie und Gesellschaftskonzept im 6. Jahrhundert., 1994 5 R. Kaiser, Das romische Erbe und das Merowingerreich, 1997. 6 L.KUCHENBUCH, Seigneurialisation, in: H.AtsMa (ed.), Marc Bloch aujourd’hui. Histoire comparée et sciences sociales, 1990, 349-361 7 J. MARTIN, Spatantike und V6élkerwanderung, 31995 8 O.G. Oex ie, Haus und Okonomie im fritheren Mittelalter, in: G. ALTHOFF (ed.), Person und Gemeinschaft im Mittelalter. Festschrift K. Schmid, 1988, ro1-122 9 G. VON OLBERG, Die Bezeichnungen fiir soziale Stande, Schichten

und Gruppen in den Leges Barbarorum, 1991 10 H. Sreurr, Frithgeschichtliche Sozialstrukturen in Mitteleuropa, 1982 11R.WeENskus, Stammesbildung und Verfassung,*1977 12H. Wo.rraM, Das Reich und die Germanen, 1990. LU.KU.

VI. BYZANTIUM see > Byzantium

Social Wars. Wars within or between ancient alliance systems (— Socii; + Symmachia; > Symmachoi). The

term does not include punitive expeditions by the leading power against individual alliance members. The following wars were already called SW (m6heuoc ovppayinxdc/polemos symmachikos, bellum sociale) in Antiquity: [1] The war by Athens against seceded allies of the Second > Athenian League from 357-355 BC, which put Athens into serious military and financial difficulties (+ Symmoria). Due to disregard for their autonomy by the hegemonial power of Athens, Chios, Rhodes and Kos sided with > Maussolus of Caria, who supported them with ships and mercenaries. Soon, Byzantium and Perinthus joined the insurrectionaries. The Athenian trierarch > Chabrias was killed in the siege of Chios. The strategos — Chares succeeded in the relief of Samos; however, he was defeated at Embata (356). With the support of the rebellious Persian satrap Artabazus, he was able to gain Lampsacus and Sigeum and defeat a Persian army [355]. Although the Persian king then pressured Athens to guarantee the autonomy of

SOCIAL WARS

league. Besides Euboea, not a few islands and cities appear to have remained with Athens. J. CaRGILL, The Second Athenian League, 1981; M. DrEHER, Hegemon und Symmachoi, 1995, 287-292.

[2] The war of 223/22 BC of the Hellenic League (Achaea, Macedon, Boeotia, Thessaly, Epirus, Phocis, Acarnania, and from 222 Sparta), founded by > Anti-

gonus Doson with the help of > Aratus, under the leadership of the Macedonian king Philip V against the + Aetolians and their allies Sparta and Elis (220-217 BC). Through mutual raids, but especially the piracy of the Aetolians, who avoided a decisive battle, the war, which was fought with great ruthlessness, affected almost the entire Greek world, so that Rhodes and Chios sought (in vain) to mediate. Only Philip’s interest in an alliance with Hannibal led to the Peace of Naupactus in 217, significantly strengthening the Macedonian king’s position as the leader of the Greeks. M.ERRINGTON, 164-171; F.W. WALBANK, Philip V of Macedon, 1940, 24-67.

[3] The war of the Italian > socii against Rome (bellum sociale, bellum Italicum, bellum Marsicum) with the

goal of gaining Roman > citizenship. The Roman SW began at the end of 91 BC, essentially ending militarily in 89 and politically with the admission of the new citizens to all tribus in 87. The battles between the Samnites and Sulla, which ended with the victory of Sulla at the Colline gate before Rome in 82 (1 Nov.), are not part of the SW. The causes of the SW lay, on the one hand, in the growing dominance of Rome in the > Roman confederation, the strong military involvement against Iugurtha and the Celts and the lack of legal protection for Italian traders in the provinces, and on the other hand, in Rome’s fluctuating citizenship policies, which made all classes of the socii aware of their inferior position. Citizenship had been a political issue for the socii since the reforms of the Gracchi, although they did not demonstrate any particular interest in it at the time. The situation became more tense when the inclusion of Italian military units in the citizenry by Marius, the participation of Italians in the veteran settlements by L. > Appuleius Saturninus and the acceptance of Italians in the citizen lists by the censors of 97/96 awakened hopes which were dashed in 95 by the lex Licinia Mucia, because the law provided for the examination and removal of Italians who had illegally gained citizenship. In 91, when the people’s tribune M. > Livius Drusus failed with a well thought-out and initially widely supported bundle of laws which also provided for the granting of citizenship to the Italian socii, and was ultimately murdered, the secretly prepared rebellion broke out after the murder of a Roman praetor in Asculum. Its centre was in central and southern Italy among the Marsi and their neighbours (Paeligni, Vestini, Marrucini), the Frentani, Hirpini, Lucani, Samnites and individual

SOCIAL WARS

579

580

89 BC: Latin law} (lex Pompeia)

gers ee,

90 BC: lex lulia 89 BC: lex Pompeia, Roman citizen rights

@ Luca

-

e isae he. x

Faesulae D4

f

Yip

4

\

iy Ses

8

© Uy, Yjv fegewngions? d : Faletio @ Cig Spoletium

Beu

fs

re

ee Ostia

Asculum

er

Te,

pete

$

Corfini

‘Itali

i

Aricia rOn8 ce Fregeli Zio

oe Tarracina

|

v

P

7)

2m

Larinum

Garganus ™ Aesernia 44 A7° : ic}Al / Luceria _ \9 a t gh 3 ‘S Salapia

m1frum %, Bovianum,

Se77*y

BS QEangae Re ae: ji

CELTS are Whee —— 7

6e7)i Sse & __Venusia

¥

Nes a,

Bantia\

See inset map |

L

SS = urre

sls &

Tabiae®

d

A. ca

\\

: de 7


Poppaedius Silo and the Samnite C. + Papius Mutilus. Corfinium, programmatically renamed Italia, became the political centre with a senate of 500 members, two consuls and 12 praetors, who stood at the head of an army of c. 100,000 men. Except for Venusium, the Latin > coloniae remained loyal to Rome, Etruria and Umbria later joined the rebels. Rome, which used up to 14 legions, was barely able to prevail militarily and thus defused the situation politically by granting Roman citizenship through the /ex Iulia (end of 90) to all Latins and Italics who had remained loyal or were prepared to put down their weapons, which opportunity was used immediately by Etruria and Umbria. The battles then concentrated in the south. An attempt by the rebels to gain the help of

to imply that all socii had the same obligations; equally, the socii did not necessarily receive equal shares of the profits. It was not possible for a socius to havea share of the profits without being compelled to bear losses (Inst. lust. 3,25). There were several forms of societas. The socii of the societas omnium bonorum invested their entire extant and future assets in the society. The aim of such a society was less the conduct of business activities than the creation of an association in the sense of property law. The societas unius negotiationis, to which each socius brought only a part of his assets, had a single, precisely defined business purpose, e.g. monetary transactions (> Banks) or the > slave trade. An example of such a societas is found in the case of the P. > Quinctius [I 3] whom Cicero defended, who had founded a societas with Sex. > Naevius [I 3]. Its purpose was the management of estates in the province of Gallia Narbonensis (societatem earum rerum, quae in Gallia comparabantur; Cic. Quinct. 12). If one or more socii so wished, once the business was completed or a socius died, the societas was dissolved (Inst. Iust. 3,25,4-6). The contract of association did not create a legal entity, and the societas could therefore be neither owner nor creditor nor debtor. Slaves who worked for the societas belonged to one or more of the socii, but not to the societas as such. This legal position posed a serious obstacle to the development of enduring businesses. In the case of banking (> Banks), one socius of a societas was responsible for all contracts concluded by the other socii (e.g. on > loans). The societas publicorum, however, a special case, had a different structure insofar as it could have a joint kitty and shared property, and was not dissolved on the death of a SOcius.

~ Mithradates VI of Pontus was unsuccessful; after decisive victories by Pompeius Strabo and Sulla at Asculum, Corfinium, Aesernia and Bovianum, the SW ended with the fall of Asculum (Noy. 89), although the Samnites and Lucani continued to fight. In 89, more Italians were granted citizenship by the lex Plautia Papiria; the lex Pompeia granted Roman citizenship to the allies south of the Po and Latin rights to the socii north of the Po as a precursor to Roman citizenship. The attempt to undo the military success of the socii politically by enrolling the new citizens in only a few (eight of 35) tribus led to new disturbances (— Sulpicius Rufus), which ended with the enrolment in all tribus. E. BADIAN, Roman Politics and the Italians, in: DialArch 4/5, 1970/71, 373-409; E.GaBBA, Rome and Italy: The Social War, in: CAH

9, *1994, 104-128; I.Hauc, Der

romische Bundesgenossenkrieg

91-88 v.Chr. bei Titus

Livius, in: WJA 2, 1947, 100-139; H.D. Meyer, Die Or-

ganisation der Italiker im Bundesgenossenkrieg, in: Histo-

ra 7, 1959, 74-79. Maps: H.GALSTERER, Herrschaft und Verwaltung im republikanischen Italien, 1976; E.GaBppa, Rome and Italy. The Social War, in: CAH 9, *1994, 104-128. W.ED.

Societas. Society (xowomeatia/koinopraxia) based on a contract, known to Roman law from the late Republic. In its origins, it was probably influenced by archaic forms of acommunity based on > kinship, esp. the consortium ercto non cito (‘partnership by undivided inheritance’) of brothers who did not wish to divide their father’s estate (Gai. Inst. 3,154, v. also > communio). However, this influence was no longer of import to the legal development of the societas after the 2nd cent. BC. The societas was created by the conclusion of a contract of consent (> consensus) between two, sometimes three or more associates (socii), who were obliged to make contributions, monetary or in kind, and to provide services for the societas. The purpose of the societas was to achieve profits, which would be divided among the socii (as would incurred losses). The obligations of the societas were laid down precisely in the contract of association. This should in no way be taken

SOCII

1 E.Bapran, Publicans and Sinners. Private Enterprise in the Service of the Roman Republic, 1972 2 E. DEL CutARO, Le contract de société en droit privé romain, 1928 3 A. GUARINO,

S. consensu contracta,

1972

4 KASER,

RPR1,572-576 5 F.SERRAO, Impresae responsabilita a Roma nell’eta commerciale, 1989 6 F. WIEACKER, S., Hausgemeinschaft und Erwerb-Gesellschaft, 1936 7 Id., S. consensu contracta, in: Jura 24, 1973, 243-254.

‘J.-A.

Socii. Rome’s allies in Italy and, in exceptional cases,

also communities and individuals outside Italy were already known as socii in antiquity. The socii in Italy were listed in the formula togatorum, a schedule which laid down the extent of the obligation to provide military contributions, as communities from which Rome was accustomed to require the provision of soldiers for the Roman

army

(‘socii nominis(ve)

Latini

quibus

sc.

Romani ex formula milites in terra Italia imperare solent’: lex agraria of 111 BC, FIRA 1, no. 8, Il. 21 and 50). The criterion for membership of the Roman citizenry or the socii was neither citizenship nor language, but military service either in the Roman legions or in the allies’ infantry and cavalry divisions (cohortes and turmae). The socii provided their soldiers either in their

583

584

own units (e.g. as cohors Perusina) or in mixed units

togatorum) [3]. The Roman disposal over the troops of the Socii quickly led to political mediation, and the often lengthy service together in the army was one of the most important factors of Romanization in Italy. Since the Socii supplied troops, they were usually exempt from taxes. They also received a share in the spoils of war, albeit that Roman Law granted the commander the exclusive control over distributing the spoils which, in actuality, might often have led to the confederates’ being disadvantaged. The right to the spoils also entailed the confederates’ participation in the founding of colonies on jointly captured territory, first in Latin and

SOCII

(e.g. cohors

Umbrorum,

Samnitium).

A number

of

socii, the socii navales, each provided one crewed ship. From the 2nd cent. BC, many socii began, for various and much-disputed reasons, to perceive their independent political existence as disadvantageous, and aspired to Roman citizenship. The system collapsed in the ~ Social War [3]. In 90/89 BC all socii communities south of the Po received Roman citizenship. The Gauls and Veneti living north of the same river joined them in 49 BC.

Outside Italy, only Messana [1], city of the > Mamertini and Rome’s oldest ally in Sicily, was entered in the formula togatorum. The formula sociorum also included cities and individuals in the Greek East who were assured of preferential treatment at Rome. D.A. Bowman, The Formula Sociorum in the Second and First Centuries BC, in: CJ 85, 1990, 330-336; H.GaL-

STERER, Herrschaft und Verwaltung im republikanischen Italien,

1976,

to1—1o4;

A.N.

Roman Citizenship, *1973,

SHERWIN-WHITE,

119-133.

The

H.GA.

Socii (Roman confederation) A. DEFINITION B. PARTICIPANTS RESPONSIBILITIES D. History

C. RIGHTS AND

later in citizens’ colonies as well (> coloniae).

D. History The ‘classical? Roman confederation developed from earlier and little known precursors in the interval between the end of the Latin Wars in 338 BC and the Social Wars. Since very early on, Rome had annexed neighbouring settlements whose residents and land became one with ‘Rome’. Contracts (foedera) were formed with communities that could not (yet) be integrated, or they were integrated as autonomous municipes sine suffragio. From the 4th cent. onwards, communities with similar languages or cultures were admitted into the civitas Romana, but maintained their own

A. DEFINITION

The term “Roman confederation” or “Italic Federation” (BELOCH) refers to the Roman manner of govern-

ing Italy during the Republic. The Romans themselves apparently had no name for this structure, in documents one encounters the paraphrase socii nominisque (or nominisve) Latini quibus ex formula milites in terra

Italia imperare solent [1]. B. PARTICIPANTS

Geographically, the confederation comprised the Apennine peninsula without the islands. The Ligurian and Gallic tribes of Upper Italy were probably included as well, although they lived north of the Arno-Rubico line. After the > Social Wars at the latest, this region became the province of Gallia (Cisalpina). Messina in Sicily became a fully entitled member of the federation as well. C. RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES The expression quoted under [A] shows that, for Rome, the most important aspect of the Socii was

Rome’s disposal over the military resources of the confederates and the control of their foreign policy. Since there were no shared institutions such as a federal assembly or federal magistrates, the common Italian army under the authority of a Roman magistrate was the only common institution. The cohortes and alae, or

respectively the ships of the confederates were deployed and paid for by the individual states and commanded by their own officers [2]. Military units were conscripted by the Romans according to a system that was probably based on the details of the respective > foedus (formula

government (oppida, later municipia civium Romanorum; > municipia). Then, beginning in 338 BC, Rome used the old institution of colonies joined in the Latin Federation to build fortresses which belonged to ‘Rome’ politically but remained legally independent. Finally, there were cities with foreign languages and cultures which entered into the citizens’ alliance but largely maintained interior > autonomy and self-government (Caere, Capua). Their citizens fought in the legions (Paul. Fest. s.v. municeps p. 117) but otherwise had little in common with the Romans. The Roman confederation reached the peak of its efficiency, despite a wide-ranging defection, in the Punic Wars. Afterwards, the desire became increasingly prevalent to be admitted into Roman >citizenship which afforded better opportunities and greater protection against abuses by the Roman magistrates [4]. Beginning with the > Gracchi, various Roman politicians made themselves spokesmen of this request, sometimes with highly self-serving motives. The failure of Livius Drusus in 91 BC regarding a citizenship law instigated the bellum sociale, and when, in the leges Tulia and Plautia Papiria of 90 and 89 BC, the Romans promised civitas to communities that remained or became loyal, the pressure to accept this offer became overwhelming. Since the 80s, Italy consisted entirely of Roman municipalities and colonies all the way to the Po (and from 49 BC to the Alps): the Roman confederation had come to an end. + FEDERATION 1 Lex agr. 21 und 50, Roman Statutes, 1996, vol. 1, 115 or respectively oi te woAitat ‘Pwopatiwy oi te obppayor Svouatog

Aativov: lex de prov. praet., Roman Statutes 1, 231ff.:

SOCII

(ROMAN

CONFEDERATION)

3Eporedia hs

Corsica

lucr’/0(6

tL uceria’

Ardeats

Antium™s Tarracinay7 y Minturnae VolturnumSyg LiternumkQa

/O

ipontum

ee ts, Ae anum

Puteofi >

Surrentu

‘Croton

©

pea

City of Rome

civitates sine suffragio:

Territory of full Roman citizens (ager Romanus)

Half- citizen communities

Territories annected by Rome after the 2nd Punic War (ager Romanus)

Latin colonies

Members of the confederacy

Latin coastal colonies

Roman provinces

oppida Latinorum

Arno-Rubicon line

c. 225 BC

The urban area of Rome

Territory of the rural tribus, under Roman administration; subdivided into praefecturae, fora and conciliabula Citizens’ towns (oppida, later municipia civium Romanorum): Tusculum Latin towns incorporated 338 BC. Communities raised from half-citizen status Citizens’ colonies (colonia civium Romanorum)

Half -citizen communities (Caere, Capua, Velitrae, Fundi, etc.)

Remaining socii

Territory inhabited by

‘Simple’ socii

Roman citizens:

Territory inhabited by socii:

c. 300,000 men

c. 450,000 men

(acc. to Brunt)

(acc. to Brunt)

ade) later municipia, Latinorum Tibur, Praeneste, cities of the Hernici, etc.

Latin colonies

SOCII

(ROMAN

CONFEDERATION)

Cnidos 2, ll. 7f. and 3, Il. 31f.

2 V.ILart, Gli italici nelle

strutture militari romane, 1974 3 E.Lo Cascio, I togati della formula togatorum, in: Ann. Ist. Ital. Stud. Stor. 12,

1991/94, 309-28 4U.Larri, II sistema di alleanze italico, in: A.MoMIGLIANO, A.SCHIAVONE (eds.), Storia di Roma 1, 1988, 285-304 BapIANn, Imperialism, *1968; J. BELOcH, Der italische Bund unter Roms Hegemonie, 1880; E.GaBBA, Rome and Italy in the Second Century B.C., in: CAH 8, *1989, 197-

243; H. GALSTERER, Herrschaft und Verwaltung im republikanischen Italien, 1976; TH. HANtros, Das rémische Bundesgenossensystem

in Italien,

1983;

M. HUMBERT,

Municipium et civitas sine suffragio, 1978; A.N. SHER-

WIN-WHITE, The Roman Citizenship, 1973 BIBLIOGRAPHY ON Maps: A.J. TOYNBEE, Hannibal’s Legacy, 1965; H. GALsTERER, Herrschaft und Verwaltung im republikanischen Italien, 1976; TH. Hantos, Das

romische Bundesgenossensystem in Italien, 1983

= H.GA.

Soclarus (XwxAagoc; Soklaros). [1] A son of Plutarchus of Chaeronea (not necessarily the eldest, perhaps named after Plutarch’s friend(s) S. [2] and [3]) who was reaching adolescence at the time when his father wrote How a young man should listen to poets (Plut. Mor. 15a). [1] assumed that he died young, as he is not mentioned again and Plutarch dedicated On the Generation of the Soul in Timaeus to his brothers Autobulus and Plutarchus, not to Soclarus; he assumed that Plutarch alludes to the loss in the Consolation to his Wife (Mor. 609a). The silence is however not so surprising if Soclarus was not the eldest son. Soclarus may therefore be the L. Mestrius Soclarus of IG ix 1,61, lines 41-42 (AD 118). [2] A friend of Plutarchus [2] of Chaeronea, who appears as a speaker in several conversations of Table Talk (Plut. Symp. 2,6; 3,6; 5,7; 6,8; 8,6) and in On the cleverness of animals (Plut. Mor. 59a ff.); he is characterised as an old, close family friend and a cultivated gourmet. [1] thought him identical with the L. Mestrius Soclarus mentioned as a witness in IG ix 1,61 (AD 118) and inferred that he, like Plutarch himself, owed his Roman citizenship to L. > Mestrius [3] Florus; but it is more likely that L. Mestrius Soclarus is Plutarch’s son Soclarus [1]. In that case the present Soclarus is likely to be identical with Soclarus [3]. [3] T. Flavius Soclarus T. Flavius Soclarus of Tithora in Phocis (IG ix 1,200), son of Aristion, friend of Plutarchus [2] of Chaeronea (Plut. Mor. 749b; 75 5d-e; 7644; 771d) and father of L. Flavius Pollianus and T. Flavius Agias, with whom he dedicated a statue in honour of the emperor Nerva (IG ix 1,200); archon in Delphi at

some date between AD 98 and 102, and presumably identical with the Flavius Soclarus named in Syll.3 823a-c as epimelétes of Delphi. 1K.Zr1EGLER,

s.v. Plutarchos,

RE

588

587

21, 648f.,

684 f.

2 B.Puecu, Soclarus de Tithorée, ami de Plutarque et ses

descendants, in: REG 94, 1981, 186-192 3 1d., Prosopographie des amis de Plutarque, in: ANRW II 33.6, 1992, 4831-4892 (here 4879-4883). CBP.

Socrates (Swxodtnc; SOkrateés). [1] Sculptor from Thebes. He created a cult statue of Meter Dindymene for Pindar [2] in Thebes (Paus. 9,25,3) and therefore must have worked in the ‘Severe Style’ around 470 BC. Paus. 1,22,8 attributed a relief of the Charites and a Hermes Propylaios on the Acropolis in Athens to the philosopher S. [2] as the alleged sculptor. The relief of the Charites is identified as the model of a much-copied type. Because it is dated to around 470, it has to be attributed to the Theban S. Its popularity came from its alleged creation by the philosopher S. Plin. HN 36,32 mentions a controversial identity with a painter by the same name. OVERBECK, no. 478, 909-915; LIPPOLD, 112;

W. FucHs,

Die Vorbilder der neuattischen Reliefs, 1959, 59-63; Id., s.v. Socrate 1, EAA 7, 1966, 397f.; E.SCHWARZENBERG, Die Grazien, 1966, 14-19; B. RipGway, The Severe Style in Greek Sculpture, 1970, 114-121; T.STEPHANIDOUTiveriou, Neoattika, 1979, 88-94. RN.

[2] Athenian philosopher, 469-399 BC A. BloGRAPHY B. PROBLEMS WITH THE EVIDENCE C. PHitosopHy D. INFLUENCE

A. BIOGRAPHY S. was born in 469 as son of the stonemason — Sophroniscus and of > Phaenarete. He belonged to the Attic deme of > Alopece. We know almost nothing of the first 40 years of his life, except that as a young man together with > Archelaus [8], a disciple of Anaxagoras, he travelled to Samos. In the > Peloponnesian War, S. had to serve three times as a hoplite. At the beginning he took part in the siege of the city of > Potidaea, which ended in 429 when it was taken; in 424, S. took part in the campaign against the Boeotians in which the Athenians suffered a serious defeat near > Delium [1]; and in 422, S. belonged to the contingent that was unable to prevent the loss of the city of > Amphipolis. At least by 423, S. must have been a well-known personality in Athens, because in that year two of the three playwrights who had comedies performed at the + Dionysia made him one of the central characters of their works: > Aristophanes [3] in the Clouds and > Ameipsias in Konnos, named after Socrates’ real or alleged music teacher (Pl. Euthd. 272c; Pl. Menex. 23 5e). The next at least somewhat certain date in S.’ life is the birth of his son Lamprocles. Since he was a young man in 399 (Pl. Ap. 34d; Pl. Phd. 116b) he must have been born between 420 and 410. His mother was > Xanthippe [3]. S. had two more sons, Sophroniscus and > Menexenus [1]; in 399 both were still young children, one of them possibly a baby (PI. Phd. 60a; 116b). A tradition going back to Aristotle’s text On Noble Birth (Peri eugeneias) claims their mother was > Myrto [2], a granddaughter or great granddaughter of > Aristides [1] the Just. This tradition is generally relegated to the realm of myths about S. Yet, there is some evidence that suggests it could be factually accurate [5.148].

SOCRATES

589

57°

Since S. served in the Athenian army as a hoplite (+ Hoplitai), and therefore in the register of those fit for military service was listed as a citizen who had to bear the expenses for his military equipment on his own, he cannot have been completely destitute. Nevertheless, even in winter, he habitually wore only a simple Spartan wool coat, the > tribon, and went barefoot. (Pl. Symp. 220b; Xen. Mem. 1,6,2 et passim). It is difficult to say how his social position may have changed over time. There is no indication that he had any income-generating occupation. He and his family lived off donations from occasionally very wealthy supporters and thus he may have said the truth in Plato’s Apology (23b-c) when he claimed he lived in abject poverty as a result of his service to the God. In 406, S. belonged to the Athenian council (> Boule B. Athens) which each year was formed from 50 representatives per each one of the ten phylai of Attica, chosen by lot. For a tenth of the year the representatives of each + phyle managed the government as > prytaneis. During the term of the Antiochis [1] phyle (to which S. belonged), the popular assembly sentenced to death the generals who had commanded the Athenian fleet in the battle of the > Arginusae. The sentence was a twofold, grave violation of the existing law and the prytaneis should have intervened. But for fear of the agitated mob they conceded, with one exception: S. declared he would not do anything that was against the law and withheld his consent (Xen. Hell. 1,7,3-34; Pl. Ap. 32a-c et passim). About two years later, after the + Peloponnesian War, during the regime of terror of the so-called Thirty in Athens (404-403; > Triakonta), S. stood up for his beliefs again. To secure their power the Thirty tried to implicate as many Athenians as possible in their crimes and approached S. as well. Together with four other men they ordered him to arrest a man by the name of Leon from the island of Salamis who had committed no offense whatsoever, so that he could be executed. The other four did not dare to refuse, but S. disobeyed and went home (PI. Ap. 3 2c-d; Pl. Ep. 7,324d-325a and

tention, it became possible to accuse S. of religious irreverence, which was punishable by death. The death sentence as the outcome of the trial was mostly due to the legal situation of the time, but S.’ personality played a role as well. The jury was composed of laymen selected by lot; the only criterion was possession of full Athenian citizenship. At S.’ trial there were 500 or sor lay judges or jurors (> Dikastes), and certainly not just a few of them had a preconceived aversion towards the accused. The accused generally had to defend himself; there were no lawyers. However, it was possible to hire a professional speech writer (+ Logographos) to compose a speech and then memorize it. S. rejected this categorically since after all it was about the ‘business’ (pragma) to which he felt bound and not about winning over the jurors by verbal acrobatics. Over the course of the trial many found the manner in which S. talked about his ‘business’ arrogant, even some who at first had been well-disposed towards him. This is how the death sentence came about. The execution of the sentence was delayed for religious reasons. During his stay in prison some friends tried to convince S. to escape with their help. S. refused since he was convinced that he would do wrong by escaping. Finally the execution took place by S. drinking the hem-

elsewhere).

In 399 S. was accused of religious irreverence (aoéBeva/asébeia, > Asebeia). He was officially charged with two offences: (1) that he did not believe in the gods of the polis and introduced new divine entities (daimonia), and (2) that he corrupted the young (Diog. Laert. 2,40). It is unknown how the prosecutors tried to prove this, but their strategy was rather obvious: their goal was to get S. out of the way because in their opinion he had an extremely bad influence on the young, esp. through his conversations which they deemed corrupting. Yet, this was not a criminal offence, at least not one that deserved the death sentence. The prosecutors manufactured an offence by resorting to the ominous daimonion, a divine or demonical voice which S. heard from time to time (Pl. Ap. 31c-d; 40a; see below C.).

They somehow multiplied it and contended S. put certain newfangled demons at the place of the traditional gods. While there was nothing to substantiate this con-

lock (> Death penalty). The numerous surviving ancient portraits of S. uni-

formly give him a physiognomy reminiscent of a silen (snub nose, thick lips, balding, bearded; > Silens) [17]. They reflect how S. was portrayed in the texts of the ~ Socratics (Pl. Symp. 215b; Pl. Tht. 143e; Xen. Symp. 2,19; 4,193 5,5-7). Since in the surviving contemporary comedy there is no indication of such an appearance, we have to assume that at least to some extent it was a creation of the Socratics and adopted by visual artists.

B. PROBLEMS WITH THE EVIDENCE Since S. produced no writings, for information about his philosophy we depend solely on the testimonies of others. As sources, however, these testimonies are problematic [5.143-145, 155-156]. Four types of sources are generally considered the most important evidence

or rather group of evidence: the Clouds of > Aristophanes [3], the early writings of Plato (> Platon [x] C.3.), the Socratic texts of > Xenophon and notes about S. in the works of > Aristotle [6] (SSR IB 1-40). Obviously the writings of S.’ students Plato and Xenophon did not produce an authentic portrait of their teacher since their depictions of S. are very different and in some ways are even incompatible. More recent studies, inspired by Gigon’s book on S. of 1947 [7], have argued that Plato, Xenophon and other students of S. in their Socratic writings did not intend to produce a historically accurate portrait of S., but rather used S. as a medium to expound their own philosophical ideas which their teacher had shaped in various ways. Therefore the Socratic texts of Plato and Xenophon can serve as evidence for the historical S. only after careful examination. An even more problematic source is the Clouds

SOCRATES

591

by Aristophanes, in which S. displays all the characteristics which the average citizen of Athens associated with any type of intellectual and which he found amusing or annoying. In his remarks on S., Aristotle probably mostly if not completely referred to the S. he knew from Plato’s texts, and therefore Aristotle’s references are not valid independent sources. Considering these difficulties, the question arises whether it is even possible to reconstruct the main tenets of S.’ philosophy. The following approach could help resolve this problem: among S.’ many friends ancient historians of philosophy identified the seven most important ones: > Aeschines [1], > Antisthenes [1], ~ Aristippus [3], > Euclides [2], > Phaedo, > Plato [1] and — Xenophon. All of them wrote philosophical works. Only the works of Plato and Xenophon have survived. For a reconstruction of S.’ philosophy we will have to make do with whatever we can find out about the texts and philosophical ideas of the five other writers whose works are lost. Assuming that each of the seven Socratics was influenced in a particular way by their common teacher S., then the philosophical ideas of the seven, albeit different in details, nevertheless should individually reflect the philosophical influence of their common teacher. From the sum of these reflections one has to reconstruct the common source S., i.e. by practicing a method which has been so aptly described as ‘historical deduction from effect to cause’ [11.153]. If this method is applied systematically, then an outline of the historical S. emerges which in all the important points overlaps with the S. of Plato’s Apology. Although this does not mean that in the Apology Plato more or less recorded the speech which S. actually gave, it nevertheless suggests that Plato intended it to be a portrait of the historical S. and authentic at least in its basic outline [4]. The following account of S.’ philosophy thus relies on the account which Plato in the Apology had S. give of himself and of his philosophy. C. PHILOSOPHY 1. KNOWING AND DOING WHAT IS GOOD 2. ELENCTICS 3. POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY 1. KNOWING AND DOING WHAT Is GOOD

S. was a practical philosopher (— Practical Philosophy). In a time of general political and moral destabilization he wanted to demonstrate how new stability could be achieved. Since he was convinced that the stability of the > polis was based on the stability of the citizens who made up that polis, his first and most important concern was to point out to people how to achieve this stability, or rather, how to rediscover it since it had existed before. S. expressed his objective in Plato’s Apology (29de; 36c): he tried to convince every single one of his fellow citizens that instead of only concerning himself with things which only had to do with himself (t@v éavtot/tén heautou) - such as money, prestige, honour -, he had to look after himself (avtot/ heauton) to be as good as possible, and to look after his

592

soul (psyché) so that it was as good as possible. For S. the soul and the self were the same thing; in other words: the soul was man’s self. Soul referred to the ‘faculty’ that was responsible for man’s moral action. Limiting the essence of man to the soul in the way S. understood it, became the basis for S.’ ideas which he apparently did not question any further. Everything else S. believed was derived from this concept. First: someone who really takes care of himself will above all strive to never do anything except the morally Good (agathon), since by doing so he takes care of his Self, does himself some good and thus comes closer to happiness (evdauovia/eudaimonia; > Happiness) (Pl. Ap. 36de); whereas someone who acts the opposite, harms himself und makes himself unhappy. Someone who wants to do what is good, however, first has to apply himself to acquire knowledge of what the Good is. Once he understands it, it will be in his very own interest to try to act accordingly; for everyone only wants what is best for himself. In this sense, the knowledge of the Good is not only a necessary but also a sufficient condition for a good and happy life. Thus S. was convinced that someone who knew what was good would by necessity act accordingly, and conversely he believed that those who did not act in accordance with the Good would only not do so because they did not know what it was (PI. Ap. 37a-b, 25e-26a). Considering that the knowledge of the Good played such a central role in S.’ philosophy, the question arises how to explain the well-known fact that S. vehemently denied possessing this knowledge himself and even stated that it was absolutely impossible for anyone to acquire this knowledge (Pl. Ap. 2od—23b). How could S. insist the quest for the knowledge of the Good was essentially necessary when at the same time he declared that this knowledge could never be attained? The contradiction resolves when one realizes that ‘knowledge’ does not have the same meaning in both instances. Once it is used in a strict sense and in the other instance in a looser sense. When S. claimed it was impossible for someone to know what was good, pious, just, etc., he referred to a universally valid and infallible knowledge that offered unchanging and unquestionable rules for action. Knowledge of that kind was generally unobtainable for man. What was obtainable for man was a partial and preliminary knowledge which, no matter how certain it seemed at any moment, nevertheless always had the potential of a need for revision in the future. Accordingly, Plato (Ap. 36c; 29e; 30b; 39d) had S. proclaim that what one needed to strive for above all was not to be good and knowledgeable but rather to be as good and knowledgeable as possible. The assumption was that there was an unchangeable Good, independent of the opinions of men. As far as we can tell, S. was convinced that this was the case; however, it is not clear how he arrived at this certainty. The phenomenon of language might have come into play. The fact the we can communicate by language might have indicated to S. that there is something behind the

593

594

words we use which is the same for everyone and which is equally valid for everyone. These types of considerations were probably not so much the reason for S.’ conviction that there was an absolute Good but rather reinforced a conviction he already had which was rooted in the religious sphere. S.’ statement — by way of Plato in the Apology (23a) — that the true knowledge of

edge either (S.’ statements in Pl. Ap. 21b and 22c come closest to the proverbial ‘I know that I know nothing’), seemed to many unbelievable and insincere or, as they said, an > irony (eiowvetia/eironeia) — ‘irony’ in the original sense of the word, meaning ‘dissimulation in order to mislead’ (Pl. Ap. 38a; Pl. Resp. 1,337a). We cannot be sure whether S. began to play with his ignorance and thus he was in part responsible for ‘irony’ taking on the connotation of deliberate, strategic selfdenigration. There are some indications that what we call ‘Socratic irony’ may have been a creation of Plato. The historical S. was serious in his belief that he knew nothing; only the Platonic S. and, as it seems, he alone, played with his ignorance. The surviving evidence reveals not much about the constructive part of S.’ dialogues, probably because the the dialogues usually did not get beyond the destruction of inadequately founded convictions, and accordingly this aspect was reflected stronger. This does not change the fact that originally the objective had been a constructive one: to acquire as certain and as reliable as possible a knowledge of what was the Good. The means to this goal was the examining dialogue as well: the desired knowledge was reached by constantly and rigorously examining in a dialogue one’s ideas about the Good. The ideas that stood up to repeated rigorous examination could be considered knowledge as long as there was no argument which upon re-examination might prove them to be faulty nevertheless. VLAsTos [19] accurately called that knowledge ‘elenctic knowledge’. If an insight remained irrefutable after a number of examinations then, although the knowledge could not be considered irrevocable — according to S. this was reserved for God — it could nevertheless claim a high degree of certainty. 3. POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY One of the insights that deserves this high degree of certainty is that if we do not want to harm ourselves, we should never knowingly and deliberately do wrong, not even if we ourselves have suffered some wrongdoing (Pl. Crit. 49a-c). Therefore, contrary to prevailing opinion, the worst for man is not to suffer injustice (Gduxeto0aVadikeisthai) but to do injustice (&dimetv/ adikein; Pl. Grg. 508d—509c). This insight became the basis for S.’ thoughts on the question of how a member of a polis community should behave towards its institutions and entities. The most important evidence for this part of S.’ philosophy was his behaviour as a citizen of a polis in critical situations such as the Arginusae trial, the Leon affair, before a court and in prison, since his behaviour was a reflection of the principles he had reached in his thought process (see above A.). The common thread that runs through theses cases is that in principle every citizen has the obligation to obey all the laws and institutions of the polis as well as their representatives. This applies even if fulfilling these obligations puts one in personal danger or if one might suffer injustice by doing so. S.’ behaviour in the Arginusae trial (see above A.) corresponded to the first

the Good

obviously is limited to God (theds) alone,

should be taken seriously. With this conviction S. inserted himself in a tradition represented by Solon, Herodotus and the tragic poets as well as by the Oracles of Delphi and the sayings of the > Seven Sages, all of whom rigorously disclosed the fundamental limitations of any human knowledge and ability compared to the divine. Furthermore, the surviving evidence supports the conclusion that the religious dimension in S.’ life and philosophy should not be underestimated. This is most obvious in the case of the daimdnion (see above A.) which, if we want to believe Plato (Ap. 3 1c-d; 40a), did only one thing: it dissuaded S. from doing what he was about to do. Later on, theological and psychological explanations for this phenomenon were sought; as far as we can tell, S. himself did not do this. He considered hearing the voice a process that did not need or have any other explanations than that a divine or demonic power directly gave him directions. There is probably some authentic core when, in Plato’s Apology (23b; 30a et passim), S. calls his peculiar practice which so much annoyed his fellow citizens (it consisted of walking around all day and involving others in conversations) a service he did for the God, namely on the God’s insistence pointing out to men how mistaken they were about themselves and how thus they acted against their true interest without even being aware of it. 2. ELENCTICS From a systematic point of view S.’ dialogues had two sides, a destructive one and a constructive one. Their foremost objective was to expose alleged knowledge as pseudo-knowledge. To demonstrate to his dialogue partners how little they had been thinking about what is good and what is bad, S. pointed out to them that their ideas, if followed through, by necessity had nonsensical or at least unintentional consequences or were irreconcilable with other opinions they held (the so-called elenctics, éAeyxtixh teyvy/elenktike téchné, of S., his ‘art of examination and refutation’). It remains largely unknown how much of the technique of argumentation which S. employs in Plato’s early texts (— Plato [1] C.3.) can be attributed to the historical S. Apparently in order to prove whether something was a certain way or not, S. liked to invoke analogous cases in which the situation seemed obvious to everyone and then draw a deduction from the analogous case to the case in question (> Analogy). Considering that S. regularly succeeded in proofing that his partners did not really know what they thought they knew, i.e. that in his questionings he always came out the winner, his claim that he himself had no knowl-

SOCRATES

SOCRATES

situation; the second scenario applied when he had the option of escaping from prison and avoiding the death penalty. We cannot be sure how many of S.’ arguments in Plato’s Crito to justify staying in prison can be attributed to the historical S. It is certain that S. had the opportunity to escape, but did not take advantage of it because he was convinced that if he escaped he would have responded to an injustice by committing an injustice himself. There is, however, one exception to the principle that one is obliged to obey the laws and the institutions of the polis: Although one has to accept to suffer injustice by the polis, one cannot obey orders from the polis or its representatives when they demand that one should commit an injustice or participate in an injustice. One cannot obey an order of the kind the regime of the Thirty (> Triakonta) issued to S. (see above A.):

injustice that is suffered by someone does not harm his essence, his soul; however, this does happen when he

commits an injustice, even if demanded by public orders. To be unconditionally on the side of the Just (Sixatov/dikaion), always and everywhere, this expectation applies regardless of the political situation (PI. Ap. 32a-e). To live up to this expectation may require various kinds of commitments, but is always possible. This is at the core of S.’ political philosophy, which just as his philosophy in general, focused on the individual and his virtue (Ggeti/arete). General problems, with regard to the political sector, do not appear to have played any role in S.’ conversations. At least there is no indication that he ever thoroughly applied himself e.g. to the issue of the legitimation of laws and political institutions which the > Sophists discussed so eagerly, or to the issue of the merit of various forms of government. Therefore it is extremely unlikely that, as was claimed later (Xen. Mem. 1,2,9), in his conversations he denigrated certain institutions of Athenian democracy, such as filling offices by lot (> Lot, election by), and -» democracy as a form of government in general. He was not interested in distinguishing between better or worse forms of government but wanted to convince his fellow citizens that the best they could do for themselves was to forcefully adhere to what they after thorough examination had found to be just, no matter in whose hand the political power was and even when doing so meant they risked their own livelihood and life. -» Plato [1]; > Socratics; > Sophists EDITIONS:

1SSRIA-G.

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

2H.H.

BENSON

Philosophy of Socrates, 1992

(ed.), Essays on the

3 T.C. BRICKHOUSE,

N.D.Smitu, Plato’s Socrates, 1993

4K.D6rING, Der

Sokrates der Platonischen Apologie und die Frage nach dem historischen Sokrates, in: WJA N.F. 13, 1987, 75-94 5 Id., Sokrates, in: GGPh? 2.1, 1998, 139-178, 324-341 6 G. GIANNANTONI, Che cosa ha veramente detto Socrate, 1971 70.GIGoN, Sokrates, 1947,31994 8 GUTHRIE 3, 1969, 321-488 (published on its own as: Id., Socrates, 1971) 9F.-P.HAGER,s.v. Sokrates, TRE 21, 2000, 434-

445

596

525)

10 R.KRAUT,

Socrates

and the State,

1984

11 H. Mater, Sokrates: sein Werk und seine geschichtliche Stellung, 1913 12 E.Marrens, Die Sache des Sokrates,

1992 13 L.E. Navia, E.L. Karz, S.: An Annotated Bibliography, 1988 14 A.Parzer, Bibliographia Socratica, 1985 15 Id. (ed.), Der historische Sokrates, 1987 16 W.J. Prior (ed.), Socrates: Critical Assessments, 4 vols., 1996 17 K.SCHEFOLD, Die Bildnisse der antiken Dichter, Redner und Denker, *1997, 126-129, 174-177 18 G. Viastos (ed.), The Philosophy of Socrates, 1971, 21980 19 Id., Socrates’ Disavowal of Knowledge, in:

Philosophical Quarterly 35, 1985, 1-31 (revised version in: [21], 39-66)

20Id., Socrates: Ironist and Moral Phi-

losopher, 1991

21 Id., Socratic Studies, 1994.

D. INFLUENCE The ancient historians of philosophy considered S.’ work a turning point in the history of philosophy: after the predominance of natural philosophy, S. introduced + ethics (Cic. Tusc. 5,10; Diog. Laert. 1,14; 1,18-19; 2,16 et passim). Although this is probably an oversimplification, it is reflected in the modern term ~ Presocratics for the Greek natural philosophers. It is also true that by way of some of his students, S.’ influence on the history of philosophy can hardly be overestimated, esp. via the two traditions of, on the one hand, > Plato [1], his student > Aristotle [6] and the - Academy that Plato had founded and, on the other hand, — Antisthenes [1], ~ Diogenes [14], > Crates [4], > Zeno [2] of Citium and the Stoa (> Stoicism) he founded.

In the early 3rd cent. BC, Arcesilaus [5] explicitly invoked S. for the turn to > scepticism he brought about in the Academy. In the literature of > popular philosophy which had developed in the 3rd cent. BC, S. is often cited as an example of a wise man. Stoics such as ~» Seneca [2] and > Epictetus [2] admired S. as a man whom nothing could prevent from doing what after thorough examination he had recognized to be good and just, and thus in his person word and action uniquely coincided. In the surviving texts of the Platonists of the early Imperial Period, mainly S.’ daiménion (see above C.) and his > érds were discussed, which in keeping with Plato was considered a means of psychagogy that directed our attention from transient to intransient beauty, from the image to the archetype (> Plutarchus [2], ~ Maximus [1] of Tyre, > Ap(p)uleius [III] of Madaura). The early Christian martyrs and apologists cited S. as an example of someone who had lived earlier and who was persecuted and killed for the sake of truth. > Justinus [6] Martys considers S. a precursor of Christ. After S. had been almost completely forgotten in the Middle Ages, in the Renaissance interest in him enjoyed a revival, at first in Italy, then to the north of the Alps as well. In 1440 the Florentine Giannozzo MANETTI wrote the first modern S. biography (along with a biography of Seneca). In his efforts to reconcile Christianity and Platonism, the Platonist Marsilio FICINO (1433-1499) frequently invokes S., whom he, just as Iustinus before him, considers a precursor to Christ. In his writings, ERASMUS (1465-1536) mentions S. with great reverence, as does MONTAIGNE (1533-1592). S.’ influence

SOCRATES

97

598

was especially strong in the 18th cent., which therefore has been called the ‘Socratic’ century. In his Discourse of Free-Thinking (1713) the Englishman Anthony CoLLins declared S. the first prominent ‘free-thinker’ because he arrived at an adequate conception of God solely by way of reason and therefore, just as all free-thinkers after him, he was persecuted for being an atheist. For similar reasons the French Enlightenment considered S. its intellectual ancestor. In VOLTAIRE’s satirical play Socrate of 1759, S. was presented as a victim of the intolerant priest Anitus, who felt threatened in his power which was based on superstition. In Germany the Pietist Nicolaus Ludwig CouNT OF ZINZENDORF published anonymous Christian weekly papers in Dresden in 1725 and 1725 which were first entitled Le Socrate de Dresde, and then Der Dresdne-

Out of the Spirit of Music’; 1872) as a turning point of world history because $. condemned ‘instinct’ and propagated the absolute primacy of ‘reason’ thereby putting an end to the creative abundance of the original Greek life; this was the beginning of a process of decadence which continued to the present day. Subsequently NIETZSCHE’s criticism of S. became even harsher. In Ecce homo (1888) and in the chapter Das Problem des Sokrates in G6tzen-Dammerung (‘Twilight of the Idols’; 1889) he explicitly took credit for having been the first to recognize and describe the fateful influence of S. In the 2oth cent. the most influential reference to S. was made in an effort to portray S. as a proponent of a democratic liberalism who credited everyone with reason and the ability to learn, and to contrast him with Plato as a proponent of an authoritarian dogmatism who in general denied that most people possessed either reason or the ability to learn, therefore justifying a rigorous rule over the masses. In his work The Open Society and its Enemies (1945), K.R. POPPER emphatically supported this idea and started a debate that continues to the very day. Even outside of philosophy the figure of S. has fascinated and inspired artists in many fields throughout the Modern Period. An example in painting is J.-L. Davip’s work La mort de Socrate of 1787, in music G. Ph. TELEMANN’s opera Der gedultige Socrates (‘The patient Socrates’) which premiered in Hamburg in 1721 and has a libretto based on the story of the two wives of S., > Xanthippe und — Myrto [2], and E. SaTIE’s drame symphonique Socrate based on texts from Plato’s Symposium, Phaedrus and Phaedo which premiered in 1920. Writers in particular made the figure of S. the subject of poems, plays and narrative texts: In the year of his

rische Sokrates (‘The Dresden Socrates’). Just as S. earlier, he wanted to make his fellow citizens think, in

his case with the goal of turning them into true Christians. In Sokratische Denkwuirdigkeiten (‘Socratic Memorabilia’) of 1759 Johann Georg HAMANN turned against the Enlightenment’s reliance on reason by contrasting the S. of Enlightenment with a very different one. For Hamann, S. was important because of his knowledge of his own ignorance. HAMANN considered this a liberating step that overcame the dependence on reason which prevented one from seeing truth and thereby opened up the only way knowledge of reality was possible, namely through immediate ‘experience’ and ‘faith’. In the r9th cent. the S. reception is mostly associated with HEGEL,

KIERKEGAARD

and NieTzscHE.

In the

chapter onS. in his Vorlesungen tiber die Geschichte der Philosophie (lectures on the history of philosophy given in 1805/6-1829/30, published 1833-1836) HEGEL defined S.’ place in the history of philosophy: “For a mental turning-point exhibited itself in him in the form of philosophical thought” and said that with S. came, “the knowledge of the consciousness of self as such”. S. replaced the “natural morality” of the Greek popular spirit with “reflective morality”. Because thereby he destroyed the principle of Greek life, the Athenians were justified to execute him. But this does not change the fact that from a higher perspective his presence was necessary and therefore he was right as well. Time had come “for the World Spirit to raise itself into a higher consciousness”, and S. was the means by which this was accomplished. Starting with his dissertation The Concept of Irony, with continual reference to Socrates (1841), where he interpreted S.’ irony as the attitude of an “infinite absolute negativity”, KIERKEGAARD repeatedly mentioned S. Next to the figure of Christ - who belonged to a completely different sphere and thus was beyond any comparison — S. was the central point of reference for his philosophy because Kierkegaard considered S. the only philosopher of the past with whom he felt an affinity. NiETZSCHE denounced S. in his very first significant philosophical work Die Geburt der Tragodie aus dem Geiste der Musik (‘The Birth of Tragedy

death (1679), HOFFMANN

VON

HOFFMANNSWALDAU

published a translation of Traicté de l’immortalité de lame, ou la mort de Socrate (1621) by Théophile DE Viau, entitled Der sterbende Sokrates, which was a paraphrase of the Phaedo, partly in verse, partly in prose. In his treatise De la poésie dramatiqueDIDEROT outlined the setting for a drame philosophique La mort de Socrate (1758). In the early 1770s GOETHE had the intention of writing a play about S., which he never did. In 1798 HOLDERLIN wrote his famous poem Sokrates und Alkibiades. In 1905 STRINDBERG wrote the dramatic trilogy Moses — Socrates — Jesus (published only posthumously). In the same year he turned the text of the S. play without any significant changes into the three novels The Hemicycle of Athens, Alcibiades and Socrates and published them in the collection Historical Miniatures. In 1920 the play Der gerettete Alkibiades by the expressionist playwright Georg KaIsER had its premiere in Munich; it is an idiosyncratic version of the story of Alcibiades’ rescue by S. during the campaign against Potidaea, which Alcibiades tells in Plato’s Symposium (220de). In his story Der verwundete Sokrates (1938), BRECHT uses this version but interprets it com-

SOCRATES

599

pletely differently. DURRENMATT’s bizarre story Der Tod des Sokrates was published in the collection Turmbau in the year of the author’s death (1990). In this version the comic poet Aristophanes sneaks into prison, pretends to be S. and dies in his place. S. goes to Syracuse where he has to take the hemlock after all for drinking the tyrant Dionysius under the table, who had sworn that whoever could do that would have to die for it. + PHILOSOPHY

600

Xoeimoil ay@ves, RE 3, 2431-2438 Sokrates (12), RE Suppl. 8, 717-719.

5 H. RIEMANN, S.v.

RO.HA.

1 E.ABMaA, Sokrates in der deutschen Literatur, 1949 21.ALon, Socrates Arabus. Life and Teachings, 1995 3 B.B6uM, Sokrates im achtzehnten Jahrhundert, 1929

[6] S. from Boeotia, served as an allied officer in the Macedonian army, switched to Egypt where he helped build up the army, and in 217 BC commanded the + peltastai at > Rhaphia (Pol. 5,63,12; 65,2; 82,4). W.A. [7] S. of Argos. The identification is problematic, because there were several homonymous authors and only a few Greek text fragments. Argivus Socrates (Tert. Ad nat. 2,14) and S. (h)o Argeios, ‘Socrates, the Argive’ (Schol. Pind. Nem. 3,92), have been identified with the

(repr.1966)

4K.DOrING, Exemplum Socratis. Studien

S. who was mentioned as the author of Peri hosion (‘On

zur Sokratesnachwirkung in der kynisch-stoischen Popularphilosophie der frihen Kaiserzeit und im frihen Christentum, 1979 5Id., Sokrates, Nachwirkung, in: GGPh? 2.1, 1998, 166-178, 337-341 6P.J. FirzPa-

the Sacred’; Plut. De Is. et Os. 35,364f.), probably a treatise on Argive religious antiquities, as well as with a S. (b)istorikés, who wrote a Peri(h)égésis Argous (‘Guide to Argos for strangers’; cf. > Periegetes; Diog. Laert. 2,47, possibly the Argolika in Schol. Eur. Rhes. 29). He may also have written the polemic work Pros Eidotheon (‘Against Eid6theos’) (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 1,1207b; Suda s.v. yuaCeww). S. is usually dated to the Hellenistic Period.

TRICK, The Legacy of Socrates, in: B.S. Gower, M. C. StoKES (eds.), Socratic Questions, 1992, 153-208

7J.W.

Hu tse, The Reputations of Socrates. The Afterlife of a Gadfly, 1995 8 H.SPIEGELBERG (ed.), The Socratic Enigma. A Collection of Testimonies through Twentyfour Centuries, 1963. K.D.

[3] Probably mistaken for a painter by earlier scholars. The ambiguous passage Plin. HN 35,137 suggests a portrait of the philosopher S. [2] which should be attributed to > Nicophanes, who had been mentioned earlier. It could be related to the time when the sculptor ~» Lysippus [2] conceived a new statue of S. in the context of the reforms of > Lycurgus [9]. Yet, since information about the nature of the painting is lacking, this assumption remains mere speculation. G.Lrppo_p, s.v. Sokrates (8), RE 3 A, 891; P.MoRENO, s.v. S. (2), EAA 7, 1966, 398. N.H.

[4] S. the Younger (2. 5 vewoteQoc/S. ho neoteros). Greek mathematician or philosopher, criticized by Aristotle [6] for an analogy he made with living things in mathematical definitions (Aristot. Metaph. 1036b 24-32). Already the Aristotle commentators Alexander [26] of Aphrodisias and Asclepius (CAGI 514; VI 2, 420) identify him with a younger Socrates mentioned by Plato, a contemporary of Theaetetus (Pl. Soph. 218b; Pl. Tht. 147d), who joins the discussion in Politicus (257¢). Probably also identical with the S. mentioned in PI. Ep. 11,358d5. It cannot be verified whether this S. could also have been a teacher of Aristotle (cf. e.g. Vita Marciana 5). K-HS. [5] Auletes from Rhodes, known from inscriptions for participating in choregic agones in Athens (Dionysia) [3.80], Delphi (Soteria) [1.124-125, 128] and Miletus [2.913 4.2434] in the first half of the 3rd cent. BC, at a time when auletai assumed the leading role in such competitions [4.2435]. ~ Technitai 1 E.Capps, Studies in Greek Agonistic Inscriptions, in: TAPhA 31, 1900, 112-137 2 P. HERRMANN, Inschriften von Milet, Teil 2, 1998

3Merre

4E.REISCH, s.v.

B. BiscHorr, s.v. Perieget (II.14), RE 19, 733 f.; A.GuDEMAN, 8.v. Sokrates (3), RE 3 A, 804-810; FGrH 310.

AAD.

[8] S. of Rhodes. Greek historian, probably rst cent. BC; wrote a history of the Roman Civil War (Emphylios polemos), which according to Jacoby covered “the time from Caesar’s assassination to the victory of the young Caesar over Antonius”. Fr. 1 of Book 3 (in Athenaeus 4,147e-148b) describes the first encounter between Cleopatra [II 12] and Antonius [I 9] in Cilicia in 41/40 BC. The dependence of Plutarch’s Life of Antony on S. is obvious; S.’ influence on later writers is unclear. FGrH 192 (with JacoBy’s comm.).

K.MEI.

[9] Greek Church historian (born after AD 380, died after 439). A student of the pagan grammarians Helladius [2] and Ammonius and resident of Constantinople, S. had at his disposal good information about the sect of the Novatians ( Novatianus) to which he possibly belonged ([6.294]; pace [4.562]). Although in the tradition S. is called > scholasticus, this is a controversial basis for the assumption that he was a lawyer or a cleric [6.216f.]. The Ecclesiastical History of S. (Exxdnovaotuxh iotogia/Ekkleésiastike historia: {1}; Engl. translation: [2]) was a commissioned work. The account written in a plain, straightforward style is conceived as a continuation of a work by the same title of ~» Eusebius [7] of Caesarea. In seven books it discussed the years 306 to 439, with each book covering the rule of an emperor of the eastern half of the Empire. The Church History, which was completed no later than 443 [6.212] is characterized by a high degree of reliability and a remarkably critical use of the sources. For its theology the > Nicaenum and > Origenes [2] served as guidelines. Of great textual significance are transla-

601

602

tions into Syriac and esp. Armenian (cf. Sirinjan: [x.XXV-XXVIII]). An important source for the 4th and early sth cents., S. was imitated and consulted by later authors (+ Sozomenus, > Theodoretus [1] of Cyr-

First, the Socratics employed traditional dialogue forms. In his Heracles, for example, Antisthenes [1] appears to have continued the tradition of mythological dialogue, a tradition that also encompasses the work Troicus by > Hippias [5] of Elis. The Socratics also created the completely new form of the Socratic dialogue

rhus and others). EDITIONS:

1G.CH. HANSEN, Sokrates: KG (GCS N. F.

1), 1995 (Corrigenda: Id., in: Zeitschrift fiir antikes Christentum 2, 1998, 295-298) 2 A.C. ZENos (ed.), Socrates Scholasticus: The Ecclesiastical History (Select Library of Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, 2nd Series 2), 1890, I-178 (repr. 1994).

BIBLIOGRAPHY: 3G.F. CHESNUT, The First Christian Histories, 1986,175-198 4J.ULRICH, s.v. Sokrates, in: S. Dopp, W. GEERLINGS (eds.), Lexikon der antiken christ-

lichen Literatur, 1998, 562f. 5 TH. URBAINCZYK, Socrates of Constantinople, 1997. 6 M. Wa.irarr, Der Kirchenhistoriker Sokrates, 1997. JRL.

Socratic letters see — Letters of Socrates and of the Socratics

Socratics. The term ‘Socratics’ refers in a broad sense to all of those who, according to surviving evidence, had a close relationship to > Socrates [2] (469-399 BC). Ina narrower sense, it is limited to those known to have written philosophical works: > Aeschines [1], > Antisthenes [1], > Aristippus [3], > Euclides [2], > Phaedo,

— Plato [1] and > Xenophon. Ancient sources tell us a great deal about the personal relationships of these Socratics, both with Socrates and among themselves. Some is evidently based on their writings and their diverse (and partially contradictory) philosophical views; other information can only be surmised (with more or less solid reasoning) to have the same basis. Since it was common practice in ancient biographical literature to use any information on an individual found in literary works, including fiction, as biographical material (> Biography), such material should be treated with caution unless its origin and authenticity can be confirmed. This is especially so with the many extant anecdotes and apophthegmata. One of the few arguably reliable facts is that after Socrates’ death, Plato withdrew to Euclides [2] in Megara, together with ‘some others’ (according to Diog. Laert. 3,6) or ‘the other’ Socratics (according to Diog. Laert. 2,106). There was disagreement among the Socratics as to whether it was permissible to charge a fee for teaching. Aristippus and Aeschines are believed to have done so, while Plato (implicitly) and Xenophon (explicitly, cf. Xen. Mem. 1,2,60) rejected the idea [1]. We may suspect that the teacher’s financial situation was not without influence on his decision to accept or refuse payment. Some of the Socratics’ writings were structured as treatises, while others were in dialogue form. We have no specific information about the nature of the former, since none of the Socratic treatises survive, nor can they be reconstructed, even in rudimentary form. As for the dialogues, a distinction can be made between two types.

SOCRATICS

(Swxeatimdos Adyoc/SOkratikos légos, Aristot. Poet. 1,1447b 11), in which they described Socrates convers-

ing with one or more individuals about a wide variety of topics. The background, topic and course of these conversations were always entirely fictitious. Even when the author refers to specific historical events or asserts that he was present when a certain conversation took place (as Xenophon does on numerous occasions), this is merely part of the literary fiction and does not mean that the event actually occurred in this or a similar form. Of the Socratics’ writings, only those of Plato and Xenophon have been preserved. The works of the others (Aeschines, Antisthenes, Aristippus, Euclides, Phaedo) have been lost; more extensive fragments sur-

vive only of the dialogues Alkibiades, Aspasia and Miltiades by > Aeschines [1]. It is believed that the Socratics > Criton [1], + Glaucon [3], > Simmias [1] and ~» Cebes, all of whom are well known from Plato’s dialogues, as well as the shoemaker — Simon [3], also wrote Socratic dialogues (cf. Diog. Laert. 2,121-125). Indeed, in later times dialogues were passed down under the names of these Socratics, but that says nothing about their authenticity (cf. the extant — Letters of Socrates and of the Socratics, which have long been known to be spurious). The Socratics in a narrower sense can be divided into two groups: those who were not teachers (Aeschines, Xenophon) and those who were. The teachers, some of whose pupils were teachers themselves, etc., gave rise to their own traditions (Antisthenes, Aristippus, Euclides, Phaedo and Plato). This duality reflects the differing attitudes of the various Socratics about the purpose of their work. Aeschines and Xenophon wanted above all to present an accurate picture of what they viewed as Socrates’ legacy, each from his own perspective. The five others took a more independent approach; the ideas they developed in their writings differed substantially. This is clear in Plato’s case from his surviving works; for those whose writings have been lost, we have some idea from the documents that have been handed down. Ancient observers frequently cited as an example of divergent philosophical views the theories of Antisthenes [1] and Aristippus [3] on pleasure (fdSovi/ hédoné) and its opposite, effort and hardship (s6voc/ ponos). The philosophical ideas of the individual Socratics were adopted or developed further by their pupils and their schools. Hellenistic historians of philosophy devised a system in which the Cynic school was believed to be derived from Antisthenes, the Cyrenaic school from Aristippus, the Megarian school from Euclides, the Elian school from Phaedo and the Academic school from Plato (Diog. Laert. 1,18-19; > Cynicism, > Cyrenaics, > Megarian School, > Elis and Eretria, School

SOCRATICS

604

603

of, ~ Academy). Of these schools, only the Academy had a fixed organization with its own seat, administration and deliberately cultivated school traditions. The others were hardly more than a series of teacher-pupil relationships extending over several generations. Moreover, it was only the Academy that survived in the long term. Members of the other schools played an important role in the emergence of the Epicurean and Stoic schools, since > Epicurus developed his theory of pleasure through his dealings with the > Cyrenaics of his time, while > Zeno owed a great deal to the Megarian + Diodorus [4] and the Cynic > Crates [4]. However, the emergence of the two new schools meant the end of the tradition of the Megarians and Cyrenaics; they were more or less absorbed into their successor schools. Cynicism alone survived as an independent school into the 5th cent. AD. 1 C.A. Fores, Teachers’ Pay in Ancient Greece, in: University of Nebraska Studies in Humanities 2, 1942, 23-28. EpiTions: SSR I-VI. BIBLIOGRAPHY: L.Brisson, Les Socratiques, in: M.CANTO-SPERBER (ed.), Philosophie grecque, 1997,

145-184; K. DOr1NG, Die sogenannten kleinen Sokratiker und die von ihnen begriindeten Traditionen, in: F. RICKEN (ed.), Philosophen der Antike, vol. 1, 1996, 194-211; Id., Die Sokratiker, in: GGPh* 2.1, 179-321; J.HUMBERT, Socrate et les petits socratiques, 1967; P.A. VANDER WaeErpT (ed.), The Socratic Movement, 1994. K.D.

Period [9]; Varro (I.c.) assumes that they are named

after the observation of bird flight. In the Imperial Period there is evidence of s. belonging to the equestrian class and freedmen (CIL VI 1933), but a senatorial origin remains customary. Augustus, who himself belonged to a number of sodalities (R. Gest. div. Aug. 7), restored the s. New s. were instituted for the cult of the imperial family, initially the S. Augustales Claudiales (from AD 15/54), established in analogy with the S. Titii as priests of Titus > Tatius (Tac. Ann. 1,54,1; Tac. Hist. 2,95,1). Later the S. Flaviales Titiales, the S. Hadrianales, the S. Antoniniani, etc. followed (evidence in [2. 390-394]). The cult of each deceased emperor (> Deification) was performed by some 25 s., until the s. came to an end in the 3rd century (but other forms of the > ruler cult remained in existence [3]). ~ Lapis Satricanus; > Ruler cult 1M.Brearp, J.NortH (eds.), Pagan Priests, 1990 2 M.Ctauss, Kaiser und Gott, 1999 3 G.GOTTLIEB,s.v. Kaiserpriester, RAC 19, 1104 ff. 4 A.Masier, I S.

nell’eta di Antonino Pio, in: Patavium 15, 2000, 53-80 5 J.R&pKE, Die Religion der Romer, 2001, 208-219 6J.SCHEID, Romulus et ses fréres, 1990, 252-260 7 H.S. VERSNEL, Historical Implications, in: C.M. STIBBE et al. (eds.), Lapis Satricanus, 1980, 108-127 8 Id., Die neuen Inschriften von Satricum, in: Gymnasium 89, 1982, 193-235 9S. WEINSTOCK, s.v. Titi s., RE 6 A, 1538-

1540

10G.Wissowa, Religion und Kultus der Romer,

*1912, 550-566.

Socus (Z@xoc¢; Sdkos). Trojan, son of Hippasus

challenges Odysseus to battle to avenge the death of his brother + Charops [4] (Hom. Il. 11,430-433: one of the rare direct speeches by a ‘minor’ combatant). He wounds Odysseus so badly that he has to leave the battle field, but not before killing the fleeing S. and directing a sneering speech of triumph to him (ibid. 11,43 4458). P. WATHELET, Dictionnaire des Troyens de I’Iliade, vol. 2, 1988, s. v. S., LoOI-1004. RE.N.

Sodales. Originally members of an association (> Associations)

in the broadest

sense:

the suodales

MSE.

[2],

of

Poplios Valesios, which appear in an inscription from — Satricum (c. 500 BC; CIL I? 4,2832a), could be com-

panions, politically or religiously like-minded people [7; 8]. The majority of the evidence, however, relates to Rome in the Republican and Imperial Periods. In the Roman tradition the institution of s. is ascribed to + Romulus [1] (Sempronius Tuditanus fr. 3 BECKWALTER) or > Numa (for > Salit and > Fetiales: Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2,70-72). The following s. can be seen as religious specialists: > Arvales fratres, — Fetiales, Luperci (> Lupercalia), > Salii and the S. Titii (Varro Ling. 5,85 f.). Common to all is a temporal restriction of their cult activities (e.g. the Luperci once a year, the Fetiales in the event of war). They come under the authority of the councils of > pontifices and > augures. There are no S. Titii known by name until the Imperial

Sodamus (2wSapyoc/Sodamos) of Tegea. A number of sources, which can be traced to Strato of Lampsacus, 3rd century AD (fr. 146 f. WEHRLI), and Clearchus (PSI IX 1093, cf. fr. 69d WeEHRLI), tell that the > gnome Mnpééev Gyav: xa1ed mavta mEedcEOTL xae (“Nothing too

much; everything beautiful has its own measure”) was ascribed to S. instead of > Chilon [1]. An epigramma handed down in schol. Eur. Hipp. 264 in the form of a single distich, permits the assumption that S. had an inscription with Chilon’s saying mounted in the Temple of Athena in Tegea, paralleling the epigraphic maxims in the Temple of Apollo at Delphi and in the sanctuary of Leto on Delos (see [2]). Ep.:

1£E.Drenr,

Anthologia

Lyrica Graeca,

vol. 1,

31949, 127 f. Lit.:

Sodom

2 Wer zt, Schule, vol. 5, 84.

(Hebr.

s’dom;

Gk.

Xddoua/Séddoma,

M.D.MA.

Lat.

Sodoma) appears, together with Gomorrah (‘amorah), Admah (’admah), Zeboim (s‘bojim) and Zoar (so‘ar) in

a military alliance of cities (Gn 14,8). Gn rq tells of the destruction by fire and brimstone of the cities, apart from Zoar, as a divine punishment. There is no archaeological evidence of the cities; ancient tradition locates them at the southern end of the Dead Sea (> Asphaltitis Limne). For ancient authors, the desert region there and the Dead Sea are among the mirabilia

605

606

of Judaea: plants crumble to ashes, the Dead Sea disgorges asphalt (Tac. Hist. 5,7; Jos. Ant. Iud. 1,174; Wisd 10,6 f.). On the one hand there were attempts to explain these phenomena scientifically (Str. 16,2,44; Tac. Hist. 5,7), on the other hand they became evidence of a model of divine punishment for human misdoings. In the tradition of the southern kingdom of > Judah S. appears stereotypically coupled with Gomorrah (Am 4,11; Zeph 2,9; Is 1,9 f.), in the northern kingdom of Israel Admah and Zeboim play a greater part (Hos 11,8). Various aspects of the punishment are emphasised: its suddenness (Lam 4,6; Lk 17,28 f.), the absolute annihilation (Is 1,9; Jer 49,18; 50,40; Rom 9,29), its function as a warning before the Judgment (Zeph

for central Asian trade, the city principalities of S. were at their height, until the Islamisation of S. in the 8th cent.

SOHAEMUS

P. BERNARD, Maracanda-Afrasiab. Colonie grecque, in: La Persia e |’Asia Centrale da Alessandro al X secolo (Atti dei convegni lincei 127), 1996, 331-365; B.I. MARSHAK,

N.N. NeGmartoy,

S., in: A. DANI (ed.), History of Civili-

zations of Central Asia, Bd. 3: The Crossroads of Civilizations, A. D. 250 to 750, 1996; M. MopE, Sogdien und die Herrscher der Welt. Turken, Sasaniden und Chinesen in Historiengemalden des 7. Jahrhundert n. Chr. aus AltSamarkand, 1993; G.V. SHISHKINA, Ancient Samarkand. Capital of Soghd, in: Bull. of the Asia Inst. N. S. 8, 1994, 81-99; J.WIESEHOFER, Das antike Persien, 1993.

HJ.N.

2,9; Mt 10,15; 11,23; 2 Petr 2,6). Based on Gn 19 vari-

ous traditions are formed as to which misdeed by the inhabitants of S. was the cause for punishment: 1) breach of the law of hospitality, xenophobia, lack of charity and avarice (Ez 16,49; Wisd 19,13-15; Jos. Ant. Iud. 1,194 f.; bSan rogab; Pirge de Rabbi Elieser 25); 2)

sexual offences (Jubilees 16,5), esp. 3) homosexuality (Phil. De Abrahamo 135 f.; Jos. Ant. Iud. 1,199-204) or 4) desire for ‘strange flesh’, i.e. attempted rape of angels (Jud 7), by means of which a connexion is made (Jud 5-7; possibly also TestNapht 3,4 f. and Jubilees 20,53; Sir 16,6—8) with the story of the fall of the Watcher Angels, who with human women fathered giants (Gn 6,1-4; 1 Hen 6-16). As with other figures in the Hebrew > Bible, a reevaluation of the inhabitants of S. takes place in > Gnosis: S. is considered the home ofthe good descendants of > Seth (Gospel of the Egyptians NHCod 3,56,11; 3,60,12). ~ De Sodoma O. Keer, M.KUCHLER, Orte und Landschaften der Bibel, vol. 2: Der Siiden, 1982, 249-257. ST.KR.

Sogdiana (Zoyd.wavi}; Sogdiané). Region of the Achaemenid

Empire

between

Oxus

(> Araxes[2])

and

~ Jaxartes, part of the Sixteenth Satrapy; The inhabitants were called Sogdianoi or Sdgdoi, Old Persian Sug(u)da, Avestan Suyda, Sogdian Sughdh. The capital was > Maracanda (modern Samarkand), the Achaemenid base for ruling eastern Iran. In Darius [2] II’s building report on his palace in Susa S. is mentioned as the supplier of > lapis lazuli and cornelian. S. played an important part in trade with the peoples of the Steppes and the regions along the > Silk Road; settlements of Sogdianan traders e.g. in > Turfan and China (from the 2nd cent. BC) came, after bitter resistance, under Greek rule, which came to an end in a battle with the > Sacae and the Yuezhi (Tocharians); later the $. came under the

rule of + Kushan. For the period when S. was under Sassanid rule from the 3rd cent. AD, under Hephtalite rule from the 5th cent., and under Turkish rule in the 6th cent., there is evidence of Zoroastrian, Buddhist, Manichaean, Nestorian and Hindu traditions. When the formation of an Goktiirk empire in the 6th cent. provided Sogdianan merchants with the best protection

Sogenes (Zwyévys; Sdgénés). Poet of New Comedy, reached the fifth rank at the Attic Dionysia in 183 BC with his play ®tAodé0m0t0¢ (‘His Master’s Friend’) [1]. 1 PCG VI, 1989, 593.

T.HI.

Soghitha (also Sogitha). A simple stanzaic form of Syriac verse, and a subcategory of the isosyllabic madrasa. The soghitha normally has stanzas of four lines, each of 7 or 8 syllables. An acrostic and/or a dialogue may also be present. ~ Madrasha S.BR. Sohaemus (Ldawoc/Sdaimos, Ldeuoc/Sdemos). {1] Ituraean (— Ituraea), in a position of trust under ~» Herodes [1] the Great, who in 30 BC gave him the duty of guarding him and, should he not return from his visit to Octavianus [1], of killing his wife > Mariamme [x] and mother-in-law Alexandra. S. revealed the order to them and in 29 was executed by Herod (Jos. Ant. Iud. 15,185; 204-229). [2] Tetrarch of the Ituraeans (— Ituraea) AD 38-49, appointed by > Caligula (Cass. Dio 59,12,2; Tac. Ann. 12,23). One of his sons was Varus, who was mentioned several times as an Ituraean dynast or vice-king of M. — Julius [II 5] Agrippa Varus (Jos. BI 2,247; 481-483; Ios. Vita 49 ff.). One of his ancestors was probably the Ituraean dynast Ptolemaeus, son of a S., who supported Caesar in Alexandria in 47 BC (Jos. Ant. Iud. 14, 129.). K.BR. [3] The (younger) son of — Sampsigeramus [2] (ILS 8958 =IGLS 2760), he succeeded his brother Azizus as king of > Emesa in AD 54 (Jos. Ant. Iud. 20,8,4) and in the same year was appointed king of > Sophene by Nero (Tac. Ann. 13,7), but it is certain that he ruled there only temporarily. In 66, S. marched with Cestius {II 3] Gallus against Jerusalem (Jos. BI 2,18,9), in 69 he allied himself with Vespasian and Titus (Tac. Hist. 2,81; 551; Jos. BI 3,4,2) and in 72 fought with Caesennius [3] Paetus in Commagene (Jos. BI 7,7,1). S. is the last known Emesan ruler. R.D. SULLIVAN, The Dynasty of Emesa, in: ANRW II 8, 1977, 198-219, esp. 216-218.

607

608

[4] Of royal, allegedly Achaemenid and Arsacid lineage (lambl. in Phot., Bibl. 94), but the name suggests the no

1,55,2). A second festival (agonium) was celebrated on 11 December (Lydus Mens. 4,155) [3.535f.]. In the

longer ruling dynasty of > Emesa. Appointed king of Armenia by the emperor L. > Verus in AD 164 (Fronto Epist. 5,127 N), he was expelled in 172 and reinstated at the behest of the governor Martius [4] Verus of

Circus Maximus (— Circus C) stood a temple to both Sol and > Luna (‘Moon’; cf. Tac. Ann. 15,74,1), whose festival was celebrated on 28 August [3.503]. There is no obvious connection between these festival days and

—» Cappadocia (Cass. Dio 71,2,3; cf. 72,14,2).

the astronomical course of the sun. Apart from an aes grave series in the late 3rd cent. BC (RRC 39.4), S. Indiges is only represented on coins after 132 BC (RRC 250.1). The various types of images on them originate from Rhodes [4.46f.]. The influence of Greek concepts is evident in the epithet Sol alter (= ‘the second sun’, véog “H&toc/néos Hélios) which was bestowed upon Scipio Africanus (> Cornelius [I 70])

SOHAEMUS

M.-L. CHAUMONT, L’Arménie entre Rome et Iran I, in: ANRW II 9.1, 1976, 71-194, esp. 147-152; Id., s. v.

Armenia and Iran II, Enclr 2, 418-438, esp. 425; J.G. VINOGRADOV, The Goddess Ge Meter Olybris. A New Epigraphic Evidence from Armenia, in: East and West 42, 1992, 13-26.

M.SCH.

Soknopaiou Nesos (Zoxvonaiov vijooc/Soknopaiou Nésos; Egyptian paj, later 3 m3j(.t), modern Dima). Town in the > Faiyum; the chief god was > Sobek. Like Tebtynis, S. is primarily significant because of its ~ papyri (Greek documents, temple library with Hieratic and a large number of Demotic religious, literary and scientific papyri, c. rst-2nd cent. AD) [2]. Their edition is still in progress [4]. 1A.E. R. Boak, S.N., 1935

2E.A. E. ReEymonp, De-

motic Literary Works of Graeco-Roman Date, in: FS zum roojahrigen Bestehen der Papyrus-Sammlung der 6sterreichischen Nationalbibl. Pap. Erzherzog Rainer, 1983, 42-60 3C.WESSELY, KaranisundS.N.,1902. 4 S.L. LipPpeRT and M.SCHENTULEIT, aus Dime, 2006-.

Demotische

Dokumente Av.L.

Sol (the Roman sun god, Greek “Hitoc/Helios). I. GRAECO-ROMAN

II. CHRISTIANITY

I. GRAECO-ROMAN A. GENERAL SUMMARY C. THE GREEK HELIOS ANTIQUITY

B. ROMAN REPUBLIC D.So.tInvictus E. LATE

A. GENERAL SUMMARY

Although S. is one of the few undisputed Indo-European deities of the pantheon (cf. Gallic sulis, Gothic sauil, Old High German sél, Greek * oaFédoc/* sawélios = iuoc/hélios; [x]), the public cult of the > sun played only a subordinate role in Rome and the Greek world, until the time that political developments led to an affinity between S. and the concept of monarchy (— ruler cult). B. ROMAN REPUBLIC According to Varro, the cult of the ‘Sun’ was introduced in Rome by the Sabine T. > Tatius (Varro Ling. 5,74; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 2,50,3). It was based on the gens cult of the Sabine gens Aurelia (> Aurelius), which for a long time supervised the cult of the sun (Fest. 22,5 ff.; differently: [2]). The festival for S. > Indiges took place on 9 August on the Quirinal [3. 493], probably at the pulvinar Solis in the precinct of > Quirinus (Quint. Inst. 1,7,12); the cult was probably closely connected with that of S. Indiges in Lavinium (Dion. Hal.

(Cic. Nat. D. 2,14). It can also be seen in the solar symbolism which was associated, at the time of the crisis of the Late Republic, with M. Antony [I 9], C. Julius Caesar and Octavian/Augustus [5]. Varro’s invocation of Sol and Luna as the deities who order the agricultural calendar (Varro, Rust. 1,1,5) shows a less spectacular, but for the rural population and for many others (e.g. ILS 1774; 39393; 3943) more important significance of S. Indiges. In Venetia and Istria existed an indigenous cult of the sun [6].

C. THE GREEK HELIOS The fact that the sun is part of the natural cosmos as well as a god finds expression in Helios’ classification as a — Titan, who is a descendent of Uranus and Gaia and

their son > Hyperion. He has no pronounced mythological personality. Even the etiological myth that explained Helios’ prominent position in > Rhodes testifies to the lack of official Helios cults in the Greek world (Pind. Ol. 7,54-76 with scholium; Diod. Sic. 5,56,3—-5). The worship of Helios was mainly a private matter (PI. Symp. 220d 4f.). The famous iconographic representation of Helios as a charioteer (with a halo, later with a corona radiata) did not appear until the end of the 6th cent. BC [7. No. 2-10, 96-98].

Still, the two most significant aspects of Helios in view of the later developments (Helios as observer of the human world and as the upholder of cosmic order) already appear in Homer [1]. (1). As Helios observes everything (Hom. Od. 11,109), he, like > Gaia/Gé and ~ Zeus, was invoked — probably since Indo-European times — as the guarantor of oaths (Hom. Il. 3,103-107; + oath). This characteristic, which remained in existence throughout antiquity (cf. e.g. IGR 3,137, > Gangra), led to the depiction of Helios as an incorruptible witness (Aesch. Supp. 213; Soph. El. 824 f.). In this capacity, Helios —- who himself acts as a moral force (Xen. Mem. 4,3,14) — is often invoked as protector against grave robbers or as avenger of misdeeds (e.g. SEG 6, 803; IDélos 2533; AE 1994, 1658). Helios’ righteousness is also the basis of the apocalyptic motif of the ‘saviour from the sun’ (Or. Sib. 13, 151). (2) The sun embodied the order of the cosmos because of the regularity of its course (cf. Hom. Od. 12,383). Yet, the exact course of the year constantly

609

610

posed a mystery (e.g. Hom. Od. 15,403 f.; Mimn. fr. 3 DIEHL). Presocratic speculation could be reinterpreted religiously, already in the late 5th cent. BC, into Helios as the giver of life (Soph. fr. 752 Rapt). Early > stoicism also further developed the rational cosmography of > Eudoxus [1] of Cnidus (middle of the 4th cent. BC) in a religious sense and aggrandised Helios as the dominant power in the cosmic order (Cic. Rep. 6,17; Sen. Ep. 41,5; Plin. HN. 2,12 f.). Helios thus became the focus of a late Hellenistic theology of nature which enabled the educated elite to distance themselves from the irrational traits of traditional > polytheism, without having to repudiate the state religion. This theology also served to legitimise the ideological claims of the Hellenistic monarchies (e.g. FGrH 76 F 13, lines 9-12; [4.47f.]). The accolade Néos Hélios (‘New Helios’), given to some Roman emperors, stands directly in this tradition (e.g. ILS 8794, line 34; IGR 3,345).

intellectuals, e.g. the Middle and Neoplatonists, the authors of + Hermetic writings and of the > Oracula Chaldaica, Gnostics and Greek-Egyptian ‘mages’, continued the tradition of esoteric, cosmic speculation [15], traces of which are found in Christology (see II below). A history of this solar speculation is not yet available. + Elagabal; + Gnosis; — Malachbelus; — Mithras; + Neoplatonism; - Phaethon [1] and [3]; > planets; + sun; > sun god

D. Sox Invictus It is generally accepted that by the 2nd. cent AD, S. Indiges has been replaced by S. Invictus, the ‘undefeated sun’, an oriental sun god [8]. However, the evidence is extremely meager. On the one hand, Syrian cults were not primarily solar cults [9]; on the other hand, the iconographic evidence (decisive in these cases) indicates that that S. Invictus originated in the Graeco-Roman Helios/Sol [10]. Sol or S. Invictus occurs mainly in the following contexts: (1) From the time of Caracalla, S. (rarely depicted on official Imperial coinage until the reign of Commodus) is closely connected with the emperor as comes, augustus, invictus, oriens, propugnator (the companion, the illustrious one, the undefeated one, the one who rises and the defender) [11]. (2) When paired with > Luna, S. connotes cosmic or chronological order. (3) In private and local worship, e.g. in the cults of > Emesa and > Palmyra [12], S. assumes very different characteristics. Until the time of the emperor + Aurelianus the cult of §. Invictus is hardly distinguishable from that of the traditional S. For this reason, the official cult of §. Invictus, whose temple was inaugurated in the Roman regio VII on 25 December 274, should probably not to be thought of as an Oriental cult (cf. SHA Aurelian. 25,3-6), but rather as an official attempt to focus the state cult on a hypostasis of the emperor, alluding to the theology of victory (cf. SHA Gall. 16,4). A strong impetus for this was provided by henotheistic tendencies, as evident in e.g. Porph. Peri theion onomdaton (cf. Macrob. Sat. 1,1723) or lambl. Peri theon (cf. Julian. Or. 4) [13]. E. LATE ANTIQUITY

The solar cults of the Tetrarchy and of Constantine {x] originate indirectly in the Aurelian cult [14]. Until the late 4th cent. AD, the close relationship between S. and the emperor’s rule was maintained, both in Rome (ludi Solis, r9th-z2nd October; circus games n/(atalis) Invicti, 25th December; [3.523, 545]) and in Constantinople. Largely independent of that, smaller groups of

SOL

1 CHANTRAINE, vol. 2, 410 f. 2C.Santi, A proposito della “vocazione solare” degli Aurelii, in: SMSRN. S. 15, 1991, 5-19

3InscrIt, vol. 13,2

4S.B6HM, Die Miinze

der romischen Republik, 1997 5 S. Weinsrock, Divus lulius, 1971, 382 f. 6 O.IANovirTz, Il culto solare nella X Regio, 1972 7N.YaLouris, s. v. Helios, LIMC 5.1, 1005-1034 8 G.HALSBERGHE, The Cult of Sol Invictus, 1972 9H.SeyriG, Le culte du soleil en Syrie, in: Syria 48, 1971, 337-373 10S.E. Hiymans, The Sun Which Did Not Rise in the East. The Cult of Sol Invictus in the Light of Non-Literary Evidence, in: BABesch 71, 1996, Its-r50 11 R.Turcan, Le culte impérial au III‘ siécle, in: ANRW II 16.2, 1978, 996-1084 12 F.CHAUSSON, Vel Iovi vel Soli, in: MEFRA 107, 1995, 661-765 (esp. 662-718) 13 J. BOUFFARTIGUE, L’empereur Julien et la culture de son temps, 1992, 331-337. 14J.H. W.G.LizBESCHUETZ, Continuity and Change in Roman Religion, 1979, 281-287

C.Kocu,

15 W.FauTH, Helios Megistos, 1995.

Gestirnverehrung

im

alten

Italien,

1933;

K.SCHAUENBURG, Helios, 1955; E.HeE1Tscu, Drei Helioshymnen, in: Hermes 88, 1960, 139-158; C. LETTA, s. v.

Helios/S., LIMC 4.1, 592-625;

F.CUMONT, La théologie

solaire du paganisme romain, in: Mémoires présentés par

divers savants a |’Académie des Inscriptions et BellesLettres 12.2, 1909, 447-479; M.GAWEIKOWSKI, S. v. Helios (in peripheria orientali), LIMC 5, 1034-1038.

RG.

II. CHRISTIANITY The increased religious interest in the sun in Late Antiquity was not without consequences for Christianity — in contrasts and connections. In the process, forms of piety developed which shaped Christianity far beyond antiquity. An example is the tradition of turning to the east to pray; this could be related to Christ whose Resurrection and Second Coming were expected to take place in the East. From the 3rd century, this observance found expression in the architecture of church buildings. The coincidence of the (Jewish) first day of the week — for Christians, the day of Christ’s Resurrection — with the (pagan) dies solis (day of the sun) in the planetary week (> planets) likewise abetted Christological interpretations of the sun. This interpretation is especially elaborated in Easter sermons; in turn, it palpably influenced the nature of the celebrations (rite of light). From the 4th century, solar elements were also introduced into Christianity in the context of Imperial propaganda. S., Christ and emperor could be associated with one another. In this way, solar epithets were transferred to Christ, particularly in iconography (halo, + nimbus). Occasionally, Christ could be portrayed stylised as S. himself (Julian mausoleum, Rome; San

611

612

Aquilino, Milan). The personified gods S. und Luna

rate of two drachmaia day, with one drachme being for the servant; the crews of ships received the same (Thuc. 3,17). > Mercenaries, e.g. the Thracians in the Decelean War (> Decelea; Thuc. 7,27,1 f.), were also entitled to a payment of this amount (1 drachme). In 407 BC the Spartans demanded from the Persians a payment of 1 + drachme [1] a day for the seamen of their fleet; they were ultimately due 4 oboloi a day (+ Obolos; Xen. Hell. 1,5,4-7). In 401 BC, Cyrus [3] awarded his Greek mercenaries 1 + dareikos a month, corresponding to about 20 drachmai, but after protests from the Greeks raised their pay to 1/2 dareikoi (Xen. An. 1,3,21). The differences in salary between soldiers and officers follows from a proposal by the Spartan > Thibron, who offered simple soldiers 1 > dareikos, lochagoi (+ Léchos) 2 dareikoi and strategoi 4 dareikoi a month

SOL

(Moon) accompanied the scene of the crucifixion as its

‘cosmic setting’ and maintained this position far into the Middle Ages. A jointly developed festival was also influential. While the 2 5th December was commemorated from the early 4th century on by non-Christians as dies natalis Solis invicti (‘birthday of S. Invictus’), the Christian feast of Christmas developed alongside and in competition with it, on the same date. The underlying Christology is clearly reflected in the festive texts: Christ is celebrated as the ‘true sun’, the ‘sun of justice’ (following Mal 3, 20). 1 F.J. DOLGER, Sol salutis. Gebet und Gesang im christlichen Altertum (Liturgiegeschichtliche Forschungen 4/5), 314972 ('1920)

2M. WALLRAFF, Christus Verus Sol. Son-

nenverehrung und Christentum in der Spatantike, 2001.

(XenwAna2 65m)

M.WA.

Solar eclipse see —> Eclipses C. Soldier emperors . The term SE was first [1. 13] used to describe the emperors ‘from the end of the reign of Commodus until the beginning of that of Diocletian’ (AD 192-284), but today the Severan dynasty (AD 193235; — Septimius [II 7]) is generally kept separate (as already [2. 393-468]: Severans = military monarchy, subsequently military anarchy) and only the period from Maximinus [2] Thrax (23 5-238) to > Diocletian (284-305) is called the period of the SE or the ‘Crisis of the 3rd cent. AD’. The term delimits the turmoil of the 3rd cent. (> Rome I. E. 2.e) from stable phases of the Roman Empire and more particularly carries a general depreciation of the more than 60 emperors and usurpers, who had — unlike earlier emperors of senatorial status and allegedly beholden to the Senate — worked their way up in the army and owed their power only to ‘the vagaries of unruly soldiers’ [3. 434]. Balanced judgment in [4]. 1 F. ALTHEIM, Die Soldatenkaiser, 1939 2 RosrovrzerF,

Roman

risma, vol. 2, 1960

Empire

3 F. TAEGER,

Cha-

4 F. HARTMANN, Herrscherwechsel

und Reichskrise, 1982.

Soldiers’ pay. Sources give about the introduction and Greece and in Rome, and they figures for the amounts. Hence largely based on assumptions from them. I. GREECE II. ROME

TE.

only little information development of SP in contain only few precise modern works on SP are and estimates resulting

I. GREECE In Greece, soldiers of the citizen contingent of a polis probably did not receive regular money until the sth cent. BC, and this was initially used to pay for provisions (oitngéouov/— sitérésion); at the beginning of the + Peloponnesian War the Athenian > hoplitai besieging Potidaea were given pay (0086¢/ > misthos) at the

Il. ROME SP is supposed to have been paid for the first time during the siege of — Veii in 406 BC (Liv. 4,59,11; 5,4,3-7; Diod. 14,16,5) and to have consisted of a simple remuneration, from which equipments costs would have been deducted (Liv. 24,11,7-9; 40,41,11; 42,34). A simple soldier (miles) at the time of Polybius [2] (c. 2nd cent. BC) is supposed to have received an annual payment (stipendium) of 120 denarii, compared with 240 denarii for a centurio and 360 denarii for a cavalryman (eques; Pol. 6,39,12-15). Polybius, who uses the term drachme for denarius, seems, however, to be referring to the currency of the Achaean League; accordingly a simple soldier would have received only 75 denarii. + Caesar rewarded a simple legionary with a second annual stipendium (Suet. lul. 26), and this amounted to a sum of 150 denarii a year. A soldier of the same rank in AD 14 received three stipendia a year, totalling 225 denarii (Tac. Ann. 1,17,4). By adding a fourth stipendium, Domitianus [1] raised SP to 300 denarii a year (Suet. Dom. 7,3; cf. table: 1.). Literary sources indicate that Septimius Severus (SHA Sept. Sev. 12,2), later Caracalla and finally Maximinus Thrax raised SP, but without giving information on how much by. Recent studies, based on analysis of an inscription recently found in — Vindonissa, have permitted the drawing up of a table of the varying payments (see table). To these regular payments donativa (> donativum), which were paid out on the occasion of a significant event — such as the coming to office or the birthday of a princeps, or a victory, must be added. For Late Antiquity higher payments are given, e.g. 1,800 denarii a year for a soldier of a legion and for a cavalryman in an ~ ala [2] at the time of Diocletian, and 1,200 denarii for a soldier of a > cohors; again not inconsiderable donativa must also be added. In the subsequent period cash payments became rarer and rarer and were increasingly replaced by payment in kind (annona).

~» Armies; > Mercenaries

613

614

SOLICIA

Development of salaries in the Roman army (in denarii a year) Augustus 27 BC-AD 14

Septimius Severus AD 193-211

Domitianus AD 81-96

Caracalla AD 211-217

Maximinus Thrax AD 235-238

1. Legions

miles

225

300

600

900

1800

eques

262,5

350

centurio

3375

4500

700 9000

1050 13500

2100 27000

2. Auxilia miles cohortis eques cohortis eques alae centurio cohortis

187,5 225 262,5 93755

250 300 350 1250

1500

decurio cohortis

1125

1500

TEAL

1750

decurio alae

1R.ALston, Roman Military Pay From Caesar to Diocletian, in: JRS 84, 1994, 113-123 2A.BoEcKH, Die Staatshaushaltung der Athener, 31886, 340-358 3H.C. Boren, Studies Relating to the stipendium militum, in: Historia 32, 1983, 427-460 4D.J. BREEZE, Pay, Grades and Ranks below the Centurionate, in: JRS 61, 1971, 130135 5R.P.DuNcAN-JonEs, Pay and Numbers in Diocletian’s Army, in: Chiron 8, 1978, 541-560

6 JONES, LRE,

623-666 7E.Lo Cascio, Ancora sullo stipendium legionario dall’eta polibiana a Domiziano, in: Annali dell’Istituto Italiano di Numismatica 36, 1989, 101-120 8 M.A. SpEIDEL, Roman Army Pay Scales, in: JRS 82, 1992, 87-106 91d., Sold und Wirtschaftslage der romischen Soldaten, in: G. ALFOLDY et al. (ed.), Kaiser, Heer und Gesellschaft in der romischen Kaiserzeit. Gedenkschrift E. Birley, 2000, 65-96 10H.ZEHNACKER, La solde de l’armée romaine, de Polybe 4 Domitien, in: Annali dell’Istituto Italiano di Numismatica, 30 (1983), 1986, 95-121.

Y.LB.

Soli (=dAo1; Sdloi). {1] City on the northern coast of Cyprus at modern Karavostasi with a harbour which was also usable in winter (Scyl. 103; Str. 14,6,3). According to Plut. Solon 26,2 named after > Solon [1], who advised the king Philocyprus of Aepeia to relocate his unfavourably situated city to the plain. But according to Str. loc. cit. S. was founded by — Phalerus and > Acamas from Athens. Based on rich copper deposits the region was settled by the Bronze Age. An autonomous kingdom is documented as early as 673/2 BC by an Assyrian inscription [1]. The king Aristocyprus was killed in the > Ionian Revolt at > Salamis [2] in 497 BC; S. was not captured by the Persians until after a five-month siege (Hdt. 5,113; 115). Ptolemaeus [1] I allowed the last

500

750

600

900

1800

700

1050

2100

2500

3750

7500

3000 3500

4500 5250

9000 10500

acropolis a Hellenistic-Roman temple complex. In the Christian period S. was a see. Coins: BMC, Gr Cyprus CXIV-CXVII. 1R.BorGE,

Die Inschriften Asarhaddons,

Ko6nigs von

Assyrien (AfO Beih. 9), 1956, 59-61. E. GJERSTADT, A. WESTHOLM, Soli. The Swedish Cyprus Expedition 3, 1937, 399-582; Masson, 217-222; E. OBERHUMMER, S. v. S. (2), RE 3 A, 938-941; J.DEs GAGNIERS, V. TRAN TAM TINH, S. 1. Dix campagnes de fouilles (1964-1974), 1985; R.GinouvEs, S. Dix campagnes de fouilles (1964-1974). 2. La ville basse, 1989;

A. WEsTHOLM, The Temples of Soli, 1936.

RSE.

[2] Port in Cilicia Pedias on the border with Cilicia Tracheia (Str. 14,5,1 and 8) at modern Viransehir. Originally Phoenician, in the 8th cent. S. was colonised from Lindus [1. 121 with ill. 39]. > Tigranes [1] I destroyed S. and relocated its inhabitants to his newly

founded residence city of Tigranocerta. S. was settled by Pompeius [I 3] with some of the pirates he had defeated and from then on was called Pompeiopolis. In 260 AD the — Sassanids attacked the city without success [2. 109]. S. was a bishopric of Cilicia Prima (— Cilices, Cilicia, III. C.), in the Middle Ages a metropolis without suffragans. Remains of the harbour constructions, a theatre and 33 columns of a colonnaded road. > Chrysippus [2] and > Aratus [4] were from S. — Cilicia 1 E.BLUMENTHAL, sation, 1963

Die altgriechischen Siedlungskoloni2

E.KETTENHOFEN,

Die romisch-persi-

schen Kriege, 1982. W.RucgE, s. v. S. (1), RE 3 A, 935-938; A.M. SCHNEIDER,

s. v. Pompeiopolis (1), RE 21, 2043 f.; MAGIE 1, 273 f.; HILD/HELLENKEMPER, 381 f. FH.

king, Eunostus, to remain in power and gave him his

daughter Eirene in marriage (Ath. 13, 576e). The ancient docks are still visible to some extent. Str. loc.cit. mentions a temple to Aphrodite and Isis. Numerous buildings were brought to light in the urban area at excavations, including a theatre and to the west of the

Solicia. Place in Gallia Belgica, modern Soulosse-sousSaint-Elophe, on the road from the Rhodanus to the Rhenus between Andematunnum and Tullum (modern Toul) in the territory of the Leuci (It. Ant. 3 58,9; CIL

SOLICIA

615

XIII 4679); another name was Solimariaca, derived from a deity Solima or Solimara (It. Ant. 385,8; CIL

XIII 4681; 4683). Inscriptions provide information on trade and industry (CIL XIII 4678-4703; [1. 48454890; 2]). Inthe 4th century AD a castrum was built on the Saint Elophe hill. In the Carolingian period S. was the main town of the Pagus Solocensis. 1 ESPERANDIEU, Rec. 6

2 L. Kann, Gallo-Roman Sculp-

ture from Soulosse, 1990. Cu. BerTAUX, Soulosse-sous-Saint-Elophe, in: J.-P. PETIT, M. MancIn (ed.), Atlas des agglomérations secondaires

de la Gaule Belgique et des Germanies, 1994, 190 f. (=No. 190); ead.., Soulosse-sous-Saint-Elophe, in: J.L. Massy (ed.), Les agglomérations secondaires de la Lorraine romaine, 1997, 297-312. F.SCH.

616

than 95% by AD 366, then rose again after the laws of 366/7 to 99.5 %. Inthe sth cent. it was between 97 and 99 % [6.p. 4-7] (numerous solidus weights survive from the 4th and 5th cents. AD; > exagium [6. 8-11]}), mid-rrth cent. still around 90 %, but by 1092 only 12 % [4. 202-247]. From the late 9th cent., the solidus became ever larger and thinner, becoming key-shaped from 1034 (> Scyphates). Multiples of the solidus were made (as special coins and gifts coins) up to 12 solidi [6. p. 11-12], and the subdivisions > semis and > triens were minted until the gth cent. The solidus became the main currency coin of Late Antiquity and of the Byzantine Empire. It is found in great abundance in the imperial territory and far beyond (NW Europe, Baltic region, Eastern Europe, Near East, India, China; for the 5th cent. [6. LXXXVIII-

Solidus (Latin, ‘whole’, of metals ‘solid’, e.g. aurei solidi: Apul. Met. 10,9), main coin of Roman currency of Late Antiquity. A lighter gold coin introduced by Constantine (+ Constantinus [1] I) to replace the + aureus because of rising gold prices. It was introduced from AD 309 at Trier, from 3 13 in Constantine’s entire half of the Empire and from 324 throughout the Empire. Greek yevouov vououa/chrysion némisma (lit. ‘golden’ coin; from the 7th cent. only nomisma; numerous bynames referring to its high quality or to coin images [5.1229]). The solidus weighed '/,2 Roman pounds (— libra [1]; value LXXII on coin of Antioch 336/7) = */s ounces (> Uncia) = 4 > scripula = 24 — siliquae (> keration, minted as a silver coin) = 4.55 g. This measure was in theory retained until the

fall of the Byzantine Empire. Alongside the heavy, 24 siliquae solidi came later lighter solidi of 22 and/or 21 siliquae ({1. 55-58; 3. 62-64]; solidi of 21 siliquae around AD 600 were called Gallicanus; change to 1 solidus = */7 ounce in Cod. Theod. 12,7,1 in the Merovingian Period [1. 10; 2. 330]; cf. Greg. M. Epist. 6,10) and 20 siliquae (pieces inscribed OB(ryzum) XX, c. AD 527-641). The linguistic distinction of the solidus from the aureus is modern: aurei dated AD 317/319 from ~ Antioch [1] bear the legend I S(olidus) INT(eger) [2. 466], and in the AD 325 inscription from Feltre (ILS 9420), the solidi are still called aurei. Laws and decrees were devoted to the obligation to accept good solidi (including those bearing different or older portraits) and to reject bad ones: Cod. Theod. 9,22,1 (AD 317, on the dating [2. 364]); 12,7,1 (AD

325; on this [2. 330]); 9,21,5 (343); 12,7,2 (363); Cod. Just 11,11,1 (367); 11,11,3 (379); Cod. Theod. Nov. Valentiniani IIT XVI (AD 445); Cod. Theod. Nov. Maioriani VII,r4 (AD 458). The law Cod. Theod. 12,6,12 (of AD 366, see also 12,6,13 of AD 367) re-

quired collected solidi to be melted down to a mass (massa) of pure gold (obryza), to prevent fraud by officials and tax-collectors. The bars cast from this gold were stamped by the monitoring official. Coins with the designation OB(ryzum), ‘pure gold’: from AD 367 at Trier, Constantinople and Antioch, also other mints from AD 378. The purity of the solidus declined to less

CXVI]). Almost all Germanic kingdoms of the Age of Migrations minted the solidus and the triens, at first in the name of the Emperor, from the reign of Theudebert I (534-548) in their own. These coins gradually mutated iconographically from their models, and some lost a good deal of purity ([2. 395] with sources). In 458, Majorian (— Maiorianus [1]) decreed that Gaulish solidi were to be accepted at a lower value (Cod. Theod. Nov. Maioriani VII,r4), and by 595 they were no longer legal tender in Italy (Greg. M. Epist. 6,10). After a plethora of coin images in the 4th and 5th cents. (Rome and Constantinople with vota shield, Emperor, Constantinople, Victoria with shield), winged Victory with the cruciform sceptre became the customary coin image for the solidus from the 2nd half of the 5th cent., from c. 520 usually in frontal view as an ‘angel’, standing with cross and orb. From 610 the cross potent with three steps was used, from c. 720, increasingly, the co-regents. From 842, Christ (bust or enthroned) appeared on the obverse and the Emperor on the reverse. In 1093, the hyperpyron was introduced as a new 20 '/2 carat golden solidus. Its gold content fell again from 1204. Byzantine gold minting ended in 1354. 1H.L. ApeEtson, Light Weight Solidi and Byzantine Trade during the Sixth and Seventh Centuries, 1957 2 M.F. Henpy, Studies in the Byzantine Monetary Economy c. 300-1450, 1985 3 C.Morrisson, Catalogue des monnaies byzantines de la Bibliothéque nationale J-II, 1970 4l1d.etal., L’or monnayé, vol.1,1984 5 Id.,s.v. Nomisma, LMA 6,1229

S., RE 3 A, 920-926

6RICX

7K.REGLING, s.v.

8 SCHROTTER, 642 f.

DLK.

Solinus. C. Julius $. Grammarian and compiler of the 3rd (end) or the 4th cent. AD. Author of the Collectanea rerum memorabilium (‘Collections of Curiosities’), dedicated to (Oclatinius?; cf. [x]) Adventus (not the cos. of 218). The work, which inclines in the first part

towards mythical history and in the second towards paradoxography, manifests a ‘national’ programme in its structure. It begins with a history of Roman origins and follows with a periegesis, starting in Italy, of the > oikoumene as a framework for relaying curiosities.

617

618

This works as follows: 1,1-47 Roman archaeology and chronology up to the calendar reforms of Caesar and Augustus, for the most part from > Suetonius’ Pratum or De anno Romanorum, as suggested by parallels in Censorinus and Macrobius. 1,48-127 anthropology with a teratological focus (following Plin. HN 7). 2-56 a periegesis of mirabilia, first of the northern okoumene anticlockwise: 2-6 Rome, Italy; 7-11 tertius sinus Europae (Greece); 12-19 quartus sinus (Thrace, Scythia); 20-23 Germany, Gaul, Britain, fretum Gaditanum (Straits of Gibraltar). Then the southern ozkoumene clockwise: 24-32 Libya, Egypt; 33-51 Arabia, Syria (35,9-12 about the Essenes, cf. [2]), Asia Minor, Bactria; 52-56,3 India, Taprobane, Parthia; 56,4-19 Ethiopia, western Africa, insulae fortunatae (Canary Islands). His source is a richly glossed Pliny (HN 3-6; 8-13; 37), if sources independent of Pliny are not taken into account as well [3]. The assumptions regarding the sources such as a lengthy Chorographia Pliniana or a Geographia VarroSallustiana [4] are no longer current. The line from Rome to the ‘Island of the Blessed’ ( Makaron Nesoi) results in a sensible structure for a reading public, combining entertainment by sensation with an edifying enrichment of knowledge. Hence S. is far less important than his scholarly model, the Poikilé historia of > Aelianus [2], as well as the Latin compilations of Suetonius (Pratum) and > Macrobius [1] (Saturnalia). Convergences with the > Pervigilium Veneris [5] and the Phoenix poem of > Lactantius [1] (cf. [6]) as regards dating point to the end of the 3rd cent., the date of origin of the ~— Physiologus. The work enjoyed a considerable reception by Late Antiquity and in the Middle Ages at the hands of historians (> Ammianus Marcellinus, cf. [7], Aldhelm, — Beda Venerabilis, > Paulus [4] Diaconus, Walahfrid Strabo), geographers (Aethicus Hister, — Priscianus, + Geographus Ravennas, Honorius of Autun, Dicuil, Adam of Bremen) and encyclopaedists (> Martianus Capella, > Isidorus [9] of Sevilla). S. even found his way into theology as a witness to divine wonders (Petrus Damiani, Guido de Bazochiis), as illustrated by the versifications of Theoderich of Trond (1199) and the anonymous De monstris Indiae (ed. princeps before 1473 by J. Schurener de Boppardia, Rome, undated); in 1629 the humanist Claudius SALMaAsIus undertook a detailed edition (text and source commentary [8]). Only the Enlightenment put an end to S.’ reputation. The tradition [9] - MoMMSEN already knew of 153 manuscripts [10] — is based on a 6th-cent. archetype. Only Class III of this shows traces of revision, in so far as its additional introductory letter — rejected by MoMMSEN - is genuine [11]. A proper second edition cannot be proven textually [12]. > Buntschriftstellerei 1 H.Usener, Zur lateinischen Literatur-Geschichte, in: RhM 22, 1867, 446 2 C.BuRCHARD, Solin et les Esséniens, in: RBi 74, 1967,

392-407

3 S. BIANCHETTI,

L’Africa di Solino, in: L’Africa romana 9, 1992, 803-811

SOLLIUM

4 G.M. CoLumsa, La questione soliniana e la letteratura geografica dei Romani, 1920 ‘5 G.H. Pacés, Sobre la

datacion del Pervigilium Veneris, in: Anales de Filologia clasica 11, 1986, 105-117. 6 L.RoBeERTs, Origen and the Phoenix Too Frequent, in: Classical Folia 32, 1978, 79-89 7H.CicHocKa, Ammien et Solin, in: Meander 30, 1975, 336-352 8 C.SALMASIUS, Plinianae exercitationes in Solini Polyhistoria, 1629 (repr.1777) 9 M.E.

MiLHaM, A Handlist of the Manuscripts of C.I.S., in: Scriptorium 37, 1983, 126-129 10R.H. Rouse, S., in: L.D. REYNOLDs (ed.), Texts and Transmission, 1983, 391-393 11 H.Watter, Die “Collectanea rerum memorabilium” des C.I.S., 1969 12 G.KIRNER, Contributo alla critica di Solino (Mommsen), Rassegna di

antichita classica 1/1, 1896, 75-96. EpDITION:

T. MOMMSEN, *1895, repr. 1958 (71864).

KL.SA.

Solium {1] Roman high seat with foot-, arm- and backrest, + throne; the solium was the seat of kings (Ov. Fast. 3,358; 6,353) and, presumably as early as in Etruria, the symbolic seat of a > pater familias. It was inherited

from father to son, selling it was considered shameful (> Salutatio). F.Prayon,

Frithetrurische

Grab- und Hausarchitektur,

1975, 111 f.; TH. SCHAFER, Imperii Insignia. Sella curulis und Fasces. 29. Erganzungsheft MDAI(R), 1989, 26 f.

[2] Roman bathtub for one (Mart. 2,42; Vitr. 9 praef. 10; Plin. HN 28,183) or several persons (Petron. 73, cf.

92) of wood (Suet. Aug. 82,2) or even silver (Plin. HN

33,152). At the end of the rst century AD solium was synonymous with — alveus [1]. I, NIELSEN, Thermae et Balnea, 1990, 157.

[3] In the Roman Imperial period solium is a term for a stone (Suet. Nero 50) or clay (Plin. HN 35,16) — sarcophagus; according to Curt. 10,10,9 Alexander [4] the

Great’s solium was gold. J. SrRoszeck, Wannen als Sarkophage, in: MDAI(R) ror,

1994, 217 f.

R.H.

Sollium (206Adov; Sdillion). Originally a Corinthian settlement (Thuc. 2,30,1: mOdtoua; Steph. Byz. s. v. =.: moAiyviov) with a harbour in the area of the Plagia peninsula, which is to the east of + Leucas; unlocated (suggestions: [1. 21 f.]). Mentioned only when captured by the Athenians in 431 BC, after which S. was permanently annexed to > Palaerus (Thuc. 2,30,1; 5,30,2). 1 M.Scuocn, Beitrage zur Topographie Akarnaniens in klassischen und hellenistischen Zeit, 1997. Cur. WACKER, Palairos, 1999, 47-54.

SOLOMON

Solomon

(1] I. OLD TESTAMENT CAL LITERATURE

II. ExTRA- AND POST-BIBLI-

I. OLD TESTAMENT S. (Hebrew $4omo, literally ‘his peace’ or ‘his restitution’). Successor to > David [1] (2 Sam 9-1 Kg 2) in the second third of the roth cent. BC. His 40-year reign (1 Kg 11:42, cf. r Kg 2:11) is of ideal duration, resulting from his esteem as a wise man and temple-builder (1 Kg 3:6-8, cf. Sir 47:12-18). He is criticized for building altars to foreign deities (1 Kg 11:1-13) and his introduction of forced labour (1 Kg 5:27-32). Stories about S. (1 Kg 3-11) are to some extent projections from the time of later kings, who, in describing economic contacts with Hiram of > Tyrus (1 Kg 5,15-263 32; 9,1014; 26-28; 10,11; 22) and the visit of the Queen of Sheba (+ Saba’, Sabaei) (1 Kg 10:1-10 and 13), create a model of prestige and power (1 Kg 5:2-8; 9-14). S.’s political significance is undeniable, however: he introduced a centralized administration and tax system (1 Kg 4:1-19, cf. 5:27-32) and worked on a temple and palace in Jerusalem (1 Kg 5:15-8,13). Later tradition styled S. as a powerful ruler of the ancient Oriental kind (1 Kg 5:1) and as the author of > wisdom literature (wisdom of S., psalms of S.; > Qohelet). His glory (Mt 6:29) and wisdom (Mt 12:42; Lk 11:31) are famed as late as the NT. — Judah and Israel L.K. Hanpy (ed.), The Age of Solomon, 1997; V.FRITz, S., in: MDOG 117, 1985, 47-76. RL.

II. EXTRA- AND POST-BIBLICAL LITERATURE

Extra- and post-Biblical Judaic literature sees S. primarily as a master of spirits and demons (cf. Wisd 7,20;

Jos. Ant. Iud. 8,44-49; see also the text Testament of S. and a later description of the encounter with the Queen of + Sheba, who is represented as a demon, Targum Sheni on Esther 1:2), who is supposed, with the help of A&modai/Asmodaeus to have built the Temple in a miraculous way (bGit 68a-b). His wisdom (Mt 12:42) and his wealth were nothing short of proverbial (cf. > Eupolemus [1], who claims that S. donated the golden column in the Temple of Zeus at Tyrus; cf. Mt 6:29). The motif of S. as a master of spirits and demons is taken up in Islam (cf. Qu’ran surah 21,82; 34,11 f.5 38,3 5-38). ~ Wisdom literature G. STEMBERGER, S. V. S. II. Judentum, TRE 29, 1998, 727730 (with lit.).

620

619

BE.

[2] (ZoAduwv/Soldmon). Byzantine army leader under Iustinianus [1] I, a eunuch as the result of a childhood accident. From AD 527 in the service of > Belisarius, he fought against the Persians and Vandals and, appointed magister militum in 534, took over from him as supreme commander in the Vandal War. In 534/5 he also became praef. praet. Africae based in Carthage. In 535

he was twice victorious in the province of Byzacena over the Berbers. A revolt in his army could be suppressed only when Belisarius was recalled from Sicily. Ordered back to Constantinople, it was not until 539 that S., now with the title patricius, returned to Africa and to the same post. By means of a further victory over the Berbers in 5 40 he secured Roman control over the province of Mauretania Prima (modern Algeria). Called to his nephew Sergius’ [II 7] help against the Leuathae in 543, he lost a battle with them at Cillium in Byzacena in 544 and was killed while escaping. He is recorded in numerous local inscriptions. W.E. Kasai,

A. KAZHDAN, s. v. S., ODB 3, 1925 f.; PLRE

3B, 1167-1177, Nr. 1; STEIN, Spatrom. R. 2, 320-324,

327 £., 547 f. [3] (SoAduwv). Nephew of S. [2], younger brother of Sergius [II 7], was taken prisoner by the Leuathae as a

young man in the battle of Cillium in AD 544 (> Solomon [2]), but was ransomed by a physician called Pegasius. According to Procopius (HA, ch. 5), he killed Pegasius a short time afterwards in an argument and was punished for it by God with an early death. PLRE 3B, LIZ 7anOn2. FT. Solon (=d6iAwv/S6l6n). [1] S. of Athens I. Lire

IJ. THE STATESMAN

III. THE POET

I. LIFE S. (b. c. 640 BC), an Athenian of the family of the

~ Medontidae, supposedly related through the maternal line with —> Peisistratus [4], the most important Greek legislator (alongside the legendary Spartan > Lycurgus [4]) of the Archaic period and the first prominent Athenian poet. S. first emerged around 600 BC, when he successfully appealed for the conquest of ~» Salamis [1] during the conflict with > Megara [2] (Sol. fr. 2 G/P = fr. 1-3 West), exhorting all Athenians in the style of the paraenetic poetry of the period (+ Callinus [1], > Tyrtaeus) to identify with their polis and to be active in its support, a guiding principle which characterized his poetry (esp. fr. 3 G/P = 4 W) and his political activity. When, during a grave Athenian crisis (— Athens [1] [III 2]) in 594/3 BC, S. was elected archon (> archontes [{I]) and diallaktes (‘mediator’), his reforms came to encompass almost all spheres of political, social, economic and religious organization. Later, he is said to have obliged the Athenians to observe the new laws and to have left the polis. His remaining biography becomes lost in legend ([{12. rx ff.; rx]. His sojourn with the Lydian King > Croesus is first mentioned in Hdt. 1,29-33; reactions to the tyrannis attempt of Peisistratus 561/o). Tradition makes S. one of the + Seven Sages [18].

622

621

Il. THE STATESMAN A. THE REFORM PROJECT

A. THE REFORM

B. LEGACY

PROJECT

S.’s reforms provided answers to concrete problems in numerous individual measures (thesmoi, cf. fr. 30,18 G/P = 36,18 W, > thesmos), and were thus no ‘constitution’. Many measures remain disputed because of the disparate, sometimes contradictory and often corrupted tradition. Together with the frr. of S.’s poetry (see below, IIL), the main sources are the (pseudo-)Aristotelean Athénaion politeia (2,5-12) and Plutarch’s vita of S. [2]. S. considered his most important measure to be the abolition of the debts which were a particular burden to smallholders (- seisachtheia). This probably included the cancellation of the tribute obligation of the ~+ hektemoroi. S. himself speaks only of the removal of the > horoi (fr. 30,6 G/P = 36,6 W; divergent interpretations in [9. 15 ff.] and [5]). S. also boasts of ‘having freed’ (ghevOéQous %Onxa/eleuthérous éthéka) indebted Athenians from ‘enslavement’ (SovAin/doulié) to foreigners (fr. 30,8-15 G/P = 36,8-15 W). Measures accompanying the seisachtheia were the ban on encroachment upon the person of the debtor, which in the long term ensured a free peasantry, restrictions on the acquisition of land (F 66 RUSCHENBUSCH = R) and some provisions of family and inheritance law, e.g. the encouragement of parents to have their sons learn a trade (F 56 R), in order to counter the land shortage arising from the division of inheritances. The limited admission of immigrants to the citizenry also served to alleviate the lack of land. Only those banished from other communities and craftsmen wishing to carry on their trade on a permanent basis (and hence not to be in competition with farmers) were accorded citizenship (F

75 R). The promotion of trade and industry was thus something of a side-effect, although the ban on the export of agricultural produce (except olive oil) also seems to have served the purpose of economic reform (F 65 R). The introduction of a timocratic system was to remain fundamental to future Athenian socio-political organization. Under this, the citizenry was divided into four census classes measured according to their annual agricultural harvest (+ pentakosiomedimnoi: 500 bushels of grain, — hippeis: 300, — zeugitai: 200, + thetai), and fitness for office was linked to wealth, not to lineage. Although this division was based on an older military order, the new distinction of the group of pentakosiomedimnoi, from among whom the archontes were from now on probably exclusively chosen, must have had considerable consequences for the structure of the aristocracy, because remnants of the old elite, the hippeis, were now closer by census sums to the zeugitai than to the pentakosiomedimnoi [4. 27]. The restriction of political leadership to a small circle at least temporarily weakened existing /etairiai (— hetairia), and thus contributed to internal Athenian

SOLON

stability, although it did not remove the constant, latent danger of a tyranny (> tyrannis). S. therefore imposed the > atimia on prospective tyrants (F 37 R) and, according to a law disputed by scholars, obliged every Athenian to take sides in case of internal conflict (F 38a R), in order to turn attempts at tyrannis into immeasurable risks. S. ensured the political participation of the entire + demos by giving the people ‘that which befits it’ (fr. 7,1 G/P = 5,1 W), but the institutional measures are hard to grasp. The > heliaia introduced by S. probably constituted a genuine popular court, not merely an instance of appeal against arbitrary actions of magistrates. In addition to the existing council of former archontes on the Areopagus (— areios pagos), which S. probably entrusted with the (scarcely formalized) scrutiny of public officials [2. 38 ff.], S. is said to have created a council of four hundred (one hundred from each of the four phylai (> phyle)), but its competences are not ascertainable. It is certain, however, that the position of the demos in relation to the nobility was strengthened by the popular appeal (F 40 R), which allowed any Athenian to raise claims for others even if they were not personally involved. The legal rules plotted by S. and published on the — axones dealt not only with crimes of murder, theft and adultery, but also e.g. with clubs and associations (F 76 R) and individual conduct oflife (F 71-72 R). The rural, peasant background often still shines through [16]. For instance, the puzzling law against laziness (némos argias: F 148 R) was intended to prevent those who had fallen into difficulties through their own fault from also harming neighbouring farmers, which would follow from the social obligation to assist neighbours [16. 578 f.]. Laws on the construction of wells, minimum distances of crops and graves from neighbours (F 60-63 R) and on the sons’ obligation to provide for their parents (F 53-57 R) also belong in this context. The reform of coinage, weights and measures attributed to S. is scarcely plausible, as the minting of coins only began considerably later at Athens ([23. 198 ff.; 8]; > Minting [I. C.]).

B. LEGACY Fragments of the poems of S. show that his reforms were not greeted with universal enthusiasm (cf. frr. 7; 29b; 30; 31 G/P = 5; 3.4; 36; 37 W). Poorer citizens were disappointed that S. undertook no redistribution of land, while some nobles thought the reforms went too far. In fact, S. was unable to create any permanent political stability (+ Damasias, > Peisistratus [4]), but his reforms did strengthen the institutional structures of the polis, the abolition of debt bondage (— slavery) in particular providing the demographic basis for the de-

velopment of Athens into a major polis. In Antiquity, S. was regarded from at least the 4th cent. BC as the founder of Athenian democracy (> demokratia), but the verdicts of modern scholars differ wildly. While his formative role in the foundation

SOLON

624

623

of democratic institutions is considered minor (in con-

Sometimes the political message is general, not spe-

trast to > Cleisthenes [2] and > Ephialtes [2]), his work for democracy [21] esp. in the field of cultivating a col-

cific to the Attic crisis (see above, I): so, in the 76 lines of

lective ‘polis mentality’, and in the politicization of all Athenians, is widely recognized [19; 20; 22. 192 ff.; 1. 63]. The image of S. as the patron of small farmers in particular is also contrasted with that of a representative of primarily noble interests [4]. EDITIONS AND FRAGMENTS: see under III.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: 1 J.BLEICKEN, Die athenische Demokratie, 41995, 24ff., 511ff. (with bibliography) 2 M. Braun, Die ‘Eumeniden’ des Aischylos und der Areo-

pag,1998 3 Davies, 322-324,334f. 4 W.EDpER, Polis und Politai, in: I.WEHGARTNER (ed.), Euphronios und seine Zeit, 1992, 24-38 5 E.M. Harris, A New Solution to the Riddle of the Seisachtheia, in: L.G. MITCHELL, P.J. RHopes (eds.), The Development of the Polis in Ar-

chaic Greece, 1997, 103-112

6 A.Heuss, Archaisches

Athen, in: Propylaen Weltgeschichte

3, 1962, 162 ff.

7 K.-J. HOLKEskaMpP, Schiedsrichter, Gesetzgeber und Gesetzgebung im archaischen Griechenland, 1999 8 G.Horsmann, Athens Weg zur eigenen Wahrung, in: Historia 49, 2000, 259-277. 9 S. Link, Landverteilung, 1991 10A.Martina, Solone. Testimonianze sulla vita e Popera, 1968 11M.MeEtrer, Peisistratos auf dem Thespis-Karren, in: WJA 23, 1999, 181-188 12P.OLIva,

S., 1988 13RHODEsS, 118 ff. 14 E.RUSCHENBUSCH (ed.), DOAwWvos vouot, 1966, repr. 1983 (=R.) 15 W.ScuMiTz,

1997, 45-140

Der

nomos

moicheias,

in: ZRG

114,

161d., Nachbarschaft und Dorfgemein-

schaft, in: HZ 268, 199; 561-597 17 Id., ‘Drakonische Strafen’, in: Klio 83, 2001, 7-83. 18 B. SNELL, Leben und Meinungen der Sieben Weisen, 41971 19 P.SPAHN, Oikos und Polis, in: HZ 231, 1980, 529-564 20 M.SrauH1, Solon F 3D, in: Gymnasium 99, 1992, 385408 21 R.W. WALLacE, Solonian Democracy, in: I. Morris, K.A.RAAFLAUB (eds.), Democracy 2500?, 1997, I129 22 U. WALTER, An der Polis teilhaben, 1993 23 K.W.Wetwel, Athen, 1992. M.MEI.

Ill. THE POET

In addition to his political activity, S. also composed elegiac and iambic poetry (and, according to Diog. Laert. 1,61, epodes). Many ofthe elegiac fragments that survive are gnomic (— gnome, e.g. 27 WEST on the ten ages of man); 20 W suggesting, in feigned reply to

~ Mimnermus’ famous poem, that men should ask to die not at 60 but at 80; other poems of gnomic content are 14 W, 16-18 W, 24 W. A few fragments refer to the sympotic pleasures of ‘sex, wine and song’ (25-26 W),

while in 19 W, S. bids farewell to his Cypriot host, Philocyprus. But most of the fragments (as with his iambics) deal with S.’s political activity in Attica (a distribution that may reflect the interest of the ancient authors who quote S.’s works). All the poems were probably performed in symposia (cf. [1]; + Banquet), attended by S.’s aristocratic friends and kin (e.g. Dropides, great-grandfather of > Critias, cf. 22 W, 22a W) and others he might hope to influence (cf. Phocus, addressed in 24 W).

13 W (an apparently complete elegy, and thus our longest complete Archaic or Classical elegy), S. prays to the + Muses for justly acquired wealth, condemns injustice and asserts that it will be punished sooner or later by Zeus, denies the appropriateness of human optimism and effort given the unpredictability of Fate (yotea, moira), and concludes by condemning the pursuit of wealth, since that brings blind folly (&tn, até). 15 W, however (4 lines), in which ‘we’ praise virtue (Ggetn, areté) as preferable to wealth, is related by Plut. Solon 3,2 to the Attic crisis. It is perhaps from the elegy whose opening is cited by [Aristot.] Ath. Pol. 5 (4a W), in which it is stated that in this poem, S. argued the cases of the rich and of the poor against each other, citing another fr., 4c W, urging the rich to be restrained. These exhortations fit best in the period before S.’s reforms were implemented, as do the four lines recommending limited freedom for the people (Sfuos, démos, 6 W), and the lacunose fr. 4 W (39 lines, cited by Dem. Or. 19,254), blaming the greed of the ‘people’s leaders’ for destroying the city (s—8) and causing the poor to be sold into slavery overseas (23-25). S. concludes by praising the benefits of ‘good order’ (ebvvopin, 32-39; > eunomia).

Fr. 5 W belongs to an elegy in which S. defended his political reforms (presumably after their implementation), claiming to have respected the right of both the people and the elite. Probably of the same period are the tetrameters in which he commends himself for not seizing power as tyrant (32 W; 33 W) and not bowing to

pressure by greedy friends in his distribution of land (34 W, cf. [2]), and of similar defences of his legislation in trimeters (36 W; 37 W). In Antiquity, a prediction of the dangers of > tyrannis (9 W) was understood as referring to > Peisistratus [4], but no individual is named here or elsewhere in S.’s political poetry. A different sort of exhortation, perhaps like the martial elegies of > Callinus [1] and > Tyrtaeus) was found in the elegy that Plut. Solon 8,1-3 tells us had roo lines and a title, Salamis, and locates earlier in S.’s career. In the two-line opening that Plutarch quotes (x W), S. presents himself as a herald from — Salamis [1]; two of its six lines cited by Diog. Laert. 1,47 (3 W) explicitly urge fighting to recover Salamis. S. often seems to draw on Homeric phraseology; he knows and adapts Hesiod (+ Hesiodus) (esp. in 4 W and 13 W, cf. [4]), > Mimnermus (20 W), and perhaps > Archilochus (4,17 W; 13,76 W). The arguments of the two longer elegiac pieces (4 W; 13 W) are loosely structured but enlivened by striking imagery (punishment from Zeus compared to destructive but cloud-clearing wind: 13,18-25 W). Some transmitted lines have been declared not to be by S., many more could be; all that is secure is that in 5th/4th-cent. Athens the lines transmitted as S.’s were considered genuine. | S.’s elegiac poetry, probably familiar to Aeschylus, was parodied by -> Cratinus [1] in the Laws (11,5 W)

625

626

and known to Herodotus (19 W; 27,17 f. W), > Plato [x] (22 W; perhaps 23 W) and > Demosthenes [2] (Or. 19,254 f.). Known also to Aristotle ( Aristoteles [6]) (13,71 W; 22 W; 27 W), it was used (and extensively quoted) by the Athénaion politeia to reconstruct S.’s political career (4a-6 W; 34 W; 36-37 W); it is parodied by > Crates [4] of Thebes and quoted by > Cicero (21 W), > Diodorus [18] Siculus (9 W; rz W) and often by Plutarch (> Plutarchus [2]) (1 W; 2 W; 4b W; 5-7 W; 9 W; 11-13 W; 15 W; 19 W; 24-6 W; 28 W; 31 W) and + Diogenes [17] Laertius (2 W; 6,3-4 W; 9 W; 10 W; 27 W). It is still known to Apuleius (+ Ap(p)uleius [IIT]) and Athenaeus (both 25 W), to Clement of Alexandria (> Clemens [3]) (11 W; 16-17 W; 27 W) and commentators on Plato (22a W; 23 W; 26 W), alluded to by Libanius (20 W) and Basil (> Basilius [1]) (13,71 W), and cited by Choricius (43 W). 27 W (the ‘Ages of Man’), cited by > Philo [I 12] and Clement of Alexandria, was translated into Latin by Censorinus and Ambrosius. Fragments were anthologized in + Theognis [1] (6,3-4 W; 13,71-76 W; 24 W) and Stobaeus (21 W; 24 W), the latter being the only one to cite a complete poem of S. (13 W). Echoes in verse epigrams (e.g. 4,20 W in GVI 771,4: Smyrna, rst cent. AD) suggest wide familiarity. S.’s iambics were much less well known ([Aristot.] Ath. pol. 34 W; 36-37 W; Plut. 32-37 W), but are cited by Athenaeus (38 W) and alone by > Aristides [3] (34 W; 36-37 W) and (for recherché words) — Iulius [IV17] Pollux (39 W) and Phrynichus (40 W). ~ Elegy; ~ Iambographers

and xr8th-cent. works on the emerging discipline of gemmology, and the chalcedony bust was also, like the ‘S. of Ursinus’ and the ‘S. Maecenas’ preserved in four modern replicas, the subject in 1717 of the discussion on gem cutters’ signatures triggered by BAUDELOT DE DairvaL (Lettre sur le prétendu S.) and pursued in respect of the ‘S. cameos’ [7. 19 f. et passim]. Also of high quality is the ‘Winckelmann Bacchant’, a violet glass paste with the bust of a nymph (Berlin, SM) [r. 319n. 85, pl. 93,5]. Among the mythical motifs of S. are the theft of the Palladium [1. 320 n. 86, pl. 93,6] and a stone with a standing Hercules (Naples, MN; [1. 320 n. 87, pl. 93,7]: Hercules = Antonius; [6. 249, fig. 10, 251 n. 40]: Hercules = Marcus > Antonius [I 9]). Like other gem-cutters, S. was also probably active as a cutter of coin stamps. The attribution to him of the onyx vase of Saint-Maurice is not tenable [4. 44]. The possibility is discussed that > Cleon [7], among others, may have been a pupil of S. [1. 320 note 91]. ~ Gem cutting

1 G. TeDEscHuI, Solone e lo spazio della communicazione elegiaca, in: Quaderni Urbinati 10, 1982, 33-46 2V.]J. Rosivacu, Redistribution of Land in S., Fr. 34 West, in: JHS 112, 1992, 153-157. 3E.L. Bowrr, Early Greek Elegy, Symposium and Public Festival, in: JHS 106, 1986, 18-21 4B.MaANnuwa Lp, Zu S.s Gedankenwelt (frr. 3 u. 1 G.-P.=4 u. 13 W.), in: RAM 132, 1989, 1-25. EpiTions: IEG (West = W); GENTILI/PRATO 1, *1988; D.E. GERBER, Greek Elegiac Poetry, 1999 (with English transl.); E.PREIME, 1940 (with German transl.); E.RuSCHENBUSCH, LOAwvos vouot, 1966, Ndr. 1983. BIBLIOGRAPHY 1921-1989: D.E. GERBER, in: Lustrum 33, 1991, 163-185.

LITERATURE: E.K. ANHALT, S. the Singer, 1993; D.E. GERBER, S., in: Id. (ed.), A Companion to the Greek Lyric Poets, 1997, 113-116; A. MAsARACCHIA, Solone, 1958; H.SoLMsEN, Hesiod and Aeschylus, 1949, 107-123; O.Vox, Solone autoritratto, 1984. E.BO.

[2] see > Perseus [2]

[3] Intaglio artist of the Imperial period, the equal of -» Dioscorides [8], who cut exquisite bust portraits, but also depictions of myths and statues. The style and let-

tering of his signature suggest a date towards the beginning of the Augustan period [2. 308 f.; 3. 354 f.]. His chalcedony bust of the snake-haired Medusa is famous (London, BM: ‘Strozzi Medusa’ [1. 11 f. n. 26, 319 n. 835) ply 93245) 7- 20325 nh 73" (literature), ‘pl. 6;3)]):

Copper etchings of this stone adorned appropriate 17th-

SOLYMI

1ZazorF, AG 2 A.FURTWANGLER, Studien iiber die Gemmen mit Kinstlerinschrift, in: JDAI 3, 1888, 105-325 3 FURTWANGLER,

vol. 3

4 M.-L. VOLLENWEIDER,

Die

Steinschneidekunst und ihre Kiinstler in spatrepublikanischer und augusteischer Zeit, 1966 5 G.M.A. RICHTER, The Engraved Gems of the Romans, 1971 6 P. LausSCHER, Motive der augusteischen Bildpropaganda, in: JDAI 89, 1974, 242-259 7 ZAZOFF, GuG. S.MI.

Solus (Zodotc/Solotis, Loddetc/Soldeis, Latin Soluntum). City on the northern coast of > Sicilia at Cannita near modern Santa Flavia about 20 km to the west of Palermo (burial finds from the 6th cent. BC). Like

Motye and Panormus S. was one of the bases to which the Phoenicians, under pressure from Greek colonists, retreated at the turn from the 8th cent. BC to the 7th (Thuc. 6,2,6). Dionysius [1] I captured the city in 397

BC, and after a set-back the following year had to conquer it again (Diod. Sic. 14,48,4 f.; 78,7). The inhabit-

ants abandoned S. and settled nearby on Monte Catalfano (orthogonal urban layout, Hellenistic peristyle buildings). In 307 BC Carthage induced S. to take in mercenaries of Agathocles [2] who had surrendered at Carthage (Diod. 20,69,3 f.). In the first of the > Punic Wars S. allied with Rome (254 BC; Diod. Sic. 23,18,5). S. was a civitas decumana in the province of Sicilia (Cic. Verr. 2,3,103). The last evidence of S. (coins of Commodus’ time) suggests that the city was abandoned at the end of the 2nd cent. AD. V. Tusa, s. v. Soloeis, PE, 849 f.; Id., s. v. Solunto, EAA 2.

Suppl. 5, 1997, 327 f.

E.0.

Solymi (Z6dvpot; Sdlymoi). Tribe in eastern Lycia / southwestern Pisidia. Hom. Il. 6,184 and 204 mention the S. as enemies of Bellerophontes. Linguistically there is a relationship with Luwian [t1. 4]. In the Hellenistic/ Roman period Solymus, a son of Zeus, was worshipped as the ancestor of the S., primarily in Termessus on

627

628

Mount Solymus. Zeus Solymeus had a cult there. The warrior hero Solymus was depicted on Imperial period coins of the city [2].

historiae 2,32 f.). Ovid portrays S.’s grotto as a dark and deadly quiet place in the land of the Cimmerians, where he stays with his thousand sons (including > Morpheus). There Iris finds him, overcome by sleep himself (Ov. Met. 11,583—-649; in Stat. Theb. 10, 106111 S. is also sleepy). Elsewhere in literature H. is a young god, who, equipped with wings, approaches people from the air, bringing them sleep with his wing (Callim. H. 4,234) or a wet twig (Verg. Aen. 5,83 8-842), or pouring sleep over them (Stat. Theb. 2,144 f.). Poets know of two sides of H.: on the one hand, like + Eros, he is a force affecting both gods and humans (Hom. Il. 14,233) and, as sweet and pleasant sleep (ibid. 242 and 354), the liberator from cares (Soph. Phil. 827832; Ov. Met. 11,623 f.; Sen. Herc. f. 1066-1081). On the other hand, closely connected with > Death, he can be baleful (Verg. Aen. 6,278; 5,838-861: death of Palinurus). In mythology H. plays a part in the history of + Endymion (representations on Roman sarcophagi). He has no cultic significance. The only record is for Troezen, in Paus. 2,31,3: an altar and sacrifices to him

SOLYMI

1 F.Koxs, B.Kupke, Lykien, 1989

2 E.KOSMETATOU,

The Hero Solymos on the Coinage of Termessos Major, in: SNR 76, 1997, 41-63.

H.B.

Somatophylakes (owyatopbdaxec/somatophylakes; from s6ma = ‘body’ and phylattein = ‘keep guard’; sing. somatophylax) were among the Greeks the bodyguards of high-ranking personages — sometimes nobles themselves (e.g. Diod. Sic. 14,43,3; cf. Hdt. 7,205; 8,124; Xen. Hell. 6,4,14). Two circles of attendants and guards surrounded > Alexander [4] the Great, the ‘Companions’ (+ Hetairoi) and the somatophylakes, some of whom could also be entrusted with assignments far away from the king [1. 1,32 ff.]. In this way, somatophylax (and dGexiompatodvAaE/archisomatophylax, ‘arch-bodyguard’) came to denote a rank at the Hellenistic courts (> Court titles B.). 1 BERVE.

A.ME.

Somnium Neronis. A Latin text, appended in the 6th cent. to the so-called Gospel of Nicodemus (Acta Pilati,

see -» New Testament Apocrypha), whose narrative sections can be traced by way of > Rufinus [6] and + Eusebius [7] to > Iosephus [4] Flavius. It is about Jesus appearing in a dream to the emperor — Nero and announcing to him Vespasian’s revenge on the Jews (ch. 1), the omens of the destruction of Jerusalem (ch. 2), the

destruction itself and the killing of the Jews (ch. 3). The remainder (ch. 4-12) consists of a > cento of OT quotations prognosticating predict these events. The significance of the text lies in these pre-Jeromian Bible quotations.

and the Muses (images of H.: ibid. 2,10,2; 3,18,1). On

the > Cypselus Chest H. and Thanatos were represented as sleeping children in the arms of Nyx (ibid. 5,18,1); both also appear as bearers of dead heroes and men on numerous Attic vases. In art H. is mostly depicted as a winged boy with various attributes (poppy stem, horn with soporific juices, staff), sometimes — as in

Roman literature — also himself sleeping. As an embodiment of beneficial sleep he is occasionally represented together with > Asclepius and > Hygieia. Drawing on invocations of S. in hymn and prayer forms in ancient poets (Sen. Herc. f. 1066-1081; Stat. Silv. 5,4; Orph. H. 85), neo-Latin authors wrote poems on S., often combined with a love motif, to which the elegiac form of the texts corresponds. ~» Death; > Dreams

Ep1TIoNns: E.v. DoBscHUTz, in: Journal of Theological Studies 16, 1914/15, I-27.

J. Bazant, s. v. Hypnos, LIMC Suppl., 643-645; C.Lo-

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

DAU, Somnus. Neulateinische Dichtung an und iiber den Schlaf, 1998; G.W6nRLE, Hypnos, der Allbezwinger,

G.RUWENKAMP,

s.v. Pilatus-Literatur,

in: $.DUpp, W.GEERLINGS (eds.), Lexikon der antiken christlichen Literatur, 1998, 508 f. J.GR.

Somnus (also Sopor, Greek “Yavoc/Hypnos). As a god personifying sleep, Hypnos (= H.) is already mentioned in the Iliad, where Hera visits him on Lemnos and asks him to lull Zeus to sleep (Hom. Il. 14,230-360). In return she promises him Pasithea [2], one of the Graces (cf. Catull. 63,42 f.). Once he had done this, so that Hera could inflict harm on Heracles after the first destruction of Troy, H. had to flee from Zeus’s anger to ~ Nyx (Night). He then hides from Zeus in the form of a night bird and sends him to sleep so that Poseidon can help the Greeks. H. and his twin brother > Thanatos (Death) also take the dead > Sarpedon [1] to his native Lycia (Hom. Il. 16,671-673). As sons of > Nyx, the

‘mighty gods’ H. and Thanatos are located by Hesiod in ~ Tartaros (Hes. Theog. 211 f.; 756-759). According to Lucian, H. rules over the island of dreams (Verae

CHIN, s. v. Hypnos/Somnus, LIMC 5.1, 591-609; B. WIN-

1995.

J.STE.

Somtutefnakht (Egyptian Zm}-twy-by.f-nhtt). Head of the Egyptian city of > Heracleopolis Magnac. 660630 BC, naval commander and supervisor of Upper Egypt, related to the royal house, an important ally of ~» Psammetichus [1] I when

the latter extended power to Middle and Upper Egypt.

his

G. Vittmann, Der demotische Papyrus Rylands 9, 1998, 708-713.

KJ.-W.

Sondergotter. A modern term describing deities, primarily in Roman religion, whose role was limited to one particular activity only and whose name described that role (e.g. + Obarator; > Stata Mater). The term has its origin in [rx. 276-301]: Sondergétter there designates deities in the second of three phases of a supposed reli-

629

630

gious evolution. The first phase were the Augenblicksgotter (anonymous deities connected with only one ac-

melody raises problems: the specified octave would lead us to expect different tonal centres; the fifth-based diatonic melody and a rhythm levelling out the textual metres suggest comparisons with folk music.

tivity); from the sondergétter evolved the > pantheon

of personalized deities. The modern concept of sondergétter synthesises the Romans’ contradictory, primarily literary tradition of their own ‘early’ gods, despite its concomitant problems. For example, the Di > Indigetes and the Di > Novensides are indigenous concepts, but their original meaning is unclear; moreover, there is no consensus as to which deities constituted the group of indigetes [2; 3]. Neither did attempts at classification in Roman literature become canonical (certi dei: Varro, Antiquitates rerum divinarum fr. 87 test. CARDAUNS); nevertheless,

since [4], all three concepts can be found as classificatory categories in modern literature. The term sondergétter was accepted in the United

Kingdom [5; 6] because of anthropological interest there in such terms as > numen and mana, as well as related evolutionary theories of a (pre-)animistic phase in the history of religion [7.246 f.]. In Germany, [8. 306*] (cf. [4]) used the term in a modified form, as did other, ethnographic and comparative scholars such as [9. 88-90], whereas the majority of German classicists (following W1LAMowITZ) rejected [1]’s method and conclusions [1o. no. 35; 11. 314 f.; 12. 97-113]. Among scholars, the term sondergétter and its underlying evolutionist thesis meet full acceptance by some [13] and is used cautiously [14. 36-62] and even rejected completely [15] by others. But even if the evolutionist theories that led to its formation have proved to be untenable, the term remains an occasionally useful modern descriptive category. -~ Personification 1 H.UsENER, Gotternamen, +1948 (1896) 2R.PETER, s. v. Indigitamenta, ROSCHER 2.1, 187-233, 3 O. RICHTER, s. v. Indigitamenta, RE 9, 1334-1367 4G.WissowaA, Religion und Kultus der Romer, *1912 5 W.W.

Fow er, The Religious Experience of the Roman People, 1911,161-164 6H.Rosg, Italian sondergéotter, in: JRS 3, 1913, 233-241 7 C.R. PHILLIPS, W. BuRKERT, In Partibus Romanorum, in: Religion 30, 2000, 245-258 8 G.Wissowa, Gesammelte Abhandlungen, 1904 9H.MetteE, Nekrolog einer Epoche, in: Lustrum 22, 1979/80, 5-106 10 W.CALDER, Usener und Wilamowitz,*1994

11SCHLESIER

12R.Kany, Mnemosyne

als Programm, 1987 13 H. WaGENVOORT, Roman Dynamism, 1947. 14DuMéziIL_ 15 J.SCHEID,s. v. Indigetes, OCD}, 755. CRP.

Song of Sicilus (Seikilos). The only surviving ancient Greek song with musical notation whose origin is neither liturgical nor dramatic. It is inscribed on a grave stele from the rst cent. AD, found in Tralles (Asia minor) in 1883; now in Copenhagen, NM (inv. 14897). The song is preceded by a votive inscription and followed by anow mostly destroyed explanation, both in the name of Sicilus (Zeixtdoc/Seikilos), the donor of the stele. The text of the song, consisting of four iambic dimeters, exhorts: “As long as you live, shine!” The

SONGS

1 W. ANDERSON, Music and Musicians in Ancient Greece, 1994, 222-227 2TH. MATHIESEN, Apollo’s Lyre, 1999, 148-151. RO.HA.

Songs I. ANCIENT NEAR EasT

II. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

I. ANCIENT NEAR EAST Many song genres are attested in Mesopotamia (beginning in approx. 2600 BC), in Egypt (from the

24th/23th cents. BC onwards), among the Hittites (14th/13th cent.), in > Ugarit (14th/13th cents.) and in the OT (see below). There is no uniform genre classification, since hybrid forms are common. The ancient terminology is only of limited help. The umbrella term ‘cultic poetry’ refers to the literary, lyric form of song. The term ‘song’ is related to the type of performance, i.e. singing with or without instrumental accompaniment. Texts from Mesopotamia and Egypt as well as the psalms from the OT give some indication of the type of instrumental accompaniment used; so far, musical notation is attested only in texts from Ugarit, located in northern Syria (> Music). The individual verses of Sumerian and Akkadian songs are identical to the written line; this is not the case with Egyptian texts. Egyptian, Sumerian and Akkadian songs can be divided into stanzas (some of them already have stanza divisions from ancient times), which in some cases differ in length within a song. In Sumerian and Akkadian songs, stanza divisions are often marked on the clay tablets with a horizontal line. Choruses and antiphons also serve to structure the song. Most of the extant songs have words relating to a cult (hence their denomination as ‘cultic songs’): hymns (songs of praise) to gods (in Egypt almost exclusively to the sun god; in Ugarit to Baal: TUAT 2, 819-823; Sumerian and Akkadian hymns sometimes take the form of self-praise of a deity: e.g. TUAT 2, 646-649), hymns to statues of gods, to rulers, temples, cities, ritual objects; > prayers with hymnic passages or in song form; in Mesopotamia, dirges with litanies, hymnic passages and, in their final sections, requests [8], which can thus can also be classified as prayers. The Hittite tradition includes only few songs (TUAT 2, 791; 796-799; 803-808, prayers with hymnic passages). However, Hittite texts mention numerous ritual

contexts which include singing [10]. The many Hattic festival songs have remained largely incomprehensible. In some > colophons [2], various Mesopotamian and Hittite myths are referred to as songs (myths of > Kumarbi, Ullikummi and Erra [4]). Mesopotamian myths and epics contain hymns or hymnic passages. War songs are mentioned in Hittite texts [10. 487]. The victory song of Deborah (Judg 5) is a hymn to Yahweh with

SONGS

narrative sections; a hymn of David to Yahweh (2 Sam

22) also includes thanksgiving for a victory. Motifs from folk songs are included in literary and traditional songs from Mesopotamia and Egypt. A drinking song from Mesopotamia has been preserved, with references to topics from — wisdom literature [7. 894f.]. Egyptian revelry poetry (known as ‘harpist’s songs’ and ‘love songs’) is situated in the context of > festivals; these poems are an invitation to join in reyelry, reminding the listener that human life is short and precious (TUAT 2, 833), as in the harpist’s songs that are “in the tombs of the ancestors” and that “elevate this life and disparage the hereafter” [1. 972]. Love songs from Egypt (13th/12th cents. BC), some of which were collected in the Book of a Thousand Songs [11], and from Mesopotamia are part of the respective literary traditions, and are hence often handed down independent of their original contexts. Some Egyptian and Akkadian love songs are integrated into incantation rituals (e.g., against a rival [5. 68] or to gain the attention of the beloved [12. 8]). Sumerian love songs are part of the mythological tradition of Inanna/— Ishtar and Dummuzi/Tammuz

[9; 13]. On a secondary level,

the love songs that are part of the OT Song of Solomon have been interpreted in terms of religious songs. David’s dirge for Saul and Jonathan (2 Sam 1:19-27) was sung; it contains narrative elements. Lullabies in the context of incantations are attested in Mesopotamia (18th and 7th cents.; [6. 34f. et passim]). There is evidence of Egyptian work songs from the 2 5th/24th cents. onwards [3]; in Mesopotamia they are attested only indirectly (cf. [4. 329] on the onomatopoetic parallels between Sumerian/Akkadian alala and Greek diadd/ alala, éiadGew/alalazo). — Hymn; > Literature II.; > Music

1 J.ASSMANN, s.v. Harfnerlieder, LA 2, 972-982 2Id., s.v. Kultlied, LA 3, 852-855 3 E. BRUNNER-TRAUT, s.v. Arbeitslied, LA 1, 378-385

4 Chicago Assyrian Diction-

ary A/1, 1964, 328f., s.v. alala

Ritualtafel der sogenannten BERG-HALTON

5D.O. Epzarp, Zur

Love Lyrics, in: F.ROCH-

(ed.), Language, Literature and History,

1987, 57-69 6 W.FarRBER, Schlaf, Kindchen, Schlaf: Mesopotamische Baby-Beschw6rungen und _ -Rituale, 1989 7B.R. Foster, Before the Muses, *1996 8 J. KRECHER, S.v. Klagelied, RLA 6,1-6 9 G.LEICK, Sex and Eroticism in Mesopotamian Literature, 1994 10S.pE Martino, s.v. Musik, RLA 8, 483-488

11 D. Meeks, s.v. Liebeslied, LA 3, 1048-52 12 S.ScHorTr, Alltagliche Liebeslieder, 1950 13 Y.SEFATI, Love Songs in Sumerian Literature, 1998 14 W.v. SODEN, C. WILCKE, s.v. Hymne, RLA 4, 539-548 15 C.Witcke, Formale Gesichtspunkte in der sumerischen Literatur, in: Assyriological Studies 20, 1976, 205316.

632

631

J-RE.

II. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY B. ANCIENT LITERATURE

A. DEFINITION

C. IN-

FLUENCE

A. DEFINITION The Greek terms for song, @51 (Gide), Godt) (aoide), uédog (mélos) and tyvos (hymnos), refer primarily to a song sung by a chorus or soloist, in most cases with

instrumental accompaniment. When the ancient songs lost their connection with a real-life context during the Hellenistic period, and Greek melic poetry (— Lyric poetry) became artificial ‘book poetry’, the terms were also used for poems of various genres that were never intended to be sung. This tradition continued in Latin poetry, where the term carmen could be used for any kind of poetry or song that was sung or recited, as well as for those not intended to be performed orally. However, only those forms of poetry that were intended to be sung are to be considered songs. B. ANCIENT LITERATURE In Greek poetry, all Melic genres of monodic or choral lyric poetry are considered to be songs; a distinction is made between art songs, whose authors are generally known, and anonymous — folk songs. The majority of extant Greek art songs are choral songs from (a) the realm of cult (among others, songs containing a request or songs of thanksgiving: > Hymn, > Paean; choral songs in the cult of Dionysus: > Dithyramb; procession songs: > Prosodion; songs for girls’ choruses: + Partheneion, -» Daphnephorikon; dancing songs: + Hyporchema) as well as (b) from the secular realm

(wedding songs: -» Hymenaios, epithalamion; dirges: + Threnos; songs of praise: > Encomium; songs of victory: > Epinikion; etc.). The art songs of Greek monodic lyric poetry include, in addition to cult songs (+ Hymn), above all poems with sympotic (> Skolion) and erotic content. From Euripides on, Greek drama included not only choral songs, but also elaborately composed theatrical arias. The Greek culture of folk songs during the older eras is largely documented in the collections of Carmina Popularia and Convivalia (PMG 847-917; [3]), which contain cult songs, love songs, magic songs, drinking songs and songs for various occasions. The songs of the Imperial period reflect the transition to an accent-based metrical system [2]. Very few Latin songs have been preserved. A distinction should be made between (a) cult songs (+ Carmen

Arvale; > Carmen Saliare and others; songs of forgiveness; magic songs; procession and festival songs: reaper songs at the festival of Ceres, vintage songs at the vintage festival, Hor. Carm. saec.), as well as (b) songs outside of the cult (table songs, very few ancestral songs; different view in [6. 20r]), songs of triumph, work, lamentation, sleeping, scolding, love, travelling, etc. [5]. According to ancient sources, the > /udi [II. C.] scaenici introduced Roman folk songs (joking songs) to the stage; however, it remains a matter of dispute whether the solo > cantica of Latin + comedy originated in folk songs.

633

634

In the Christian era, hymns and psalmody followed the song tradition of classical antiquity to some degree [5. 367-397]; Eastern forms also found their way into the Latin West through the Greek Church (Christian

Carponianus (whom S. calls ‘son’) and treating its subjects with a very uneven degree of thoroughness. Its overall ordering principle is the status doctrine (— status) of > Hermogenes [7], from which, however, S. allows himself to deviate occasionally in reference to subdivision, terminology and sequence. The importance of this treatise lies in the unique insight it affords into the everyday practice of ancient rhetorical teaching. Also preserved in S.’s name are a commentary on Hermogenes and extracts from ~ progymnasmata, Metamouoetc/Metapoieéseis (paraphrases of sections of Homer and Demosthenes) and prolegomena to Aelius — Aristides [3]. The identification of the author of these writings with that of the Di(h)airesis Zetémdton is

— Music).

C. INFLUENCE Along with spiritual songs (hymns for liturgy and private devotions), the ancient pagan song forms continued to exist in Latin medieval literature, for example in the theatre [5. 388-400], in court poetry (Cambridge songs) and in Goliardic poetry (Carmina Burana; +> Medieval Latin II.). In addition, lyric poetry from classical antiquity (particularly Catullus, Virgil, Horace, Ovid) was set to music and sung. The tradition of setting ancient and early modern Greek and Latin lyric poetry to music is still alive today [x]. + Folk songs; > Hymn; > Lyric poetry; > Melos [2]; + Metre; + Music; > Ode; > Work songs; > Lyric POETRY 1 J. NovAK, Cantica Latina, poetarum veterum novorumque carmina ad cantum cum clavibus modis, 1985 2 A.Dinie, Die Anfange der griechischen akzentuierenden Verskunst, in: Hermes 82, 1954, 182-199 3J.M. Epmonps, Lyra Graeca, 3, 1967, 488-581

4A.J. NEu-

BECKER, Altgriechische Musik, 1977 5 G. WILLE, Musica Romana, 19676 Id., Quellen zur Verwendung miindlicher Texte in romischen Gesangen vorliterarischer Zeit, in: G. Voct-Sprra (ed.), Studien zur vorliterarischen

Periode im friihen Rom, 1989, 199-225.

TF.

Sontius (also: Isontius, Aesontius). River in Venetia (Tab. Peut. 4,5; Cassiod. Var. 1,18,1; 1,29; with no mention of the name: Str. 5,1,8; Hdt. 8,4,2). The source is in the Alpes Carnicae, it is joined from the left by the Frigidus (modern Vipacco) and flows into the Adriatic Sea between Aquileia [1] and Tergeste, modern Isonzo. During the yearly snow-melt, it swells strongly and is difficult to cross. It was crossed by the Via Gemina (Aquileia—Emona)

near

Pons

Sontii

(modern

Mai-

nizza) and by the Via Flavia (Aquileia — Pola) near the sources of the Timavus. A cult of Aesontius is documented in dedications [1]. Theoderic the Great defeated

Odoacer at the S. in AD 489 (Lord. Get. 57). 1 L.Bertaccut, Il ponte romano sull’Isonzo, in: Journal

SOPHAENETUS

uncertain. EDITIONS:

Diairesis Zetematon: WALZ

this subject: D. INNEs,

8,1-385 (cf. on

M. WINTERBOTTOM, S. the Rhetor.

Studies in the Text of the D. Z., 1988). Hermogenescomm.: WALZ 5,1-211, see also 4,39-846. Prolegomena to Ael. Aristides:;W.DinporF (ed.), Ael. Aristid., 1829 (repr. 1964), vol. 3, 744. Paraphrases: H. RaBE, Aus Rhe-

toren-Handschriften,

1908,

127-151;

S.GLOCKNER, Aus S. Metasoujoets, in: RhM

in: RhM

63,

65, 1910,

504-514. Progymnasmata: H.RaBeE Progymnasmata, 1926, 57-70. LITERATURE:

G.A.

KENNEDY,

Greek

(ed.), Aphtonios, Rhetoric

under

Christian Emperors, 1983, 104-108; Id., A New History of Classical Rhetoric, 1994, 218-220; F.W. Lenz, The Aristeides Prolegomena, 1959; D.A. RussEL, Greek Declamation, 1983, 123-128.

M.W.

[2] S. of Paphos. Hellenistic poet, known only from ~ Athenaeus [3], who mentions S. six times as a parodist (maew56c/pardidos) and five times as a composer of

+ Phlyakes (p\vaxoyeadoc/phlyakographos) [1; 2]. Frr. 1, 13 and 24 suggest that S. lived in Alexandria, while the mention in fr. 19 of Thibron, who killed ~ Harpalus in 324 BC, would indicate dates in the time of > Alexander [4] the Great or shortly after. Athenaeus preserves 12 (possibly 15) play titles, mostly on mythical subjects, and 25 frr., of which the longest (fr. 6: 12 iambic trimeters) contains a barb aimed at the

Stoa. 1 CGF 192-197 2 A. OLtvigrI (Ed.), Frammenti della commedia greca 2, *1947, 27-42 3 A. KOrTE, s. v. S. (9), RE 3 A, roor f. T.HI.

of Ancient Topography 9, 1999, 67-80 2 V.VEDALDI IasBEZ, La Venetia orientale e |’Histria (Studi e ricerche

sulla Gallia Cisalpina 5), 1994, 109-113.

GU.

Sopater (Zwmateoc/Sopatros). [1] Greek rhetorician of the 4th cent. AD, contemporary and perhaps pupil of > Himerius (WALz 8,3 18,29, where the reading 6 coddc 6 huéteQosg “TIuéQuog ‘our learned teacher Himerius’ is probably to be preferred). S. probably taught at Athens (Wauz 8,55,6 f.). These pieces of information come from his main work, the Ataigeoic Zntmatwv/Di(h)airesis Zéetématon (approx.

‘Discussion of Questions’), a collection of 82 fictional ~ controversiae, dedicated to an otherwise unknown

Sophaenetus (Lodaivetod/Sophainetos). From Stymphalus; despite his advanced age one of the leaders of Cyrus [3] the Younger’s mercenaries in his struggle with his brother Artaxerxes [2] II (Xen. An. 5,3,1; 6,5,13): He recruited mercenaries among the Greeks (1,1,11; 1,2,1) and took 1000 hoplites to Cyrus in Sardis or Celaenae (1,2,3 or 1,2,9). On the return journey he led a convoy of ships from Trapezus to Cerasus (5,3,1), but because of his casual attention of finances had to pay a fine (5,8,1). Only Stephanus [7] from Byzantium mentions an Andbasis Kyrou by S. (F 1-4). It is held to be authentic

635

636

by several [1; 2] and is considered the ultimate source —

possibilities to Attic vase painting. In this he also uses particular painting techniques, which create a very lively contrast between the narrative frieze and animal friezes: white areas directly on the clay surface, red for contour lines and internal drawings (e.g. richly decorated women’s garments) and clay-ground garments with red outlines. Almost all figures are named (red labels). The best preserved is a dinos on a tall pedestal in London (BM 1971.11~-1.1) with a festal procession of gods at the wedding of Peleus and Thetis, a free and lively representation. A replica of this dinos stood on the Acropolis, where > Clitias, who also depicts this procession in a very similar composition, must have seen it. Some of S. other themes, partly new: funerary games for Patroclus [x], wedding of Menelaus [1] and Helena [1], wrestling bout between Heracles [1] and Nereus, Heracles’ battle with the Centaurs and Dionysian scenes with satyrs. For his densely figured friezes S. chooses dinoi, krateres and a louterion; his lebes gamikos and volute krater are the first occurrences of these forms in Attic pottery. > Pottery; > Vase painting, black-figured

SOPHAENETUS

by way of the > Hellenica Oxyrhynchia and > Ephorus — for Diodorus’ [18] non-Xenophontic parts in book 14 (19-313 37,1-4); others, however, consider it — probably with more justification — to be a later forgery because of the poor attestation [3. 372, note 3; 4. 267269]. 1 E. Bux, s. v. S., RE 3 A, ro08-1013

= 2 F. SCHROMER,

Der Bericht des S. tiber den Zug der Zehntausend, typewritten diss. Munich 1954 3 E.SCHWARTZ, in: A.V. Mess, Untersuchungen iiber Ephoros, in: RhM 61, 1906, 3723 4H.D. WestLake, Studies in Thucydides and Greek History, 1989. EpITIONS: FGrH 109 (with comm.).

K.MEI.

Sophanene see > Sophene Sophanes (Lwhavyc/Sophdnés). Athenian from Decelea, son of Eutychides (Hdt. 6,92,3; 9,73,1). In 490 BC after the battle of Marathon he refused to honour Miltiades [2] with a wreath (Plut. Cimon 8,1), since the victory was understood to be a success of the > démos as a whole [1. 193]. S. distinguished himself by particular bravery in the Athenians’ war with Aegina in 488/7 (Hdt. 6,92; 9,75; Paus. 1,29,5) and in the battle of Plataeae in 479 (Hdt. 9,73-75; Plut. Cato maior 29,2). He fell in 465/4 as a stratégos and one of the commanders of the colonists who advanced from Enneahodoi into the territory of the > Edones and were annihilated at Drabescus (Hdt. 9,75; Thuc. 1,100,3; schol. Aeschin. 2,31; Paus. 1,29,4-5; IG D> 1144). 1 E.SrerN-HOLKEsKAMP, Adelskultur schaft, 1989 2PA 13409.

und _ PolisgesellK-W.W.

Sophene (Lwonvi/Sophene; Byzantine also TCopnvi/ Tzophéne). Region to the east of the Euphrates, opposite the Melitene and to the north of Commagene, Urartian Supa, Assyrian Suppu; Syrian and Armenian docu-

mentation. S. was often administratively linked with Sophanene to the east. Geographically S. was usually considered part of - Armenia. Kings of S. are documented from the 2nd cent. BC until 54 AD (Tac. Ann. 13,7). L.DILLEMANN, Haute Mésopotamie Orientale et pays adjacents, 1962, 116-124; F.H. WeIssBachH, s. v. S., RE 3 A, 1015-1019. K.KE.

Sophia see > Wisdom Sophilus (Zdud0¢g; Sophilos). [1] Early Attic black-figured vase painter, c. 600-570 BC, the earliest whose name is known (3 painter signatures verified). S. is one of the representatives of the animal frieze style, as is the > Gorgo Painter, to whom he is very close. His significance, however, is founded on a mythological frieze with which S. introduces new

G.Baxir, S., 1981; D.Wrtiiams, S. in the British Museum, in: Greek Vases in the J. Paul Getty Museum 1,

1983, 9-34.

H.M.

[2] Poet of Middle Comedy (4th cent. BC), from Sicyon or Thebes [t1. test. 1]. rr fragments (a total of 19 verses)

and 9 play titles survive: “AvdgoxAfc/Androklés (‘Androcles’), Papo (Gdmos, ‘The wedding’), Ania (Délia, ‘The girl from Delos’), “Eyyevgidvov (Encheiridion, “The dagger’), KiOaewddc/Kitharoidos (‘The citharode’), Hagaxatadixn (Parakatathéké, ‘The deposit), Luvteéyovtes (Syntréchontes, “The co-runners’), Tuvddgews i Anda/Tynddreds é@ Léda (‘Tyndareos or Leda’), ®vAa@yoc/Phylarchos or Pikaeyoc/Philarchos (‘Phylarchus’ or ‘Philarchus’). Fragment 3 contains mockery of the philosopher — Stilpo. 1 PCG VII, 1989, 594-599.

T.HI.

Sophists (from 4 copiotxn, sc. teyvn/hé sophistike, sc. téchné, ‘the sophistic, sc. art/method’, e.g. Pl. Soph. 231rb 8). I. TERMINOLOGY II. SOPHISTS AS EDUCATORS AND PHILOSOPHERS III. SOPHISTS AND POLITICS

I. TERMINOLOGY The use of the word ‘sophistic’ as a noun, as has been adopted into modern languages, seems not to predate ~ Philostratus [5] (VS 481, AD 237/8). His distinction between an ‘ancient’ (archaia) and a > Second Sophistic (deutéra) was taken up in 1903 by Hermann Diels,

who gave the title Altere Sophistik (‘Elder Sophistic’) to the final section of his Fragmente der Vorsokratiker (‘Fragments of the Presocratics’). Most of the authors collected there were also listed as representatives of the ‘ancient sophistic’ by Philostratus: - Protagoras [1], ~ Gorgias [2], > Prodicus, + Thrasymachus, > Hippias [5], > Antiphon [4], — Critias.

637

638

For Philostratus, Gorgias was the ‘father’ of the ancient Sophistic, with the effect that his pupils > Polus

sciences. On the other hand, Protagoras in Plato boasts of teaching nothing of these, but only ‘the art of sound judgment’ (euboulia), otherwise referred to as the art of politics (politike techné; Pl. Prot. 318e 5-319a 7). ~» Socrates [2] may also have offered such tuition (cf. Xen. Mem. 1,6,15), thus appearing in the eyes of his contemporaries (~ Aristophanes [3]) as a ‘sophist’. With the exception of > Antiphon [4] and Socrates, all sophists known by name today were peripatetic foreigners without citizenship, lacking even the status of metoikot (- Metoikos). These teachers of politics took no part in the politics of their place of activity (here, too, parallels can be drawn to Socrates, who however was an Athenian; the only exception is Antiphon). Probably because of the novelty of these circumstances, sophists attracted the mistrust and hostility of conservative circles (which are not necessarily to be equated with aris-

[1] and — Isocrates were also considerd part of it (Alcidamas, however, is not mentioned). D1ELs, conversely, restricts himself to the > Presocratics, and thus does not make mention of contemporaries of — Plato [1].

The present-day portrayal of the sophists is still strongly influenced by Diets’ rearrangement; yet it is in need of revision in two respects. (1) Unlike the term sophistés (‘sophist’, see below), the adjective sophistiké (‘sophistic’) is not mentioned before Plato. It is thus possible to discern here (as is also assumed in the case of rhetoriké[16]) a Platonic neologism forged with critical intent, which robs the concept of Sophism of much of its supposed historical objectivity. (2) If, following the chronology derived from DiELs, one distinguishes between Sophists and Socratics, it is necessary to be aware that Plato was the first to ignore this very distinction. In the persons of > Euthydemus [4], > Dionysodorus [5] and ~ Protagoras [1], he criticizes Socrates’ pupil — Antisthenes [1] (Pl. Euthd. 283e-284e; 285d-286c; cf. Aristot. Metaph. 1024b 32-34), and even defines the Socratic method as ‘sophistic’ (Pl. Soph. 226a—23 rb). The term ‘sophistic’ is thus (esp. in Plato, who probably coined it) the expression of a negative value judgment, and does not establish any objective link between the individuals thus judged. The modern term ‘Sophist Movement’ also is a product of the illusion emergent from the contrast between ‘philosophy’ and ‘sophistry’ formulated by Plato. The dissociation from the Platonic view of the sophistic hence requires, beyond the rehabilitation of the sophists (by HEGEL [4] and George GrotTE [5]), the acceptance of the fact that there were as many ‘sophistics’ as there were ‘sophists’. Moreover, the word sophistés (‘master of one’s craft, expert’), already attested some time before Plato (Pind. Isthm. 5(4),28; Aesch. PV 62), originally meant nothing pejorative, but probably described the same type of man (such as the > Seven Sages (Hdt. 1,29) or > Pythagoras (Hdt. 4,95)) as subsequently did the word philosophos popularised by Socratic/Platonic circles. According to Plato, Protagoras was the first to call himself (or have himself called) a ‘sophist’ (Pl. Prt. 317b 4). If so, he and not Philostratus would be the founding father of Sophism. In Plat. Prt. 317b 4-5, ‘to be a sophist’ means ‘to educate people’. II]. SOPHISTS AS EDUCATORS AND PHILOSO-

PHERS Perhaps the only common feature among all sophists of the late 5th cent. BC was this: they pursued the career, hitherto unknown in Greek cities, of a peripatetic teacher, giving tuition in return for payment and hence being independent of personal patrons. The word sophistés, at first merely a synonym of sophds (‘wise man, sage’), had thus acquired the sense of ‘teacher’ in the period immediately before Socrates. On the one hand, sophists taught new skills: + mathematics (including > astronomy and > music theory) and natural

SOPHISTS

tocratic circles).

This tuition, remote from political practice, could extend only to the means of political activity, and especially to its most important toolin the democratically structured state (— Polis): the technique of oratory (> Rhetoric) and reasoning (— Dialectics). Hence, the ‘sophistic’ in its usual definition, already even to Plato (Pl. Soph. 23.4c-23 5a), consisted solely of abstract oratory. The predominance of the facility with words in Sophistic teaching also explains why a number of sophists (Prodicus, Protagoras, Hippias) developed a theoretical interest in language (problems of linguistics, stylistics and grammar). Some (Gorgias, On Non-Being or On Nature; Protagoras, Truth) even developed an independent philosophy in which they portrayed the individual as a linguistic being, and language itself as the sole admissible reality, or as the measure of all reality. Not for nothing did Plato, in the dialogue Theaetetus, have Protagoras appear as the representative of the whole spectrum of Greek thought (except Parmenides); and even Aristotle (Aristot. Metaph. 4,4,1005b 454,8,1012b 31) still made it his business to counter his relativism. III. SOpHISTS AND POLITICS Though the soil of the emergent Greek democracy (> Demokratia) provided the conditions for them to practise their profession, by no means all of the sophists were democrats. The entire spectrum of political positions is represented among them, including the refusal to avow oneself to any political order at all. Protagoras is the earliest known theoretician of democracy and the social contract; Antiphon, by contrast, was an uncompromising partisan of the Four Hundred (— Tetrakosioi). Hippias allegedly advocated that one follow natural law rather than the conventions that make up the rules in the single communities. > Aristippus [3], who ‘taught as a Sophist’ and ‘was the first of the Socratics to demand payment’ (Diog. Laert. 2,65), preferred ‘to be a stranger everywhere’ rather than ‘confine himself to any single city’ (Xen. Mem. 2,1,13). The sophists, contrary to the accusation generally levelled at

SOPHISTS

640

639

them since Plato (e.g. Euthd. 272b 1), did thus in no

Sophocles (Zopoxdtjc/Sophokles).

way defend any random standpoint, political or other-

[1] The sth cent. BC Attic tragedian

wise.

A. Lire B. SURVEY OF SOPHOCLES’ WORK C. DRAMATURGY, THEOLOGY, VIEW OF HUMANIry D. RECEPTION

The sophists’ loss of importance in the history of political philosophy is the consequence solely of the loss of their writings. As representatives of a new professional group, which taught for money and thus became associated in the popular mind with the development of currency circulation and maritime trade, the sophists helped (in spite of the respect they showed for the traditions of the cities they visited, cf. Pl. Hp. mai. 28 5d— 286b) to dissolve traditional social values. In teaching young people knowledge which unmasked their fathers, they simultaneously undermined traditional forms of transfer of both knowledge and power within families and communities. As foreign observers of local traditions and cults, as cosmopolitan eye-witnesses (cf. + cosmopolitanism) of the relativity of convictions of belief, as disseminators and inventors of new theories of man and the cosmos, and as instruments — even initiators — of the rationalisation of political, social and family life, they propagated a religious scepticism whether they wanted to or not. The — asebeia trials of Protagoras and Socrates are evidence not of the defendants’ ‘irreligiosity’ but of the disquiet triggered by these new currents of thinking. + Atheism; > PHILOSOPHY; — Plato [1]; — Political philosophy; -— Rhetoric; -> Scepticism; — Second Sophistic;

+ Socrates;

Ep.: 1 DreLs/KRANZ, no. 79-90 2 M.UNTERSTEINER, Sofisti. Testimonianze e frammenti, vol. 1-2, *1961; vol. 3, 1954, vol. 4,1962 3R.K. SpRAGUE (ed.), The Older Sophists, 1972.

Lit.: 4 G.W. F. HEGEL, Vorlesungen iiber die Geschichte der Philosophie IJ, in: Id., Werke, vol. 14, 1833, 5-42 5 G.GroTE, History of Greece, vol. 8, 1850, 479-544 6 H.GOMPERZ, 1965)

Sophistik

7W.NEsTLE,

und

Rhetorik,

1912

(repr.

Vom Mythos zum Logos, *1942

(repr. 1975) 8 E.DupREEL, Les Sophistes, 1948 9 M. UNTERSTEINER, I Sofisti, *1967 (repr. 1996; English 1954, French 1993) 10 GuTHRIE,vol.3 11 C.J. CLassEN (ed.), Sophistik, 1976 12 G.B. KERFERD, The Sophistic Movement, 1981 13 Id. (ed.), The Sophists and Their Legacy, 1981 14H Aexaia Lodrottxy. The Sophistic Movement (Symposion 1982), 1984 15 B.CASSIN (ed.), Positions de la sophistique, 1986 16 E.SCHIAPPA,

Did Plato Coin “Rhetorike”?, in: AJPh 111, 1990, 457470 17F.Wo ter, Le chasseur chassé: les définitions du sophiste, in: P. AUBENQUE (ed.), Etude sur le Sophiste de

Platon, 1991, 17-52 18 A.HourcaDE, Les sophistes et Pécole d’Abdére (PhD thesis, Rennes 1999). BIBLIOGR.: 19 C.J. CLASSEN, in: Elenchos 6, 1985, 75140 20 G.B. KERFERD, H.FLAsHAR, in: GGPh? 2.1, 1998, 108-137.

MLNA.

A. LIFE The most important records are the vita which has survived in several manuscripts and the Suda (o 815); the complete testimonies have been collected in TrGF, vol. 4. S. was born in 497/6 BC as the son of Sophilus from the Attic deme of > Colonus. In 480 he is said to have intoned the > paean at the victory celebrations after the battle of Salamis [1]. His two sons, + lophon [2] (from his marriage with Nicostrate) and Ariston (from a liaison with Theoris of Sicyon), were also tragedians. On several occasions S. held important political offices in Athens: in 443/2 he was — hellenotamias, in 441/o he acted alongside Pericles as > strategos [I] in the Salaminian war. Furthermore he officiated as + proboulos [1] in 428 and possibly in 423/2 and from 413 to 411. Serving asa priest of the hero Halon he kept the (snake image of) > Asclepius, which had been taken from > Epidaurus, in his house, until a > temenos had been built. For this he was after his death venerated as the hero Dexion (T 69). S. died in 406, probably shortly after the Great Dionysia, at which he won first prize (DID C 20) [43. 196ff.]. He gave his debut as a tragedian in 470 (DID C 3(a)) and gained his first victory in 468 (DID A 3a 15). The story that Aeschylus [1] was defeated by him and left town in a grudge (T 36/7) is purely anecdotal (T 36/7). The number of victories S. is credited with varies from 18 (DID A 3a, 15; at the Great Dionysia) to 24 (Suda). The difference might be explained by the fact that S. like Aesch. was granted the right to have his plays re-performed posthumously. His grandson §. [3] was in charge of these performances. [43. 249-52]. S. never came third in an agon. The number of plays ascribed to him ranges from 113 (probably the correct figure handed down by Aristophanes [4] of Byzantium: 28 tetralogies plus the posthumously performed Oedipus at Colonus (OC)) via 123 (Suda) to 130 (Vita, T 1, 76f.) [41. 60f.]. The dates of the seven surviving tragedies (see B.) are uknown with the exception of Philoctetes (= Phil.; 409 v. Chr.) and OC (posthum. 401). Antigone (= Ant.) should probably be dated to 440 (not 442) to match the information from the > hypothesis [A] that S. was elected strategos because of that play [41. 48f.]. For Oedipus Rex (= OT) the period from 436 to 433 is a likely choice [41. 59]. Ajax (= Aj.) and The Trachinian Women (= Trach.) are generally considered early plays, because of their plot construction (‘diptych form’ [5 5. 145 ff.5 47. 250; 56. 341f.]), but sometimes Trach. is dated after Eur. Alc. (438). The chronological relationship between the Sophoclean Electra (=El.) and the one by Euripides [1] is still being discussed, but it is plausible that the latter was performed first [44].

641

642

According to the ancient Testimonia (T 1, 95-97; T 2, 3-5) S. introduced painted stage sets (> scenography) and the third actor (— tritagonistes). He is also said to have raised the number of chorus members from 12 to 15. Aristotle (poet. 1456a 25 = T 132) praises the way S. uses the > chorus (“like an (additional) actor)”). S. also wrote elegies (IEG II 165f.) and paeans (737 PMG [33. 366]). The authenticity of a prose work on the chorus, which has been ascribed to S., is still a matter of controversy [37. 172]. According to a selfcharacterization (T 100) found in Plut. De profectibus in virtute 7,79b S. distinguished three stages of his development as a poet: First he freed himself from his dependence on Aeschylus, next he cleansed his work from everything harsh and artificial, finally he arrived at perfect representation of character.

take when it is too late. Like Ajax, Deianira only perceives reality when she insincerely pretends to realize her mistake (436 ff.) [28. 80ff.]. 3. ANTIGONE (Avttyovn/Antigone). By the time he wrote Antigone S. had discarded the rigorous diptych form. Although there is a caesura when > Antigone [3] is led away to be executed (943), > Creon [1]’s continued presence breaks the dualistic mould. The plot is dominated by the antagonists Antigone and Creon. Antigone firmly abides by her decision to pay her last respects to her brother — Polyneices by giving him a burial against Creon’s express command. She brusquely rejects her sister Ismene’s offer of help (536 ff.), who initially failed to support her plan. The chorus characterizes her aptly

B. SURVEY OF SOPHOCLES’ WORK 1. AJAX 2. THE TRACHINIAN WOMEN

change and finally comes to his senses, even though it is too late (1270). Like an Aeschylean hero he sees himself as the victim of a cruel fate that has blinded his judgment (1271 ff.). Until the seer > Teiresias [53. 117 ff.] opens his eyes to the truth, his thinking is governed by constant fear of his overthrow; he smells conspiracies everywhere that are driven by the greed for money and

3. ANTIGONE 4. OEDIPUS REx 5. ELECTRA 6. PHILOCTETES 7. OEDIPUS ATCOLONUS 8. FRAGMENTS 1. AJAX (Aiac/Aias). The subject, taken from the Ilias Parva

and Aithiopis (— Epic cycle), the awarding of the arms of > Achilles [1] to Odysseus and the rage and suicide of — Ajax [1], had already been treated by Aesch. “Oxhwv xeiotg (Hdplon krisis, ‘the Decision over the Arms’; TrGF, vol. 3, p. 288-291). In this tragedy S. presents types of human behaviour: He focuses on the hero who transgresses normative boundaries and whose behaviour is termed > hybris by Athena already in the prologue (13 1-133). The disgrace he has brought upon himself by slaughtering sheep in the belief he was killing enemies can only be purged by suicide. Using tragic irony, S. has Ajax perceive reality only when being insincere (‘deception speech’, 646 ff. [28.75 ff.]). He is contrasted with + Odysseus, who is guided by moderation (> sophrosyne) and after Ajax’s suicide prevails over the hate-driven generals Menelaus and Agamemnon in securing Ajax’s burial. Then there is — Tecmessa, who in opposing Ajax’s aristocratic mindset holds up a ‘modern’ ideal of human responsibility (485 ff.). Ajax’s farewell speech to his son Eurysaces (545 ff.) is closely modelled on Homer; the implied contrast to Hector’s farewell from Astyanax and Andromache (Hom. Il. 6,466 ff.) exposes the questionable nature of Ajax’s heroism. 2. THE TRACHINIAN WOMEN (Toayivial Trachiniai). This play reverses the diptych form of ‘Ajax’ like a mirror image. While Ajax even after his death influences the course of events, > Heracles [1] shapes the thoughts and actions of his fellow men by the mere news of his impending arrival. Trach. is a dual tragedy, whose first part focuses on > Deianira, the wife of Heracles, who (like Oedipus) in attempting to escape fate (i.e. losing her husband’s love to the captive > Iole), is entangled in it, but only realizes her mis-

SOPHOCLES

as avtOvouOs (autdnomos, ‘living according to her own laws’, 821). Creon, on the other hand, undergoes a

power. The word ‘profit’ (xéeS0c, kérdos) serves as a

leitmotif in all his speeches. The other characters are placed between the poles represented by Antigone and Creon. Their behaviour is determined by their varying ties with the two antagonists: Ismene in contrast to Antigone typifies the aver-

age human being; she is torn between her fear of Creon and her love of Antigone. Haemon [5], Creon’s son and Antigone’s betrothed, tries to cope with the tension between the love of his bride and his father by keeping his plight to himself. It is only when he realizes that Creon is not accessible to reasonable arguments (726ff.), that he openly sides with Antigone. The behaviour of the watchman and the chorus of the Theban Council of Elders exemplifies the reactions of ordinary citizens under pressure. They know right from wrong, but fail to stand up to be counted; instead there are only occasional hints as to whose side they sympathize with (vgl. 278 f.; 370). For a long time the philological interpretation of Ant. was influenced by HEGEL’s analysis in his Lectures on Aesthetics according to which there is a clash of two equally justified positions — Creon’s claim that he is protecting the state and Antigone’s defence of unwritten laws -, i.e. a conflict of public and family interests [57. 72 ff.; 58. 129f.]. Such an interpretation, however, ignores the mindset of the contemporary audience who for political and religious reasons would have found it very difficult to see any merit in Creon’s position: Creon sees the aristocratic Thebans (the chorus) as a privy council whose secret meetings have not been legitimated by civic election. His permanent distrust of everyone violates the basic principles of democracy as they are voiced by Pericles in Thucydides’ Epitaphios (2,37).

SOPHOCLES

643

4. OEDIPUS REX

(Oidistous tHEavvoc/Oidipous tyrannos). This play is essentially about man’s ability to know and understand [363 51; 58. 83 ff.]. S. presents Oedipus’ tentative groping for the truth by devising a plot that consists of two strands, > Oedipus’s search for the murderer of + Laius [1] and the search for his own origin. These strands finally come together in an act of horrifying discovery. Right from the start the search for the perpetrator crucially hinges on ‘hope’ (éAmic, elpis) (121), a concept which — while being a threat to human understanding — is elevated by the chorus to divine status in the — parodos (158). With his thinking trapped by hope Oedipus becomes entangled in a web of illusions, the more so the closer he gets to the truth. When the truth is revealed to him by the seer > Teiresias [53. 148 ff.], who addresses him as the wanted murderer (353) and even indicates his incestuous relationship with — locaste (366f.), Oedipus’ resolve to pursue his delusions is only strengthened. To him the ruling of the Delphic oracle which is delivered by + Creon [1] and Teiresias’s prophecy are simply parts of a plot to overthrow him. Only when the term ‘crossroads’ (716) is used to describe the place where Laius was murdered does he have a first flash of recognition (754). Yet in spite of all the incontrovertible evidence pointing to him as the murderer Oedipus clings to the false information that Laius was killed by a band of robbers. It is not before the arrival of the Corinthian messenger (924 ff.) and the interrogation of the surviving eye witness (1r10ff.) that the pieces of the puzzle — the matching oracles to Laius, Oedipus and Creon and Teiresias’s prophecy - fall into place. Thus the acknowledgment of the truth - the patricide and the marriage to his mother — is forced upon Oedipus who as a result blinds himself. 5. ELECTRA (Hiéxtea/Eléktra). By postponing Orestes’s and Electra’s mutual recognition (— anagnorisis) a long way (1226), S. — in marked contrast to Aeschylus and Euripides — makes > Electra [4] herself a victim of the intrigue and turns her into a pivotal figure in the play. Acting as their personified guilty conscience Electra constantly reminds her mother ~ Clytaemnestra and her lover > Aegisthus of their crime, the murder of her father + Agamemnon. Her hopes rest exclusively on the return of her brother > Orestes [1]. The false news of his death (680 ff.) causes her temporary breakdown, but her hatred would eventually have driven her to carry out the act of revenge herself (rorg f.). Her sister Chrysothemis, who values physical freedom (339 f.) more highly than the independence of the spirit which Electra puts first (354), serves as a non-tragic foil (3 54) to the heroine, much in the vein of Antigone’s sister Ismene. Orestes, right from the outset, follows the path of revenge relentlessly. Filled with a sense of mission he is convinced that Apollo’s oracle has given him a divine mandate to ‘purify’ the household (69f.). Line 1425 concerning Apollo’s mandate could be an indication that S. conceived the play as an ‘open-ended’ tragedy by

644 posing the question (with an implicit reference to Aeschylus’ Eumenides), how the siblings could go on living after their matricide. 6. PHILOCTETES (Pthouthty/Philoktetés). Like El., this play centres on the suffering of an outcast, i.e. > Philoctetes’ life on the unpopulated island of Lemnos (which is a departure from Aeschylus’ and Euripides’ versions, in which Lemnos is populated and Philoctetes’ isolation less radical; cf. Dion [I 3], or. 62 [19. 87ff; 42. 211 ff.]). Philoctetes is filled with a deep hatred of the Greeks, especially + Odysseus. The breach of trust by Achilles’ son + Neoptolemus, who attempts to take him to Troy instead of Greece as he had promised moves him to an almost total refusal of communication. In Phil. Odysseus is presented as a power politician, who is always on the look-out for opportunities (kairds). To him, oracles serve a welcome justification of his actions, as they provide him with arguments. Neoptolemus is caught between the extremes represented by Philoctetes and Odysseus, but he undergoes change and development and discovers his true nature. The plot is determined by two forces: a) the oracle of > Helenus [1], stating that Philoctetes should leave for Troy of his own free will, in order for Troy to be conquered the same summer according to fate and b) the permanent threat that divine providence might fail as a result of human scheming and stubbornness. It is only when — Heracles [r] appears as > deus ex machina that the plot is put back on track for the ending provided by myth. 7. OEDIPUS AT COLONUS (Oidisous él Kohwve/Oidipous epi Kolondi). Blind ~ Oedipus, who has been driven from Thebes, receives the oracle from Apollo that he will end his life in the temple of the Eumenides (- Erinys) at the Attic deme of ~+ Colonus (84-110). As in OT the god is present from the beginning, but this time he acts as a saviour. The salvation prophesied by the god is deferred by two plot lines: First Oedipus has to be acknowledged as an asylum seeker by the citizens of Colonus (117 ff.) and their king > Theseus (551 ff.), and then the threat posed by Thebes has to be repelled. (887 ff.). In OC, S. offers a solution to the dilemma posed by the earlier Oedipus play: OT ends with Oedipus blinding himself and the recognition that the ways of the gods are beyond human comprehension. OC, however, presents the resolution of the antithesis between god and man: there is a benign god, who has pity on human suffering and hands out death not as a painful fate, but grants it as an act of mercy (esp. 1627f.) [20; 58. 91 ff.]. 8. FRAGMENTS About one third of S.’ plays are based on narratives related to > Troy, esp. the > Epic cycle, which in Antiquity led to S. being called duneimds (homerikos, ‘homeric’), ptAouneos (philhbémeros, ‘friend of Homer’s’) and ‘the Homer of tragedy’ [46]. The discovery of a large collection of papyri (1912/1927) has made it possible to reconstruct the plot of the satyr play “Iyvevtai (Ichneutai, ‘The Tracking Satyrs’) quite accurately. Its

645

646

subject matter — the theft of Apollo’s cattle and the invention of the kithara by Hermes — has been taken from the Homeric Hymn to Hermes (edition of fragments: IrGF 4).

82) as early as 405 BC in The Frogs of > Aristophanes [3]. The virtual unassailability of S.’ centrist position means that there is hardly any parody of his work found in contemporary comedy. In his ‘Poetics’ > Aristoteles [6] presents Oedipus Rex (OT) as an exemplary tragedy, especially because of its > Peripeteia — an appraisal that established the play’s prominent position in the theory of literature and facilitated the return of Greek tragedy to the stages of Europe during the Renaissance (performance of OT in Vicenza 1585; > Greek tragedy;

C. DRAMATURGY, THEOLOGY, VIEW OF HUMAN-

ITY S.’ tragedies centre on human beings in extreme situations. [32]. Owing to their exceptional position external pressure triggers the development of the extraordinary character of these persons, with their behaviour either bordering on > hybris or actually being hybris (esp. Ajax; Oedipus’ case is controversial: is he guilty through no fault of his own or can he be held responsible, even though his guilt is of an intellectual nature [pro 36; 49]; [contra 40]). The protagonists are

often paired with contrasting figures (esp. Chrysothemis, Ismene, but Tecmessa and Iocaste are also cases in point), who represent the average human being. The

divine will is revealed in oracles and prophecies. It is part of human nature that we wish to shape the divine will to suit our personal purposes, to interpret it in terms of our own objectives and — like Oedipus in particular —to try to avert an inevitable fate through action. Man is deluded into thinking of fictitious alternatives, which may even have been explicitly excluded by the wording of the oracles. He takes refuge in hope to be able to bear life at all. Above all Aj., Ant. and OT highlight the conflict which springs from the clash between divine destiny and human hope, whereas El. and Phil. focus on the way divine destiny is threatened by failure because of the subjective and manipulative handling of oracles — which can only be rectified at the very last opportunity. D. RECEPTION 1. TIEXTUAL HISTORY

2. RECEPTION

1. TEXTUAL HisTORY From the commented edition of Sophocles’ complete works edited by Aristophanes [4] of Byzantium, in Late Antiquity the canon of the seven surviving plays developed, which were edited in the 4th cent. A.D. by > Salustius [1]. This edition was the source of the Byzantine edition by Manuel Moschopoulos (ca. 1290) of Aj., El. and OT (the so-called ‘Byzantine Triad’), to which Thomas Magister (ca. 1270-1325) added Ant. and (without scholia) the texts of the other three plays [24. 275 f.]. About 150 MSS have survived of which the following groups are of particular importance: the I-class (esp. Cod. Laurentianus 32. 9 [L], the Leyden palimpsest BPG 60A [A], both ca. 950 n. Chr., Laurentianus 31.10 [K bzw. Lb], ca. 1150) and the so-called classis Romana with four important MSS (1282 — 16th cent.;

cf. [1. VII-XIII}).

2. RECEPTION Whereas his ‘colleagues’ > Aeschylus [1] and Euripides [1] represented opposite extremes of tragic poetry, S. was called ‘well-balanced’ (etxohoc, evtkolos,

SOPHOCLES

[26]). Especially in the 2oth century the larger-than-life quality of the Sophoclean protagonists, the problems this causes to the people around them and above all the multi-facetted personalities of his female characters made S. a highly stimulating source of material for creative artists. H.VON HOFMANNSTHAL wrote a play Elektra (1903) and the libretto for the opera by RICHARD STRAUSS (1909). Hofmannsthal- inspired by S. FREUD — added a new psychological dimension to Electra’s character. His Electra has only one raison d’etre: an all-consuming hatred of her mother. When the act of revenge has been accomplished, she collapses, as her life has lost all meaning [45. 137 ff.]. J.GrRAauDOUx in his Electre (1937) interprets Electra’s hatred as a sin against the community. Her insistence on justice at any cost is destructive of the state, the family and the individual. J.P. SARTRE in Les Mouches (‘The Flies’, 1943) draws an equally negative portrait of Electra. While Orestes achieves his liberation as a human being through the deed, Electra — like the Euripidean Electra — is just the person who goads him on to commit the murder. Whereas the reception of Electra focused on the negative features, Antigone has remained a positive character in all modern adaptations. W.HASENCLEVER’s Antigone (1917) turns the Sophoclean tragedy into an appeal for peace. As in B. BRECHT’s later adaptation (1948) Antigone becomes a pacifist martyr. J. ANOUILH in his Antigone (1942, first performed in 1944) highlights the contrast between her consistent negation of life and Creon’s love of life. As in S., Anouilh’s Antigone is incapable of putting up with the compromises of everyday life, so she sees death as the only escape from the absurdity of life. No other play by S. has received more attention than Oedipus Rex [30]. This applies to literary theory, philosophical discourse and other disciplines such as psychology (S. FREUD’s ‘Oedipus complex’, in The Interpretation of Dreams, 1900), but also to dramatists and other literati. To the representatives of the German classic period (SCHELLING, SCHILLER) OT served as the model of a ‘tragic analysis’, which is characterized by a dialectical tension, the unity of opposites and “sudden antithetical change” [52. 151 ff.]. Creative artists have treated the subject in a wide range of ways. In Seneca’s [2] Oedipus the question of human understanding has been sidelined. [35]. His Oedipus firmly states in the very prologue (32 ff.) that he is to blame for the epidemic ravaging Thebes; thus the theme of his tragedy is not

SOPHOCLES

human hope and delusion. Seneca rather focuses on the behaviour of a tyrant who is facing the fact that his heinous crime is causing suffering to the whole community. The motif of the judge who presides over his own case and the dichotomy of seeming vs. being take centre stage in HEINRICH VON KLEIST’s tragi-comedy Der zerbrochene Krug (‘The broken jug’, 1808), which stands the Sophoclean situation on its head in that the judge knows the truth, but tries to preserve the illusion. J.Cocteau’s La machine infernale (1932, first performed in 1934) stresses the inescapability of fate and the inscrutabilty of the gods. There are only few modern stage productions of S.’ Electra because it has been displaced by Hofmannsthal’s play and Strauss’ opera. Ant. and OT, however, are still part of the standard repertoire of modern theatre (cf. also C.OrRFF, Antigonae, Oedipus der Tyrann, 1949). OT has been famously re-interpreted in P.P. Paso.ini’s Film Edipo Re (1967): by transferring the ancient subject-matter into the present without specifying the location, he manages to demonstrate the topical nature of the Greek myth while equally stressing its archaic roots [29]. ~+ Tragedy; > TRAGEDY/THEORY OF TRAGEDY Ep.: 1H.Lioyp-Jongs, N.G.Witson, 1990 (cf. [38; 393;31]) 2R.D. Dawe, 31996 (cf. [22]). Fr.:

648

647

36 Id., Die Unfahigkeit, sich zu erkennen, 1242-1262 37 A.Lesky, Die tragische in: WJA 13, 1987, 37-57 Dichtung der Hellenen, +1972 38 H. LLoyp-JONEs, N.G. Witson, Sophoclea, 1990 39 Id., Sophocles: Second Thoughts, 1997. 40 B.MANUWALD, Oidipus und Adrastos, in: RhM 135, 1992, 1-43 41 C.W. MULLER,

Zur Datierung des sophokleischen Odipus, 1984 42 Id., Philoktet, 1997 43 Id., Kleine Schriften zur antiken Literatur und Geistesgeschichte, 1999 44 Id., Uberlegungen zum zeitlichen Verhaltnis der beiden Elektren, in: E. STARK, G. Voct-Spira

(Ed.), Dramatische Waldchen,

2000, 37-45

Newicer, Drama und Theater,

1996

45H.-J.

46Sr. Rant, S. in seinen Fragmenten, in: J.DE

RomILLy (Ed.), Sophocle, 1983, 185-222 47 K.REINHARDT, S., 41976 48 A. RODIGHIERO, La parola, la

morte, leroe. Aspetti di poetica sofoclea, 2000 49 A.ScumiTT, Menschliches Fehlen und tragisches Scheitern, in: RhM 131, 1988, 8-30

50 CH. SEGAL, Sopho-

cles’ Tragic World, 1998 51Id., Oedipus Tyrannus. Tragic Heroism and the Limits of Knowledge, *2001 52P.Szonp1, Schriften, vol. 1, 1978, 151-260 53 G. UGOLINI, Untersuchungen zur Figur des Sehers Teiresias, 1995 541d.,Sofoclee Atene,2000 55 7.B. L. Wesster, An Introduction to S.,*1969 56R.P. WINNINGTON-INGRAM, S. An Interpretation, 1980

57 B. ZIMMERMANN, Die griechische Tragédie, 71992 58 Id., Europa und die griechische Tragédie, 2000 59 CH. ZIMMERMANN, Der Antigone-Mythos in der antiken Literatur und Kunst, 1992. B.Z.

3S.RaptT, TrGF vol. 4, *1999.

SELECTED COMMENTARIES: ENTIRE OEUVRE: 4R.JEBB, 1883-1896 (with Eng. transl.) 5 F.W. SCHNEIDEWIN, A.Nauck, E. BRUHN, L.RADERMACHER, I909-I914 6 J.C. KAMERBEEK,

1953-1984. SINGLE WORKS: Aj.: 7 W.B. STANFORD, 1963

8 A.F. GaRvIE, 1998

(with Eng transl.). Ant.:

9G.MULLER,

1967

10 A.BRoWN,

1987 (with

Eng. transl). El.: 11G.Karpet, 1896 12J.H.KELLS, 1974. Phil: 13 T.B. L. WeBsTER, 1970 14R.G. UssHER, 1990 (with Eng. transl.). OT: 15R.D.DaweE,1982 16 J. BOLLACK, 4 vol., 1990. Trach.:

17 P.E. EASTERLING,

1982

18 M. Davis,

1991. Lit.: 19 G.Avezzv, Il ferimento e il rito. La storia di Filottete sulla scena attica, 1988 20 W.BERNARD, Das Ende des Odipus beiS., 2001 21 U. Curt, M. Trev (Ed.), L’enigma di Edipo, 1997 +22 R.D. Dawe, Studies in the Text of S., 3 vol., 1973-1978 23 H.DILLErR (Ed.), S., 1967 24H.Ersse, Uberlieferungsgeschichte der griechischen klassischen und hellenistischen Literatur, in: H.HunceER,

O.STEGMULLER

(Eds.), Die Textiiberliefe-

rung der antiken Literatur und der Bibel, 1975, 207-284 25 B.GENTILI,

R.PRETAGOSTINI

(eds.), Edipo. Il teatro

[2] Attic + strategos. During the > Peloponnesian War in the spring of 425 BC he was sent on a mission together with Eurymedon [4] and Demosthenes [1] to support the pro-Athenian faction in Corcyra and Athens’ allies in Sicily. On the way Demosthenes engaged in military activities near Pylos in Messenia (Thuc. 3,115,5;4,2-5), which led to the fall of — Sphacteria (Thuc. 4,8-14). Subsequently S. and Eurymedon continued to Corcyra, took the base of the oligarchic exiles (Thuc. 3,69-81) who had been banned in the Civil War and did nothing to stop the massacre of the captives by the people of Corcyra (Thuc. 4,46-48). Their delayed arrival in Sicily made it impossible to turn the situation around in favour of Athens’ allies. So they negotiated the statusquo peace of > Gela (Thuc. 4,65,1). The fleet returned to Athens in 424. S. was charged with corruption and sent into exile (Thuc. 4,65,3; Diod. 12,54,6-7; Philochoros FGrH 328 F 127). S. is possibly identical with S., one of the thirty tyrants (— triakonta) of 404 (Xen. Hleliah3.2)) PA 12827; K.-W. Wetwel, Das klassische Athen, 1999, 176-179, 185 f. WS.

31 H.-C. GUNTHER, Exercitationes 32 B.M. W. Knox, The Heroic Tem33 L.KAppEL, Paian, 1992 34 J.LarTacz,

[3] Son of Ariston, tragedian (TrGF I 62), first half of the 4th cent. BC, grandson of S. [1]. He directed a posthumous production of S$.’ Oedipus at Colonus. According to Suda (o 816) he produced 40 plays gaining seven (according to Diodorus twelve) victories. The divergence could possibly be explained by his successfully re-entering plays by S. [1].

Einfihrung in die griechische Tragédie, 1993 35 E. LEFEVRE, Die politische Bedeutung der rémischen Tragodie und Senecas ‘Oedipus’, in: ANRW II 32.2, 1985,

C.W. MU ter, Kleine Schriften zur antiken Literatur und Geistesgeschichte, 1999, 249 ff.

greco e la cultura europea, 1986

26 H.FLAsHAR, Insze-

nierung der Antike, 1991 271d.,S.,2000 28 E.Fucus, Pseudologia, 1993 29 M.FusiLLo, La Grecia secondo

Pasolini, 1996

30TH. Hatter, Kénig Odipus. Von S. zu

Cocteau, 1998 Sophocleae, 1996 per, 1964

SOPHRON

649

650

[4] S. of Athens. Tragedian (TrGF I 147) and poet, rst cent. BC, descendant of S. [1], author of 15 plays, winner at the Charitesia in > Orchomenus (ca. roo

mimoi, quasi-dramatic dialogues or monologues in a kind of rhythmic prose that depicted everyday characters for humorous purposes through mime and language. S.’s mimes are believed to have been divided into ‘men’s’ and ‘women’s’ plays (Athen. 3,89a; 7,309cd; 7,28 1ef; cf. POxy II 301, p. 303); among the mimes for women whose titles have been handed down are ‘Heal-

BC).

B.Z.

Sophocleus (Lodxdevoc/Sophodkleios; not Sophocles [3. 90']). Greek grammarian of the late 2nd cent. AD, known from his commentary on the Argonautikd of + Apollonius [2] Rhodius, which he wrote following + Theon [4] and > Lucillus [1], presumably with a polemic bias against > Eirenaeus [1]. S.” commentary had above all a mythographical/geographical character. Although S. is cited only twice by name in the surviving scholia, etymologies of place names under S.’ name in ~ Stephanus [7] of Byzantium can certainly be ascribed to him. Further reminiscences of his explanations appear in the > Etymologica. 1 A.GuDEMAN, s. v. Sophokles (6), RE 3 A, 1096-1098 2 H. MAEHLER, Die Scholien der Papyri in ihrem Verhaltnis zu den Scholiencorpora der Handschriften, in: F. Montanari (Ed.), La philologie grecque a |’époque hellénistique et romaine

(Entretiens 40), 1994,

107-109

3 C. WENDEL, Die Uberlieferung der Scholien zu Apollonios von Rhodos (AAWG 3rd par, 1), 1932, 87-99; 105107;

I1O—116 (repr. 1972).

ST.MA.

Sophoni(s)ba (Zodovi(c)Ba/Sophoni(s)ba, Punic *Spnb‘ = ‘Baal has pronounced judgment’, other Greek forms of the name: Diod. Sic. 27,7; Zon. 9,12 f.). Daughter of Hasdrubal [5], married c. 205 BC to > Syphax, from whom she vehemently demanded a proCarthaginian policy (cf. Pol. 14,1,4; 14,7,4-7; Liv. 29,23). S. is supposed to have previously been betrothed to > Massinissa (Diod. Sic. 27,7, [1. 200, note 1195; 2]), who married her after his victory over Syphax in 203 in the conquered city of Cirta and forced her to take poison when P. > Cornelius [I 71] Scipio suspected him of political unreliability because of her patriotism (Liv. 30,7,8 f.; 12-13; App. Lib. 27,11128,119; Cass. Dio 17,57; Zon. 9,1 1-13; [2]). S.’s ‘hero-

ic’ death, by means of which she is supposed to have evaded being handed over to her Roman arch-enemies, has been the basis of the fame of S. (‘Sophonisbe’) in

literature, music and painting

since the Renaissance

[3]. 1Geus sche

21L.-M.GUNTHER, Sophoniba - eine karthagi-

Patriotin?,

in: K.Grus,

K.ZIMMERMANN

(eds.),

Europa und Afrika in der Antike, 2001 3 J. AXELRADT, Le théme de Sophonisbe dans les principales tragédies de la litterature occidentale, 1956. L-M.G.

Sophron (2mewv/Sophron). {1] from Syracuse. According to Suda o 893, approximately contemporaneous with (Arta) Xerxes in Persia

and Euripides in Athens, i.e. from the 2nd half of the 5th cent. BC. This is in keeping with the traditional belief that his son Xenarchus composed a — mime that referred to a historical event occurring in 394 or 389 BC (fr. x; 4 OLIVIERI; [1. 59]). S. became famous for his

ers’, ‘Sorceresses’ (Tai yuvatxec al tav Beov havi &&e-

hav/Tai gynaikes hai tan theon phanti exelan), ‘Women Looking on at the Isthmian Games’, “The Bride’s Attendant’, ‘Mother-in-law’; those featuring men include ‘Messenger’, ‘Fisherman to Farmer’, ‘Tuna Catcher’ and ‘Prometheus’. Most of the frr. that have been preserved are single words or phrases; continuous papyrus frr. have been found of the first two mimes for women mentioned above [233]. The excerpt from the ‘Sorceresses’ uses a series of instructions to (male) servants (five noupavtec/potibdntes, ‘errand runners’) to depict preparations for a ritual act: a sacrificial altar is set up; apotropaic substances (salt, laurel) are prepared, a young animal is brought to the altar, along with a knife and fire, all of the doors to the house are opened; there is a call for quiet before the sacred act takes place; finally, the spokeswoman summons the goddess (pdtnia = Hecate?) for a meal (xénia). The word é&eiav (exelan) contained in the title can be interpreted in different ways: either as the transitive verb ‘to cast out’ (in the sense of exorcism) or the intransitive ‘to set off’ = ‘to be on one’s way’ (sc. to the sacrifice/feast) [4]. In one case

the punctuation in the papyrus and the meaning of a word (8 ‘there’!) indicate a change of speaker (— Speaker, change of). Overall, both the mimetic nature of the play and its theme of a magical act (praxis) in the private sphere are reminiscent of the Pharmakeutria of Theocritus (cf. schol. on the latter, contending that Theocritus had ‘revised’ a mime by S.). There was controversy in ancient times over whether S.’s works should be viewed as ‘poetry’; a scholium on Gregory of Nazianzus mentions S.’s use of ‘certain rhythms and cola’ without adhering closely to metrical requirements [5; 1. 61-62]; a quotation from Aristotle’s De poetis (Athen. 11,505c) appears to dispute the idea that S.’s mimes were metrical in nature; similarly, the Epicurean Philodemus rejected the opinion of Heracleodorus that the mimes of S. could be considered poetry [6]. According to [7], the rhythms of the ‘Sorceresses’ are dactylo-epitritic. Plato [1] is said to have been very fond of S. and to have kept his mimes with him constantly (Diog. Laert. 3,18; Duris of Samos in Athen. 11,504b = FGrH 76 F 72). Aristotle (Aristot. Poet. 1447b 10) compared the mimetic aspect of Plato’s ‘Socratic dialogues’ to the mimes of S; an Anonymus Oxyrhynchi disputed the theory supposedly put forth by Aristotle (Peri poiétén bk. 1) that Plato learned his craft from an earlier writer of Socratic dialogues, Alexamenus of Teos; rather, he argued, Plato had imitated S. as he wrote his dramatic dialogues [8]. + Mime

SOPHRON

652

651

1 A. OLtvieR! (ed.), Frammenti della commedia greca e del

Ioannis and 25 anacreontic odes (Greek) are also by

mimo nella Sicilia e nella Magna Grecia, 1947, 59-143 2 M. Norsa, G. VITELLI, Da un mimo di Sofrone, in: SIFC 10, 1932, 119-124 3 G.Perotra, Sofrone poeta in

him.

versi, in: SIFC N. S. 22, 1947, 93-100 4R.ARENA, Tai yuvaixes ai tav Oedv bavi grav, in: PdP 30, 1975, fasc. 162, 217-219

5 CGF

6 C.ROMEO, Sofrone nei papiri

ercolanesi (P. Herc. 1081 e 1014), in: Proc. of the 16th

international

Congr.

of Papyrology,

1981,

183-190

7 A.SajiA, Per un tentativo di interpretazione metrica di PSI 1214 di Sofrone, in: Aegyptus 67, 1987, 27-32 8 M. W. Hasta, Plato, S., and the Dramatic Dialogue, in: BICS 19, 1972, 17-38. CGF

152-181; PCG

I, 2001,

187-253; H.Reicn,

Der

Mimus, vol. 1, 1903; K.Latre, Zu dem neuen Sophronfragmenten, in: Id., KS, 1968, 492-498; A. OLIvIERI (s. {1]); G. Mastromarco, Il mimo greco letterario, in: Dioniso 61, 1991, 169-192. W.D.F.

[2] An inscription ([Labraunda 3) refers to a S. who served as a Ptolemaic or Seleucid official epi Karias prior to Ptolemy [4]. Accordingly, it is unlikely that he was identical with the Seleucid official who, as governor of Ephesus, defected to Ptolemy [6] III in 246 BC (Phylarchos FGrH 81 F 24) (an opposing view can be found in [1]). S. himself or a son of the same name is probably identical with the Ptolemaic nauarch Oprona (Pomp. Trog. Prologi 27) who lost the naval battle at Andros. 1 J.Koses, Mylasa und Kildara in ptolemaischer Hand? Uberlegungen zu zwei hellenistischen Inschriften aus Karien, in: EA 24, 1995, 1-6.

Cu. HaBICHT, Rezension zu: J. CRAMPA, Labraunda. Swedish Excavations and Researches. Vol. III, part 1, 1969, in: Gnomon 44, 1972, 166-169.

W.A.

Sophroniscus (Swdeovioxos; Sophroniskos). Husband of + Phaenarete with whom he fathered > Socrates [2] the philosopher, stone cutter by trade. In Plato’s Laches (180e), + Lysimachus [1] praises S. as his true late friend with whom he had never quarreled. Nothing more is known about S. Socrates named one of his three sons after his father, as was customary. K.D.

Epitr1ons: J.D. Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, vol. 11, 1901

GANTE, Anakreonteen, 1957;

H. Donner, Die anakreon-

tischen Gedichte Nr. 19 und Nr. 20 des Patriarchen Sophronius von Jerusalem, 1981.; BIBLIOGRAPHY:; H. UsEngrR, Der heilige Tychon, 1907, 83-107; H.CHapwick, John Moschus and his Friend

Sophronius the Sophist, in: Journ. of Theological Studies, n.s. 25, 1974, 41-74 (esp. 49-55).

ment survives),

12 sermons, the Miracula Sancti Cyri et

K.SA.

Sophrosyne (Zwgoobvyn; Sdphrosyne). Personification of ‘prudence and moderation’, first in Theognis (1135-1140), in whose political thought the concept plays a central role: alluding to Hesiod’s tale of > Pandora (Hes. Erg. 57-105), Theognis has the > Charites, > Pistis and S. leave the Earth. An Attic burial inscription of the 4th century BC mentions S. as a daughter of + Aidés (‘respect’). In Asia Minor S. was worshipped as a cult [1]. 1G. TURK, s. v. S., RE 3 A, 1107 (epigraphic evidence).

Sophytes (ZwxeiOyns; Sdpeithés). Indian king in the Punjab to the east of the > Cathaei, allied with Alexander [4] (Arr. Anab. 6,2,2; Str. 15,1,30; Diod. Sic. 17,91; Curt. 9,1, 24-30). His land is described very positively, to some extent idealised. There is particularly frequent mention of the fearless dogs he presented to Alexander. The ancient identification of S. with the Old Indo-Iranian Saubhiti is quite uncertain, and that with the prince Sophytes (recorded only numismatically) is certainly mistaken [1. 60-72]. 1 R.B. WHITEHEAD, The Eastern Satrap Sophytes, in: NC 1943,60-72 2K.KARTTUNEN, India and the Hellenistic World, 1997, 53. K.K.

Sopianis (Sopianae). Roman settlement in > Pannonia inferior (It. Ant. 231; 264; Amm.

Sophronius (Zwdedvio¢d/Sophroénios). Patriarch of Jerusalem (634-638), Greek-Byzantine saint, poet and author. S. was probably from Damascus and taught rhetoric. He became a monk in Palestine and with his friend > Iohannes [29] Moschus travelled to the monastic settlements there. As a staunch opponent of ~» Monotheletism in 633 he tried but failed to persuade Cyrus of Phasis, patriarch of Alexandria [1], to abandon it. S. was able to agree a compromise with the patriarch of Constantinople (— Sergios [2]), another advocate of the Monothelite doctrine) in the formula of the one effective Christ. In his encyclical on accession as patriarch S. turned against this doctrine. He is considered to be the author of a florilegium against Monenergetism. A Life of > Iohannes [32] Eleemon (one frag-

(reprints), 461-510

(Synodika); PG 87,3, 3379-3676 (Miracula); PG 87,3, 3201-3364 (sermons); A.GALLICO, Sofronio di Gerusalemme, Le omelie, 1991 (It. transl. and comm.); M.GI-

Marc. 28,1,5; ILS 3795), modern Pécs in Hungary, situated at the starting point of significant roads into the Pannonian Limes zone: north of + Carnuntum, > Arrabona, > Brigetio and > Aquincum, southeast of > Mursa, > Sirmium and - Singidunum. There were strong commercial relationships with Italy (imported metal goods, ceramics). Its economic upturn attracted settlers from Italy. Evidence for the prosperity of S. is provided by imperial demesnes, numerous archaeological finds (remains of buildings and roads) and the existence of flourishing agricultural production in the surrounding region (villa areas). There is evidence of veteran auxiliaries in S. for the Imperial Period (CIL III 14039, first half of the rst cent. AD; CIL III 3350, between AD 193 and 235). S. knew cultic worship of > Iuppiter, > Iuno and => Silvanus. A burial site and burial chambers with frescoes

653

654

showing biblical motifs are archaeological evidence of Christianity. In the 4th cent., S. was a see, where the > praeses of the province of Valeria held office. S. was the birthplace of Maximinus [3].

(= 851 f. ADLER). None of the c. 30 works has been preserved without fragmentation or contamination and

TIR L 34 Budapest, 1968, 105 (sources and older bibliogr.); F. FULEP, Sopianae, 1985.

J.BU.

Sora. City of the > Volsci on the banks of the Liris (Liv. 10,1,2; Sil. Pun. 8,396; Str. 5,3,10: DHea/Séra), still S. today. In 345 BC S. was conquered by the Romans for the first time (Liv. 7,28,6; 9,23,2; Diod. Sic. 19,72,3) and in the Second Samnite War (— Samnites) was bitterly fought over (Liv. 9,43,1; 44,16; Diod. Sic. 20,80,1). In 303 BC a colonia provided with Ius Latii (> Ius D.2z.) was conducted by the Romans to S. (Liv. 10,1,1 f.; Vell. Pat. 1,14,5). In 89 BC municipium, tribus Romilia; in 44 BC colonia Iulia Praetoria, later an Augustan colonia (Plin. HN 3,63). Archaeology: remains of fortifications (6th/5th cents. BC) and a podium temple (303 BC). M.Lo ui Guetri, N. PAGLIARDI, S., in: S$. QUILICI GIGLI

SORANUS

many are known only from excerpts or titles; S.’s commentaries and works on doxography and medical history are evidence of a comprehensive medical and philosophical education. There are pseudo-epigraphical treatises. S.’s writings are clearly laid out, simple and vivid, of stylistic maturity and without superfluous rhetoric. S., “son of Menander and Phoebe” (Suda), probably studied in Alexandria [r], at any rate he took advantage of the wealth of education offered by Alexandrian medicine and built up the Methodist school. His writings suggest that elite Roman families, who preferred Greek doctors and enlightened Hellenistic medicine, were his clientele. S. had great influence on later authors, especially on > Caelius [II rr] Aurelianus (= C. A.), > Oribasius (in an encyclopaedic respect) and ~ Tertullianus (in a philosophical respect, eclectic); the

latter calls him “methodicae medicinae instructissimus auctor” (the “best-informed writer of the Methodist school of physicians”, Tert. De anima 6,6); > Galen

(ed.), Archeologia Laziale, vol. 3 (Quaderni di Archeolo-

uses S. for pharmacological questions and for doxogra-

gia Etrusco-Italica 4), 1980, 177-179; E.M. BERANGER,

phy.

s.v. S., EAA 2. Suppl. 5, 1997, 330 f.; H. SoLtn, Iscrizioni di S. e di Atina, in: Epigraphica 43, 1981, 45-61.

M.M.MO.

Soracte. Limestone ridge (691m), present-day Soratte to the northwest

of Sant’Oreste,

cut off from

the

Appennines in South Etruria in the territory of the Falisci to the right of the Tiber between the via Flaminia in the west and the via Tiberina in the east. It dominates the Campagna Romana and is visible from Rome (Hor. Carm. 1,9). Apollo (Verg. Aen. 11,785; Sil. Pun. 5,175; 7,662; 8,492; sanctus Soranus Apollo: ILS 3034). The

Manes and Dis Pater Soranus were worshipped as a cult. At its base lies Feronia with a sanctuary to the Sabine goddess of the same name (— Lucus Feroniae [1]; Str. 5,2,9). The ritual of the hirpi Sorani is allegedly related to the wolves (Sabine hirpi) on the S.: these priests, who belonged to certain local families, could walk barefoot over glowing coals without burning themselves (Str. 5,2,9; Plin. HN 7,19). Cato mentions wild goats on the S. (HRR 70; Varro, Rust. 2,3,3). NISSEN 2, 367 f.; G. ToMASSETTI, La Campagna Romana,

vol. 3, 1976, 330-341; M. ANDREUSSI, s.v. S., EV 4, 946 f. G.U.

Soranus (Sweavoc; Sorands) of Ephesus. Physician in Rome around AD 100, principal representative of the medical schools of the > Methodists, recognized in the 2oth cent. as one of the most significant physicians of Greco-Roman antiquity. I. Person II. Work I. PERSON

The > Suda mentions two people of the same name whose usually accepted identity has not been proved

Il. Work A. MEDICAL WRITINGS

B. OTHER WORKS

A. MEDICAL WRITINGS

Tlegi yuvaixeiwv mad@v

(Peri gynaikeion pathén,

‘On Diseases of Women’): his major work (4 books), preserved in Greek, originally obviously illustrated and restored by J.ILBERG, edited and revised in Latin in C. A. and in Muscio, must have existed in a detailed

version for physicians. A catechism-like short version for > midwives (Cateperotiana), which was available to Muscio, bears pseudo-Soranic features and is probably younger. S. shows a superior, rationally founded obstetric and gynaecological working technique with the use of a birthing stool and a vaginal speculum (> speculum muliebre; cf. + medical instruments with illustration) and detailed theory on the care of infants. Xergoveyovpeva (Cheirourgoumena,

‘On Surgery’;

several books) are mentioned in C. A.; there are altered sections in Peri semeion katagmaton (‘On Signs of Frac-

tures’), a fragment on traumatology contained in the Codex of Nicetas (Codex Laurentianus 74,7); in the same place can also be found the original work Tegi émdeouwv/Peri epidésmon, ‘On Bandages’, richly illustrated in 60 chapters with respectively assigned illustrations. Tlegi 6Eéwv naO@v/Peri oxédn pathdn — Mei yeo-

viov ta0av/Peri chronion path6n (‘On Acute Diseases — On Chronic Diseases’, 8 books) have been preserved only in the Latin edition of C. A. Completely lost and known only from their titles are treatises on the theory of disease, reproduction, fever, the theory of health, nursing the sick, naturopathy and ophthalmology.

655

656

B. OTHER WORKS The role of S. as a commentator on Hippocratic writings ( Hippocrates [6]) is based on citings by later authors. > Orion [3] and possibly also Meletius obviously knew his ’Etupodoyiat tot o@patos tod &vOemmov (Etymologiai toi sdmatos toi anthropou) or MovofiBrov seQi 6vownaodv (Mondbiblon peri onomas6n), a lost ‘Manual on naming the parts of the human body and limbs’, from which many quotations have been preserved. S. collected news about the great physicians in Bio iatedv xat aigéoets xai ovvtayuata. (Bioi iatrOn kai hairéseis kai suntagmata, ‘Life of the great physicians, their sects and theories’, 10 books); of these only one fragment on Hippocrates is extant. Tlegi woyiis (Peri psuchés, ‘On the Mind’, 4 books): > Tertullianus had this lost work to hand when composing his De anima. > Caelius [II rr] Aurelianus; > Gynaecology; > Medicine; Methodists

of the Danube (lower terrace) to the southeast of the Allachbach; in the neighbourhood an extended > vicus developed as well as a river port (until the Trajanic or early Hadrianic period). Traces of six training camps have been found approximately 1.5 km to the east of the forts. After being destroyed in the > Marcomanni Wars and being subsequently rebuilt in the second half of the 3rd cent., the forts and the civil settlement came to a violent end. To the west of these sites, there is evidence for a Late Antiquity fort [1]. Burial sites from Late Antiquity and the early Middle Ages (late 3rd cent. until the 7th) indicate + settlement continuity until the Baiuvarian Middle Ages (cf. > Baiovarii) [25 3].

SORANUS

EDITIONS AND TRANSLATIONS: P. BURGUIERE et al., S. d’Ephése, Maladies des femmes, 4 vols., 1988-1994 (with French transl., comm. and index); J.ILBERG, Sorani Gynaeciorum Libri IV; De signis fracturarum; De fasciis; Vita Hippocratis

1927;

O.TEMKIN

secundum

Soranum

et al., Soranus’

(=CMG

vol. 4),

Gynecology

J.PRAMMER, Das rémische Straubing, 1989; Id, Der Kastellvicus von S. — Straubing, in: K.ScHMorz (ed.), Vor-

trage des 16. Niederbayerischen Archaologentages, 1998, 193-207. GHW.

(Engl.

transl. w. introduction), 1956 (repr. 1991).

LITERATURE: K.-D.FIsCHER, The Isagoge of PseudoSoranus, in: Medizinhistor. Journ. 35, 2000, 3-30; A.E. Hanson, M.H. Green, Soranus of Ephesus: Methodicorum princeps, in: ANRW

1 J.PRAMMER, Neues zur romischen und frihmittelalterlichen Besiedlung der Altstadt von Straubing, in: Das Archaologische Jahr in Bayern 2001, 2002 2 Id., Germanen im spatrémischen Straubing, in: W. MENGHIN et al. (ed.), Germanen, Hunnen und Awaren, 1987, 599-607 3 H. GeisLer, Das Graberfeld von Straubing-Bajuwarenstrafe, in: [2], 608-611.

II 37.2, 1994, 967-1075.

Sornatius, C. Documented for 72-68 BC as legate of Licinius [I 26] Lucullus in the 3rd Mithradatic War (> Mithridates [6] VI.; Plut. Lucullus 17,1; 24,1; 30,3; 35,1; [Perg 431; MAMA 6,260). J.BA.

Sorothaptic. A language found on votive tablets from south-west France (znd cent. AD) which, in addition to elements from Latin, contains traits of an older stratum

that cannot be Celtic. J.CoROMINEs has given it the name Sorothaptic, ‘belonging to the urnfield culture’,

following the belief (which is also shared by others) that speakers of an Indo-European language had come to the Iberian Peninsula from the Balkans prior to the spread of Celtic culture in Western Europe. The term is thus to be applied also to other relics of Indo-European origin, especially to place names in Spain and borrowings in > Basque. ~ Hispania, Iberia II. Languages J.Coromines, Les plombs sorothaptiques d’Arles, in: Zeitschrift fiir romanische Philologie 91, 1975, 1-53.

H.SCH.

Sorviodurum. Auxiliary fort site in Raetia (Tab. Peut. 4,4; > Raeti, Raetia), modern Straubing (in Lower Bavaria). Despite the Celtic root of the name no preRoman settlement is known. From the early Flavian period (69-79), four forts altogether were built at a strategically important position on the southern bank

Sosia (Sossia).

[1] Pompeia S. Falconilla. Daughter of Pompeius Sosius {II 2] Priscus (cos. ord. in AD 149); married to M. Pontius [II 3] Laelianus (cos. ord. in 163). An indication of her social position was her extraordinary paternal ancestral line, which therefore — as with her grandmother S. [2] Polla - always appears in her inscriptions (CIL VIII 7066; AE 1935, 26). [2] S. Polla. Daughter of Sosius [II 4] Senecio who had married a daughter of Sex. Julius > Frontinus. S. was married to Q. Pompeius [II 8] Falco (cos. suff. in 108) whom she accompanied to the province of Asia in AD 123/4 during his proconsulship. S. [1] is her granddaughter. W.Eck, Senatorische Familien der Kaiserzeit in der Provinz Sizilien, in: ZPE 113, 1996, 109-128, esp. 117 ff.; RAEPSAET-CHARLIER no. 632 (S. [1]); no. 723 (S. [2]). W.E.

Sosibius (ZwoiPioc/Sdsibios). [1] Son of Dioscurides, father of Ptolemaeus [32], Sosibius [2] and Arsinoe [II 5]; from Alexandria; still under Ptolemaeus [6] III he won victories in the diaulos at the + Ptolemaia, in the agéneioi (‘beardless’) wrestling at the > Panathenaea and in chariot racing at the > Isthmia and + Nemea (Callim. fr. 384 PFEIFFER; [1. 144149; 2. 79-81]). At the time there was already talk of endowments for Zeus Kasios in Pelusium and the Heraeum (of Argos?). S., who was honoured on Delos c. 240 BC (IG XI 4, 649), was probably, as successor to Apollonius [1], dioikétés (3. 239] from c. 245 onwards and in 235/4 became an eponymous priest of Alexander. S. contributed substantially to securing the succession of Ptolemaeus [7] IV, and for this reason for a

657

658

long time, with and perhaps before Agathocles [6], he directed Egyptian policy (Pol. 5,3 5-38; 63-673 87), perhaps as dioikétes. He commanded the Egyptians at Rhaphia and then went as ambassador to Antiochus [5] Ill. In 2144/3 he tried to rescue Achaeus [5] (Pol. 8,1723); at the accession to the throne of Ptolemaeus [8] V, whose pseudepitropos he became according to Polybius (15,25), he had the regent-designate Arsinoe [II 4] assassinated. There is also evidence of his significance in numerous honorific decrees (OGIS 79: Cnidus; 80:

rid of Nero, he was condemned and executed (Tac. Ann. Is Weta dags Gass: Dioi6o332,5). 1 B. Levick, Claudius, 1990.

SOSIPATER

W.E.

Sosicrates (Swoimodtys; Sdsikratés). Greek comic poet, attested exclusively in others’ writings, by all appearances belonging to New > Comedy. Pollux quotes three verses from the play Nagaxatadjnxn (Parakata-

Tanagra; IG VII 3166: Orchomenus). An estate (dored)

theké, ‘The Pledge’), Athenaeus three from the Oiadehoou (Philddelphoi, ‘The Fond Brothers’), Sto-

in his name, awarded by the king, is mentioned in 138 (PTebtunis III 860, 17 f.). PP I/VIII 48; VI 17239.

baeus two verses and the Suda the gloss &udias from unknown comedies [1].

1 TH. FuuReR, Die Auseinandersetzung mit den Chorlyrikern in den Epinikien des Kallimachos, 1992 ~—-2:Id., Callimachus’ Epinician Poems, in: M.A. HARDER et al. (eds.), Callimachus, 1993, 79-97 3 C. ORRIEUX, Les archives d’Eucles et la fin de la dérea du dioicéte Apollonios, in: Chronique d’Egypte 55, 1980, nos. 109-110, 213-239. W.Huss,

Agypten in hellenistischer Zeit, 2001, 458f.;

P. Maas, S. als pevdemniteomos des Ptolemaios Epiphanes, in: Id., KS, 1973, 100;

L.Mooren, The Aulic Titulature,

1975, 63-66, no. o18.

T.HI.

Sosigenes (Zwoyévys; Sdsigénés). [1] S. of Caunus is attested as oikondmos of Ptolemaeus [1] lin Lycia (SEG 27,929, Limyra) in 288/7 BC. waa.

[2] Comedy writer, only attested epigraphically as a participant of the Attic Dionysiac agon in 157 BC, where he took sixth place with the play Avtgovuevoc (Lytroumenos, ‘The ransomed man’).

[2] Son of S. [1], > somatophylax of Ptolemaeus [8] V at the time of Agathocles [6]; after taking part in the overthrow of Agathocles (Pol. 15,32,6 f.), until zor BC he rose to a high position the details of which are unknown (hypomnématographos?), but was soon removed from power by > Tlepolemus (Pol. 16,22). W.A.

[3] Grammarian, chronographer and writer on cults of Spartan origin, often cited as ‘the Laconian’ (6 Adxov/ ho Ldkon), between 250 and 150 BC (2. 635 f.]. Among S.’ works (surviving only in scanty fragments) are a commentary on > Alcman (Ilegi ‘Adxuavoc/Peri Alkméanos) consisting of at least 3 books, a chronography, written on the model of > Timaeus and > Eratosthenes [2] and arranged according to Olympiads, (Xedvwv avayeadr/Chronon anagraphe, ‘Register of Dates’) and several writings on the cults of Sparta (Iegt tov év Aaxedainovi Svoiv/Peri tén en Lakedaimoni thusion, ‘Sacrifices in Lacedaemon’; [legi 0@v/Peri ethdn, ‘Customs’). EpITIONS: 1FGrH 595. BIBLIOGRAPHY: 2FGrH comm. on 595 3 R. Laqueur, Zur griechischen Sagenchronographie, in: Hermes 42, 1907, 513-532

3 A, 1146-1149

1 PCG VII, 1989, 600-602.

41d.,s.v. Sosibios (2), RE

5 C. WacHsMuTH,

De Eratosthene

Apollodoro Sosibio chronographis, 1891/2

6 L. WEBER,

Quaestionum Laconicarum capita duo, thesis, Gottingen 1887, 55-64. ST.MA.

[4] (Sosibius). Tutor of > Britannicus, one of the accusers of > Valerius Asiaticus in AD 47 [1. 61-64]. As a reward he was given 1 million sesterces. As he was closely connected with Britannicus and Claudius [III r], — Agrippina [3] saw to it that he was removed from the palace. Soon after in 51, allegedly because he tried to get

1 PCG VI, 1989, 603.

H.-G.NE.

[3] Astronomer charged by Caesar with computing the Julian > Calendar: Plinius (HN 18,212) mentions three different versions (commentationes) of his work. Also according to Plinius (HN 2,39), he studied the maximal

elongation of the planet Mercury. A. REHM, s. v. S. (6), RE 3 A, 1153-1157.

W.H.

[4] Peripatetic in the 2nd cent. AD, teacher of > Alexander [26] of Aphrodisias. His chief work, Tegi tv avehittovodv odaiedv (Peri ton anelittouson sphairon ‘On revolving spheres’), was a comparative presentation of the two most influential ancient models of heavenly motion, the homocentric one of + Eudoxus [1] and Aristotle [6], and the later Ptolemaic one (> Ptolemaeus [65]) with its eccentric spheres and epicycles. S. conceded the advantages of the latter, but noted that it did not satisfy the fundamental requirements of the Aristotelean system (Simpl. in Aristot. Cael. 493-5 x0; Ps.Alex. Aphr. in Aristot. Metaph. 703-706). Of his work Tlegi 6wews (Peri Opseds ‘On vision’) we know the explanations of the phosphorescent bodies and the lunar corona (Them. in Aristot. An. 61,21 ff.; Alex. Aphr. in Aristot. Mete. 143,7 ff.), otherwise only a couple of remarks on questions in logic. $. combined an objective presentation with an orthodox Aristotelean tenor. Moravx, vol. 2, 1984, 335-360; H.B. GoTTSCHALK, Aristotelian Philosophy..., in: ANRW II 36.2, 1079-1174 (esp.: 1159 f.). H.G.

Sosipater (Xwoinateos; Sdsipatros). Poet of New ~ Comedy, known only from a 57-verse citation, pre-

served in Athenaeus, from the play Katawevdouevoc

SOSIPATER

(Katapseudomenos, “The Slanderer’) [1]. In the fragment, a cook praises himself — in a dialogue with his interlocutor Demylus, presumably his employer — as one of the three greatest living exponents of his craft, which he depicts as a most exacting science based on astrology, architecture and strategy. 1 PCG VII, 1989, 604-607.

T.HL.

Sosiphanes (Zwoupdvyc; Sosiphanes). [1] S. of Syracuse, tragedian (TrGF I 92), died 336/333 or 324/321 BC. The Suda (0 863) credits him with 73 plays and 7 victories. Meléagros is attested as a title. Inclusion in the > Pleiad of tragic poets (IrGF T r) relates to S. [2]. [2] Tragedian (TrGF I 103), born 306/5 BC, numbered among the > Pleiad of tragic poets. B.Z.

Sosipolis (Swoimodtc; Sdsipolis). [1] Protective goddess in > Gela in Sicily. [2] Male > daemon or god for which there is evidence in + Olympia from the first half of the 3rd cent. BC onwards. Turned into a snake when a small child, he repulses the Arcadians and is given a sanctuary in Olympia together with — Eileithyia (Paus. 6,20,2-6). In Elis S. is worshipped in a sanctuary together with ~ Tyche. [3] Epithet of > Zeus in Magnesia [1] (cf. Str. 14,1,41). IMagn., 82, No. 98; Syll.3, vol. 2, No. 589.

Sosippus (Xwoinnoc; Sosippos). Comic poet from an undetermined period, mentioned only in Athenaeus, who introduced a citation of 8 verses with the remark: Diphilus or S. says in his Asodeisovoa (The runaway) ... [1]. The fragment itself is more often ascribed to the better known Diphilus, particularly as his play of the same name is attested several times [2]. 1 PCG VII, 1989, 608

660

659

2PCGV, 1986, 58-61.

conquered Syracuse, but not Ortygia, which Thoenon succeeded in holding. When, because of the union of the two cities, the Carthaginians besieged Syracuse, S. and Thoenon together called on - Pyrrhus [3] in 278 and handed Syracuse over to him; then S. also placed Acragas, the other towns and his armed forces under Pyrrhus’ control. When Pyrrhus arbitrarily had Thoenon executed, S. fled from Syracuse. Sources: Diod. 22,753; 8,4 f.; 10,1; Plut. Pyrrhus 23; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 20,8,1. H.Berve, Die Tyrannis bei den Griechen, vol. 1, 1967, 458-462; G.DE SENSI SESTITO, in: E.GaBBA, G. VALLET (Eds.), La Sicilia antica, vol. 2.1, 1980, 347 f. K.MEI.

[3] Tragedy writer (TIrGF I 142), mid-znd cent. BC, successful at the Heraea on Samos with a new tragedy (DID A rx (b)). B.Z. Sositheus (SwoiOeoc/Sdsitheos) from Alexandria [2] in the Troad, Satyr playwright and tragedian of the ~ Pleias, first half of the 3rd century BC (TrGF I 99). According to the Suda (o 860) he is also supposed to have written poetry and prose (T 1). Ina fictitious burial epigram Dioscurides [3] (Anth. Pal. 7,707 = T 2) praises him as a reviver of the — satyr play, taking his direction from — Pratinas. 24 verses survive from Daphnis or Lityerses, presumably a satyr play, about the love of > Daphnis and the nymph Thalia, their being taken prisoner by Lityerses and presumably their release by Heracles. R.KRUMEICH

et al. (Eds.), Das griechische

Satyrspiel,

1999, 602-613.

B.Z.

Sosius. Italic family name [1], which first appears in senatorial circles at the end of the rst cent. BC. 1 SCHULZE, 425.

T.HI.

Sosistratus (Lwoioteatoc/Sdsistratos).

I. REPUBLICAN

PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN

II. IMPERIAL

PERIOD

PERIOD

[1] From c. 330 BC leader with Heraclides of the Oligarchy of the > Six Hundred in > Syracusae. Although he was suspected by Agathocles [2] of aspirations to tyranny, his successes in the war of Croton with the Bruttii confirmed his position in Syracuse (Diod. 19,3,3—5). After a military failure against Rhegium he was banished from Syracuse c. 322 (Diod. 19,4,3), but he and his followers were able to return under > Acestoridas; after Agathocles seized power in 316/5, however, he was expelled (Diod. 19,8,2). In 314 the Spartan Acrotatus [1], who for a short time commanded the exiles in battle, had S. killed at a banquet in Acragas out of jealousy (Diod. 19,71,4). The overall appraisal of S.

[I 2] S., C. First attested by the coins he minted in 39 BC as quaestor of Antony [I 9] (BMCRR 2,504), for whom he was governor of Syria and Cilicia from 38 BC. With Herod [1] he successfully fought Antigonus [5] who had been installed in Iudaea by the Parthians (Cass. Dio 49,22,3; BMCRR 2,508). Antony enabled him to have a — triumph in 34 (CILI* p. 50) and to become consul in 32. S. attempted to use his position to attack Octavian, but then fled to Antony (Cass. Dio 50,2). At the battle of > Actium S. was in charge of part of Antony’s fleet (Vell. Pat. 2,85,2), but was pardoned by Octavian

in Diodorus (19,3,3 and 71,4) is contradictory.

on Arruntius’ [II 2] recommendation (Vell. Pat. 2,86,2).

S.N. CONSOLO LANGHER, Siracusa e la Sicilia greca, 1996, 273-279; K. MEISTER, in: CAH 7.1, *1984, 384-391.

[2] Syracusan, probably grandson of S. [1], in 279 BC tyrant of + Acragas and 30 other towns. He soon also

[I 1] Two brothers who were fairly well known publishers at the time of Horace (Hor. Epist. 1,20,2; 2,3,345).

He is mentioned again in 17 BC as XWuir sacris faciundis (CIL VI 32323). In Rome S. restored the temple of Apollo which was then called Sosianus after him; the works of art displayed there he had probably stolen

662

661

from Seleuceia [5] in Cilicia (Plin. HN 13,533; 36,28). S.’

relationship to C. Sosius praetor mentioned in Cic. Att. 8,6,1 is unclear. 1SyMe,RR

2 Syme, AA.

J.BA.

SOSTRATUS

1 C.P. Jones, Sura and Senecio, in: JRS 60, 1970, 98-104 2SymMeE,RP VI 3 W.Ecxk, An Emperor is Made: Senatorial Politics and Trajan’s Adoption by Nerva in 97, in: G. CLark, T.Rajak (eds.), Philosophy and Power in the Graeco-Roman World, 2002. W.E.

Il. IMPERIAL PERIOD {fl 1] Q. Pompeius S. Falco. Patrician, son of S. [II 3].

Sossia see > Sosia

When he was designated consul in AD 192, > Commodus is said to have considered killing him and his colleague (Cass. Dio 72,22,2). Cos. ord. on 1 January 193, therefore in a leading position when he was confronted with the murder of Commodus and the proclamation of — Pertinax as emperor. He came out against

Sossinati (Looowdto1; Sossindtoi). Mountain people in + Sardinia, who at the time of Strabo (5,2,7) lived, like the neighbouring Parati, Balari (cf. Liv. 41,6,6; 12,5; Plin. HN 3,85; Paus. 10,17,5) and Aconites, at a low

Pertinax

(HA Pert.

5,2). According to Cassius Dio

(73,8) he was to have been proclaimed emperor by the praetorians, at the instigation of Aemilius [II 6] Laetus; Pertinax prevented this by quick intervention, but did not have S. executed. {i 2] Q. Pompeius S. Priscus. Like his son S. [II 3] he bore numerous names (cf. in particular AE 1966, 115). Born probably in AD 117 or 118 as son of Q. Pompeius {II 8] Falco and Sosia [2] Polla. Patrician career, which culminated in 149 in the ordinary consulate. Proconsul of Asia; comes of Marcus [2] Aurelius and Lucius Verus. Member of various priesthoods. He and his son are typical examples of senators of high aristocratic descent, who had great influence, even with the emperor, but no longer played much of a role in the administration of the empire outside Rome. PIR* P 656 and CIL VI 41129. {I 3] Q. Pompeius Senecio S. Priscus. Son of S. [II 2].

His full name is given in ILS 1104 with 38 elements; cf. CIL VI 37071 and AE 1966, 115. Patrician. After taking the lower offices appropriate to his rank, he attained the ordinary consulate in 169. He was given the proconsulate of Asia, probably without taking it up. On his relations see PIR* P 651. [II 4] Q. S. Senecio. Father of Sosia [2] Polla, who married Q. Pompeius [II 8] Falco; as such maternal grandfather of S. [II 2]. Although he was a homo novus, he became cos. ord. in AD 99, the second year of the reign of > Traianus. He supposedly therefore played a considerable role in the latter’s coming to power. Also for this reason the attribution of the inscription CIL VI 1444 =ILS 1022 =CIL VI, pars VIII fasc. 3 p. 4698f. by [x] is highly probable [2. 403 f.]. In AD 97, when Trajan was in office in Germania and was adopted by Nerva [2], S. was governor of the province of Gallia Belgica and evidently gave Trajan comprehensive support in his political ambitions (cf. [3]). During the First Dacian war (— Daci, Dacia B) perhaps legate of Moesia superior or else legate in Dacia; took part in the Second Dacian war as army commander. Honoured with double + dona militaria. In 107 cos. ord. II with Licinius {II 25] Sura. Trajan bestowed on him the triumphal insignia (Cass. Dio 68,16,2). Connected with numerous

people, including Pliny [2] the Younger and Plutarch. On the literature see CIL VI, pars VIII fasc. 3, p. 4698 f.

cultural level, i.e. in rock caves, and only partly from agriculture but mainly from raids into neighbouring regions. P. MELONI, Sardegna romana, 1990, 312 f.

P.M.

Sosthenes (XwoSévyc/Sosthénés). Macedonian noble. After the death of Ptolemaeus [2] Ceraunus his brother Meleager [5] became king of Macedonia at the beginning of 279 BC, but was deposed just two months later. It became apparent that his successor Antipater, nephew of > Cassander, was no match for the Celts and after 45 days he was expelled by S., who managed to overcome the Celtic danger. S. rejected the title of king that was then offered to him and ruled as a > stratégos. When Brennus [2] invaded, Macedonia was again plundered; but when the Celts moved on to Greece, S. regained the trust of the army, withstood several pretenders and held his ground for a whole year in Thessaly. After a victory over the Celts in Thrace, Antigonus [2] was recognised as king (in 277), whereupon S. disappeared from history (Hier. Chron. 1,241; 245 SCHONE; Just. Epit. 24,5,6,2). HM 3, 254-2573; 580-581.

EB,

Sosthenis ([woevic; Sdsthenis). City in the + Spercheus valley, its location at modern Vardates is not without dispute. S. originally belonged to the > Oetaei and probably went into decline with the end of Aetolian rule over this region (Syll.3 421 Z. 22; 636 Z. 13) after 168 BC. Y.BéQquiGNon, La vallée du Spercheios, 1937, 306 f.; A. KONTOGIANNIS, &., in: La Thessalie (Actes du colloque international Lyon 1990), 1994, vol. 2, 239-244; F. STAHLIN, Ss. v. S., RE 3 A, 1198 f. HE.KR.

Sostratus (Xwoteatoc/Sostratos).

[1] Son of Dexiphanes of Cnidus; architect of the early Hellenistic period (1st half of 3rd cent. BC), mentioned several times in ancient literature (Plin. HN 36,83; Lucian, Amores r1; Lucian, Hippias 2). He was also diplomatically active, as one of the philoi of Ptolemaeus {3] IL (Str. 17,1,6). As well as with various canal constructions linked to the conquest of the Egyptian city of > Memphis and buildings at + Cnidus and > Delphi (FdD II/z nos. 198 and 299), he is also especially cre-

663

664

dited with the design of the Pharos of Alexandria

Sosus (X00c/S6sos). The only Greek mosaicist to be

(> lighthouses), one of the > Wonders of the World (Plin. HN 36,83; Suda s. v. @dQos).

both known from written sources (Plin. HN 36,184) and from extant Roman copies of the Imperial Period. S. was active in the 2nd cent. BC in > Pergamum. There he created i.a. a ~ pavimentum in opus tessellatum

SOSTRATUS

W.MULLER,

Architekten

in der Welt der Antike, 1989,

204 f.

C.HO.

[2] S. of Chalcis, tragedian of the rst cent. BC, attested only on an Argive inscription (TrGF I 161).

B.Z.

[3] S. of Nysa, rst cent. BC, from a renowned family of grammarians. His father was called > Menecrates [13],

and his cousin Aristodemus was a tutor in the house of Pompeius [I 3] Magnus (Str. 14,1,48). S. taught ~ Strabo and wrote geographical works incorporating plentiful mythological material (sparsely quoted in Stobaeus and Plutarch): On Rivers, 2 vols.; Tyrrhénikd, Thrakika; Mythikes historias synagogé (mythological accounts). S. also wrote Kynégetika (‘On Hunting’, Stob. 4,20b = FGrH 23 F 4 = SH 735). Probably not identical with the elegiac poet of the same name cited by Eustathius [5]. FGrH 23 (I.A addenda p. *11-*12); SH 731-735. _ S.FO.

[4] Gem cutter of the rst cent. BC, signed a lost cameo which featured Eros in a chariot drawn by two female panthers [1. pl. 24,1-3]. It is not known whether S. also cut intaglii. + Gem cutting 1 M.-L. VOLLENWEIDER, Die Steinschneidekunst und ihre

(> Mosaic II.B.), recorded in literature and in copies, depicting doves surrounded by what is known as asdrétos oikos (unswept floor littered with the remains of a meal). According to Pliny, S. came particularly close to nature in this work. Earlier studies [4] interpreted dove mosaics and the asdrotos oikos as symbolical representations (soul birds and food for the dead). In a critical re-examination of Hellenistic art, more recent studies (cf. [23 5]) have yielded the result that the representation is related to xénia (gifts for a host) [4] and belongs to the area of entertaining trompe I’ceil effects. — Mosaic 1 M.Donperer,

Das kapitolinische Taubenmosaik,

MDAI(R) 98, 1991, 189-197.

in:

2H.MeyeEr, Zu neueren

Deutungen von Asarotos Oikos und Kapitolinischem Taubenmosaik, in: AA 1977, 104-110 3 E.M. MoorMANN, Ein neues Fragment des Taubenmosaiks aus der Hadriansvilla in Tivoli, in: AA 1987, 153-158 4K.Partasca, Das pergamenische Taubenmosaik, in: JDAI 78, 1963, 259-293 5G. VeTTERS, Trompe l’ceil in

der griechischen

Malerei

und Mosaikkunst,

diploma

thesis Vienna 1997 (excerpts in: Forum Archaeologiae —

Zeitschrift fiir klassische Archaologie, http://farch.net 6, Ill, 1998, 1-4).

AL.PA.

Kunstler in spatrepublikanischer und augusteischer Zeit, 1966 20O.M. DatrTon, Cat. of the Engraved Gems of the Post-Classical Periods in the British Museum,

no.770

3 ZaAzorF, AG, 289 f.n. 140 f.

1915,

S.ML.

[5] Hellenistic poet. According to Eust. 1665,48 ff. (=SH 733), he was the author of an elegy entitled Teigeoiac (— Teiresias) on the seven metamorphoses of the mythical seer. Eustathius (1696,49 f.=SH 734) also

traces to S. the story of > Paris having studied with his lover Apollo who gave him the bow with which he would kill Achilles. In both cases, it seems that — Ptolemaeus [64] Chennos was Eustathius’ source. Because Ath. 13,590a-b (=SH 732) refers to a poem entitled "Hotot (Eofoi, presumably a catalogue of the eromenoi of gods) as the work of a certain Sosicrates of Phanagoria, and because Steph. Byz. 459, 13-16 MEINEKE (=SH 731) mentions a S. of Phanagoria, SCHWEIGHAUSER already supposed that Athenaeus’ ‘Sosicrates’ should rather be read as ‘S.’. In this case, the elegy on Teiresias would be derivable from the Eoioi (as suggested by [1]). According to [2. 382], there was a poet Sosicrates, perhaps a contemporary of Phanocles’, while the elegy and its author S. were ‘a mere invention on the part of Ptolemaeus Chennos’ (cf. also S. [3]). 1SH,p.354

2 F.SusEmIHL, Geschichte der griechischen

Litteratur in der Alexandrinerzeit, vol. 1, 1891 3 GH. Uco.in1, Untersuchungen zur Figur des Sehers Teiresias (Classica Monacensia 12), 1995, IL00-1I0.

M.D.MA.

Sosylus (Zwovdoc; Sdsylus). Greek historian, from Laconia, like Silenus [1] in Hannibal’s retinue, “as long as fate allowed”; he was also Hannibal’s Greek teacher (Nep. Hann. 13,3 = FGrH 176 T 1). Author of an ‘offi-

cial’ history of Hannibal in 7 books (Diod. 26,4 = FGrH 176 T 2): S. is sharply criticised by Polybius (3,20,5 = FGrH 176 T 3) for factual errors, but his description, preserved in one of the Wurzburg papyri (PGraec. r), of a complex nautical manoeuvre from a sea battle gives a far more favourable view of his historical writing. FGrH 176 (with comm.); K. MEISTER, Historische Kritik bei Polybios, 1975, 167-172; J. SEIBERT, Untersuchungen zu Hannibal, 1993, 12 f., 261 f. K.MEI.

Sotades (Zwtadnc/Sotddes). [1] Attic poet of the Middle - Comedy (4th cent. BC), explicitly referred to as such by Athenaeus and the Suda [x. test. 1.2]. Athenaeus quotes 35 verses from the play "Eyxhevopneval/Enkleiémenai (or —ov/-oi; ‘The Incarcerated’) in which a cook speaks at length about his skill of preparing fish (fr. 1). Furthermore, two verses from the Ilagahuteotuevos (Paralytroumenos, ‘The Redeemed Prisoner’; fr. 3) were transmitted by Athenaeus (fr. 4) and in a commentary on Job five verses from an unknown play have been preserved. The latter contain an elaborate wordplay with the verbs xaOetv/pathein and pabetv/mathein. 1 PCG VII, 1989, 609-613.

THI.

666

665

[2] S. of Maronea. Hellenistic poet of the 3rd cent. BC. The stichic verse form named after S., the Sotadeus,

consists of three largely Ionic metres, ionici a maiore (-~~) and a spondeus. The ionici allow great freedom (e.g.--~-x or-~ ~- or with ‘irrational’ longum--y~ -), and WEsT is correct in describing it as a ‘Protean-form’ [8]. Some of the verses by S. himself were transmitted by Athenaeus and Hephaestion [1] and are reminiscent of the mock verses by > Hipponax in their acrimony, in the obscenity of some and in the Ionic language. His ancient biography (Suda s.v. =.) knew of the verbal attack on Ptolemaeus [3] II Philadelphus because the latter had married his own sister (274 BC); as a poet of protest, S. drew a heavy punishment for the attack [7]. S. was regarded as the inventor of cinaedology (obscene poetry; Str. 14,41); the performer of Sotadea could also be called kinaidologos (Athen. 14,620e). Quintilian dismissed Sotadea as school literature (Quint. Inst. 1,8,6). Latin poetry tended to use Sotadea in the speech of lower-class characters (cinaedi: Petron. 23,3; drunken Sosia: Plaut. Amph. 168 f.). S. re-wrote the Iliad in Sotadea (fr. 4a-c CollAlex) in a completely different style, a prime example of his rich Alexandrian imagination. Several longer quotations which Stobaeus erroneously attributed to S. (fr. 6-14 {1]) are written in a free metre and contain popular philosophical wisdom, such as “Human happiness is never unclouded” (fr. 6), “Law is God” (fr. 7) or “Live

modestly even asa king!” (fr. 9). They are interpreted as educational verses by [10], meant for the young in Alexandrian Egypt. There are fundamental differences between these later Sotadea and the original verses by S. [3]: the latter are characterized by linguistic and metric precision, acrimony and polemics, the former by a verse form so loose it can hardly be discerned and by shallow moralizing. Sotadea in Ennius (Sota), Accius (Didascalica) and Plautus illustrate this fundamental division in Sotadeic tradition [3] (Sotadea found in a Greek

poem of praise for Alexandria: [2]; POxy. 3010: versus metroaci?; [9]). In fr. 15 CollAlex (Stob. 4,3 4,8), however, elements of both styles can be found: on the one hand, it says, in unmistakably late religious terminology, that “all-creating Aeon” has not ordered everything justly on earth. A tortoise fell onto the head of Aeschylus as he was writing and killed him; Euripides was torn to pieces by Thracian dogs: this, on the other hand, shows the iconoclastic and heretical tendency originally characteristic of S$. Ultimately, it remains unclear whether S. diverted from its original use a preexisting, perhaps cultic metre (ionici) for his tradition of mock poetry that resembled Ionic iambography, or whether he created an Alexandrian novelty which, in the period following, was taken up for other purposes (moralizing verses) [2. 77-78]. EpiTions: 1 CollAlex 238-240 (frr. 1-4) 21H. M. HENpRIKS et al., Papyri from the Groningen Collection I: Encomium Alexandreae, in: ZPE 41, 1981, 71-83 (esp.

76-78). BIBLIOGRAPHY: 3M.Betrin1, A proposito dei versi sotadei, greci e romani, in: Materiali e Discussioni 9,

SOTER

1982, 59-105 41.M. NacHoy, La poésie de la protestation et de la colére (Sotades, Phénix, Kerkidas), in:

Voprosy klassigeskoj Filologii (Moskau) V, 1973, 5-67 5 F.PopHorsky, De versu Sotadeo, thesis, Vienna 1895

6 R.PRETAGOSTINI,

Ricerche sulla poesia alessandrina.

Teocrito, Callimacho, Sotade, 1984

7 G.WEBER, The

Hellenistic Rulers and Their Poets. Silencing Dangerous Poets?, in: Ancient Society 29, 1998-1999, 147-174 8 M.L. West, Greek Metre, 1982, 144f. 9M.L. West, The Metre of Arius’ Thalia, in: Journ. of Theological Studies 1982, 98-105

10U.von WiLaMowiITz-MOEL-

LENDOREF, Lesefriichte, in: Hermes 33, 1898, 514. W.D.F.

Sotades Painter. Attic red-figured vase painter, active c. 460-450 BC. The name SP refers primarily to the Sotades who signed as the potter. With his creations he towered over the figure painter, whether or not they are identical; he was Athens’s most original potter. His repertory, which survives in limited numbers, includes bowls, often decorated with stamping on the inside (+ Stamped ware), cups, which are painted — some coral red — extremely delicately on a white ground, rhyta in the shape of heads of animals and people and even figural forms such as a horseman or a camel driver, a pygmy dragging a dead crane or a negro in the grip of a crocodile. All moulded vases are combined with a part turned on the potter’s wheel, bearing pictures by the SP and some other painters. Their themes, whether taken from the > thiasos, the troublesome lives of the pygmies or the Amazons or from Athenian mythology (e.g. a drinking cup shaped like a seated Sphinx, London, BM E 788), expand on the statement of the sculpture. A high point is certainly an outsized — astragalos (London, BM E 804), a real ankle-bone used for games and divination, whose painted figures (a bearded man guiding thirteen girls, some levitating) evoke a multitude of interpretations. Even phialai and cups by SP, with moulded animals or ribs instead of pictures, are without compare among vases. BEAZLEY, ARV*, 763-765; BEAZLEY, Paralipomena, 415 f.; BEAzLEY, Addenda’, 286 f.; M.ROBERTSON, The Art of Vase-Painting in Classical Athens, 1992, 185-190;

H.HoFFMANN, Sotades. Greek Vases, 1997.

Symbols

of Immortality on A.L-H.

Sotadeus see > Sotades [2] Soteira see > Soter Soter (Zwtijo/Soter), less often Zadwtn¢/Saotés [x], feminine Ywtewo/Sdteira: ‘saviour’. From the Homeric

hymns (Hom. H. 22,5; 33,6) onwards the epithet of very diverse Greek deities in the role of helper in time of need (esp. Zeus, Artemis, Asclepius, Dioscuri, also anonymously: theoi Séteres/theds Sotér) [2], also an epithet for humans based on crucial actions (of help) (e.g. Aesch. Supp. 980-982; Aesch. Cho. 264; Hdt. Gepesiey, WNoiike. Uearinaee NDYsany, WOle, bay” IDyteysk Ste 11,26,6). Its applicability to gods and mortals predes-

SOTER

tined the term for the Hellenistic ruler cult; it swiftly

turned from spontaneous expressions of the population’s gratitude into royal self-presentation (form of address, state cult). Antigonus [1] Monophthalmus and Demetrius [7] I received divine honours as Sétéres in Athens in 307 (Diod. 20,46,2; Plut. Demetrios 9,1; 10,4; 13,23 [3. 44-48]). The same happened posthumously to Antigonus [3] Doson on behalf of all Greeks (Pol. 5,9,10; [4. 92 no. 77]), and the cult title Sdtér is also recorded for Philippus [7] V (SEG 37,612). Probably right at the the beginning of his reign, the first Ptolemy received the epithet Sotér ([5. 238 f.]; sceptical: [6. 56 note 35]), and from this a cult of the Theds Soter Ptolemaeus [1] I [5. 241] or of the Theoi Sotéres Ptolemaeus | and Berenice [1] [7. 156 no. 1] soon developed, which was claimed anew by Ptolemaeus [15] IX, Cleopatra [II 5] II, Cleopatra [II 6] III and Cleopatra {II 8] V Selene as well as Ptolemaeus [16] X and Cleopatra [II 9] VI Berenice III. Because of their success against the Galatians, Antiochus [2] I, Attalus [4] I, and

his successor Eumenes [3] II assumed the epithet S6¢ér; the Seleucid Demetrius [7] I and several Indo-Greek kings of the rst century BC (Diomedes [3] S., Dionysius [3] S., Hermaeus [1] S., Hippostratus [3] S.) continued the tradition. In addition, however, the term remained in use independent of cultic worship — as an appreciation of particular actions by individuals, with the city or even the whole cosmos, depending on the context, being the object of ‘salvation’. Hellenistic kings (e.g. OGIS 253; IDélos 1551) as well as deserving citizens were honoured in numerous inscriptions as Sdter [8], as were Roman officials from the time of Rome’s eastward expansion onwards (Plut. Flamininus 10,7; Syll.3 751 f.; IG XII 5,557 [9. 189-194]) and, later, Roman emperors (e.g. SEG 42,390 and IG IV 1406). Yet the term never became an official imperial title [10. roro f.] probably not least because of the lack of an exact Latin equivalent (Cic. Verr. 2,2,154). The association with worldly benefactors may have been the reason that Sotér as an epithet of Jesus did not become established in Christianity until relatively late (particularly in gnostic circles) [xx] (cf. the acrostic IXOY= = Jésous Chréistds Theou Hyids Sotér, which emerged towards the end of the 2nd century [12]; > Ichthys [r]). ~ Epiclesis; > Ruler cult 1 A. ADLER, s. v. Saotes, RE1 A, 2308 20O.HOFER,s. v. Soteira. SOter, ROSCHER 4, 1236-1272 3 CH. HABICHT, Gottmenschentum und _ griechische Stadte, *1970 4M.B. Hatzopoutos, Macedonian Institutions under the Kings, 1996, vol. 2 5 W.Huss, Agypten in hellenistischer Zeit 332-30 v. Chr., 2001 6R.A. Hazzarp, Did Ptolemy I Get His Surname from the Rhodians in 304?, in: ZPE 93,1992, 52-56 7 O.RUBENSOHN, Neue Inschrifte aus Agypten, in: APF 5, 1913, 156-169

8 T.R. STEVENSON, Social and Psychological Interpretations of Graeco-Roman Religion, in: Antichthon 30, 1996,1-18 9 Pu.-S.G.FREBER, Der hellenistische Osten und das Illyricum unter Caesar, 1993 10 W. FOERSTER, s. v. Soter A, ThWB7, to05—-1o12

668

667

11J.ENGEMANN,S. v.

Fisch, RAC 7, 1024-1047 D-G, ThWB 7, 1or5—1022.

12 W. FOERSTER, s. v. Soter KL.ZI.

Soteria. When feminine singular (Zwtngia/Sotéria), a

~ personification of (physical) well-being, whose cult in the Peloponnese is documented (IG IV 1319; Paus. 7,21,73 752453) [1]. More often neuter plural (Zwtjeva/ Sétéria): thanks offerings (Xen. An. 3,2,9), from the early Hellenistic period onwards festivities to mark the occasion of an event celebrated as a ‘deliverance’, initially once only (OGIS 4: the Nesiotai for Thersippus; Syll.3 391: the Delians for Philocles), later as an historical day of commemoration [2. 151], as a rule recurring annually (as at first [Priene 11: for liberation from tyranny). The amphictyonic S. at Delphi (+ Amphiktyonia), established on the occasion of a victory over the Galatians in 279/8 BC, acquired pan-Hellenic significance when organised anew by the Aetolians in 246/5 [3; 4]. As well as gods, local heroes were also worshipped in the framework of S. (Plut. Aratus 53; Syll.3 624). + Personification; > Soter 1 J.Cu. Batty, s. v. S., LIMC 7.1, 800 2 A.CHANIOTIS, Sich selbst feiern?, in: M.WO6rRLE, P.ZANKER (Eds.),

Stadtbild und Biirgerbild im Hellenismus, 1995, 147-172 3 G. NACHTERGAEL, Les Galates en Gréce et les S. de Delphes, 1977. 4.C.CHampion, The S. at Delphi, in: AJPh I16, 1995, 213-220.

KL.ZI.

Soterichus (Swthe.yoc/Sotérichos). Epic writer of the 3rd/4th cents. AD from Hyasis (in Libya), lived under Diocletianus (AD 284-305), and, according to Suda s. v. 2., wrote an encomium to him. Further works: Bassarika or Dionysiakd (4 books), Pantheia of Babylon,

Ariadne, Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Python or Alexandriacus (on the storming of Thebes by Alexander [4] the Great) and an epic on his own homeland; Schol. Lycoph. 486 [2. 641*"] also mentions Kaledoniakd (on the myth of the Caledonian boar) [2]. 1FGrH 641

2M.Cn. G.MULLER, Tzetzes, Scholia eis

Lycophrona, vol. 2, 1811, 641-642, n. 11 (for the older bibliography). S.FO.

Sothis (owic/sdthis according to Heph. [5] 1,1). Constellation (Egyptian spd.t, from spd ‘sharp’), essentially corresponding to Sirius (its main star). Identified with ~ Isis, it appeared in a prominent role as early as the Pyramid texts (> Funerary literature) [x]. It retained this role until the end of the Egyptian religion. S. is one of the 36 decan stars (> Astronomy B.2.). Its first heliacal rising was thought to introduce a new year and forebode the flooding of the > Nile. Its 70-day phase of invisibility was associated with the equally long period of embalming. S. was considered to be the eye of the sun [2]. The myth of the ‘Distant Goddess’ (> Tefnut, legend of), in which S. is identified with Tefnut, is based on its astronomical behaviour. 1 R. Krauss, Astronomische stellungen, 1997, 173-180

Konzepte und Jenseitsvor2A.VON LiEvEN, Scheiben

669

670

SOUL,

MIGRATION

OF

THE

H.B. GotrscHAaLk, Aristotelian Philosophy in the Roman

am Himmel — Zur Bedeutung von itn und itn.t, in: Studien zur Altagyptischen Kultur 29, 2001, 277-282

World, in: ANRW

3 G.RoEDER, S. und Satis, in: ZAS 45, 1908, 22-30.

1926, 565 f.; App. 179*.

II 36.2, 1987, 1079-1174;

GGPh’,

RS.

A.v.L.

Sotion (Zwtiwv; Sdtion). [1] It is uncertain to how many individuals, and in what combinations, the following reports of S. should be referred. (1)-(5) are linked by an interest in marvels and anecdotes [1.128, 2.167f.]; (5), (9) and (xo) indicate a Peripatetic who may be distinct from (11); (4) and (ro) indicate a date in the first half of the rst century AD, and the other reports are consistent with this. (rz) Author of a “little book” (Phot. Bibl. cod. 189,145b28-36), Diverse reports on marvellous rivers, springs and lakes.’ The identification of the extant Paradoxographus Florentinus [1.13 5-136; 2.3 15-329] as part of this is dubious. (2) Author of a treatise on the effects of the waters of the Crathis (Tzetzes, Schol. in Lyc. 1021: [2.147]). (3) Aornos is a cave rather than a lake (ibid. 704: [2.168]). (4) S. heard from > Potamon of Lesbos (FGrH 147 F 1) that Alexander the Great named a city in India after his favourite dog (Plutarch, Alexander 61). (5) The Peripatetic author of a Horn of ~ Amalthea [r] (cf. Plinius, HN praef. 24) full of stories of various sorts, including one of > Demosthenes [2] and Lais the hetaera (Gell. NA 1,8,1). (6) S. is named as a source by > Geoponica 1, praef. p.3,14 BECKH. (7) Applying the term ‘moonless’ to days at new moon (Anecdota Parisina 1,391,3 CRAMER). (8) Author of refutations of > Diocles [9] of Magnesia — later therefore than Sotion [2] — containing an attack on Epicurus (Diog. Laert. 10,4). (9) Aristotle’s definition of sleep (as the privation of waking) conflicts with S.’s claim that privation is the absence of something naturally present (Alex. Aphr. In Aristot. Top., CAG II.2 434,2). “The associates of Achaicus and S.” criticised “the ancient interpreters of the Categories, Boethus [4], Ariston [2], Andronicus [4], Eudorus [2] and Athenodorus [3]” for speaking of relatives (t& medc tWta pros ti) in the singular rather than the plural (Simpl. In Aristot. Cat., CAG VIII 159,24). A fragment in PFayum 3 = PLitLond 180 [4. no. 165] may be part of acommentary by this S. on Aristotle’s Topica [3.215-216]. (10) Brother of the Peripatetic Apollonius (Plut. Frat. am. 16,487d). (11) A pupil of the Roman eclectic philosopher Q. > Sextius [I 1], teacher of — Seneca [2], advocating — vegetarianism in view of the migration of the soul (— Soul, migration of the) and the effects on health (Sen. Ep. 108,17-21, cf. 49,2; [5]). (12) Excerpts of a work On

anger (Stob. 3,14,10; 3,20,53-553 4,445,593 4,48b,30. [6]). (13) Excerpts on fraternal love; cf. (10) (Stobaeus 4,27,6-8 and 17-18).

-» Paradoxographi 1 A. GIANNINI, Studi sulla paradossografia greca II, in: Acme 17, 1964, 99-140 2 Id. (ed.), Paradoxographorum Graecorum Reliquiae, 1966 3 Moravx, vol. 2, 1984, 211-216 4PacKk*, 125 5R.SORABjI, Animal Minds and Human Morals, 1993, 125, Nr. 23 6 P.Rassow, Antike Schriften itiber Seelenheilung und Seelenleitung, 1914, 82-84, 97-100.

[2] Author of an influential work on the history of philosophy, Atadoyxai tov piroodgwv (Diadochai ton philoséphon, Successions of philosophers) often cited by > Diogenes [17] Laertius. The work was written between 200 (it included Chrysippus, who died in 208/4) and 170 BC (it was epitomized by > Heraclides [19] Lembos). According to Athenaeus he was an Alexandrian. It is likely that he was connected with the Peripatetic school (— Peripatos) and continued its interest in philosophical biography [4]. His work consisted of at least 13 books. It organized the history of Greek philosophy into successions (+ Doxography), in which traditions are handed down from teacher to pupil. The origins of this method go back to Aristotle and Theophrastus, but Sotion appears to have been its first systematic proponent [6]. His work plainly inspired the structure of Diogenes Laertius’ Bioi (see the overview in [3.70]). Diogenes cites him 23 times in all but 2 of his 10 books, and also includes 8 references to Heraclides’ Epitome. It is, however, far from certain that Diogenes used Sotion’s work directly [5]. Other writers who refer to him are Athenaeus, Sextus Empiricus and Eunapius. Sotion did not discuss doctrinal matters, but concentrated on issues pertaining to philosophers’ lives (including anecdotal material), writings, chronology, and relations with other philosophers. In the 13th book he discussed the relation between Greek philosophy and barbarian thought (see Diog. Laert. 1,1,6). Athenaeus 8,33 6d also reports that Sotion wrote a commentary on the Silloi of Timon of Phlius (who also features in the Diadochai). EDITIONS, COMMENTARIES: 1 WEHRLI, Schule, Suppl. DLO Os BIBLIOGRAPHY: 2 W.vONKIENLE, Die Berichte iiber die

Sukzessionen der Philosophen in der hellenistischen und spatantiken Literatur, 1961, 79-91

3 J.MEJER, Dioge-

nes Laertius and His Hellenistic Background, 1978, 62-74 4 F. WEHRLI, in: GGPh’, vol. 3, 1983, 584 5 F.ARONADIO, Due fonti laerziane: Sozione e Demetrio di Magnesia, in: Elenchos 11, 1990, 203-233 6 J. MANSFELD, The Sources, in: K. ALGRA et al. (ed.), The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, 1999, 23D5 D.T.R.

Soul, migration of the. The Greek terms petewpbyaouc (metempsychosis, literally ‘re-ensoulment’), wetevowuatwoug (metensomatosis, ‘re-embodiment’), maduyyeveota (palingenesia, ‘re-becoming’) are not recorded in ancient sources before the rst cent. BC (only the verbal phrase méhw yiyveo@avpdlin gignesthai is in Plato; the noun in the other sense, that of periodic world renewal, is documented in the older Stoa). However, the doctrine of the migration of the soul is demonstrably present in the Greek cultural sphere from the 2nd half of the 6th cent. BC at the latest. + Pherecydes [1] of Syros already seems to have advanced it [1]. It is then safely attested in

SOUL,

MIGRATION

OF THE

672

671

> Pythagoras [1] (cf. Xenocrates 21 B 7 DK). Hdt. 2,123 is also probably thinking not least of Pythagoras when he — wrongly — derives the migration of the soul from the Egyptians. The possibility of Indian influence is discussed by modern scholars (cf. [2.133]; sceptical [3]; for independent evolution [4.140f.]). The chronological relationship of the Pythagorean and Orphic doctrines of migration of the soul is disputed (cf. [4], who argues that the Orphics were first (> Orphism, Orphic poetry)). The most important proponents of migration of the soul after Pythagoras were > Empedocles [1] and -» Plato [1], whose presentation would be constitutive for subsequent periods (esp. Middle Platonism and Neoplatonism). Even the earliest sources in Greece give migration of the soul an ethical dimension. It is interpreted as a punishment for a preceding guilt, whether for a mythical original guilt (the dismemberment of Dionysus in the Orphic tradition, cf. [5.494-500]) or an individual act (murder or perjury: Emp. 31 B 115 DK; cf. on Pherecydes [1.123f.]; because the human soul could enter animals as well, meat-eating was also regarded as murder: Emp. 31 B 136-139 DK). A life conscientiously lived could improve the interim lot of souls in the afterlife (cf. Pind. Ol. 2,61-67; Pl. Phdr. 249a, Resp. 614¢; on Pythagoras cf. [6]). It also had a beneficial effect on rebirth. Whoever succeeded in keeping himself innocent of any unjust act could expect elevation at the next re-embodiment, while evildoers drew a worse fate in life upon themselves (cf. Pl. Resp. 617e-620d, who emphasizes the individual’s own responsibility). The spectrum of rebirths ranged from various species of animals — occasionally even plants (Emp. 31 B 117; 31 B 127 DK; perhaps also an underlying factor in the notorious Pythagorean ban on the consumption of beans? on which [2.183-185]) — by way of women (PI. Tim. 42b-c; 90e92c) up to the social elite (Pind. fr. 133; Emp. 31 B 146 DK; cf. also Pl. Phdr. 248d—249b; who stresses the ‘affinity’ of the migration of the soul ‘to the upper classes’ [7]). The final step, after threefold incarnation at the highest level (Pind. Ol. 2,68-70; Pl. Phdr. 249a und 256b), was the heroization (Pind. fr. 133; gold lamella B 1,11 ZUNTZ) or deification of the soul (gold lamellae A 1,8 and A 4,4 ZuNTz; cf. Emp. 31 B 112,4 DK; rapture to the Isle of the Blessed: Pind. Ol. 2,70-80). Hence, the original condition was restored (cf. [8]; duration of the entire cycle: 10,000 — i.e. uncountably many — years according to Pl. Phdr. 248e, cf. Emp. 31 B 115,6 DK; the individual reincarnations take place 1,000 years apart: Pl. Phdr. 249a; Resp. 615a). People on the verge of deification were characterized by e.g. remarkable powers of recollection (mmnémé): they could recall their own previous existences, and recall to others theirs (cf. Emp. 31 B 129 on Pythagoras; Porph. Vita Pythagorae 26; > Myllias). Orphic and Bacchic mystery cults offered assistance on the path to the goal. They promised initiands purification (xd0agou/katharsis, - Katharsis) from pre-

ceding guilt through the rites, and gave instruction on correct behaviour in the Underworld. Initiates came thereby to the assurance of finally escaping ‘the cycle of pain and suffering’ (gold lamella A 1,5 ZuNTz; cf. OF 229f.). Plato, in whose thought the doctrine of the migration of the soul played an important role, makes explicit reference to these cults (e.g. Pl. Phd. 69c; cf. [9]), transferring their function to the ‘true philosophy’, which, esp. in Phaidon, is understood as katharsis on a higher plane (purification of the body from the obscuring of insight caused by the same body) and a guide to contentment in the afterlife (cf. Pl. Phd. 82b rof. and 114b-c; the philosophical existence accordingly regarded as supreme reincarnation: Pl. Phdr. 248d). By way of Plato and Pythagoreanism (increasingly Platonic in tone), the migration of the soul also entered the Latin tradition, from > Ennius [1] on (cf. esp. Verg. Aen. 6,713-751 and Ov. Met. 15,153-175; 453-478; [r0.87-92]), and it also found its way into Manichaeism (+ Mani) and > Gnosicism (cf. [10.96-101, 13.4-

137]). On > Origenes [2], to whom a doctrine of migration of the soul is frequently and dubiously attributed, cf. [10.137-145]. > Afterlife, concepts of; + Deification; — Mysteries; + Orphism, Orphic poetry; > Pythagoras [1]; > Soul, theory of the; > Vegetarianism 1H.S. ScHrpit, Pherekydes of Syros, 1990, 104-127 2 W. BurKERT, Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism, 1972 3 K. KarTTUNEN, India in Early Greek Literature,1989,112-115

4 G.Casapio, La metempsicosi tra

Orfeo e Pitagora, in: PH. BoRGEAuD

(ed.), Orphisme et

Orphée, 1991, 119-155 5 R.PaRKER, Early Orphism, in: A. POWELL (ed.), The Greek World, 1995, 483-510 6 B.CENTRONE,

Introduzione

ai Pitagorici,

1996,

59

7 G. LoRENZ, Seelenwanderungslehre und Lebensfiihrung in Oberschichten: Griechenland und Indien, in: ThLZ II5, 1990, 409-416 8 CH. RIEDWEG, Initiation-TodUnterwelt, in: F.Grar (ed.), Ansichten griechischer Rituale, 1998, 380-382 9A.BERNABE, Platone e |’Orfismo, in: G. SFAMENI GASPARRO (ed.), Destino e salvezza, 1998, 69-80 10H.ZANDER, Geschichte der Seelenwan-

derung in Europa, 1999. A.BOuME, Die Lehre von der Seelenwanderung in der antiken griechischen und indischen Philosophie, 1989; Casapi0o (s. [4]); H.S. Lona, A Study of the Doctrine of Metempsychosis in Greece, 1948; ROHDE, vol. 2; F. SOLMSEN, Reincarnation in Ancient and Early Christian Thought, in: Id., KS 3, 1982, 465-494; W.STETTNER, Die Seelenwanderung bei Griechen und Romern, 1934; H. ZANDER, (s. [ITo]).

CRI.

Soul, theory of the A. CONCEPT OF THE SOUL ARISTOTLE C.StToicisM E. METAPHYSICS

B. PLATO AND D. Late ANTIQUITY

A. CONCEPT OF THE SOUL In order to understand the concept and the theory of the soul (‘psychology’: Adyoc/ldgos, ‘theory’, from wuyn/psyché, ‘soul’) in Graeco-Roman Antiquity, it is

673 important to distinguish between two ways of perceiving the soul: the soul as an essential component of a human being, as the subject of thinking and feeling, which controls one’s behaviour, and the soul as the general quality that infuses a living thing with life. The first view is based on the perception of the soul (psyché) as an individual’s shadowy doppelganger, which separates itself from the body at the time of death, as found in the works of Homer (Hom. Il. 23,72; 104; Hom. Od. 11,83). Under the influence of religious movements such as + Orphism, this led to the concept of the soul (psyche) as the true self that determines human behaviour (Socrates, Plato). This concept presupposes that the various psychological functions, such as those of the intellect (xdo0s, nous), the heart (kér) or spiritedness (thymos), which are quite separate in Homer’s works, are integrated into a system whose functioning provides an explanation for human behaviour. This sort of integrated concept of the soul is evident for the first time in the works of > Socrates [2], at any rate as he is depicted in Plato’s Protagoras. Among the Pre-Socratics (for example in > Empedocles [1], + Anaxagoras [2] and > Democritus [1]) we find a different view, namely that all living creatures have a soul. In Greek, living beings in general are referred to as ‘having a soul’ (uwuya, émpsycha). This appears originally to have presupposed a certain conception of life, which is that life — at least in the case of animated bodies — implies cognition and desire; accordingly, these qualities were also attributed to plants (PI. Ti. 77a-c; [Aristot.] De plantis 815a 10-15). It was not until Aristotle gained influence that a clear distinction was made between plants and animals. According to Aristotle, plants have a soul, but they have no cognition and hence no desire (Aristot. An. 411b 27-30). The Stoics (+ Stoicism), by contrast, believed that plants do not have a soul because they have no cognition (Ps.Plut. Placita 5,26,3). Plato, Aristotle and many philosophers who followed them believed that not only plants, animals and human beings have a soul, but all creatures, at least all animated bodies, such as the stars. Thus > Plato [1] attributes a soul to the world in his Timaeus, and the Platonics and Stoics did so later as well. The distinction between two concepts of the soul is blurred by the fact that with human beings the life principle and the self are seen as one; and in the teachings of the migration of the soul also by the fact that there is a presumption of a certain kind of soul (the human soul), which can animate different types of bodies (— Soul, migration of the). It is only the human soul with which we are concerned below. B. PLATO AND ARISTOTLE Central to the ancient theory of the soul is the belief that the soul is the basis for human awareness of, and desire for, things. Awareness (actual or supposed) and desire determine human behaviour. Indeed, according to Socrates, as he is depicted in Plato’s Protagoras (PI.

674

SOUL, THEORY

OF THE

Prt. 358b-d), it is > opinion (d6dxa) itself that deter-

mines one’s behaviour: We regard something as good, and for that very reason we desire it. No one acts voluntarily if he does not ultimately consider that action to be good. Joy and suffering, desire and fear depend on one’s opinions, if indeed they are not themselves a form of opinion (ibid. 358d-359a). In his Republic (Pl. Resp. 437b-441¢), Plato argues against this view that human behaviour is consistently governed by reason and distinguishes between a rational and a non-rational part of the soul, each of which has its own forms of desire (desire/epithymia and thymos) that come into conflict with reason (nous, logistikon) and may in fact win out. He was followed in this view by Aristotle [6], particularly in his moral psychology, but also by later Platonism and Aristotelianism. It is important to note that the division of the soul is not based on assigning cognitive abilities to reason and forms of desire to a non-rational part of the soul. Instead, all parts of the soul have both their own form of desire and their own specific form of cognitivity. Even the non-rational parts form their own opinion (d6xa in Plato’s Republic) or at least their own conception (— Phantasia).

C. STOICISM The Stoics returned to the view contained in Plato’s Protagoras which held that reason (> Logos, Lat. ratio) always prevails, because the soul in a narrower sense is nothing other than reason. Under the influence of objects on our senses, for example, reason produces conceptions and thoughts that it assesses and either agrees or disagrees with. Opinions (ddxai) constitute agreement with conceptions: emotions, wants and desires are all based on agreement with a certain kind of conception, namely an impulsive or emotive conception (hormétikai, Stob. Ecl. 2,86,17-87,13 W.; cf. Sen. Ep. 113,18; Cic. Tusc. 4,14-15). What appears to be emotional conflict is nothing other than the wavering of reason in its agreement. This view of the soul leads to the development of a concept of the will (prohairesis, boulésis, thélésis; Lat. voluntas; > Will) as reason’s disposition to agree with conceptions (particularly impulsive conceptions) or not, and to adhere to them. This concept of the will was taken up in particular by Christian authors beginning in the mid 2nd cent. AD (Iustinus [6], Tatian, above all Origenes [2], De principiis, bk. 6). D. LATE ANTIQUITY

During the late antique period the distinction between the > intellect and the non-rational part of the soul was emphasized so strongly that the division between body and soul was often replaced by a tripartite division among body, soul and intellect (s6ma — psyché — nous), with emphasis on the dependence of the soul on the body (cf. e.g. Galen’s treatise Quod animi mores corporis temperamento sequantur, “That the qualities of the soul depend on the temperament of the body’). In

SOUL, THEORY OF THE

676

675

orthodox Christian and Gnostic texts, the intellect is often replaced by the spirit (+ Pneuma). Instead of distinguishing between the soul and the intellect or spirit, one might distinguish between two souls, one rational, the other irrational (for example in > Numenius or the Manichaeans; > Mani).

E. METAPHYSICS The metaphysics of the soul is considered by the ~» Presocratics to be a material that animates the body, for example in the form of small, round, fire-like atoms (according to Democritus in Aristot. An. 405a 8-13; — Atomism). It is in Plato that we find for the first time the conception of the soul as an immaterial > substance with its own life (internal life), which enters into the body to animate it, although it is itself immortal, since it is immaterial. This kind of dualism is also found in the early works of Aristotle and in the entire Platonic tradition. In later Aristotelian works (e.g. De anima) this idea is replaced by a view of the soul as the immaterial form of the animated body — which, however, exists only in its embodied form. This theory is not widely accepted in the Hellenistic > Peripatos, but during the Imperial Period it was taken up particularly by Alexander [26] of Aphrodisias. According to this view it is not the soul, but merely the active intellect within the soul that is immortal. The Stoics returned to a material conception of the soul. Christian doctrine, particularly in the West, shows some fluctuation: the soul (psyché, Lat. anima) is often seen as immortal not because of its nature, but owing to God’s grace, since it was created; this was in part influenced by the doctrine that everything that has come into being naturally dies, but also by Plato’s Timaeus (Iren. Adv. haereses 2,34,2-4). Moreover, the soul is often regarded as material — because it was created, or because of Stoic influence (Tert.

Soul, weighing of the (Psychostasia). The weighing of the soul occurred in Egyptian religion; the hearts of the dead, which were thought to contain the memory of their actions, are weighed with a feather under the supervision of > Osiris [1.321-323]. The Greek idea of the weighing of the soul is entirely different: it takes place before death and is not assessed according to moral criteria. Here men’s fates are weighed (xio/ker, > Ker), as a result of which it is decided who will live or die (kerostasia). This version was probably already known to the author of the > Aethiopis from which the Iliad took the motif [2.3 16-318]. In Hom. Il. 22,209213, Zeus seizes a set of scales and places the two kéres of Achilles and Hector in them. In the course of this, Hector’s fateful day tilts the scales so that he has to die in battle [3.1421]. In Hom. Il. 8,68-74, two kéres, one for the Greeks and one for the Trojans, are actually weighed collectively. In the tragedy Psychostasia (TrGF 3 F 279-280a; cf. Schol. Hom. Il. 8,70 and 22,210) Aeschylus apparently is the first to replace the kéres by souls, as a result of the change in the concept of the soul in the meantime. Here Zeus weighs the souls of Memnon and Achilles, whilst their mothers Eos and Thetis stand next to the weighing-pans. There are extant pictorial depictions from the 6th/5th cents. BC of this scene which show the kéres of both heroes on the scales [4]. The weighing of the soul is parodied in Aristoph. Ran. 1364-1410. ~~ Psychology 1K.Kocn,

Geschichte der agyptischen Religion, 1993

2 W.KuLLMANN, Die Quellen der Ilias (Hermes ES 14), 1960 3 W.P6TscHER, Moira, Themis und tw im

homerischen Denken, in: WS 73, 1960, 5-39 4 R. VOLLKOMMER, s.v. Ker, LIMC 6.1, 14-23.

J.STE.

Sound law see - Phonetics and phonology

De anima 6-9; Faustus of Riez, Ep. 3; Maximus Homo-

logetes, Ep. 6, PG 91, 424-433). + Ethics; — Intellect; -» Metaphysics; — Ontology; + Psyche; — Rationality; > Soul, migration of the; > Will H.J. BLUMENTHAL, Plotinus’ Psychology, 1971; J. BREMMER, The Early Greek Concept of the Soul, 1983; D.B. Ciaus, Toward the Soul, 1981; A.J. FESTUGIERE, La révélation d’Hermés Trismégiste, vol. 3: Les doctrines de lame, 1950; J.-P. GouRINAT, Les stoiciens et |’Aame, 1996;

B. GUNDERT, Soma and Psyche in Hippocratic Medicine, in: J. P. WRIGHT, P. PoTTER (eds.), Psyche and Soma, 2000,

13-35; W.K. C. GuTurRig, Plato’s Views on the Nature of the Soul, in: G. VLasTos (ed.), Plato, vol. 2: Garden City,

1971, 230-243; J.HOLZHAUSEN (ed.), Psyche — Seele — Anima. FS K. Alt, 1998;

M. NussBauM, A. Rorty (eds.),

Essays on Aristotle’s ‘De anima’, 1992; R.J. O’CONNELL,

The Origin of the Soul in St. Augustine’s Later Works, 1987; E.ROHDE, Psyche, '1898;

G. ROMEYER DHERBEY,

C. VIANO (eds.), Etudes sur le ‘De anima’ d’Aristote, 1996. M.ER.

Sound theory I. Or1GIN II. HeEriTaGe TRANSMISSION

III. SEmitTic

I. ORIGIN It is difficult to differentiate the concepts of basic acoustic and musical terms in the ancient European languages, just as it is in modern languages (cf. German Klang (‘sound’) and Ton (‘tone’, ‘sound’), [3. 130]). We can, however, trace the development of individual words from everyday usage down toa specific technical meaning in the wake of the emergence of ancient sci-

ence. In Greek, this semantic field includes such terms as poposd/psophos, p0dyyod/phthongos, pwvi/phone and tovoc/tonos. Psophos is the general term for ‘noise’ as a phenomenon accompanying an action (Xen. An. 4,2,4), vocal din (Soph. Aj. 1116-1117) or musical sounds (Eur. Cyc. 443). Pséphos was coined as a concept of natural philosophy (the basic category of the audible: Aristot. Ph. 7,5,250a 20) and the theory of phonetics (sibilant: Pl. Tht. 203b). Aristotle [6] distinguishes be-

677

678

tween psophos (Lat. sonus) and phone (Lat. vox) when explaining acoustic phenomena as conditioned by the factors of ‘impact’ (xdnyt/plége) and ‘movement’ (xivrnouc/kinésis) of the air (Aristot. An. 2,8). Whether psophos was adopted as a concept of music theory depended on whether the subcategory of discrete quantity (th1)80c/pléthos — including number as well) was chosen as the basis of measurement (Pythagorean framework with the use of pséphos: Archyt. 47 B 1 DK; Nicom. Harmonicum enchiridium 4: MSG 242,20-21; Ptol. Harm. 1,1: 3,2 DURING), or rather the category of continuous quantity (mégethos [2. 51] — cf. Aristox. Harm.

moric ratio, the tone cannot be divided into two equal semitones (cf. [4. 182-185; 2. 139]), and was therefore divided into the greater (Aetpa/leimma) and the lesser (aotoun/apotome) semitone and their difference, the komma. These questions, which continued to be topical down to the modern period [4], were dealt with in the earliest attested treatises on musical theory (fragments of Philolaus [2] and of Archytas [1] in Boeth. 3,5-8 and 3,11 Friedlein).

2544: 55,4-6 DA RIOS; 2,32: 41,13-42,3 Da Rios. Ari-

stoxenus does not use psophos). Phthongos generally means ‘noise’ (Eur. [A 9-10); it became a grammatical technical term for ‘diphthong’. As a term of music theory, it designates an individual tone on a scale (Aristox. Harm. 1,15: 20,15-17 Da Rios; cf. Pl. Ti. 80a; Aristot. An. 2,8), as determined by its relative pitch (téouc/tdsis: Cleonides 2: MSG 181,7), for instance in the ascending series of terms phthongos (‘tone’) — didstéma (‘interval’) — systéma (‘system’) (Aristox. Harm. 1,15-16: 20,15-21,7 DA Rios), or, in de-

scending order, mélos (‘song’) — phthdngos (‘tone’) — phoné (‘sound’) — psophos (‘noise’) — pléxis aéros (‘air blast’) (Theon 50,4-7 HILLER). For Nicomachus [9],

SOUND

THEORY

Il. HERITAGE Ps6phos and phthoéngos were occasionally adopted as loan words in ancient and medieval Latin musical writings, but were otherwise rendered by sonus (musicus) and vox [5]. In the Middle Ages, phthongus received such new meanings as ‘key’, ‘whole tone’ and so forth. As a key term in Latin music theory, tonus maintained its Greek connotations. Based on Aristotle [6] and current from around 1250, a derivation which was to be decisive for subsequent theory defined the discipline of music as scientia media, a ‘middle discipline’ between mathematics and physics in the — artes liberales (> Music I.C.4.). The physical tone (sonus) was understood as a continuous stream of very small parts that could be interpreted in terms of proportions. Following the modal notation of the r2th-13th cents., this

phthongos is the indivisible musical atom, or auditory

gave rise to a rhythmic notation (mensural notation)

unit (wovac/monds, Harmonicum enchiridium 12: MSG 261,4-5; cf. lambl. Ta theologoumena tés arithmetikés 31-11; 6,5-9 DE FALCO).

conceptually based on Aristotle’s Physics; though this notation was modified several times, it is still the basis of the conservative notation that is in use today.

Tonos, derived from teinein (‘to stretch’, e.g. the string of a bow: Hom. Il. 4,124), can denote ‘that which is stretched’ (such as bed straps, Hdt. 9,118, or sinews/ Lat. nervi), but also ‘the state of being stretched’, for

instance of ship ropes (Hdt. 7,36); hence the music-related uses of the term tonos in the sense of ‘individual note of a scale’ (phthdngos), ‘interval’ (didstéma, here: ‘whole tone’), ‘region of the voice’ (topos phonés, ‘the two-octave series of whole and half steps of the Greater Perfect System’), or ‘pitch’ (tdsis) (Cleonides 12: MSG 202,68). As the ‘region of the voice’, also called trépos (Lat. modus) and often translated by ‘transposition scale’, tonos means the series of intervals of the two-octave ‘Greater Perfect System’ (systéma téleion). > Aristoxenus [1] transposed this series of intervals to 13 pitches, > Alypius [3] to 15, > Ptolemaeus [65] to 7 and —> Boethius to 8. As a part of harmony and as an interval capable of use in music (emmelés), tonos (Arab. tanin, pl. taninat) was a key element of ancient music, and its definition and constitution were central questions of harmonics. Usually considered as the difference between the fifth and the fourth (Ptol. Harm. 1,5; Nicom. Harmonicum enchiridium 5; Aristox. Harm. 1,21: 27,1416 Da Rios), the ‘tone’ (tdnos) is defined by Aristoxenus as the distance between two points on an infinitely divisible linear continuum oftones (Harm. 1,15: 20,2021,4 Da Rios; cf. Ptol. Harm. 1,10), but by the Pythagoreans as a > proportion (9:8). Since 9:8 is an epi-

Ill. SEMITIC TRANSMISSION

Correspondences to the most important aspects of psophos (saut) and phthongos (nagm, nagam, nagma) are found in Arabic musical theory, which was modelled after Greek sources. As regards the subdivision of tones, the ‘smallest tone’ was seen, following Aristotle, in the (enharmonic) Sieou/ dibesis (Aristot. Sens. 6,445b 33-446a 20), with the theory of this quartertone being developed further [8]. In addition, al-Farabi went decisively beyond his Greek sources in his Great Book of Music (Kitab al-musiqi al-kabir), written before 950, insofar as he understands the physical tone as made up of now-points (cf. Aristot. Ph. 4,11,219b 11; viv/nyn, Arab. an, pl. anat) [7. 335]. This basis enabled him to explain any given length, although he himself did not exploit this preliminary stage for developing the concept of real numbers. Certain terms associated with speaking or with tones and sounds (e.g. Syr. gala (gold), Middle Greek tyyoc/ échos [10. 42-45] or Arabic saut) came to represent series of tones in the sense of model melodies (models to which various texts were adapted by reducing or expanding the melody; cf. > Psalmody, fig. 3). This was also customary in Byzantium (échos as ‘key’ and ‘melodic model’), which might go back to the Semitic origins of Byzantine hymnody [r]; yet the historical genesis of such keys remains unclear. The earliest attestations of the structure called ‘eight-tone system’ or octoechos

679

680

(from okto échoi) are mostly Arabic [7. 376 f.]. Current scholarship tends to assume a Byzantine-Syrian origin of the octoechos although Syrian and Middle Greek evidence for it is largely lacking. Moreover, the modes used in Byzantine hymnody were not restricted to the octoechos; two additional ‘medial echoi’ (échoi mésoi; cf. cod. P in [6. 142]) were known in theory and applied in practice. ~» Music; > Psalmody; > Music; > Moves, MusIcaL THEORY OF

reign that e.g. the enslaving of the > Helots is ascribed

SOUND

THEORY

1S. BROCK, Syriac and Greek Hymnography: Problems of Origin, in: E.A. LivincsToneE (ed.), Papers Presented to the Seventh International Conference on Patristic Studies (Oxford 1975), vol. 2, 1985, 77-81 (Studia Patristica 16.2) 20O.Buscu, Logos syntheseos. Die euklidische Sectio canonis, Aristoxenos, und die Rolle der Mathema-

tik in der antiken Musiktheorie, 1998 (Greek and German) 3 J.Hanpscuin, Der Toncharakter, 1948 4 F. HENTSCHEL, Sinnlichkeit und Vernunft in der mittelalterlichen Musiktheorie, 2000 5 Id., s. v. Sonus, HmT 6 P. Maas, C.A. Trypanis (eds.), Sancti Romani Melodi Cantica: Cantica genuina, 1963 7 E. NEUBAUER, Arabische Musiktheorie von den Anfangen bis zum 6./12. Jh., 1998 (with German/Arabic texts) 8 B. REINERT, Das Problem des pythagoraischen Kommas in der arabischen Musiktheorie, in: Asiatische Studien 33.2, 1979, 199-217 9 A. RIETHMULLER, s. v. Phthongos; s. v. Psophos, HmT 10 R.SCHLOTTERER, Die kirchenmusikalische Terminologie der griechischen Kirchenvater, doctoral thesis, Munich 1953 +11 B.L.vAN DER WAERDEN, Erwachende Wissenschaft, 1966.

Soup was prepared by boiling solid food (such as corn, vegetables, pulses, fish, meat or fruit) in water or other

liquids. There were no clear or light soups in ancient cooking, nor was there a term for it. The main reason for this lies in ancient eating habits: although Greeks and Romans did have large spoons (ligula), they were accustomed to eat with their hands; also as a rule there was no individual cutlery ( Table utensils). Thus there were only thick soups in both the simple cooking and the haute cuisine of antiquity: stews, porridges (pultes; Apicius 5,1), fricassees (minutalia; Apicius 4,3,1-8);

the famous Spartan ‘black soup’ (Cmydc¢ pédac/zomos meélas; Plut. Lycurgus 12,6; Ath. 9,379e) was probably also only a kind of porridge, made of pork and pig’s blood, vinegar and salt. People ate these thick soups by dunking bread into shared bowls or with their fingers. -» Dishes, Meals; > Polenta F.RuF, Die Suppe in der Geschichte der Ernahrung, in: I. BitscH,

T.EHLERT,

X.VON

ERTZDORFF

(eds.), Essen

und Trinken in Mittelalter und Neuzeit, 1987, 165-181.

AG.

Sous (Z60¢/Sdos). Member of the Spartan royal house of the > Eurypontids. Not yet mentioned in Herodotus (7,204; 8,131), but included as son of > Procles [1] and

father of Eurypon in ruler lists in more recent sources (Plut. Lycurgus 1,40a-2,40c; Paus. 3,7,1; Phlegon FGrH 257 F 1,2). It may be possible to trace this mythical figure back to a historical person, since it is to S.’s

(Plut. loc.cit.), and Plato (Crat. 412b) is familiar with a respected Spartan with the name Zotc/So#s (contracted form of Sdos). + Lycurgus [4] SLA. South see — North and South

South Cadbury. Iron Age hill fort in Somerset, used for a short time in the middle of the rst cent. AD by the Roman army. Resettled and fortified in the late sth cent. Ceramics were imported from the Mediterranean, other goods from Gaul. L. ALcock, Cadbury Castle, 1995.

M.TO.

South Italian minuscule. Alongside the Latin > Beneventana, there also existed independent Italo-Greek scripts in the Middle Ages (often called south Italian minuscule in scholarly literature). Due to a lack of subscribed (> Subscriptio) and localised MSS, the ItaloGreek origin is not easy to prove for Greek > majuscule codices (++ Codex). One can assume

an Italo-Greek origin only for certain Greek MSS executed in the Biblemajuscule (e.g. Cod. Claromontanus with St. Paul’s Epistles, 5th cent. AD) and in pointed-arch majuscule (esp. the palimpsests from Grottaferrata). Except for the problematic — Anastasius style, the Italo-Greek + minuscules from the late 9th to the roth/r1th cents are marked by conservative traits and are executed in a rather stiff fashion. The so-called as de pique (named after the characteristic although not exclusive epsilonrho ligature) is a unique stylization combining calligraphic and cursive elements; this script is documented up to the middle of the r1th cent. Between the 2nd half of the roth and the early 11th cent., a writing school, the so-called scuola niliana, developed in the circle surrounding Neilus of Rossano, the scribe, author and founder of the abbey of Grottaferrata (d. in 1004): this environment gave rise to a small and tight > minuscule with special punctuation marks and its own > tachygraphy. r1th/12th-cent. Apulia (esp. Terra d’Otranto) gave rise to a special style, the rectangular Otrantine script. At the same time, the so-called Rossano style emerged (from the Patir monastery) in North Calabria; its characteristics are a certain symmetry of the letters and a vertical or slightly right-leaning axis. In the early 12th cent., the so-called Reggio style appeared in the southern part of Calabria and in Northern Sicily (first dated MS: 1118; traceable up to the 14th cent.): a vertical script that, over time, shows an increasing contrast between small and wide letters. An Otrantine Baroque script, often used for profane texts, emerged in late 13th cent. Apulia: its typeface — which leaves an untidy impression — is dominated by numerous ligatures and enlarged letters and is similar to the eastern > greasedrop script. The Otrantine style continues in the 15th and 16th cents and other traditional scripts occur particularly in liturgical MSS from Calabria.

681

682

P. Canart, Paleografia e codicologia greca. Una rassegna bibliografica, 1991, 43-46; S. LucA, Scritture e libri della scuola niliana, in: G. CAVALLO, G. DE GREGORIO, M. MaNIACI (eds.), Scritture, libri e testi nelle aree provinciali di Bisanzio, 1991, vol. 1, 319-387. P.E.

South Italian vases I. BEGINNINGS II. SUBJECT MATTER II]. DisTRIBUTION AND USE IV. TECHNIQUES AND

VESSEL FORMS

I. BEGINNINGS The first workshops in southern Italy for red-figured pottery appeared around the mid sth cent. BC, founded by Athenian vase-painters. Native artists were trained there. Thus, the initial dependence on Attic models, which expressed itself e.g. in the choice of motif or Atticizing forms (> Lucanian vases), was replaced by a characteristic painting style and repertoire of decorations and motifs. Towards the end of the 5th cent. BC, the so-called ‘ornate and plain styles’ emerged in Apulian vase-painting (> Apulian vases). Through the 4th cent. BC, painters of the ‘ornate style’ started using ever richer additional colours (esp. white, golden yellow, purple) and applying lavish vegetal ornamentation and embellishments to the necks and sides of vessels, in many cases filling such panels with figures, heads or birds. While this had a formative effect on the artistic output of the other southern Italian artistic centres (Campania, Lucania, Paestum), the quality of the Apulian antetypes was not achieved here. II]. SUBJECT MATTER

After 370 BC, the Apulian vase-painters turned to religious and eschatological themes, a tendency which was then imitated in the other workshops of southern Italy. To this category belong vases with scenes from the funerary cult (+ Naiskos vases) and the images often linked with it, e.g. of Dionysus, Aphrodite or Cupids, in which a Dionysian and Aphrodisian afterlife of rapture and blessedness expressed itself. The combination of funerary scenes with images of the gods and heroes also formulates the hope of immortality and deification in death, the so-called underworld vases (> Underworld, vases featuring) acquiring particular importance in this regard. Abduction scenes (e.g. that of + Persephone) also reflect the hope of being adopted into the circle of the gods. Alongside these themes referring to conceptions of the — afterlife, many of the portrayals are loaned from the realm of the theatre, referring to the dramatic works of the great Athenian tragic poets and presenting stagings of these (> Tragedy). Also treating the sphere of theatre are the > phlyax vases, which satirize everyday life or the myths of the gods as farce. Italic peoples, e.g. > Osci or > Samnites, also appear, in costume marking them out as non-Greeks, and esp. in warriors’ scenes of farewell, hunting and fighting scenes. It is striking that ‘Oscans’ in Apulian vase-painting prior

SOUTH

ITALIAN

VASES

to the mid 4th cent. appear almost exclusively on colonette kraters. Another motif found in all workshops of South Italian vase-painting, is the depiction of a female head, on vessels of large or small size. This may appear on both sides of a vessel, or in combination with another portrayal (e.g. a maiskos scene). Such heads are often found on the necks of volute kraters or the shoulders of amphorae, where they emerge from a rising flower. They can only seldom be categorized as Aphrodite or Amazon heads. There are also heads of satyrs, youths, Cupids or Nikes. The portrayal of women at their toilet or in wedding contexts is another major theme of South Italian vase-painting. These can refer not only to anonymous figures, but also to characters from myth (e.g. + Paris and —> Helena [1]). The portrayal of the socalled ‘cloaked youths’ adorning the reverse of bell kraters in particular was adopted from Attic vase-painting. Everyday and palaestra scenes, which still belonged to the repertoire of Attic vase-painting, are very rare in South Italian vase-painting. The symposium motif, so beloved in Athens, only appears as an everyday revel in the vase-painting of southern Italy in the early phase of South Italian art, and became altered in the 4th cent. BC into a reference to the Dionysian afterlife. Dionysian motifs (including esp. > thiasos images), the depiction of Dionysus, > satyrs and > maenads are also to be found on the vessels of all South Italian artistic centres. Inscriptions are very rare on SIV. The same is true of artists’ signatures. Apart from the two Paestan vasepainters, > Asteas and Python [5], South Italian vasepainters are not known by name. They are referred to in scholarship by the find site or location of their main works, by striking themes on their vases, or particular characteristics of their work. III. DisTRIBUTION AND USE

SIV were intended for the domestic market. Vases only seldom went for export. There are occasional examples in Egypt, Albania, France, Carthage, Corinth, Sidon, Spina, Spain and southern Russia. Of the approx. 21,000 works of southern Italian vase-painting which have as yet come to light, Apulian vases make up the largest portion, at some 11,000 examples. Around 4,000 are Campanian vases, and the remainder are divided among Lucanian, Paestan and Sicilian vases. SIV were primarily intended for funerary use. This is evident e.g. from the numerous portrayals of tombs (+ Naiskos vases) and underworld images (see above). IV. TECHNIQUES AND VESSEL FORMS

Many of the vases were thrown with a separate foot (in the case of volute kraters) or an open base (esp. amphorae, volute kraters, loutrophoroi, hydriai, type I

oinochoai). This eliminates everyday use. They also often had handles which were far too thin and fragile in relation to size and weight, precluding the carrying of the vessel. Another technical peculiarity was the firing holes or slits on handle rotellae of volute kraters and

683

684

alongside or beneath the handles of hydriai, intended to prevent the clay from breaking. SIV used the same shapes and types of > pottery as the Attic workshops. The Lucanian and Apulian workshops adopted the > nestoris from indigenous pottery, Campanian workshops also the stirrup-handled amphora without lateral handles. SIV sometimes assumed considerable vessel sizes. Volute kraters, loutrophorai and amphorae of 1 m

Sozomenus. Salamanes Hermeias (SwCopevoc/Sdizomenos, LXahkapnavys “Eoueiac/Salamanés Hermeias),

SOUTH ITALIAN VASES

in height are no rarity. For instance, some volute kraters at Naples (Nat. Arch. Museum) are of monumental

proportions, at heights of 148 to 155 cm. Yet even traditionally small-scale vessels such as oinochoai and lekythoi could reach heights of 50 cm or more. This development began around 350 BC, and endured until red-figured pottery died out in southern Italy. SIV were not restricted to the red-figure technique. Other

decorations

were

used

on

~ Gnathia

ware,

+ Canosa Vases and > Centuripe Vases. Small-format vessels (lekythoi, bottles) also re-emerged, painted using the black-figure technique, in all southern Italian workshops (except the Apulian), in the form of the socalled Pagenstecher lekythoi. With > Calenian pottery and -> Teano ware, stamped decor and embellishments in relief on black-glazed vessels became fashionable from the 3rd cent. BC. ~ Apulian Vases; > Baltimore Painter; > Calenian Pottery; » Campanian vases; > Canosa Vases; > Centuripe Vases; -> Darius Krater; +» Darius Painter; > Gnathia ware; — Fish-plate; — Iliupersis Painter; > Kemai;

+ Lasimus Vases;

Krater;

-> Nestoris;

> Lycurgus - Owl

Painter;

— Naiskos

Group;

— Paestan

Pillar

ware; — Phlyax Vases; — Sicilian vases; > Teano ware; + Underworld, vases featuring; ~ Vase-painting,

black-figured; > Xenon group A.D. TRENDALL, Rotfigurige Vasen aus Unteritalien und Sizilien, 1990; J.M. PapGetr,

M.B.ComsrTock

et al.,

Vase Painting in Italy. Red-Figure and Related Works in the Museum

of Fine Arts, Boston,

1993;

B. BRANDES-

Drusa, Architekturdarstellungen in der unteritalischen Keramik, 1994; H.FRIELINGHAUS, Einheimische in der apulische Vasenmalerei. Ikonographie im Spannungsfeld zwischen Produzenten und Rezipienten, 1995; Bilder der

Hoffnung, Jenseitserwartung auf PrunkgefafSen Siditaliens (Exhibition catalogue GiefSen

- Hamburg),

1995/1996; L.GIULIANI, Tragik, Trauer und Trost. Bildervasen fiir eine apulische Totenfeier, 1995; R.HurSCHMANN, Die Pagenstecher-Lekythoi (JDAI, suppl. 29), 1997; CH. ZINDEL, Meeresleben und Jenseitsfahrt. Die Fischteller der Sammlung Florence Gottet, 1998; I. ALEXANDROPOLOU, Gnathia- und Westabhangkeramik. Eine vergleichende Betrachtung, 2001; K.SCHAUENBURG, Studien zur unteritalischen Vasenmalerei, 3 vols., 1999-2001; S. VRACHIONIDES, Studien zur Tracht in der unteritalischen Vasenmalerei, thesis, Wirzburg 2000.

Southern Picene see > Oscan-Umbrian Sovana see > Suana/Sovana

RH.

probably born in Bethelea near Gaza (possibly modern Bait Lahiya) into a well-to-do Christian family (cf. Phot. Cod. 30; Sozom. Hist. eccl. 5,15,14). The dates of his birth and death cannot be determined. The Palestinian and partially monastic context of his youth (+ Monasticism) characterizes his ExxAnovaottxh totooia/Ekkleésiastikeé Historia or ‘History of the Church’ (= HC; Sozom. Hist. eccl. 1,1,19), which was written between AD 439 and 450. After 425, S. worked as a lawyer (Sozom. Hist. eccl. 2,3,10) or — scholastikos (cf. Phot. loc.cit. and the preface of Sozom. Hist. eccl. 7) in Constantinople. In his nine-book HC he expresses typical lay piety, maintaining a distance from bishops, church politics and complicated theological disputes. The work, which, like the writings with the same title by Socrates [9] and > Theodoretus, was supposed to continue until the year 439 and therefore augment the HC of ~» Eusebius [7] of Caesarea, contains Palestinian local colour and valuable information on the religious history of the region (e.g. Sozom. Hist. eccl. 6,32,7). It was evidently not finished (cf. Sozom. Hist. eccl. 9,16,4: there is no further account of the announced discovery of the relics of Stephanus [4]) and presumably appeared posthumously (as in [2]). The direct MS tradition is rather modest in comparison to the other works mentioned; its limited distribution is also shown by the Latin Historia tripartita of Epiphanius [3]. As a source for both structure and content S. primarily used Socrates (without naming him), as well as Rufinus [6], Gelasius [x] of Caesarea and monastic literature. Finally, he drew on a number of documents of 4th-cent. Christian authors. There are also references to classical Greek historiography, e.g. > Xenophon. In spite of its anecdotal style the HC is of outstanding significance to any historical reconstruction of the period, particularly because of its documentation. EDITIONS:

1CPG3,6030

GCSN.F.4,71995 Church

Histories:

2 J.BipEz, G.CH. HANSEN,

3 A.C. ZeNos, Cu. D. HARTRANFT, Socrates

— Sozomenus

Postnicene Fathers 2.2), 1890, 236-427

(Nicene

and

(=1983; Engl.

transl.). BIBLIOGRAPHY: 4G.F. CHEsnut, The First Christian Histories, *1986, 199-207. 5 W.ELTESTER, s.v. Sozo-

menos, RE 3 A, 1240-1248 6 F.GEpPPERT, Die Quellen des Kirchenhistorikers Socrates Scholasticus, 1898, 5965.

CM.

Sozopetra (Zw Cometeo/Sdzdpetra, also ZiCoatoa/ Zizoatra, Zanetea/Zapetra; in Arabic sources Zibatra

or Zubatra). City in + Cappadocia in the strategia of Lauiansene, which borders on Syria (Ptol. 5,7,10), modern Dogansehir (formerly Virangehir), 56 km to the southwest of > Melitene. HILD/RESTLE, 1256.

286 f.; E.HONIGMANN,

s.v. S., RE 3 A, K.ST.

685

686

Space I. TERMINOLOGY

II. History AND

NACHWIRKUNG

I. TERMINOLOGY If it be granted that we normally use the word ‘place’ in a relational setting, i.e. to refer to the place of something, whereas we use ‘space’ rather to refer to an underlying frame of reference or to the sum total of all places, the Greek language did not have a one-to-one equivalent to either ‘space’ or ‘place’. The words toxo¢ (topos) and ywea. (chora) could, at least in ordinary parlance, be used in both roles, although in philosophical texts topos tended to become the equivalent of our ‘place’ (Aristotle e.g., consistenly uses it when he refers to his own philosophical conception of place, on which see below). Also xevov (ken6n, ‘void’) could in some contexts be used to denote space (e.g. by Democritus: cf. Simpl. in Aristot. Cael. 294,33), although it was more often used to specifically denote empty space or empty ‘pockets’ in a particular substance (— Topics). The first attempt to define and articulate a clear-cut concept of space was made by Hellenistic philosophers: Epicurus defined it as “intangible substance” (&vate¢ ovoia/anaphes ousia; Epicurus, Ep. ad Hdt. 40) and maintained that this could be called kenén when empty, and topos (i.e. ‘place’) when full (Sext. Emp. AM ro,2). The Stoic > Chrysippus [2], defining space as “that which is capable of being filled by being” (Arius Didymus fr. 25) likewise added that it was to be called topos when filled, and kenén when empty. Latin usage (esp. Lucretius [III r]) in general follows these Hellenistic sources and uses locus for ‘place’, spatium for ‘space’ and inane for ‘void’ (in all its senses). Il. History AND NACHWIRKUNG Space and place being interconnected notions, theories of space should not be discussed in isolation from theories of place. Ancient physical theories of place and space were all dependent on the way spatial terms were used in ordinary thinking and speaking. Aristotle shows that common parlance suggests various candidates for the identification of place (Aristot. Ph. 4,1-5): (1) we might think that place is the extension (didotnpa/ didstéma) of a body (which would make it ‘inseparable’ from the body and hard to distinguish from matter), or (2) an underlying three-dimensional extension, or (3) a surrounding something (mequyov/periéchon) [1.153191]. He claims that Plato was the first to offer, in the Timaeus, some kind of theory of place and space, and that he tended to choose the first option, which identifies space and matter, although he also claims, rightly, that Plato’s theory is basically unclear [1.72-120]. The second option (extension) Aristotle seems to attribute to the advocates of the void (i.e. Democritus [1] and his lot). Against the first option (1) Aristotle argues that place does not move along with the emplaced body, but remains itself immobile. Against the second (2), he

SPACE

argues among other things that it fails to take account of the fact that there are fixed directions in the cosmos and that the elements all have their natural place. Place as a mere extension (1) would be isotropic, i.e. any part would be no different from any other, and on such a basis the thesis that a certain place would naturally belong to, say, earth, would become impossible to defend. Aristotle himself notoriously plumps for the third option (3) and defines place as “the first immobile limit of the surrounding body” (to tod meQuéxovtos méQacs Gxivyntov me@tov/to tow periéchontos péras akinéton proton, Aristot. Ph. 4,4,212a 20), thus saddling the later Aristotelian tradition with a range of problems: How are we to specify such an immobile limit or surface? Just how is this concept of place involved in Aristotle’s explanation of natural > motion? Isn’t this concept useless beyond contexts dealing with the location of static individual bodies [1.192-260]? Doubts were raised already at an early date: > Theophrastus suggested a relational conception of place as a better alternative (Simpl. in Aristot. Ph. 639,13-22 [2]), whereas Strato of Lampsacus abandoned the Aristotelian conception altogether and preferred a concept of space as an underlying three-dimensional extension (Aetius in Stob. 1,156,5-6 WACHSMUTH; as did the Stoics and Epicurus, see above). In some Neoplatonists (lamblichus [2], Damascius, Simplicius) we witness the emergence of metaphysical conceptions of place or space, where place is accorded a formative role in the process of + emanation [2.157-162; 4; 6.202-219].

The main points of ancient discussions of place and space revolve around a number of recurrent questions: Is space (or place) an underlying three-dimensional extension (didstéma, see above: Democritus [1], Epicurus,

Stoicism, Philoponus), or a surrounding surface (préton péras: Aristotle and his orthodox followers), or perhaps a relation (Theophrastus, Iamblichus [2]), or is it to be equated with matter (Plato and a number of Platonists)? Is it infinite (Archytas [1] and other Pythagoreans, Democritus [1], Epicurus, most Stoics) or

finite (Plato, Aristotle, Posidonius [3])? Is it inert (Epicurus, Stoicism) or dynamical (some Neoplatonists)? Is there extracosmic space (Pythagoreans, Democritus, Stoicism, Epicurus) or not (all the others) [6.125-219]?

The Aristotelian view was much discussed in the medieval and early modern scholastic tradition. Stoic and Epicurean conceptions of space were used as ammunition against the Aristotelian by early modern thinkers like PaTRizi and GassENDI. 1K. A. AGRA, Concepts of Space in Greek Thought, 1995 21d., Place in Context: On Theophrastus Fr. 21 and 22 Wimmer,

in: W.W.

ForTENBAUGH,

D.GurTas

(eds.),

Theophrastus. His Psychological, Doxographical and Scientific Writings, 1992, 141-165 3 W.BurRKERT, Konstruktionen des Raumes und raumliche Kategorien im griechischen Denken, in: D. REICHERT (ed.), Raumliches Denken, 1996 4S.SamMBurRsky, The Concept of Place in Late Neoplatonism, 1982 5 D.N. SEDLEY, Philoponus’ Conception of Space, in: R. Sorasyji (ed.), Philoponus and the Rejection of Aristotelian Science, 1987, 140-154

SPACE

6 R.Sorasji (ed.), Matter, Space and Motion: Theories in

Antiquity and Their Sequel, 1988.

688

687

K.AL.

Spacing, interaxial. Modern technical term which in the archaeology of buildings denotes the interaxial distance between two columns (as different from the free interspace, which has been known as the intercolumnium since Antiquity, cf. [1]). The interaxial space was a clearly defined subset of the axial span, i.e. the distances between the centres of the four corner columns and as such served as one of the crucial design parameters in temple architecture (- Temple; > Building trade). This goes especially for the peripteral temples of the Classical Age of Greece; the archetypal design model of the archaic temples of the 6th cent. BC on the other hand was the longsided rectangular — stylobate. The interaxial space is frequently marked on the stylobate (> Tracing ) as can still be seen at the temple of Zeus at Olympia. As part of the Doric order of spacing columns it determined the size and proportional distribution of the metopes and triglyphs in the — frieze; the interaxial space equalled the length of space taken up by two triglyphs and two metopes. (The arithmetic relation between the interaxial space and the metopes and triglyphs is reflected in a smallest common denominator, which in its turn frequently served as the ‘basic measuring unit’ for understanding the sizing of the complete structure.) As a vital element of architectural design interaxial space also played a central part in the > angle triglyph problem. In spite of its crucial importance as evidenced by the findings of research on Greek building structures, no contemporary term denoting interaxial space has been found in ancient sources on architecture.

pia, the + Parthenon at Athens and the great temple at Segesta. The drawing-board design of the grid-based buildings of the Ionian and later the Corinthian order, which replaced the Doric modular construction, integrates the interaxial space into its comprehensive grid. As a result, interaxial space as a central element of architectural design became obsolete. 1 K. Nou, Index Vitruvianus 1876, s.v. intercolumnium.

H.Businc,

Eckkontraktion

und Ensembleplanung,

in:

MarbWPr 1987, 14-46; J.J. Coutron, Towards Understanding Doric Design: The Stylobate and Intercolumniations, in: ABSA 69, 1974, 61-86; CH. H6cxer, Planung und Konzeption der klassischen Ringhallentempel von Agrigent, 1993, 72-74; 119-141; H. KNELL, Vitruvs Architekturtheorie, 1985, 63-114; D.Merrtens, Der

Tempel von Segesta und die dorische Tempelbaukunst des griechischen Westens in klassischer Zeit, 1984, 252 S.v. Joch; W. MULLER-WIENER, Griechisches Bauwesen in der Antike, 1986, 29-31; H.RIEMANN, Zum griechischen Peripteraltempel, 1935, passim; Id., Hauptphasen in der Plangestaltung des dorischen Peripteraltempels, in: G.E. My tons (ed.), Studies presented to D.M. Robinson, vol. I, 1951, 295-308; B. WESENBERG, Beitrage zur Rekonstruktion griechischer Architektur nach literarischen Quellen, 9. suppl., MDAI(A), 1983.

C.HO.

Spado. The Latin term for a + eunuch, but also for someone who is sterile without having been castrated (> castratio; Ulp. Dig. 50,146,128). In Roman law, special family and inheritance rights applied to a spado: whereas we have a regulation from the 2nd cent. AD that, in general, allowed a spado to adopt (Gai. Inst. 1,103), under Justinian (6th cent. AD), a distinction

was made: the earlier rule applies only to a natural

Even Vitruvius (e.g. 3,3,1 ff.) only offers circumscripti-

spado, not toa

ons based on the imtercolumnium and the diameter of the column base. The tendency towards a systematic sizing and proportioning of individual construction elements and distances found in Greek peripteral temples is manifested with particular clarity by the considerable change in the concept of interaxial space taking place between the 6th cent. BC and the late 4th cent. BC. Until the late 6th cent. BC there was usually a difference between the frontal interaxial spaces and the lateral ones, as architectural concepts were additive rather than comprehensive; as a rule the front of the temple is given more emphasis by its larger interaxial spaces than the more crowded longitudinal sides. The temple of Athena at Paestum (c. 510 BC) pioneered for the West the normative innovation of identically sized interaxial spaces on all four sides of the building. In the Greek mother country this design is found for the first time in the older temple of Poseidon at Cape Sounion around 490 BC; it became a standard design feature from then onwards. In the second half of the 5th cent. BC the commensurabilty of transaxial spaces with the partitions in the frieze and the proportional linkage with the heights of the columns and the entablature culminated in the temple of Zeus at Olym-

corresponds to a general trend against castration in Late Antiquity: permission to marry for a spado, but not for a castrated man; legal manumission for a eunuch slave (Nov. 142,2). But it is likely that any sterile person could make a will (Paulus, Sent. 3,4a,2 for a spado over 18 years old; Cod. lust. 6,22,5 for eunuchs).

castrated person (Inst. lust. 1,11,9). This

D.DaALta, L’incapacita sessuale in diritto romano, 1978.

Gs,

Spain see > Hispania, Iberia Spalatum (‘AomdAa8oc/Aspdlathos). Town in Dalmatia on the southwest tip of a peninsula, c. 5 km southwest of > Salona (Tab. Peut. 6,3; Geogr. Rav. 4,16), modern

Split; until the 4th cent. AD an insignificant IllyrianGreek harbour town (medicinal sulphur springs). In AD 295-305, > Diocletianus had a home built here for his retirement, where he lived until his death (probably in 313). The palace was designed in the tradition of Roman castles and villas (c. 180 x 215 m, four gateways, outer wall with sixteen fortified towers). At the intersection of the + cardo and ~ decumanus, arranged round a peristyle, were the mausoleum (modern cathedral), a temple of Jupiter, two circular temples and the vestibulum (link to the southern chambers). The

690

689

SPARROW HAWK

south side — a cryptoporticus with a loggia above (pri-

1D’Arcy

vate chambers) — was next to the sea. Remains of the

1936 (repr. 1966)

walls in the north half, three corner towers and the gateways are extant.

schen Dichtern des klassischen Altertums, Teil 2, Pro-

B. Kiricin, E. Marin, The Archaeological Guide to Central Dalmatia, 1989, 25-51. UL.FE.

1930

W.THompson,

A Glossary of Greek Birds,

2O.KORNER, Homerische Tierwelt,

3 A.PISCHINGER, Das Vogelnest bei den griechi-

gramm Ingolstadt 1907 4 KELLER 5 F. IMHOOFBLUMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen

des klassischen Altertums, 1889

(repr. 1972).

Sparadocus (Znaeddoxoc; Sparddokos). Brother of king Sitalces [1] of Thrace and father of his successor Seuthes [1] (Thuc. 2,101,5; 4,101,5). His position in the Odrysae dynasty is debatable; he may have succeeded to Teres as ruler in southwestern Thrace. S. was the first of the Odrysae to mint silver coins of various face values. U.PETER, Die Miinzen der thrakischen 3. Jh. v. Chr.), 1997, 62-75.

Dynasten

(5.UP.

KELLER 2,88—90; A. STEIER, s. v. Sperling, RE 3 A, 16281632.

C.HU.

Sparrow hawk (and other birds of prey). In Antiquity many species of the Falconidae family of birds of prey were grouped under the name iégaxec/hiérakes, Latin accipitres. In Aristot.

Hist. an.

8(9),36,620a

17-29

there are ro species, in Plin. HN ro,21 f. as many as 16,

but the information is often too vague for a more precise determination. The most important of them are: r) The universally common Buzzard (Buteo buteo), Greek

Sparrow (Greek oteov0dc/strouthds or oteov0ic/ strouthis, diminutive oteovOiov/strouthion, also as a

name for hetairai, Elean d5evgnt)s/deirétes: Nic. fr. 123; Latin passer, diminutive passerculus: Plaut. Asin. 666 and 694; Cic. Div. 2,65; Arnob. 7,8). Strouthds is a term for the House Sparrow (Passer domesticus) and every other kind of small songbird, which in Antiquity were not distinguished. Hom. Il. 2,3 11-3 17 (strouthos) is interpreted to some extent as a ‘little bird’ [1. 269; 2. 73 f.] and to some extent as a sparrow [3. 27 ff.]. Lesbia’s favourite creature (Catull. 2,1: passer) is interpreted zoologically e.g. as a Blue Rock Thrush (Monticola solitarius; e.g. [4. 2,80]) or as a sparrow. Aristotle’s information on its internal organs (such as the location of the liver: Aristot. HA. 2,15,506b 20-22, the length of the stomach: ibid. 2,17,509a 8 the presence of small caeca: anopuddec/ apophyddes, ibid. 2,17,509a 22 f.), its feeding on maggots (ibid. 7(8),3,592b 16 f.), its readiness to mate (ibid. 5,2,539b 32 f.) and its reproduction, the occasional albino (ibid. 3,12,519a 5 f.) and the initial blindness of the nestlings (Aristot. Gen. an. 4,6,774b 26-29) apply to almost every songbird. Its nesting at the ends of tree branches is mentioned in Ael. NA 4,38. It relationship to > Aphrodite/Venus (schol. Hom. II. 2,308; Sappho fr. 1,9 f.; Aristoph. Lys. 724) led to the use ofpasser (Plaut. Cas. 138) and passercula/ -us (Plaut. Asin. 666; Fronto ad Marcum Caesarem 4,6)

as a pet name (cf. the probably metaphorical meaning also in Catull. 2 and 3). Flocks of these granivorous fringillids could damage cornfields (e.g. among the Medes according toDiod. Sic. 3,30). In Egypt therefore it was hunted with hawks (Ael. NA. 2,43; Phaedr. 1,9). It was used by people almost until the present day as a delicacy or, because of its inclination to mate (Plin. HN 10,107) as an aphrodisiac (Athen. 2,65e; Plin. HN 30,141: flesh and eggs). In medicine the ashes of a sparrow in hydromel were supposed to help against epilepsy (morbus regius) (Plin. HN 30,94). In ancient art the sparrow is not common, e.g. on gems [5. pl. 21,16 and 25,16].

toweyn¢/tridrchés (allegedly with three testicles), Latin buteo. This plump and allegedly strong (Aristot. ibid. 17) hiérax was an important bird of augury in Rome (Plin. HN ro,21; Fest. 214) and enjoyed religious worship in Egypt. 2) The Kestrel (Falco tinnunculus), see + Falcons. 3) The > Goshawk (Accipiter gentilis). 4) The Sparrow Hawk (Accipiter nisus), see > Goshawk. 5) The Harrier (ixtivoc/iktinos, Latin milvus), which Aristot. Hist. an. 7(8),3,592b 1, in contrast to Plin. HN

10,28, does not count as one of the hiérakes. It was considered the most voracious (Plin. loc.cit.) of the

birds of prey with the most extensive hunting territory. This does not indicate identification with the rather harmless piscivorous Black Kite (Milvus migrans), es-

pecially as it winters in Greece and is therefore not a proper herald of spring (Aristoph. Av. 499 ff. and 713; Plin. HN 18,237) as the harrier is.

Aristotle numbers sparrow hawks among birds ‘with crooked talons’ (yappdvuxes/gampsonyches), which grip their prey, primarily smaller birds, snakes (Ael. NA. 10,14) and quadrupeds, in various ways and devour it. It was an erroneous observation that they did not eat the hearts (Aristot. Hist. an. 7(8),11,615a 4-6; Plin. HN 10,24; Ael. NA 2,42). As predators the hiérakes depend mainly on their speed (e.g. Hom. Il. 13,6265 and 15,237 f.; Hes. Op. 203-212). In the north of the Mediterranean region they migrate in winter, in Egypt they are resident (Hdt. 2,22). For the most part they nest on inaccessible rocks (e.g. Hom. Il. 13,63; Aristot. Hist. an. 6,7,564a 5 f.). They lay from four to six eggs — primarily kestrels (Aristot. Hist. an. 6,1,558b 28-30; Plin. HN 10,143), but harriers only two at most —and incubate them for 20 days (Aristot. ibid. 6,6,563a 29-31). Like all crooked-taloned birds they throw their fledged young out of the nest (ibid. 563b 7-9). Allegedly there are crosses between different species. There were supposed to be enmities between the goshawk (aiodhwv/aisdlon) and the fox (Aristot. ibid. 8(9), 1,609b 30-32) and the dove (ibid. 8(9), 36,620a 2329), between the harrier and the raven (609a 20-23)

SPARROW HAWK

691

and between the buzzard and the toad and the snake (609a 24 f.). The meat of the sparrow hawk species, mainly of the fat chicks, was (other than to Jews) not forbidden, and people enjoyed eating it (Aristot. Hist. an. 6,7,564a 4 f.). Plin. HN 29,125 recommends it, as well as their blood and faeces, as organotherapy for eye diseases (because of their keen sight?) and for sterility in women (Plin. HN 30,130). In the cult in Egypt the Horus sparrow hawk (with the head of a sparrow hawk; > Horus) was important. Birds fed by special priests (iggaxoBooxoi/hierakoboskoi) according to specific rules (Plut. Is. 51; Ael. NA 7,9 and 12,4) were sacrificed to him (Hdt. 2,65 and 2,67; Ael. NA 10,14). In the fire cult sparrow hawks played an important part (Ael. NA 10,24). The accipiter transformed itself into Horus/ Apollo (Antoninus Liberalis 28; Ov. Met. 6,123). Accipitres were very important birds of augury in Rome (e.g. Cic. Nat. D. 3,47; Obseq. 58; Sil. Pun. 4,104). They foretold rain. Their behaviour was considered mysterious. The Egyptians exaggerated their life as 500 years long (Ael. NA. 10,14). The accipiter was supposed to heal its eyes with wild lettuce (ibid. 2,43) and bury bodies (ibid. 2,42) instead of eating them. Depictions from Egypt are not uncommon [1]. A sparrow hawk can also occasionally be found on Roman coins [2. tab. 5,15] and Egyptian gems [2. tab. 20,59-60]. ~+ Falcons; > Goshawk 1 KELLER 2,13; 16; 19 und 23 2 F. IMHOOF-BLUMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und

Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972). V.HEHN, Kulturpflanzen und Haustiere (ed. O.ScHRADER), *rg911 (repr. 1963), 374-382; KELLER 2,13-26;

A.STEIER, s.v. S., RE 3A, 1628-1632; D’Arcy W.TuHompson, A Glossary of Greek Birds, 1936 (repr. 1966), 30 (aiodAwv); 114-118 (i€QaE); 119-121 (ixtivos);

134-136 (xeyxonis); 144-146 (xigxoc); 286 Ff. (teLexXNS)5 3.02 (acoodovos).

C.HU.

Sparta (=xdetn/Sparté, Doric Xndeta/Sparta). I. POLITICAL HISTORY

II. SOCIETY, CULTURE AND

ART I. POLITICAL HISTORY A. ARCHAIC PERIOD B. DEVELOPMENT OF STATE STRUCTURES C. PERSIAN WARS D. SPARTA AND ATHENS E. THE END OF SPARTA’S HEGEMONIC POSITION F. SPARTA UNDER ROMAN RULE

A. ARCHAIC PERIOD City in > Laconica on the middle reaches of the Eurotas; originally four villages (> Cynosura [3], Limnae, > Pitana/Pitane, > Mesoa), which developed from settlements of Doric immigrants to the north of modern S.in the roth cent. BC. The place name S. is more recent than the place name Aaxedaiuwv/ Lakedaimon, which was also used as the official designation of the state of the Lacedaemonii (— Spartidtai, > Perioikoi Il) as a whole (Thue. 5,18,10). The four villages were linked by

692

the cult of > Artemis Orthia

(Paus. 3,16,9), whose sanctuary has been located by inscriptions (IG V 1, 863; for the reconstruction of S. — essentially according to Paus. bk. 3 —cf. site plan). Farther to the south there was probably a Mycenaean power centre in the area of ~ Amyclae [1], which was destroyed in c. 1200 BC (end of LH III B). The population of Laconia subsequently (LH II C) declined, but in LH III C, primarily in the peripheral regions of the > Eurotas basin, settlements joined towns of the Palace Era. At the end of LH III C (c. 1100 BC) settlement activity decreased further, but the region did not become depopulated. Mycenaean linguistic relics (-- Mycenaean) and place names, such as Lacedaemon and Amyclae, indicate a certain continuity, whereas the change of dialect attests to the migration of Doric elements. The latter, however, in spite of the existence of the three historical Doric phylai in S. (Hylleis, + Dymanes, Pamphyli), formed small groups as newcomers and did not settle as members of a large pre-historic tribe (on this problem cf. + Doric Migration, with map). The finds from the early period of the Laconian proto-Geometric vase style do not support the conclusion of a massive appropriation of land by new settlers around 950 BC. To begin with, it is likely that contacts between the established population and the new arrivals were peaceful. The early speakers of the Doric dialect (+ Doric/Northwest Greek) were already in parts of Greece proper before their colonization of the > Peloponnesus, and were unlikely to have been without exception herder-warriors. Their destination by the Eurotas was an excellent base for agriculture. The life of the settlers in S. at first corresponded to conditions in Greece as a whole, but greater social differentiation was already evident by the roth/gth cents., with the result that representatives of certain families took positions of high rank in a structure of small societies. A far-reaching consequence of this development in S. was the rise of two ‘noble houses’, which in the historical period represented the Spartan double kingdom of the > Agiadae and the + Eurypontidae. These two houses presumably established their dominant position gradually, in rivalry with other influential families. Their prestige in society was the product of a long development. B. DEVELOPMENT OF STATE STRUCTURES

A significant event for S. in the early 8th cent. was the integration of Amyclae [1] into the original association of settlements. According to Paus. 3,26, Amyclae capitulated after prolonged and hard fighting, whereas, according to Ephor. FGrH 70 F 117, it fell through treachery. The special position of Amyclae in the Spartan association of settlements, however, indicates that considerable concessions were made to the Amyclaei. S. having probably already extended its influence northwestwards as far as Aegys, the incorporation of Amyclae permitted the occupation of southern Laconia, where the helot system (> helots) and the Spartan klaros system later developed as klaroi (‘plots

693

694

SPARTA

aipneios 4

L@) Prasiai

¥) Kyphanta

2

re mady

ae

3

=

Akriai

Laconian

Psam(m)athus

Kap Tainaron

at Phari

is Sure fas

F . 3 Menelaion: cult of Helena, the Dioscuri and of Menelaus, f

~~

c, 700-c. 200 BC

Amyklaion: worship of the pre- Mycenaean/preDoric Hyacinthus/‘throne of Apollo’; from c. 1500 (?)/2nd half 6th cent. BC

Eleusinion:

non-Doric sanctuary of Demeter, not an official Spartan cult; Mycenaean/6th cent. BC - c. AD 300

Sparta/Lakedaimon/Lakonike: settlement and/or political territory of the Spartiatai /Lakedaimonioi and the Perioikoi eS

Core area of Lacedaemonian citizens’

a

a ead iol

Regional borders

o

Sanctuary (pre-Doric/ Doric)

territory

Settlement in Lacedaemonian citizens’

re-Doric settlement

(abandoned/new or continued)

Harbour

territory Other settlement

Important polis of the Perioeci

AAI

ee ' Localisation not confirmed

Part of the koinon of the Eleutherolakones from 195 BC

\ Lakonia

; Region, Area, Sea

Territories subjected by Lacedaemon

Parnon

Mountain, Mountain range

200

500

1000

1500

2000m

696

695

SPARTA

| 100

200

300

400

500m

Issorion

16 +

~

™“™\Ye x

@ --= = = --

4 1 i] 1 i] 1 1 i] i] i] i] 4

Greece

Reconstruction of Sparte /Lakedaimon acc. to the descriptions of Pausanias,

bk. 3 (c. AD 160), and acc. to archaeological evidence Confirmed /conjectured course of the Hellenistic city walls: built in stages from the 4th/3rd cents. BC; ring wall completed only under Nabis

Based on archaeological evidence; identification /use not confirmed

(207 - 192 BC); renovation and extension in the 3rd and 4th cents. AD.

Based on literary evidence; localisation hypothetical Mountain, Mountain range

Location of the original komai of the Spartiatai Pitane Mesoa

(confirmed/

Eurotas

Ancient name

Magula

Modern name

hypothetical ) Based on archaeological and/or literary evidence

Modern city of Sparti

698

697

. Acropolis, centre and Aphetais Street . Agora with, e.g., government buildings; so-called Persian Stoa, the temples of Caesar and Augustus -a total of 24 monuments according to Pausanias (3,11,2-11). 2. Choros (location of the annual festival of the

SPARTA

. Pitane (Pitana)

According to Pausanias 3,14-—15: 20 temples (e.g. of Poseidon Genethlios), 11heroa (e.g. of Cleodaeus and Oebalus), 5 tombs (e.g. thouse of the Agiadae), 5 sculptures, 2 stoai, 6 further buildings. No mention of private dwellings, with the exception of the ‘House of Menelaus’.

Gymnopaidia in honour of Apollo) . Cenotaph of Brasidas

. Temple?, so-called tomb of Leonidas/‘Leonidaion’ (3rd cent. BC) . Tomb of Pausanias (opposite the entrance to the . Aphetais Street north and south of the Agora; i.a., three sanctuaries of Athena Keleutheia; to the south, near the city wall (with gate?), sanctuary of Dictynna and tombs of the Eurypontidae. The street continued, over a bridge, to Amyclae. 4. Skias (meeting- place of the popular assembly; 2nd half 6th cent. BC) . Tholos of Zeus Olympios and Aphrodite Olympia (archaic, c. 600 BC ?; = Pausanias 3,12,9?)

Near the tholos: tombs of Cynortas and Castor (subsequently built over with a temple). Furthermore (i.a.): . Temple of Kore Soteira

protemenisma; cf. no, 24)

. Tomb of Leonidas and stele with names of the fallen

of Thermopylae (c. 440 BC) . Dromos (with 2 gymnasia) . Platanistas: location of the ‘battle’ of the ephebes, surrounded by plane-trees and a moat (probably fed by a connection to the Magula stream), acessible via two bridges (statues of Heracles and Lycurgus). . Dorkeia? (spring). Nearby the tomb of Alcman, etc.

. House of Crius (sanctuary of Apollo Karneios)

. Temle of Artemis Issoria (with remains of the city wall, a tower and a small fortress)

. Statue of Aphetaeus (Pausanias 3,13,6).

. Limnai (‘Marshy Lakes / Meres’)

. Booneta: ‘House’ of King Polydorus (c. 700 BC), ‘next to it’, temple of Asclepius, and nearby: Heroon of Teleclus, temple an wooden image of an armed Aphrodite; temple of Hilaeira and Phoebe. . Acropolis with temple of Athena Poliouchos or Chalkoikos (before mid 6th cent. BC; temple panelled with bronze reliefs). Furthermore: to the west and the south, one stoa each (finds of votive offerings);

to the south - west of the temple, shrine of Athena Ergane? The outer court (protemenisma) reached as far as the foot of the slope; confirmed for c. 470 BC.

Theatre (c. 30-20 BC/Augustan) at the foot of the acropolis (Pausanias 3,14,1).

28. Course of the acropolis ramparts (3rd and 4th cents. AD and Byzantine). . Eastern spur of the acropolis ridge (Tympanon), with temle of Dionysus Kolonatas (remains probably still visible 1835) and perhaps a heroon. . Agora (surrounded by stoai, altars of Zeus Amboulios, Athena Amboulia and of the Dioscuri Amboulioi ) = so-called ‘ancient agora’? . Northern main street, beginning at the agora, leading across the acropolis ridge in the direction of the north gate and of the Eurotas, as well as towards the Limnai.

Near the Byzantine acropolis wall, probably first the “chiton’ house, then northwards, the Heroon of Chilon

(Pausanias 3,16,2—4).

. Roman- medieval bridge? To the west, the north gate. On the eastern (?) bank of the Eurotas: sanctuary of Athena Alea? . Temple of Lycurgus? (temple and altar, tomb of Eucosmus; tombs of the mythical Lathria and Anaxandra; Tombs of

King Theopompus and of Eurybiades; nearby, to the west, store for votive offerings and heroon?). . Heroon of Astrabacus? (cult from the 10th cent. BC into Roman Period; according to Herodotus 6,69,3, the house

of King Ariston must have been nearby). . Sanctuary of Arthemis Orthia (so-called Limnaion. Altar and temple | c. 700 BC; temple I] between 570 and 560 BC;

reconstructed in the 2nd cent. BC; Roman theatre). Nearby: sanctuary of Eileithyia.

. Near the northern main street, by the eastern foothills of the acropolis ridge: archaic tomb sanctuary (6th cent. BC); built over in early Roman Period. . Archaic sanctuary? (late 6th/early 5th cent. BC), in front of it, tomb (Hellenistic- Roman heroon? lesche? stoa?

finds); renovated in Roman Period:

. North-east of the modern bridge across the Eurotas, adjacent to the city wall: remains of a gate and fragment of settlement (6 layers, Late Geometric to Late Roman: house, tombs, rubbish pit, well).

IV. Cynosura

South of the temple of Dionysus: sanctuary of Zeus Euanemos, and to the right of it, heroon of Pleuron. Not far away:

. Temple of Hera Argeia . Temple of Hera Hypercheiria.

of land’; > kleros) were distributed to Spartans and the

subjugated rural populace was bound to the land as labour for the new owners. However, S. in no way assumed a special status within the nascent Greek community by the developments thus introduced. Like the leading ozkos lords of other communities, high-ranking Spartans sought to demonstrate their social status through their lifestyle and to increase their wealth by plunder expeditions. The consequent conflicts with

Messenian ‘aristocrats’ brought about the First > Messenian War and tensions between the Spartan ruling class and the damos (-> demos [1]) in the late 8th and early 7th cents. BC. These events led to the separation of a group of aristocrats and their retinues by their deployment to > Taras (> Colonization IV with summary: Doric Colonization). However, they also led to a period in which polisstructures were created.

699

700

The Great > Rhetra [2] first made tangible the respective functions of the kings, the > gerontes and the > apella (Plut. Lycurgus 6,1 f.). This important step in S.’s development belongs to the pan-Hellenic process whereby ‘state’ structures were created on a polis level

88), while almost simultaneously the Spartan king Leotychidas [2] neutralized the still battle-worthy Persian naval forces at Mycale. He then agreed to the admission of Samos, Chios, Lesbos and other Greek islands into the Hellenic League of 481 and undertook an advance to the Hellespont, but left the Athenians to lead further operations in 479/8 (Hdt. 9,106).

SPARTA

(— State IV; > polis). Associated with this was the crea-

tion or restructuring of the phylai (> phyle [1]) and obai as subdivisions of polissociety, but this was insufficient to overcome social conflict. This found expression in the demands of the damos for land redistribution in the crisis of the Second > Messenian War, which ended in the late 7th cent. with the helotization of most of the Messenians (+ Messana, Messene [2]) and the creation of new klaroi for the Spartiates. This masked the hostility between the nobility and damos in S. The attempt early in the 6th cent. to subjugate Tegea failed, but Sparta outmatched Tegea and > Argos II inc. 550. The treaty then concluded with Tegea (StV 2, 112)

D. SPARTA AND ATHENS The foundation of the > Delian League was also a turning-point in the history of S. (StV 2, 132). It was accompanied by a shift in power politics between Athens and S., which was now no longer the undisputed leading Hellenic power. However, in the battles of Dipaea and Tegea, S. managed to preserve the cohesion of the > Peloponnesian League. The revolt of the Messenii soon afterwards precipitated a new crisis, which was greatly magnified by the catastrophic earthquake

heralded a new phase of foreign policy. Until late in the

of 464 in S. (+ Messana [2]; > Messenian Wars). The

6th cent., S., as the dominant power, allied itself with a

Spartan leadership’s snub of > Cimon [2] was a serious mistake: offering 4,000 Athenian — hoplitai in support of S.’s war with the Messenii in 462, he was rebuffed

range of Peloponnesian entities by individual treaties, obliging them to military service and thus to the recognition of S.’s military leadership, Spartan territory now including also the territories of the > perioikoi. The 6th cent. in S. also saw the intensification of the > agoge and increased efforts to direct the lives of the > Spartiatai towards the obligations demanded of them as full citizens, to ensure their supremacy over the — helots. Nevertheless, in the 6th cent. this system was not yet characterized by the degree of discipline to which the Spartans later subjected themselves when their numbers declined and it was feared that the polis order might be destabilized. C. PERSIAN WARS The dominant figure in S. around 500 BC was -» Cleomenes [3] I, who in 510 ended the rule of the > Peisistratidae at Athens. He was, however, unable to prevent the reforms of - Cleisthenes [2] in 508/7 (Hdt. 5,70-72). After this failure, a synod of representatives of Peloponnesian symmachoi (‘allies’, v. > symmachia) was convened for the first time in S., but it did not thereafter meet on a regular basis. In 499, at the instigation of Cleomenes, S. turned down a request for help from the Ionian Greeks rebelling against > Darius [1] I (Hdt. 5,49). By the aftermath of its decisive victory over the Argives in c. 494 (Hdt. 6,78—81) if not before, S. was considered the dominant power of Greece. S. probably felt an obligation to send an auxiliary force to > Marathon in 490, but religious considerations prevented its fulfilling this in time. When the Greek communities joined forces against Xerxes in 481 (StV II* 130; > Persian Wars [1]), S. was given supreme command on land and water. After the demise of Leonidas [1] and the 300 Spartiatai under his command at > Thermopylae and the Greek naval victory at > Salamis [1] in 480, the final, decisive victory in the fight against the Persian forces was that of the Greek army under the Spartan regent Pausanias [1] at > Plataeae in 479 (Hdt. 9,19-

(Thuc. 1,102; Plut. Cimon 16,8—17,2). In this tense atmosphere, fateful alliances were forged. The Athenians gained Megara [2] as an ally, giving them a strategic apron of territory fronting S., which intervened in Boeotia in 45 8/7, but withdrew its force of hoplites in spite of victory at Tanagra (Thuc. 1,107 f.). S. could prevent neither Athens’ conquest of Aegina nor operations against Gythium and other coastal areas in its sphere of influence. When, at the end of the five-year truce of 451, a Spartan advance on Attica under > Pleistoanax was unsuccessful (Thuc. 1,114), Athens and S. concluded a thirty-year peace in 446. In it, they undertook to recognize one another’s alliance networks, and to allow neutral communities free choice of alliance (StV 2, 156). This did not achieve a lasting de-escalation. Although the Corinthians did prevent a Spartan intervention in favour of Samos during the Samian Rebellion of 441-439 (Thuc. 1,40,5; 41,2), they exerted pressure on S. from 433 when they came into conflict with Athens as a result of their battles against > Corcyra [1] and their support for their colony of + Potidaea, which had seceded from the Delian League. A majority in S. supported a resolution against Athens in 432, the intention of which was to signal to S.’s allies that S. was ready for war (Thuc. 1,86 f.). The purpose was both to prevent the erosion of S.’s own system of alliances and to prevent a further increase in Athenian power. After the failure of negotiations with Athens (winter of 432/r), fighting began in the > Peloponnesian War, which ultimately brought S. to the zenith of its power. Nevertheless, S. was not in a position to fill permanently the power vacuum left by Athens’ defeat. The > dekadarchiai [1] (‘committees of ten’ to direct the business of government) constituted by S. in the cities proved inadequate as political instruments.

7o1

702

E. THE END OF SPARTA’S HEGEMONIC POSITION The relinquishment of its poleis in Asia Minor to the Persian Great King was a particularly heavy burden for S. in the latter phases of the Peloponnesian War. When S. tried to alter what was, from a Greek perspective, an intolerable situation, and in 400 BC became enmeshed in war with the Great King, various states took the opportunity of shaking off the Spartan yoke. A large antiSpartan coalition emerged in Greece, leading to the ~ Corinthian War. After conflicts of fluctuating fortunes, S. was compelled in 387/6 to accept the peace terms of > Artaxerxes [2] II (Xen. Hell. 5,1,31), relinquish its influence in Asia Minor and the Aegaean (+ Aigaion Pelagos) and recognize the autonomy of the

(with internal political autonomy). Antiquated institusuch as ephoroi, gerousia, apella, syssition (> Banquet II B), agoge and diamastigosis (the ritual flagellation of boys at the altar of > Artemis: Xen. Lac. 2,9; Paus. 8,23,1; Plut. Mor. 239d) continued to exist in recollection of former glories, or were restored. S. was plundered by the > Heruli in AD 267/8 (Sync. P. 467,15—-28) and destroyed by Alaric I (> Alaricus [2]) in 395 (Zos. 5,6,5). The development of S. was originally determined to a large extent by the historical conditions of polisformation, but in the long term the introduction of helotry necessitated special measures to ensure the security of domestic rule. This blocked necessary innovations in the political system and social structure, while the glorification of its own history created an image of S. which did not correspond to reality, and which determined the character of a peculiar myth of S. in ancient as in modern times.

communities in Greece (StV 2, 242). However, it was

there able to assume the role of the ‘guarantor of peace’ (Xen. Hell. 5,1,36) and to continue the pursuit of its hegemonic policy. In 385, S. subjugated Mantinea, it captured the Kadmeia of Thebes in 382 and reorganized its system of alliances by dividing it into ro areas (uegidec/merides, sing. wegic/ meris, ‘part’; Diod. Sic. 15,31,1). Thebes was able to free itself in 379 and was victorious at Leuctra in 371, where some 400 Spartans fell (Xen. Hell. 6,4,15; cf. > Epaminondas). Messenia became independent, and after a further defeat at Mantinea in 362 (Xen. Hell. 7,5) S. was no longer able to maintain its hegemonic claims. S. did not join the > Corinthian League in 338/7 (StV 3, 403). After the departure of > Alexander [4] the Great for Asia, King Agis [3] III organized an antiMacedonian alliance, but was defeated in 331 by + Antipater [1]. After a lengthy period of weakness, ~ Areus [1] succeeded in defending S. against + Pyrrhus [3] in 273/2 (Plut. Pyrrhus 27,2; 29,11; 30,4; 32,4). The same king’s plan to strengthen the position of S. in the Hellenic system of states was reasserted by ~» Agis [4] IV, who sought land reform and the reconstitution of the considerably reduced citizenry. This was thwarted by the > ephoroi, who had him executed (Plut. Agis 16-21). After neutralizing the opposition and abolishing the office of the ephoroi, > Cleomenes [6] III attempted to implement the reform programme, giving 4000 Rlaroi to perioikoi (Plut. Cleomenes 8-11). However, he did not achieve his goal of restoring S.’s hegemony in the Peloponnese. He was defeated by ~» Antigonus [3] Doson at Sellasia in 222 (Pol. 2,65-

SPARTA

tions,

E. BALTRUSCH, S.: Geschichte, Gesellschaft, Kultur, 1998; P.CARTLEDGE, S. and Lakonia, 1979; A.SPAWFORTH, Hellenistic and Roman S., 1989; W.G. CAVANAGH, S.E. C. WALKER (ed.), S. in Lakonia (Proceedings of the r9th

British Museum Classical Colloquium), 1998; K. CHRIST (ed.), S., 1986; M.Ctauss, S.. Eine Einftihrung in seine

Geschichte und Zivilisation, 1983; J.Ducat, Les hélotes, 1990; S.Hopkinson,

A. POWELL (ed.), S.. New Perspec-

tives, 1999; S.HODKINSON, Property and Wealth in Classical S., 2000; F. KIECHLE, Lakonien und S., 1963; S. LINK, Der Kosmos S., 1994; Id., Das friihe S., 2000; D. Lorze,

Metaxy Eleuthér6n kai dilon. Studien zur Rechtsstellung unfreier Landbevélkerungen in Griechenland, 1959; M. Meter, Aristokraten und Damoden, 1998; M.NaFISsI, La nascita del kosmos ..., 1991; P. OLIva, S. and Her Social Problems, 1971; A.POWELL (ed.), Classical S., 1989; Id., S.HODKINSON (ed.), The Shadow of S., 1994; C.M. StipBE, Das andere S., 1996; L.THOMMSEN, Lakedaimonion Politeia, 1996; E.N. TIGERSTEDT, The Legend

of S. in Classical Antiquity, 2 vols., 1965/78; L. WiERSCHOWSKI, Die demographisch-politische Auswirkungen des Erdbebens von 464 v. Chr. fiir S., in: E.OLSHAUSEN, H.SONNABEND (ed.), Naturkatastrophen in der antiken Welt, 1998, 291-306. K.-W.W.

Il. SOCIETY, CULTURE AND ART A. PROBLEMS REGARDING THE SOURCES B. THE SPARTAN ‘COSMOS’ C., LITERATURE AND ART D. FINE ARTS AND ARCHAEOLOGY

69).

F. SPARTA UNDER ROMAN RULE

New reform plans were pursued by > Nabis, who supported himself with mercenaries and emancipated numerous helots (Pol. 16,13,1; Liv. 34,27,2). He failed because he refused to relinquish Argos after > Quinctius [I 14] Flamininus’ proclamation of freedom in 196 BC at Corinth. S. was compelled to withdraw from the perioikoi territories (Liv. 34,35,3-11). The intervention of Flamininus marked the end of Spartan independence. However, the city remained in existence until well into the Roman Imperial period as a civitas libera

A. PROBLEMS REGARDING THE SOURCES The society and internal order of S. in the pre-Hellenistic period are only inadequately documented in contemporary sources. Thuc. 5,68,2 already refers to the legendary ‘secretiveness’ of the Spartans in domestic matters. Although later authors do provide more material, this is increasingly influenced by the S. myth, and its value as source material is disputed. The consequence is widely divergent evaluations of S. in the Archaic and Classical periods. The foci of discussions are esp. the highly partial glorification of the Spartan order by > Xenophon [2] (Xen. Lac.; [22. 14-35]), Aristot-

SPARTA

704

703

le’s (> Aristoteles [6]) cryptic criticism of S. (Aristot. Pol. 1269a 29-1271b 19; [9]) and Imperial authors (esp. Plutarch (+ Plutarchus [2], > Pausanias [8]),

whose value as sources for the early period many doubt (esp. [6. 31 f.; 11. 19-64; 12; 25], though some are less sceptical [7; 17; 24]).

B. THE SPARTAN ‘COSMOS’ Spartan society in the early Archaic period shows no significant differences from other Greek communities. In particular, the existence of an > aristocracy, in possession of all the typical attributes of Greek aristocracies, can no longer be doubted [17. 18-44; 28. 44-47]. There seem to have been increasing tensions from the late 8th cent. between aristocratic retinue groups and other members of the Spartan damos (- demos [1]) [17. 55-69}. Arbitrary actions on the part of these groups probably led, among other things, to the First > Messenian War (c. 700/690-680/670) and to the banishment of certain undesirable individuals who went on to settle > Taras [2] (c. 660/650) [17. 121141]. This unrest, which seems to have intensified in the rst half of the 7th cent., did, however, also create important impulses for the formation of community institutions, as can be seen esp. in the Great + Rhetra [2]. The Second — Messenian War (c. 640/630-600) seems to have formed a watershed. Widespread demands for the redistribution of land, which was evidently still largely controlled by aristocrats (Aristot. Pol. 1306b 36 ff.), were channelled towards — Messana [2] in the course of the existential crisis of this conflict (Tyrtaeus fr. 3 GENTILI/PRATO). After the conclusion of hostilities, Messana was divided into klaroi (‘plots of land’; + kleros) and shared out among the Spartiates (— Spartiatai), as had already happened in the 8th cent. in southern > Laconica. The land problem was thus defused for now, but controlling the transTaygetan Messanii, now demoted to > helots, proved difficult. The Spartiates’ consequent permanent fear of the helots (on which, most recently, [1]) proved henceforth to be a heavy burden. The collective compulsion to be prepared at all times for a revolt of the helots became superimposed on the tensions between aristocrats and damos until the liberation of Messana (370/369 BC), and explains a range of peculiarities of the Spartan ‘cosmos’. In spite of the self-designation > homoioi (II) for all Spartiates, which was probably introduced around this time, social and societal differences persisted and intensified in the 5th and 4th cents. BC. An aristocracy continued to exist. So-called ‘leading houses’ are apparent in the preserved sources, and charismatic individuals such as Cleomenes [3] I could again and again attain great influence. The schematic division of Spartan society into Spartiates, > perioikoi (IL) and the bonded > helots, usual for the Classical period, leaves other groups, whose exact affiliations are not always clear, unconsidered, e.g. the + mothakes, nothoi (> nothos),

+ neodamodeis and + hypomeiones (former Spartiates who had lost their citizenship [14. 21-25]). The status of women in S. has again emerged in the discussion (- Woman II). On this issue in particular, the S. myth had an effect on source authors from an early date. Reports of the supposed liberality of Spartan women probably arose from misunderstandings of various aspects of the communitarian way of life in S., though Spartan women did indeed possess particular rights of inheritance and ownership compared to women in other Greek poleis [3; 5; 6. 120 f.5 11. 94-103; 18; 29]. The shortage of men (‘oliganthropy’) which became particularly severe in the 4th cent. and which Aristotle ascribes to excessive ownership rights of women (Aristot. Pol. 1r269b 12-1270a 31) derived from a complex of reasons. The loss of citizenship in consequence of divisions of legacies, losses in war and earthquakes as well as the continuing social inequalities were probably important factors [11. 399-445; 30]. The necessity of controlling the helots in Messana may also have been responsible for crucial aspects creating the impression even in antiquity of S. as a ‘military camp’. The fragments of Tyrtaeus already betray the increasing necessity for the subordination of the individual to the collective interest (fr. 6; fr. 9 GENTILI/ PRATO), a process then to all intents and purposes elevated to a mystery in the context of the > Persian Wars (e.g. Simonides fr. 531 PMG; Hdt. 7,228). It seems to have led to a rigorous reshaping of Spartan society after the end of the 2nd Messenian War, new characteristics being on the one hand the separation of boys from the parental home and their public education in classes according to age (— agoge), and on the other hand the transformation of formerly aristocratic symposia into the strictly regulated community banquets of all male citizens (> Banquet) [17. 216-221], temporary polyan-

dry and probably even the abolition of > marriage [24]. Numerous contradictions and peculiarities emerge in the ancient sources from attempts to adhere to the regulations associated with such a communitarian way of life and from their increasing non-observance (social inequalities, integration of Spartan aristocrats in panHellenic contexts etc., cf. [11. 209-368]), e.g. the diverse reports of the conditions to which the private ownership of land was supposed to be subject. The idea that the so-called archaiai moirai (‘old plots of land’) were subject to a sale ban can now be regarded as disproved. Recent researchers even suppose that land ownership in S. was subject to similar conditions as elsewhere in Greece [11. 65-208; 13. 69-105].

The Spartans themselves also made increasing efforts from the 5th cent. to propagate an image of S. by distortion and mystification [11. 19-64; 28. 134-146]. In this way, numerous elements of the Spartan order came to be rooted in the perceptions of other Greeks which are regarded with scepticism today, e.g. the supposed expulsions of foreigners [23], the alleged exposure of weak children [15] (+ Child exposure), the legend of > Lycurgus [4] and the emphasis on > eunomia (‘good order’).

706

7°95

C. LITERATURE AND ART The level of literacy was certainly not as high in S. as, for instance, at Athens, but this hardly means collective illiteracy [2]. None the less, S. was an oral society, in which norms and regulations were not published in written form but were transmitted in apophthegms. Early Greek poetry, in which S. had an active part, was also of an oral character. Among the many foreign and native poets active in S. in the 7th cent. BC (> Terpander of Lesbos, > Polymnestus of Colophon, > Thaletas of Gortyn, > Sacadas of Argos etc.), the most prominent were the choral lyric poet > Aleman and the elegist ~ Tyrtaeus. While the fragments of Aleman afford an insight into the festivals and cultic activities of Archaic S., Tyrtaeus was a genuinely political poet, influencing - Solon [1], among others. Their venues included aristocratic symposia, performances also reflected in > Laconian vase painting [19. 219-228; 20; 21; 26; 27. 163203]. Works of transregional importance also emerged in the monumental architecture of the Archaic period. The ‘throne of Apollo’at > Amyclae [1], by > Bathycles of Magnesia, dated from the 6th cent. BC (Paus. 3,18,919,5; see below II Dz), as did the ‘Skias’ (community hall: Paus. 3,12,10) designed by > Theodorus [I 1] of Samos and the temple of Athena by the Spartan > Gitiades (Paus. 3,17,2f.; 3,18,8). Spartan artists and architects are also attested outside S. in the 6th cent., e.g. at Olympia (Paus. 5,17,1 f.; 6,4,43 6,19,8; 6,19,14)

[27. 114-120]. Spartan bronze work, too, enjoyed much prestige esp. in the 6th and early 5th cents. [8; 27. 128-162]. Also important are Archaic ivory work (esp. 7th and early 6th cents.), which is known esp. from rich finds at the sanctuary of Artemis Orthia [4; 16].

1 E.BALTRuscH, Mythos oder Wirklichkeit? Die Helotengefahr und der Peloponnesische Bund, in: HZ 272, 2001,

1-24

Production and the Problem of Spartan Austerity, in: N.FIsHER, H. vAN WeEs (ed.), Archaic Greece, 1998, 93117-11 Id., Property and Wealth in Classical $., 2000 12 N.M. KENNELL, The Gymnasium of Virtue, 1995 13 Sr. Linx, Landverteilung und sozialer Frieden, 1991 14Id., Der Kosmos S., 1994 15 Id., Zur Aussetzung

neugeborener Kinder in S., in: Tyche 13, 1998, 153-164 16 E.-L.I.Marancou, Lakonische Elfenbein- und Beinschnitzereien, 1969 17 M. Meter, Aristokraten und Damoden, 1998 18 E.G. MILLENDER, Athenian Ideology and the Empowered Spartan Woman, in: [7], 3 5 5-391 19 M. Nariss1, La nascita del kosmos, 1991 20 M.P1rix1, Laconian Iconography of the Sixth Century B. C., 1987 21 A.PowELL, Sixth-Century Lakonian Vase-Painting, in: [10], 119-146 22 St. REBENICH, Xenophon. Die

Verfassung der Spartaner, 1998 23 Id., Fremdenfeindlichkeit in S.?, in: Klio 80, 1998, 336-359 24 W.ScuMiITz, Die geschorene Braut. Kommunitdre Lebensformen in S.?, in: HZ 274, 2002, 561-602 25 Cu.G, Starr, Die Glaubwiirdigkeit der friihen spartanischen Geschichte, in: K.CHrisT (ed.), S., 1986, 264— 289 26 C.M. StrpBE, Lakonische Vasenmaler des 6. Jahrhunderts v. Chr., 1972 27 Id., Das andere S., 1996 28L.THOMMEN, Lakedaimonion Politeia, 1996 29 Id., Spartanische Frauen, in: MH 56, 1999, 129-149 30 L.WrerscHowskl, Die demographisch-politischen Auswirkungen des Erdbebens von 464 v. Chr. fiir S., in: E. OLSHAUSEN, H.SONNABEND (ed.), Naturkatastrophen in der antiken Welt (Geographica Historica ro), 1998, 291-306.

W.G. CavanaGH, S.E. C. WALKER (ed.), S. in Laconia, 1998; R.FORTSCH, Kunstverwendung und Kunstlegitimation im archaischen und frithklassischen S., 2001; D.M. MacDoweELL, Spartan Law, 1986.

D. FINE ARTS 1. FINE

Debate has turned to the reputed curtailment and ossification of Laconian art production around the mid 6th cent., which has been attributed to a way of life at S. that was increasingly strictly at the service of military needs (cf. below D.1). As well as the methodological problem of connecting these two circumstances, recent work has indicated that Laconian art production was far from ‘moribund’ everywhere by 550. However, the quality and quantity of older work were never achieved again [6. 46 f.; 10]. + SPARTA

2P.CaRTLEDGE, Literacy in the Spartan Oligar-

chy, in: Id. (ed.), Spartan Reflections, 2001, 39-54 31d., Spartan Wives, in: [2], 106-126 4R.M. Dawkins (ed.), The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at S.,1929 5M.H. DETTENHOFER, Die Frauen von S., in: Klio 75, 1993, 6175 6M.Drener, Athen und S., 2001 7 J.Ducar, Perspectives on Spartan Education in the Classical Period,

in: St. HopKINson, A.POWELL (ed.), S., 1999, 43-66 8 M. Herrort-Kocn, Archaische Bronzeplastik Lakoniens, 1986 9 E.HERRMANN-OTTO, Verfassung und Gesellschaft S.s in der Kritik des Aristoteles, in: Historia 47,1998, 18-40

10 St. Hopkinson, Lakonian Artistic

SPARTA

ARTS

AND

M.MEI.

ARCHAEOLOGY

2. ARCHAEOLOGY

1. FINE ARTS The self-image of S. in the Classical period maintained that fine arts had been abolished for centuries for reasons of state. This is often challenged with the equally anachronistic ‘archaeological counter-evidence’ of ‘normal’ artistic activity in S. [1. 110 f.; 2. 335 f£.5 3. 1-9; 4.27; 5.9 £5 6. 316]. Such activity, however, belonging as it did to the realm of luxury, was subject to tighter restrictions and necessitated more justification than elsewhere. Black-figured — vase painting [3; 7. 240; 8. 153 f.] and bronze tripods (— tripus) [5. 68 f.] and statuettes, which found wider distribution through export [7. 240 f.], can be relatively securely attributed to Spartan production by analogy to local finds, as can ivory pieces. However, commissioned work of foreign workshops, such as the Ionizing throne of + Amyclae [1] (cf. above II C) and dedications in sanctuaries across Greece [9; 10; 11. 45-63] were also

conceptually Spartan. The almost complete absence of high-quality large-scale sculpture is striking: sculpture seems only to have been granted the protection of legitimacy in the context of utilitarian objects (e.g. tripods ~ tripous, and supporting figures), by the criterion of

>

SPARTA

‘usefulness’ [11. 181 f.]. The manufacture of fine arts was increasingly suppressed from c. 600 BC, but neither production nor the issuance of commissions died out immediately. The third quarter of the 6th cent. BC saw a decisive shift [12. 48 f.]. Three of the five most important art forms (reliefs of heroes and Dioscuri, marble akroteria, (+ Akroterion)) produced in S. into the 5th cent. and to

some extent even into the Hellenistic period emerged at the very time when an interruption of unprecedented abruptness was occurring in art production. Yet the en-

suing period still saw state commissions, such as the krater for Croesus [11. 49 f.], the new constructions of the Amyclaean throne and the Temple of Athena Chalkioikos around 500 [8. 154; 13. 252; 14315. 80]. Aculture of fine arts that was aristocratic and emphasized luxury was being gradually superseded by the egalitarian ideology, hostile to luxury, of the > homoioi. Strategies here emerged in approaches to fine arts, such as the blending of luxurious and consciously coarse design elements, which were included in the construction of the artworks themselves (Alcm. fr. 17 PAGE; [7. 217, n. 155]). Artworks thus themselves came to convey the intensified Spartan variant of the discourse on culture and luxury. The imagery is characterized by particular combinations of feats [11. 129 f.], but also by a consciously egalitarian approach to heroic motifs [11. 126 f.]. The absence of any phalanx scenes in vasepainting and the late emergence of depictions of hoplites (vase-painting,

708

707

bronze statuettes:

[11. 121-129])

are striking. Although the individual genres often attain a common formal vocabulary (black-figured vasepainting, bronze statuettes: [11. 158-172]), they also demonstrate strong heterogeneity in their often presuppositionless beginnings in + Laconica, their brief lifespan and inconsequential disappearance [11. 187225]. Isolated evidence of luxury elements (e.g. in depictions of symposia) [16. 119] and the continued use of small-format votive gifts in the 5th and 4th cents. BC [17] do not suffice to refute the energetic pursuit of the policy of thrift. Objects of Spartan fine arts require a critical approach to sources just as do written records (see above II. C) and do not reveal themselves directly,

but only through their iconography and formal vocabulary. 2. ARCHAEOLOGY Knowledge of the topography of S. has been advanced esp. by the excavations of the British School at Athens since the late roth cent., recommenced 19891998. These have included the Acropolis with the Temple of Athena Chalkioikos, and the urban area, with the sanctuary of Artemis Orthia and its large hoard of votive objects [18. 5, note 15]. It has not yet proved possible to publish a large number of finds from the Archaic to Classical and, esp., Roman periods, which would be important to an assessment of the city and to the records on public buildings of the Archaic to Classical periods. Nor does the increasing and undocumented destruction of the ancient city remains in the modern period ease the situation.

The first city wall of S. was probably built in the Hellenistic period [18. 5, note 15; 19. 283 f.]. In the city’s Roman period, a phase of particular construction activity under > Eurycles is worthy of note, when the city joined the Augustan marble monumentalization process, most clearly seen in the theatre, built entirely of marble. The revival of the festivals at the tomb of Lycurgus [4] also fits the cultural climate of the Augustan period. The 2nd-cent. AD description by > Pausanias [8] (3,10-18) sheds light on the position reached in S. within the general Greek tendency of depicting its own culture and history [18]. Late antiquity assumes physical form e.g in the spolia wall from the time of Alaric (> Alaricus [2]) in the 4th/sth cents., and in the late 4th-cent. repairs to the theatre, attested by inscription [20], by Honorius [3] and Theodosius [3] I. In AD 375, a severe earthquake devastated the city, as did the attack of the > Visigoths under Alaric in 396. ~» SPARTA 1 E.KirsTen, Kothon in S. und Karthago, in: K.SCHAUENBURG (ed.), Charites. FS E. Langlotz, 1957, 110-118 2 F.BROMMER, Krater Tyrrhenikos, in: MDAI(R) 87, 1980, 335-339 3 C.M.St1pBe, Lakonische Vasenmaler des 6. Jahrhunderts v. Chr., 1972 4 K.H1z1, Die Ent-

stehung und Entwicklung des Volutenkraters, 1982 5 M.Herrort-Kocu, Archaische Bronzeplastik Lakoniens, 1986 6 R.SENFF, Produktion und Handel, in: K. VIERNEISEL, B. KAESER (ed.), Kunst der Schale, Kultur

des Trinkens (Ausst. Antikensammlungen Miinchen 1990), 1990,316 7M.Narisst, La nascita del kosmos, 1991 81.McPuHekr, Laconian Red Figure from the British Excavations in S., in: ABSA 81, 1986, 153-166 9 E.BuscHor, W.v. Massow, Vom Amyklaion, in: MDAI(A) 52, 1927, 1-85 10 A.FAUSTOFERRI, Il trono di Amyklai e S., 1996 11 R. FORTscH, Kunstverwen-

dung und Kunstlegitimation im archaischen und frihklassischen S.,2001 12 Id., Spartan Art: Its Many Different Deaths, in: W.G. CAvANAGH, S.E. C. WALKER (ed.), S. in Laconia. Proc. of the r9th British Museum Classical Colloquium, 1999, 48-54 13 A.M. Woopwarp, M.B. Hos inc, Excavations at Sparta, in: ABSA 26, 1923-25, 116-310 14 L.PicciriLut, Il santuario, la funzione guerriera della dea, la regalita, in: M.Sorpt (ed.), I santuari e la guerra nel mondo classico, 1984, 3-19 15 M.Prp1ui, Laconian Iconography of the Sixth Century B. C., 1987 16 A. POWELL, Sixth-Century Lakonian Vase-Painting, in: N. FIsHER, H. vAN WEES (ed.), Archaic Greece, 1998, 119146 17 St. HODKINSON, Patterns of Bronze Dedications at Spartan Sanctuaries, in: [12], 55-63 18 G. WAYWELL, S. and Its Topography, in: BICS 43, 1999, 1-25 19A.]J. B. Wace, The City Wall, in: ABSA 12, 1905-1906, 284288 20A.M. Woopwarp, Excavations at S. 19241928 I: The Theatre Architectural Remains, in: ABSA 30, 1928-30, 151-240.

Maps:

C.M. Stripper, Beobachtungen zur Topographie

des antiken S., in: BABesch 64, 1989, 61-99; Id., Das andere S., 1996. RE.

Spartacus. Leading an insurrection of slaves, the Thracian S. entangled Rome from 73 to 71 BC in the most dangerous slave war of her history (App. B Civ. 1,116120; Plut. Crassus 8-11: Xmaetaxog; Flor. Epit. 2,8).

799

710

Together with 70 companions Spartacus had succeeded in escaping from a gladiator school in Capua in 73 BC. With shepherds and other agricultural slaves (> Agriculture) joining them, the band around S. grew rapidly. Although S. managed to repel 3,000 Roman soldiers by outmanoeuvering them near Mount Vesuvius, the Romans continued to underrate the danger of the uprising. As a consequence, their attempts to prevent S. from raiding Southern Italy ended in abject failure. These successes encouraged an ever-increasing number of runaway slaves as well as impoverished free men to join the insurrectionists. The estimates for 72 BC of the size of this army, which was excellently organized by S., range from 40,000 to 120,000 men. According to Plutarchus [2], S. intended to retreat from Roman territory in order to

played a crucial role in the uprising of Berlin labourers, now known as the Spartacist insurrection. In 1959/60 the American Stanley KuBRIck created a (cinematographic) milestone in directing the movie ‘Spartacus’. + Gladiator; —~ Munus III.; >; Slavery; — Slave

enable his men to return to their home countries (Plut.

Crassus 9). It is true that he initially led them to Gallia Cisalpina, but from there he marched them back to Southern Italy. The Roman armies sent out to stop him suffered heavy defeats. It was in this situation that the Senate entrusted Licinius [I rr] Crassus in late 72 BC with the command in the Slave War. Crassus pushed the insurgents back to Bruttium, preventing them from returning to the interior of Italy by setting up a line of forts running from coast to coast. After a failed attempt to ferry his army across to Sicily (Cic. Verr. 2,5,5), S. broke through the line of defences in 71 BC, but was cornered in Lucania by Crassus’ army and killed in battle. The victor had 6,000 captured slaves crucified to line the > via Appia all the way to Capua. Whereas Cicero and Florus [1] express their contempt of S., Sallustius [II. 3] mentions his intervening against excesses by his men, and Plutarchus [2] praises his physical strength, intelligence and kindness. (Cic. Phil. 4,15; Sall. Hist. 3,98; Plut. Crassus 8); Plinius [1]

emphasizes the fact that S. outlawed the possession of gold or silver inside his camp. (Plin. HN 33,49; cf. App. B Giver)

In the face of these highly divergent assessments the real S. can barely be separated from the legends and topoi; nevertheless his historical importance must on no account be underrated. In the Modern Age, the highest respect was paid to his achievements again and again; especially Lessinc, VOLTAIRE, GRILLPARZER, HEBEL and Karl Marx held him in high esteem. From the 18th cent. onwards S. has been regarded as a symbol of the rightful struggle against oppression: The tragedy ‘Spartacus’ by Bernard SAURIN was first performed in Paris in 1760. Denis FoyaTIER revealed his statue of S. (Paris, LV) in the revolutionary year of 1830, while in 1916 the extreme left in Germany forged an alliance called the Spartacus Group which was renamed Spartacus League in 1918. On January 1, 1919 the Spartacus League took the lead in the founding of the German Communist Party, which four days later

SPARTIATAI

revolts; > FILM 1K.Brap.ey,

Slavery

and

Rebellion

in the Roman

World, 140 BC-70 BC, 1989 +2 A. GUARINO, Spartakus, 1980 3 W.SCHULLER, S. heute, in: Id. (ed.), Antike und Moderne, 1985, 289-305 4H.T. Wattinca, Bellum

Spartacium: Florus’ Text and Spartacus Objective, in: Athenaeum 80, 1992, 25-43.

BJ.O.

Sparti (Greek =nagtoi/Spartoi, ‘the sown ones’). In mythology the warriors who grow from the dragon’s teeth sowed by - Cadmus [1] and kill one another, until only five of them remain: > Echion [1], Pelor, Chthonius, Hyperenor and Udaeus. Cadmus makes them the first citizens of his newly founded city of Thebes (Cadmeia; — Thebae). Spartiatai

(Xnmagtata; Spartiatai). Full citizens of -» Sparta, who attained this status at 20 years of age, and who from the 5th cent. BC saw themselves as + homoioi [II] (peers), distinct from the > perioikoi, and from the hypomeiones, who enjoyed only limited rights as citizens. The conditions for assuming this status included pure Spartan blood, completion of the + agoge and participation in the syssitiai (+ Banquet [II. B]), to which they had to contribute. Their economic basis were the klaroi (> kleros), which were worked by ~ helots. The notion that all of Laconia was originally parcelled by > Lycurgus [4] into 9,000 equal plots for the Spartiatai and 30,000 more for the perioikoi (Pol. 6,45,3; Plut. Lycurgus 8; Plut. Agis 5) is a later legend. The system derived from the foundation of kleroz in the conquered Eurotas Valley in the early 8th cent., but the parcels of land were hardly of equal size. By the late 7th cent. there were already sharp differences in property ownership, to which the allocation of land to Spartiatai in subjugated Messenia (— Messenian Wars) failed to provide a lasting solution, especially as economic inequality was exacerbated esp. by inheritance procedures. The decline in numbers of Spartiatai observable from the time of the > Persian Wars of 480/79 does seem for a time to have concealed extreme property inequalities, as many Spartiatai were still seen as wealthy around 370 BC (Xen. Hell. 6,5,28; Diod. Sic. 15,65,5). However, this changed after Messenia was lost (370 BC; + Epaminondas), such that by 250 BC there were gross disparities, although Plutarch’s (Agis 5) assertion of 100 rich klaros owners and 600 impoverished Spartiatai is exaggerated. Grants of citizenship by > Cleomenes [6] III and > Nabis failed to stabilize the system, especially as the expansionist policies each pursued in parallel to these led to catastrophic losses. — Sparta

SPARTIATAI

Fi

Gast

S. Link, Das frithe Sparta, 2000; M. Meier, Aristokraten und Damoden, 1998, 58 ff.; H.W. Sincor, Admission to the Syssitia in Fifth-Century Sparta, in: $.HODKINSON, A.PowELt (ed.), Sparta. New Perspectives, 1999, 67-89. K.-W.W.

The dynasty of the Spartocids Spartokos [1] I. (438/7-433/2)

Satyros [2] |. (433/2-389/8)

Seleukos [1] (433/2-393/2)?

Spartocids. Ruling dynasty in the > Regnum Bosporanum, named after its founder Spartocus [1] I, who took over the power from the Archaeanactids of > Panticapaeum in 43 8/7 BC. The dynasty, which distinguished itself in the Classical and early Hellenistic periods with a brisk trade in corn in the Aegaean (primarily with Athens), came to an end in rog9 BC with the handing over of power by its last ruler, Paerisades [6] V, to Mithridates [6] VI of Pontus. W.ED. Spartocus (=ndetoxoc/Spdartokos). Name of a king from the Bosporanian dynasty of the — Spartocids (+ Regnum Bosporanum). Contrary to earlier opinion he was of Iranian origin and not Thracian. [1] S. I. (43 8/7-43 3/2 BC; in Diod. Sic.12,3 1: written as Spartacus). Founder of the Spartocids dynasty. He removed the Archaeanactidae from power, probably through a coup and without changing the state’s structure as an hereditary > tyranny. The culture remained purely Greek, which is in contradiction with the assumption that S. was the leader of a Thracian army of mercenaries. Under his rule the relationship with Athens was probably very good. [2] S. IL. (349/8-344/43 BC). Son of Leucon [3], ruled the Bosporus as an archon, while his brother Pairisades [x] I ruled over the town of > Theodosia and the ~ Maeotae. A decree set up in his honour by the Athenians (IG II* 212) mentions the trade in corn and Athenian help in constructing the Bosporanian fleet. [3] S. OL. (304/3-284/3 BC). Son of Eumelus [4]. S. is honoured in an Athenian decree as a generous contributor of corn (IG II* 653). [4] S. IV. (c. 245-240 BC). Son and successor of Pairisades [3] II. According to Ov. Ib. 309 f. (with scholium) he was killed by his brother Leucon [4]. [5] S. V. (c. 200-180 BC). Mentioned in IOSPE 2,308 and on brick stamps from > Panticapaeum and > Gorgippia; his family relationships within the dynasty are unexplained. His daughter > Kamasarye Philoteknos married his successor Pairisades [4] III. ~ Spartocids (with stemma) R. WERNER, Die Dynastie der Spartokiden, in: Historia 4, 1955, 412-444; J.B. BraSinskyJ, O nekotoryh dinastiéeskih osobennostjah pravlenija Bosporskih Spartokidoy, in: VDI 1, 1965, 118-127; V.F. GAJDUKEVIC, Das Bosporanische Reich, 1971, 65-110; S.R. TOKHTAS’EV, Iz onomastiki Severnogo Pri¢ernomor’ja, in: A.K. GAVRILOV

(ed.), Etjudy po antiénoj istorii i kul’ture Severnogo Pricernomor’ja, 1992, 178-200.

Leukon [3] I.

Gorgippos [1]

(389/8-349/8)

Spartokos [2] Il.

(349/8-344/3) Satyros II.

(311/0-3 10/09) Pairisades [2]

Daughterco Hekataios King of the Sindi

Pairisades [1] |.cO Kamasarye

(349/8-311/0)

— Apollonios

Eumelos [4]

Prytanis

(310/09 -304/3)

(310/09)

Spartokos [3] Ill. (304/3 -284/3)

Pairisades [3] Il. (284/3-—c. 245)

Spartokos [4] IV.

(c. 245-240)

Leukon [4] Il. (c. 240-220)

Hygiainon (not from this dynasty) (c. 220-200)

Spartokos [5] V. (kinship relation to the dynasty unverified) (c. 200-180)

|

Argotas co (2) Kamasarye Philoteknos (1)©o Pairisades [4] III.

(180-c. 150)

Pairisades [5] IV. (c.150-—125)

Pairisades [6] V. (c. 125-109)

412 f.), initially with two talents, from 43 4/3 BC with three. S. seceded from Athens in 432 (Thuc. 1,58,1) and participated on the side of its opponents in the > Peloponnesian War. In the summer of 429 the Athenians suffered a defeat at S.; the following winter the region was devastated by the troops of king - Sitalces [1] of Thrace (Thuc. 2,79; ror,r). In the text of the peace of Nicias (421) S. was declared autonomous, but tributary to Athens (Thuc. 5,18,5). In the 4th cent. S$. was temporarily a member of the Chalcidian League; during the Spartan-Olynthian war (382-379) S. was used as a base by the Lacedaemonian troops (Xen. Hell. 5,3,6). In 349 S. became Macedonian and from 315 was part of the urban region of the newly founded Cassandria (— Potidaea). M. ZaurRntT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 236 f.

MZ.

Lv.B.

Spartolus (Zxdetwdoc/Spartélos). The most significant city in the territory of the Bottiaei, hard to locate exactly, first mentioned in the Athenian Tribute Lists (ATL 1,

Sparton (Zadetwv; Spdrtdn). Theban general of the Boeotian contingents that inflicted a heavy defeat on the Athenians at - Coronea in 447 BC. The victory levelled the way for the founding of the Boeotian

713

714

League (> Boeotia B.). S.’s name alludes to the > Sparti (Plut. Agesilaos 19,2; cf. Thuc. 1,113,2; Diod. Sic.

ic theatre editions, are still found rather frequently. In the textual transmission of philosophical dialogues, the archaic notation has been kept through dikola or paragraphoi up into the medieval editions. + Diacritical signs; > Stage direction

12,6,2; Xen. Mem. 3,5,4). D.R. SuipLey,

A Commentary on Plutarch’s Life of Age-

silaos, 1997, 239.

HA.BE.

SPECTACLES

R.Barsis Lupi, La paragraphos: analisi di un segno di lettura, in: Proceedings of the 2oth International Congress of Papyrologists, 1994, 414-417; W.A. JoHNsoN, The Function of the Paragraphus in Greek Literary Prose

Spatha see > Sword

Spatharios (Xa0deuoc/Spathdrios, ‘sword-bearer’). From the 5th to the r2th cent. AD a member of a body of chamberlains (eunuchs) at the Roman-Byzantine Imperial Court, from about the 8th cent. subordinate to a protospathadrios im Senatorenrang of senatorial rank. From the roth cent. there is also evidence of noneunuchs as protospathdrioi.

Texts, in: ZPE 100, 1994, 65-68; E.J. Jory, ‘Algebraic’ Notation in Dramatic Texts, in: BICS 10, 1963, 65-78;

J.B. C. Lowe, The Manuscript Evidence for Changes of Speaker in Aristophanes, in: BICS 9, 1962, 27-42; G. MasTROMARCO, The Public of Herondas, 1984, 99-

113; E.G. Turner, Greek Manuscripts of the Ancient World, *1987, 8-9, 13; K.-U. WAHL, Sprecherbezeichnun-

gen mit griechischen Buchstaben in den Hss. des Plautus und Terenz, 1974. V.LC.

A. KAZHDAN, Ss. v. Proto-S., ODB 3, 1748; s. v. S., 1935 f.

ET.

Spatium see > Punctuation

Speaker, change of. In the oldest transmission-levels of Greek dramatic texts one finds diacritical marks, such as the dikolon and the pardgraphos (> Diacritical signs I. C.4-5), that indicate a change of speaker. The paragraphos generally functions as a separator: in prose and verse texts, it designates phraseological and/or thematic units; in dramatic texts or texts with dialogue it indicates a change of speaker. The earliest records of this can be found in papyri from the 3rd cent. BC (e.g. PLit. Lond. 80; PSorb. 2272). Sometimes the pardgraphos is combined with a colon inside the line (esp. in comedies or Plato’s dialogues), sometimes with a space. In tragedies, a change of speaker in mid-verse is sometimes indicated by the fact that the verse is distributed over two lines. The dikolon (colon), on the other hand, is used within a single line, at times in combination with a hyphen. Another system for identifying a change of speaker documented from the rst cent. AD at the latest consists of Greek alphabetical sigla (numerals): in some cases, a horizontal line is placed above certain letters or one finds letters such as ¢ and 9 (PSI 1176; POxy. 2458). This system, which can be found in a few papyri of Greek + mime (mostly from the znd cent. AD; see PBerolinensis 13876), seems to correspond to that found in several MSS of Latin comedians (cf. e.g. the Cod. Bembinus by Terentius, Cod. Vaticanus Lat. 3226, 5th/6th cents AD). This notation is assumed to have been added to actors’ scripts and represents the ancient division of roles (e.g. POxy. 413). Abbreviations of speaker names on the left side of a verse were still rare in the 1st cent. BC but became increasingly frequent in the Imperial Period, esp. after the 3rd cent. Due to weak documentation, however, a complete and continuous system of indications for speakerchanges cannot be found until Byzantine and medieval editions, although the above marks, remnants of archa-

Spectabilis (or vir spectabilis, Greek peribleptos, also spektabilios). Senatorial title, coined in Late Antiquity, for officials ranking second to the illustres (— Illustris vir), originally used in the sense of admirabilis (‘admirable’), from the middle of the 2nd cent. also to describe prominent persons. The title is first recorded in AD 3.65 (Cod. Theod. 7,6,1); the usage initially fluctuated con-

siderably between illustres, spectabiles and clarissimi (— Vir clarissimus) and seems not to have been unequi-

vocally fixed until c. 400. The first to be given the title were the > proconsules and — vicarii, the praefectus Augustalis and the > comes Orientis, later a large number of other offices was added. Within the spectabiles, there were grades, too: proconsules, for instance, were of higher standing than vicarii, who were higher in turn than duces (> Dux [1]). Spectabiles enjoyed more privileges than clarissimi, but fewer than illustres; until 436 they were exempt from the obligation to serve as a decurion. K.G-A.

Spectacles I. PRINCIPAL TYPES II. POLITICAL IMPORTANCE AND ORGANIZATION III. FESTIVALS AND AUDIENCE IV. CHURCH AND SPECTACLE I. PRINCIPAL TYPES

A. GREECE

B. ROME

A. GREECE Fundamental to Greek spectator events was the distinction between gymnic, hippic and musical agons (+ Competitions, artistic). All games emerged from cult, whether of the dead or of the gods. They remained connected with the cult and took place in conjunction with festivals (> Festivals, ‘Festival culture’). The presentation of gymnic and hippic games (e.g. chariot races, Hom. Il. 23,257-538; — Sports festivals), and of choral agons (Hom. Od. 8,256-366) is already found in Homer. Hesiod attests to a musical agon (Hes. Op. 650-

659).

SPECTACLES

Fas

In the Archaic period, games of Panhellenic renown developed. The best-known were those of ~ Olympia (Olympic Games), which lacked the musical contests. Also important were the > Pythia [2] (Pythian Games) at Delphi, the > Isthmia (Isthmian Games) at Corinth and the + Nemea [3] (Nemean Games), which often did not take place at Nemea. All these games were initially connected with sanctuaries and not with poleis. They were biennial, triennial or quadrennial. Participation was open to free, male Greeks. The value of victors’ prizes was low, but their prestige considerable. Moreover, winners could expect substantial material and immaterial honours in their homeland. There were also many other agons, some of local, some of transregional significance. The best-known were the > Panathenaea (Panathenaic Games), which included musical, gymnic and hippic agons. Some contests (e.g. the Athenian agon of masculinity and beauty, the agon euandrias) were only open to Athenians. As wellas these festivals whose importance extended beyond the local were some whose participants typically came from the citizenry of the particular polis. The best-attested are the Great > Dionysia at Athens, which offered among other things a venue for theatrical performances, various types being in competition with regard to different aspects. Such performances also took place at other festivals (e.g. the > Lenaea), including outside Athens at various spectacle venues in the Attic demes (~* Demos [2]). Similar festivities were also celebrated outside Attica. The vibrancy of spectator events is shown by the numerous surviving buildings attributable to them in the Greek world. However, it is certain that considerable regional differences must be expected. The sth and esp. the 4th cent. BC brought a shift towards the professionalization of actors. Fewer aristocrats, and more and more professional athletes, chariot-drivers and artists who depended on the income, appeared at the Panhellenic games. Modern scholarship has drawn away from the tendency to see this as a symptom of decline. Very occasionally, women appeared as agonists. Over time, the touring of individual actors and their retinues became more important. This phenomenon was encouraged by the blossoming of agonistics in the Hellenistic period. Agons were held in many places across the Greek world, some at regular intervals, others in association with special occasions. The distinction indicated above between the contests established itself in the division between ‘sacred’ agons, or ‘crown agons’ (ay@vec tegoi otedavitavagénes hieroi stephanitai), the Panhellenic agons, in which the contest was

primarily for honour and which offered indirect material gain, and the dy@vec OeuatixoU/agénes thematikoi or yonuatita/chrématitai, in which various levels of prize monies were at stake. While the first of these resonated across the oikoumene, the latter two were generally of regional significance. In the musical agons, a separation developed between thymelic (i.e. held on the

716

orchestra and mostly solo) and scenic agons. The most renowned of the agons (Olympia, Pythia, Isthmia and Nemea, the musical agonists replacing the Olympia with the Heraea of Argos) together formed the periodos, to win which brought especially great fame. With some losses, this system survived into Late Antiquity. Spectator events received generous sponsorship from the nascent Hellenistic courts, at which performances were readily given. The model here was Alexander [4] the Great, who had important festivities accompanied by splendid theatrical performances. The Hellenistic monarchies provided the context for spectacles at victory festivals, weddings and other celebrations, while urban spectator events continued alongside. The Augustan period heralded an ’explosion agonistique’ [1]. In the Roman period, presentations of a Roman nature (see below) penetrated into the Graecophone East. B. ROME Ludi scaenici (theatre, > ludi), ludi circenses (circus games, — circus I), munera and venationes (gladiatorial contests and animal hunts in the arena) were the constituent elements of Roman spectator events. Sometimes, these elements interwove (e.g. staged performances in the circus). The Roman /udi had Etruscan and, more generally, Italian roots, but were also considerably influenced by Greece in several impulses. The result was something unique, esp. since it was integrated into Roman cult. Alongside the fixed, annual games were those arranged for special occasions (e.g. at > triumphs, later imperial festivals). Originally, games were dominated by chariot-racing. Later, stage performances were added. The 3rd cent. BC saw the emergence, originally as part of funerary games, of gladiatorial contests (+ munus), and these were brought under government control in the Imperial period. Athletic contests were rare and were regarded as offensive because of the nudity of the contestants. More unusual programmes were also possible according to the requirements of the organizer. Although contests did take place within these shows, they must be distinguished from agons. Agons as independent festivals increasingly entered the Roman system from the Imperial period onward. The periodos was expanded to include the Actian Games of Nicopolis (> Actia), the > Sebasteia at Neapolis [2] and the Capitoline Agon (> Capitolea). The western agons had peculiarities, e.g. pantomimes were also allowed at sacred agons [2. 169 ff.]. The programme of ludi became larger and richer during the Imperial period, but did not change fundamentally from that of the Republic. However, in the ludi scaenici, comedy and tragedy were gradually displaced by > mime and > pantomime.

718

717 Il. POLITICAL

IMPORTANCE

AND

ORGANIZA-

TION A. GREECE

B. ROME

A. GREECE Spectacles were not only educational material and entertainment, but were typically incorporated into a political context, either of Greece as a whole or of the specific polis. Panhellenic games such as the Olympic Games were the responsibility of individual poleis to organize, control of the often politically fought-over sanctuaries (e.g. the Heraeum at Argos or Nemea) providing the right to hold the games. Panhellenic games were in fact politically neutral, but the politically motivated exclusion of participant states is attested, esp. during the > Peloponnesian War. Spectacles could meet the need for representation of monarchs (Archaic tyrants as well as Hellenistic princes) — but also of a democracy, as a forum of civic self-presentation. Oligarchic orders seem to have had a less stimulating effect. Although its roots lay in earlier times, Classical Attic drama (— tragedy, > comedy, — satyr play) was fully incorporated in the democratic polis. Its audience took the form of a festive gathering of citizens. The choregoi and choreutai (— choregos, > chorus) had to be citizens, but the poets, actors and musicians did not. All participants were men, the choreutai probably ephebes([3. 20-62]; > ephebeia) and initially laymen. The judges were chosen by lot from the ten > phyles. Urban officials presided. Poets applied to participate and were assigned a chorus by the > archontes [I] responsible. The games were financed by the > liturgy of the + choregia, which was in particular responsible for furnishings. The choregos must be distinguished from the chorodidaskalos (often the poet), who was responsible for rehearsal. Special officials could also be selected for the organization of particular festivals, e.g. the athlothetes appointed for four years (> agonothetes) at the + Panathenaea. The event (esp. the Great Dionysia, which also attracted many spectators from outside) was framed by many rituals confirming the identity of the citizenry: the presentation of tributes by members of the ~» Delian League, honours, etc. There were changes in the Hellenistic period (e.g. replacement of the choregoi by agonothetai at Athens), but transformation was less drastic than is often assumed [4]. As acting became professionalized, a process began whereby games, and especially the actors, became separated from the context of the polis. However, this process was never complete. The musical agonists organized themselves into the association of Dionysian > technitai (> Associations), which encompassed seyeral local guilds and which, perhaps in the triumviral period but at all events not later than the early Principate grew into an international association. The technitai received various privileges, such as the > asylia and the — ateleia, which eased their peripatetic lives. Their associations acted corporately and interacted

SPECTACLES

with political bodies. In a similar way, an athletes’ association developed during the Imperial period (ovvodoc¢ Evotxn, synodos xystike). The role of the > agonothetes was decisive for the realization of the Hellenistic-Roman agons, the organizational details of which may have varied from place to place. He could make a significant contribution to the financing of the contests, which were often primarily based on gifts, and he could also control the course of the games, having to aim at the approval of the audience in the spirit of > euergetism. Actors showed their skills not only during the contests, but also during so-called epideixeis (‘declamatory displays’). B. ROME The organization of the ludi publici (- ludi) may originally have been the responsibility of priests, later, at least in essence, urban Roman magistrates (esp. the ~ aediles, also the > praetores, > consules, from the Imperial period increasingly the > quaestores) or local officials. Organizers were allotted a certain sum of money, but it was expected that they would add to this out of their own means, which offered an opportunity for self-promotion. The actors themselves were generally trained and maintained by entrepreneurs (directors of gladiatorial schools, circus groups, theatrical troupes, etc.) and could be hired by the games promoter. As well as ludi publici, there were also ludi privati, e.g. on the occasion of funerals (ludi funebres, > dead, cult of the). During the Principate, a process of the ‘imperialization’ of the games became apparent. The Emperor took control of all important events and presented himself to the public as the true > euergetes (‘benefactor’). All games became incorporated into the > ruler cult, and the associations of technitai and athletes honoured the Emperor. Many actors — e.g. the outstanding pantomime artists — were Imperial freedmen. In Late Antiquity, the Emperor actually had a monopoly on good horses. However, on a regional level, considerable diversity in the organizational forms of public games persisted. Peripatetic artists were often accompanied by local ensembles. In addition, games could be held privately, financed from door takings. III. FESTIVALS AND AUDIENCE

A. GREECE

B. ROME

A. GREECE The composition of the audience varied according to the event. It was typically male and Greek or indigenous. However, women could spectate, e.g. as priestesses or on special conditions (at Olympia they had to be unmarried), and in some places they may even have done so regularly (on Athens in this regard most recently [5]). Slaves and foreigners were certainly present among the spectators. Certain festivals, such as the Great Dionysia at Athens, seem even to have been specially formulated in order to impress outsiders. It was

719

720

usual for there to be honorific seats for honoured domestic and foreign political figures and for priests and

IV. CHURCH AND SPECTACLE The early Church criticized spectacles mainly for two reasons: for their immorality and for their connections with the old religion. However, it proved exceedingly difficult to convince Christians that games were ruinous. It is striking how often even clerics had to be banned from participating in games [ro]. When Constantine (> Constantinus [1]) the Great became Emperor, he proceeded only half-heartedly against gladiatorial contests. Spectator events remained a vibrant tradition in the Christian Empire. It is true, however, that they were stripped of their religious connotations. Only with > Theodosius I (AD 379-395) did energetic action back up the spirit of ecclesiastical criticism. However, only gladiatorial contests were definitively abolished, and not until the 5th cent. [rr]. Otherwise, the end of urban culture, or its transformation, brought an end to games in the west. By contrast, there was continuity into subsequent centuries in the Eastern Roman Empire, esp. with chariot racing. -» Amphitheatrum; > Athletes (with map); > Circus;

SPECTACLES

priestesses.

The numbers of spectators ranged up to the thousands. The audience was relatively disorderly, esp. as e.g. dramatic performances at Athens lasted from morning to evening, meaning that people ate and drank during them. Applause and opprobrium were communicated loudly, and emotional outbursts (e.g. tears) are often mentioned. Actors could also be pelted with missiles, and conversely, objects might sometimes fly from the stage into the ranks of spectators (on Attic drama in the sth/4th cents., cf. [6]). As a whole, the audience and actors were less sharply separated than in modern arrangements. Although the audience was diverse, the intended audience of the performances was the citizenry, who may have sat arranged by > phyle. Entrance charges were sometimes made, including at Athens, where, however, they were later repaid to citizens from the theorikon (state fund paying for seats at spectacles) [7].

~ Comedy;

B. ROME From the zenith of the Republic, the audience sat in

accordance with social status. The seats of the senators and equestrians, as well as honorific seats (e.g. for the -» Vestals), were in the area corresponding to the Greek orchestra (~ Theatre, with fig.). The simpler people thronged the cavea, the spectator tiers, and slaves and women sat far above. The Roman elite felt the populace gathered for the games to be threatening, esp. at stage performances, which breached the monopoly of officials on speaking before the multitude. The construction of stone theatres was long banned. Cn. > Pompeius [I 3] Magnus was the first to have one built, connecting the structure with a temple. On several occasions during the Principate, histriones (> histrio) and their retinues who had made themselves unpopular were banished. Legal discrimination against actors — histriones, like gladiators and chariotdrivers [8] were infames (‘of ill repute, without honour’; ~ infamia) — should probably also be seen in this con(+ Marginalized groups). The role of the text ~ factiones (‘circus parties’), which gained influence during the Imperial period and also had a following among the spectators, is difficult to assess. In Late Antiquity, they seem to have replaced private involvement and also to have included other actors, thereby at least functionally speaking becoming, among other things, successors to the technitai (9. 143 ff.]. At the same time, they served as an instrument of imperial control of spectator events, and took on official duties (e.g. the defence of the city). Furthermore, specific rituals of annunciation to the people in the theatre, amphitheatre or circus increasingly developed in the Imperial period, which offered an important opportunity for political communication and were to this extent of central importance to the political system.

— Competitions,

artistic; — Entertainers;

— Festivals; Feasts; > Gladiator; > Histrio; ~ Hypokrites; > Mimos; + Munus, munera;

> Pantomimos;

+ Recreation; -—> Satyr plays; - Sports -» Theatre (with figs.); > Tragedy 1 RoBert, OMS

6, 709-719

festivals;

2H.Leppin, Histrionen,

1992 3J.J. WINKLER, F.I. ZEITLIN, Nothing to Do with Dionysos?, 1990 4 B. Le GuEn, Théatre et cités 4 |’époque hellénistique, in: REG 108, 1995, 59-90 5 J. HENDERSON, Women in the Athenian Dramatic Festivals, in: TAPhA 121, 1991, 133-147 6R.W. WALLACE, Poet, Public, and ’Theatrocracy’ in: L.EDMUNDs, R.W. WALLACE (eds.), Poet, Public, and Performance in Ancient Greece, 1997, 97-II1, 157-163 7 A.SOMMERSTEIN,

The Theatre Audience, the Demos, and the Suppliants of Aeschylus, in: CH. PELLING (ed.), Greek Tragedy and the Historian, 1996, 63-80 8 G.HorsMann, Die Wagenlenker der r6mischen Kaiserzeit, 1998 9 C.ROUECHE,

Performers and Partisans, 1993 10 G.BINDER, Pompa diaboli, in: Id., B. EFFE (ed.), Das antike Theater (Bochumer altertumswissenschaftliches Colloquium 33), 1998, II5-147 11J.BLANsporr, Der antike Staat und die Schauspiele im Codex Theodosianus, in: Id. (ed.), Theater und Gesellschaft im Imperium Romanum, 1990, 216—

274. F. BERNSTEIN, Ludi publici, 1998; H.-D. BLuMe, Einfiihrung in das antike Theaterwesen, 31991; A. CAMERON, Circus Factions, 1976; W.DECKER, Sport in der griechi-

schen Antike, 1995; J.R. GREEN, Theatre Production, in: Lustrum 37, 1995 (1998), 7-202; PICKARDCAMBRIDGE/ GouLp/Lewis; G.M. Siraxts, Studies in the History of

Hellenistic Drama, 1967; G. VILLE, La gladiature en Occident, 1985. HL.

Speculum muliebre. Gynaecological vaginal specula (Svontea/didptra,

speculum)

are

excellent

Roman

+ surgical instruments (with ill. 6) without recognizable Hellenistic antecedents. Finds from Italy (Pompeii: before AD 79), Spain, the Balkans, Asia Minor and Switzerland. The screw-thread was cut by hand.

(oie

721

L.J. BLiquez, Roman Surgical Instruments and Other Minor Objects in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples, 1994; E. KUNZL, Forschungsberichte zu den anti-

ken

medizinischen

Instrumenten,

in: ANRW

II 37.3,

1996, 2433-2639; J.S. MILNE, Surgical Instruments in

Greek and Roman Times, 1907 (repr. 1970).

E.KU.

Speculum principum/regum see — Princes’ mirror

Speech I. GENRE

II. SUB-GENRE

I. GENRE s. > Rhetoric

II. SUB-GENRE Direct speech can be found in most genres of ancient literature, esp. in > epic and > historiography. Homer already made use of the possibilities of ‘fictitious orality’ [1-4] and imbedded it in the narrated context. There, direct speech is used to characterize persons as well as to dramatize, to elevate the style and, at times, to structure the narrated material. In historiography, it occasionally reveals the author’s opinions (e.g. Tac. Agr. 30-32). Various forms of dialogue, non-dialogue and monologue [5] speeches can coexist; even collective or mass speeches ([6]; see also [7]) are possible. In prose and poetry, these forms of speech are separated from their context by their style, by their structure of an appeal or by a special introduction. In > tragedy and + comedy, where direct speech is the main form of expression, such separations are difficult to effect by means as these; instead, they must be indicated by the staging. This is especially the case where monologues as ‘audible thinking’ are concerned [8]. Generally, direct speech used as a sub-genre within differently structured narrative contexts can be characterized according to the terminology of ancient rhetoric as aversio (uetaPpaoic/metabasis, the speaker’s ‘turning away’ from himself). In this sense, it is related to digressio, the turning away from the matter at hand (> excursus). In the case of sermocinatio (ethopoeial ethopotia, imitatio/mimésis), the speaker’s turning away from himself involves the narrator or speaker imitating a person’s particular way of speaking. Occasionally, the latter may be transferred into indirect speech. The sermocinatio receives a special quality in the prosopopoeia (prosdpopoiia, fictio personae) in which mostly abstract concepts, e.g. the fatherland (Cic. Cat. I,7,18; 1,11,27) or Roma (e.g. Luc. 1,190-192), are made to speak through — personification. The imitation of speech was criticised by Plato (Resp. 392c 6-394d 9), a criticism that Aristotle (Poet. 1448a 1928) took up as well (see Serv. Ecl. 3,1). A special kind of sermocinatio is the percontatio (exquisitio, exetasmos), in which the speaker creates a fictitious dialogue -usually with ironic intent — with his adversary in court or with another external person. Direct speech within narratives or prose is often indicated through a special

SPENDIUS

introductory or concluding phrase [9] but can also burst out of the narrative unintroduced, usually in affect-laden situations, and may be brought back to the narrative — as with the digressio — through similar textual signals (demonstrated for the example from Symmachus, Relat. 3,8 ff., the prosopopoeia of Roma, by [10. 466f.]). The various rhetorical types of speech such as consultation, lamentation or anger speeches (— invective, cf. genera causarum) are, in general, modelled after the genera of major oratory, the majority being epideictic speeches (epideixis). The deliberative aspect is found esp. in monologues (e.g. Hom. Od. 5,465-473; Verg. Aen. 4, 534-552; on the distinction of various types of monologues see [r1]). As a sub-genre, the structure of speech also forms the basis of individual stories such as love elegies (Ov. Am. 3,12). + Dialogue; - Genera causarum; — Personification; > Rhetoric; > SPEECHES, GENRES OF 1 P. Goerscn, Fingierte Miindlichkeit in der Erzahlkunst entwickelter Schriftkulturen, in: Poetica 17, 1985, 202-

218, here 20 2M.HeEtziz, Der Stil ist der Mensch. Redner und Rede im rémischen Epos, 1996 3 T.P. WIsEMAN, Clio’s Cosmetics,1979 4 B.EFFE, Entstehung und

Funktion personaler Erzahlweisen in der Erzahlliteratur der Antike, in: Poetica 7, 1975,135-157 5 U.AUHAGEN, Der Monolog bei Ovid, 1999, 22-33, 6 A.W. SCHMITT, Die direkten Reden der Massen in Lucans Pharsalia, 1995 7 M.ERDMANN, Uberredende Reden in Vergils Aeneis, 2000 ~=6©.8 E.TorNQvistT, A Drama of Souls. Studien in O’Neill’s Super-Naturalistic Technique, 1968, 199 9 U.SANGMEISTER, Die Ankiindigung direkter Rede im “nationalen” Epos der Romer, 1978 10 CH. GNILKA, Zur Rede der Roma bei Symmachus rel. 3, in: Hermes 118, 1990, 464-470 11H.OFFERMANN, Monologe im antiken Epos, Diss. Miinchen, 1968.

V. Bers, Speech in Speech, 1997; E. Fucus, Vorteil und Recht in den Reden bei Thukydides, in: Lexis 16, 1998, 87-112;

M.Gataz,

Rhetoric

Strategies

of Feminine

Speech in Plutarch, in: L. Van DER Stocxt (Ed.), Rhetorical Theory and Praxis in Plutarch, 2000, 203-209; LausBERG, §§ 820-829.

UE.

Spelaion see > Grotto Spelunca. Latin term for a > villa or > praetorium of — Tiberius (Tac. Ann. 4,59,1; Suet. Tib. 39; Plin. HN 3,59) to the east of Terracina in southern Latium. There is no agreement on whether S. is identical with the ~ Sperlonga villa complex with its cave-like magnificent grotto. B. ANDREAE,

Praetorium

Speluncae,

1994; G.HAFNER,

Das Praetorium Spelunca bei Terracina und die Hohle bei Sperlonga, in: Rivista di Archeologia 20, 1996, 75-78.

C.HO.

Spendius (ZmévS.0c/Spéndios). Campanian slave who defected to Carthage in the rst > Punic War. In 241 BC, he and > Mathos led the insurgent army in the so-called + Mercenaries’ War. He was known for his strength

SPENDIUS

and courage (Pol. 1,69,4-7) more than for his revolutionary thinking (cf. [1.95, 107 f.]). After his initial

military successes, he was defeated several times, had his army pursue Hamilcar [3], surrendered near Prion and was executed in 238 at Tynes/Tunis (Pol. 1,86,4; [2.259 f., 263-265]). 1 L. Loreto, La grande insurrezione libica contro Carta-

gine del 241-237 A.C., 1995

724

723

2 Huss.

L.M.G.

Spercheius (Zmeoyewc/Spercheids). River that has formed the basin between Othris and Oete in the south of Thessaly; it rises in the Tymphrestus, and nowadays,

after a course of some 75 km, enters the Gulf of Malis south-east of Lamia. In its upper and middle course a typical mountain river, its meandering lower course (up to 50 m wide) has changed frequently since Antiquity, and its mouth become displaced some 14 km to the east (Hdt. 7,198,2; Str. 1,3,20). Its tributaries, some of them still with independent access to the sea in Antiquity, are the Inachus, Dyras, > Melas [6], > Asopus [x] (from the south), and the Achelous (from the north). In Late Antiquity it was called the Agriomelas. The town of Spercheai, named after the S., was probably located on the south bank near the modern Kastrorrachi (cf. SGDI DOB Os LaA). Y. BEQUIGNON, La vallée du S., 1937; P. PANTOS, La vallée du S., in: La Thessalie (Actes du colloque international Lyon 1990), 1994, 221-228; F.STAHLIN, s.v. Spercheios, RE 3 A, 1626-1628. HE.KR.

Sperlonga. On the coast near the modern town of S., half-way between Naples and Rome is a site, described in Antiquity as a > praetorium (Suet. Tib. 39) or > villa (Tac. Ann. 4,59), with a grotto in the rock in which

~ Tiberius was supposed to have almost been killed by falling lumps of stone. In essence the site consists of three complexes: a large court area directly on the sea behind a terrace bordered by porticoes, the central building of the villa, and, opposite, the grotto (plan: A), architecturally developed and with groups of sculptures. From the triclinium island in the middle of a round pond people looked into the grotto on to a grandiosely staged landscape of marble sculptures: in the centre of the view the Scylla Group (plan: no. 1), behind it at the entrance to a northern side-cave on the right a multi-figure group of the blinding of Polyphemus [2] by Odysseus and his companions (plan: no. 2). The scene was framed by two further ensembles, to the left a slightly altered copy of the Pasquino Group (Odysseus and Achilleus; plan: no. 3) and Diomedes and Odysseus’s theft of the > palladion (plan: no. 4). Above the apex of the grotto there was a group with > Ganymedes, abducted by the eagle. It is likely that the whole ensemble of statues was installed at the time of a complete restructuring of the villa in about 30/20 BC. On the ship’s stern of the Scylla Group the Rhodian sculptors > Athanodorus, son of Agesander, - Agesander, son of Paeonius, and Poly-

dorus, son of Polydorus, are mentioned as the artists of the work. The attribution of all the sculptures to these artists seems somewhat improbable; in fact, stylistic differences indicate at least one other workshop. Stylistic similarities between the ‘Scylla Group’ and the ‘Laocoon’ in the MV in Rome, on the other hand, support ancient sources (Plin. HN. 36,37), which also mention the latter as the work of Rhodian artists. Whether they are Roman originals or copies of Hellenistic models is controversial. > SPERLONGA B. ANDREAE, Odysseus, Mythos und Erinnerung. Exhibition catalogue, Munich, 1999, esp. 17-21 passim; 177223; Id., Praetorium Speluncae. Tiberius und Ovid in S.,

1994; N.HIMMELMANN, S. Die homerischen Gruppen und ihre Bildquellen, 1996; C. KUNZE, Zur Datierung des Laokoon und der Skyllagruppe aus S., in: JDAI 111, 1996, 139-223; R.NeuDECKER, Die Skulpturenausstattung romischer Villen in Italien, 1988, 41-43, 220-223, no. 62 (with older literature). MLLE.

Sperthias (Hdt. 7,134,2: =meQOinc/Sperthiés; Plut. Mor. 23 5f: Uméouc/Spértis; 815e: Uméexic/Spérchis). A high-ranking Spartan (— Spartiatai) who is supposed to have offered himself and the Spartan Boulis in Susa as atonement for the ambassadors of Darius [1] Iwho had allegedly been killed in Sparta in 491 BC, but refused to prostrate himself before Xerxes who nevertheless set him free (Hdt. 7,13 4,2-136). Whether Persian ambassadors had appeared in Sparta in 491 BC, however, remains questionable [1. 276-279]. The sons of S. (Aneristas [2]) and Boulis (Nicolaus) were captured in 430 BC on their way to the Great King by the Athenians and killed (Hdt. 7,137; Thuc. 2,67). 1M. Zaurnt, Der Mardonioszug des Jahres 492 n. Chr. und seine historische Einordnung, in: Chiron 22, 1992,

237-279.

K.-W.W.

Spes (The Roman personification of ‘hope’). I. RomMAN II. CHRISTIAN I. ROMAN Unlike the Greek — Elpis, Spes (‘Hope’) had a cult and temples. In the rst > Punic War, A. Atilius [I 14] Calatinus dedicated a temple to Spes on the Forum Holitorium in Rome (Cic. Leg. 2,28; Tac. Ann. 2,49).

The building burned down on several occasions (Liv. 25,76; Cass. Dio 50,10,3); there was a rededication under Germanicus in AD 17; the remains of the temple are visible in the church of St. Nicola in Carcere. According to Liv. 2,51,2 and Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 9,24,4, an older sanctuary of Spes had been endowed on the Esquiline by Horatius [5] Pulvillus in 477 BC, after the victory over the Etruscans. The cult of Spes also occurred outside Rome; thus a temple to. Spes, + Fides and > Fortuna is attested in Capua in rro BC

(CIL X 3775).

SPERLONGA

725

Sperlonga. So-called Villa of Tiberius, ground-plan. A Grotto B Triclinium

C Building on the island D Nymphaeum E Peristyle Position of the sculptures (acc. to B. Andreae): 1 Scylla group

2 Polyphemus group 3 Pasquino group 4 Palladion group

E=5 ool

727

728

Spes is a frequent motif on coins of the Imperial Period from Claudius [III x] (AD 41-54) onwards, as an

22,967a-d = T 30 T.), he had shared a close friendship with Dion since the latter’s exile in Athens. His hostility to + Dionysius [2] II of Syracuse also stems from that bond (the letters to Dionysius, Socratic letters nos. 36 and 37 ORELLI, are probably not genuine). S.’s essentially friendly attitude to the Macedonians is also recognizable — whether the letter written in 3 43/2 BC to king Philip [4] Il of Macedonia (F 156 ISNARDI PARENTE, not included in [1], cf. [1. XXII f.]) is genuine, will remain disputed. Critical review of the entire biographical material: [3].

SPES

expression of hope for the dynasty. Spes always holds a blossom in one hand, and with the other gathers up her dress as a sign of drawing near. + Personification F, COARELLI, s. v. S., aedes und S. vetus, aedes, LTUR 4,

336-338; J.R. Fears, The Cult of Virtues and Roman Imperial Ideology, in: ANRW II 17.2, 1981, 861-863; F.W.Hamporr, s. v. S., LIMC 7.1, 804-806. R.B.

Il. CHRISTIAN Whereas the ancients directed their hopes from present reality towards future possibilities, Christians directed their Biblically inspired hopes from the promised future reality towards present possibilities. The essence of Christian hope was the kingdom of God which embraced salvation from judgement, the awakening of the dead and the eventual revelation of God, Christ and renewed humanity. This hope, however, did not lead to

a rejection of the world, but to the acceptance of present reality and its progressive transformation to full justification and freedom (Rom 5:8). The Latin West increas-

ingly understood spes as subjection to God and orientation towards resurrection, this conception being critically reinforced by the Latin fides, ‘refuge in trust’ (Tert. Apol. 39,1). In > Augustine, spes is a Christian cardinal virtue alongside faith (fides) and love (caritas; Aug. Enchiridion 2,8; 30,114). Spes hereby becomes a matter for the individual who hopes for his or her own happiness hereafter. Augustine is forward-looking here, not least on account of the more pronounced orientation of hope to the hereafter. ~» Elpis 1 A. Dine, B.StupER, F.RICKERT, s. v. Hoffnung, RAC

15, 1159-1250 (Bibliography)

2 H.-G.Link, s. v. Hoff-

nung, HWdPh 3, 1157-1166

Speusippus

(Xmevoutmoc/Speusippos),

BC A. Lire

Work

B.

J.BU.

c. 410-339/8

C. PHILOSOPHY

A. LIFE Academic philosopher, son of Plato’s sister Potone, who succeeded his uncle as scholarch of the Academy (from 348/7 BC, the year of > Plato’s [1] death; > Academy), without having been appointed by means of an official election; the family relationship may have been the decisive factor. A fundamental organisational innovation in the Academy is linked to his name: the introduction of school fees; lessons during Plato’s time were free of charge (cf. Diog. Laert. 4,2 = T 1 TARAN). In the biographical tradition S.’s negative character traits of violent anger and craving for pleasure are emphasized (e.g. Philod. Academicorum index 7,14-18 = T 2 T.).S. was heavily involved in politics: in Sicily, in contrast to Plato, he was emphatically in favour of Dion’s [I 1] revolutionary plans (cf. Plut. Dion 17,964e-f = T 29 T.;

B. WorK None of S.’s treatises have been preserved in their entirety; if the above-mentioned letter to king Philip were genuine it would have been his longest extant work. A list of his works may be found in Diog. Laert. 4,4-5 = 1 1 T. The fragments are currently available in two editions which appeared around the same time but are quite different from one another ([1; 2]; cf. the concordance [1.479ff.]). The reconstruction of S.’s thought remains difficult; in contrast to [1; 2; 4], others emphasize more strongly the dependence on Plato ([5; 6] and similarly [7]). The work “Opova/H6moia, ‘Similitudes’, spanning 10 volumes can be seen as his main philosophical work, and about of one third of the fragments known to us can be assigned to it. In addition to the fragments passed down in his name, a few texts, significant for the reconstruction of his philosophical position, have been claimed to be his, even if they are not explicitly attributed to S. [6.22]). For instance, the treatise in Iambl. De communi mathematica scientia 4 (=F 72 and 88 I. P.; [8] being the first to link it directly with S.), important for the reconstruction of metaphysical stages, has been shown to be very likely connected to S. (so [9.440-143] contra [2.297-306, 325-328; 1.86— 107]). The Eyx@piov WAdtwvoc/ Enkomion Platonos,

‘Encomium of Plato’, was written by S.; it was probably read to mark Plato’s first birthday after his death (Diog. Laert. 3,2 = F x T.; on the problem of the Perideipnon Platonos [1.230-233]). Init S. tells how Plato was wondrously begotten by Apollo, thus establishing the belief in Plato’s divine filiation ([1.229] denies this was S.’s intention).

C. PHILOSOPHY S’s thought follows that of Plato, but shows distinctive characteristics of its own. S. aims at the systematic order and classification of reality through relationships between genera and species. By systematically applying the synoptico-dihaeretic method, developed in platonic + dialectics, to reality as a whole, S. tried to classify all areas of reality, endeavouring to arrive at common (cf. ovvwxeiwos, ‘he correlated closely’ — Diog. Laert. 4,2 = F 70 T.) and distinctive features. In the process, 6yo10v/ homoion, ‘similar’, became the most basic concept of S.’s dialectics, mediating between the fundamental platonic concepts of tavtov/tauton, ‘the same’, and étegov/ héteron, ‘different’. For this reason, it has recently been

729

730

suggested that S. believed that a ‘theory of everything’ could be arrived at mathematically [10.150]. It must be emphasized, however, that for each realm of being, S. postulated particular principles, which are analogous to one another. This results in significant changes from Plato: the distinctive innovation lies in the emphasis on the particular nature of each realm of being; the individual replaces the general as the supporting being, the general is reduced to its elements. Mathematical numbers take the place of ideas (more on his concept of numbers in [10.150-153]), while the realm of universals loses its significance. The ultimately transcendent One (év, én) and the Many (xAf90c, pléthos) are the supreme principles (basically [r1.161-174]; on further characteristics of the One, arising from a new S. testi-

beautiful (xaddv, kaldn), then as the good (F 42a T.; F. 44 T.; F 72 I. P.). The two extant definitions by S. of eudaimonia (F 77 T.; > happiness) — to wit, a ‘state of perfection in things natural’ and ‘possession of goods’ with the explanatory reference to the freedom from disturbance (doyAnoia, aochlésia) — presuppose the Academy’s three classes of goods (in detail [12.204-216]). Traces of a discussion of S.’s restriction of the good to areté might perhaps be found in Plato’s later dialogues (e.g. Pl. Phlb. 64e as well as in the question about human good, > virtue); generally, attempts have been made to discover S.’s views in the Philebus (e.g. [13], cf. [12.192-193], for criticism, see [1.79-81]). + Academy; ~— Aristotle [6]; —> Ideas, theory of; + Plato [1].

mony, see [7]).

S. postulates the following realms of being and knowledge, each with an increasing degree of distinctiveness: mathematical numbers (when being is added to the principles), then mathematical quantities (adding expansion), followed probably by the (world) soul (adding motion) and finally the realm of perceptible bodies (adding materiality). On the one hand, S. reduces the genera of intelligible kinds of being to mathematics (F 33 T.), on the other hand he postulates more kinds of being, as he allocates a specific level of being to each sphere of being (F 29a T.; cf. the table in [10.15 6]). From this stems Aristotle’s [6] accusation that by this expansion S. had classified the structure of being episodically (F 30 T.) — like a bad tragedy (F 37 T.; on the accusation see [8.118f.; 10.15 6f.]); on the other hand S.

had paved the way for him ([6.25, 38]). Like Aristotle, S. presupposed the possibility that the intelligible is directly perceived in a noetic act (he speaks of éxagr/ epaphé, ‘touch’; F 73 T.). The recognition of an EmLoTHMOVIxi} aicOnorc/epistemonike aisthésis, a kind of ‘scientific perception’ involving the > ldgos (F 75 T.), is one of the consequences of the appreciation of the individual.

Semantics is another area where S. endeavours to achieve clarity by systematically classifying the relationship of names and definitions (F 68a-c T.). Firstly he differentiates between identity of and difference between names: tautonyms and heteronyms. The former are divided between synonyms (identity of definition) and homonyms (difference in definition). The latter are divided between heteronyms in a narrow sense (containing a difference in both cases) and polyonyms (identity of definition, i.e. the synonyms in the Aristotelian and modern sense of the word), as well as paronyms (variations of the same lexeme), a fifth group. Thus he paves the way for Aristotle (cf. Aristot. Top. 1,15 ff.; Gatien, ats): S. also deviates from Plato on ethics. He does not identify the good (&ya86v, agathon) with the One, because the principle of value comes before all valuable things ([5.359]; for the order of being under the aspect of things of value, see [6.34]). Thus goodness only comes into play on a later, derivative level: first as the

SPHAERUS

EDITIONS WITH COMMENTARY: 1L.TaRAN, Speusippus of Athens, 1981 2 M.IsNARDI-PARENTE, Speusippo: Frammenti, 1980.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: 3PH. MERLAN, Zur Biographie des Speusippos, in: Id., Kleine philosophische Schriften, 1976, 127-143 4H.CueRNISsS, Die altere Akademie, 1966, 42-73 5H.J. KrAmer, Der Ursprung der Geistmetaphysik, 1967, 193-223 6l1d., Speusippus, in: GGPh?, vol. 3, 22-43 7 J.HALFWASSEN, Speusipp und die Unendlichkeit des Einen, in: AGPh 74, 1992, 43-73 8 PH. MERLAN, From Platonism to Neoplatonism, #1968, 96-140 9H.ScHMiITZz, Die Ideenlehre des Aristoteles,

vol. 1.2, 140-143

10 A.MetTRy, Speusippus’ Philoso-

phie als Universalwissenschaft, in: M. Erler, A. Graeser (eds.), Philosophen des Altertums, 2000, vol. 1, 149-162 11 H.J. KrAmeEr, Aristoteles und die akademische Eidoslehre, in: AGPh 55, 1973, 119-190 12 Id., Platonismus und hellenistische Philosophie, 1972 13 M.SCHOFIELD, Who Were of dvoxeeets in Plato, Philebus 44 a ff.? in: MH 28, 1971, 2-20.

K-H.S.

Sphacteria (Spaxtyneia; Sphaktéria). Narrow rocky island of the Bay of Pylus [2] on the west coast of MesSelia=a(Stey Saas we line mid NiN4s 55a Btolemaemon23: Xoayia), in Spartan hands from the 7th cent. BC, modern Sphaktiria. In 425 BC, 292 Spartiatai were surrounded by the Athenians on S. and forced to capitulate (Thuc. 4,8; 16; 26-38; Str. 8,4,2; — Peloponnesian War). It was in the Bay of Pylus that a Turkish fleet was destroyed by the Allies in 1827 in the course of the Greek War of Independence (cf. monuments on S. and in the bay). J. Witson, Pylos 425 B.C., 1979; S$.HORNBLOWER, A Commentary on Thucydides, vol. 2, 1996, 159 f., 184197; R. SCHEER, s.v. S., LAUFFER, Griechenland, 636.

Sphaerus (=paigoc/Sphairos) of Borysthenes. Stoic philosopher of the third cent. BC, student of + Zeno [2] of Citium and later of > Cleanthes. He was active at the court of Ptolemy II in Alexandria (Diog. Laert. 7,185). Anecdotes (Diog. Laert. 7,177, Athenaeus 3 54e) reveal his interest in > epistemology; he distinguished cataleptic and plausible (e#logon) presentations. Plutarch (Cleomenes 2, 11) portrays him as a teacher of + Cleomenes [6] and an adviser on the revived Spartan

SPHAERUS

731

+ agoge. Diogenes Laertius lists nearly 30 book titles (on physics, ethics, politics, epistemology and dialectic), letters and dialogues (cf. Diog. Laert. 7,177-178). SVF 1, 620-630.

BL.

Spheres, harmony of the. According to the > Pythagorean School, the entire cosmos is harmony and number. Inspired by this (Pl. Resp. 7,530d), — Plato [1] interprets the HS (ibid. 10,616 f.) as a system of eight concentric celestial spheres bearing fixed stars and planets, turning more rapidly with proximity to the Earth. On each sphere, a siren sings the same note, but the result, in consequence of the different speeds, is a multisonous harmonia (intervals are not mentioned). For Plato, the world-soul (PI. Ti. 34b-36c) is based on a system of multiples of the numbers 2 and 3 (2 3 4 6 9 8 27), distances between which are filled by parts obtained by harmonic and arithmetic means and thus corresponding to octave, fifth, fourth and diatonic intervals. In spite of Aristotle’s rejection (Aristot. Cael. 290b), this theory endured in Platonism and Pythagoreanism. In Cicero’s vision of the celestial concert (Cic. Rep. 6,5: Somnium Scipionis), eight spheres revolve around the Earth. The Moon sphere produces the lowest sound, and the spheres of the other celestial bodies an ascending musical scale. The commentaries of Macrobius (In Somn. 2,3,14) and Favonius (25-27) speculate as to the numerical values of the intervals. According to Boéthius (De institutione musica 1,27), the old musical scale of the planets (cf. Nicom. Enchiridion 3) is heptatonic and descending (d’ c’ b-flat a g f e, without fixed stars), while Cicero’s scale is octatonic and ascending (ABcdefga, ‘hypodoric’, foundation of Boéthius’ transposition scales). In Alexander [22] of Ephesus (Theon Smyrnaeus 139-141 HILLER), the nine spheres (Earth and fixed stars) have fixed intervals (de f g-flat a bc’ d-flat’ d’). There are ascending scales in Varro, Pliny (HN 2,21 f.), Censorinus [4] (13) and Martianus Capella (2,169-199). Rarely, the outer notes of the five tetrachords of the tonal system are assigned to the planets (see Claudius > Ptolemaeus [65] II.A.5.). Writers influenced by Neoplatonism drew analogies between harmonic forces, forces of the soul, celestial motions (Ptol. Harm. 3,3-16), elements, Platonic bodies, seasons (Arist. Quint. 3,9-27), ‘music of the world’ (musica mundana), ‘human music’ (musica humana) and ‘music with instruments’ (musica instrumentalis; Boeth. De institutione musica 1,2). The HS has also exerted a fascination through the Middle Ages and modern period. — SPHERES, HARMONY OF 1 J. DURING, Ptolemaios und Porpyhrios iiber die Musik,

1934,280f. 2017-2185,

2 W.undH.GunpDeEL,s. v. Planeten, RE 20, especially 2053-2056; G.SCHAWERNOCH,

Die Harmonie der Spharen, 1981; J. PEPIN, s. v. Harmonie der Spharen, RAC 13, 1986, 594-618; L. RICHTER, Die Lehre von der Spharenharmonie, in: GMth 2, 2001

TH.RI.

73%

Sphettus (Xpyttd; Sphéttds). Attic mesogeia deme of the Acamantis phyle, with five (seven) bouleutai, counted part of the Attic Dodekapolis (Str. 9,1,20), and located, on the basis of honorary inscriptions by the Sphettii for Demetrius [4] (SEG 25, 206), in the northwest of Coropi; the Bronze Age fortress Kastro tou Christou is situated here [1]. The Sphéttia Hodos (‘S. Road’) connected S. with Athens [2]. The Sphettii were considered witty (Aristoph. Plut. 720). 1 R. Hope Stmpson, Mycenaean Greece, 1981, 50 B 33

2 CH. Korres, Spnttia Oddc, in: id. (ed.), Agopor ty¢ Kiacowncs EAkaSo¢ (im Druck).

TRAILL, Attica, 19, 48, 59, 67, 112 Nr. 129, Table 5; WHITEHEAD, Index s.v. S. H.LO.

Sphinx (ZoiyE/Sphinx, also dvégooiyE/androsphinx: Hdt. 2,175; Boeotian: i&/phix; pl. Xbiyyec/Sphinges). I. Egypt

II. GRECO-ROMAN

ANTIQUITY

I. Ecypr Greek designation for the depictions which were originally only of the Egyptian king with the body of a lion and a human head; there is no known Egyptian designation for this type of image. Three-dimensional sculptural representations of recumbent sphinxes have been documented since the 4th Dynasty. (Djedefre‘, 2570-2450 BC). The great sphinx of > Gizeh, worshipped from the 18th Dynasty as an image of the god + Harmachis [1], represents king > Chefren. Likewise from the period of the Old Kingdom, sphinxes are found mainly in two-dimensional images, standing, striding and mostly trampling on Egypt’s enemies. Iconographical variations are sphinxes with manes (from the 12th Dynasty; integration of both characteristic elements by inserting the king’s face into the lion’s mane) as well as sphinxes which proffer sacrificial offerings with human arms (since the New Kingdom). Sphinxes with the head and wings of a falcon (from the Old Kingdom) combine the lion’s body with the falcon figure of the Egyptian king as > Horus. From the period of the Middle Kingdom queens could also be represented in the shape of a sphinx; from the time of the New Kingdom the god > Amun was portrayed in the form of a sphinx with a ram’s head; dating from the New Kingdom such statues and similar ones line the dromos of great temples in long avenues. In mythical contexts sphinxes rarely served to represent various gods; the Egyptian god Tithoes who was popular in the Greco-Roman period, is depicted as a sphinx. In the New Kingdom, seated female sphinxes, with wings and often floral headdresses, emerged as an obviously Syrian inspired, decorative motif with no narrowly definable mythical connotations. Since the middle of the second millennium depictions of sphinxes frequently appeared in Syria and Anatolia (sphinx-gates of Alacahityiik and > Hattusa; 13th cent.), admittedly in female shape —- this form influenced

733

734

Egypt in turn. The physical form with (Egyptian) Hathor curls is supposedly a Hittite invention. There are frequent examples of sphinxes in Late Hittite architectural sculpture (Karatepe, Sam/al, ‘Ain Dara; > Asia Minor III. C.z.) and on official seals and ivory carvings. Their significance is unknown.

beard and helmet, but female from the 5th cent. onwards. Vases mostly show scenes from the myth of ~» Oedipus and the sphinx [5], which was conspicuously often caricatured, probably due to the influence of the satyr play Sphinx by > Aeschylus [1] [7; 9]. In the Archaic period the sphinx is popular as a votive sculpture on Jonic columns (Sphinx of the Naxians in > Delphi) and as the crown at the top of Attic grave stelae, where it is probably a symbol of death, but also a guardian of the grave [2. 1165; 12; 13. 84-87]. On coins from Chios the sphinx is most likely the protectress of the island [3]. An artistic high point of the theme of the sphinx who carried off the young men of Thebes is the group under the armrests on the throne of > Zeus in > Olympia (around 430 BC). The sphinx is often simply a decorative element in architecture, furniture or even on a helmet. The two sphinxes of > Phidias were frequently copied in Roman art — on furniture, vessels, candelabra, mosaics, wall paintings, on the official seals and coins of > Augustus, as well as once again in a sepulchral context (grave altars, urns, sarcophagi). In the Christian agenda of images the sphinx emerges in the r1th cent., sometimes in a grotesque form, and following the Renaissance, in its ancient shape again. In the Baroque Age it sits in castles and gardens, often with a portrait head and sophisticated décolleté; even in the rgth cent. it is a symbol of the femme fatale [1.125-205].

Cu. M.Zivir, s. v. S., LA 5, 1139-1147; P.Neve, Zur Datierung des S.-Tores in Alaca Héyiik, in: M. DreTricu, O.Loretz

(eds.), Beschreiben und Deuten, 1994, 213-

226; W.ORTHMANN, schen Kunst, 1971.

Untersuchungen

II. GRECO-ROMAN

ANTIQUITY

A. MyTHOLOGY

zur spathethitiSS.

B. ICONOGRAPHY

A. MYTHOLOGY In Greek mythical-literary imagination the sphinx was always a female monster, daughter of > Echidna and Typhon (+ Typhoeus; Apollod. 3,52; Hyg. Fab. praef. 39); alternatively, + Chimaera (schol. Hes. Theog. 326) and + Orthus (Hes. Theog. 327) amongst others are named as mother and father respectively. According to its shape the sphinx is described as a winged half-beast, half-human creature with the head of a maiden and the body of a lioness (Apollod. 3,52; schol. Eur. Phoen. 45). In its best-known form, that of the Theban myth, the sphinx afflicts the town of Thebes (+ Thebae) and kills all the people who cannot solve a — riddle set by her. The reason for this scourge is not clear, > Hera is regarded as a possible instigator (Apollod. 3,52; schol. Eur. Phoen. 1760 = Peisander FGrH 16 F ro). The riddle, which the sphinx is supposed to have learnt as a song from the > Muses, is handed down in prose (e.g. Apollod. 3,53), and also in hexameters (e.g. Ath. 10,456b = Asclepiades FGrH 12 F 7a; [4. 332-334]): What possesses a voice, four, two and three feet and is the weaker

the more feet it walks on? After + Oedipus has solved the riddle (answer: man), the sphinx hurls herself to her death (Diod. Sic. 4,64,4; Apollod. 3,55; Hyg. Fab.

67,5). Apart from the Oedipus myth, sphinxes are known in popular belief as demons of death (cf. + Ker). Until modern times the sphinx has consistently found admittance into art [1; 8] and literature (e.g. H. HEINE, Buch der Lieder, cf. preface to the third edition, 1839; H. von

HOFMANNSTHAL, Odipus und die Sphinx, 1905). B. ICONOGRAPHY Hybrid > monsters, mostly with the body of a cat, the wings and the head of a woman (often with a headdress) were very popular in Minoan-Mycenaean art as decorative motifs. They subsequently disappear and emerge again frequently in the second half of the 8th cent. in Greek art [2. 1163; 10; 11; 12]. The significance of these early part-woman, part-lion sphinxes however, and when exactly they became identified with the Theban sphinx [9], remains unclear. In the early period the sphinx is occasionally masculine with a

SPHODRIAS

1 H.Demiscn, Die S.,1977. 2 N.Kourovetal.,s. v.S., LIMC 7.1, 1149-1174 3 L.LAcrorx, A propos dus. des monnaies de Chios, in: RA 1982, 75-80 4H.LioypJones, Greek Epic, Lyric, and Tragedy, 1990 5J.M.MoretT, Oedipe, la S. et les Thébains, 1984 6 P. MULLER, Lowen und Mischwesen in der archaischen griechischen Kunst, 1978 7K.SCHAUENBURG, Zur thebanischen S., in: B.vON FREYTAG-LORINGHOFF (ed.), Praestant interna, Festschrift U. Hausmann, 1982, 230-

8 W.ROSCH-VON

DER Heypk, Das S.-Bild im

Wandel der Zeiten, 1999

235

9 E.Stmon, Das Satyrspiel S.

des Aischylos, 1981 10N.VERDELIS, L’apparition du S. dans l’art grec aux VIII* et VII® siécles av. J.-C., in: BCH 75,1951, 1-37. 11R.VOLLKOMMER, Zur Deutung der Lowenfrau in der frihgriechischen Kunst, in: MDAI(A) 106, 1991, 47-64 12H. WALTER, Sphingen, in: AXA 9, 1960, 60-72 13 D.WoyscH-Méautis, La représentation des animaux et des étres fabuleux sur les monuments funéraires grecs, 1982.

Legend,

1981;

A. Leskxy, R. HERBIG, s. v. S., RE 3 A, 1703-1749.

L.EpMuNbs,

BBA.

Sphodrias

The

S. in the Oedipus

(Zodgiac; Sphodrias). Cynic philosopher,

author of a Téchné erotiké (‘art of love’) mentioned in

Ath. 4,162b-c. The otherwise unknown author is mentioned /.c. along with Archestratus [2] of Gela, the author of a Gastrologia (‘treatise about the care of the stomach’) and with Protagorides, who is attributed with Akrodseis erdtikai (‘lectures about love’), as well as with Zeno’s student Persaeus who wrote Sympotikoi dialogoi (‘conversations with dinner guests’). MIGEC.

SPHRAGIS

735

736

Sphragis (odeayic/sphragis, literally + Seal). [1] Seal (stone): precious or decorative stone with intag-

F.J. Doucer, S., 1911; G.H. W. Lampe, Patristic Greek Lexicon, s. v. oeayis, '*1995.

K.FI.

lio engraving, signet ring, seal (impression). On 2nd—4th

cent. AD magical amulet gems from Roman Egypt there is often mention of the demon-averting seal of > Solomon and, connected with Solomon motifs, the Seal of God (sphragis theo). + Gem-cutting S.MicHEL,

im

Britischen

Museum, 2001, 268 ff., pls. 64-66; 430-450.

Die

magischen

Gemmen

S.MI.

[2] See > Seals; > Subscriptio.

[3] According to Poll. 4,66 the last part but one of a citharodian > nomos [3], in which the poet mentions his name, by means of his ‘seal’ making the poem recognizably his property [2. 51-53] (a relationship between a poet and his work alien to Homeric epics [1. 1758]), probably as early as > Terpander, and, following him, + Timotheus in the sphragis of his Persians (V. 215-248), where he mentions his eleven-string lyre and presents his poetic manifesto against conservative criticism in Sparta [4. 127-146].

~» Theognis (V. 19-23) sees in the sphragis a device for protecting a verse from theft by adding name and origin [1.1757]. On the basis of this Theognis passage each point in a poem at which the poet advances his personal manifesto is called a sphragis: in Homer’s ‘Hymn to Apollo’ (165-176) the ‘blind poet from Chios’ introduces himself; in Hesiod’s evocation of the Muses the verses Theog. 22-25 can be considered a sphragis, as can e.g. Alcm. fr. 92 DIEHL (=39 PAGE); Pind. Ol. 1, r15b-117, Pyth. 1,81-85, Nem. 7,35-39; Bacchyl. 3,95 f.; Callim. H. 2,r05-113. Hellenistic poets may have declared their books theirs with a concluding poem, as — Callimachus [3] did at the end of his Aitia. Following this pattern, in Roman poetry, for example, — Vergilius ends his Georgica (4,5 59-566) with a sphragis and Horace the 3rd book of his Odes (3,30) and the rst book of his Epistles (1,20,20-28) with a similar literary form [3.425 f.]. These days, for the most part sphragis describes an author’s self-reference at the end of their text.

1 W.AtLy, s.v.S., RE3.A, 1757

semasiologische

Nachlese,

thesis,

2.J. DIEHL, S., eine

Giefen,

1938

3 E. FRAENKEL, Horaz, 1963 4T.H. JANSSEN, Timotheus Persae. ACommentary, 1984 5 W.KRANzZ, S., in:

Id., Studien zur antiken Literatur und ihrem Fortwirken, 1967, 27-78.

H.A.G.

[4] From the 2nd cent., the description of baptism as sphragis (‘seal’) is documented (Herm. Sim. 9,16,4, preliminarily as early as the NT: Eph 1,13 f.; 4,30). It is also seen as a seal against evil (Greg. Naz. Or. 40,15). In the 4th cent. sphragis is identified with the ‘sign of the cross’ (Athan. Vita Antonii 13; 80). Christian sphragides can be found on tomb seals, on amulets (‘Solomon’s Seal’) and on signet rings (Clem. Al. Paedagogus

355952). > Seals; > Baptism

Sphyrelaton. Archaeological term for a metal-working technique (‘embossed with a hammer’), not documen-

ted in Antiquity. As described in Paus. 3,17,6, sheets hammered out of bronze or precious metals are joined together with nails over a wooden core. The technique is an attempt in the 7th cent. BC — before the invention of hollow casting at the beginning of the 6th cent. BC to make large-scale free-standing bronzes. Accounts of sphyrelata emphasize the great age of such cult images, e.g. the piece of wood, fallen from the sky and encased in metal, that was worshipped as Dionysus Kadmeios (Paus. 9,12,4), and the oldest sphyrelaton, Zeus Hypatos in Sparta (Paus. 3,17,6; 8,14,7). A colossal Zeus of

the + Cypselides in Olympia was fashioned with gold sheets and was hence considered as an expression of tyrannomania (Str. 8,378). A few items still survive, such as a Leto with her children from the end of the 8th cent. BC from Dreros, more recent fragments of kouroi (— Statue) also from Crete, a female bust from Samos, fragments of a female triad from Olympia (7th—6th cent.) and a bull from Delphi (6th cent.).

— Cult image; > Bronze R. Hamper, s. v. S., EAA 7, 1966, 444-446; G. NENCcI, I donativi di Creso a Delfi, in: ASNP 23, 1993, 319-3313 E. Kunze, Sphyrelata, in: Bericht uber die Ausgrabungen in Olympia, vol. 9, 1994, 101-139; J.PAPADOPOULOS, s.v. S., EAA 2. Suppl. 5, 1997, 367-369; B.BORELL, D. Ritric, Orientalische und griechische Bronzereliefs aus Olympia, 1998, 187-195. RN.

Sphyrus (=dte0¢; Sphyros). Probably an ancient Peloponnesian hero, who was probably only subsequently made the son of > Machaon, out of which developed a connection with > Asclepius. S. is considered the builder of the earliest Asklepieion in > Argos II. (Paus. 2,23,4). The name may be borrowed from sphyra or sphyrion, ‘hammer’ (as a medical instrument).

Spices (Greek fSvopata/hédysmata; Latin condimenta). Flavouring ingredients of food and drink, mostly from particular parts of indigenous wild and garden plants and exotic ones. A great abundance of spices was known in antiquity, although availability and use differed from period to period to a considerable extent. In the rst cent. AD > Caelius [II 10] Apicius used in total sixty spices, of which ten were imported (cf. the lists of spices in Plin. HN 12; 19,r01-175; Ath. 2,68a; Apici excerpta a Vinidario 1 ANDRE). The most important indigenous spices of the ancient world were ~+ anise, — dill, + caraway, lovage, > mint, parsley, ~ rue (in the Roman period), > rosemary, saffron, sage and thyme. Then, from the Hellenistic period onwards, exotic spices were introduced in increasing numbers from the Near East into the Mediterranean region; this process intensified when Augustus and Tiberius established direct sea trade between Egypt and India. Of the

FOE

738

exotic spices, however, only ~ pepper (Plin. HN 12,2629) and > silphion (Plin. HN 19,38-45) became significant in cooking. Other exotic spices, such as > ginger, cardamom, spikenard and > cinnamon, were primarily used for the production of perfumes, drugs and spiced wines, and only secondarily for preparing foods. Whereas indigenous spices were consistently cheap, the price of exotic spices was very high. Spices were conserved by drying or being pickled in vinegar or in a mixture of brine and vinegar. Spices, in turn, were used as a means of conserving, particularly for > vegetables and > wine. Spices could also help to achieve an improvement in taste; since vegetable, fish and meat dishes were usually of low quality, predominantly boiled and therefore unsavoury, the only way of adding taste and a strong aroma was through large amounts of spices. From the beginning of the Greek Classical period and the late Roman Republic, there was a great interest in spices (Aristoph. Equ. 676-679; Plaut. Pseud. 814-837). From then on, a large variety and great amounts of spices were used in cooking, initially added to food simply as spices, then also as the basis of increasingly important sauces (Ath. 14,660e-661d); the upper class was convinced that the art of cooking essentially consisted in the art of seasoning (Pl. Resp. 1,332c-d). At an early stage, therefore, their consumption reflected social differences (Aristoph. Plut. 253; 925). The poorer population flavoured their food only with indigenous spices, whereas high-priced exotic spices were reserved for the upper class (Plin. HN 12,29). Spices could be a status symbol, an example of which is the excessive use noble circles made of pepper, particularly in the early Imperial period. Apicius adds it to almost every dish, even desserts (Apicius 7,13,1; 5-8).

the city itself: a regular city layout on a small river island, wooden buildings, fossa graves in coastal dunes. The presence of > Veneti and Greek merchants, strong trade in Attic Red Figure ceramics and a high degree of literacy (graffiti on ceramics until the last quarter of the 3rd century BC) can be demonstrated. In the Roman period S. had just the character of a village. Archaeological finds can be found in the Museum of Ferrara.

J.ANpDRE, L’alimentation

et la cuisine 4 Rome,

71981,

199-209; A. DALBY, Siren Feasts. A History of Food and Gastronomy in Greece, 1996; A. LALLEMAND, H.DirttMANN, s.v. Gewiirz, RAC ro, 1172-1209; A.SCHMIDT, s.v. Drogen, RE Suppl. 5, 172-182. AG.

Spiculum see > Pilum Spina {1] Term for the massive elongated barrier that divided a Roman > circus into two tracks running in opposite

directions. A spina was usually walled and variously decorated (e.g. with statues); at its ends stood the metae (+ Meta [2]) that marked the turning point of the running track.

SPINTRIA

S. AURIGEMMA, Scavi di S., 1960-1965; N.ALFIERI, S., 1958; S.Patitucci, G.UGGERI, Topografia e urbanistica

di S., in: SE 42, 1974, 69-97.

Spinning see > Textiles, production of Spintharus (=mivOagoc; Spintharos). Tragic poet (TrGF I 40), according to Suda o 945 author of a Heracles burnt and a ‘Semele struck by lightning’. Since + Heraclides [16] Ponticus (fr. 13 WEHRLI) describes him as an old man, he cannot be identical to the Phrygian S. mentioned in Aristoph. Av. 762, but must have lived in the 4th cent. BC. B.Z.

Spinther. Roman cognomen, > Cornelius [I 54-5 5]. Spintria (Latin ‘male prostitute’, Tac. Ann. 6,1; Suet. Tib. 43). Modern term for bronze or brass coin-like — tesserae, probably dating to the reign of the emperor Tiberius (AD 14-37) [2. 55-57], with 15 different representation of acts of copulation or fellation on one side and, for the most part, a number I-XVI on the other, with the numbers II, IIIJ and VIII sometimes preceded by an A [r. 389 f.; 3. 20-25; 4]. The number may be an indication ofthe value in asses (> As), and this may also explain the A. The number XVI would then correspond to a > denarius [1. 391; 2. 53]. Singleton examples of spintriae with the numbers XVII [r. 389 no. H,17] and XXV [5.12], or the legend AVG instead of a number [1. 390 no. H,31], may be miscoinings.

Scholars have interpreted spintriae as counters for calculating, tokens for brothels, theatres, or games, or

as defamations of the emperor —> Tiberius [2. 55-57]. Because of the depictions on them they can probably be regarded as a means of payment in or at least in connexion with > brothels [2. 3913 5. 35]. — Tokens 1J.D. BaTeson, Roman Spintriae in the Hunter Coin Cabinet, in: R. Martini, N. VisMAra (eds.), Ermanno A. Arslan Studia Dicata, vol. 2, 1991, 385-394 27.V. Butrrey, The Spintriae as a Historical Source, in: NC 1973, 52-63 3R.MarrtTINI, Tessere numerali bronzee

romane

J. Humpnrey, Roman Circuses, 1986, Index s. v. S.

C.HO.

[2] Etruscan city at the mouth of the Spines, founded in the last quarter of the 6th cent. BC. A sea power, S. endowed a treasury in Delphi (Dion. Hal. ant. 1,18,4; Str. 5,1,7). In 1922 the necropolis was discovered, and in 1965, after the Comacchio Lagoons were drained,

GU.

nelle

Civiche

Raccolte

Numismatiche

del

Comune di Milano, 1997 (Annotazioni Numismatiche, Suppl. IX) 4 SCHROTTER, s. v. s., 640 f. 5 B.SIMONETTA, R.Riva, (spintriae), 1981.

Le

tessere

erotiche

romane GES.

SPIRA

Spira. The cylinder, in some cases lavishly sculpted and sometimes decorated with a double trochilus and convex and concave sections, that forms the ‘middle layer’ of a conventional old-Ionic column base (Samos, Heraion; +> Column). The spira supports the equally sculpted and convexly curved > torus. The spira customarily rises from a plinth. A special form of Ionic basis is developed in late 6th- and 5th-cent. BC Attic architecture, consisting of a torus as base surface, a concavely curved trochilus lying on it and a further torus on top of that, and dispenses with the spira as an independent formative element. This form of Ionic, later also Corinthian, column base spread far on the Greek main-

land and became the norm for both Late Classical/Hellenistic and Roman architecture. ~ Column (with ill.); > Trochilus W.MULLER-WIENER,

Griechisches

Bauwesen

in

der

Antike, 1988, 122-124; B. WESENBERG, Kapitelle und Basen. Beobachtungen zur Entstehung der griechischen Saulenformen (BJ, 32. supplement), 1971. C.HO.

Spiraeum (=neigaov/Speiraion). Promontory (Plin. HN 4,18; Ptol. 3,16,12) or bay (Thuc. 8,10,3, emenda-

tion) in northeastern Argolis on the border to Corinth, usually identified with modern Akrotiri Spiri or the Bay of Frangolimano; topographical considerations, however, suggest rather Akrotiri Trachili or the Bay of Korfos. Also, remains of a Late Classical watchtower above the bay indicate the border line. It was there that a Peloponnesian fleet was surrounded by the Athenians in 412 BC (Thuc. loc.cit.; + Peloponnesian War). The bay played a role in a border dispute between Epidaurus and Corinth in the 3rd cent. BC (IG IV* 71). J. WisEMAN, The Land of the Ancient Corinthians, 1978, 136-140; K.HartTer-Urpopuu, Das zwischenstaatliche Schiedsverfahren im Achaischen Koinon, 1998, 16-23.

Spiritus [1] (‘breath’, ‘spirit’). I. GRAECO-ROMAN

740

739

II. CHRISTIAN

I. GRAECO-ROMAN The Latin word spiritus (denominative from spirare ‘blow’, ‘breathe’) describes any stream of air, also the breathing in and out of life-giving air, and hence even life itself. Thus in Cicero (Rosc. Am. 72) spiritus is what is common to all living beings. Unlike Greek + pneuma, spiritus has a more anthropological/moral accentuation and it also describes self-reliance, positively as courage, self-confidence, pride, enthusiasm, negatively as arrogance, overbearingness, conceitedness. Quite generally it means any spirit in its actively operative form. Cicero was the first to link — in connexion with > Stoicism — the human spirit with a universe pervaded by the spirit of God (Cic. Tusc. 5,38); in the same thought Seneca emphasized more the anthropological moment: “Deep in the body ofa person there is a part of the divine spirit” (Sen. Ep. 6,11). This spritus sacer is “a custodian and observer of our vices and vir-

tues” (Sen. Ep. 41,2). In the sense of the Stoa, however,

this spiritus sacer is to be understood as material. Il. CHRISTIAN Because of its basic materialistic meaning Christianity only hesitantly adopted spiritus as a term for (the divine) spirit: “If you assume spirit to be the substance of God you are making God a creature, for every spirit is a creature” (Novatianus, De Trinitate 7,39). > Tertullianus (De pudicitia 9; De praescriptione 21), however, is already familiar with the phrase spiritus sanctus (‘holy spirit’; because of its Stoic connotations sacer or divinus was unacceptable to Christians). As much as he asserts the transcendence of God as opposed to Stoic pantheism, however, for him the materialistic concept of spirit remains essential to the reality of the spiritus of God. The turn-around does not come until > Augustinus: before his conversion, spirit in the sense of the Stoa is something material for him, too (Aug. Conf. 7,1), afterwards he quite decisively relates it only to God (Aug. De Genesi ad litteram 12,7,18; Aug. Trin. 14,16). Simplicity, immutability, incorporeality and perpetuity are now characteristics of the divine spiritus. The spirit here corresponds to the love (caritas) that binds Father and Son; it proceeds from these two as the sole mediator of all actions of grace. In this way, under the influence of anthropological connotation in the Latin western Church, the doctrine developed that the spirit “proceeds from the Father and the Son” (ex patre filioque procedit; for the first time at the Council of Toledo in 589). This filioque, which in the West later was adopted into the > Nicaeno-Constantinopolitanum, was, among other things, the reason for the East-West schism of the Church in the rrth cent. 1 H.CrouzEL, s.v. Geist, RAC 9, 490-545 (bibliogr.) 2 B.ScHROTT, s.v. Geist III., HWdPh 3, 162-169 (bibliogr.) 3 H.K.KOHLENBERGER, S.v. Geist IV., V., HWdPh 3,169-180 4G. VERBEKE, L’evolution de la doctrine du pneuma du stoicisme a S. Augustin, 1945. J.BU.

[2] (asper/lenis) see > Punctuation. Spitamenes (Zmitapévync/Spitaménés). Prince in > Sogdiana, father of + Apama [1] (Arr. Anab. 7,4,6), re-

mained loyal to > Bessus after the death of Darius [3] until he despaired of him and in 329 BC, in concert with - Dataphernes, handed him over to Alexander [4] (thus Aristobulus [7]; Ptolemaeus [1] wrote himself into the action: Arr. Anab. 3,30). After Alexander’s departure S. triggered a partisan war, supported by Bactrian princes and > Sacae tribes, who also give him sanctuary. After a temporary occupation of Maracanda (modern Samarkand) he annihilated a Macedonian contingent (see > Pharnuches), but retreated when Alexander hurried back. In 328 he lured the garrison of Bactra (— Balkh) into a trap, but Craterus [1] was able to kill some Sacae on the return march (Arr. Anab. 4,16,417,2; Curt. 8,1,3-6). In the spring of 327 S. was crush-

ingly defeated by > Coenus [1] and he fled to the Sacae, who now killed him and sent his head to Alexander

741

742

(Arr. Anab. 4,17,3-7; novelized in Curt. 8,3). After devastating the land and executing thousands Alexander had now secured his rule.

tribus Horatia; regio VI (> Regio, regiones). S. was a Byzantine base in the wars against the Goths (Procop. Goth 1,16,3). In 570, S. was the seat of the Langobardic dukedom (Paulus Diaconus, Historia Langobardorum 2,16). Archeology: Systematically designed colonia, circular wall 2,3 km in length with polygonal masonry, forum with capitolium and arch (23 BC), temple near Sant’Ansano, theatre, amphitheatre outside of the walls (made into a fortress by Totila), two aqueducts. Archaic leges Spoletinae for lucus Iovis and lucus Bonae Deae (CIL XI 4766 f.).

BERVE 2, 717; A.B. BoswortTH, A Historical Commen-

tary on Arrian’s History of Alexander, vol. 2, 1995, 121

114EB.

Spithame (omOaut/spithameé, handspan). Greek unit of length taken from the proportions of the human body, extending between the tips of the thumb and little finger, equal to '/2> péchys, i.e. 3 palaistai (> palaisté) or 12 daktyloi > daktylos |1|. Depending on the underlying foot size (> pous), its length was c. 20-26 cm. According to a metrological relief from the island Salamis [1], the Attic spithame was 24,3 cm long. There was no unit of length corresponding to spithame in the Roman measurement system. 1K. W. BEINHAUER (ed.), Die Sache mit Hand und Fuf — 8000 Jahre Messen und Wiegen, 1994 2 F.HuLtTscu, Griechische und romische Metrologie, 71882. H.-J.S.

Spithridates

(XmOeudatyo/Spithriddtés,

‘granted

by

heaven’).

{1] Persian commander froma

highly prominent family

(Xen. Hell. 4,1,6 f.). In 420 BC, he fought against the

rebellious > Pissuthnes, and under > Pharnabazus [2] against the Ten Thousand, joined > Agesilaus [2] in 396 and returned to the Persians in 395/394 (Ctes. FGrH 688 F 15,53; Xen. An. 6,5,7; Xen. Hell. 3,4,10;

4,1,20 ff.5 Xen. Ages. 3,3). BRIANT, Index s. v. S.

jw.

[2] Satrap of Lydia and Ionia who fell at the > Granicus in a single combat with Alexander [4] the Great in 334 BC (Plut. Alexander 16,4; Arr. Anab. 1,12,8; 1,16,3). P.BrranT, Histoire de l’empire perse, 1996, 721, 816, 838; F. Justi, Iranisches Namenbuch, 1895, 310. PHO.

Splonum (Zniatvov; Splatinon). The location of the fortress conquered by Germanicus [2] in 9 AD (Cass. Dio 56,11-17) is debatable: near Sipovo (extended settlement from the Roman period: [1]) or farther east at Plevlje in Bosnia: [2]. 1G. ALFOLDY, =xAatvoy-S., in: Acta Archaeologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 10, 1967, 3-18

2J.J.

Wixes, Dalmatia, 1969, 74, 282.

PI.CA.

Spoils see > War booty Spoletium (Z2oAttwov/Spolétion; Lat. Spoletum). City in Umbria (Str. 5,2,10; Ptol. 3,1,54) in the valley of Clitumnus on the Via Flaminia (It. Ant. 125,4), presentday Spoleto. Became colonia (> Coloniae) in 241 BC (Cic. Balb. 48; Liv. Per. 20; Vell. Pat. 1,14,8) with praetores, tresviri, iudices, tribunus, in 90 BC municipium,

SPOLIA

C. PIETRANGELI, S., 1939; L.D1 Marco, S., 1975.

GU

Spolia [1] (from Latin spolium, ‘arms stripped from an enemy, booty’). Technical term of archaeology and art history, denoting parts of earlier buildings or monuments reused in constructive or decorative contexts. Scholars long saw the use of spolia in architecture and decoration as a symptom of decline in architecture, of the dissolution of the Classical Orders (+ Column) and of a lack of imagination and technical ability in respect of ~ architectural sculpture. Only recently has the notion been emphasized that the use of spolia was rarely an expression of lack and inability, but rather a sign of a conscious and purposeful new construction of carefully selected building or sculptural elements, and that some decorative cycles consisting of spolia (Rome, Temple of Apollo Sosianus and Arch of Constantine) can be said truly to be ‘composed’. The use of spolia was widespread esp. in the architecture and building decoration of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, but it was rather rare at first in antiquity. In Greek architecture, spolia were largely used for technical reasons, e.g. in using old building materials that lay at hand for making a new structure — the term spolia is arguably not applicable here (Archaic spolia from > Tiryns, also on the — Parthenon; it is disputed whether and to what extent various complexes of architectural sculpture, e.g. the southern metopes, are to be seen as early examples of the use of spolia; similarly in the case of the cella frieze in the Temple of Apollo at > Phigalea). Spolia in Roman decorative and architectural art increasingly acquired from around AD 2.50, at least on public buildings, the character of a prestigious, ennobling attribute, and became a widespread phenomenon in the 4th and 5th cents., also in Christian sacral architecture. Apart from various old pieces of architectural sculpture (best-known: Rome, Arch of Constantine), highly-ornamented parts of columnar structures such as bases and capitals were especially used as spolia, often combined with ‘modern’ column shafts in conspicuous materials (granite, porphyry, e.g. Rome, Santo Stefano Rotondo, 5th cent.). Occasionally, entire buildings give the impression of being composed of spolia (Temple of Juno Clitunno at Spoleto). — SPOLIA

743

744

J. ALCHERMES, Spolia in Roman Cities of the Late Empire, in: Dumbarton Oaks Papers 48, 1994, 167-178; B. BRENK, Spolia from Constantine to Charlemagne. Aesthetics versus Ideology, in: Dumbarton Oaks Papers 41,

(Hom. Il. 18,414; Aristoph. Ach. 436) less for washing than for mopping off water (Aristoph. Ach. 463; Ath. 15,686d; Plin. HN 31,131). Sponges were also used as soft padding for helmets, greaves and breastplates (Liv. 9,40,2; Plin. HN 31,131). Because of their iodine content sponges were a common remedy used in veterinary and human medicine (main reference: Plin. HN 31,123-

SPOLIA

1987, 103-109; A. Escu, S.; Zur Wiederverwendung anti-

ker Baustiicke und Skulpturen im mittelalterlichen Italien, in: Archiv fir Kunstgesch. 51, 1969, 1-64; F. W. DEICHMANN, Die S. in der spatantiken Architektur (Bayerische Akad. der Wiss., Philos.-histor. Klasse. Sitzungsberichte,

No. 6), 1975; C.JAGGI, S. oder Neuanfertigung? Uberle-

131).

— Hygiene, personal

RH.

gungen zur Bauskulptur des Tempietto sul Clitunno, in: U. PEscHLOow, S. MOLLERS (eds.), Spatantike und byzantinische Bauskulptur (congress Mainz 1994), 1998, 105— 111; D. KInneEy, Spolia from the Baths of Caracalla in S. Maria in Trastevere, in: Art Bulletin 68, 1986, 379-3973

L. DE LACHENAL, Spolia. Uso e reimpiego dell’antico dal Il al XIV secolo, 1995;J.PoESCHKE (ed.), Antike S. in der Architektur des Mittelalters und der Renaissance, 1996 (with full bibliogr.); E.L. ScHwANDNER, Archaische S. aus Tiryns, in: AA 1988, 269-284; B. WESENBERG, Parthe-

nongebalk und Siidmetopenproblem, in: JDAI 98, 1983, 57-86.

C.HO.

Sponsalia. A couple’s engagement in Roman law. The term appears to have derived from the fact that marriage in earlier times had been promised mutually through an official > stipulatio (or through > sponsio) of the couple’s fathers. In the late Republic and in the Principate, the sponsalia could be revoked freely and it was no longer possible to file a suit for marriage. Indirect

commitments

(e.g.

contract

penalties,

Dig.

392 f.; TREGGIARI,

145-

45,1,134 pr.) were abolished as well. HonsELL/MAYER-MALY/SELB, 160.

GS.

[2] see > War booty

Sponsio

Sponge I. SCIENCE

IJ. HYGIENE

AND MEDICINE

I. SCIENCE Indyyoc/spongos, onoyyia/spongia (Attic omoyyid/ spongia), Latin spongia (with the special names peniculus in comedies of such as Plautus and Terence, penicillus in Colum. 12,18,5 and Pliny) is the Bath Sponge (Euspongia officinalis Bronn.), which grows in the Mediterranean. Four geographical subspecies, three black and one white (&Avoia/aplysia of the genus Sarcotragus Schmidt), are distinguished by Aristotle in his accurate description (Hist. an. 5,16,548a 30-5 49a 13; cf. Plin. HN 9,148-150) and a further one by Dioscorides (5,118,1 WELLMANN = 5,135 BERENDES). Pliny (HN 27,69) also mentions a freshwater sponge. In Aristotle (Hist. an. 1,1,487b 9-11; 9(8),1,588b 20 f.; Part. an. 4,5,681a ro f. and 15-17) it remains an open question whether it has an animal or plant existence, despite the presence of sensation, for Plinius (HN 9,146 and 148; 31,124 f.) the sponge is certainly an animal. H. Gossen, A. STEIER, s. v. Schwamm, RE 2 A, 777-782; KELLER 2, 583-586. C.HU.

Il. HYGIENE AND MEDICINE Sponges were important utility objects in ancient everyday life, used for wiping tables (as early as in Hom. Od. 1,111 et passim), benches (Dem. Or. 18,258), dishes (Colum. 12,9,2; 12,52,14), baskets (Cato Agr. 67,2), Shoes (Aristoph. Vesp. 600), writing and school tablets (Aesch. Ag. 1329; Anth. Pal. 6,65; Dem. Or. 22,4393 453), even a forum after a blood bath (Cic. Sest. 77); sponges (on wooden handles) were also used for cleaning the anus at latrines (e.g. Aristoph. Ran. 487; Mart. 12,48). For cleaning the body sponges were used

I. CONSTITUTIONAL

LAW

II. PRIVATE LAW

I. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

An institution of Roman international law, sponsio was a form of treaty characterized by > stipulatio (Gai. Inst. 3,94), and a normal form even for an oral peace treaty (> pax) entered into by the emperor [t. 97; 2. 46]. From the High Republic onwards, it also meant ‘a treaty entered into by a Roman commander by virtue of his word, without the authorization of the Senate’ (3. 48]: ‘battlefield treaty’; cf. [2. 47]). As demon-

strated by the rejection of the capitulation (> pactio) in the war against Numantia (137 BC; > Hostilius [8]), and the annalistic reconstruction of the pax Caudina (321 BC), it was open to interpretation by the authorities at home as to whether the obligation bound the entire people or — as maintained by Livy (9,9,15) — only the sponsor himself, enabling — fetiales to deliver him up for expiation of his oath (Liv. 9,10,9 f.; noxae deditio, see > noxa) [1. 93 f.5 2. 47; 3. 48 f.]. Careful magistrates accordingly concluded preliminary agreements (Pol. 1,62,8; Liv. 21,19,3) subject to the approval ofthe populus Romanus. 1 K.-H. ZIEGLER, Das Volkerrecht der romischen Republik, in: ANRW I 2, 1972, 68-114 2/1d., Friedensvertrage im romischen Altertum, in: Archiv des Volkerrechts 27,1989, 45-62 3l1d., Volkerrechtsgeschichte, 1994.

P.KE. II. PRIVATE LAW

In Roman private law, a binding promise to deliver, concluded orally in the form of the > stipulatio. Sponsio was the technical term for the oldest form of — surety; it was accessible only to Roman citizens (Gai. Inst. 3,93), and had to serve as assurance of an obligation

SPORTS

745

746

entered

des (Thera, Anaphe, Sicinos, Lagusa, Pholegandros, Cimolos, Siphnos, Melos, Amorgos, Lebinthos, Leros, Patmos, Corassiae, Icaria/Icaros [2], Astypalaea, Telos, Chalcia, Nisyros, Carpathos, Casos, Calymna: Str.

into by stipulatio (Gai. Inst. 3, 119). The Corpus iuris civilis expands the scope of the term, and applies it to stipulatio itself (Dig. 50,16,7: “sponsio appellatur non solum quae per sponsus interrogationem fit, sed omnis stipulatio promissioque” (“sponsio means not only the response to a (formal) request for a surety, but any stipulation and any promise”)). LITERATURE: S. ~ stipulatio.

N.F.

Sponsoring of literature see > Literary sponsorship Spoons. Spoons were initially used as stirring or wooden spoons (Greek togtvr/toryné, Aristoph. Equ. 984,

cf. Anth. Pal. 6,305; 306, Latin trua or trulla) for preparing food. For scooping liquid foods or wine, a xvaboc/kyathos was used. Although spoons were known at an early stage, they were little used for eating since people mainly used hollowed-out pieces of bread (uvotihn/mystilé, wooteov/mystron) to eat pulse soups,

broth or soups etc. (Aristoph. Equ. 1168-1174). The Romans distinguished a spoon with oval bowls (ligula) for soup, flour soup, pulse etc. from a spoon with small round bowls (cochlear, cochleare). These were used for eating seafood (having sharpened ends for breaking shells), also for eggs (Petron. 33) and snails (Mart. 14,121). Hence a tank for breeding snails was also called a cochlearium (Varro, Rust. 3,14). In medicine,

physicians used both the ligula and the cochlear for giving medication to patients. Spoons and spoon probes, which have been found in graves alongside ointment appliers and ointment dishes, were used in cosmetics and medicine. Spoons were favoured as (Saturnalia) gifts (Mart. 5,19; cf. Mart. 8,33 and 71). Some extant

spoons date back as early as the Bronze Age, but finds of spoons are not particularly numerous until those from the Vesuvius cities and from the provinces of the Rhine and Gaul. Materials used are clay, horn, bone, ivory

and some precious metals. — Cutlery (with ill.); > Household equipment H.v. BOHME, L6ffelbeigabe in spatrémischen Grabern nordlich der Alpen, in: JRGZ 17, 1970, 172-200; M. FEu-

GERE, La vaisselle gallo-romaine en bronze de Verhault (Céte-d’Or), in: REA 45, 1994, 137-168; E.KUNZL, Medizinische Instrumente aus Sepulkralfunden der rémischen Kaiserzeit, *1983; Pompeji wiederentdeckt, exhibition Hamburg 1993, 157 No. 28. RH.

Sporades (=x0gdadec/Sporddes, ‘the scattered’). Collective term, varying in detail, for the Aegean islands not reckoned as > Cyclades (schol. Dionys. Per. 1325 530; Eust. in Dionys. Per. 530; Mela 2,111; Plin. HN 4,6871; Aristot. Mund. 3,393). The name appears to have

first been coined by Hellenistic geographers; there is no evidence for it yet in the 4th cent. BC (e.g. in Ps.-Scyl. 48; 58; 96-99). After its introduction it was inconsistently applied; the boundary with the Cyclades fluctuated. For instance, Strabo assigns to the S. islands of the southern > Aegean Sea today partly counted as Cycla-

OGM Tinie (Ely TKO Dake ie Ido igis ly) a12)|, whereas Artemidorus [3] allots Melos, Siphnos and Cimolos to the Cyclades (cf. Str. 10,5,3). Different attributions can be found in Dionysius [26] (Dionys. Per. 130 ff.; 144 ff.) and Mela (2,111). Euboea, Lemnos, Thasos, Samothrace and Imbros were understood to be among the S., even Proconnesos (Eust. in Dionys. Per. 530) (cf. the most extensive listing in Plin. HN 4,68-71, where not all the names can be identified, among them poetic epithets and mistakes in the textual tradition). The term Nijoot Zm0eddec/Nésoi Sporddes has survived until today for the Magnesian islands off the coast of Thessaly. There is no ancient tradition for the exclusiveness of the narrow use, usual today, of the term S. for the islands of the Dodecanese between Samos and Rhodes off the coast of Asia Minor. L. BURCHNER, s. v. S., RE 3 A, 1857-1874 (map sketch 1861 f.); P.SoustaL, A.Koper, Aigaion Pelagos (TIB 10), 1998, 54-56.

AKU.

Sports I. INTRODUCTION II. QUESTION OF ORIGIN Ill. Egypt IV. ANCIENT ORIENT V. HITTITES VI. GreEcE VII. Erruscans VIII. ROME

I. INTRODUCTION The modern generic term ‘sports’ for physical exercise in the broadest sense, comprising the multi-faceted cultural phenomenon in a generally understandable way, was coined in England in the 18th cent.; it goes back to the late Latin deportare with the secondary meaning ‘to enjoy oneself’. Within Classics and sports history as an institutionalized part of sports studies, concentrated work far beyond the traditional area of Graeco-Roman Antiquity has been established in recent decades [1]; the earlier advanced cultures, especially Egypt and the Ancient Orient, have also attracted the attention of scholars. There is a growing awareness that sports are an anthropological constant with their own characteristic form within an individual culture, determined by the changing natural, political, social and historical conditions. II]. QUESTION OF ORIGIN

Ancient information on the origin of sports is particularly to be hoped for in the justifiable assumption that the oldest sources on this question would be able to provide the best answers. However, as long as these sources are vague, i.e. their iconographic language is not completely understood, as is the still the case for cave and rock paintings [2], one is only on certain ground with written history. In the research to date, cultic, military, biological or work process related reasons are discussed as provocations for its origin [3].

SPORTS

Particular attention should be given to ethological considerations (excess motor stimuli, aggressive impulses,

play impulses) [4], which pay due regard to the long era of Palaeolithic hunters [5] within human history. The transition to the settled way of life c. 10,000 years ago can be conceived as a turning-point following which movement was ritualized and > Cult, > Festivals; Feasts) [6].

748

747

institutionalized

(cf.

III. Ecypt The written [7] and pictorial sources [8] which are

thus far known from the Pharaonic era provide a clear image of an Egyptian sporting culture. Because of the royal dogma, there are vast differences between the sports of the king and those of the common Egyptians: because the ideal king was superior to all others and was only imaginable as a victor over enemies as the guarantor of world order, athletic competition with the participation of the > Pharaoh was completely out of the question. However, this did not exclude the king from officially and publicly demonstrating his outstanding athletic abilities. Thus, for example, the anniversary festival which took place after 30 years of rule consisted, at its core, of a race, with which the ageing king proved the physical strength necessary for his office and, at the same time, magically renewed it. The ancient rite, which probably reflects the important function of running for the prehistoric chieftain as a successful hunter, is pictorially depicted in all ages of Egyptian history [8. A 1-314]. After the expulsion of the > Hyksos, who captured Egypt with the help of two-wheeled, two-horse chariots and the new composite bow, the image of the athletic kings changed during the NK. In the 18th Dynasty, the traumatic experience of foreign rule was assimilated by, among other things, making the newly introduced

with prizes and received an honorary banquet among the royal guard [9. 68-74]. In Egyptian mythology, an athletic contest is held twice in the conflict between ~+ Horus and > Seth for world supremacy; the victor is to assume the role of the king of the gods [7. Document 36]. Combat sports are recorded from the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC, where > wrestling is impressively shown to advantage in the tombs of the nomarchs of the MK in Bani Hasan, with hundreds of pairs (shown in a variety of stages of combat) [8.L 14 f., 17-21]. Together with stick fencing, it appears in a tournament bordered by spectators (also foreigners) on the ‘Window of Appearances’ in the mortuary temple of + Ramesses [3] III in Madinat Habt, where Egyptian athletes are depicted as superior to their foreign opponents [8. L 34, M 9]. Depictions of boxing are encountered occasionally [8. N 1-2]. Aquatic sports are less well documented for Egypt than would be assumed for a river oasis. A rowing regatta was once held in the presence of Tutankhamun (> Rowing) [12]. Knowledge of > swimming was widespread [9. 96-103], without it, however, taking on a competitive character; on the other hand, that was the case for water jousting, where opponents tried to push each other off papyrus rafts into the water with punting poles [13]. Other festivals were also accompanied by an athletic programme [14], thus, for example, the acceptance of the tribute of the south under Amenophis [4] IV (r8th Dynasty) or the topping-out of the pyramid of Sahure (5th Dynasty) in Abt Sir [15]. Swimming and archery (> bow-shooting) were subjects which were also part of the educational programme of the royal princes. Statements on sports in ancient Egypt can be rounded out by numerous findings on games [8. P-Q], dance [8. S] and hunting [8. J-K].

equipment into royal sporting equipment. A sporting

1 W. Decker, et al., Jahresbibliographie zum Sport im Altertum, in: Nikephoros 1 ff., 1988 ff. 2H.KoLMErR,

tradition developed from this, passing from father to

Vorformen sportlicher Aktivitaten in prahistorischen Fels-

son over three generations (> Thutmosis III, > Ame-

bildern, 1989 3 H.UeBeRHorST, Ursprungstheorien, in: Id. (ed.), Geschichte der Leibesiibungen, vol. 1, 1972, 11-38 4K.WIEMANN, Die Phylogenese des menschlichen Verhaltens im Hinblick auf die Entwicklung sportlicher Betatigung, in: [3], 48-61 5 D.SANsSONE, Greek Athletics and the Genesis of S.,1988 61. WEILER, Langzeitperspektiven zur Genese des S., in: Nikephoros 2, 1989, 7-26 7 W.DECKER, Quellentexte zu Sport und K6rperkultur im Alten Agypten, 1975 8 Id., M. Hers, Bildatlas zum Sport im Alten Agypten, vols. 1-2, 1994

nophis [2] II, > Thutmosis IV): shooting at copper targets with a bow from a moving chariot, the royal discipline par excellence [9. 42-54], is recorded especially for Amenophis II (1428-1397 BC); furthermore, his Sphinx stele highlights running, piloting a ship with 200 oars and horse training as athletic areas of activity for the king [7. Document 17]. Among other finds of interest for sports history, the tomb inventory of > Tutankhamun (1333-1323 BC) also included six original chariots [10] and numerous composite bows [11]. The archery skills of the kings were very precisely recorded (e.g. how thick the target was, how deep the arrows allegedly penetrated), so that the concept of a record can be defined [9. 63-67]. Quantifying information is also recorded for the sports of private people. On the Running Stela of Taharqa (690-664 BC, year 5), after daily running

9 W.DEcKER, Sport und Spiel im Alten Agypten, 1987 10 M.A. Litrauer, J. H. CRouwEL, Chariots and Related

Equipment from the Tomb of Tut‘ankhamun, 1985 11 W.McLreop, Composite Bows from the Tomb of Tut‘ankhamun,

1970

=.12 W. Decker,

D. Kuru,

Eine

Ruderregatta zur Zeit des Tutanchamun, in: Nikephoros 12, 1999, 19-31 13 M.Hers, Der Wettkampf in den Marschen, 2001 14 W.DEcKER, Sport und Fest im Alten Agypten, in: Cu. ULF (ed.), Ideologie — Sport — Aufenseiter, 2000,

111-145

training (of unrecorded length), the selected soldiers of

Discovered

Blocks from the Causeway

15 Z.Hawass, M. VERNER, Newly

the king covered a stretch of c. 100 km in c. 9 hours, which is certainly credible. The best were rewarded

MDAI(K) 52, 1996, 177-186.

of Sahure, in: W.D.

SPORTS

749

75°

IV. ANCIENT ORIENT A bronze figurine (28th/27th cent. BC, Iraq) shows two naked wrestlers holding each other by the belt (PropKg 14 fig. 35), each balancing a vessel on his head; the loser was probably the one whose vessel fell first. A variety of sport types are recorded as court disciplines beginning no later than the 3rd dynasty of Ur (21st cent.). Sulgi, the second king of the dynasty (2094-2047 BC), represented himself as a perfect man and king, not only able to write, but also an outstanding runner, wrestler, archer and hunter [1. 11-18]. Two wrestlers are depicted on an Old Babylonian cylinder seal (18th/r7th cent.) [2. fig. 4]. Two Old Babylonian clay reliefs show two boxers (1st cent. of the 2nd millennium) [2. fig. 1, 2]. In the rst millennium, archery was a noble discipline at ancient Oriental courts. An orthostat from the palace of Sargon [3] II shows a disc fastened to a pole, at which archers are aiming [4. 39 with fig. 2]. An inscription of ~ Assurbanipal records an archery competition at the Assyrian court in the presence of an Elamite prince

is recorded on a wall painting from the Neolithic settlement Catalhiiyuik (on the Konya Plain; 7th millennium) is uncertain. In the 2nd millennium, the motif (probably taken from Minoan Crete) is found on various cylinder seals of Syrian provenance [8. fig. 3-10].

[4. 39 f.].

1 P.S. VeRMAAK, Sulgi as Sportsman in the Sumerian SelfLaudatory Royal Hymns, in: Nikephoros 6, 1993, 7-21 2 L.Jaxos-Rost, Sport im Alten Orient?, in: Das Altertum 11, 1965, 3-8 3 .N.OeTTINGER, Indogermanisch *s(b,)neur/n — ‘Sehne’ und *(s)men — ‘gering sein’ im He-

thitischen, in: Miinchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 35, 1976, 93-103 4 V.Haas, Kompositbogen und BogenschiefSen als Wettkampf im Alten Orient, in: Nikephoros 2, 1989, 27-41 5 F.W. Konic, Handbuch der chaldischen Inschriften, 1955-1957, no. 75 6 V.Haas, Der Wettkampf als Teil des hethitischen Festrituals, in: L. BuRGENER et al. (ed.), Sport und Kultur, 1986, 15-17

71Id., Geschichte der hethitischen Religion, 1994 8 T.Srpaut, New Evidence from Anatolia Regarding BullLeaping Scenes in the Art of the Aegean and the Near East, in: Anatolica 27, 2001, 107-125 9 P.DARDANO, L’aneddoto e il racconto in eta antico-hittita: La cosiddetta ‘cronaca di palazzo’, 1997. V.H.

Archery is recorded as a pastime at Urartian courts on a stele found in Van, which was erected to commemorate a 476 m shot by King Argisti (c. 713 BC).

The enormous distance presupposes the use of a composite bow, which was known from Egypt and is described in the Ugaritic Aqhat epic [4. 36 f.]. For Urartu, famous for horse breeding and training, an inscription of King Menua (8th cent. BC) records the jump of a horse over a distance of 11 m [5]. V. HITTITES In Hittite Asia Minor, athletic competitions were usually cultic-ritual acts. At a festival, wrestlers battled before the deity. Another festival ritual refers to a ‘stone shooting’ competition. During the spring festival, ‘ten runners come; and the one who wins and the one who is in second place are given two soldier’s tunics... The runner who wins is brought a mina of silver and a meal.’ On the same festival day, ‘the chief of the pages prepares the horses of the running. A reward is received by the one who is victorious with the horse.’ Mock battles were part of another festival ritual [6; 7. 688 f.]. That racing and the art of archery were also aristocratic virtues at the Hittite court, as in the 3rd dynasty of Ur, is shown by a ritual with the wish: “Give [him the speed] of the wind, and give h[im] courage, and give him the bowstring [and marksmanship in] shooting’ [3. 93 f.]. An epic work tells of the (Hurrite) king Gurparanzah, who defeated ’60 kings and 70 heroes’ in archery during a banquet and received the beautiful woman Tatizuli as prize [4. 38 f.]. According to the socalled Old Hittite Palace Chronicle, the loser in archery had to bring water (from the well) while naked as a penalty of disgrace [6. 52 f.; 9]. Bull leaping is recorded on a relief frieze of the Hittite Hiiseyindede cult vase and probably in a festival ritual (KUB 35.37 Rs. III 1-5) [8]. Whether the subject

VI. GREECE Sport is already a known factor in Minoan Crete. One athletic theme is the bull game, an acrobatic leap

over a running bull, which should perhaps be interpreted as an initiation rite. It decorates the palace of -» Knossos in > wall paintings and is found on Cretan export items in an Egyptian palace of the early NK (middle of the 2nd millennium) in Avaris. — Fist-fighting is also deserving of mention (horn rhyton from Hagia Triada; ‘boxing princes’ as wall painting in Akrotiri, Thera [1. r5—21]). The first definite depiction of a chariot race comes from the Mycenaean cultural area (collar-necked amphora from Tiryns, 13th cent. [2]), as does the custom of the funeral agon, which is first recorded on a larnax of the 13th cent. BC from Tanagra [3]. In the Homeric world (+ Homerus [r]), sports are

already very pronounced [4]. No less than 5 % of the Iliad and the Odyssey describe athletic themes: funeral games for Patroclus [1] (Hom. Il. 23,262-897); competitions by the Phaeacians to honour their guest Odysseus (Hom. Od. 8,97-130); a boxing match between the beggar Irus and Odysseus, who had returned to Ithaca incognito (ibid. 18,1-123); the archery contest of the suitors for the hand of Penelope (ibid. 19,571-

581; 21,68-79; 393-423). How strongly Greek culture was influenced by sports is best shown by the countless agons (> Sports festivals), which covered the country beginning in the Archaic era. Besides the major pan-Hellenic festivals (> periodos) in > Olympia, > Delphi, on the Isthmus of Corinth (+ Isthmia) and in > Nemea, every polis celebrated its local cult festival in connection with an athletic programme, whose victors were held in high esteem [5]. Commonly, a variety of distances (> stadion, > diaulos, > dolichos, race in armour), the

three

combat

sports

(+ Wrestling,

— Fist-fighting,

SPORTS

is

752

> pankration) and the > péntathlon were performed at

in the necessity of training the > hoplitai [15. 9-30],

gymnasial competitions. Frequently, an equestrian and

which states that it is to be understood as a refuge of the aristocratic way of life, which had to give way to the emergence of democratic forces [16]. A Greek polis without a gymnasium is unthinkable (Paus. 10,4,1); over the course of time, it also developed into a first-rate cultural centre [17. 131-137] and became the institution of Greek identity in the diaspora. The variety and specialization of Greek sporting culture is also demonstrated by + sports equipment [18] such as the spear (> Javelin throwing), discus (+ Discus throwing) or haltéres (jumping weights;

musical programme of competition was added. The efforts to earn the victory in athletic contests soon led to systematic training (gymnastics), which can already be perceived in the poetry of > Pindarus [2] in the form of five trainers mentioned by name, all specialists in the combat sports [6. 64-107]. The Athenian Menander, who is also mentioned as a trainer by Bacchylides (13,192 MAEHLER), was cleverly compared to a whetstone (Pind. Isthm. 6,73). Of the once extensive

written work of ancient gymnasts (sports teachers, e.g. Iccus of Tarentum/Taras, Herodicus of Selymbria and Theon of Alexandria) and > paidotribai (‘trainers’), the only fully preserved work is the treatise on training by Philostratus [5] Megi yuwvaotixtis/Peri gymnastikés) from the 3rd cent. AD [7]: besides psychology and rhetoric, the art of the gymnasts included knowledge of physiognomy. Philostratus criticized the tetrad system, a cyclically repeated phase on four subsequent days with varyingly regulated training intensity (chaps. 47 and

54). A forced diet (anankophagia)

was

recom-

mended for those competing in combat sports, whose domains were not divided into weight classes. One particular characteristic of Greek sporting practice was the > nudity of the athletes, who still appeared in loincloths e.g. in Homer (Il. 23,683; 710), beginning in the middle of the 6thcent. BC. After attempted explanations such as cultic or heroic nudity or artistic convention, today the indication [8; 9] is that the burgeoning democracy, with its principle of > isonomia, is responsible for this Greek custom [ro]. The Greeks were the first to create fixed forms in sports architecture: the > stadion and > hippodromos as places of competition and the > gymnasium as a place of training. Despite a rapid development in stadium construction [11] — which led to elaborate stone constructions such as the facilities in Delphi (cf. [12]) and Aphrodisias [1] (Caria) which can still be seen today — the Eleans refrained from building the spectator stands in the stadium of > Olympia in permanent stone in order to document the venerable age of their games by keeping the archaic form. Conversely, they were the only ones to provide the hippodrome - which was set up ephemerally everywhere else on the occasion of the agon (and thus nowhere archaeologically demonstrable today) — with a permanent form, at least in the area of the starting mechanism (daphesis; Paus. 6,20 [13]). However, the stadium in Olympia had an entrance tunnel to increase the show effect of the entry of the athletes; the facilities at Epidaurus and Nemea were the only others to be built in such a way. As a special technical feature, the 600 foot long stadia had special course mechanisms intended to allow a fair start; there was a development from simple starting places (balbis) to starting machines (hyspléx), which are particularly well-preserved in the stadium of the Isthmia and on Rhodes and Cos [14]. Recently, there has been a theory on the origin of the > gymnasium, which was long seen

[x9]) - which pentathletes (+ péntathlon) used for these disciplines typical of combined events, and which were not uncommonly dedicated to the god by the victor — as well as the fist-guards of the boxer. Another sign of the ‘fondness for sports’ (proyupvaoia/ philogymnasia, P|. Symp. 182c; 205d) is the artistic use of the sports theme. Without question, this occurred most impressively in sculpture (including small sculpture [20]), although only a few works from the genre of > victor statues have survived the ages. However, the few originals are supplemented by Roman marble copies. Vase paintings of athletic subjects [21] are also numerous and impressive; among them, the c. 850 > Panathenaic prize amphorae represent a special group, because they contained oil for the victors and thus were part of the victory prize [22]. Not uncommonly, coins with athletic images were also minted on the occasion of athletic successes (Sicilian tyrants; Philippus [4] II of Macedonia). Greek literature also dealt with the subject very frequently; the Greeks even had their own poetic form inspired by athletic success: the victory ode (+ Pindarus [2], — Bacchylides, ~ Simonides [2]); a comparable small form is the victory epigram [23]. Compared to the usual disciplines, aquatic sports did not feature strongly in Greek agons (> Sports festivals). While occasional rowing regattas (+ Rowing) are named, + swimming was almost never practised competitively. However, various forms of — ball games are known [24. 209-214]; with episkyros, — harpaston and phaininda, these include team sports with heavy physical exertion, particularly as they were played by the Spartan ephebes (> ephebeia) known as ‘ball players’ (sphaireis; 1G V 1, 674-687) [25. 59-63]. A form of hockey (xeontiCew/kerétizein) is also depicted on the relief on the base of a statue (Athens, NM 3477). Despite the high esteem enjoyed by sports in Greece, a never dwindling tradition of sports criticism also formed beginning in the Archaic era [26. 41-206]. VII. ErRuscANS Sport among the Etruscans can be considered wellstudied thanks to the efforts of J.-P. THUILLIER [27]. In pre-Roman Italy, it demonstrated thoroughly unique characteristics (most strongly in the phersu game), although Greek influences can also be noted through contact with the Greek culture. The frequent appearance of

SPORTS

753

PY;

sporting themes in tomb paintings [28. Nos. 15, 17, 22, 23, 25, 42, 47, 73, 74, 82, 83, 92] suggests the expla-

greats of today [41]. The amphitheatrum Flavium (+ Colosseum) of the capital, where the most elaborate gladiatorial combats took place, was the model for the — munera (gladiatoria). Besides the extant amphitheatres themselves, numerous inscriptions record their wide spread [42]. Roman sports criticism, which is almost completely absent for the bloody single combats (exception: Sen. Ep. 7,3-5; 90,453 95533), was directed in part strongly against the certamina Graeca, the ‘Greek contests’ [26. 214-223], and increasingly became a topic for Christian authors (e.g. Tert. De spectaculis) [43]. + Recreation; — Festivals; Feasts; + Ludi; — Sports equipment; + SPORT

nation that funeral games were held for the aristocratic deceased. Even the Romans were aware that chariot races (with three-horse teams) and boxing were central elements of Etruscan athletic events. According to Livy (1,35,7-10), the Etruscan king — Tarquinius Priscus

provided splendid games in Rome with this programme (equi pugilesque), for which grandstands were also built, such as those depicted in the Tomba della biga [27. 622 fig. 66]. Numerous cippi (> cippus) are decorated with reliefs of athletes [29]. There is inconsistency in the nudity of the athletes. Apart from the occasional wearing of a loincloth, sports were also performed nude in Etruria [8]. Attic vases intended for the Etruscan market (so-called perizoma group) from the period around 510 BC show naked athletes on whom loincloths were later painted, probably to adapt to Etruscan tastes [30]. Regular pan-Etruscan sports festivals (ludi sacri) were held in Fanum Voltumnae (probably located near Orvieto) [27. 429-431, 457-460].

VIII. ROME Apart from initial strong Etruscan and later Greek influences, sport had its own image in Roman culture. Although conservative Roman circles liked to suggest that sports were of value to Romans only in a military context and that the Campus Martius was their centre (Hor. Carm. 1,8 [31. 47-55]), the facts indicate otherwise. In the gigantic public > thermal baths and numerous private > baths of the Imperial era [32; 33; 34], wholeheartedly organized leisure and popular sports were practised, robbing Seneca [2], who wished to study, of his peace (Sen. Ep. 56,1f.). Besides the enjoyment of bathing luxury, a variety of > ball games to which the Romans were partial (trigon, harpastum) were played [35]. Just as baths spread throughout the Roman Empire as a characteristic of Roman culture, two other monumental Roman sports structures also extended to their entire area of rule and, in many cases, provide signs of Roman sports culture still visible today: the enormous circus facilities (> circus), 74 of which are preserved throughout the empire with the main centres in Spain and North Africa [36], and 176 [37.20] amphitheatres (> amphitheatrum) [38], the majority of them in Italy, North Africa and Gaul. The fact that amphitheatres were only built in a few places in the Greek east does not mean that gladiatorial combats (+ munera) were not held there; however, they occurred in the abundantly available local theatres or stadia [39]. The archetype of all circus facilities and the most splendid location for chariot races was the Circus Maximus in Rome, where 150,000 spectators cheered the stars of the racecourse and supported one of the four racing teams [40] (— factiones II.). Among the 229 chariot drivers of the Imperial era known by name (almost exclusively slaves by descent) are some whose win totals allow them to be compared to the sports

1 W.DEcKER,

2K.Kiutan,

Sport in der griechischen Antike,

1995

Zur Darstellung eines Wagenrennens

spatmykenischer

Zeit, in: MDAI(A)

aus

95, 1980, 21-31

3 W. Decker, Die mykenischen Herkunft des griechischen Totenagons, in: E. THomas (ed.), Forschungen zur Aegaeischen Vorgeschichte, 1987, 201-230 4 S.LAsER, Sport und Spiel (ArchHom T), 1988 5 H.BUHMANN, Der Sieg

in Olympia und in den anderen panhellenischen Spielen, 1972 6K.KRAMER, Studien zur griechischen Agonistik nach den Epinikien Pindars, thesis, Cologne 1970 7 J.JUTHNER, Philostratos iber Gymnastik, 1909 8 J.P.THUILLIER, La nudité athlétique (Gréce, Etrurie, Rome), in: Nikephoros 1, 1988, 29-48 9M.McDonne1, The Introduction of Athletic Nudity: Thucydides, Plato and the Vases, in: JHS 111, 1991, 182193 10 St. MILLER, Naked Democracy, in: P. FLENSEDD-JENSEN, T.H. NIELSEN et al. (ed.), Polis and Politics. FS M. H. Hansen, 2000, 277-296

11 W. ZscHIETZSCHMANN, Wettkampf- und Ubungsstatten in Griechenland, vol. 1: Das Stadion, 1960 12 P. AupERT, Le stade (FdD II), 1979 13 J. HEIDEN, Die Tondacher von Olympia, 1995 14 P. VALAVANIS, Hysplex, 1999 15 J.DELORME, Gymnasion, 1960 16 CH.

Mann, Krieg, Sport und Adelskultur. Zur Entstehung des griechischen Gymnasions, in: Klio 80, 1998, 7-21 17 Cu. WaAckER, Das Gymnasion in Olympia, 1996 18 J.JUTHNER, Uber antike Turngerathe, 1896 19 D.KNOEPFLER, Haltére de bronze dédié a Apollon Hékabolos dans la collection G. Ortiz (Genéve), in: CRAI 1994, 337-379 20R.THOomas, Athletenstatuetten der Spatarchaik und des Strengen Stils, 1981 21 E. GoossENs, S. THIELEMANS, The Popularity of Painting Sport Scenes on Attic Black and Red Figure Vases, in: BABesch 71, 1996, 59-74 22 M.BENTz, Panathendische Preisamphoren, 1998 23 J.EBERT, Epigramme auf Sieger an gymnischen und hippischen Agonen, 1972

24 I. WEILER, Der Sport bei den Vélkern der Alten Welt, 71988 25 N.M. KENNELL, The Gymnasium of Virtue, 1995 26 S.MULLER, Das Volk der Athleten, 1995 27 J.-P. THUILLIER, Les jeux athléthiques dans la civilisation étrusque, 1985 28 S.STEINGRABER, Etruskische

Wandmalerei, 1985 29 J.-P. THurILuier, Un relief archaique inédit de Chiusi, in: RA 1997, 243-260 30 I. WEILER, Langzeitperspektiven zur Genese des Sport, in: Nikephoros 2, 1989, 7-26 31M.Rets, Sport bei Horaz, 1994 321.NrIELsEN, Thermae et balnea, 1990 33 W. HEINZ, Romische Thermen, 1983 34 F. YEGUL, Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquitiy, 1992 35 E. WEGNER, Das Ballspiel der R6mer, 1938 36 J.H. HumpuHrey, Roman

Circuses, 1986

37K.W.

WEBER,

SPORTS Panem et circenses,

1994

théatre romain, 2 vol., 1988

755

756

38 J.-C. GoLvin, L’amphi-

was replaced by a bronze attachment (caestus) which could considerably increase the force of a blow; the effect was occasionally heightened further by introducing pointed elevations or adding sharp protrusions to the caestus. 4) An indispensable item for the > long jump were stone or lead jumping weights (GAtfeec/haltéres; Latin halteres), of which diverse examples survive (6th century BC until the Roman period). In weight (between 1 and 2 kg) and size (160 to 260 mm) they exhibit only limited variation; larger weights (more than 4 kg) are rare. Their shape was quite simple (cf. Paus. 5,26,3; Philostr. Peri gymnastikés 55): a semi-circle curve with thickened ends, which the jumper held in the middle; in a second kind the two ends were joined, making a hollow for the jumper to grip. Other weights are very rare, such as disc-shaped ones or those in the shape of a horizontal eight; in the Roman Imperial period there were also cylindrical jumping weights. 5) For > discus throwing, the athletes used carefully worked discs of bronze, lead, iron, less often also stone, which could sometimes also be decorated and bear inscriptions. Their diameter was between 170 and 320 mm, and their weight was about 5 kg. These diskoi were kept on site and made available for competitions; for instance, the diskoi in Olympia were deposited in the treasure house of Sicyon (Paus. 6,19,4). After use, the diskoi were stored in cases and hung on the wall.

39L.RoBeERT, Les gla-

diateurs dans |’Orient grec, 1940 (repr. 1971) 40 A. CAMERON, Circus Factions, 1976 41 G. HorsMANN, Die Wagenlenker der romischen Kaiserzeit, 1998 42 M.Fora, I munera gladiatoria in Italia, 1996 43 W. WEISMANN, Kirche und Schauspiele, 1972.

W. DECKER, Sport in der griechischen Antike, 1995; R. W. ForTUIN,

Der

Sport

im

augusteischen

Rom,

1996;

M. GOLDEN, Sport and Society in Ancient Greece, 1998; H. A. Harris, Sport in Greece and Rome, 1972; J. JUTHNER, Die athletischen Leibesitibungen der Griechen, vols. I-2,1, 1965-1968; S.MiLLER, Arete, 1991; I. WEILER

(ed.), Quellendokumentation zur Gymnastik und Agonistik im Altertum, 6 vols., 1991-1998. W.D.

Sports equipment. Equipment needed for training and for practising a sport in antiquity. 1) Hoplitodromia (verb dxdttodeouetw/hoplitodromein) was the last > running competition to be included in the programme of the Olympic Games (> Olympia IV.) in 520 BC (65th Olympiad). In the beginning it was run in full kit (helmet, greaves, round shield), but the armour was successively reduced until only the shield (Gomic/aspis) remained (cf. Paus. 6,10,4).

This discipline, which only adult males entered, is represented particularly in vase paintings. 2) The torch race (Kaunadndeopia/lampadédromia) took place at many agones, e.g. the > Panathénaia (but not at Olympia); it was a team race (Aesch. Ag. 312314; Paus. 1,30,2). The essential rules of the race were that the torch (hapsdc/lampds; daic/dais) should not go out and not be dropped when passed to the next runner. Vase depictions show that at the moment of being handed over, or when the goal was reached, the hand holding the torch was stretched out in front of the body; there was also a broad protective plate to protect the hand from falling or dripping fuel. 3) In boxing (— Fist-fighting), the required equipment was more extensive. Training included shadow boxing (oxtapayetv/skiamachein) and practicing with a punching bag (xdwevxocd/korykos); boxers also used padded boxing gloves (oatealsphairai) and head protection (Guddtudec/amphotides) to avoid the risk of injury.

Leather

straps

(iwavtec/himdntes),

wrapped

around the fist and forearm in a complex way, were not used until the competition; originally only the boxing fist was wrapped. Fighting with both fists began in the 6th century. In about 400 BC, the leather straps were strengthened by means of a broad sharp thong (ivas OEvc/himas oxys) of several thick layers of leather, which had sharp edges and was wrapped over the lower finger joints (not including the thumbs). This equipment was soon replaced by a glove (yetgic/cheiris), which left the fingertips free and extended well up the forearm. A tightly tied bandage of leather straps went round the glove, giving it a stable fit. Behind the sharp thong, there was an added ridge to hold it firmly in position. This form of boxing glove was also adopted in Roman sports, but in the rst cent. BC the leather thong

6) A javelin made

of wood

(dxdvtov/akéntion,

80Qv/déry; Latin iaculum) was propelled by means of a sling positioned around the shaft (ayxbAn/ankyle; Latin amentum; — Javelin throwing). When the javelin was thrown, the index or middle finger, or both, were in-

serted in this sling in order to make the javelin rotate (cf. Pind. Ol. 13,93 f.; Ov. Met. 12, 323), thus achieving a stable flight path and hence a greater distance. > Circus IL; — Discus throwing; — Fist-fighting; ~ Sports; > Sports festivals W.Rupo tpn, Antike Sportgerate, in: Klio 48, 1967, 81— 92; U.HausMann (ed.), Der Tiibinger Waffenlaufer, 1977; J.JUTHNER, F. BREIN, Die athletischen Leibesiibungen der Griechen, 1968; S$.LAsER, Sport und Spiel (ArchHom T), 1987; D. VANHOVE, Le sport dans la Gréce antique. Du jeu a la compétition (exhibition Brussels 1992), 1992; J. NeILs, Goddess and Polis. The Panathenaic Festival in Ancient Athens, 1992, 178 f. (on the Fackellauf);

W. DECKER, Sport in der griechischen Antike. Vom minoischen Wettkampf bis zu den Olympischen Spielen, 1995; U. Sinn, Sport in der Antike. Wettkampf, Spiel und Erziehung im Altertum, 1996; E.KOHNE, C. EWIGLEBEN (eds.), Caesaren und Gladiatoren (exhibition Hamburg), 2000.

RH.

758

iow

Sports festivals I. INTRODUCTORY REMARK II. EcyptT CIENT ORIENT IV. GREECE: AGONS V.ETrruscans VI. ROME

III. An-

I. INTRODUCTORY REMARK The general term SF is broader than the Greek cultural phenomenon of the &ywv/agon. The Greeks did not invent SF, but undoubtedly brought them to a peak with the institution of the agon.

Il. Ecypr The Pharaonic culture of the Nile valley, according to Hdt. 2,58-59,1 the birthplace of the — festival (panegyris), provides clear indications for combining sports and festival in a single event [1]. The jubilee festival, the pivotal royal celebration, had a strong athletic accent with its ritual run (— Sports III.). The funerary complex of the pharaoh > Djoser (2690-2670 BC) in ~» Saqqara contains the extant race course, which was thus available to the pharaoh in all eternity for the celebration of this festival [2. 32-41]. Only a little more recent was the topping-out ceremony for the completion of the Pyramid of Sahure (2496-2483 BC). celebrated in conjunction with a sports programme (archery, stick fighting, wrestling, rowing?) [3. 184 f.]. The supporting programme of the jubilee festival could also include sportive single combats (stick fighting, boxing) [4.Mz, Nr]. Combat sports displays, dance and music also gave a festive atmosphere to the handing over of tributes by the Nubians under > Amenophis [4] IV (1351-1334 BC) [4.L28, M3, N2]. Under > Ramesses [3] R. III (1183/2-1152/1 BC), Egyptians competed in combat sports (wrestling, stick fighting) against foreigners (Nubians, Syrians, Libyans) [4. L34, Mg]. Amongst the SF there are also number a rowing regatta by the soldiers of > Tutankhamon (1333-1323 BC [5]) and a foot race by a troop of elite soldiers of — Taracus (690-664 BC [6]). The many images of the marsh economy as depicted in numerous graves hint at a festival to mark the end of the working season in the swamps which was associated with organized river jousting [7]. II]. ANCIENT ORIENT The festival culture (— Festival I.) of the Ancient Orient also used sport as a constitutive element [8]. The myth of the Wedding of the God Martu, originating from the Sumerian period (4th/3rd millennia BC), reports of a feast in the temple of the god Numu§da; in addition to musical performances, they also included wrestling matches, in which the Barbarian god Martu himself participated [8. 18-22]. Economic records from the Ur III period (around 2000 BC) confirm a sporting programme for two of the three main festivals in Ur, in which wrestlers and other athletes participated [8. 28-33]. Funerary celebrations also included wrestling and running competitions, as indicated e.g. in the short epic of The Death of Gilgamesh [8. 36-40]. A

SPORTS FESTIVALS

terracotta relief from Larsa, dating back to the Old Babylonian period (c. 2040-1700 BC) shows two fistfighters, accompanied by musicians, as was also the custom for festive rituals [9. 107-109]. Even towards the end of Mesopotamian culture, a text from the Seleucid period (4th—2nd cent. BC) points to the close link between sport and festivals: [month Abu, fes]tival, meeting, wrestling match and running race] [8.39 no. 171]. Several Hittite festivals (+ Hattusa) included sport-

ing elements [ro]. A the festival of AN. TAH. SUM in spring, the winner or a foot race of the royal bodyguard was given the office of royal marshal (KUB X 18; [11. 267-269]). A different festive gathering of the army included a fist-fight, whose winner was given prizes (Boghazkoi clay tablets 23, 55 I, 2-27) [r0o. 29 f.]. Sport also featured in the festival of KI.LAM, with ten runners competing with each other. In an older version, the winner received from the king himself two loaves of bread and one silver > mina [1], while a different version stated that the prize for the fastest two runners was clothing [12. 103-104]. IV. GREECE: AGONS A. MINOAN-MYCENAEAN RIOD

PERIOD

B. HOMERIC PE-

C. CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC

PERIOD

A. MINOAN-MYCENAEAN

PERIOD Minoan Crete also saw the practice of a festive ritual; its iconographic tradition is dominated by the motif of men leaping acrobatically over a bull [13]. The history of this motif can be traced back to the stone-age Catalhuyuk, where it appears on wall paintings [14. 195 f.]; its most lavish Cretan depiction is on a wall fresco in the palace of > Knossos [15]. It is probable that the bull-game was a kind of initiation rite which may have ended with the animal’s death as a sacrifice [16]. As a Cretan export, the motif also appears in the early New Kingdom in Egypt (Tall ad-Dab‘a) [17; 18]. Such festivities are also documented for the Mycenaean period ([19]; images on a larnax from Tanagra as part of a funeral ceremony, Late Mycenaean [20. no. 13]).

B. Homeric PERIOD The custom of the funeral agon [21] is impressively documented at the very onset of Greek literature in book 23 of the Iliad [22. 21-25]: > Achilles [1] makes funeral games the highlight of the funeral ceremony for his friend — Patroclus [1]. He donates valuable prizes for the winners in eight disciplines, the most important of which is the chariot race. The description of this event is equal testimony to the high standard of this event in terms of sportsmanship in the 8th cent. BC and the expert knowledge of > Homerus [1]. In the Odyssea, too, improvised SF are an important element of the plot. Winning the SF held by — Phaeces in his honour gave new strength to Odysseus (Hom. Od. 8, 100-233). He gained renewed self-confidence for the forthcoming battle for his ancient rights from the impromptu chal-

SPORTS FESTIVALS

759

760

lenge agon with the beggar Iros, whom he defeated incognito in a fist-fight (Hom. Il. 18,1-123); he then used this when wreaking revenge on the suitors after he had won the bride agon organized by Penelope (Hom.

C. CLASSICAL AND HELLENISTIC PERIOD 1. OCCASIONS AND PREVALENCE 2. ORGANIZATION, STRUCTURE, PARTICIPANTS, PRIZES

mates arrive at a total of 150 [42], more recent ones at 266 [43. 226 (map 4)]; the very latest estimates for the Roman Imperial period, however, assume the existence of more than 500 agons in the Greek East of the Roman Empire alone [44. 31]. Despite their apparent complexity, agons had a very simple basic structure [45]: the festive assembly at regular intervals was combined with a market with flourishing trade. This aspect is emphasized in the term

3. EQUESTRIAN AGONS

navyyuers

Od. 21,75-443).

4. GYMNASIAL AGONS

shares

1. OCCASIONS AND PREVALENCE Poetic texts reflect a world, in which sports festivals were common practice even as early as the Geometric period. There is plenty of historical evidence to confirm the Greek practice of funerary agons [23] as well as bridal agons. The former custom was still practiced at the death of + Alexander [4] ‘the Great’ (Arr. Anab 7,14,10), while an illustration of the latter is > Clei-

sthenes [1] of Sicyon who promised to give his daughter Agariste in marriage to the best of her Greek suitors with great significance attached to their athletic prowess (Hdt. 6,126-130).

Other agons

were

connected

with > hero cults, as e.g. the Aianteia games in honour of + Aias [1], staged in Salamis and later in Athens by the ephebes (— ephebeia), which included competitive events such as torch races, long-distance races and rowing regattas [24]. Sports festivals were most commonly staged in form of an agon linked to a local, regional or pan-Hellenic cultic festival. “Aywv/agon (still in the Homeric double meaning of assembly and competition [22. 11-13; 25]) is the key word to the understanding of the Greek sports festival. Where people assembled for whatever reason, there was an expectation by the audience to be entertained by an athletic competition. The early 6th cent. saw the emergence of the great periodic pan-Hellenic agons in + Olympia (allegedly first in 776 BC, but cf. [25]), > Delphi (586 BC, both every four years), at the Isthmus of Corinth (around 580 BC, > Isthmia) and in — Nemea (from 573 BC, both every two years); they all

started off as cultic festivals, extending over several days, in honour of the respective main local deity. Fistfighting was the only sporting event of the cultic festival in honour of Apollo, for which the Iones assembled in + Delos and which probably dated back to the 7th cent. BC (Hom. H. Apollinis 149 f. [22. 25 f.]). In 566/5 BC, -» Peisistratus [4] reformed the Athenian festival of the — Panathenaea to include a more varied sporting programme [26. 32-39]. The whole country was covered by a close network of sporting festivals, which were held at regular intervals down to the level of the smallest polis communities (bibliographical overviews: [39; 40; 41]). Agons continued for more than a millennium as an expression of a Greek way of life; even if a more stringent definition is applied, agons flourished from the late Geometric period the the end of Antiquity (i.e. from c. 700 BC to c. AD 400). Their total number is as yet unclear; older esti-

(panegyris,

a common

(‘polupar’)

‘festival’), which

root with ayood (agord, ‘market’)

[46]. In many ways, it is synonymous with agon. The gathering of people promoted the spirit of competition and the desire for entertainment, thus leading to the addition of an athletic, equestrian and musical programme

(-» Competitions,

artistic). Occasionally, an

agon could also be linked to a thanks offering (Xen. An. 4,8,25-28; [47. 1 f.]). 2. ORGANIZATION, STRUCTURE, PARTICIPANTS, PRIZES In Antiquity, the gathering of many people from different areas was a comparatively exceptional occasion due to difficult travelling conditions; for that reason, such gatherings always served as important and lively exchange of news [48], but were also used to broker political agreements, even treaties were signed or their texts put on display to inform all visitors to the festival [49. 89-93]. A great banquet of all participants was the community-enhancing highlight of the gathering, which for that reason required a large festival ground in the immediate vicinity of the sanctuary and the running-track (> Stadion) or respectively the > theatre or + hippodromos. Prior to these events, invitations were distributed by special messengers (thedroi, > thedria); for the panHellenic agons, these messengers would swarm out in groups into the + oikouméné [50. 79-83] to proclaim the festival date and truce (— ekecheiria) [51]. The existence of a co-ordinated festival calendar is to be assumed in order to avoid clashes between important agons. For the > Pythia [2], lists of thedrod6koi (hosts to the festival messengers) are extant which reflect the long distances travelled by the thedroi [52. 288 ff.]. At the festival site, roads and bridges were repaired (CID 1.115-118), the buildings and particularly the sports facilities prepared and if necesssary repaired to look their best (CID 2.139 [53]). The actual running of an agon required a wealth of legal regulations, governing all aspects including the rules of the competitions [54]; compliance with all of these was monitored by the ~» hellanodikai. The impressive appearance of cultic buildings and sports facilities made architecture an essential element in the Greek agon. Art, too, played an important role, in the form of — victor statues [55] as well as odes or epigrams to victors [35]. In that way, agons represented a synthesis of Greek culture, combining the main elements of cult, sport, commerce, politics, architecture and art.

761

The most highly esteemed agons were those whose prizes consisted only of wreaths (&y@vec tegoi xai ote-

davitavagénes hieroi kai stephanitai); in addition, there were those (mostly local agons), where winners were awarded cash prizes (&y@vec Seuatixoi/agdnes thematikoi). Distinctions between them could be fluid. Victory in certain competitions entitled the victor to a triumphal entry into his home town (eiceAaotxdc/ eiselastikos) and could be combined with other privileges, e.g. life-long entitlement to free food (oitnotc/sitésis), exemption from military service (doteatia/astratia) and public liturgies (+ Liturgy I.), or tax exemption (atéheva/atéleia) [56. 7-12]. Individual cities could stage several agons; in the Roman Imperial period, Athens thus organized the Panathénaia, > Olympia [4], Panhelléneia and Hadridneia [57. no 79, 25 f.]. Whereas participation in earlier periods was restricted to Greek males of free birth and free from blood guilt [58. 45-47], this restrictive selection was opened up in the Hellenistic period and the Roman Imperial period to include all men who identified with Greek culture [57. no. 64]. The cultic association of an agon with a particular deity became more relaxed after the end of the sth cent. BC, making it possible to stage an agon in honour of a living person. This was done for the first time in honour of the Spartan general > Lysander[r], to whom the Samians dedicated their Héraia (FGrH 76 F 71). It continued with the Hellenistic rulers and is well documented as the standard practice in the eastern part of the Imperium Romanum, where from the rule of Augustus onwards [59] agons were firmly linked with the > ruler cult and have to be seen as expressions of loyalty to the power of Rome. In the same way that the initial procession (mount/pompe) at local festivals reflected the political and social order of the respective community, the rank of an individual city was reflected by the place of its delegation in the order of the procession at national agons [60]. In addition to pan-Hellenic agons, recent studies (for older ones cf. [39; 40; 41]) are available to the following agons (selection): S6téria in Delphi [61], > Capitolea in Rome [62], Olympia in Dion [63], Basileia in Lebadea [64], Niképhoria in Pergamum [65], Greek agons in the west (certamina Graeca) [66], Panathénaia in Athens [26. 36-38; 32]. The studies by L. ROBERT on Greek agons are seminal

[67; 68]. 3. EQUESTRIAN AGONS This second pillar of Greek sports festivals — alongside gymnastic competitions (— Sport) — allegedly made its first appearance in an Olympic programme in 680 BC, even though a chariot race between > Oenomaus [1] and > Pelops was at the centre of the Pelops myth with its great significance for Olympia [27. 129-131]. Furthermore, in the Iliad (Hom. II. 23,262-650), the chariot race was by far the most important competition in the funerary games in honour of > Patroclus [1]; [22. 26-32]. Even though the light, two-wheeled chariot was used by many early cultures outside of Greece in the 2nd millennium BC [28], with documentary evi-

762

SPORTS FESTIVALS

dence from Egypt (including a surviving original chariot [4. H-I]) and the Hittites (in form of horse training manuals [29], > Horsemanship), the earliest clear evidence for chariot races only dates back to the lateMycenaean period (12th/r1th cents. BC; [30]). Even though chariots lost in importance during the Geometric period, chariot races experienced a great boom from the 7th cent. BC onwards, not just at the pan-Hellenic games. In the programme of the Olympia (=Ol.), for example, the number of competitive disciplines increased as follows (the race distance — excluding the 320 m starting procedure — is given in stadia (= st.), according to the latest calculations by J. Ebert [3 1]: 25.Ol. (680 BC) quadriga (harma) 33. Ol. (648 BC) saddle horse (kélés)

rasta 12) St.

7o.Ol. (500 BC) two-mule chariot (apéné) 71.Ol. (496 BC) mare raced (kdlpé) 93.Ol. (408 BC) two-horse chariot (syw6ris)

99. Ol. (384 BC) quadriga with foals (barma polon) 128. Ol. (268 BC) chariot with two foals (synoris polon) 131. Ol. (256 BC) foal race (kélés polon)

48 st.

48 st. 18 st. 6 st.

The > Panathénaia stood out for the exceptional wealth of equestrian disciplines [32. 89-94], including a number of competitions rarely found elsewhere [33. 138-142], such as the -—apobdtés contest [32. 188 f.]. The aristocratic flair associated with equestrian competitions from their very beginnings stayed with them throughout the centuries. This is impressively confirmed by the lists of > Olympic champions, which recorded the names of the > Eupatridai, of tyrants and great families. including those of Roman emperors Tiberius and Nero [34. 110-114]. > Alcibiades [3] entered seven quadrigas into a race in order to gain Olympic victory, which he was then to use as justification for his political claim to the office of > stratégds [32. 163168, 195 f.]. Because of the rule that it was the owners of the horses who were proclaimed as Olympic champions, some women managed to become Olympic champions (these included the Spartan princess CyniSCA Pausasy Sls

ull5.tise5 50255 NO Os [3

5.4110283.3)]))s evel

though as a general rule women were excluded from all other Olympic competitions; for a correction of the number of participants in a race, previously estimated at 40 chariots, to only about ro cf. [36]. The sculpture of the Delphi Charioteer [37; 38; 35. no. 13 (inscription)], a votive gift to commemorate an equestrian vic-

tory, is one of the most famous extant ancient works of

art. 4. GYMNASIAL AGONS

Even as late as the Hellenistic period, gymnasial competitions (+ Gymnasium II), held in honour of ~» Hermes and > Heracles, still included military competitions (running, spear throwing, archery) in addition to tests of discipline (ettakia/eutaxia), diligence

763

764

(gvonovia/ philoponia) and obedience (eveEia/euhexia). They were generally financed by the gymnasiarch (+ Gymnasiarchy) out of his private funds [69]. Here, too, the sports programme was closely associated with the religious cult and the communal banquet. The rules for gymnasial agons were set down in gymnasiarchic laws [70].

14 L.D. MoreENz, Stierspringen und die Sitte des Stierspieles im altmediterranen Raum, in: Agypten und

SPORTS FESTIVALS

V. ETRUSCANS It seems very likely that the Etruscans also held SF in their as yet unidentified cultic centre of Fanum Voltumnae (near Orvieto) [71. 429-431]. They also had the custom of private funerary games to mark the funerals of high-ranking persons. VI. ROME For the Romans, the > /udi and to a certain extent also the munera (> munus) were SF. The chariot races in the > circus and the gladiatorial fights were thus at the centre of their SF, but they also had an athletic programme. From time to time, Rome, too, saw the staging

of Greek-style gymnic events (from 186 BC: Liv. 39,22,1 f.), e.g. by Sulla, Caesar and Augustus (R. Gest. div. Aug. 22) [72. 268-256]. In AD 60, Nero set up the Neronia, penteteric games to be held in his honour every five years; however, because of their name, they fell victim to the > damnatio memoriae after his death. Their programme was a combination of athletic, equestrian and artistic competitions (Suet. Nero 12,3) and were criticized by Tacitus (Tac. Ann. 14,20). By contrast, the + Capitolea set up by Domitian in AD 86 survived their unloved founder into the 4th cent. because of their neutral name. They were seen as part of the > periodos [62; 73]. The outline of the ancient stadium for the athletic competitions of these games is still evident in the frontage line of the buildings flanking the modern Piazza Navona in Rome. + Circus; — Festivals, Feasts; > Ludi; — Munus; ~» Sport

1 W.Decxker, Sport und Fest im Alten Agypten, in: CH. ULF (ed.), Ideologie — Sport — Aufenseiter, 2000, 111-145

2 Id., Sport und Spiel im Alten Agypten, 1987 3 Z. HawassW. VERNER, Newly Discovered Blocks from the Causeway of Sahure, in: MDAI(K) 52, 1996, 177-186 4 W.Decxer, M.Hers, Bildatlas zum Sport im Alten Agypten, 1994 5 W.Dercker, D.Kurtn, Eine Ruderregatta zur Zeit des Tutanchamun, in: Nikephoros 12, 1999, 19-31 6 W.DeckeR, Die Lauf-Stele des Konigs Taharka, in: Kolner Beitrage zur Sportwissenschaft 13, 1984, 7-37. 7M.HeErs, Der Wettkampf in den Marschen, 2001 8 R.ROLLINGER, Aspekte des Sports im Alten Sumer, in: Nikephoros 7, 1994,7-64 9 CH. EDER,

Levante 10, 2000, 195-203 15 M.C. SHaw, Bull Leaping Frescoes at Knossos, in: Agypten und Levante 5, 1995, 91-120 16J.G. YOUNGER, Bronze Age Representations of Aegean Bull Games 3, in: Aegaeum 12, 1995, 507-545 17 M. Bierak, Die Wandmalereien aus Tel el-Dab‘a/Ezbet Helmi, in: Agypten und Levante 4, 1994, 44-80 18 M.Brerak, N.Marinatos, The Minoan Wall Paintings from Avaris, in: Agypten und Levante 5, 1995, 49-62

19 M.C. SHaw, The Bull-Leaping Fresco from Below the Ramp-House at Mycenae, in: ABSA 91, 1996, 167-190 20 O. TzacHou-ALEXANDRI (ed.), Mind and Body, 1988

21 W. Decker, Die mykenische Herkunft des griechischen Totenagons, in: E. THomas (ed.), Forschungen zur Aegae-

ischen Vorgeschichte, 1987, 201-239 22 S. LASER, Sport und Spiel (ArchHom T), 1987 23 L.E. ROLLER, Funeral Games for Historical Persons, in: Stadion 7, 1981, 1-18 24 J.TOEPFFER, s. v. Aianteia, RE 1, 925-929 25 A.MaLLwitz, Cult and Competition Locations at

Olympia, in: s. [10], 79-109

26 D.G. Kyiz, Athletics in

Ancient Athens, 71993 27 W.DEcKER, Zum Wagenrennen in Olympia, in: W.Coutson, H.KyrieLets (ed.),

Proc. of an International Symposion Games

(Sept. 1988),

1992,

on the Olympic

129-139

28 M.A.

Lir-

TAUER, J.H. CrouweEL, Wheeled Vehicles and Ridden Animals in the Ancient Near East, 1979

29 A.KAMMENHUBER, Hippologia hethitica, 1960 30 K.Kiiian, Zur Darstellung des Wagenrennens aus spatmykenischer

Zeit, in: MDAI(A)

95, 1980, 21-31

31 J.EBert, Neues zum Hippodrom und zu den hippischen Konkurrenzen in Olympia, in: Nikephoros 2, 1989, 89-107 32 D.G.Kytt, The Panathenaic Games: Sacred and Civic Athletics, in: J. NErs et al., Goddess and Polis, 1992, 77-101, 203-208 33 St.V. Tracy, The Pana-

thenaic Festival and Games: An Epigraphic Inquiry, in: Nikephoros 4, 1991, 133-153 34 W.DECKER, Sport in der griechischen Antike, 1995 35 J. EBERT, Epigramme auf Sieger an gymnischen und hippischen Agonen, 1972 36 Id., Eine Textverderbnis bei Pindar, Pyth. 5,49, in: Quaderni Urbinati N. S. 38, 1991, 25-30

37 R.HampE,

Der Wagenlenker von Delphi, 1941 38 F. CHAMOUx, L’Aurige (FdD IV 5), 1955 (repr. 1990) 39 TH.F. ScanLON, Greek and Roman Athletics. A Bibliography, 1984, 55-73 40 N.B. CRowTHER, Studies in Greek Athletics 1, in: CW 78, 1984, 506-558 41 W.Decxer et al., Jahresbibliographie zum Sport im Altertum (III 3: Agon, Athleten), in: Nikephoros 2 ff., 1989 ff. 421.C. RINGwoop, Agonistic Features of Greek Festivals Chiefly from Inscriptional Evidence, vol. 1, thesis Columbia 1927 43 H.A. Harris, Greek Athletes and Athletics, 1964

44 W. LescHHoRN, Die Verbreitung von Agonen in den ostlichen Provinzen des rémischen Reiches, in: Stadion 24,1998,31-57 45 C. THONE, Ikonographische Studien zu Nike im 5. Jahrhundert v. Chr., 1999,77-79 46 CH. CHANDEZON, Foires et panégyries dans le monde grec et hellénistique, in: REG 113, 2000, 70-100 47 M.GoLp-

Kampfsport in der Siegelkunst der Altlevante, in: Nike-

EN,

phoros 7, 1994, 83-120

48 I]. WEILER, Olympia — jenseits der Agonistik: Kultur und Spektakel, in: Nikephoros 10, 1997, 191-213 49 J.Eperr et al., Olympia, 1980 50 W.Decker, Zur Vorbereitung und Organisation griechischer Agone, in: Nikephoros 10, 1997, 77-102 51 G. ROUGEMONT, La hieroménie des Pythia et les ‘tréves sacrées’ d’Eleusis, de Delphes et d’Olympie, in: BCH 97, 1973, 75-106 52 P.AMANDRY, La féte des Pythia, in: Moaxtixa me

10J.PUHVEL, Hittite Athletics

as Prefigurations of Ancient Greek Games, in: W.RascHKE (ed.), The Archaeology of the Olympics, 1988, 26-31

11E.EHELOLF, Wettlauf und szenisches

Spiel im hethitischen Ritual, in: SPrAW, 1925, 267-272 12 I. SINGER, The Hittite KI.LAM Festival, vol. 1, 1983

13 J.G.

YOUNGER,

Aegean

Bull-Leaping,

Bronze

Age

in: AJA

Respresentations 80,

1976,

of

125-137

Sport

and

Society

in

Ancient

Greece,

1998

766

765 Axadnpiag AOnvwiv 65, 1990, 279-317

53 J. PourL-

LOUX, Travaux a Delphes a l’occasion des Pythia, in: Etudes Delphiques (BCH Suppl. 4), 1997, 103-123 54 J. EBERT, P.SIEWERT, Eine archaische Bronzeurkunde aus Olympia, in: XI. Olympia-Bericht, 1999, 391-412 55 F.Rausa, L’immagine del vincitore, 1994

SPOUDOGELOION

extracts on the > quadrature of the circle and the + duplication of the cube [4. 226]. He criticized > Archimedes’ [1] approximation of the number pi (thus [x. 258,22]), provided his own solution to the problem of the duplication of the cube [1. 76-78; 4. 266-268]

56 P. FriscH, Zehn agonistische Papyri, 1986 57 L.MoRETTI, Iscrizioni agonistiche greche, 1953 58 L. DREES, Olympia, 1967 59 H. LANGENFELD, Die Politik des Augustus und die griechische Agonistik, in: E. LEFEVRE

and rejected the Quadratrix of > Hippias [5] of Elis [2. 252-254; 4. 229-230]. He appears in the Aratus scholia [3] as the editor and critical annotator of > Aratus’ [4] Phainomena.

(ed.), Monumentum Chiloniense. FS E. Bruck, 1975, 228259 60P.HeRz, Herrscherverehrung und lokale Fest-

1 J.L. Herpere (ed.), Archimedis opera omnia cum commentariis Eutocii, vol. 3, 1915 2 F.Huttscu (ed.),

kultur im Osten des rémischen Reiches (Kaiser/Agone), in: H.CANCcIK, J. RUPKE

(ed.), Romische

Reichsreligion

und Provinzialreligion, 1997, 239-264 61 G. NACHTERGAEL, Les Galates en Gréce et les S6téria de Delphes, 1977 62 M.L. CaLpELu, L’Agon Capitolinus,

1993

63 M.Makri, Olimpie macedoni di Dion tra Arche-

lao e l’etaé romana, in: RFIC 126, 1998, 137-169 64L.A. TuRNER, The Basileia at Lebadeia, in: J.M. Fossry (ed.), Boeotia Antiqua, vol. 6, 1996, 105-126

65 D.Must1, Nikephoria e il ruolo panellenico di Pergamo, in: RFIC 126, 1998, 5-40 66 M.L. CaLpDELLI, Gli agoni alla greca nelle regioni occidentali dell’impero. La Gallia Narbonnensis, in: Memorie della Classe di Scienze morali, storiche e filologiche dell’ Accademia dei Lincei 9, 1997, 391-481 67 L.RoseErT, Hellenica, vol. 1, 1940 68 ROBERT, OMS 6, 709-719 69IK19,no.1 70PH. GauTHieR, M.B. Harzopou os, La loi gymnasiarchique de Béroia, 1993 71 J.-P. THUILLIER, Les jeux athlétiques dans la civilisation étrusque, 1985 72 I. WEILER, Der Sport bei den Volkern der Alten Welt, *1988 73 B.RIEGER, Die Kapitolia des Kaisers Domitian, in: Nikephoros 12, 1999, 171-203.

H.W. Piexet, Zur Soziologie des antiken Sports, in: Medelingen van het Nederlandsch historisch Instituut te Rome 36, 1974, 57-87; I. WEILER, Der Agon im Mythos,

1974; R.ZIEGLER, Stadtisches Prestige und kaiserliche Politik, 1985; M. WOrRLE, Stadt und Fest in Kleinasien, 1988; RoBERT, OMS 6, 709-719. W.D.

Sportula (sporta, sportella). Roman basket (Isid. Orig. 20,9,10; Petron. Sat. 40) used for shopping (Apul. Met. 1,24 and 25), the term is also used for a basket which held money or food for clients (Petron. 40; Juv. 1,95 f.;

> Salutatio). Hence sportula denoted a feeding of the public (cf. Suet. Claudius 21,4) or a fee due to the magistrates for their official activities. In the 4th and sth cents. AD, the fees that were charged by court magistrates for their services were also called sportula (Cod. lust 332) + Donativum H.A. Caun et al., Der spatromische Silberschatz von Kaiseraugst, 1984, 406-408; D.CLoup, The Client-Patron Relationship, in: A. WALLACE-HADRILL (ed.), Patronage in Ancient Society, 1989, 209-215. RH.

Sporus [1] (Zxde0¢; Sporos) or Porus

(Ildg0c¢; Poros). It is

unclear whether the two individuals of this name living around AD 200 are in fact the same person (v. [5]). S. or Porus wrote a (lost) compilation, Kneia (Keria), with

Pappi Alexandrini Collectionis quae supersunt, vol. 1, 1886 3 J.MartTIN (ed.), Scholia in Aratum vetera, 1974 4T.L. Heatn, A History of Greek Mathematics, vol. 1, 1921 5F.KLiIEM, A.GUDEMAN, s.v. S., RE 3 A, 18791883.

MF.

[2] Freedman of Nero. He so strongly resembled the recently-deceased (AD 65) > Poppaea [2] Sabina that Nero had him castrated and used him as a sexual surrogate for Poppaea. During his Greek voyage of 66-68, he even went so far as to join himself to him in a wedding ceremony, giving him the name Sabina (Cass. Dio 62,28,2 f.; 63,12 f.; Suet. Nero 28; 29). S. accompanied Nero on the latter’s flight in June 68. After Nero’s death, + Nymphidius [2] Sabinus was supposed to have made sexual use of him, as was > Otho (Plut. Galba 9,3; Cass. Dio 64,8,3). When Vitellius commanded him to perform on the stage, $. committed suicide (Cass. Dio 65,10,r).

WE.

Spoudogeloion

epi-

(onovdoyéiovwwv/spoudogéloion,

graphically also onovdatoyédo.ov/spoudaiogéloion). Compound of ‘serious’ (spoudaion) and ‘laughable’ (geloion). These two contradictory modes of interpretation and presentation are often combined in ancient literature, as in Aristoph. Ran. 391 f., Phaedr. 4,2,1—4; in Pl. Symp. 222 Socrates requires that the same person should be able to compose both tragedies and comedies. There is critical reflection on the relationship between spoudaion and geloion: Pl. Leg. 816d-e, Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1176b 27-1177 6 and Aristot. Poet. 1449a 32-38 (cf. Cic. De or. 236) consider geloion inferior; according to Aristot. Rh. 1419b 3-8, in rhetorical debate the serious and the laughable cancel one another out

[2. esp. 33-37]. The consciously close connexion between spoudaion and geloion is characteristic primarily of the kynikos tropos, the Cynic style (> Cynicism F.). It was developed particularly by > Crates [4] of Thebes, who moderated the rigor of Diogenes [14] of Sinope; with him, “the laughable assumes the rank and significance of a maxim (ye@eia/chreia)” (Demetrios [41], De elocutione 170; [4. 548, no. 66; 5. 572-579]). But the first to be described as spoudogéloios is a pupil of Crates, + Menippus [4] of Gadara (Str. 16,2,29; Steph. Byz. 193,5), also one Heraclitus (Diog. Laert. 9,17; cf. [1]) and a certain poet Blaesus of Capri (Steph. Byz. 3 57,3; [3]). Spoudogeloion occurs in literary forms such as:

SPOUDOGELOION > fable, ainos, — chreia, — satire [2. 19-31].

> mime,

— parody

767

768

and

Sulis, have often brought to light sacrificial gifts thrown into springs. There are written testimonies of wreaths at

In Latin literature the satires of > Horatius [7] in particular are defined by spoudogeloion (cf. Hor. Sat. 1,1,24: ridentem dicere verum, ‘tell the truth with a laugh’; cf. Sat. 1,10,14 f.); by the moderation of his

mocker he sets himself apart from his predecessor +> Lucilius [I 6] and his successor > Iuvenalisy [2. to5— Try, 1H.Berve,

s.v.

Herakleitos

(6b), RE

Suppl.

4, 730

2 L. GIANGRANDE, The Use of Spoudaiogeloion in Greek and Roman Literature, 1972

RE3,556

4SSR2

5SSR4.

3 G.KAIBEL, s.v. Blaisos, H.A.G.

SPQR. Stands for s(enatus) p(opulus)gq(ue) R(omanus)

and was the usual title of the Roman state as embodied in its two governing bodies, the ‘Senate and People of Rome’ (i.e. not, as in Greece, the people alone, e.g. hoi Athénaioi), from the rst cent. BC. Before this, the populus was in first place (first evidence in the decree of Aemilius [I 32] Paullus for Lascuta, early 2nd cent. BC: ILS 15; cf. Pol. 21,10,8). From the time of Augustus,

SPQR appears on inscriptions as the author of consecrations (e.g. of buildings and monuments), later also as the recipient of dedications. > Populus; > Senatus H.GA. Springs (Spring gods). In Greek and Roman culture, + nymphs were widely worshipped as guardian patrons of springs and other natural sanctuaries; in Greece, they were also invoked under the name - naiads in their role of water deities. Some Greek spring nymphs were viewed as daughters of > river gods (+ Achelous; - Cephis(s)us). Springs also came

under the protection of + Apollo and > Artemis [7. 201-216]. Springs were also dedicated to > Hercules, particularly thermal springs, in Sicily, Italy, Dacia, Gaul and, as early as the Classical period, in Greece (Aristoph. Nub. 1051). Despite such widespread commonalities, ancient spring cults exhibited a large number of regional peculiarities. For example, in Roman Gaul and Germany spring gods and divine couples, such as Apollo (often identified with the Celtic ~» Grannus) and his partner - Sirona, predominated. In Britain, in contrast, springs mainly came under the protection of local female deities: Coventina, Arnemetia and > Sulis Minerva, who guarded over > Aquae [III 7] Sulis (modern Bath, the hottest springs in Britain) and who was identified in Italy with > Minerva, who was also worshipped as a healing (Minerva Medica) and spring goddess [11]. The fact that Apollo is only mentioned in one votive offering at a spring in Britain [4. no. 1665], significantly by a soldier from Germania Superior, shows that the spring cults in Britain and Gaul had no common roots. In contrast to Gaul, in British spring sanctuaries there are only few votive gifts in the form of body parts (+ Votive offerings). Excavations, e.g. in Vicarello [3. 273-296] near Rome, in Bourbonne-les-Bains [10] and Aquae

the time of the Fontanalia, the festival of the Roman

spring god Fons on 13 October (Varro Ling. 6,22), the blood of sacrificial animals (Hor. Carm. 3,13), dice (Suet. Tib. 14,3), water and milk (Serv. Ecl. 7,21). Offering coins, which probably traces back to Italic roots, was very widespread [ro]. Often votive gifts were also deposited beside springs, as e.g. at the source of the Seine (-» Sequana).

> Oracles were

often connected

with sacred springs, e.g. in northern Italy (Suet. Tib. 14,3), and in the Greek [9. 107] and Germanic world [x. r4f.]. In Greece, Sicily, Asia Minor and Syria fish, which swam in sacred ponds fed with spring water, were also sacred; they were sometimes adorned with gold chains and earrings [6. 977f.]. The cult of indestructible springs often survived in christianised (Cassiod. Var. 8,33) and islamicised forms. -» Sanctuaries; -> Votive offerings in springs 1 H.Becx, s. v. Brunnen III. Religidses, RGA 4, 1981, 11-16 2C.BourGEo!s, Divona, 2 vols., 1991-1992 3 R. CHEVALLIER (ed.), Les eaux thermales et les cultes des

eaux en Gaule et dans les provinces voisines (Caesarodunum 26),1992 4R.G. CoLtincwoop etal. (eds.), The Roman Inscriptions of Britain. I. Inscriptions on Stone,

*1995

5 J.H. Croon, Hot Springs and Healing Gods,

in: Mnemosyne Ser. 4, 20, 1967, 225-246

6]J.ENGE-

MANN, Ss. v. Fisch, Fischer, Fischfang, RAC 7, 1969, 9591097.

7R.GrNouveés et al. (eds.), L’eau, la santé et la

maladie dans le monde grec, 1994

8 Z.KADAR, Heil-

gotter in den Donauprovinzen, in: ANRW II 18.2, 1989,

1038-1061 9F.MUTHMANN, Mutter und Quelle, 1975 10 E.Sauer, The Augustan Army Spa at Bourbonne-lesBains, in: A.GoLDswortHy, I.Haynes (eds.), The Roman Army as a Community, 1999, 52-79. 11 E.Sauver, Minerva as a Healing Goddess, in: Oxford

Journal of Archaeology 15, 1996, 63-93.

W.SA.

Spruce. This name (xevxn/peuké, picea, derived from pix = pitch) encompasses three genera of conifer, namely (a) the Common or Norway Spruce Picea abies [L.] Karst. = excelsa Link, which is found hardly anywhere in the Mediterranean, (b) the Fir (abies, dn, in some species on Mediterranean uplands) and (c) the > Pine (pinus, nivuc/pitys, mebun/peuké). Spruce and fir wood, felled on a large scale in the southern Alps and mountains of the Balkans, was used from Antiquity for wood for building — including ships and masts [1. 38] — and for firewood. Plin. HN 16, 225 recommends the easily glued wood of the abies for door panels and inlays for carpentry. The wood of the Italian Spruce (P. abies forma fissilis) is used for roof shingles (scandulae, cf. Plin. HN 16,42) and musical instruments. Spruce cones, as otedPthou strobiloi, x@voWVk6no0i (coni), represent the model for mathematical cones. 1 H. Baumann, Die griechische Pflanzenwelt, 1982. C.HU.

Spurge see > Tithymal(l)os

769

770

Spurinna. Etruscan haruspex famous in Rome in the middle of the rst cent. BC (+ Haruspices). In 44 he prophesied the danger threatening > Caesar (Cic. Div. 1,119; Suet. ul. 81; Val. Max. 8,11,2); he is presumably the summus haruspex who warned him in 46 against an

Square measures I. ANCIENT NEAR East

early crossing to Africa (Cic. Div. 2,52). Evidently,

however, such prophecies were not taken very seriously (cf. Cic. Fam. 9,24,2). JBA.

Spurius [1] Latin > praenomen, customary initial abbreviation originally S., then, as it became rarer, from c. t00 BC,

Sp. The rare nomen gentile, Spurilius, is derived from its diminutive form, of which no record survives. Some evidence also survives from the Italic languages, e.g. Oscan Spuriis (the personal name identical to the nomen gentile). The vocative formed the basis for the Etruscan personal name Spurie, attested from the 7th cent. BC on. The Etruscan nomen gentile Spurie/anawas absorbed into Latin in its later pronunciation as Spurinna. The etymology of the name (which was not Etruscan!) is disputed. Direct reference to the Latin spurius (‘illegitimate (child)’), which is of late date, must be rejected (the latter may more probably have been invented by jurists as a catch-all name derived from the abbreviation s(ine) p(atre)).

AND

SQUARE MEASURES

II. EGypt

III. GREECE

ROME

I. ANCIENT NEAR EAST Various concepts of square measures (SM) are found (even simultaneously) in Mesopotamia. The oldest, attested from the late 4th millennium BC, was based on the length measurements of squares or rectangles, and was thus suited to the needs of surveying fields: 1 rod x1 rod (with 1 rod = 6m) = 1 rod square (‘bed’) (36 m*). The fundamental unit for fields was 1 ‘field’ or dyke’ (0.36 ha). In the rst millennium, the Babylonian system (for smaller areas) was based on a rectangle with one fixed side of 1 ‘reed’ (= 7 cubits) and a variable other side, whose length indicated the area. In Assyria (from mid2nd millennium) and Babylonia from the 7th cent., SM were expressed as > measures of volume, which indicated the amount of seed needed for the respective area: e.g. in Babylon 1 ‘kor’ (180 1) = 54,000 square cubits (approx. 1.35 ha), in Assyria 1 ‘donkey load’ (c. 80 |) = approx. 1.8 ha. J. A. FrrBerG, Seeds and Reeds Continued, in: BaM 28, 1996, 251-365; M.A. PowWELL, s.v. MafSe und Gewichte, RLA 7, 477-488. WA.SA.

SALOMIES, 50-55, 157, 160 f.; D.H. STEINBAUER, Neues Handbuch des Etruskischen, 1999, 468. D.ST.

[2] The term for a child born out of wedlock in Roman law, similar to the > nothos of Greek law (other term: vulgo quaesitus, approx.: ‘assumed among the people’; fem. spuria), also a widespread forename (cf. S. [1]).

According to Mod. Dig. 1,5,23, spurius was derived from the Greek spora (‘seed’). The spurius was legally related only to his mother (cognatically, i.e. ‘by blood’, — cognatio). Only towards her was there a claim to maintenance (enforceable by imperial law, s. in this regard —> cognitio) (Dig. 25,3,5,4 ff.) and a ‘legal’ right of inheritance. Asa child of a female citizen, the spurius became a Roman citizen (> civitas). The spurius was subject to no paternal authority (> patria potestas), i.e. was from birth sui iuris (‘fully legally competent’). The spurius is to be seen as distinct from the ‘natural children’ (> naturales liberi) of a non-connubial relationship (+ concubinatus). After a contrary tendency under Constantine > Constantinus [1] I (early 4th cent.), the latter were privileged in various ways in Late Antiquity, and, in particular, could still be legitimized after the marriage of their parents. Kaser, RPR, vol. 1, 351 f.; vol. 2, 219-221.

GS.

Il. Egypr The basis of Egyptian SM was the length measure of the ‘royal’ or ‘divine’ cubit (approx. 52.5 cm). The area of 100 cubits x 100 cubits = 2,756.25 m* was in all periods called setjat, Greek aroura. At certain periods, specific terms distinguished the area of 10 cubits x ro cubits and its fractions of 7/2, '/4, */s, that of 10 cubits x 100 cubits and the area of 10 arourai. Demotic texts distinguish square cubit (x cubit x 1 cubit), area cubit (1 cubit x 100 cubits) and aroura. Special signs were used to indicate fractions (*/2, '/4, */s, "/x6, '/32) of the

aroura. These were probably of actual different sizes in different areas of the country. Areas of cloths were indicated with special symbols based on the cubit in the oldest period. Demotic records a SM of the cloth cubit of unknown size. W.HELCK, S. VLEEMING, s.v. Mafe und Gewichte, LA 3, 1200f., 1210; S. VLEEMING, Demotic Measures of Length

and Surface, Chiefly of the Ptolemaic Period, in: P.W. PESTMAN, Textes et études de Papyrologie grecque, démo-

tique et copte (Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava 23), 1985, 208-229.

HE.FE.

III. GREECE AND ROME Originally, the unit of measurement was the area of land to be worked in one day or in one period of work (from yoking to unyoking). Once fixed standards had been introduced, the usual SMs were, with one notable exception (see below), the squares of roo times the length unit, the cubit or the foot. Thus, the > aroura (Aeovea/droura, Greek term for the Egyptian unit of

SQUARE MEASURES

771

measurement, the sett/setjat), measured 100 square cubits (of 52.5 cm), i.e. 2,756 m*. A square with sides of 100 feet (of varying standard from c. 26.9-3 5 m) made the Greek p(e)léthron (x()A€OQov). Originally the word denoted a unit of length, probably from the stem meA- = to turn (the plough-oxen), and thus indicated furrow length, but a SM of this dimension seems to occur as early as Hom. Il. 23,164. */100 of the plethron was the + akaina (&xawa; dkaina), actually the stick for driving the animals, then a measuring rod of ro feet, finally an area of this side length. The foot (> pous, nots) and even the > daktylos, finger width, are found as SM, the latter probably only in mathematical and technical areas. Of unknown dimension are the Homeric > gye (yon; gyé) and the Southern Italian gyés (yinc; gyés), which means ‘yoke’ and thus leads to ‘morning’ or ‘day’s work’. The equivalent of the > plethron (also in etymology) was the versus or vorsus of the Italic people, an area of 100 square Oscan feet (of 27.5 cm), i.e. 757 m7’. Its analogue among the Romans was the > actus quadratus. Its original meaning was also the furrow length. However, the measure followed the duodecimal system and thus equated to 120 square feet (of 29.6 cm), i.e. 35.52 m X 35.52 m = 1,262 m?*. The fundamental unit of Roman SM, the > as, was its double; the > iugerum, a rectangle of 120 feet x 240 feet and 2,523 m’, the day’s work to be accomplished with a team (iugum). The iugerum was divided into ounces (like the as and the ~ libra). Its > scripulum (1/288 = 8.76 m*) was an area with a side length of 10 feet = 1 > decempeda quadrata. The smallest measure for fields was the dimidium scripulum (e.g. the system in Columella 5,1). Outside this sequence was the clima = 60 feet x 60 feet, i.e. '/4 actus. Multiples of the iugerum used by surveyors are the > heredium (2), the centuria (200; > Limitation) and the —> saltus (800) according to Varro, Rust. 1,10. However, these values did not apply everywhere and at all times. Subdivisions were the pes quadratus and its fractions down to the ~ uncia and the digitus. The Gaulish arapennis equated to the actus, the iugum in Spain to the iugerum, elsewhere a capitum of varying libra is size. The standard for the Narbonensis unknown. Another method of area measurement was used in Cyrenaica and perhaps also in Sicily (Cic. Verr. 2,3,112) with the wédmvov (médimnon). This was a SM equating to the requisite seed quantity of 1 > medimnos (uédurvoc; médimnos), approx. 1 iugerum in extent. H.Businc, Metrologische Beitrage, in: JDAI 97, 1982, 1-45; O.A. W. Ditxe, The Roman Land Surveyors: An Introduction to the Agrimensores, 1971; Id., Mathematics and Measurement, 1988; U. HEIMBERG, ROmische Landvermessung, 1977; F.Huttscn, Griechische und romi-

sche Metrologie, *1882, 39-42, 82-88.

HE.C.

Square script (k tab m‘*rubba’) is the term for the style of script in which Jewish Hebrew and Aramaic texts are written. It developed from the Aramaic square script

772

style (in the Babylonian Talmud k ‘tab assuri, i.e. Assyrian script), which according to the Babylonian Talmud (Aboda Zara roa) was brought from Babylonian captivity to Palestine by Jews in the post-Exilic period, whereas the Samaritan style developed from the palaeoHebraic script. The earliest documents extant in square script are fragments of the Biblical books Ex and 1 Sam from > Qumran (2nd cent. BC), the Nash papyrus and later mosaic, burial and ossuary inscriptions (1st-2nd cents. AD). In the broadest sense two other contemporary kinds of writing in Palestine could also be described as square script, the Samaritan and the Christian-Palestinian-Aramaic. The latter arose out of the Syriac > Estrangela. Both scripts were apparently adjusted in imitation of the Aramaic square script. +» Alphabet; > Aramaic; -» Hebrew J. Naven, Early History of the Alphabet: An Introduction to West Semitic Epigraphy and Palaeography, *1987; E. Tov, Der Text der Hebraischen Bibel, 1997, 178-180.

CK.

Squeeze. ‘Squeeze’ (German abklatsch, French estampage) is the term for a negative impression of an inscription on paper or a latex sheet. After the inscribed surface has been cleaned, soft paper is pressed with a firm brush, or a thin film of liquid latex is poured, on to the inscription. After drying the squeeze can be detached and transported at will; under suitable lighting it can often be read better than the original. Large collections of squeezes can be found in the Akademie der Wissenschaften in Berlin, the Institute for Advanced Studies in

Princeton in New Jersey, the Ashmolean Museum in Oxford and the Museum of Classical Archaeology in Cambridge. A.G. WoopHeaD, 78-83.

Study of Greek inscriptions, *1981, W.ED.

Squill (oxidAn/skillé, Latin scilla), Urginea maritima of the Liliaceae family. In the Mediterranean area, metrehigh flowering stems with numerous white and red blooms issue from its large bulb [1. 114f. and figs. 190— 192] in autumn before leaf-formation (Theophr. Hist. pl. 7,13,6). According to Dioscorides 2,171 WELLMANN = 2,202 BERENDES the spicy-flavoured bulb was roasted on a fire wrapped in clay or wheat dough, or stewed in a lidded pot. It was then cut up and dried in portions on linen in the shade. It was ground and prescribed with honey in drinks, e.g. to stimulate digestion in cases of dyspepsia or dropsy, and for asthma, jaundice and haematoptysis. Its ingredients are mucilage and bitter constituents, as well as cardiac glycosides. Squill vinegar (Dioscorides 5,17 WELLMANN = 5,25 BERENDES) or squill wine (5,18 = 5,26; cf. Columella 12,33; Pall. Agric. 8,6), whose production was described by Plin. HN 20,97f. (cf. Columella 12,34; Pall. Agric. 8,8) and which is still officinal today, was also recommended e.g. for stomatitis and for improving visual acuity. According to Plin. HN 19,94 > Pytha-

STADION

773

774

goras allegedly wrote a book on its healing powers. Pliny himself, at HN 20,97—101 gives numerous uses for various maladies. Hanging it over a door it is praised by Dioscurides 2,171 WELLMANN = 2,202 BERENDES (= Theophr. Hist. pl. 7,13,4; Pythagoras according to Plin. HN 20,101) as a universal preventive against poisons.

Samnite Papius [I 4] in 90 BC (App. Civ. 1,42), then by Cornelius [I 90] Sulla on 30 April 89 (Plin. HN 3,70), and its territory added to that of Nuceria [1]. From then until the time of the > Antonines, S. was chiefly a summer resort for wealthy Romans (Plin. HN. 3,70; Cic. Fam. 7,1,1; Plin. Ep. 6,16,11 f.). S. was famous for its mineral springs (Plin. HN. 31,9; Columella 10,133). S. was destroyed, partially by an earthquake in AD 62 (Sen. Q Nat. 6,1,1-3) and completely by the eruption of —» Vesuvius in 79 (Plin. Ep. 6,16,1 ff.). A decade later, however, S. was ‘reborn’ (Stat. Silv. 3,5,104 f.), and now on the site of modern Castellammare di Stabia. In late Antiquity, S. was a see. Archaeological excavations in the area of S. since the middle of the 18th cent. [2. 13-16] have brought to light numerous > villa complexes, mostly villae rusticae. Villa Arianna [2. 17-40] and Villa San Marco [3] above modern Castellammare di Stabia, however, are of the villa maritima type. With their architectural form (sightlines) and their decor (+ wall paintings of the 2nd to 4th Pompeian styles [4], mosaics [5]) they represent good examples of Roman luxury villeggiatura on the Bay of Naples [6].

1 H. Baumann, Die griechische Pflanzenwelt, 1982. A. STEIER, s.v. Skilla (Meerzwiebel), RE 3 A, 522-526. C.HU.

Squirrel. The name sciurus of the rodent Sciurus vulgaris, an excellent climber, derives from its long bushy tail, which is allegedly supposed to provide shade in summer (oxioveosd/skiouros, from oxd/skid, ‘shade’ and oved/ourd, ‘tail’, cf. Plin. HN 8,138 and Opp. Cyn. 2,586-588). According to Pliny, it is sensitive to the weather and blocks up the entrance to its hole against storms [1. 218]. In winter squirrels live on the provisions they have collected. Pliny (HN 11,245) is familiar with its sitting up and using its front paws when eating, and this is only mentioned again by Albertus Magnus (Animal. 22,134 [2. 1421]). In the Middle Ages squirrels were described in detail by Alexander Neckam (2,124 [3. 203f.]) as scurulus or hesperiolus and e.g. by Thomas of Cantimpré (4,94 [4. 161]) as pirolus. 1 LEITNER

2 H.STaADLER

(ed.), Albertus Magnus, De

animalibus, I], 1920 3TH. Wricut (ed.), Alexander Neckam, de naturis rerum, 1863 (repr. 1967) 4H.Boese (ed.), Thomas Cantimpratensis, Liber de

natura rerum, 1973.

C.HU.

St(h)enius. Originally an Oscan praenomen (Stenis), later also used as a gens name [1.89, 425]. Known primarily from S. of Thermae Himerae in Sicily (descendent of > Mamertini or of Greek origin?). An educated aristocrat, in 82 BC he was responsible for Cn. Pompeius’ [I 3] sparing Thermae (Plut. Pompeius 10,6), in 72 he sought help from the Senate against the greed of C. > Verres and was condemned in absentia at first to a fine, then to death. The scandalous judgment made a decisive contribution to a lawsuit against Verres, in which S. appeared as a witness (Cic. Verr. 2,2,83-118). 1 SCHULZE

2 SALOMIES, 91.

JOR.

Stabiae. Port on the Bay of Naples, not precisely located (at Fontana Grande?). The Ager Stabianus was

bounded in the north by the Sarnus, in the east by the Monti Lattari, in the west by the sea and in the south by Monte Faito. Little is known of the Oscan (> Osci) settlement, which can be shown to have existed from the 7th cent. BC. In its development, however, it was significantly shaped by a Greek and Etruscan presence, as ceramics from a necropolis at the chapel of Santa Madonna delle Grazie to the east of Castellammare di Stabia attest [x]. In the second of the > Punic Wars, S. was on the side of Rome (Sil. 14,408 f.). In the > Social War [3], S. was conquered and destroyed, first by the

1 P. MinteEroO, S. dalle origini al 79 d.C., in: La Provincia di Napoli 7, 1985, 49-64 2D.CAMARDO, A. FERRARA, S.:

Le ville, 1989

3 A.BarBeT, P. Mintero (ed.), La Villa

San Marco a Stabia, 3 vol.,1999 4 P.MINIERO FORTE, S.: Pitture e stucchi delle ville romane, 1989 5M.S. Pisapra, Mosaici Antichi in Italia. Regione prima: S., 1989 6J.H. D’ARMs, Romans on the Bay of Naples, 1970.

Stadiasmos (otadiaoudc/stadiasmés) is the term for distance in stadia (Str. 1,3,2; 4,6; 2,1,173 4,7; > Stadion

[1]) analogous to which miliasmos is the term for distance in milia ’miles’ (Str. 6,2,1; cf. Eust. ad Hom. Od. 2,133,2: miliasmon.... é stadiasmot). Consequently the

stadiasm6n epidromé (Marcianus, Epit. _peripli Menippi 3 = GGM 1,566,23), was an abridgment, made by Timosthenes of Rhodes of his own ro-volume description of harbours (mid—3rd cent. BC), a ‘compilation of distance data in stddia’ from harbour to harbour. It was not until the 2nd cent. AD that stadiasmos was also considered a term for a literary genre, synonymous with > periplous. For instance, this extract from Timosthenes’ harbour descriptions (Herodian. De prosodia catholica 3,1 p. 313,1 f.) and the periplous of Menippus [6] in Constantinus Porphyrogennetus (De thematibus, Asia 2,7) are now also described as stadiasmoi; the stadiasmos tés thaldssés, part of the Chro-

nikon of Hippolytus [2] from the year 234 AD, also bears this title, as does the anonymous stadiasmos étoi periplous tés megdlés thalassés (GGM 1,427-514), a Byzantine revision of a stadiasmos from the 3rd cent. AD. EO, Stadion (otddt0v; stddion). [1] (Doric omddvov/spadion). Greek unit of length equal to 6 pléthra (— pléthron; cf. Hdt. 2,149,3) or 600

STADION

775

+ pous (foot). Depending on the underlying standard of the foot (pous), this corresponds to a length of c. 162-210 m; the Attic stadion is equal to 186 m. The stadion for the race at Olympia had a length of 192.3 m, at Delphi177.3 m, at Epidaurus 181.3 m, and at Athens 184.3 m. 8 stadia correspond approximately to 1 Roman mile (mille passus) of 1500 m. In Greek literature, larger distances are generally indicated in stadia; if other units of length are used, such as the Egyptian > schoinos or the Persian + parasdngés, a conversion to stadia usually follows, with one parasdngés equal to 30 stadia, and one schoinos equal to 60 stadia (Hdt. 2,6; cf also for the Royal Road Hdt. 5,53). The marching pace for soldiers is given as 150 stadia per day (Hdt. 5,53). Although Xenophon reports the distances for the march of the Greek

776

Ancient stadium complexes (schematic development)

— mercenaries in 401 BC in parasdngai (Xen. An. 1,4,1;

1,4,4; etc.), he uses the Greek unit of length to describe distances otherwise (Xen. An. 1,10,4). In the astro-

nomical and geographical literature, the stadion is also used as the unit of length: thus, Aristotle [6] indicates the circumference of the earth as 400,000 stadia (Aristot. Cael. 298b; cf. for example Str. 3,1,3 on the Iberian peninsula); in Pliny, however, distances are ex-

pressed in milia passuum (m.p.; cf. e.g. Plin. HN 3,16), which corresponds to the usual measuring of distances in road construction. 1 F.Huttscu, 77882 1963.

Griechische

und

rémische

Metrologie,

2C.-F.LEHMANN-HaupPytT,s. v.S., RE 3 A, 1930H.-J.S.

[2] Race over a distance of 600 feet (at — Olympia:

192.25 m), and the length of the sports facility of the same name. The stadion was the shortest race distance;

at Olympia, beginning in 776 BC, it was allegedly the first and, until the 13th Olympics, the only competition; also held for juveniles beginning 632 BC. The stadion was also the fourth discipline of the > pentathlon. The runners took their starting places, which could be noted with letters [2. 46 and fig. 29 f.], according to lot [1.87], standing in the grooves of the Padpidec/ balbides, (‘starting blocks’). Later, a sophisticated starting mechanism (tomdn&/hysplex) [3] provided equal chances. The crouch start was unknown. False starts were punished with blows from a rod ([{1. 90]; Hdt.

8,59). Runners developed the highest speed in the stadion; this is expressed on vase paintings by long strides and windmilling arm movements [1. Tab. V, IX f.]. Judges observed the finish at the goal line. Room for run-out was available. Despite the 20 starting places at Olympia, the preliminary heats of the stadion took place in groups of four (Paus. 6,13,4). In the Archaic era, the stadion runners of > Croton were famous (12 victories); they were said to have once recorded the first seven places at Olympia (Str. 6,1,12); later, those from Alexandria [1] (26 victories) were also said to be excellent [4. 104]. Outstanding performances in the stadion were given by Chionis of Sparta [5. nos. 42, 44, 46], Astylus of Croton (later Syracuse) [5. nos. 178, 186,

196] and especially Leonidas of Rhodes, who was victorious at Olympia four times in a row [5. nos. 618, 622, 626, 633]. The name of the victor in the stadion could be used for dating. > Sports

778

777 1 J.JUTHNER, F.BREIN, Die athletischen Leibesiibungen der Griechen, vol. 2.1,1968 2D.G. Romano, Athletics and Mathematics in Archaic Corinth: The Origins of the Greek Stadion, 1993 3 P. VALAVANIS, Hysplex. The Starting Mechanism in Ancient Stadia, 1999 4 W.DECKER, Olympiasieger aus Agypten, in: U. VERHOEVEN (ed.), Religion und Philosophie im alten Agypten. FS Ph. Derchain, 1991, 93-105 5 L.Moretti, Olympionikai, 1957-

T. AIGNER, B. MAURITSCH-BEIN, W.PETERMANDL (eds.), Laufen; Texte, Ubersetzungen, Kommentare, 2003. WD.

[3] The development of the stadion as a building type is closely connected to the development and differentiation of the Greek agons (— Sports festivals), which were initially limited to a non-specialized location for competition. In Greek literature, the term stadion for a building is first attested in Pindar (1st half of the 5th cent. BC); agon and drémos are also common as synonyms for ‘place of contest’ and ‘race course’ respectively. The term stadion was derived from the unit of length of the same name, equivalent to 600 feet (see

above [1]). Beginning in the late 6th cent. BC, it described a facility with exactly this length, used for holding > running competitions (see [2]).

Initially, the stadion as a structure is difficult to demonstrate archaeologically. Flat valleys with an embankment which served as a spectator stand were used; the aim was to create a location suitable for the race, with as little excavation as possible and maximum use of the topographic conditions (+ Olympia, rst construction phase, c. 540 BC). A division of the facility into racetrack and spectator area then became a common pattern; the racetrack was equipped with a starting mechanism (dphesis) and a finish or turn marker (térma), as well as a stand for the judges. In the 5th cent. BC, the major supra-regional sanctuaries (among others, > Olympia, > Delphi, > Epidaurus, > Isthmia, > Nemea [3]) were equipped with permanent stadia, which still used natural features in their construction. These were further extended in the 4th cent. BC and were then also converted to permanent stone architecture. New stadia were occasionally built outside of the sanctuaries in cities, usually near a — gymnasium or — theatre (Megalopolis, Tegea, Rhodes, Mantinea, Messene), sometimes also combined with the > agora (Athens, Corinth). In the Hellenistic era, the stadion became a widespread building type, which, besides its function as a place of competition, also served as a place for representation and festal processions (Miletus, Priene among others). The numerous Greek stadia were carefully maintained in the Roman era; they became an architectural symbol for the cultural significance of ancient Greece. Continuing to be used in Greece, the stadion did not play a role in Roman sport and leisure, unlike the > circus or > amphitheatre. New Roman constructions according to the Greek model, such as the stadion of Domitian in Rome (modern Piazza Navona), were rare exceptions.

STAGE DIRECTIONS

On the occasion of the organization of the first modern Olympic Games (in Athens in 1896), the Panathe-

naic. stadion, which was built in Athens in the 4th cent. BC, was faithfully (according to the knowledge of the time) reconstructed by the excavators in form and material as a prototype of the Greek stadion. — STADIUM F.KRINZINGER, Untersuchungen zur Entwicklungsgeschichte des griechischen Stadions, 1968; R. PATRUCCO, Lo stadio di Epidauro, 1976; D.G. Romano, Athletics and Mathematics in Archaic Corinth. The Origins of the Greek S., 1993; J.SCHILBACH, Olympia. Die Entwick-

lungsphasen des Stadions, in: W. COULSON, H. KyRIELEIS (ed.), Proceedings of an International Symposium on the

Olympic Games (Athens 1988), 1992, 33-37; K. WELCH, The Stadium at Aphrodisias, in: AJA 102, 1998, 547-569; W.ZSCHIETZSCHMANN, Wettkampf- und Ubungsstatten in Griechenland, vol. 1.: Das Stadion, 1960.

C.HO.

Staff sling. The Roman army’s staff slingers (fundibulatores) hurled large stones of about a pound in weight with the aid of a staff sling (fustibalus) which was just 1.2 mlong (Veg. Mil. 3,14,14). Whereas a hand-slinger (funditor) bound one end of the funda (‘sling’) to his wrist, a fundibulator knotted one end to the middle of the staff sling; he hooked the other end of the funda to the end of the staff sling. When he gripped the staff with both hands at the lower end and swung it forwards over his head, the sling came unhooked; the projectile flew in an arched path. In the Roman army, fundibulatores were deployed together with funditores (Veg. Mil.

314,13). ~ Funditores TH. VOLLING, Funditores im romischen Heer, in: Saal-

burg Jb. 45, 1990, 24-58.

Cie

Stage directions. Ancient theatre texts contained sparse stage directions (SD); as compositions for stage performance (as distinct from those for reading) they rarely offered written directions. The actors’ spoken words with their explicit and implicit hints and their metric variations sufficiently conveyed the plot, the situations and the movements of the characters or the chorus (cf. for instance the verbal evocations of torch light in ‘night scenes’ or the use of a deictic form of address to the actors entering the scene). An implicit system of SD such as this roughly corresponds to the modern concept of ‘stage convention’. SD in the actual sense are the nagemtyeadai/parepigraphai (parepigraphai), literally, ‘what is written next to it, on the side’. This technical term referred to the comments added to the MSS of dramatic texts, that is, expressions that were not to be spoken by the actor. Usually, the parepigraphai are transmitted as en eisthései (‘in indentation’) and thus belong to the text. One can find the parepigraphai in the MSS of comedies (e.g. Aristophanes: Ach. 113, 114; Av. 221; Nub. 3, 10, 226; Ran. 311, 313; Menandros: Aspis 93, 467;

STAGE DIRECTIONS

780

779

Dys. 879; POxy. 211 v. 989, 1003, 1024; cf. schol. Eur.

League paid only 1000 drachmai (ATL 1, 412 f.). In

Or. 1384) more often than in those of tragedies (e.g. Aeschylus: Eum. 117; 120; 123; 126; 129; Dictyulci 803; Adespota TrGF 649, v. 3, 9, 12, 15, 22, 26). POxy. 413 and PBerl. 13876 (both 2nd cent. AD) contain directions for musical accompaniment which can be said to relate to dramatic technique. It is unclear whether the parepigraphai go back to the authors of the plays or to later explicators (readers, actors or directors). Most of them appear to be out of context and contribute little towards an understanding of the text. In any case, they fail to offer any clues about the art of acting, more so perhaps about the intended sound. Another type of SD in the narrower sense is the formula yogot ("wéA.0¢)/chorou (mélos), ‘(song) of the chorus’ which appears in some of the papyrus frr. of the New Comedy. It is always found at the start of a new scene, which is the basis for the assumption that it indicated the intermezzo that marks the division between acts. A direction of this sort should go back to the author or, in any case, to contemporaneous copies. Signs that correspond to the Greek parepigraphai are rarely found in Lat. MSS where they appear to be glosses (cf. the expression tacitus in Cod. Laurentianus 37.13 of Seneca or similar directions in the Palatine

424 BC S. seceded to Brasidas (Thuc. 4,88,2), in 422 it

was unsuccessfully assaulted by Cleon [1] (Thuc. 5,6,1; -» Peloponnesian War), and was declared independent in the Peace of Nicias in 421, but obliged to pay tribute to Athens (Thuc. 5,18,5). In the 4th cent., S. belonged for a while to the Chalcidian League and was destroyed by Philippus [4] II in 349 because of its strategic location, but at the request of Aristoteles [6] (who was from S.) it was rebuilt by Philippus or Alexander [4] the Great. Str. 7a 1,35 mentions S. as abandoned. Native city of Aristoteles [6] and Hipparchus [4]. At the farthest end of the projecting headland, there was a fortress in the Byzantine period. F.PapazoGcLou, Les villes de Macédoine a l’epoque romaine, 1988, 435 f.; M.ZAHRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 238-243. M.Z.

Staienus, C. Usurped the name of Aelius Paetus (Cic. Brut. 241; Cic. Clu. 72). S$. was quaestor of consul Aemilius [I 14] Lepidus in 77 BC and provoked a mutiny in his army (Cic. Clu. 99). In 76 ina court case in Atella he is said to have embezzled 600 000 sesterces intended for bribing the judge (Cic. Clu. 68; 99). In 74

J. ANpDRIEU, Le dialogue antique, 1954; D. Barn, Actors and Audience. A Study of Asides and Related Conventions on Greek Drama, 1977, 53-54, 132-133; G. CHANCELLoR, Implicit Stage Directions in Ancient Greek Drama,

he was a juror in the case against > Abbius Oppianicus and attempted to enrich himself. Abbius had provided him with money to bribe sixteen judges, but he attempted to make personal gain from this by embezzling the money and personally voting for Abbius to be convicted (Cic. Clu. 65-67; 78). He was later condemned for his behaviour as quaestor (Cic. Clu. 99). Thanks to Cicero, S. has become the epitome of a corrupt judge (Schol.

in: Arethusa 12, 1979, 133-152; A.M. Date, Seen and

Pers. on Pers. 2,19 f.).

MSS of Plautus).

-» Comedy; > Diacritical signs; > Speaker, change of; — Tragedy

Unseen on the Greek Stage: A Study in Scenic Conventions, in: WS 69, 1956, 96-106 (= Id., Collected Papers, 1969, 119-129); V.D1 BENEDETTO, E. Mappa, La trage-

dia sulla scena, 1977; TH. GELZER, s.v. Aristophanes, RE Suppl. 12, 1551f.; E.A. Havetock, The Oral Composition of Greek Drama, in: Quaderni urbinati 6, 1980, 61— 113 (part. 80-83); K.Hoxzincer, Uber die Parepigraphae zu Aristophanes. Eine Scholienstudie, 1883; W.J. W. Koster, Ad Aristophanis Thesmophoriazusarum fragmenta in PSI 1194 servata de coronide, de parepigrapha, de proceleusmatico, in: Acme 8, 1955, 93-103; D.L. PaGg, Actors’ Interpolation in Greek Tragedy, 1934; C.F. Russo, Aristofane autore di teatro, 71984, 66-77; SCHMID/STAHLIN

I 4, 451,11;

W.G.

RUTHERFORD,

A

Chapter in the History of Annotation, Being Scholia Aristophanica III, 1905, 113-114; O. TAPLIN, Xogot and the Structure of Post-Classical Tragedy, in: Liverpool Classi-

cal Monthly 1, 1976, 47-50; Id., Did Greek Dramatists Write Stage Instructions?, in: PCPhS 203, 1977, 121-132.

VLC. Stagira (Stageira; Xtdyioa/Stagira, Xtdywwod/Stagiros, LXtdyevwwa/Stageira, idayewooc/Stageiros). Colony of ~» Andros, founded in the 7th cent. on the eastern coast of the Chalcidian peninsula, shown to have been to the east of modern Olympias. In the 6th cent., S. minted splendid silver coins, but as a member of the > Delian

J.BA.

Stairs, Stairways (x\iwat/klimax, Latin scalae, plural). I. ANCIENT ORIENT AND EGYPT II. GRAECO-ROMAN

ANTIQUITY

I. ANCIENT ORIENT AND EGYPT Stairways were installed to overcome differences in height, but in the form of monumental constructs, they also created distance between buildings and people. There is evidence from the Ancient Orient of stairways ranging from a few steps between street level and a house or stairs inside houses and palaces, through monumental staircases in > temples and > palaces to stairways in funerary architecture. The materials used were dried or baked mud bricks, stone and wood. A further development of stairs leading to temple terraces (e.g. temple ovals of Hafaga and Tall al-‘Ubaid: middle of the 3rd millennium BC) is represented by triple-flight staircases, which in Mesopotamia are part of the canonical form of a > ziggurat. Staircases within buildings, straight or angled, allowing access to an upper storey or a roof (> Roofing), can be found in the grand buildings of > Uruk as early as the end of the 4th millennium BC and in houses of all periods and regions. In Neo-Assyrian palace sites (9th-7th cents. BC) a stair-

781

782

case at the opposite end of the throne room from the throne formed a constitutive element of the central

Roman > amphitheatres and — theatres exhibit extremely elaborate systems of stairways, allowing many small separated segments of the cavea or the galleries to be reached by way of gangways which were also strictly separated from one another; in amphitheatres in particular speedy and unimpeded access for quite large attending crowds (and the possibility of swift evacuation in the event of unrest or riot) was of considerable significance.

area. Quite extraordinary are the stair-tunnels giving

access to water from the elevated forts of > Urartu. The monumental stairways of > Persepolis are building components of particular significance, especially the double-flight staircase leading to the palace terrace and the Gate of All Nations. In Egypt, above all the straight or angled stairways in ~ pyramids and pylons, and wide free-standing stairs in palaces and temple sites and in front of the Sphinx in > Gizeh are worthy of mention. — Architecture; — Funerary architecture; —> Palace; ~ Temple J.-C. MaRGUERON, Recherches sur les palais mésopotamiens de |’Age du bronze, 1982; P.A. MIGLus, Stadtische Wohnarchitektur in Babylonien und Assyrien, 1999, 21; H.G. Scumip, Etemenanki, 1994; R.-B. WARTKE, Urartu. Das Reich am Ararat, 1993; W. HELCK, s. v. Treppe, LA 6,

757 £. II. GRAECO-ROMAN ANTIQUITY A. STAIRS IN MULTI-STOREY BUILDINGS B. DISPLAY STAIRS AND FLIGHTS OF STEPS

A. STAIRS IN MULTI-STOREY BUILDINGS In ancient architecture, multi-storeyedness,

a pri-

mary prerequisite for the existence of stairs, can be found as early as in Cretan Minoan and Mycenaean palaces (— Palace IV.); in these the stairs are located in monumental stairwells with multiple flights and landings, therefore exploiting the internal structure of the buildings, (Knossos; Phaestus; Mycenae). Stairs in constructionally separated staircases (external access: outside connexion between points on different floors without cutting through internally), by contrast, connect the levels of a two-storey > stoa [1] (e.g. the Stoa of Attalus in Athens). Angled or spiral newel staircases as access to a roof can often be found in temple buildings from the 6th cent. BC, particularly in western Greece (temples at Paestum, Selinunt and Acragas); there has been much speculation about a possible ritual or cultic sense for these staircase installations, which from a technical or functional point of view are often unnecessarily large and representative for mere roof access. The upper floor of a Greek house (cf. + House IL.) was reached by way of a narrow single-flight wooden stairway, which often had something of the nature of a ladder (houses in Ammotopus, Olynthus and Delos); in a Roman house a comparatively wider, almost monumental stairway led mostly from the — atrium to the upper floor (numerous examples in the cities destroyed by Vesuvius, particularly the quite well-preserved stairs of houses in Herculaneum). In multi-storey tenement buildings (Rome, Ostia) the stairs were made of stone; here the staircases formed the structural core of the building and above and beyond their pure function of access were natural hubs of social interaction for the residents.

STAIUS

B. DISPLAY STAIRS AND FLIGHTS OF STEPS To the Greek way of thinking, the idea of accessing a multi-terraced and therefore artificially formed terrain by way of a system of perfectly symmetrical staircases, placing significance in the ascending of such a complex (rather in the sense of an ‘elevation’), was at first foreign and a phenomenon of the high cultures of the East (particularly > Persepolis); until the 4th cent. BC high-lying areas, while commonly terraced at an early stage (e.g. acropoleis), were invariably accessed by way of rather unimpressive irregularly winding ramps (Athens Acropolis). It was under the Carian satrap - Maussolus (377-353 BC) -therefore under oriental influence, which was no coincidence — that for the first time in Greek culture, at the Sanctuary of Zeus in > Labraunda a terraced area was systematically made accessible by broad flights of steps, which became a typological model for the large Greek terrace sanctuaries of > Lindus (3rd cent. BC) and > Cos (2nd cent. BC). Roman-ltalian terrace sanctuaries (Praeneste, Gabii, Tibur, Terracina) are part of this Hellenistic tradition. Flights of steps as access to individual buildings, however, are older. As early as the 6th cent. BC there are steps emphasizing the facade at temples (Selinunte) and at monumental altars (Samos, Monodendri, later Pergamum, with the oriental Persian motif of ‘solemnly ceremonial ascent’ here undoubtedly being a component of the concept of the building). Of particular public significance were the steps of a Roman podium temple, which often led to a > rostrum constructed on the temple podium (> Temple V. C.). B. FEHR, Plattform und Blickbasis, in: MarbWPr 1969, 31-67; W.HOoEPENER, E.L.SCHWANDNER, Haus und Stadt im klassischen Griechenland, *1994, 356 (Indexs. v. Treppe); F.MIELKE, Treppen in Herculaneum, in: Ant. Welt 8, 1977, 41-46; Id., Beitrage zur Entstehung der Wendeltreppe, in: Berichte iiber die 31. Tagung fiir Ausgrabungswissenschaften und Bauforschung (conference Osnabriick 1980), 1982, 78-82; E.THomMas, Zu den Schautreppen in griechischen Stadten auf Kreta und ihren Vorbildern, in: Riv. di Archeologia 8, 1984, 37-42; W.MULLER-WIENER,

Antike, 1988, 155-157.

Griechisches

Bauwesen

in

der

C.HO.

Staius. Oscan nomen gentile, documented on Delos since the late 3rd cent. BC [1. 186 f.]. [1] S. Murcus, L. Possibly a Marsus (but not the S. mentioned in ILS 885), legate of + Caesar in the Civil War in Oricum in 48 BC (Caes. B Civ. 3,15,6; 3,16,2), in

STAIUS

Africa in 46 (Cic. Att. 12,2,1). A praetorship in 45 is speculation (MRR 2,307). In 44 S. took the side of Caesar’s assassins, became pro-consul of Syria (MRR

2,330) and thanks to Q. Marcius [I ro] Crispus surrounded his opponent Q. Caecilius [I 5] Bassus in Apamea. There in 43 S. handed his army over to C. Cassius {I ro] who later made him admiral of his fleet. $., now imperator (RRC 510), defeated C. Cornelius [I 29] Dolabella decisively and blockaded M. Antonius [I 9]

in Brundisium (App. B Civ. 4,363; 4,365—-3 68); he had to flee, but in the autumn of 42 he and Cn. Domitius [I 6] Ahenobarbus were victorious over the fleet of Cn. Domitius {I 10] Calvinus (App. B Civ. 4,480-487). Owing to the battles at Philippi, the sea victory was of no avail; in 41 S. fled with 2 legions and 80 ships to Sex. Pompeius [I 5] in Sicily (App. B Civ. 5,100). His position there was undermined by Pompeius’s admirals Menecrates [11] and Menodorus [1], until $. was murdered in Syracuse at the turn of the year 40/39 (App. B

Civ. 5,293-2973 5,302). 1 SCHULZE.

JOR.

Stamnos (otcéuvoc/stamnos). Storage jar for wine, oil, etc.; mercantile inscriptions point to the pelike (> Pottery, shapes and types of, fig. A 8); today an archaeological term for a bulbous lidded vessel with a recessed neck and handles on the shoulders (> Pottery, shapes

and types of, fig. C 6). First instances in Laconia and Etruria in the Archaic Period, adopted in Athens around 530 BC, in the sth cent. almost exclusively exported from there to Etruria. Depictions on red-figured stamnoi show it as a central wine vessel in a Dionysian women’s festival, though the term ‘Lenaean vases’ (> Lenaea) is doubtful, as well as the use of the stamnos in Attic cults owing to its origins outside Attica

and the high proportion of exported vessels. B.Puiiippaki, The Attic Stamnos, 1967; C.ISLER-KERENYI, Stamnoi. An Exhibition at the J. Paul Getty Museum, 1980; C.M. StrpBE, Lo Stamnos Laconico, in: BA 27, 1984, 1-12; C.ISLER-KERENYI, review on: F, FRONTISIDucroux, Le dieu-masque, 1991, in: Gnomon 66, 1994, 44-51.

784

783

1S.

Stamped ware. Almost all cultures produced pottery decorated by stamping, e.g. the Greek > pithos, the Etruscan > impasto and > bucchero. In the narrower sense, the archaeological term SW refers to the types of stamped vessels of the Hellenistic and Roman periods, esp. — black-glaze ware and sigillata pottery of Late Antiquity from North Africa (> Terra sigillata). The practice of stamping vessels was introduced in black-glaze ware at Athens around the mid 5th cent. BC [1]. In particular, stamped vessels included palmettes, ivy and olive leaves, meanders, inscribed triangles and diamonds. From the late 4th cent. BC, the stamping repertoire became restricted to palmettes in connection with wheel-stamp decorations. SW lost its primacy at Athens around 225 BC to moulded vessels (— Relief

ware), but continued to be produced until around the mid-2nd cent. [2]. The stamps themselves were manufactured in a mould and had a rounded surface, enabling the stamps to be applied both on flat and curved vessel elements using a rotary hand movement, before the black glaze was applied [3]. One of the most important genres of SW in the West was manufactured at Rome or in its immediate environs, and in Etruria (e.g. > Populonia): the so-called Groupe (formerly Atelier) des Petites Estampilles [4. 1, 59-117; 5. 243-246]. Its typical product are simple bowls (pocula) bearing four small stamps in the centre on parallel axes. There are also examples with one, three or five stamps, which are often impressions of seal stones (e.g. palmettes, rosettes). Coin images from the time of the Roman > aes grave issues can also be found among the stamp motifs (helmeted Athena, open right and left hands, dolphins, Pegasus and clam shells). The workshops were active from c. 300 to 260 BC, and evidently specialized to a high degree in the export trade. The main production is from a short time span from 285 to 265 BC. The different genres thus represent a kind of chronological ‘index fossil’ for the period immediately preceding the first + Punic War. It was probably due to Massaliot traders (> Massalia) that SW was distributed across southern France and the coast of the Spanish Levant [6], while other agents must be assumed for the spread to Carthage and North Africa [7; 4. 101103, fig. 27]. Rome or its environs produced another genre of SW around 200 BC: the ‘Hercules bowls’ named after their typical seal stone representations

[8; 9]. A third genre of SW in the West was black-glaze ware of the ‘Campana A’ type from the region of Naples. It dates from the 2nd half of the 3rd cent. BC to the rst cent. BC, and was widely distributed across the Mediterranean, esp. in the 2nd cent. BC [10; 9; 5. 246249]. Stamps of rosettes and palmettes were common, esp. from the 2nd cent., alongside — and sometimes in combination with — wheel-stamp decorations, incised decorations and painting. ‘Campana B’ black-glaze ware too was sometimes adorned with stamps and fine wheel-stamp decorations; it was manufactured in Etruria from the 2nd quarter of the 2nd cent. to around the mid-rst cent. BC. The stamp decoration of this genre predates that of the Roman Arretine terra sigillata [1o. esp. 143-151]. An independent genre of SW developed from North African terra sigillatain Late Antiquity, known as African Red Slip. Stamps are a typical decorative element from the 4th-7th cents. AD, in the bottoms of open vessels, mostly plates, bowls and platters. Three main phases of this genre can be distinguished. In the first, floral and geometric motifs predominate; the second is dominated by animals and Christian symbols in the centre of large plates and bowls, framed by stamped floral, geometric and animal motifs; the third phase is characterised by decorated crosses, human figures, animals or other motifs [11; 12]. J. W. Hayes distinguished

785

786

five styles of North African sigillataof Late Antiquity. Recent research has contributed to a better understanding of the working methods of the workshops of this SW [13; 14]. Using the example of the El Mahrine pottery centre in northern Tunisia, M. MACKENSEN was able to document no fewer than 557 different stamps. Clay stamps have also been published from Sidi Marzouk Tounsi in central Tunisia. A clay plate bearing 23 stamps of 18 different stamp types probably constituted a kind of pattern book. Fine North African SW was distributed far across the Mediterranean region, and inspired much regional production of late Roman SW. + Black-glaze ware; > Ornaments; > Pottery, production of; > Seals; > Terra sigillata

family (wife Méthé, ‘drunkenness’; son Botrys, ‘bunch of grapes’), the death of the king and the funeral games in his honour. [4] Goatherd of king > Oeneus, who by observing his goats discovers the grapes that inspire Oeneus to invent wine (Prob. Verg. G 1,9). CA.BL.

1 B.A. Sparkes, L. Tatcott, Black and Plain Pottery of the 6th, 5th and 4th Cent.s B.C. (Agora 12), 1970, 22-31 2S.I. Rotrorr, Hellenistic Pottery. Athenian and Imported Wheelmade Tableware and Related Material (Agora 29), 1997, 37-38

3 P.E. Corsetr, Palmette

Stamps from an Attic Black-Glaze Workshop, in: Hesperia 24, 1955, 172-186, Abb. 1 Taf. 66-71 4 J.P. Moret, Etudes de céramique campanienne, vol. 1: L’Atelier des petites estampilles, in: MEFRA 81, 1969, 59-117. SId., Les importations de céramique du III* siécle et de la premiére moitié du II° siécle. Quelques remarques a propos de PIbérie, in: J.RAMON et al. (ed.), Les facies ceramiques

d’importacio a la Costa Ibérica, Les Balears i Les Pititises durant el segle III aC i la primera meitat del segle II aC, 1998, 243-246 6 E.SANMARTI-GREGO, El taller de las pequenas estampillas en la Peninsula Ibérica in: Ampurias 35,1973, 164-171, Abb. 12 7 F. CHELBI, Céramique 4 vernis noir de Carthage, 1992, 41-42, Taf. 132-138 8 R. PAGENSTECHER, Die calenische Reliefkeramik (JDAI suppl. 8), 1909, 15-16 9 J.P. MoreL, Céramique Campanienne: Les Formes, 1981, 47. 10 N.LAMBOGLIA, Per

una classificazione preliminare della ceramica campana, in: Atti del I° Congresso Internazionale di Studi Liguri, 1952, 139-206

Pottery, 1980

Stasanor (=tacdvwe/Stasdnor). A Greek from — Soli, hetairos (- hetairot) of > Alexander [4] (Arr. Anab. 3,29,5; Str. 14,6,3). In 329 BC he was entrusted with

taking the satrap of Areia into custody, whom he brought to the king, and with becoming his successor (Arr. Anab. 3,29,5; 4,7,1). In the winter of 328/7, Alexander also conferred Drangiana on him (Arr. Anab. 4,18,3; Curt. 8,3,17). After Alexander’s losses in Gedrosia, S$. brought him camels and pack animals and then returned to his satrapy (Arr. Anab. 6,27,6; 29,1). He is mentioned as a guest at Medius’ [2] feast. After Alexander’s death, Perdiccas [4] left him his satrapy (Diod. 18,3,3). Antipater [1] transferred him to BactriaSogdiana (Diod. 18,39,6; Arr. FGrH 156 F 9,36), where he was so popular that Antigonus [1] made no attempt to dismiss him (Diod. 19,48,1). E. HONIGMANN, Ss. v. S., RE 3 A, 2152 f.

EB.

Staseas of Naples (name recorded only in Latin), the

first Peripatetic known to be active in Rome (c. 91 BC). He combined philosophy and rhetoric and represented the doctrine of his school, that, in addition to virtue, external goods are also necessary for eudaimonia (+ Happiness). Moravx, vol. 1, 1974, 218-221.

H.G.

12Id., A Supplement to Late 13 M. MACKENSEN,

Die spat-

antiken Sigillata- und Lampentdpfereien von El Mahrine (Nordtunesien): Studien zur nordafrikanischen Feinkeramik des 4. bis 7. Jh., 1993 141d., New Evidence for Central Tunisian Red Slip Ware with Stamped Decoration (ARS Style D), in: Journal of Roman Archaeology 11,

1998, 355-370.

Staphylus

Stars, legends about see > Katasterismos

11J.W. Hayes, Late Roman Pottery,

1972, 217-287, 295-296 Roman

STASIMON

(Ztdgvi0c/Staphylos

RD.

from

otadvar/sta-

phylé, ‘grape’; Xtapvaitne/Staphylités and Evotaovhoc/Eustaphylos are epithets of > Dionysus). [1] Son of Dionysus and —> Ariadne (Apollod. 1,9), brother of + Oenopion, Thoas and Peparethus, husband of ~ Chrysothemis [1], father of — Rhoeo, + Molpadia [1] and Parthenus (Diod. 5,62,1), considered the inventor of viticulture (EM 742,48). [2] Son of the > Silen; inventor of the custom of mixing wine and water (Sall. fr. inc. 87 DieTscH; Plin HN

75199). [3] Nonn. Dion. 18,5—20,139 in its latest and finest version of — Dionysus’ triumphal procession to India describes the god’s visit to the Assyrian king S. and his

Stasicrates (Ztacimedtys; Stasikratés). A Hellenistic architect recorded only in Plutarch (Plut. Alexander 72; Plut. Mor. 335c ff.); probably confused by Plutarch with Deinocrates or miswritten and identical with him (— Deinocrates [3], also with bibliogr.). CHO. Stasimon (16 otdouw.ov/to stdsimon; derived from the adjective stdsimos, ‘standing’). In the list of structural forms (uéen/méré) of the > tragedy (I.), Aristotle (Poet. 1452b 22-24) distinguishes — among the chorus parts — the > parodos from the stasima, which he defines as chorus songs that have no anapest or trochee, thus no recited verses, which are used primarily in the parodos [1]. The term stasimon must not be understood in the sense that the chorus was ‘standing’ while it sang the song, rather that the chorus performed it, with dance accompaniment, after it took its ‘stand’ in the orchestra (cf. schol. Aristoph. Ran. 1314). The various stasima, the number of which increased from > Aeschylus [1] (3 as a rule) to > Sophocles [1] and > Euripides [1] (4-5), subdivide a tragedy into different — epeisddia. Although Aristotle used the term stasimon only for trag-

787

788

edy, it would make sense to apply it to > satyr play and to the chorus songs in the second part of a~* comedy (1.) as well [7. 74 ff.]. Usually, stasima are structured antistrophically; astrophic stasima that accompany an agitated scene are found mainly in satyr plays but occur in tragedies as well (Aesch. Cho. 152-163; Eur. HF 874-885, 10161038, Hipp. 811-816, Cycl. 608-623). While the ties of the stasima to the plot are evident in Aeschylus’s tragedies, they fade in the later Euripides (‘program song’, e.g. Eur. El. 432-486 [5. 111]). According to Aristot. Poet. 1456a 30, none of the songs written by > Agathon [1] had any connection to the plot whatsoever (éuBoAua/embélima, ‘insertions’). The function of stasima in the tragedies of Sophocles is a matter of debate: Does the song of the chorus emerge from its dramatic role or is it superimposed as the author’s mouthpiece (cf. esp. the discussion on the first stasimon in Antigone,

Stasippus (Ztdounnoc/Stasippos). Leader of the proSpartan ‘oligarchs’ in Tegea (Xen. Hell. 6,4,18) who in the summer of 370 BC opposed annexation, instigated by anti-Spartan forces in Tegea, to a pan-Arcadian state, planned by ‘democrats’ in > Mantinea. Initially successful in the disturbances unleashed by this [1. 505— 507; 2.105; 3.74 f.], S. did not, however, have his defeated opponents prosecuted and, after the Mantineans intervened, he and his supporters were overcome, captured despite fleeing to temple asylum and executed in Tegea (Xen. Hell. 6,5,6-9; 6,5,36; Diod. Sic.

STASIMON

15,59,2-3; Wal. Max. 4,1 ext. 5). 1 J.Roy, Postscript on the Arcadian League, in: Historia 23,

1974,

505-507

2 H.-J.GEHRKE,

3 H. Beck, Polis und Koinon, 1997.

Stasis,

1985

K.-W.W.

Stasis see > Social conflicts; > Status [1]

332-375 [53 6])? In 5th cent. BC comedy, the term stasimon can be applied to the chorus songs that follow the > parabasis and are not structured as an > amoebeum (usually satirical songs or makarismoi, ‘praises’ of the comic hero (7. 44 ff.]). In Hellenism’s New Comedy (+ Comedy I. H.), only embo6lima without any connections to the plot occur; they have not been transmitted (annotations XOPOY/CHOROU ‘chorus insertion’ in the papyri). In — Seneca’s [2] tragedies, the stasima have a mostly structural function. The connection to the plot is often limited to the chorus’s general, at times philosophical reflections triggered by the events on stage. This practice can be regarded as an implementation of the rules for the function of the chorus [8. 144 ff.] drawn up by > Horatius [7] (Ars 193-201). + Chorus; > Tragedy 1A.M.

Date,

S. und Hyporcheme,

Papers, 1969, 34 ff. Euripides,

in: Id., Collected

2M.Hose, Studien zum Chor bei

2 vol., 1990/91

3 W.KRANz,

S., 1933

Stata Mater. Roman goddess. The earliest literary evidence (Fest. 416 f. L. with [z. 2167]) mentions a statue of Stata Mater, which is said to have stood in the Forum Romanum until the early rst cent. BC; the population of the city of Rome is supposed to have then carried the cult of the goddess into the vici (‘city quarters’; — Vicus) (Fest. 416 f. L.; cf. [2]). Inscriptions from the Imperial period attest to dedications by the vicomagistri to Stata Mater alone (ILS 3307), in conjunction with the Lares Augusti (ILS 9250; > Lares) or with > Volcanus (ILS 3306). She was invoked to avert fires (Fest. 416 L.). Her name, from Latin sistere ’bring to a stop’, may be imitative of > Iuppiter Stator [3]; earlier scholars [4.223 f.] reckon Stata Mater among the ~ indigitamenta. 1 G. Wissowa, s. v.S. M., RE 3 A.2, 2167 f. 2 C.BuzzetTTl, s. v. Vicus Statae Matris, LTUR 5, 191 3 G.CAPDEVILLE, Volcanus, 1995, 418 f. 4R.PETER,

s. v. Indigitamenta, ROSCHER 2, 129-233.

CRP.

4 P. RiEMER, B. ZIMMERMANN (eds.), Der Chor im antiken und modernen Drama, 1998 5 J.RODE, Das Chorlied, in: W. Jens (ed.), Die Bauformen der griechischen Tragédie, 1971, 85-115 6 W.ROsLER, Der Chor als Mitspie-

ler, in: A&A 29, 1983, 107-124 7 B.ZIMMERMANN, Untersuchungen zur Form und dramatischen Technik der Aristophanischen Komddien, vol. 2,1985 8 Id., Europa und die griechische Tragédie, 2000, 144-160. B.Z.

Stasinus (Ztaocivoc; Stasinos). Epic poet of unknown date, from Cyprus. According to a widespread tradition lasting until Proclus and Tzetzes, he wrote the > Cypria supposedly named after his homeland. According to an anecdote which Pindar may already have known (Pind. fr. 265 SNELL-MAEHLER; but cf. [3.33]), Homer (> Homerus [1]) gave the epic to his daughter as a dowry for her marriage to S. (the legend shows that there were problems as to its authorship already in Antiquity). + Epic cycle 1 PEGI, 36-64 2EpGF 28-29 3M.Davies, The Epic Cycle, 1989, 33-52 4H.LLoyp-Jonegs, Stasinus and the ‘Cypria’, in: Stasinos 4, 1968-1972, I15—122.

S.FO.

State I. GENERAL II. ANCIENT NEAR East IV. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

III. EGypr

I. GENERAL Neither the states of the ancient Near East nor those of classical antiquity had a word corresponding to the modern, impersonal concept of the state. There was no abstract idea of state separate from the > ruler or distinguished by law. In particular, the state did not appear as a perpetrator of action. The use of the term ‘state’ for these pre-modern societies is none the less justified, because, on the one hand, they did fulfil the minimum formal criteria: permanent state population, defined + territorium, organized administration and government and capacity for conducting foreign relations including by — international treaties; on the other hand, the purpose of the state is to create domestic order by means of legal security. The development of statehood is always a response to altered living conditions (e.g.

789

Ie

increasing population, environmental factors) and the thereby increasing complexity of society. Hence, states can arise in different regions at different times. A common criterion, however, is the dissolution of ‘prestate’ personal authority, by the objectification of rule in institutions and offices. + Rulers; > Rulership; > Social structure W.ED.

institution of the Elders had a particular role in northern Mesopotamia, as well as in Syria [7]. Towards the mid 2nd millennium BC, the Old Kingdom of the Hittites ( Hattusa) in Asia Minor reached its zenith, before again losing prominence because of intra-dynastic power struggles. The political world of the Near East in the first half of the 2nd millennium BC was characterized by the political, diplomatic and military behaviour of various major powers (Egypt, Mitanni, Hittites, Babylon, Assyria) [8]. The smaller states of Syria/Palestine, which were of sometimes great importance for trading, found themselves dependent on, or under the influence of, the rival states of Egypt and the Hittites of the so-called ear of the Great Kingdom. In Iran, the Elamites intermittently succeeded in re-organizing their state and extending its territory. The rst half of the rst millennium BC was marked by the expansionist, superpower politics of the states of Assyria and Babylon, each of which was able to unite large parts of the Near East under its rule. When the -» Achaemenids [2] conquered Babylon in the 6th cent. BC, the focus of state organization and political dominance for Mesopotamia shifted into the Iranian sphere

Il. ANCIENT NEAR East The state in the ancient Near East, characterized by socio-economic differentiation and hierarchization as well as by the development of structures of political organization in society, formed around the turn of the 4th/3rd millennia BC in southern Mesopotamia and neighbouring south-western > Iran [1]. Typical of the so-called Early Dynastic period in southern Mesopotamia (up to 24th cent. BC) was the existence of rival city-states based on urban centres (+ Town, city II.) competing for ascendancy. These were sometimes the seat of a political power developing independence, and central cultic sites. With the emergence of a hereditary monarchy and its attendant institutions (administrative and civil service apparatus), the decisive and typical form of rule in the Near East had formed (> Rulers I.), not least in confrontation with the influential temple aristocracy in the main cultic centres of the city-states. The economic foundations of royal and priestly power were the institutional households of — palace and — temple respectively, which constituted independent economic entities. Forms of individual property also arose in the course of the process of differentiation of property. The co-existence of different forms of property remained a characteristic of Ancient Mesopotamian social and economic history into the rst millennium BC [2]. Similar processes of state development can also be traced in Syria (+ Ebla) and Iran (> Elam). As major territorial states developed in Mesopotamia (Akkad, Ur III) in the 2nd half of the 3rd millennium BC, the rise in prestige of the monarchy (deification of the ruler) went hand in hand with the refinement of the administrative apparatus and of the law [3; 4]. Subsequently, and in spite of recurrent individual endeavours tending towards city- or regional states, the territorial state remained the dominant form of state in Mesopotamia. The rst half of the 2nd millennium BC was characterized in Mesopotamia by the development of Amorite states, of which that of the kings of > Babylon was the most important. The foundation of economic power was now formed by a decentralized system of land use geared towards duties (> Tax) and services, and by other tributary economic forms (palace business), which essentially prevailed in Babylonia into the late Babylonian period [5]. In northern Mesopotamia, the citystate of > Assur [1], at first mostly geared towards trade, established itself with specific governance and organizational structures [6], before expanding in the 18th cent. BC into a territorial state. In the context of the exercise of power and local administration, the

STATE

(+ Iran) [9]. ~ Asia Minor III; > Elam; > Mesopotamia; > Rulers I; > Social structure I; > Town, city II 1 H.KLENGEL,

Einige Aspekte der Staatsentstehung im

fruhen Vorderasien, in: J.HERRMANN, J.KOHN (Eds.), Familie, Staat und Gesellschaftsformation, 1988, 319327 2J.RENGER, Institutional, Communal, and Individ-

ual Ownership or Possession of Arable Land in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: Chicago-Kent Law Review 71, 1995,

269-319

3J.BAUER et al., Mesopotamien: Spaturuk-

Zeit und Friihdynastische Zeit, 1998 BERGER, A. WESTENHOLZ, Mesopotamien:

4 W.SALLAAkkade-Zeit und Ur IlI-Zeit, 1999 5 J. RENGER, Das Palastgeschaft in der altbabylonische Zeit, in: A.C. V. M.BONGENAAR (ed.), Interdependency of Institutions and Private Entrepreneurs, 2000, 153-183 6 M.T. Larsen, The

Old Assyrian City-State and Its Colonies, 1976 7 H.KLENGEL, ’Alteste’ in den Texten aus Ebla und Mari, in: M. LEBEAu (ed.), Reflets des deux fleuves. FS A. Finet, 1989,61-65 8 R.COHEN, R. WesTBROOK (ed.), Amarna Diplomacy. The Beginnings of International Relations, 2000

9 BRIANT.

F.M. Fates, L’impero assiro (IX—VII secolo a.C.), 2001;

H. KLENGEL, Geschichte des Hethitischen Reiches, 1999;

Id., Syria 3000 to 300 B. C., 1992; S. LAFONT, Fief et féodalité dans le Proche-Orient ancien, in: E. BOURNAZEL, J.P.Poxy (ed.), Les féodalités, 1998, 517-630; H.NeuMANN, Uberlegungen zu Ursprung, Wesen und Entwick-

lung des frithen Staates im alten Mesopotamien, in: OLZ 85, 1990, 645-655; D.T. Potts, The Archaeology of Elam, 1999.

HN.

Ill. Ecypr The Pharaonic state existed from c. 3050 BC to the conquest of Egypt by > Alexander [II 4] the Great in 332 BC. Its state territory extended from the Mediterranean in the north to the First Nile Cataract in the

STATE

791

792

south, the Red Sea in the east and the oases of the Libyan Desert in the west. Estimates of the population range from 1.5 million in the Old Kingdom period to 3 million during the New Kingdom. According to the Egyptian view, the state served the implementation of > Ma?at, i.e. justice and order in the world. Its guarantor was the king (> Ruler IL.) [1]. The state emerged gradually during the second half of the 4th millennium BC, from various areas of Upper Egypt. Among the various reasons for this, the economic ones (access to trade routes, esp. for long-distance

feudal structures [3]. The various periods of foreign rule (e.g. Libyan, Persian) during the Late Period made little difference to the state structures. + Egypt; > Egyptian law; > Ruler IJ; -> Social struc-

trade) were decisive. The creation of the state was for-

mally completed at the ‘Unification of the Kingdom’ (of Upper and Lower Egypt) with the creation of the rst Dynasty, when the culture and political system of Upper Egypt was extended into Lower Egypt, but the process continued until the 4th Dynasty (28th—-26th cents. BC) [6].

The focus of the Egyptian state in all periods was the Pharaoh [5], who founded his legitimacy on lineage, inheritance or selection by a divine or royal father, as well as on his capabilities. In theory, he was at once High Priest, judge, soldier and administrative head of government. At lower levels, these various spheres were not strictly separated either formally or personally. The king was also regarded as the owner of the land, but private land ownership existed de facto. In practice, administration was under the control of the vizierate, which was sometimes divided into Upper and Lower Egyptian offices. After the king, the vizier was the senior judge within a system structured in levels of jurisdiction [2]. His most important tasks included the collection of > taxes, the organization and conduct of public works and expeditions in search of raw materials. Territorial administration, which was still organized patrimonially in the Old Kingdom [4], is traditionally supposed to have extended over 42 nomes, but in reality, the country was divided into a fluctuating number of large territories with a central city and surrounding rural area, each governed by a so-called nomarch or mayor. > Temples, too, functioned as administrative centres, esp. for tax collection. The administration of foreign possessions in the New Kingdom was handled in various ways: > Nubia was largely incorporated into the Egyptian heartlands under the rule of the ‘King’s Son of Kush’, while fort commanders or vassals were placed in control of Syrian and Palestinian territories.

At first, the army was only called up in case of war, but later developed into a standing army, and was supplemented in the Late Period by the employment of foreign mercenaries. In the New Kingdom, at the zenith of Egypt’s military power, the army was generally under the command of a son of the king. Structural weaknesses interrupted the unity of the state of Egypt in three so-called Intermediate Periods, when various rulers simultaneously claimed dominion over parts of Egypt. The Third Intermediate Period (c. 1070-664 BC) showed most clearly the development of

ture I; > Town, city II 1 J.ASSMANN, Ma’at, 1990

©2G.P. F. VAN DEN Boorn,

The Duties of the Vizier. Civil Administration in the Early New Kingdom, 1988 3 K. JANSEN-WINKELN, Gab es in der altagyptischen Geschichte eine feudalistische Epoche?, in: WO 30, 1999, 7-20 4R.MULLER-WOLLERMANN, Das agyptische Alte Reich als Beispiel einer Weberschen Patrimonialbirokratie, in: Bull. of the Egyptological Seminar 9, 1987/8,25-40

5 D.O’Connor, D.P. S1L-

VERMAN (eds.), Ancient Egyptian Kingship, 1995 6T.A. H. WILkinson, State Formation in Egypt: Chronology and Society, 1996.

IV. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

There is no evidence of the development of states in the Graeco-Roman cultural sphere before the 8th cent. BC. Such development took place in Greece after the collapse of the Mycenaean states in the r2th cent. and the subsequent > Dark Ages, with the circumscription of the power of the kings (— Basileus) by aristocratic councils (+ Areopagus; > Gerousia), by offices of limited duration (-* Archontes) and by the introduction into political life of a popular assembly (— Apella, Apellai;

+ Ekklesia). The development of the charac-

teristic Greek state type, the > polis, can be said to have reached completion with the political and social reforms of > Lycurgus [4] (> Rhetra [2]) in 7th-cent. - Sparta and > Solon [1] in 594 BC at Athens. The circumscription of royal powers (-» Rex [1]) at Rome was realized at approximately the same date, along with the classification into gentes (> gens) and the political and military organization of the people into ~ curiae (> Comitia [curiata]). In Rome too, this development of statehood reached completion late in the 7th cent., but it received renewed and strong stimulus in the 6th cent., under the Etruscan kings (— Tarquinius; Servius > Tullius).

The ancient view of the state was that of an association of people, formed from that part of the populace fit for military service (> Citizenship). This is evident in the terminology of the state, as in Latin > populus, ~ res publica and > civitas (cives), and Greek koindnia ton politén (polités) and — politeia, and it is also betrayed by the naming of states after their peoples (‘the Athenians’, ‘the Thebans’), a practice also used for nonGreek states not organized as poleis (‘the Persians’, ‘the Macedonians’). Neither in the actual naming of a state nor in constitutional theory (~ Constitution) was any significance ascribed to the territory. Buso_t/Swospopa; EDER, Staat; Id., s.v. Staat, in: H.SONNABEND (ed.), Mensch und Landschaft in der Antike, 1999, 495-498; V.EHRENBERG, Der Staat der

Griechen, *1965; W.GAWANDTKA, Die sogenannte Polis, 1985; H.Brck, Polis und Koinon, 1997; R. KLEIN (ed.), Das Staatsdenken der Romer, 1966; E.MEYER, R6mischer Staat und Staatgedanke, 41975; H. Quaritscn, Der

794

793 Staatsbegriff und die antike Politiktheorien, in: W. SCHULLER (ed.), Politische Theorie und Praxis im Altertum,

1998, 278-290; W.SUERBAUM, Vom antiken zum frihmittelalterlichen Staatsbegriff, 31977. W.ED.

Stateira (=tdteioa/Stateira; Latin Statira). {1] Daughter of Hydarnes, sister of Terituchmes and wife of Artaxerxes [2] II (Ktesias FGrH 688 F 15), who was beloved by the people (Plut. Artaxerxes 5,6). She was poisoned by the queen mother — Parysatis [x] (Deinon FGrH 690 F 15b). In > Chariton’s novel S. fights Callirhoe for the love of the Great King, recognises her beauty and is rescued by Callirhoe from imprisonment in Egypt. [2] Wife and sister of Darius [3] III (Plut. Alexandros 30; Gell. NA 7,8,2), was considered the most beautiful woman in Asia (Arr. Anab. 4,19,5 f.; cf. Plut. Alexandros 30; Curt. 4,10,24). She died of a miscarriage shortly after being taken prisoner at Issus (Plut. Alexandros 30; Just. r1,12,6) and was buried magnificently by Alexander [4] the Great (Diod. Sic. 17,54; Curt. 4,10,23; Plut. Alexandros 30; Plut. De Alexandri magni fortuna aut virtute 2,6). [3] Daughter of Darius [3] II] and S. [2]. Taken captive, as was her mother, at Issus in 33 3 BC, she was offered in marriage by her father to the Macedonian king, if he would discontinue his campaign (Curt. 4,5,1; cf. Arr. Anab. 2,25,1; Diod. Sic. 17,54,2; Plut. Alexander 29; Just. 11,12,3; see Curt. 4,11,15); Alexander refused, but married S. in Susa in 324. After his death S. was lured to Babylon and killed at the instigation of + Rhoxane [4] (Plut. Alexander 77). 1 M.Brosius, Women in Ancient Persia, 1996 (on [1-3]) 2 BERVE, Nr. 721 und 722 (on [2-3]). JW.

Stater (otatno/stateér). I. WeicuHT II. Corn I. WEIGHT In contrast to other Greek units of weight, the stater lacked an exactly defined norm. Instead, the term stater

referred to the most common weight pieces at hand. In Athens, inscriptions on a few exemplars show that the stater was a two mina piece adorned by an astragal (+ Ornaments) with a relief. The Attic stater could be doubled or subdivided into fractions — attested are thirds, sixths and twelfths, but also fourths, eighths and sixteenths. Peculiar is that the > mina[xz] was not understood to be half a stater but was seen as an independent unit. A bronze weight from the 4th cent. BC found in the sanctuary of Hera on Samos seems to have been referred to as a stater as faint remnants of an inscription suggest. It probably was a two mina piece as well. +> Weights III. 1 K.Hitz1, Die Gewichte griechicher Zeit aus Olympia (OIF 25), 1996 2M.Lanc, M.Crossy, Weights, Measures and Tokens (Agora 10), 1964, 2-33. K.H.

STATES, CONFEDERATION OF

II. Coin As a coin, the stater was the normal or standard

piece of coinage at hand, usually the > didrachmon of the respective — coinage standard. In elektron: > kyzikenos, > lampsakenos, the stater of various cities in Ionia; in gold: — kroiseios, — dareikos, > philippeios, alexandreios; in silver: > didrachmon, stater of Aegina (> tortoise [2]), Corinth (little horse), Korykos, Crete, the stater in Macedonia and Asia and the stater of Croesus. In Athens, the > tetradrachmon became the standard coin and thus the stater, beginning in 530 BC. The same holds true for the coinages that were tied to the Attic standard. Multiples and subdivisions of the stater were given in > drachmai [1] and> oboloi. For Cyrene, a tetrastater (for a non-extant ~ oktadrachmon), a hemistater (Poll. 9,62) and a pentastater (Poll. 9,57) are mentioned as well. Even when the stater was divided into three parts instead of the usual two, they were called drachmai, for example in Corinth. K.REGLING,

656 f.

s. v. S., RE

2.3, 2172-2176;

SCHROTTER,

DLK.

States, confederation of. In Greece federal states were regional units composed of separate poleis (— Polis) and organised in such a way that at any rate foreign policy was in the hands of the federal organisation (— Synhedrion), but the individual poleis retained their own citizenship and a greater degree of autonomy than was enjoyed by each of the demes (> Demos [2]) of Attica. “Tribal states’ in the less urbanised parts of Greece were similar, with a federal organisation and smaller local units which had a degree of autonomy: as poleis were established these tended to develop into federal states (as in the case of e.g. the > Thessalians). There is no one Greek word which means specifically ‘federal state’: the words most commonly used were + koinén which denotes a ‘commonwealth’ of any kind, and éthnos (original meaning ‘nation’). The earliest evidence for a federal state is in (probably) 519, when Plataeae resisted incorporation in a federal state dominated by Thebes and gained the protection of Athens (Hdt. 6,108). In the late fifth and early fourth centuries the federation was based on electoral units (eleven after the destruction of > Plataeae in 427, probably nine earlier; see map > Boeotia): each unit appointed a Boeotarch and sixty members of the federal council; the individual cities all had similar constitutions (Thuc. 5,38,2; Hell. Oxy. 19,2-4 CHAMBERS). This federation was disbanded in 386 after the — King’s peace; the federation as revived in the 370’s had not a council but an assembly, and may not have had electoral units. Thessaly was originally organised in four tetrads (each with a tetrarch), which sometimes combined to elect a single leader, the > tagos. From the fifth century poleis were founded and became more important than the tetrads (e.g. Thuc. 2,22,3). In the fourth century a

STATES, CONFEDERATION OF

795

dynasty of tyrants at + Pherae obtained the title of tagos, their opponents, led by the > Aleuadae of Larisa, organised a koinon with an archon and four polemarchs; appeals to Macedon and Thebes culminated in the appointment of Philip II of Macedon as archon and his overthrow of the tyrants in 352 BC; in the 3 40’s he revived the old tetrarchies (Dem. Or. 9,26). In early Arcadia there were tribal units as well as poleis [2.132-141; 3.39-104; 4.107-112; 5], but moves towards a union of all Arcadians did not go very far. In the 360’s an Arcadian koinén was founded, with a new capital > Megalopolis ( Arcadians, with map); after a few years it split into two rival bodies. Achaea in the fifth century consisted of twelve ‘parts’ (méré) and was still not fully urbanised; by the beginning of the fourth century there was a federal citizenship, which was extended to Calydon in Aetolia (Xen. Hell. 4,6,1). This organisation broke up at the end of the fourth century but was revived in the third; from 251/o it incorporated poleis outside Achaea, and it came to be dominated by its non-Achaean members (> Achaeans, with map).

In north-western Greece there was an Aetolian koinon to which Athens could protest about the misconduct of a member city in 367/6 (Top 137); in the Hellenistic Period this was a union of poleis, and poleis outside Aetolia could be attached to it by — isopoliteia either with a member city or with the koinon (> Aetolians, with map). ~ FEDERATION; > International treaties; > Isopoliteia; ~ Koinon; — Polis; > Sympoliteia; > Synhedrion 1 J. A. LARSEN, Greek Federal States, 1968 2 T.H.NIELsEN, Arkadia. City-Ethnics and Tribalism, in: M.H.

Hansen

796

Statilius. Italic nomen gentile. I. REPUBLICAN

PERIOD

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {I 1] A young friend of M. > Porcius [I 7] Cato; in 46 BC he wanted to follow Cato into death, but allowed himself to be dissuaded by philosophical arguments (Plut. Cato Minor 65,10f.; 66,6-8; 73,7). He then joined cause with M. Iunius [I ro] Brutus, who, because of S.’ attitude towards tyrannicide, did not dare let him in on the plot against Caesar. S. was killed in 42 as a scout at Philippi (Plut. Brutus 51,6). {I 2] S., L. Roman equestrian and leading follower of Catilina (Cic. Cat. 3,6; 3,9; App. B Giv. 2,13; — Catilina); in 63 BC he remained behind in Rome to set fires, and negotiated with the envoys of the Allobroges (Sall. Catil. 17,4; 43,2; 44,1 £.). He was arrested on Dec. 3, and on Dec. 5 he was executed along with the group around P. Cornelius [I 56] Lentulus (Sall. Catil. 47,4; 5556). JOF. {I 3] S., Marius. In 216 BC leader of a Lucanian reconnaissance troop, the hero of an episode which was adopted into the historiographic tradition concerning the build-up to the battle of Cannae (— Battlefields; Liv. 22,42-3; [x]) only by later annalists. His name is also associated with an initially anonymous anecdote according to which a celebrated Roman nobilis (here Q. + Fabius [I 30] Maximus) won over by his generosity an ally who was vacillating in his loyalty (Vir. ill. 43,5; Frontin. Str. 4,7,36).

+ Annalists 1 T.Scumitt, Hannibals Siegeszug, 1981, 218.

TA.S.

(ed.), Introduction to an Inventory of Poleis,

1996, 117-163 3 1.H. NIELSEN, J.Roy, Was There an Arkadian Confederacy in the Fifth Century?, in: M.H. HANSEN, K. RAAFLAUB (eds.), More Studies in the Ancient Greek Polis, 1996, 39-61 4J.Roy, Polis and Tribe in

Classical Arkadia, in: [3], 107-112

5 T.H. NIELSEN,

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

{11 1] S. Attalus. Physician to the Roman

emperors

+ Antoninus [1] Pius and — Marcus [2] Aurelius (MAMA 6,117), c. AD 160. S. was related to — Stati-

(Plin. HN 3,47); their original not been located; in 173 BC in 172 to some extent freed by

lius Crito and a benefactor to his home city of > Heraclea [6] Salbace in Caria [1]. He was a pupil of > Soranus and a > Methodist. Galen (10,909—-16 K.) cites S.’ failure to heal the Cynic Theagenes in Rome as chief example of the uselessness of the therapeutic procedures of the Methodists.

the far side of the Padus (Liv.

1 L. and J. RoBeErT, La Carie, vol. 2, 1954, 177-179; 220.

42,7,3—-9,6; 10,9-12; 10,15; 21,1-5; 21,8-22,8). In the

VN.

J. Roy (eds.), Defining Ancient Arcadia, 1999.

Statielli. Ligurian people capital at Carystum has enslaved by the Romans, the Senate and settled on

PUR.

Roman Period their capital was Aquae Statiellae (modern Acqui Terme). S. GIORCELLI BERSANI, Aquae Statiellae, in: Bollettino sto-

rico-bibliografico subalpino 95, 1997, 377-421; G.LuRASCHI, A proposito dei ‘Ligures Statellates transducti trans Padum’ nel 172 a.C., in: Annali Benacensi 7, 1981, 73-80.

Statilia see + Messalina [1]

E.S.G.

{1 2] T.$. Barbarus A senator; after completing the lower senatorial offices, in AD 195 he participated as legionary legate in the Parthian war of Septimius [II 7] Severus in Mesopotamia; subsequently praetorian legate in Thrace c.196-198; cos. suff. 198/9; governor of Germania superior in 203; later perhaps proconsul of Asia or Africa. He was interred in Rome (CIL VI 1522 = US) rerpiz)

(UL, Alene).

Eck (Statthalter), 79.

[i 3] Taurus S. Corvinus. Son of S. [II 12] and Valeria Messalina, a daughter of the orator > Valerius Mes-

STATILIUS

C97

798

salla; brother of S. [II 13]. Frater Arvalis from c. AD 32 and member of the quindecimviri sacris faciundis. AD 45 cos. ord.; in 46 he participated in Asinius [II 4] Gallus’ conspiracy against the emperor Claudius (Cass. Dio 60,27,5; Suet. Claud. 13,2). The consequences of his participation are unknown.

c.157/8 (IGR IV 1399 = IK 24,1 (Smyrna), no. 600, l.

SCHEID, Recrutement (Fréres),

151-158.

W.E.

{II 4] S. Crito (Statiktoc Koitwv/Statilios Kriton, Titos S. K.; T. Statilius Crito). Physician at the court of the emperor Trajan, rst-2nd cent. AD, benefactor of the city of Ephesus and his native city of Heraclia [6] Salbace. He is mentioned by Martial (11,60,6) and, in AD 96, may have accompanied the Roman army on their expedition against the > Dacians and might be the author of a lost history of the Getae (FGrH I B 200; ~ Getae), which, along with his work on medicine and on cosmetics was written in Greek and is known through later references. Galen mentions two titles by S. about therapeutics (Maguaxttis BipAoc/Pharmakitis biblos ‘Pharmacology’ and [legi tv &xhkOv daguaxwv/Peri tén haplén pharmakon ‘On simple remedies’, 13,833 and 862), possibly the same work (although it does not deal with ‘simple medications’). The work with the first title comprised 5 bks. and presented the material xat& tomovc (kata topous, ‘by place of disease’) and xat& yévn (kata géneé, ‘by type of drug’). The work on cosmetics (in 4 bks.) dealt with the care of the whole body. It was divided into two parts (the healthy body: bks. 1-2; the sick body: bks. 3-4), each part first focused on the head (bks. 1 and 3) and then on the rest of the body (bks. 2 and 4). 1F.E. Kinp, s.v. Kriton (7), RE 11, 1935-1938 2 J.SCARBOROUGH, Criton, Physician to Trajan: Historian and Pharmacist, in: J. W. Eapre (ed.), The Craft of the

Ancient Historian. FS Ch.G. Starr, 1985, 387-405 3 C.Fasricius, Galens Exzerpte aus Alteren Pharmakologen, 1972, 190-192. A.TO.

{II 5] S. Flaccus (writer of epigrams) see > Flaccus [1] [II 6] S. Maximus. Latin grammarian of the late 2nd

cent. AD, belonging to the archaist movement (-— archaism). In a manuscript of Cicero’s Cato Maior he noted peculiarities of linguistic usage; he emended Cicero’s first consular speech (De lege agraria) [3], and, on the basis of notes in his Cicero manuscripts, compiled a collection of singularia or semel posita (rare words and locutions). It was his intention to demonstrate that such

exceptional instances occur in ‘classical’ as well as Archaic authors. Evidence of his work can be traced via > Julius [[V 19] Romanus to > Charisius [3]. 1J.E. G. Zerzer, S.M., in: BICS 21, 1974, 107-123 2 M.MERELLO, S. M., 1977, 113-136 3 O.PECERE, La ‘subscriptio’ di S. M., in: IMU 25, 1982, 73-123 4P.L. ScHMIDT, in: HLL, vol. 4, § 445.3.

{fl 7] T.S. Maximus Cos. ord. in AD 144, curator operum publicorum 146 (CIL VI 1008), procos. Asiae

12). Son of S. [II 8]. [Il 8] T. S. Maximus Severus Hadrianus Cos. suff. in AD 115; perhaps from Berytus in Syria [1. 341]. CIL Ill 10336 does not refer to him, but to Claudius [II 47] Maximus. 1 Syme, RP IV.

[II 8a] S. Severus. Suffect consul before AD 130/132 [x. 178 ff.]; he may be identical with the praetorian governor of the province of Thracia in 114, Statilius Maximus (cf. [2. 269 ff.]); his name would then be S. Maximus Severus. His consulship was not in 115, as assumed above for Statilius [II 4]. 1 H.M. Corron, W.Eck, P. MURABBA’AT 114 und die Anwesenheit roémischer Truppen in den Héhlen des Wadi Murabba’at nach dem Bar Kochba Aufstand, in: ZPE 138,

2002, 173-183 2 E.I. Paunov, M.M.Roxan, The Earliest Extant Diploma of Thrace, A. D. 114 [= RMD I 14], in: ZPE 119, 1997, 269-279.

{fl 9] C. Cassius S. Severus Hadrianus. Related to S.

{II 8]; cos. suff. in about 37067 and Add. VI, VIII {II 10] Sisenna S. Taurus S. [Il 12]. Member of Cicero’s former domus

the mid 2nd cent. AD (CIL VI fasc. 3 p. 4814). Cos. ord. in AD 16; brother of the pontifices. He acquired on the Palatine (Vell. Pat.

20453). W.Eck, s. v., LTUR, vol. 2, 182.

{11 11] T. $. Taurus. Probably from Lucania in Southern Italy; homo novus (Vell. Pat. 2,127). He was an early supporter of Octavianus [1] whose most impor-

tant aide he became next to Agrippa [1] (/oc. cit.). One of Octavian’s commanders in the war against Sex. Pompeius [I 5]. After the defeat of Aemilius [I 12] Lepidus in Sicily, T. apparently took over the proconsulship of Africa; on 30.6.34 BC he celebrated a triumph over that province (Fasti Capitolini for 34 BC); in the same year commander in Illyricum. Commander of the land army at > Actium (Vell. Pat. 2,85,2). When he built an amphitheatre on the Campus Martius in 30 BC, he was permitted to appoint a praetor each year (Cass. Dio 51,23,1). Procos. in Hispania citerior; victory over the Cantabri and Astures (Cass. Dio 51,20,5). Acclaimed imperator three times in all (CIL X 409; II

3556). 26 BC cos. iterum with Augustus; several priestly offices (Vell. Pat. 2,127). When Augustus he left Rome in 16 BC, he appointed S. > praefectus urbi (Cass. Dio 5 4,19,6; Tac. Ann. 6,11,3). He had probably been a patrician since 29 BC [r. 155 f.]. S. [II ro] and S. [Il 12] may have been his grandsons. According to [2. 43 ff.], they were his sons; but, in view of their presumed ages during their consulships in AD rir and 16 (both were patricians), this is scarcely possible. On the columbarium of the Statilii see [2. 59-68]. 1 VOGEL-WEIDEMANN

2M.L.

CALpELii,

Monumentum familiae Statiliorum, 1999.

C.Ricct,

STATILIUS

800

799

{fl 12] T. S. Taurus. Grandson of S. [II 11]. Cos. ord. in AD 11 for the entire year. Father of S. [II 3] and S. [II 13]. Married to Valeria Messalina, a daughter of the orator Valerius Messalla Corvinus. VoOGEL-WEIDEMANN 156.

{fl 13] T. S. Taurus. Son of S. [II 12]; brother of S. [II 3], father of Messalina [1]. AD 44 cos. ord.; 51/2 or 52/3 procos. of Africa [1. 37]. In 53 he was charged with repetundae (> repetundarum crimen) and with ‘belief in magic’ (magicae superstitiones) by his legate Tarquitius Priscus; the real grounds are said to have been the desire of Agrippina [3] to possess S.’ gardens on the Esquiline [2. 85]. S. avoided prosecution by committing suicide (Tac. Ann. 12,59). His gardens passed into imperial ownership. 1 THoMASSON, Fasti Africani,37 vol. 3, 85.

2 E.Papt,s.v., LTUR,

VOGEL-WEIDEMANN, I 54-160.

W.E.

Statio. In the military context a police post ina Roman camp (Tac. Ann. 13,24,1; Tac. Hist. 1,28,1) or the sol-

diers who guarded the gates (Caes. B Gall. 6,37,3; Liv. 355543; 8,8,1). The palace of the principes in Rome was also guarded by a statio (Suet. Tib. 24,1). A small garrison watching over a road junction was also called a statio. These military strong points increased greatly in number during the Principate, assuring security; they were commanded by a > beneficiarius or a > centurio. The stationarii of Late Antiquity were to be found’in border regions in the countryside (Amm. Marc. 14,3,2; 31,8,5) and, more frequently still, in towns (Amm. Marc. 18, 5,3). Stationes and stationarii are repeatedly mentioned in inscriptions (ILS 2052; 9072; 9073;

9087).

lupercus, thanks to his patron (Cic. Att. 2,18,4; 12,5,1). Cicero reacted jealously to Quintus’ confidence in S. (Cic. Ad Q. Fr. 1,2,1-3; Cic. Fam. 16,16,2), accusing

the latter of being ungrateful and of slandering his master’s family (Cic. Ad Q. Fr. 2,8,1; Cic. Att. 5,1,3). [I 3] S. Sebosus; see — S. [II 5] JOR. II. IMPERIAL PERIOD [Il 1] L. $. Aquila. Probably from Athens [1. 141]; father of [II 4]. 1 HALFMANN.

W.E.

{II 2] P. Papinius S. Latin epic poet of the late rst cent. AD. I. Lire

IJ. Worxs

II]. INFLUENCE

I. LIFE Juvenal is the only contemporary who mentions S. by name: in an ironical passage, S. is cited as an example that public reputation and material success do not necessarily go hand in hand (7,82 ff.). All other biographical details must be sought in S.’ Silvae [1]. Probable dates: born in AD 45, died in 96. S. came from Naples [2] and was of Greek descent. According to Silv. 5,3 written in honour of his father — the elder Papinius was himself a poet, a prizewinner in Greek competitions and successful in Naples as a > grammaticus. Unlike > Lucanus [1], > ValeriusFlaccus and — Silius [II 5] Italicus, S. was no dilettante aristocrat. He made his living as a poet, placing his talent — as an encomiast and writer of occasional verse — at the service of rich citizens. Silv. 3,5 speaks of S.’ retirement (regarded today as unsubstantiated) to Naples in reaction to his disappointing defeat in the five-yearly Capitoline games (— Capitolea). Il. Works

1 H. Lies, Expleta statione, in: Britain and Rome, Fest-

schrift E. Birley, 1965, 139-144 clarier, 1995.

2 J.Ort, Die BenefiVALE:

A. OvERVIEW

B.SILVAE

C. THEBAID

D. ACHILLEID

A. OVERVIEW Extant are 5 volumes of occasional verse, the Silvae,

Statius Praenomen of Oscan origin, particularly widespread in Upper Italy (cf. S. Gellius [3], S. > Abbius Oppianicus); later also occurring as nomen gentile with many variants [1. 37, 237, 469]. 1 SCHULZE

2 O.SaLomies, Die romischen Vornamen,

1987, 90 f. I. REPUBLICAN

PERIOD

I. REPUBLICAN

which provide information on social life under Domitian; the Thebaid, an epic in 12 volumes, and its planned but unfinished sequel, the Achilleid. S. was no mere imitator of his predecessors (esp. > Vergilius), but may be regarded as innovative and original in aspiration and achievement.

II. IMPERIAL PERIOD

PERIOD

{1 1] A Samnite, in 90 BC a leader of the Itali in the ~» Social Wars [3], later (81?) on the Roman side. Proscribed at the age of 80 in 43 BC, he distributed his

property and burned himself to death in his empty house (App. B Civ. 4,102). [I 2] A slave and close friend of Cicero’s brother Quintus, from 61 to 59 BC Quintus’ procurator, freed in 59 (hence his full name Q. Tullius S.), and in 46 made a

B. SILVAE The first 4 volumes of the Silvae (‘Forests’) were collected and published by S. himself. The 5th volume was compiled posthumously and in arbitrary order; its prose proem relates only to the first poem. The proems to the other volumes (also written in prose, for the most part in letter form) are descriptive, explanatory and apologetic. The occasions upon which the poems were written are various. Most of them are written in hexameters. Generally, the author proclaims them to be extemporary, but their character as a collection of ‘rough

801

802

drafts’, suggested by the title, is to be understood as a captatio benevolentiae rather than as a true description, even if S. was capable of writing quickly. The greater part of the Silvae may be classified under the heading — epideictic poetry and assigned to the corresponding genres, which however, although recognizable, are not always followed in a rigorous manner; they include celebration and mourning, descriptions (> ekphrasis) of buildings and art objects. As a rule, all these poems have an encomiastic core. Volume 1, dedicated to the consular poet L. > Arruntius [II 12] Stella, begins and ends (1; 6) with poems written in honour of emperor Domitianus [1]. Stella’s marriage to the Neapolitan Violentilla is commemorated in 2. Descriptions of Manilius [II 4] Vopiscus’ villa in Tibur (3) and Claudius [II 29] Etruscus’ bath-house (5) frame a poem of thanks (4) for the recovery of the praefectus urbanus + Rutilius [II 3] Gallicus. Volume 2, dedicated to the wealthy Atedius Melior (3 and 4), contains seven poems and concludes (7) with a birthday poem in honour of the deceased epic poet > Lucanus [1]. Of the five poems in the 3rd volume, which is dedicated to > Pollius Felix, a millionaire from Naples, one is of a somewhat more personal nature: the letter to S.’ wife Claudia (5). Poem 4 pays homage to Domitian’s lover > Flavius [II 24]

Hypsipyle, the exiled queen of Lemnos, who leads it to the spring of Langia and recounts the Argonauts’ visit to Lemnos; King Lycurgus’ son Opheltes (Archemorus), who is under her protection, is killed by a snake. Book 6 relates the funeral games for the prince. In book 7 the Argives reach Thebes, and the war begins. Amphiaraus is swallowed up by the underworld. In books 8-10 the war continues with many incidents, while the Seven are gradually eliminated. In book rx the brothers Eteocles and Polynices fight to the death. Creon becomes king of Thebes. In book 12 Creon refuses burial to the Argive leaders. Their widows travel to Athens and persuade Theseus to intervene. He defeats and kills Creon, and the dead are buried (> Theban cycle). The plot is complex and rich in subplots. Polarities are constantly established at the narrative and symbolic levels between the world of the gods and the world of humans, Olympia and the underworld, the worst of human brutality and occasional glimpses of great virtue (e.g. the self-sacrifice of Menoecus, son of Creon, in book 1o). Furor (‘frenzy’), terror and destruction predominate, the dark overall picture brightened by only occasional shafts of light. Whether book 12 with the intervention of Theseus brings a conclusion or only a

Earinus. The 4th volume, dedicated to Vitorius Mar-

temporary respite remains open.

cellus, begins with three poems in praise of the emperor which throw light on the > ruler cult; 4 purports to bea letter to the dedicatee. S.’ favoured genre ekphrasis is represented by a poem (6) on a statuette of Hercules. The so-called 5th volume contains three epicedia (1; 3;

D. ACHILLEID In the Achilleid, it was S.’ intention to relate the entire life of > Achilles (1,4-7), but the work ceases at

5); 2 is an + encomium, while 4 comprises 19 verses on

Sleep. It is not known how or by whom this selection was compiled. C. THEBAID In the eyes of the poet himself and of his readers, S.’ reputation is founded upon his Thebaid (completed c. 90, after 12 years’ work). The topic, the war of the -» Seven against Thebes, is hardly original; but S.’ language, his metric skill, and his handling of the material justify his claim to individuality in the lists against > Vergilius, Ovidius and > Lucanus [1], as well as the tragedies of > Seneca [2]; the background to the work is Homer and the Greek epic tradition. As with Virgil’s Aeneid, the work may roughly be seen as falling into two parts: an ‘Odyssean’ half (1-6) in which the Argive army reaches Boeotia; and an ‘Iliadic’ (7-12) half, featuring the war and its aftermath (book 12). Book 1, after an introduction and dedication to Domitian, tells of Oedipus’ curse on his sons Eteocles and Polynices, and the conjuring of the fury Tisiphone from the underworld. The exiled Polynices reaches the palace of Adrastus in Argos where he meets Tydeus. In book 3, Tydeus returns to Eteocles (to whom book 2 is devoted) in Thebes; the seers Amphiaraus and Melampus tell portents. Book 4: after three years the Argive army is assembled and sets out for Thebes. It reaches Nemea where Bacchus causes a drought and then encounters

STATIUS

2,167 in the hero’s youth; S.’ further intentions are unclear. The style is less mannered than that of the Thebaid: what survives is perhaps only a draft. The Achilleid enjoyed great popularity in the Middle Ages [2]. III. INFLUENCE Until the Renaissance, the Silvuae had survived in

only one manuscript (M = Cod. Matritensis c.1430). For the Thebaid, on the other hand, considerably more

than roo manuscripts are available; the tradition, which is normally seen as two-stranded, is highly contaminated; it is not possible to determine precise lines of transmission in the form of a stemma. The Achilleid is often published as an appendix to the Thebaid, although autonomous versions in the form of the codices scholasticorum exist, containing short texts for school use. Of the early editions, only those of J. F. GRONOVIUS (1653) and C. BARTH (1664), as full as they are inaccurate, need be mentioned. For the Silvae, F.VoLLMER’S edition with commentary (1898) is still of value. — Epic 1 A. Harpik, S. and the Silvae, 1983 The Medieval Achilleid of S., 1968.

2 P.M. CLocan,

EDITIONS: edition of the complete works: A. TRAGLIA, G. ARICO, 1980 (with comm. and transl.); J.H. MozLey, 1928 (with English transl.). Silv.:A.KLotTz, *1911; J.S. PHILLIMORE, *1917; J. H. FRERE, H.J. Izaac, *1961 (with transl.); A.MARASTONI, *1970; E.COURTNEY, 1990. Theb.: A.KLotz, T.C. KLINNERT, 1973; R.LESUEUR, 3

803

804

vols., 1990-1994; D.E. HILL, *1996. Ach.: O.A. W. DILkE, 1954; J.MEHEUST, 1971. Book. 1: H.HEUVEL,

Sebosus named in Cic. Att. 2,14,2 (59 BC) is highly

STATIUS

1932; H.M. MuLper, 1954. Book 3: H.SNIJDER, 1968. Book 9: M.Dewar, 1991. Book ro: R.D. WILLIAMS, 1970. Book 11: P. VENINI, 1970. BIBLIOGRAPHY: S.M. BRAUND, Ending Epic, in: PCPhS 42, 1996, 1-23; H. CaNcIk, Untersuchungen zur lyrischen Kunst des P. Papinius S., 1965; F. SAUTER, Der romische Kaiserkult bei Martial und S., 1934; W.SCHETTER, Untersuchungen zur epischen Kunst des S., 1960; D. VEssEY, S.

and the Thebaid, 1973; ANRW II 32.5.

D.T.V.

{I 3] M. S. Priscus Licinius Italicus. Equestrian origin; home city unknown. Career: CIL VI 1523 = ILS rog2. Inc. AD 133, as a prefect of a cohort, he went with Sex. lulius [II 133] Severus from Britannia to Judaea to suppress the > Bar Kochba uprising there. After further equestrian military commands and a procuratorship, he was admitted to the Senate in c. 145. After a career as quaestor, people’s tribune and praetor, he commanded two legions and in c. 156-158 became a praetorian legate in Dacia superior where he was involved in battles with external enemies, probably free Dacians and Iazyges. In 159, quite remarkably for a former equestrian, he received an ordinary consulship. After the cura alvei Tiberis (+ cura [2]) in Rome, at the end of 160 still he went as governor to Moesia superior from where a short time later he was transferred to Britannia to deal with military unrest on the northern frontier. Already in 162, however, he was sent to the East to organize, from Cappadocia, the war against the Parthians, and captured Artaxata in Armenia. Such a pattern of transfers is unusual and indicates a high degree of military ability. As there is no further mention of him, he probably died during this war. BIRLEY 123 ff.; Piso, FPD, vol. 1, 66 ff.

{fl 4] L. $. Quadratus. Senator, son of S. [II x]; cos. ord. AD 142; proconsul of Asia probably 15 6/7, thus in the year in which bishop -> Polycarpus of Smyrna suffered martyrdom (cf. [1. 214]). His identification with the orator — Quadration cannot be ascertained. 1 ALFOLDY, Konsulat.

W.E.

improbable. + Makaron nesoi A.K1o7z, s. v. Sebosus (3), RE 2 A, 966-968 (followup W.KROLL, S. (28) Sebosus, RE 3 A, 2223); K.SALLMANN,

Die Geographie des Alteren Plinius in ihrem Verhaltnis zu Varro, 1973, 42.

Statores (from stare, ‘to stand at someone’s side’; in the

military realm = ordinance). Soldiers who in the Imperial Period belonged to the staff of military commanders and governors with troops. They could belong to the troops from the city of Rome or to those in the provinces. Their tasks are difficult to determine; they might have functioned as letter couriers and prison wards. However, these tasks were probably only an (occasional) part of their duties. R.HAENSCH, A commentariis und commentariensis, in: Y.Le Bonec (ed.), La hiérarchie (Rangordnung) de l’armée romaine sous le Haut-Empire 1995, 275,n. 54. W.E.

Statoria. S. Marcella. Wife of C. Minicius [4] Fundanus, sister of Statorius Secundus, mother of two daughters, including Minicia Marcella, whose death is mentioned in Plinius (Ep. 5,16). The ara of her tomb was found together with the ara of her daughter on Monte Mario in Rome (CIL VI 16632). W.Eck, Tra epigrafia, prosopografia e archeologia, 1996, 239-

W.E.

Statorius. L.(?) S. Secundus. senator; cos. suff. under Hadrian. Thereafter, probably in c. AD 124/5, consular governor of Cappadocia (AE 1968, 504); cf. [1.160163]. Brother in law of Minicius [4] Fundanus. 1 W.Ecxk, Jahres- und Provinzialfasten der senatorischen Statthalter, in: Chiron 13, 1983, 147-237.

WE.

Statue I. TERM AND

GENERAL

OF INDIVIDUAL

[II 5] S. Sebosus. An elusive compiler of paradoxes or a geographer who lived between the beginning of the rst cent. BC (discovery of the Canary Islands) and Plinius [1] the Elder. Plinius names him in the indices to HN 2-33 5-73 9; 12-13 and cites him for measurements of distance in Africa (6,183; 201; 202 insulae Fortunatae), as well as in 9,46 for an Indian paradox (giant aquatic worms in the Ganges). Owing to the lack of data, it is not possible to detect a reference to a > periplous or a seaman’s manual, or to a perigesis of marvels in the style of > Ctesias. The sporadic mentions of S. in Plinius (unless the latter has used him more comprehensively than he indicates for the geography of Africa) suggest that Plinius found S. already in form of excerpts, more probably in Varro (De geometria?) than in the works of Juba [2] If. His identification with the

KL.SA.

POINTS

II. DEVELOPMENT

STATUE GENRES

I. TERM AND GENERAL POINTS Derived from the Latin statuere (‘to set up’), in sculpture, ‘statue’ denotes a completely three-dimensionally designed figure. This form of stand-alone depiction of people, animals and the more than human is at the centre of Greek artistry. In archaeological usage, statues which are integrated into architecture are also included in the term (pediment, — akroterion), but > reliefs are not. Individual statues can be combined in a group in content and execution. The format of the statue ranges from smaller than life-size to several times life-size (> Kolossos).

Stone, especially + marble, predominates by far in extant statues, while in Antiquity > bronze and, to a lesser degree, precious metals played an important role.

805

806

+ Wood and composite materials, such as in the acrolithic (+ Akrolithon) and > gold-ivory techniques were also more common than the existing monuments indicate.

enthroned, strictly frontward oriented images, in which the artistic problems of > proportion and motion set the guidelines for further stylistic developments with slight displacements and asymmetries. Starting in the 6th cent. BC, there were also statues of people, as tomb or votive statues. They were oriented on statues of the gods in the form of kouroi (naked youths) and korai (clothed girls) and enthroned seated statues (> Branchidae). The frequency of statues in the Greek world increased, as korai in sanctuaries (e.g. — Athens, Acropolis) and as kouroi on tombs. The > nudity of many male statues, which is interpreted in terms of both cultural history and aesthetics, generally extends as the most conspicuous and most striking characteristic of Greek sculpture throughout all later statue production in Antiquity. In the late 6th cent. and especially in the Classical Period (5th/4th cents.), the depiction of motion in sculpture increased, whether thematically in the types of the equestrian statue, fighting or interacting groups (e.g. Athena-Marsyas group), or in the relaxation of the upright standing figure through contrapposto (shifting the weight of the body to one leg) up to the momentary motion sequences, such as can be followed in the + victor statues which populated the sanctuaries of the competition sites beginning in the 6th cent. The rendition of real people in honorary statues in public places began with the ‘Tyrannicides’ ( Harmodius [1] and + Aristogiton [1], initially c. 510 BC, renewed 477/6 BC) and led to the strategos statues (e.g. Pericles [1]) and on to statues of the Attic tragedians (e.g. Sophocles [x], Rome, VM), as well as sitting and standing poets, orators and philosophers (e.g. Aeschines [2]; Socrates [2]) of the 4th cent. BC. Civic honorary statues began at the same time as Hellenistic ruler statues and formed relatively fixed iconographic physical patterns, which remained constant up to Roman imperial statues and into Late Antiquity. With the type of clothing befitting their class, Greek statues of citizens, beginning with the Hellenistic Period portrait statues (> Portraits), took the form of the so-called cloaked statue, the Romans correspondingly the togate statue, while the clothing and physical patterns were variable for female portrait statues. Beginning in the late Hellenistic Period, above all in the Roman Imperial Period, physical patterns and models were borrowed from depictions of gods for portrait statues. Thus developed the nude, late Hellenistic civic statue with few clothing remains, e.g. the hip-cloak type or shoulder-puff type. In Roman portrait statues, the organic connection of body and head was abandoned through the borrowed statue models, i.e. ideal body and individual portrait were combined. At first, this quantitatively largest group of antique statues was displayed only in public places, but beginning in the Hellenistic Period also increasingly on tombs and in dwellings. Depictions of mythological content and ideal statues from various areas of life, such as athlete statues, fighting groups, genre figures, and animals, were already

In ancient literature, the form-related Latin terms statua, ars statuaria or Greek &vdeuac (andrids, ‘image of a man’) are less common than terms such as &yoAwa (agalma, ‘ornament’), Eavov (xdanon, ‘carved image’),

eixv

(eikon, ‘image’) or Latin signum (‘sign’) and imago (‘image’), which indicate function or meaning; frequently, the statue is called only with that which it represents, e.g. ‘Apollo’. The ancient statue represents the depicted being as a permanent substitute. In the Archaic Period, it was always perceived as magic or religious, in later periods at least in sepulchral and cultic use. Thus, for example, cult statues were prevented from ‘running away’ with chains (cf. Pl. Men. 97d), or a heavenly origin was ascribed to them (> Cult image). The statue is (as is ancient art in general) always representational; changes in style affect form and the expression of life, whether as potential for movement in the Archaic Period, as veritas perceived as quasi-living (— Art, theory of) in the Hellenistic Period or as a representative severity of form in Late Antiquity. The largely coloured composition (— Polychromy) of the statue contributed to bringing it to life; in the Hellenistic Period, this was even striven for using mechanically moveable parts (e.g. the statue of Nysa in the procession of Ptolemaeus [3] II, Ath. 5,198f.). Statues were always displayed ona base which raised them above the ground; only in the Hellenistic Period was an apparently lifelike ambience produced through embedding them directly in rocky ground (e.g. in Rhodian sculpture gardens). Display on columns, arches, benches or in exedras ( Exedra) served as accentuation.

Statues set up in the open were provided with a méniskos (disc with ‘spikes’) on the head to protect them from birds. In the Imperial Period, niches were provided in architecture for statues. In fountain statues, the outflow of water was placed in appropriate body parts. Depending on function, content and context of exhibition, relatively clear formal standards formed for ancient statues, leading to the definition of genres in archaeological scholarship. They must be taken into consideration in both historical and aesthetic perspectives. I]. DEVELOPMENT OF INDIVIDUAL STATUE

GENRES From the beginning of Greek statuary on, the > cult image in the temple was an essential assignment for sculptors. In the Classical Period (5th/4th cents. BC), the valuable acrolithic and chryselephantine statues developed from the earliest forms of the > xoanon and the > sphyrelaton, which for practical reasons were always small. At the same time, the large-format statues of the gods appeared in the 7th cent. BC, with the influence of Egyptian art. They quickly grew to colossal formats of up to rom. These were upright standing or

STATUE

STATUE

designed as votives for sanctuaries in the late Archaic Period. In the Hellenistic Period, they formed an important part of the statue production of the highest artistic quality. The religious meaning could thus be lost in favour of artistic enjoyment. Ideal statues became part of the representative furnishings and of Roman art collections with retrospective styles and copies of earlier originals (> Art, interest in; > Copies). Particularly in the Imperial Period, statue copies formed the main body of production, besides portrait statues, in order to satisfy the Roman desire for producing a certain atmosphere in the sphere of the > house (— Villa) and > garden. In the early 3rd cent. AD, the production of statue copies came to an end, and only honorary statues of citizens and rulers continued to the end of Antiquity. Early Christian art was familiar with the statue only as functionally highly integrated group depictions, such as in table supports. At the end of Antiquity, the latent consciousness of the vitality of a statue expressed itself in the Christian attacks on Graeco-Roman statuary — from polemics to destruction ~ Syrian dynasty).

808

807

(for iconoclasm,

see

+ Relief; > Sculpture OVERBECK (literary sources on artists and their statues); Liproip; G.M. A. Ricuter, The Sculpture and Sculptors of the Greeks, 1950; RICHTER, Kouroi; E. PARIBENI, s.v. statua, EAA 7, 1966, 476-481; RICHTER, Korai; P. ZANKER, Klassizistische Statuen, 1974; J.BOARDMAN, Greek Sculpture. The Archaic Period, 1978; Id., Greek Sculpture. The Classical Period, 1985; FUCHS/FLOREN; A.A.

DONOHUE, Xoana and the Origins of Greek Sculpture, 1988; W.MartTInI, Die archaische Plastik der Griechen, 1990; STEWART; S. Morris, Daidalos and the Origins of Greek Art, 1992; B.S. RipGway, The Study of Classical

Sculpture at the End of the zoth Century, in: AJA 98, 1994, 759-772; P. MoRENO, Scultura ellenistica, 1994; F.Rausa, L’immagine del vincitore. L’atleta nella statuaria greca dall’eta arcaica all’ellenismo, 1994;J.BOARDMAN, Greek Sculpture. The Late Classical Period and Sculpture in Colonies and Overseas, 1995; S.DEANGELI, s.v. statua di culto, EAA 2. Suppl., 1997, 382-392. RN.

Status (lit. ‘standing’, ‘condition’, ‘position’). [1] (Rhetoric). The Latin rhetorical term status (Quint. Inst. 3,6,1; Cic. Top. 25,93) or constitutio (Quint. Inst. 3,6,2: ‘ascertainment’ i.e. of the point in dispute) equates to the Greek otdotc/stdsis (Quint. Inst. 3,6,3; Cic. Top. 25,93; Isid. Orig. 2,5,1). A. DEFINITION B. SIGNIFICANCE AND HISTORY

noting the lining-up of pugilists: Quint. Inst. 3,6). Here, the resolution of the status was directed at all three parties participating in a court case. At the first confrontation (Quint. Inst. 3,6,5: ex prima conflictione), the judge had to determine from the usually contradictory statements of the parties in dispute in what matter, if at all, a case was to be heard. From the points of view of the defendant and plaintiff, the determination of the status was of decisive importance, because it had a fundamental impact to the advantage or disadvantage of the party represented (issues lacking the potential for conflict, for example, had no status). It was presented in the first phase as a question-and-answer game between the judge and the parties, following a sequence of four spheres of status. Before the case could be ascribed to one of the four status, a kind of preliminary examination had to determine whether (1) the material content of an argumentative verdict was available and was in this respect susceptible to the genus rationale (genus iudiciale), or whether (2) there was a need for a contractual or legal interpretation, placing the case in the genus legale. In both cases, the problems could be clarified and elucidated in four ways, but a case could require differentiation into yet further sub-status. Case (1) presented, as a logical sequence of ‘fallback positions of defence’, the model case of dialectics: a) the status coniecturalis asked whether a deed had actually been committed (question of conjecture: yes?/no?). b) The status definitivus categorized the deed or described it precisely (question of definition: what?). c) The status qualitatis pursued the evaluation of the deed and its justification and/or its penal appraisal (question of justice: justifiable). d) The status translationis tested the competence of the plaintiff or the legitimacy of the court, or determined the transfer of the case to another court (question of procedure: to proceed or not?). (2) In the second case, that requiring a contractual or legal interpretation, the distinction was made between the following spheres of status: a) scriptum — voluntas, the status detecting contradictions between form of words and (intended) sense. b) Leges contrariae, the status determining contradictions between two or more pieces of legislation. c) Ambiguitas, highlighting the ambiguity of legal texts. Finally, d) ratiocinatio, the status in the case of which legal loopholes could be closed by drawing analogies from other legal instru-

ing of the matter of dispute’) was the determination, arrived at by a series of questions (summa quaestio,

ments. Since status could change during a case by the modification of the factual basis (e.g. confessions by one or other of the parties), the four status applied not only at the beginning of the case when they determined the starting position, but also in the course of proceedings, when they determined the state of affairs at any one

‘crucial question’: Quint. Inst. 3,11,2; 27), both of the

time (e.g. Quint. Inst. 7, 1, 6-7).

points of dispute (controversia) regarding which a legal process was being conducted, and of the issue of the cognizance within which the point of dispute (causa) lay. Behind it lay the conception of legal procedure as a fight (cf. Quint. Inst. 7,1,8; status metaphorically de-

B. SIGNIFICANCE AND HISTORY The development of the doctrine of status from the topos is generally derived from — Hermagoras [1] of

A. DEFINITION In the rhetorical system (> Rhetoric), status (‘stand-

Temnus

(2nd cent. BC), and is a cornerstone of the

809

810

+ argumentatio in Roman rhetoric. It is treated with an individual focus by the various theoreticians (e.g. Rhet.

The statu liber, i.e. the individual conditionally (usu. probably the payment of a sum of money from the slave’s own property, the > peculium) freed by testament, specifically (as yet) lacked the status of liberty. The very

Her: CicInvs; Cie) Deon: 2, 1323 Quint. Inst. 3511,27;

Aug. De rhetorica) in the rhetorical system, mostly in the context of the speech in court, but originally it served the orator as a pattern of argumentation that could be deployed in any context to ascertain the loci ( Topics) and arguments suitable for the speech. There is in the case of the doctrine of status a particularly close connection assumed with forensic rhetoric and professional juridical writing, but it is in principle transferable to all literary genres. It is particularly suitable as a template of interpretation for the analysis of the conflict potential (conflicts of the application, strength and interpretation of standards) of literary works [4. 21] in discourses. 1 A. Braet, The Classical Doctrine of Status and the Rhe-

torical Theory of Argumentation, in: Philosophy and Rhetoric 20, 1987, 79-93 2 L.CaLBOLIMONTEFUSCO, La dottrina degli ‘status’ nella retorica greca e romana, 1986 3J.DINGEL, Scholastica materia, 1988, 66-162 4K.H. Gorrert, Einfiihrung in die Rhetorik, *1994 5 E.B. HOLTsMaRK, Quintilian on S$. A Progymnasma, in:

Hermes 96, 1968, 356-368 6 F.Horak, Die rhetorische Status-Lehre und der Aufbau des Verbrechensbegriffs, in: F. Horak, I2I-142

W. WALDSTEIN (ed.), FS A. Herdlitezka, 1972, 7 LAUSBERG, §§ 79-254. C.W.

STATUS SYMBOLS

expression, however, betrays the fact that the conditionally entitled person was already allowed a very similar status to that accorded on fulfilment of the condition. This legal concept, which probably dates back to the Twelve Tables (5th cent. BC), continues to resonate

in the ‘expectant rights’ (Anwartschaftsrecht) of contemporary German civil law. > Civil law IV; > Status symbols HonsELL/MAYER-MALY/SELB, 75 f.; KASER, RPR, vol. 1, 270-273, 288 f. es:

[3] (Politics). In political contexts, status did not denote the Roman ‘state’ in the sense of the institutional body politic, but the condition, form and arrangement of the commonwealth (status rei publicae; status civitatis), including in the sense of constitutional! form (cf. Cic. Rep. 1,26,423

1,44,68;

2,35,60; Tac. Hist. 4,85,2: status

imperii) and the condition of a constitution that may be preserved, undermined or improved (Cic. Rep. 1,20,33; 2533557; [1.225 f.; 2.62-66]). This fundamental meaning endured to the end of antiquity (even if status did occasionally approach the sense of ‘state-as-institution’, cf. Tert. De resurrectione 24,18: status Roma-

[2] (Law). In Roman law, status was also from the 3rd cent. AD the technical term for legal ‘status’. In Justinian (6th cent. AD), an entire digest title (Dig. 1,5) dealt with the status of individuals. Depending on the matter in hand, the issues dealt with here had, prior to the 3rd cent. AD, rather been included under the term — condicio (in the sense of legal conditionality). Distinction is to be drawn between issues of (1) citizenship (status civitatis, > civitas B), (2) personal > liberty or bondage (-— slavery), including the special status of the > freedmen (II. also > manumission C) and (3) status within the family group: as father of the family (— pater familias), as wife subject to the legal power of the husband (-— manus), subjection to paternal power (— patria potestas) or independence (with the status of one’s own rights, sui iuris), also matters of legitimate and illegitimate descent (— spurius). Special rules applied in all three spheres to the loss of status (— deminutio capitis, ‘diminution of legal status’). Certain procedural precautions were allowed for the securing of status. Most important was the suit of freedom (status quaestio, also: liberalis causa). The difficulty here was, until Justinian, that the individual asserting his or her freedom might be a slave, and therefore entirely without legal and procedural competence. Therefore, a free man had to appear on his behalf as an advocate (- adsertor), and appeal against the (alleged) slave owner using the form of the — rei vindicatio (‘claim for restoration of property’). Conversely, there was also the vindicatio in servitutem (‘claim for readmission into slavery’).

nus; 30,4: status Iudaicus; [2. 122-125]). It also sur-

vived into the Middle Ages [2. 300] and is still perceptible in the Italian loan-word stato in MACHIAVELLI [3]. Only from the 17th cent. did the loan-words ‘state’, état, stato, Staat acquire their modern meanings, and only in German has the ancient meaning been entirely lost. 1 E. KOSTERMANN, Status als politischer Terminus in der Antiker, in: RhM 86, 1937, 225-240

Vom

antiken

zum

2 W.SUERBAUM,

frih-mittelalterlichen

Staatsbegriff,

31977. 3H.MansFIELD, On the Impersonality of the Modern State: A Comment on Machiavelli’s Use of Stato, in: American Political Science Rev. 77, 1983, 849-857.

W.ED.

[4] s. > Ordo; > Status symbols

Status symbols I. STATUS: CONCEPT AND ISSUES II. DEFINITION AND FUNCTION III. INDIVIDUAL STATUS SYMBOLS

I. STATUS: CONCEPT AND ISSUES Status denotes the social position of an individual. In the narrower sense, it implies clear legal qualities, e.g. connected with membership of the citizenry of a city, a social order (> ordo II, cf. status [2]) or the groups of free-men, freedmen or slaves. Objectifiable criteria of distinction, such as official rank or age, also determine status. More broadly, and with reference to society, status refers to the degree of social prominence attained.

STATUS SYMBOLS

811

812

Important status symbols in ancient history were

Laws limiting private expenditure on lifestyle and

origin, > wealth, > education, rank within hierarchical

burial (> luxus) served in Greece and at Rome to pro-

orders, membership of exclusive groups and acquired individual renown. Only a few denied its validity

tect the aristocratic code of behaviour and to restrain a ruinous competition for status. In democratic Athens, mistrust and the pressure of conformity restricted the over-demonstrative use of status symbols [3]. In Sparta, the display of wealth was regarded as honourable if, for instance, it benefited companions in the syssition (> Banquet [II B]). There, too, however, there was no lack of opportunities for the exhibition of wealth.

(+ Cynicism), but nonetheless a fundamental re-evalu-

ation of criteria and differentiations of status was possible (+ Monasticism). Extreme differences in the various scales led to inconsistencies of status, with consid-

erable potential for conflict. A striking example of this is the hatred for the > freedmen of the princeps, who acquired not only wealth, but — especially under ~» Claudius [III 1] — great power, and experienced official augmentations of status (Plin. Epist. 7,29; 8,6; Tac. Ann. 12,53). I]. DEFINITION AND FUNCTION Status symbols were a visible shorthand for sociopolitical ranking, and at the same time, by virtue of their ubiquity, they constituted means for the internalization of such ranking. They offered rulers a means of bestowing privilege or admonition, while conversely serving to demonstrate acquired status or, where status inconsistencies emerged, to underscore a claim to as high an overall status as possible. Status symbols also permitted notably differentiated statements about oneself, as e.g. in the case of the nouveau-riche freedman Trimalchio (Petron. Sat. 32,3; [13]).

Informal status symbols as an expression of personal distinction were distinct from official or class attire and the official insignia (highly differentiated at Rome: + fasces; > lictor; > sella curulis). The connection between representation via status symbols and authority is shown by Val. Max. 2,2,7. While in Greece the status symbols of the aristocracy were part of ostentatious consumption, justified no differences in rank and possessed at most a diffuse distance from the political system, at Rome they very clearly expressed the individual’s relationship to the commonwealth [9]. Status symbols thus became regulated by law at Rome, and their allocation monopolized, in order to denote groups more clearly, to mobilize them politically, to assure loyalty or, in general, to clarify the social hierarchy. Social ascent was visibly rewarded by status symbols. This applied in particular to the equestrian order (— equites Romani), for whom the front rows at the theatre were reserved (lex Roscia theatralis:

III. INDIVIDUAL STATUS SYMBOLS

It is generally difficult to clarify the origin and functional context of status symbols (military equipment: horse, patrician’s shoes, etc.; magical/sacred sphere: ring, amulet), because of the lack of sources for the early period. The adoption of purple from Oriental royal costume seems certain. The use and regulation of > purple as a status symbol are attested throughout antiquity. Common status symbols throughout antiquity — in addition to > clothing and > shoes — were in first place ~ jewellery, by which women, too, could be drawn into the demonstration of status (Liv. 34,1—-8: repeal of the lex Oppia; Plin. HN 9,114), and the keeping of — horses (Aristoph. Nub. 12-74), which already operated as a status symbol in the Mycenaean period. Horses had no important military function in Archaic and Classical Greece, but they were closely associated with the aristocratic lifestyle. In the aestheticized culture of the Greek nobility, another status symbol was the carefully groomed, beautiful body (+ kalokagathia), toughened by sport: this was quite different from Republican Rome. Particularly favoured were status symbols which could be acquired with money and were therefore available to social climbers, although for this very reason they were also subject to criticism. Among these were, in addition to jewellery, clothing and cosmetics (Mart. 2,29), in particular splendid houses (Cic. Leg. 3,30; Cic. Off. 1,138-140; Vitr. de Arch. 6,5; Plin. HN 17,2-6; 36,48 f.; 36,109-112; Plin. Epist. 2,17), extensive gar-

dens (+ Gardens [2 II B]), the ownership of works of art (> Art, interest in) and refined table luxury (Plut. Lucullus 41,7). In general, all forms of ‘conspicuous consumption’ and the demonstrative enjoyment of

~ leisure, esp. in the company of many guests (Mart.

Cass. Dio 36,42,1-2; Cic. Mur. 40; Plut. Cicero 132-3;

10,27) and clients, constituted status symbols —not that

lex Iulia theatralis: Mart. 5,8; 5,353 5,38; luv. 3,153158). The senators had had specially allocated seats

there was any lack of attempts at functional legitimization (Tac. Ann. 2,33; on the critical viewpoint of Tiberius, cf. Tac. Ann. 3,53 f.).

from

194

BC

(Liv.

34,54,3-8;

Val.

Max.

2,4,3).

Emblems of rank on clothing — the broad purple band (latus clavus) on the > tunica and red shoes for Senators, the narrow purple band (angustus clavus) and gold ring for equites — comprised such formalized status symbols (cf. Plin. HN 33,29). In general, the standardization of status symbols increased during the Principate, but the ‘externalization’ of rank by status symbols also made unwarranted claims possible.

— Ornamenta; > Status [2] 1 E.BaLttRuscH,

Regimen

morum,

1988

2H.BiLum,

Purpur als Statussymbol in der griechischen Welt, 1998 3J.Davipson, Courtesans and _ Fishcakes, 1997 4 W.Eck, Cum dignitate otium: Senatorial domus in Imperial Rome, in: Scripta Classica Israelica 16, 1997, 162— 190 5 J. ENGELS, Funerum sepulcrorumque magnificentia. Begrabnis- und Grabluxusgesetze in der griechischromischen Welt, 1998 6E.FLatG, Politisierte Lebensfihrung und asthetische Kultur, in: Histor. Anthropologie

813

814 I, 1993, 193-217. 7 W.HOoEPENER (ed.), Geschichte des Wohnens, vol. 1, 1999 8 F.KoLs, Zur Statussymbolik im antiken Rom, in: Chiron 7, 1977, 239-259 9 E.Rawson, Discrimina ordinum. The lex Iulia theatra-

STEELYARD

Ancient steelyards

lis, in: PBSR 55, 1987, 83-114 10 M.REINHOLD, Usurpation of Status and Status Symbols in the Roman World, in: Historia 20, 1971, 275-302

11 A.G. SHERRATT,

Drinking and Driving: Bronze Age Status Symbols, 1987 12 E.STEIN-HOLKEsKAMP, Adelskultur und _ Polisgesellschaft, 1989 13 P. VEYNE, La vie de Trimalchio, in: Id., La société romaine, 1991, 9-50 14 U. WALTER (ed.), M. Valerius Martialis, Epigramme, 1996 (comm.)

U.WAL.

Staurakios [1] Byzantine emperor (AD 811), son of > Nikephoros

{2} I, seriously wounded in the battle against the Bulgarian Khan Krum, in which his father fell. After a short period of recognition as successor to the throne, he was succeeded by > Michael [3] I.

Fig. 1: Pompeii type

P.A.HOLLINGsWworRTH, s.v. S., ODB 3, 1945 f.

[2] Eunuch in the rank of a mateixvoc/patrikios (> Patrikios), from AD 781 Aoyobétng tot Seduov/logothétés tout drémou (> Logothetes), victorious over the Slavs in Greece in 783, till 797 very influential counsellor of the empress — Irene and opponent of her son Constantinus [8] VI; died in 800. P.A. HOLLINGsSworTH, s. v. S., ODB 3, 1945.

FT.

Steel. Modern term for alloys of > iron with a carbon content of up to two per cent. In the blast-furnace process, however, the iron extracted has a much higher

carbon content, which has to be reduced by means of a technical procedure (refining). In Antiquity there was an entirely different technical problem: Crude iron, the product of the smelting process, had only an extremely limited carbon content and was therefore relatively soft. The iron was therefore tempered by further forg-

Fig. 2:

Osterburken type (early group; c. AD 200 )

ing in charcoal fire, which led to an increase in carbon,

and then quenching. This procedure depended on the experience of the smith and could hardly be adequately analyzed. Because of the specific composition of the iron ore, locally occurring iron proved particularly suitable for tempering (ferrum Noricum). There was no special term for iron with a carbon content of more than one per cent. + Iron; > Metallurgy; > Mining H.SCHN. Steelyard (Latin statera, campana; xapnavoc/kampanos, xaunavov/kampanon). Steelyard refers to the form of straight-beam balance with arms of varying length, which has been demonstrated in Italy beginning in the late rst cent. BC, and was later widespread in the Roman Empire. The early form of the typical Roman steelyard and its mechanical principle was described by Vitruvius, who provides the then common term statera (‘scale’; Vitr. De arch. 10,3,4), while much later, around AD 600, Isidorus calls it campana (Isid. Orig. 16,25,6). Correspondingly, in the late antique/Byzan-

Fig. 3: Late antique type

STEELYARD

816

815

tine era, it was called xapumavoc/ hampanos, xaumavov/ kampanon, xaunavagiov/kampandarion in Greek, a fact which to date has scarcely been considered, with the verb xaunavitew/kampanizein (‘to weigh’) and with xounavot/kampanistes (‘swindler/con man’) [6. s. v.]. Besides some special forms [4; 5], by far the most common type is substantiated in a variety of development stages through the 7th cent. in several hundred examples, most insufficiently published. In this form, two (later three) attachment hooks or hangers (ansae) are placed at relatively small distances in front of the more compactly designed beam end, on which the load equipment hangs, so that there are several eccentric fulcra (centra) and thus lever ratios or weighing ranges. Opposite this variable, short ‘load arm’, the balance can be found using a hanging sliding weight (aequipondium, vagum pondus; figs. 1-3) on the long rectangular ‘scale arm’, which is rotated by 45°. The resulting weight can be read from the scales which correspond to the respective attachments and are engraved on different sides of the long arm (virga signata libris et unciis: Isid. loc. cit.). All devices are designed so that the scale arm points to the left, i.e. so that it is held in the right hand and the sliding weight is moved with the left hand (per puncta vagando perducere: Vitr. De arch. loc. cit.). Most steelyards by far were made of bronze alloys; however, steelyards were also made of iron and wood with metal beaks (in the north-western provinces

[1. 94-102; 4]). The origin of the steelyard is not yet sufficiently explained. It is certain that this extraordinarily successful, but challenging to produce technical innovation was in use towards the end of the rst cent. AD in Italy and that the manufacturing centres of the two related earlier types must have been in Italy, definitely also in Campania with its flourishing coppersmith industry, because many steelyards of one of these types have been found in Pompeii (fig. 1; cf. the term campana; Isid. loc. cit. considers Campania to be the place of origin). Changes in construction and a rapidly growing spread can be observed in the following period. Thus, production sites must have also appeared in the provinces, initially in the west. The main types [1] can be placed in a rough chronological order — with overlaps — but their period of manufacture can only be approximately determined, particularly as individual devices could remain in use for long periods. The tendencies can be clearly recognized: at first, the type variants increase, then the range of variation declines. The attachment areas were frequently expanded to three, the scale pan replaced by a pair of chains with hooks in the form of meat hooks. Beginning around the 2nd half of the 2nd cent. AD, steelyards in which the third attachment was placed on a third side of the load arm became established, correspondingly requiring a freely movable, rotating attachment of the load equipment (fig. 2). This design was further perfected, until the steelyard gained its most ideal form (which was then to remain canonical for a long time) in Late Antiquity with perfect mobility

of all elements (fig. 3). The particularly numerous extant steelyards from Late Antiquity [1; 3; 7] are of such uniformity that governmental control of their manufacture must be considered no later than this; in addition, the sliding weights for larger steelyards from the east are frequently designed as busts of empresses. The weight ranges of steelyards begin at 1 > libra or less; the scales of the various sides mostly overlap. The lightest range was marked in > unciae (with dots or nicks), half Roman pounds (small strokes, often with dots) and pounds (full strokes). On the second scale, ounces are usually left out, on the third, for the heaviest weights, the half pounds as well. Usually, the beginning of the scale and at least the five and ten pound steps are marked with Roman numerals. Greek numerals were used on late antique steelyards from the east. Astonishingly large weights could be weighed with steelyards, e.g. up to 26 librae/c. 8.5 kg (length 28 cm) with an early steelyard with two attachments, up to 77 pounds / c. 25.2 kg (length 24 cm; unpubl.) with a type such as fig. 2, a maximum of around 50 to 100 pounds/c. 16.4 to 32.8 kg with late antique steelyards of 30 to 45 cm length [3. 220]. That damage through wear and material fatigue must have occurred frequently is shown by repairs and the numerous fragments which have been found. The tendency to develop larger weighing ranges reached its peak in the east in the 5th—7th cents. with large steelyards [3; 7], where there was a return to two attachments (largest known example at 1.46 m length for a max. 400 librae/c. 131 kg). The sliding weights were often designed as busts into the 2nd cent. and again in Late Antiquity (hollow casting with lead filling; corpus [2]), but most were spherical, acorn- or onionshaped with many variants, often made of lead with a coating of copper sheeting. Decorative elements on the steelyards themselves are found only to a moderate degree; early Byzantine large steelyards are furnished with animal-headed beaks (boar, lioness) on both ends [7]. Calibration inscriptions are extremely rare [3. 220, 211; cf. 1.75], Greek owner inscriptions, most with sign of the cross, are common in the late antique/early Byzantine era [3; 7].

The triumph of the steelyard is explained by its simple, quick use and the large weighing range. Steelyards did not replace equal-armed balances, but in many areas of use (demonstrated, among other places, in markets, shops, at butchers’, on ships, in military camps, later also in Church possessions) they were apparently a mainstay of economic life in the Principate and, above all, in Late Antiquity. Their large long-range effect reaches well into the modern era and, in eastern cultures, into the most recent times. ~ Scales 1 N. FRANKEN, Zur Typologie antiker Schnellwaagen, in: BJ 193, 1993, 69-120 2 1d., Aequipondia. Figiirliche Laufgewichte romischer und friihbyzantinischer Schnellwaagen, 1994

3 J.GarBscH, Wagen oder Waagen?, in:

Bayer. Vorgeschichtsblatter 53, 1988, 201-222

4H.R.

JENEMANN, Zur Geschichte der Waagen mit variablem

818

817

Armlangenverhaltnis im Altertum, in: TZ 52, 1989, 319352 5 E.MicHon, s.v. Libra, DS 3, 1225-1229 6 E.A. SopHoc es, Greek Lexicon of the Roman and Byzantine Periods, 1914 7 D.SruTzINGER, Zwei spatantike Schnellwaagen, in: E.DAssMANN (ed.), Tesserae. FS J. Engemann, 1991, 304-328. P.W.

Steiria (Ztevoid/Steirid, Lrevota/Steiria, Xtoia/Stiria, LXrnewd/Stérid). Attic Paralia deme of the Pandionis phyle, three (four) bouleutai, on the eastern coast of Attica between Prasiae and Brauron on the bay of Porto Raphti (Str. 9,1,22; modern Limen Mesogeias) to the north of the Punta peninsula [1. 68-70]. The Steiriaké hodos (‘S. Road’) connected S. with Athens (PI. Hipparch. 229a). Steirians took part in the colonisation of -» Euboea [1] (Str. 10,1,6). The Phegaeans in IG II* 2362 probably formed a > komé (‘rural community’) of S. [2. 55, 57-60]. In about 286 BC S. and Prasiae were relocated to the Coronea peninsula and fortified, but they depopulated after the Macedonian conquest in 262 BC [1]. — Phegaea 1 H. Lauter-Bure, Die Festung auf Koroni und die Bucht von Porto Raphti, in: MarbWPr 1988, 67-102 _2J.S. TraILL, Demos and Trittys, 1986. TRAILL, Attica, 43, 62, 68, 112 No. 130, Tab. 3.

H.LO.

Stele I. NEAR EAST AND Ecyrpt IJ. PHOENICIA III. CLAssi1cAL ANTIQUITY

STELE

also includes kudurrus with their combination of figurative reliefs, divine symbols and long texts in which the ownership of land is regulated (end of the 2nd millennium BC to beginning of the rst). Stelae have no role in the other territories of the Near East. It was only at the beginning of the rst millennium that burial stelae enjoyed great popularity in Syria, presumably under Egyptian influence. K.Martin,

s.v.

Stele, LA

6, 1986,

1-6; J. BORKER-

K1iAun, Altvorderasiatische Bildstelen und vergleichbare Felsreliefs, 1982; D. BoNaTZz, Das syro-hethitische Grabdenkmal, 2000.

KJ.-W.

Il. PHOENICIA Stelae, as votive and burial stelae, are among the

most common classes of monument in the PhoenicianPunic world. In the Levant area, the repertoire of stele images and shapes essentially follows MesopotamianSyrian and Egyptian models. Corresponding to their significance as stone markers or stone representations

of dead persons or dedicators, stelae of the Mediterranean West (— Carthage, > Tharrus, > Motya, etc.) show smooth transitions to > baitylia, cippi (— Cippus), burial altars etc.; ‘naiskos stelae’ continue to be

particularly popular, with and without detailed architectural frames. Representations on stelae can be iconic or aniconic, less often showing astral and divine symbols (e.g. sun discs and moon crescents, Tanit symbol). — Phoenicians, Poeni G. Tore, Stéles, in: V.Krincs (ed.), La civilisation phéni-

cienne et punique, 1995 (=HbdOr r. 20), 475-493; M.L. UBERTI, s. v. Stéles, DCPP, 422-427. H.G.N.

I. NEAR EAST AND EGYPT

Stelae are standing stone slabs with reliefs or inscriptions on one or more sides; in Egypt wooden stelae also survive. In early Mesopotamia their shape can be natural, elsewhere they usually have rounded tops, less often squared tops. From the end of the 4th millennium BC, funeral stelae were used in Egypt at or in tombs (or cenotaphs) as cult places. In the rst millennium, funeral stelae (mostly wooden) were also placed in the burial chamber: they bear images (the dead person at a sacrificial altar or praying) and inscriptions (sacrificial formulas, prayers, biographical data etc.). Furthermore, in temples there are votive stelae and royal stelae, mostly recording a particular event (campaign, hunt, marriage, building) and used for state propaganda. Decrees were also made public on stelae (the Egypt word for stele, wd, means ‘command?’). Stelae could also be used as boundary markers. Magic stelae, covered with figures and texts, were used for healing and prophylaxis. In Mesopotamia they almost always depicted the ruler and his deeds (stele showing a lion hunt from Uruk, end of the 4th millennium; vulture stele of Eannatum from Girsu, c. 2500; stele of > Naramsin, c. 2250; stele of Gudea from Laga§ and of > Urnamma from Ur, c. 2100). The ‘Code of + Hammurapi’, recorded on a stele beneath a relief of the ruler, had the purpose of decreeing an interpretation of the laws. The term stele

III. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

In Graeco-Roman

Antiquity, stele (Greek otyAr/

stélé; Latin stela) was the term for a carrier of written or

pictorial information placed on the ground. In archaeological usage, stele denotes free-standing — reliefs, for the most part with representations on only one side but occasionally also on two, and chiefly in Greek areas. They were erected on low bases, whereas votive stelae were also embedded in the rock floor or the > stylobate of a > temple. According to its function, the stele could be a burial, votive or documentary relief. The formal design of a stele included, for the most part, an upper border formed of architectural components (architrave, gable, > epistylion). From the Archaic Period onwards, the proportions of burial stelae changed, leading from column-like stelae by way of vertical oblong stelae with increasingly sophisticated frames right up to a true - naiskos shape in the 4th cent. BC. Documentary stelae (sth-3rd cents. BC) are smaller in scale and have reliefs only on the upper part, the rest bearing an > inscription (e.g. documentary inscriptions). Votive stelae (— Votive offerings) were primarily used to bear relief images, which were affixed at the upper end in an architectural frame.

STELE

Small votive and burial reliefs from all periods can be found throughout the Greek world, including the periphery. As they were wide-spread topographically, culturally and socially from the Hellenistic period onwards, both the shapes of stelae were more or less standardised — with a rounded border at the top, with one or several sunken areas for images — and the relief depictions themselves. Below the votive reliefs, representations of chthonic deities are particularly common; burial stelae mostly show family scenes in a domestic setting. Stelae as a monument genre numbering in the

thousands are of particular significance as reference objects in the study of ancient regional cultures. E.PFuHL, H.Mo6sius, Die ostgriechischen Grabreliefs, 1977-1979; M. MEYER, Die griechischen Urkundenreliefs, 1989; C.W.CLAIRMONT, Classical Attic Tombstones,

1993; J. FaBricius, Die hellenistischen Totenmahlreliefs, 1999.

RN.

Stellatura see

> Commeatus

Stellionatus. In Roman law, the misdemeanour of malicious cozenage. Prosecuted as a criminal offence from no earlier than the reign of Antoninus Pius (2nd cent. AD), it was a ‘crime out of the usual order’ (> crimen extraordinarium, Ulp. Dig. 47,20,2), in regard to which negotiations were carried out by the cognition process (> cognitio) before imperial officials (> praefectus urbi, provincial governors). According to Ulp. Dig. 47,20,3,1, the crimen stellionatus, like the private action for deceit (actio de dolo, > dolus), was subsidiary, i.e. it was only prosecuted if no other grounds for punishment or action were present (si de his rebus alia actio non erit). However, the range of applications for stellionatus in the Classical period (1st—3rd cents. AD) was considerable. Common to all cases was the malicious infliction of damage. Examples: pledging of another’s property, fraud in commercial practices (Dig. 47,20,3,1), sale of a statuliber (person manumitted by testament) with the fraudulent concealment of the said — status. Even > perjury for the purpose of enrichment, and the fumum vendere (lit. ‘selling smoke’; sale of non-existent influence on a third party) could be prosecuted as stellionatus. Prosecutions for stellionatus could be made alongside private accusations of deceit or arising from contracts. Competition with — falsum (‘fraud’, ‘crimes of falsification’) was also possible. The exact penalty was not specified, but did not exceed banishment (of + honestiores) or forced labour (of humiliores). Conviction probably led to infamy (> infamia). L. GAROFALO, La persecuzione dello stellionato in diritto romano,

820

819

1992.

Stemma, Stemmatics see > Philological methods

A.VO.

Stentor

(Xtévtwo/Sténtor,

aptonym:

‘roarer’

[r1]).

Greek warrior at Troy, whose powerful voice is equivalent to those of 50 men. In his guise > Hera gives the Greeks a dressing-down (Hom. Il. 5,784-792). S. himself does not appear anywhere. This ‘lacuna’ was increased in ancient exegesis by scholarly speculations (Schol. AbT Hom. Il. 5,785): he had to lose his life because he had challenged — Hermes to a competition in shouting (for the motif cf. + Thamyris), and is the inventor of the war trumpet. The passage in Homer is the basis of the still proverbial ‘Stentorian voice’ (Aristot. Pol. 1326b 6-7; Aristid. 2,28). 1 KAMPTZ, 253f.

REN.

Stenyclarus (=tevibxdragoc/Stenyklaros, also LUtevbxdrnoos/Stenykléros). City (Ephor. FGrH 70 F 116; Paus. 4,3,7) and plain in the north of Messana [2]. Whereas the northern Messenian plain is described as pedion Stenyklerion or Stenyklérikon (Paus. 4,16,6 and 33,4), the site of the city is unknown (according to [1.74] identical with the city on Mount Ithome [1], according to [2.84] the hill of the Kastro of Tsoukaleika). 1 F. KitECHLE, Messenische Studien, 1959 2N. VALMIN, Etudes topographiques sur la Messénie ancienne, 1930.

F. BOLTE, s.v. Stenyklaros, RE 3 A, 2339-2342; MULLER, 852.

Stephanephoria (otedavyndogia/stephanéphoria) was the term for the ‘wearing of a garland’ as a symbol of sacred or magisterial dignity, widespread in the Greek poleis of Asia Minor and often connected with eponymity (+ Eponyms in chronology). Eponymous stephanephoria is known primarily in Miletus (Syll.3 57; LSAM 50); it was carried out by the > aisymnetai of the > molpoi [1. 68, 77*?]. In their name lists, which, with only a few interruptions, extend from 525/4 BC to AD 31/2 [2. no. 122-128], > Alexander [4] and > Augustus also appear (cf. [3. 167]). In Priene stephanephoria was at times taken over nominally by a local hero (Telon: [Priene 108, Z. 31; 39; 41; after 129 BC) or bya deity (Apollo: IPriene 44, Z. 31 f.; 2nd cent. BC; Zeus: IPriene 141, Z. 1-3; rst cent. AD). Presumably in these

cases there was no citizen prepared to take on the expenses of stephanephoria [4. 318 f.]. + Wreath, garland 1D.Rousse1, Tribu et cité, 1976 2 G. KAWERAU, A.RexuM, Das Delphinion in Milet (Milet I 3), r914 3 P. HERRMANN, Inschriften von Milet 1 (Milet VI 1), 1997. 4N.F. Jones, Public Organization in Ancient Greece, 1987. K.-W.W.

Stephanos see ~ Constellations; > Meleager ~ Philippus [I 32]; > Wreath, Garland

[8];

Stephanus (Ztépavoc; Stéphanos). [1] Athenian, son of Antidorides from the deme Eroiadai (Syll.3 205 = IG IVI’ 213 = Top 168: request to renew friendship and alliance with Mytilene in the

821

822

STEPHANUS

spring of 346 BC), as prosecutor and politician aligned with > Callistratus [2]. The allegation by Apollodorus [1] that S. had attempted to pass off the children of (his children by?) his common-law spouse, > Neaera [6], a former hetaera from Corinth, as his own children from a legitimate marriage to an Athenian woman caused quite a stir; the daughter > Phano was married twice to aristocratic Athenians. The outcome of the trial is unknown. Main sources: Ps.-Demosthenes (Or. 59; before 340; hostile); Athenaeus (13,593 f.).

cifixion of Jesus —is depicted as a trial before the > Synhedrion (Acts 6:12-7:1): S. holds a speech in his own defence (Acts 7:2-53; with reference to the > Septuagint, quotations from scripture, and sharp criticism of the temple); Paul [2] witnesses the stoning (Acts 7:58; 8:1), which marks the beginning of the persecution of Hellenized Christians. According to Acts 8:1, the Apostles were able to remain in Jerusalem. S. is recognized as the first Christian > martyr (feast day: 26 December; patron of horses).

C. Carey (ed.), Apollodoros, Against Neaira ({Demosth.] 59), 1992 (with English transl.); K.A. KApparis (ed.), Apollodoros, Against Neaira, 1999 (with English transl. and comm.); PA 12887. U.WAL.

W.STEGEMANN, Zwischen Synagoge und Obrigkeit. Zur historischen Situation der lukanischen Christen, 1991, 71-77; R.LieBERS, ‘Wie geschriebne steht’. Studien zu einer

besonderen

Art

frihchristlichen

Schriftbezuges,

1993, 215-223.

[2] New > Comedy poet (4th/3rd cents. BC), son of the comedian Antiphanes [1] [1. test. 2]. Textual corruption [2] is probably responsible for the fact that ancient criticism once termed S. one of the ‘most important poets of Middle Comedy’ [1. test. 3]. The only works that have been preserved are five verses of a dialogue from the play ®uvordxwv (Philolakon, ‘The Friend of the Spartans’), found in Athenaeus. 1 PCG VII, 1989, 614-615 2H.-G.NESSELRATH, Die attische Mittlere Komédie, 1990, 50 n. 52. T.HI.

[3] Sculptor. Preserved signatures indicate that S. was a pupil of > Pasiteles and a teacher of Menelaus [10]; he can therefore be considered part of a Roman school of sculptors. He was active in the 2nd half of the rst cent. BC. All that is left of his work is a signed statue of an athlete, called Stephanos Athlete, whose style harks back to the early Classical period. The collection of Asinius [I 4] Pollio in Rome contained Appiades (Plin. HN 36,33) — presumably statues of nymphs — that were created by S. OVERBECK, nos. 2265-2266; LOEwy, no. 374; LIPPOLD,

386; P. MORENO, s. v. S., EAA 7, 1966, 494-495; P. ZANKER, Klassizistische Statuen, 1974, 49-54; A. LINFERT, in: Forschungen zur Villa Albani. Katalog der antiken Bildwerke, vol. 1, 1989, 89-93; M.Fucus, In hoc etiam genere Graeciae nihil cedamus, 1999, 81-82. RN.

[4] S. Protomartys (Ztépavos newtoucetud/Stéphanos protomartys, literally ‘the first martyr’; approx. AD 40/50). According to Acts 6:1-8:1, S. was a Greekspeaking Jew from the — Diaspora who, after being converted to Christianity in Jerusalem, gained influence as a missionary and representative of the Hellenized, liberal wing (EAAnwotai/ Hellénistai) of the early Christian community, in contrast to those who adhered more strictly to the law, i.e. the Torah (— Bible). The theological conflict between the two wings flared up on the subject of care for the widows of the Hellénistai. As the Hellenized group within the original community was being expelled from Jerusalem, S. was publicly stoned to death by the enraged Jewish crowd. The + Acts of the Apostles characterize S. as caring for the poor; his martyrdom — modelled after the trial and cru-

K.SA.

[5] (Flavius) Stephanus. Freedman and procurator of Flavia [3] Domitilla, wife of Flavius [II 16] Clemens, cos. AD 95. S. was involved in the murder of Domitian in Sept. 96 and was the first to inflict injury; however, he was killed by others who had not been informed of the conspiracy (Cass. Dio 67,17,2; PIR S 653).

W.E.

[6] Roman bishop (12 May 254-2 August 257) between the eras when the Christians were persecuted under Emperors > Decius [II 1] and > Valerianus, entombed in the Calixtus catacomb in Rome. In the dispute over the baptism of heretics, S$. adhered to the Roman view in sharply criticizing rebaptism, and he underscored the pre-eminence of Rome so imperiously in his dealings with the Carthaginian Bishop -» Cyprianus [2] (Cypr. Epist. 67-75; Eus. HE 7,2~9) that serious discord resulted; it was not until the time of his successor, Xystus II, that harmony was restored. M.BorGo_tTe, Petrusnachfolge und Kaiserimitation, 1989, 23, 345; E. Caspar, Geschichte des Papsttums, vol. I, 1930, 627 (register); E. PULSFORT, s. v. Stephan I., Bio-

graphischbibliographisches Kirchenlexikon 10, 1995, 1350 f£.; G.SCHWAIGER, s. v. Stephan I., LThK? 9, 967 (literature up to 2000).

E.W.

[7] S. of Byzantium. Greek grammarian from > Byzantium, author of an alphabetical geographic lexicon that has been preserved mostly in epitomized form, but also in quotations. The text edition [1] has not yet been replaced by the new version edited by R. KEYDELL. The extant MSS date from the end of the 15th cent.; the ed. princeps (ALDUS, Venice) is from 1502 (for fundamental information on the history of transmission see [2; 3]). The lexicon [6. 2369-2374] is practically the only source of information on S.’ life and work: S. was a grammarian at the imperial university in + Constantinople; the lexicon, dedicated to Iustinianus [x] I [6. 2374 f.], probably dates from AD 530. S. was a Christian (cf. his information s. v. BynOdeua). In the Suda s. v. “Eguodaog (Hermolaos), the epitome of the lexicon is attributed to a certain Hermolaus (date uncertain) under the title Ethnikd (‘peoples’, cf. [5; 9]); the same title also appears in > Choiroboskos Georgios (GG 4,1, 305, |. 4 Hitcarp), frequently in

STEPHANUS

Eustathius [4] (e.g. on Hom. Il. 2,735) and in MSS of the epitome. The organization of the lexicon as originally established by S. (bk. 36 began with omicron; cf. the table in [6. 2377, 2379]) probably covered more than 50 books. A single fragment of the original work [2. 334] is reproduced in the editions [1. 240,12259,3]. The preserved excerpts of the lexicon have been excerpted in different ways [6. 2375 f.] (ona 2nd epitome that was passed down as well [1. 676,9; 7]): 1) very brief content summaries: nomen proprium and designation as ‘people’ or ‘city’ (e.g. "Eagec, £8voc, Codex S at the beginning of the 14th book [1. 258 f.]); 2) the most common form: nomen proprium, geographic identification, ethnikon (e.g. Baefydos, mOAtG "EQetoewv, TO

éO0vixdv PaePrtos); 3) somewhat expanded, often including the name of at least one source, perhaps also the title of a written work with indication of the book (as, for example, in XGAatov); 4) more comprehensive (ac-

cording to [2. 334] original) articles, from Avpdves to Aatuov, offer several sources, locations and quotations; short relevant excerpts have been handed down fires Sita] The contents of the lexicon included “cities, islands and peoples, districts and places, their corresponding names (6umMvupial homonymiai) and name changes (uetwvupia metonymiai) as well as the names of peoples, places and possessions derived from them (é0vixd, TOMAG, xT Ovouata)” [1.258 f.]. Thus the main interest of S. was hardly historical or geographical [xo. 65 f.], but rather grammatical and philological: His concern was to determine ethnika, which he frequently identified by formal analogy to other formations [11. 104 f.]. In terms of geography, S.’ lexicon encompassed the > Oikoumene and focused particular attention on the > Aegean Sea [8. 81]. The localization of the places he listed was based — to the extent this can be determined — in approx. 60% of cases on reliable sources and in approx. 33% of cases on suppositions; 7% of his conclusions are incorrect. However, his sources include not only Homerus [1] and Herodotus [x], but often poets who are more likely to be historically inaccurate [11. 109 f., 117]. More than a few geographical errors [6. 2389 f.] are the fault of S. himself, for example multiple mentions of one and the same place using names with slight variations (e.g. Lohxoi, Xvdxor [4. 85]). The lexicon is valuable for its quotations from many authors whose works have been lost or are less well known and who, in turn, passed down older material; authors’ quotations are important as evidence of textual history. Of the authors quoted (list in [6. 2379-2389], containing a source-critical discussion), the following were particularly important for S.: Herodianus [1], Orus [1] (for the grammatical system) and — Herennius Philo (a great deal of geographical material) [6.2383]. S. frequently quotes — Strabo [1.735], as well as the periegete — Pausanias [8] [1. 733], whose works were largely ignored during the ancient era and may owe their survival to S. [4. 85]. ~ Geographical names; - Grammarians; — Lexico-

graphy

824

823 EpitT1ons:

1A.MEINEKE (ed.), Stephani Byzantii Eth-

nicorum quae supersunt, 1849 (repr. 1958).

LITERATURE: 2A.DILLER, The Tradition of Stephanus Byzantius, in: TAPhA 69, 1938, 333-348 3 Id., Excerpts from Strabo and Stephanus in Byzantine Chronicles, in: TAPhA 81, 1950, 241-253 4 Id., Pausanias in the Middle Ages, in: TAPhA 87, 1956, 84-97. 5 W.DITTENBERGER, Ethnika und Verwandtes, in: Hermes 41, 1906, 78-102; 42,1907, 1-34

RE 3 A, 2369-2399

6 E.HONIGMANN, s. Vv. S. (12),

7R.KEYDELL, Zu S. von Byzanz,

in: Studi in onore di A. Ardizzoni, 1978, 479-481 8 E. OLSHAUSEN, Einfiihrung in die Historische Geogrophie der Alten Welt, 1991 9 E.RiscH, Zur Geschichte der griechischen Ethnika, in: MH 14, 1957, 63-74 10 L. RoBErT, Sur quelques ethniques, in: Id., Hellenica 2, 1946, 65-93 11D. WHITEHEAD, Site-Classification and Reliability in S. of Byzantium, in: Id. (ed.), From Political Architecture to Stephanus Byzantius (Historia ES 87), 1994, 99-124.

H.A.G.

[8] Law professor in Constantinople at the time of Justinian (6th cent. AD). S., who was not involved in com-

piling the > Corpus iuris, wrote a Greek paraphrase (index) of the > Digesta with explanations (paragraphai), which was included in the Basilica Scholia (notes on the Byzantine imperial law of 900 based on Justinian’s Digesta). PLRE 3, 1187 (Stephanus 18); P. PESCANI, s. v. Stefano, in: Novissimo Digesto Italiano 18, 1971, 425 f.; P.E. P1ELER, in: HUNGER, Literatur, vol. 2, 421 f.; A.SCHMINCK, s. v. Stephen, ODB 3, 1953. T.G.

[9] Physician and commentator on medical works in Alexandria [1] in about AD 6oo. He studied with a certain Asclepius (perhaps Asclepius of Tralleis, author of lectures on Aristotle’s Metaphysics and pupil of Ammonius [12], cf. [1]). Three commentaries by S. have been preserved: on the Aphorisms of Hippocrates, on Hippocrates’ Prognostikon and on Galen’s Methodus Medendi (Ad Glauconem). All of them demonstrate knowledge of the educational system of Alexandria during Late Antiquity (cf. [2]). However, striking parallels between S.’ commentary on the Aphorisms and that of > Theophilus Protospatharius (9th/roth cents.) are more likely to be due to a common model than to a direct dependence of Theophilus on S. [3]. Later on as well, Arabic authors associate S$. with Alexandria [r]. His methods of explicating medical texts indicate familiarity with the methodology and structure of contemporary philosophy lectures. In the MS tradition, S. is always referred to in the titles of his works as a ‘philosopher’ [1; 4]. It is impossible to determine whether he is identical with one or several individuals named S. who are known to have lived during his era. It seems plausible that he may be the same S. who taught philosophy in Alexandria around 580-585 and wrote commentaries on Aristotle’s works on logic, as well as the anonymous Athenian who taught philosophy in Constantinople in about 606. It is more problematic, although not impossible, to assume that he is identical with the astronomer, astrologist and alchemist S., who

825

826

is known only from Byzantine sources of a considerably later date [1].

Constantinople and was executed in 764 because of his support for iconolatry (— Syrian dynasty). The text itself indicates that the vita was written in the year 807. Since the work strongly supports the worship of icons, recent scholarship has cast doubt on this date for the vita in its present form; it is possible that a text that was originally shorter and less polemic, which was actually written in 807 by the otherwise unknown S., was expanded after the end of the Iconoclastic Controversy in the mid—8th cent. [5. 228 f.].

1 W. Woxsxa-Conus,

S. d’Athénes

et S. d’Alexandria.

Essai d’identification et de biographie, in: REByz 1989, 5-89 2Ead., Les commentaires de S. d’Athénes au Prognostikon et aux Aphorismes d’Hippocrate, in: REByz 1992, 5-86

3 Ead., Sources des commentaires

de S.

d’Athénes et de Théophile le Protospathaire aux Aphorismes d’Hippocrate, in: REByz 1996, 5-66 4 M. Rovecug, The Definitions of Philosophy and a New Fragment of Stephanus the Philosopher, in: Jahrbuch der Osterreichischen Byzantinistik 40, 1990, 108-128.

L.G. WEsTERINK (ed.), In Hippocratis Aphorismos commentaria 5-6 (CMG XI 1,3), 1984-1995 (with English transl.); J.M. Durry (ed.), In Hippocratis Prognosticum commentaria 3 (CMG XI 1,2), 1983 (with English transl.); K. Dickson (ed.), Stephanus the Philosopher and Physician: Commentary on Galen’s Therapeutics to Glau-

con, 1998 (with English transl).

V.N.

[10] Byzantine grammarian of the early 7th cent. AD [x. 139] who wrote a commentary on the Art of Grammar by — Dionysius [17] Thrax, of which several excerpts have been preserved. They show that S. was well versed in Stoic philosophy and linguistic theory [2. 353 3]; however, owing to the similarity of his explanations to those of the Dionysius scholia of > Heliodorus [9] and > Melampus [2] it is not possible to identify those excerpts with absolute certainty [4; 5. 2399 f.]. EDITIONS: GG 1, 3. LITERATURE: 1SANDYS,vol.1 2 J.LALLoT, La grammaire de Denys le Thrace, 1998 3 F. CAUJOULLEZASLAWSKI, La scholie de Stephanus, in: Histoire, épisté-

mologie, langage 7, 1985, 19-46 4 W. HOERSCHELMANN, De Dionysii Thracis interpretibus veteribus, 1874 5 A.GUDEMANN, s. v. S. (13), RE 3 A, 2399-2401.

M.B.

[11] S. Melodus (=. MeAwddc; S. Meloidds). Byzantine melode (hymn writer), born in Damascus in 725, neph-

ew of Iohannes [33] of Damascus, lived from the age of ro in the Sabas monastery in Palestine, where he died in 802. S. wrote numerous (Greek) hymns and described the martyrdom of the 20 monks who were murdered by Arabs in the Sabas monastery in 797. The vita of Romanus the Younger (ft 780), which is extant only in a Georgian translation, is his work. The life of S. is also familiar from the biography written by his pupil Leontius. There is no basis for the distinction made by earlier scholars between the hymn writer and the subject of this biography. ~+ Hymn IV S. EUSTRATIADES, Urépavos 6 noutijs 6 TaBaitne, in: Nea

Sion 28, 1933, 651-673, 722-7373 29, 1934, 3-19, I13— 130, 185-187.

[12] S. Diakonos (=. Adxovoc; S. Didkonos). Author of a vita of St. S. the Younger; according to that text he was born in AD 713, lived asa monk on Mt. Auxentius near

STEPPE

Epitions: 1M.F. Auzépy, La Vie d’Etienne le Jeune par Etienne le Diacre, 1997 (with French transl.). LITERATURE: 2Ead., L’hagiographe et l’iconoclasme byzantin,1999 3 G.Huxtey, On the Vita of St. Stephen the Younger, in: GRBS 18, 1977, 97-108

4F.Rouan,

Une lecture ‘iconoclaste’ de la vie d’Etienne le Jeune, in: Travaux et Mémoires 8, 1981, 415-436 5 P.SPECK, Ich bin’s nicht, Kaiser Konstantin ist es gewesen, 1990.

AL.B.

[13] Grammarian of the 12th cent. [2. 2365; 3. 308] who is believed to have taught in Constantinople [1.38]. Notes on bks 1, 2-3 and 9 of his most important work, a commentary on Aristotle’s [6] Rhetoric, have been preserved. They show his affinity with > Aphthonius and > Hermogenes [7], whose rhetorical teachings

he

sought

to

apply

in practical

instruction

[2. 2365 f.]. LITERATURE: 1C.A. Branpis, Ueber Aristoteles’ Rhetorik und die griechischen Ausleger derselben, in: Philologus 4, 1849, 1-47. 2O.SCHISSEL, s.v. S. (11), RE 3 A2, 2364-2369 3 G.A. KENNEDY, Aristotle. On Rhetoric, 1991 (English transl. and comm.).

EpiT10Nn: CAG vol. 21, 2,263-322.

MB.

Steppe. Steppe is a term for semi-arid regions of vegetation and climate that, in relation to temperature, experience inadequate precipitation for trees to grow. This form of vegetation and climate can be found in southeastern Europe, northern Africa, in various areas of the Near East, of southern Russia and of central Asia. The boundaries both with agrarian land and with > desert can fluctuate in accordance with the annual climatic conditions; in the latter case, one can also speak of desert-steppes. On most steppes, the vegetation is good enough for pasturing, and for that reason they are and were a preferred habitat for migrant animal breeders (> Husbandry). The just mentioned conditions gave rise to cultures with autonomous economic and social structures as well as their own art. From the beginning of the 3rd millennium BC at the latest, the steppes of western and central Asia were, at varying intervals, again and again a reservoir from which migrant peoples harried the agrarian regions and/or established themselves permanently there — Scythae; (= Sacae; + Hunni; Mongolians). Particularly in steppe regions bordering on agrarian regions, which in favourable years could receive sufficient rainfall, there developed mixed peoples who reacted flexibly to each circum-

STEPPE

stance, with alternating emphasis on agriculture and animal husbandry. In alliance with the settled peoples, by cultivating the peripheral regions these societies were able to raise the farming potential of a region, whereas in alliance with the non-settled peoples the unpredictability was increased. More than once since the 3rd millennium BC, such groups have prepared the way for non-settled peoples to take power in agrarian regions

828

827

(Akkadians/ Akkadian;

> Amurru;

> Ara-

maeans).

+ Climate; > Husbandry; —- Mobility;

> Nomads

R. BERNBECK, S. als Kulturlandschaft, 1993; B. BRENTJES, R.S. VAsiILigevsKy, Schamanenkrone und Weltenbaum, 1989; H.J. Nissen, The Mobility between Settled and Non-Settled in Babylonia, in: M.-TH. BARRELET (ed.), L’archéologie de l’Iraq du début de l’€poque Néolithique a 333 avant notre ére, 1980, 285-290; E. WirTH, Syrien, 1971. HJ.N.

Stercut(i)us. Roman god of manure (stercus) spreading, known by several names (e.g. Sterces: Aug. Civ. 18,15; Stercutus: Plin. HN 17,50; et al.). S. is sometimes identified with — Pilumnus or — Saturnus (Isid. Orig. 17,1,3), and is seen as the son of > Faunus (Plin. HN 17,50). Academic opinion, based on Serv. Georg. 1,21, counts S. among the > Sondergétter, or regards him as an antiquarian speculation. However, the significance of manure in the agriculture of ancient Italy (— Fertilizer), and the possible existence of an altar to Stercutus [1] in the city of Rome, as well as ancient accounts (Varro, Antiquitates fr. 216 CARDAUNS; Fest. 3 10; 311;

466 L.), combined with the calendar entry for 15 June, when dung from the area of the Roman temple of - Vesta was removed through the Porta Stercoraria

1 V. PENnNAS, s. v. S. (2), LIMC 7.1, 810-811 2 I. TRIANTIS, s. v. S. (x), LIMC 7.1, 808-810

s.v. S., RE 3 A, 2446-2448.

3 G. TURK,

K.WA.

Stertinius. Three bearers of the Italic gens name S. are known from the late Republic. [1] S., L. By popular vote a pro-consular imperium over Hispania Ulterior was transferred to him for 199 BC (Liv. 31,50,r0-11 and [r]), and he returned in 196 with such great booty that he was able to have three arches built in Rome (Liv. 33,27,3—4); In 196 he was a member of a commission to re-organize Greece (Pol. 18,48,2 and [2]). [2] S., C. Praetor of Sardinia in 188 BC (Liv. 38,35). [3] S., L. As quaestor in Brundisium in 168 BC he cared for + Misagenes, who had fallen sick (Liv. 45,14,93 Val. Max. 5,1,1d). 2 F.W. WALBANK, 1 MomMsEN, Staatsrecht 2, 652-653 TAS. A Hist. Commentary on Polybius 2, 1967, 619.

[4] C. S. Xenophon. Physician and courtier, active between AD 30 and 60. As a member of a well-to-do Coan family, which traced its origins to Asclepius and Heracles, he was the physician of Roman emperors from Caligula until Nero. In 53 AD he cured Claudius [II 1] of a serious illness. The latter thanked him by restoring +> immunitas to S.’s native island (Tac. Ann. 12,61). S.

is also supposed to have been involved in the killing of Claudius (ibid. 12,67). R. HERzoG, Nikias und Xenophon von Kos, in: HZ 125, 1922, 189-247.

V.N.

(Varro, Ling. 6,32; InscrIt 13,2,471; [2]), point to a pos-

Stesichoros (Ztpoiyxogoc; Stésichoros). [1] Greek lyric poet, one of the nine of the Alexandrian

sible cult context of S. ~ Agriculture V. Rome

canon. A. Lire

B. Worxs D. PERFORMANCE

1 J.ARONEN, s. v. Stercutus, ara, LTUR 4, 377

C. LANGUAGE, METRE, STYLE

2 F. COARELLI, s. v. Porta Stercoraria, LTUR 4, 115 f.

CRP.

A. LIFE

S. originated from Himera (Sicily) and was called Sterope (ZteQdnn/Steropé, ‘Aotegdmn/Asteropé ‘(flash of) lightning’; ‘Acgdomn/Aérope). [1] One of the — Pleiades, the seven daughters of > Atlas [2] and > Pleione (Hes. fr. 169 M.-W.; Apollod. 3,110; Paus. 5,10,6), mother by > Ares of > Oenomaus [1] (Hellanikos FGrH 4 F 19a; Eratosth. Katasterismoi (epitome) 23; cf. Tzetz. on Lycoph. 149). There is a depiction of S. on the frieze of the eastern gable at Olympia (Paus. 5,10,6; [2. 809 no. 5]), dated to the second quarter of the sth cent. BC. She is also called Asterope or Aerope (Hes. fr. 169; Hyg. Fab. 84). [2] Daughter of king + Cepheus [1] of Tegea. She is given a vase by > Heracles [1] with a lock of hair from the Gorgon (— Gorgo [1]) Medusa, to defend the city from enemy attacks (Apollod. 2,144). Compare Phot. 435,23; Suda s. v. Adxtov Pogyadoc, where she is called Asterope. In Paus. 8,44,7 she is called Aerope. According to Paus. 8,47,5 > Athena gives the lock of hair to Cepheus.

‘the Himeraean’ (‘Iuegatoc/Himeraios), or he may have

come from Mataurus in south Italy; he died in Catania (+ Catane). The dates in the Suda (o 1095) are suspect: his birth in the 37th (632-629 BC) and death in the 56th Olympiad (556-553 BC) seem based on synchronisation with other poets, with the first giving an akme of a conventional 40 years after the Suda’s date for ~ Alcman and the latter putting his death in the year of the birth of + Simonides. These dates place S.’ working life almost entirely within the sixth century, and this is generally accepted. B. Works The Suda states that his works were collected in 26 books. We have the following titles: ‘Funeral Games for Pelias’, Géryonéis, Kérberos, Kyknos, Orésteia, ‘Sack of Troy’, Nostoi, ‘Helena’ (cf. the ‘Palinode’, see below), ‘Boarhunters’, Eriphylé and Europeia. Athe-

829

830

naeus, in telling us (13,601a) that S. was an erotic poet, may be referring to the spurious Rhadine (278 PMGEF), and Ael. VH ro,r8, in maintaining that he was the inventor of bucolic poetry, cites the Daphnis, likewise spurious. It was once fashionable to attribute to S. a strong formative influence in the development of Greek myth (cf. 299, 233). But analysis of the evidence suggests that he inherited and exploited traditional themes rather than invented them [1.28-29]. Our best idea of the nature of a poem of S. comes from the fragments of the Géryonéis (PMGE S 7-87; cf. + Geryoneus). It is now possible to reconstruct the metrical pattern of an entire triad and to distinguish the actors in the story as well as its general development [2]. A sign on one fragment (S 27) indicates line 13.00 (perhaps well before the end of the poem). Kérberos and Kyknos were, like the Géryonéis, also about Heracles. Publication of the ‘Lille Papyrus’ [13.128-174] has given us our longest unbroken text, 33 almost intact lines (222b). The speaker, wife of > Oedipus, in the presence of Teiresias (who has just revealed an oracle of Apollo), proposes a way out of the strife between — Eteocles and > Polyneices, with the former to remain in Thebes and the latter to depart with the cattle and the gold. It is unclear whether this

the dactylo-epitritic metre [5.51-53] ( Metre V.D.4). He seems to have been fond of speeches, and he was known as ‘Onnoimtatoc (Homeérikotatos, ‘most Ho-

queen is -> Iocaste or Eurygane(ia),

a second (non-in-

cestuous) wife of Oedipus. The disjunction expressed between survival of the city or survival of the family anticipates Aesch. Sept. 745-749; if the queen is Iocaste, she anticipates Euripides’ ‘Phoenician Women’ (where she also survives the disclosure of the incest), while her attempt to evade the oracle of Apollo seems to anticipate Soph. OT. There is, however, no known title

of a poem of S. from the > Theban circle. Several titles have to do with the cycle of > Troy. A papyrus (PMGEF S 133b) mentions a — previously unattested - Wooden Horse, but this may be part of the Sack of Troy (cf. PMGF S ros). A Roman monument of the Augustan Period with scenes from ‘The Capture of Troy according to S.’ includes the departure of + Aeneas with Anchises [4.107]. The ‘Oresteia’ of S. (PMGF

S 210-219), popular in Athens, was in two

books. It contained several motifs later found in the tragedians: the summoning of — Iphigenia to Aulis, the dream of > Clytaemnestra, the recognition of > Electra and > Orestes at the tomb of Agamemnon, Orestes’ nurse and his self-defence with a bow provided by Apollo. S.’ ‘Oresteia’ was set in Laconia (not in Mycenae or Argos). Most famous of all the poems of S. in Antiquity was the > Palinddia (quoted by Plato, Phdr. 243a). It seems that there were in fact two palinodes, one criticising Homer, the other Hesiod (193).

C. LANGUAGE, METRE, STYLE The Suda says that S. wrote in the Doric dialect. The papyri give a mixture of Homeric forms, > Doric and literary > Aeolic, the familiar koine of choral poetry. The Suda (s.v. teia Ztnovydgov) says that all of his poetry was epodic, i.e. triadic in form (strophe — antistrophe — epode). He may well have been the first to use

STESICHOROS

meric’, Ps.-Longinus 13,3) and for his graves Camenae (“stately Muses”, Hor. Carm. 4,9,8). Quintilian

famously describes him as epici carminis onera lyra sustinentem (“supporting on his lyre the weight of the epic song”, Quint. Inst. 10,1,62).

D. PERFORMANCE The Suda o 1095 says that S.’ real name was Tisias and that he was called S. because he “was the first to establish a chorus of singers (chdéros) to the lyre”. Traditionally regarded as a composer of choral lyric, he is now frequently regarded as a solo or a citharoedic composer [6.164-165]; triadic composition is certainly no proof of choral composition [7.307—313] (traditional position: [8]). The poetry of S. differs markedly from other choral poetry in that it is free from local markers or reference to occasion. It could have been performed by bards or by travelling choruses [9] anywhere in the Greek world. If individual parts were taken by members of the chorus we have in this another important anticipation of Greek — tragedy. 1 P.BrizE, Die Geryoneis des Stesichoros und die friihe griechische Kunst, 1980 2D.L. Pace, S.: The Geryoneis, in: JHS 93, 1973, 138-154 3J.M. Bremer, S.: The Lille Papyrus, in: Id. et al., Some Recently Found Greek Poems (Mnemosyne Suppl. 99), 1987, 128-174

4D.A.Camp-

BELL (ed.), Greek Lyric, vol. 3, 1991 (with Engl. transl.) 5 M. Has aM, Stesichorean Metre, in: Quaderni urbinati 17, 1974, 7-57. 6 B.GENTILI, Poesia e pubblico nella Grecia antica, 1985

I97I, 302-314

7M.L. West, S., in: CQN.S.

8 E.CINGANO,

21,

Indizi di esecuzione

corale in Stesicoro, in: R. PRETAGOSTINI (ed.), Tradizione e innovazione nella cultura greca da Omero all’eta ellenistica, vol. 1, 1993,347-361 9 W.BurRKERT, The Making

of Homer in the Sixth Century B. C.: Rhapsodes versus S., in: A.P. BELLOLI (ed.), Papers on the Amasis Painter and

His World, 1987, 43-62.

EpiTions: 1993,

PMGF;

M.L.

87-99; D.CAMPBELL

West,

Greek

Lyric Poetry,

(s. [4]); J.VURTHEIM,

Ste-

sichoros Fragmente und Biographie, 1919. LITERATURE: D.E. GERBER, Greek Lyric Poetry Since 1920, in: Lustrum 36, 1994, 50-89.

[2] The + Marmor Parium (73) mentions a second (6 devtegoc/ho deuteros) S. from Himera (‘Ipeoatoc/ Himeraios), who won a victory at Athens in 370/369 or 369/368 BC [1.19]. He is mentioned by Didymos [1] as

one of the three authors to write a > dithyramb entitled Kyklops (840, 841 PMG). Himera was destroyed by Carthage in 409 BC; possibly S. was born there and took his name from his famous forbear, S. [1]. 1 F.Jacosy, Das Marmor Parium, 1904.

D.A. CaMPBELL (ed.), Greek Lyric, vol. 5, 1993, 210 (with Engl. transl.); D.F. Surron, Dithyrambographi Graeci, 1989, 41 T 1.

ER.

STESIMBROTUS

Stesimbrotus (=ZtoiwBeotoc; Stésimbrotos) from Thasus, 5th cent. BC > rhapsode and exegete of Homer (+ Homerus); fragments of three of his writings survive (FGrH 107). S. is considered one of the first allegorists

and co-founder of the genre of > biography. > Niceratus [1] (Xen. Symp. 3,6) and > Antimachus [3] (Suda s.v. Avtiaxoc) were his pupils. S. acquired significance through is allegorical interpretations of Homer; in Pl. Ion 530c-d he is invoked, alongside the allegorist Metrodorus of Lampsacus, as an authority in the area

of Homeric interpretation; the Stoic interpretation of Homer also recognised and cited him (schol. A Hom. O 193). The lack of allegorical interpretations in the few surviving fragments (FGrH F 21-25) of his work on Homer (title unknown), which contains only solutions

to > zetemata [1. 92], may be due to the circumstances of the transmission [2. 678]. A proposed, but uncertain [3. 75] ascription of the Derveni Papyrus (with allegorical commentary on a theogony by Orpheus [4. r]) to S. could confirm his as an allegorist. This papyrus might contain parts of S.’s work On sacred acts (Megi tehet@v) [4. 5]. The rest of the fragments of this work (F 12-20; [5. 162-167]), still quoted from by Philodemus, are of Orphic content (+ Orphism) and occupy themselves with cult legends and aetiologies, presumably in connexion with the Cabiri[?] mysteries of > Samothrace II. [2. 678]. The work

Themistocles,

Thucydides and Pericles,

which probably came into being in the first decade of the > Peloponnesian War [6. 146-149], was used by Plutarchus [2] as a source for his biographies of Pericles [7. lxii] and Themistocles [6. 152-159; 8. 16]. The content and intent of the work are disputed [9. 3-5]: The surviving 11 fragments (F 1-11) contain gossip [1o. 49]

about the lifestyles, qualifications and sexual relationships of politicians; It is unclear whether it is a political pamphlet against well-known representatives of Athenian democracy in the interests of the aristocratic opposition [11. 364; 12. 11] or a general non-political [9] description of the prevailing conditions in Athens with signs of moral decline. The polemical alternative is suggested by his praise for the Sparta-friendly, anti-democratic Cimon [2] (cf. [13. 278-281]), who is contrasted with the criticised Athenians [14. 49 f.]. Its historicalbiographical interest [13. 291], recognisable in its characterisation of contemporaries, arguably places the work at the inception of the genre of biography [15. 43]. Its character sketches, however, are less artful than the Travelogues of his contemporary > Ion [2] of Chios [14. 50]. + Allegoresis SECONDARY LITERATURE:

832

831

1 F. WEHRLI, Zur Geschichte

der allegorischen Deutung Homers im Altertum, thesis Basel 1928 2 SCHMID/STAHLIN, vol. I/2, 676-678 3 C.CALAME, Figures of Sexuality and Initiatory Transition in the Derveni Theogony and Its Commentary, in: A.Laxs, G.W. Most (eds.), Studies on the Derveni Pap., 1997, 65-80 4 W.BurKERT, Der Autor von Derveni: S. ITIEPI TEAETQN?, in: ZPE 62, 1986, 1-5 5A. TREsP,

Die Fragmente der griechischen Kultschriftsteller (RGVV

15.1), 1914 (repr.1975)

6 E.M.Carawan, Thucydides

and Stesimbrotus on the Exile of Themistocles, in: Historia 38,1989,144-161 7P.A.STADTER, A Commentary on Plutarch’s Pericles, 1989 8 F.J. Frost, Plutarch’s Themistocles, 1980 9 F.SCHACHERMEYR, S. und seine Schrift iiber die Staatsmanner (SB der Ost. Akad. der Wiss., philol.-histor. Klasse, 247.5), 1965 101. BRuNs,

Das literarische Portrait der Griechen im 5. und 4. Jh. v. Chr., 1896, 48-50 = 11 U. voN WILAMOWITZMOoELLENDORFF, Die Thukydideslegende, in: Hermes 12,

1877, 326-367 12H.STRAsBURGER, Aus den Anfangen der griechischen Memoirenkunst. Ion von Chios und S. von Thasos, in: W. SCHLINK, M. SPERLICH (eds.), Forma et subtilitas, 1986, 1-11 13 K.MetsTer, S.’ Schrift uber die athenischen Staatsmanner und ihre historische Bedeutung (FGrH 107, F 1-11), in: Historia 27, 1978, 274-294 14 A. DIHLE, Studien zur griechischen Biographie, 1956 15K.MeisTEr, Die griechische Geschichtsschreibung, 1990.

EpITION: FGrH 107.

MB.

Sthen(n)o (ZOev(v)w/Sthen(n)o, ‘the strong one’). One of the three Gorgons (> Gorgo [1]), immortal daughter

of + Phorcys [1] and > Ceto (Hes. Theog. 276; Apollod. 2,39; Nonnus Dion. 40,229), also S0eivw/Stheino (Schol. Hes. Theog. 276). Stheneboea (LOevéBoa/Sthenéboia). Called Antea in Hom. Il. 6,160, daughter of the Lycian king > Iobates (Apollod. 2,25; Hyg. Fab. 57) or Amphianax (Apollod. 2,25; schol. Hom. Il. 6,200 REKKER) or the Arcadian king > Aphidas [3] (Apollod. 3,102), wife of > Proetus and mother of the — Proetids and of + Megapenthes [1] (Apollod. 2,26; 2,29; Aristoph. Ran. 1043 with Schol. et al.). After failing to seduce > Bellerophontes she accuses him of raping her to Proetus (Potiphar motif, > Joseph; cf. > Phaedra). Bellerophontes is sent away by Proetus with the intention of killing him, but he comes back. S. escapes on > Pegasus [1], Belierophontes forces her down over Melos and into the sea (Hom. Il. 6,160 f.; Apollod. 2,30; cf. Eur. Stheneboea TGF fr. 661-672). C. Locum, s. v. S., LIMC 7.1, 810-811; G. TURK, s. v. S., RE 3 A, 2468 f.

K.WA.

Sthenelaidas (2Oevehaidac; Sthenelaidas). Spartiate, one of the > éphoroi and the leader of the > apella, who in 432 BC, with reference to the complaints of Spartan symmachoi (— Peloponnesian League) and despite the warnings of the king > Archidamus [1] II, called for an active containment of the power of Athens. Unusually, he held the vote not by acclamation but by calling for those for and against to stand in separate places, and was thus able to carry through the resolution that Athens had broken the 446 BC peace treaty (Thuc. 1,85,3-87,6). This considerably exacerbated the crisis that led to the > Peloponnesian War. E.FLaIc, ‘Die spartanische Abstimmung nach der Lautstarke’. Uberlegungen zu Thuk. 1,87, in: Historia 42, 1993, 139-160.

K.-W.W.

833

834

Sthenelus (=0évedoc/Sthénelos). {1] Son of Actor, takes part in Heracles’ [1] campaign against the > Amazons, during which he is killed on the Paphlagonian coast. There S. appears in full armour to the passing - Argonauts, who, prompted by ~ Mopsus, sacrifice to him (Apoll. Rhod. 2,911-927 with schol.; Promathidas FGrH 430 F 4-5; Val. FI.

Sthennis (0évvic/Sthénnis). Bronze sculptor from Olynthus, active in Athens from 348 BC. According to surviving inscribed bases, he and - Leochares created a family group on the Acropolis in Athens in the late 4th cent. BC, and a statue for —Lysimachus [2] in -» Oropus in the early 3rd cent. There is literary evidence for several statues by S. of gods and one of a philosopher, which were later moved to Rome, one offlentes matronae et adorantes sacrificantesque (‘weeping, adoring and sacrificing women’, Plin. HN 34,19,90) and victor statues in > Olympia. Although none of his works survives, S. was considered a famous sculptor in Antiquity.

5,87-100).

[2] Son of + Androgeos, grandson of > Minos. S. and

his brother Alcaeus are taken hostage together by Heracles [1] on Paros because they were responsible for the deaths of two of his companions, and are later left behind as settlers on Thasos (Apollod. 2,98—100; 2 1O5)) 5

[3] Son of > Perseus [1] and > Andromeda, brother of + Electryon, Helus, Alcaeus [1], Mestor [1], Perses [3] and Gorgophone [3] (Hom. Il. 19,116; 19,123 with schol.; Apollod. 2,49), husband of Pelops’ daughter Nicippe (Hes. Cat. 190; 191; Apollod. 2,53) or Amphibia, Antibia or Menippe (schol. Hom. Il. 19,116), father of > Eurystheus, Alcyone and Medusa (schol. Hom. Il. 19,116; Apollod. 2,53; Diod. Sic. 4,12,7). S. banishes > Amphitryon from Argos (Apollod. 2,56). He is killed by Heracles’ son — Hyllus [1] (Hyg. Fab.

244). [4] Son of + Capaneus and + Euadne [2] (Hom. Il. 2,564; Apollod. 3,79), father of Cylarabus (Paus. 2,22,8 f.). Participant in the campaign of the Epigones

against Thebes (cf. + Epigoni [2]; Hom. Il. 4,406 with schol.; Apollod. 3,82). According to Paus. 2,18,5, Iphis cedes his domain in Argos to his nephew S. Apollod. 3,129 includes S. among the suitors of > Helene [1]. S. is frequently mentioned as a companion and charioteer of + Diomedes [1] (e.g. Hom. Il. 2,564; 5,241; 5,835; 8,114 with schol.), and in Verg. Aen. 2,261 as one of those in the Wooden Horse. After the conquest of Troy, S. accompanies Diomedes to Aetolia (Hyg. Fab. 175). His grave is in Argos or Colophon (Paus. 2,22,8 f.; schol. Lycophr. 433). A. KAUFFMANN-SAMARAS, S.v. S., LIMC 7.1, 812 f.

SU.EL

[5] Tragedian (TrGF I 32), late 5th cent. BC; mocked by Aristophanes in Gerytades fr. 158 PCG for his humourless style (cf. Aristot. Poet. 22,1458a 20f.), in Vesp. 1313 for his poverty. BZ.

Sthenidas (2Oevidac; Sthenidas). Author of a pseudoPythagorean work ’On Kingship’ (Mei Baow\elas/Peri basileias, a fragment is preserved in Stob. 4,270). Closely related to it in form and content are texts of the same title under the names Diotogenes and > Ecphantus [2]. ~ Pythagorean pseudepigrapha EpiTIon: H.THESLEFF (ed.), The Pythagorean Texts of the Hellenistic Period, 1965 (esp. 187f.). BIBLIOGRAPHY: L.DetarteE, Les traités de la Royauté d’Ecphante, Diotogéne et Sthénidas, 1942; H. THESLEFF, An Introduction to the Pythagorean Writings of the Hellenistic Period, 1961.

STICHOMETRY

OVERBECK, no. 1343-1349; LOEWwy, no. 83, 103 a, 481, 541, 112 a; LIPPOLD, 303; P. MINGAZZINI, s. v. S., EAA 7, 1966, 499; C. HABICHT, S., in: Horos 10-12, 1992-1998, 226.

RN.

Sticheron see > Syntomon

Stichius (=tiyioc; Stichios). [1] Athenian military leader at Troy; companion of -» Menestheus [1]; killed by Hector (Hom. Il. 15,329). May appear as early as in Mycenaean as ti-ki-jo [1]. [2] Aetolian, lover of + Heracles [1], killed by him in a fit of madness (Ptol. Chennos in Phot. Bibl. 15 2b Z. 3640). 1 R.JANKO, The Iliad:

A Commentary, vol. 4: Books 13-

EG, L992, 71.

Stichometry. Modern term for the ancient technique of determining the length of a literary text by counting its lines (otixou, stichoi). While each verse in poetry is valued, stichometrically speaking, as one line, a line in prose is equated to the length of an average epic hexameter (cf. Galen 5,655 KUHN; the terminology for ‘line’ uses stichos as synonymous with éxoc/epos), i.e. approximately 35 letters or 16 syllables. Two methods of stichometry are directly attested: 1. marginal numbering, in which every hundredth line is marked with a Greek letter (A = 100 to Q = 2400) on the edge of a papyrus roll, or sometimes merely with a stroke; 2. final numbering, in which the sum total of lines in the work is stated at the end of the roll. Stichometry is attested in literary works from the 4th cent. BC (Theop. FGrH 115 F 25; Isoc. Or. 12, 136; later, e.g. in Diog. Laert. 7,187; Suda). It is also found in papyri (especially POxy. and PHercul.; cf. [5; 6]) and in Greek and (more rarely) Latin manuscripts. The ancient stichometrical indications presumably served four purposes: 1. they guaranteed the completeness of a transcribed text to the librarian (— Callimachus’ [3] Pinakes), to bookseller and readers [4. 42] (also a method against forgeries); 2. they served as a basis for estimating the payment of the scribe and the cost of the purchaser; 3. they helped the transcriber to determine the size of the task in advance and hence to choose a suitable papyrus [2, 72-73]; 4. very occasionally they also made it possible to pinpoint references to

835

836

places in other works (e.g. > Asconius’ commentary on Cicero). + Scroll

f. 422 ff., Med. 490 ff.: mixed form). Stichomythia of persuasion is primarily found in the domina-nutrix scenes (dialogue between mistress and wet nurse: Sen. Med. 155 ff., Ag. 144 ff., Phaedr. 239 ff.: with antilabai). ~ Comedy; > Tragedy

STICHOMETRY

1 T. Birt, Das antike Buchwesen in seinem Verhaltniss zur Litteratur, 1882, 157-222 (reprint 1959, 1974) 2 W.ScHuBarRT, Das Buch bei den Griechen und Rémern, 1921, 72-78 3K.OHLY, Stichometrische Untersuchungen, 1928 (reprint 1968) 4 C. WENDEL, Die griechischromische Buchbeschreibung, 1949, 34-44 5 E.G. TurNER, Greek Papyri, 1968, 94-95 6 T. DoRANDI, Stichometrica, in: ZPE 70, 1987, 35-38 7 O.MaAzat, Griechisch-rémische Antike, 1999, 111-113. GR.DA.

Stichomythia (otyouvbia/stichomythia). A form of dialogue in ancient drama in which two persons — or, more rarely, three — speak in regular turns. It was first documented as a technical term in Poll. 4,113, but a description of the dramatic technique of ‘dialogue intensification’ [6] appears as early as in > Aeschylos [1] (Eum. 585f.). The origins of stichomythia are unknown (initiation rites: [8.201], folk customs: [2. 95-106]). Under the general heading of the tech-

nique of stichomythia, scholars sometimes include forms of dialogue in which the participants converse in half verses (antilabai, technical term in Hsch. s. v. avuhaPi/antilabe) or double verses (distichomythy, technical term, non-ancient). In dramatic practice, one

often encounters a mixture of forms. Stichomythia is found in the earliest extant Greek tragedies (Aesch. Pers.). It steadily increased in length and frequency in the course of the 5th cent. BC. Thematically, the following basic forms can be determined [7]: Stichomythia of information (e.g. Aesch. Pers. 23 2245, Eum. 418-435), of dispute (Aesch. Supp. 916929), of persuasion (Aesch. Sept. 245-263, 712-719), of prayer (Aesch. Supp. 204-227, Choeph. 479-509), of > anagnorisis (Aesch. Choeph. 212-225, frequent in ~ Euripides [1]; Men. Pk. 779 ff.), of advice (Aesch. Ag. 1347-1371) or of action, where it accompanies a plot in a commentating manner (Aesch. PV 52-81; Eur. Heracl. 726-739). These thematic types, which can be found in Aeschylus in their purest form, were used in a more flexible manner by Sophocles and Euripides in consideration of the dramatic action. While Aeschylus usually employed stichomythia as explanatory additions to a > rhesis, the younger tragedians used it as a dynamic form to accompany or stimulate the plot, which aids in developing the characters. In the comedies of > Aristophanes, stichomythia is found mainly in scenes of dispute and persuasion, often in a mixed form (Aristoph. Ach. 303 ff., Equ. 335 ff., Lys. 352 ff.). In Roman comedy, stichomythia is used very freely in scenes marked by great agitation, while pure stichomythia is rarely found (Plaut. Amph. 812 ff., Cist. 240 ff.). Stichomythia became very important in the tragedies of + Seneca [2], especially in scenes of dispute or persuasion. In the scenes of dispute, a problem that had been clarified before is discussed again in a pointed, antithetical form (e.g. Sen. Tro. 327 ff., Herc.

1 A.Ercotantl, Il passaggio di parola sulla scena tragica, 2000, 20 f. 2 A.Gross, Die Stichomythia in der griechichen Tragédie und Komédie, 1905 3 G.F. K. LISTMANN, Die Technik des Dreigesprachs in der griechischen Tragédie, 1910 4 W.Jens, Die Stichomythia in der friihen griechischen Tragodie, 1955 5 E.-R.SCHWINGE, Die Verwendung der Stichomythia in den Dramen des Euripides, 1968 6 B.SEIDENSTICKER, Die Gesprachsverdichtung in den Tragédien Senecas, 1969 7 Id., Die Stichomythia, in: W. JENs (ed.), Die Bauformen des griechischen Tragédie, 1971, 183-220 8 G.THoMsoN, Aeschylus and Athens, 1941. B.Z.

Stiela (Stieh(A)a; Stiel(l)a). Fortified city in Sicilia of unknown location (Sophron fr. [1.67]; Philistus FGrH 556 F 20), in the vicinity of Megara according to Steph. Byz. s.v. =tvedka. (corrected to ZteAa based on coins) [3]. In view of the legends STA/STI/ STIA, S. is to be attributed with two series of coins (5th/4th cent. BC) ([2]; a single coin was found in excavations: Francavilla di Sicilia west of Taormina [3]). The relationship with coins from Catane and Leontini suggests that S. was located there ([4; 5]: near Portiere Stella in the plain of Catania). 1 A.OLIveRI, Frammenti della Commedia Greca ..., vol. 2,71947 2C.ARNOLD-BruccHI, s.v. Alabon, LIMC 1, 1981, 477f. 3U.Spico, Vita dei Medaglieri, in: Annali dell’Istituto Italiano di Numismatica 42, 1995, 197-208 (bibliogr.) 4S.Murong, S., in: Zeitschrift fiir Numismatik 38, 1928, 29-55 5K.ZIEGLER, s.v. S., RE Suppl. Tp LIB 2123.6.

GLF.

Stilicho. Flavius S., magister utriusque militiae in the west of the Roman Empire AD 395-408; son of an officer of Vandal origin (cf. Oros. 7,38,1) who served under Valens. S. took part as a tribunus in an embassy to Persia in 383 (Claud. Carm. 21,51-68); in 384 he married + Serena (ibid. 69-88), the niece of Theodosius I, and became comes stabuli, after 385 comes domesticorum (Claud. Carm. minora 30,193 f.) and in 392 magister utriusque militiae, probably in Thrace (Cod. Theod. 7,4,18; 7,9,3). As second-in-command to > Timasius in 394 he led a campaign against > Eugenius [1] in Italy (Zos. 4,57,2) and after a battle on the River Frigidus rose to magister utriusque militiae in the West (Zos. 4,59,1; ILS 795). At the beginning of 395, before his death, Theodosius appointed him guardian of his sons + Honorius [3] (11 years old) and > Arcadius (x7); the details of this remain unclear [9, vol. 2,2. 468ATONSAOLOMME|s S. was able to assert his power in the Western Empire [7. 257-270] and consolidate it by a close relationship with Honorius (with the title of > parens, [10]), by

837

838

marrying his daughter Maria [I 3] to the emperor in 395 (Zos. 5,4,1) and by a reform of the command structure [7. 20 f.]. Because of his guardianship of Arcadius in Constantinople, where — Rufinus [3] held the dominant position, and the dispute over whether Illyria belonged to the Eastern or Western Empire, tensions soon arose, which Alaric (> Alaricus [2]), the king of the Goths, exploited [3. 193-213; 6. 48-85]. S.’s campaign in 395 against Alaric, probably also with the aim of gaining influence in the East, was aborted when Rufinus recalled the Eastern Empire’s troops (Claud. Carm. 5, 100-256). Shortly afterwards, Rufinus was killed (Zos. 5,7,5 f.) and his place was taken by > Eutropius [4], who, when S. again marched against Alaric in 397, made the Goths extensive promises and had S. declared a hostis publicus (‘enemy of the state’) (Zos. 5,11,1; [6. 93-103]). A rebellion in Africa at the same time by + Gildo, who alternated between East and West, was suppressed (Claud. Carm. 15; Zos. 5,11,2-5; [7.272 f.]). In 401, after Eutropius’s death (in 399) Alaric marched into the West, but in 402 he was defeated by S. at Pollentia and Verona (Oros. 7,37,2; Claud. Carm. 26; [2. 191-195]) and forced to retreat to Epirus. In 405/6, S. successfully fought off > Radagaisus in Italy, but in 406/7 (alternative dating: [4]) he was unable to prevent the flow of Germanic tribes into Gaul. When an Eastern campaign planned for 407 with Alaric as an ally (Zos. 5,26,2) also failed because of > Constantinus [3] III’s usurpation in Gaul (Zos. 5,27,2 f.; Olympiodorus Historicus fr. 1,2 BLOCKLEY; but cf. [4. 330]) and S. paid a large sum of compensation to

domestic life. The depicted objects, arranged in a more or less intentional composition, included useful and decorative plants, such as — vegetables, field crops, + fruit and flowers, smaller mammals and birds, molluscs, crustaceans and fish (— Fishes), either in their raw natural state or as prepared food. Added to this were small containers of every kind, such as glasses, metal and pottery vessels (— Pottery, shapes and types of), baskets and — furniture, — jewellery, coins and > purses, as well as the tools of reading and writing. Cult objects and > theatre items formed a third group. The term SL was not known in Antiquity; it can be traced to the Dutch word stilleven, attested in the Low Countries from the mid—17th cent. onwards. After preliminary stages in the rsth and 16th cents., the genre had established itself as an independent branch of early modern painting in terms of form and content by about 1600; in the 18th cent., the genre was also defined as such in the Romance languages under the term nature

Alaric, his influence in internal politics dwindled (Zos.

5,29,5 f£.;[7. 278 f.]). After the death of Arcadius in 408 he did succeed in convincing Honorius to march with Alaric against Constantinus III, in order himself to make a move towards the East (Zos. 5,31; > Eucherius [2]), but a mutiny instigated by > Olympius [5] in the Gaulish army in Ticinum led to the death of many officials close to S. (Zos. 5,32) and ultimately — with Honorius’ sanction — to the killing of S. on 22 August 408 (MGH AA 9,300; Zos. 5,34 f.; [7. 280-283]). 1 PLRE 1, 853-858 271H.S. Burns, Barbarians within the Gates of Rome, 1994 3 P. HEATHER, Goths and Romans, 1991 4M.KuLikowskl, Barbarians in Gaul, Usurpers in Britain, in: Britannia 31, 2000, 325-345 5 A. LipPoLp, s. v. Theodosius I., RE Suppl. 13, 837-968 6J.H. W. G.LrieBEscHuetTz, Barbarians and Bishops, 1990 7 J.MaTrHEws, Western Aristocracies and Imperial Court AD 364-425, *1990 8 J.M. O’FLyNN,

Generalissimos

of the Western

Roman

Empire,

1983

9 F. PASCHOUD (ed.), Zosime, vol. 2,2, 1979 (with comm.)

10 J.STRAuB, Parens principum (1952), in: Id., Regeneratio imperil, 1972, 220-239.

WE.LU.

Still lives. Representations, as realistic as possible, of selected living and non-living objects in an independent composition and a fairly small-scale pictorial arrangement. The motifs of ancient SL were taken from all areas of ancient flora and fauna but also from everyday

STILL LIVES

morte or natura morta. Nevertheless, since W. HELBIG

(1873) the term SL has been applied to numerous depictions in the extant corpus of Roman-Campanian + wall paintings and Hellenistic and Roman > mosaics. A preliminary stage and possibly a reflex of trends in wall and panel painting can be seen in attractively composed depictions on late 4th cent. BC > Gnathia ware showing individual putti, garlands, birds, pieces of equipment, > masks and > musical instruments. A similar effect was achieved by the plant pictures on 3rd/and cent. + Hadra ware. Apulian — fish-plates with zoologically accurate reproductions of various marine animals, which first appeared in the early 4th cent., reflected a growing scientific interest in nature

(+ Nature, Natural philosophy). Certain terms in ancient sources can be connected with the SL genre, which also suggests an origin of the genre in the early Hellenistic Period. Vitr. De arch. 6,7,4, for instance, connects xénia, edible gifts for the guests in Greece, with eponymous pictorial imitations of such subjects in painting (cf. Philostr. Imag. 1,31; 2,26). Plin. HN 35,112 uses the term obsonia (‘dish, garnish’) for one of the pictorial themes of the Greek painter Piraecus, who was known for his everyday and craftsman scenes and ‘ignoble’ motifs and who was thus called a rhyparographos (‘painter of sordid subjects’). These scenes, however, are rather representative of genre painting. In art theory, a negative opinion of such

unspectacular themes of pictura minor persisted until modern times in the appreciation of SL as a genre; only a refined execution involving optical illusion by colourist or luminist painting techniques was recognised. Examples of this include anecdotes about grapes pecked by birds in a picture by > Zeuxis [1] and an extraordinarily realistic curtain painted by > Parrhasius (Plin. HN. 35,65). For the Classical masters, a SL-like style remains restricted to embellishments. Plin. HN 36,60 describes a further development in a picture by the Pergamene mosaicist > Sosus, which has as its main theme

STILL LIVES

840

839

the unswept floor of a dining room with the discarded remains of a meal (surviving in several Roman copies). Beginning in the late 4th cent. BC, there was a trend towards overestimation of technical brilliance above content and a preference for certain pictorial themes due to a ‘trivialisation’ and ‘secularisation’ in all areas of Greek art, which was increasingly aimed at the private sphere. The quality of SL varies greatly in the houses and villas of Rome and the cities of rural Campania, where the genre was represented from the early rst cent. BC until the late Imperial Period. They range from vivid rather graffiti-like wall sketches (pigs’ heads) to very elegant copies of Hellenistic paintings on folding panels with the described effects of light and shadow (> Skiagraphia). They were frequently part of a superior wall decoration. The depicted objects were presented on two levels or platforms in a kind of ‘peep box’, also floating freely or embedded in a medallion. So far, only little research has been done on house and room contexts and the relationship to other wall paintings in them, within the framework of a client’s intended pictorial programme; representational rooms used for dining or banqueting were not the only contexts of SL. Neither is there a consensus on the meaning and purpose of the depictions, though there is certainly a strong worldly

confusing, it remains unclear how S. fits into the sequence of Megarians. His character is repeatedly praised in the surviving sources. Emphasis is placed on his simple unaffected nature and his open confident manner in dealings with others; numerous anecdotes document his ready wit and his superior sense of humour. His skill at disputation is said to have fascinated people so much that “almost all of Greece turned their eyes on him and Megarised” (Diog. Laert. 2,113). S. wrote seven dialogues, which are said to be ‘chilly’, i.e. stilted and bombastic in style and train of thought (Diog. Laert. 2,120). The surviving sources report that S. represented the view that it was not possible to attribute to a subject a predicate which differed from it; furthermore, that he disputed the existence of general concepts. Both views are based on the same assumption, long before incontestably proved by Plato and Aristotle to be untenable, that the word ‘is’ always designates identity. Since it is hard to conceive that a man such as S. should have failed to comprehend this and held on to a long obsolete view, Plutarchus (Adv. Colotem 22,1119d) thinks, probably rightly, that S. did not propound the view in earnest, but presented it to others as a kind of ’dialectical exercise’. The remainder of what is still discernable of S.’s philosophical ideas touches on the area of ethics and, in

reference,

the main, revolves around one theme: that what matters

unconcealed ostentation of richness and ~+ luxury and a joy in opulent dining, including nourishments and utensils associated with it, which is a trend imitating the splendour and joie de vivre of the courts of Hellenistic rulers. -» Banquet; - Fish dishes (and seafood); > Mosaic; ~ Painting; > Wall paintings S.DE Caro, Zwei Gattungen der pompejanischen Malerei: Stilleben und Gartenmalerei, in: G. CERULLI IRELLI et al. (eds.), Pompejanische Wandmalerei, 1990, 263-273; J.M. CroisiLe, Les natures mortes campaniennes, 1965; Id., Deux artistes mineurs chez Pline l’ancien, Piraeicus et Possis, in: RPh 42, 1968, 101-106; F. ECKSTEIN, Unter-

suchungen tiber die Stilleben aus Pompeji und Herculaneum,

1957;

C.GrimM,

Stilleben,

1995;

W.HELBIG,

Untersuchungen uber die campanische Wandmalerei, 1873, Register s. v. Stilleben; K. JUNKER, Antike Stilleben, in: E.K6nr1G, C .SCHON (eds.), Stilleben, 1996, esp. 93105; N.J. Kocu, Techne und Erfindung in der klassischen Malerei, 2000, 97 f.; H.Lavacne, La peinture dans la maison romaine, in: T. NOGALES BASsARATE (ed.), La pin-

tura romana antigua, 1996, 15-21; S. MuTH, Erleben von Raum — Leben im Raum, 1998, 67-71; A. ROUVERET, Remarques sur les peintures de nature morte antiques, in:

Bulletin de la Société des Amis du Musée des Beaux Arts de Rennes 5, 1987, 11-25; Ead., Histoire et imaginaire de la peinture ancienne, 1989; I. SCHEIBLER, Griechische Malerei der Antike, 1994, 173-176; Ead., Klapptiirbilder romischer Wanddekorationen, in: MDAI(R) 105, 1998, i225

N.H.

is being self-sufficient and not allowing oneself to be ruled by one’s emotions. In this same vein he states that there is no reason to consider banishment a bad thing since there is no recognisable good it deprives one of, and that it does not make sense to grieve if a relative or friend dies (Teles at Stob. 3,40,8; 4,44,83); furthermore that, since a wise man is self-sufficient, he is not dependent on friends (Sen. Ep. 9,1-3). In antiquity, S. himself was considered a model of — autdrkeia. For this the following anecdote was repeatedly cited: after Demetrius [2] Poliorcetes had captured and plundered -» Megara in 307/6, he wanted to compensate S. for any damages because of his high regard for him. He therefore had him fetched and asked whether he had suffered any loss. Yet S. answered that that was not the case, since he carried all his property with him (Sen. Ep. 9,18; Diog. Laert. 2,115 et passim). 1 SSR II O (supplemented by POxy. 3655 = SSR IV p. 99) 2 K. Dorie, S., GGPh? 2/1, 1998, 230-234.

K.D.

Stilus see > Stylus; > Style, stylistic figures Stipendium see > Soldiers’ pay Stips. Latin ‘monetary contribution’, ‘donation’, but

also ‘minted coin’ (Fest. 379; 412). In the cult of the Latin West, a stips is a monetary offering for a deity that was — like food and drink sacrifices (— Sacrifice) and

Stilpo (=tiknwv/Stilpon) from Megara (> Megarian School); second half of the 4th and first third of the 3rd cent. BC. Since the information about his teachers is

offerings of votive gifts — either placed on an altar or thrown into a special ‘offertory box’ (> Thesaurus; Varro, Ling. 5,182). A stips was 1) given for the benefit

841

842

of the temple coffer; 2) submerged in water (e.g. Suet.

Stiria see — Steiria

Aug. 57); 3) buried (e.g. Tac. Ann. 4,53). Numerous inscriptions record this practice. Repairs in or of sanctuaries were financed ex stipe (‘by donations’) (e.g. ILLRP 39; 186; 191; CIL VI 456 f.; 30974; Suet. Aug.

57513 91,2). J.-L. DEsnikgr, S., in: RHR 204, 1987, 219-230.

AVS.

Stipulatio. A central concept of Roman law, etymology unclear. Stipulatio is a verbal form of promise to provide a service, linked to a question and corresponding answer format, i.e. a verbal contract containing a onesided obligation (Paul. Sent. 2,3). The future creditor formulated the question to the future debtor, who had to reply giving a repetition of the verb used in the question (Dari spondes? Spondeo, ‘Do you pledge that it will be given? I so pledge’, etc., Gai. Inst. 3,92). The verbs most commonly used were spondere, promittere, fidepromittere, fideiubere, the first being used by Roman citizens alone until the 2nd cent. AD, the others also by foreigners (— peregrinus). It was also permitted to use Greek (Ulp. Dig. 45,1,1,6; Gai. Inst. 3,93). The formal requirements of the originally highly ceremonial exchange of formulae, which required the simultaneous presence of the parties and the immediate sequence of question and answer, became gradually eroded, so that from the 3rd cent. AD, there was no need for the question and answer forms to use the same word, and eventually the requirement for the verbal form, too, was dispensed with. The stipulatio enabled the conclusion of agreements for the provision of services of any and every possible and permissible kind (Inst. Iust. 3,19), thereby avoiding the strict formal requirements of Roman contract law, which only permitted claims for informal agreements in certain cases. For this reason, the stipulatio’s sphere of application was extraordinarily wide, ranging from the acceptance of guarantees at purchase through amplifications to loans (e.g. promises to pay interest) to gift contracts. The stipulatio was thus ‘one of the most important and original creations of Roman law.’ [1. 538]. > Sponsio II 1 KAseER, RPR, vol. 1, 538-543. R. DULL, Zur romischen S., in: ZRG 68, 1951, 191-216; J.G. Wotr, Causa stipulationis, 1970; M. DoBBERTIN, Zur Auslegung der Stipulation im klassischen ROmischen Recht, 1987 (cf. the review by P. APATHY, in: ZRG 106, 1989, 663-665); I.REICHARD, Stipulation und Custodiahaftung, in: ZRG 107, 1990, 46-79; D. SCHANBACHER, Zur Bedeutung der Leistungszweckbestimmung bei der

Ubereignung durch traditio und beim Leistungsversprechen durch s., in: Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 60, 1992, 1-27; W.FLuMeE, Zu den romischen Birgschaftsstipulationen, in: ZRG 113, 1996, 88-131; R.ZIMMERMANN, The Law of Obligations: Roman Foundations of the Civilian Trad., 1996, 68-94; H.ANKuM, La forma dell’acceptilatio nella realta giuridica di Roma nel periodo classico, in: RIDA 1998, 267-285. NF.

STOA

Stiris (=tioic/Stiris, Ntupic/Stiris). City in Eastern Phocis on the route from Chaeronea over the Helicon [2] to Delphi (Paus. 10,35,8), remains at modern Paleochori

(monastery of Agios Nikolaos). In the 3rd cent. BC border conflicts with Panopeus (SEG 42, 479), in the middle of the 2nd cent. BC > sympoliteia with Medeon [x] (Syll.3 647). Inscriptions: IG IX 1,32-57. F.ScHosBeEr, Phokis, 1924, 40f.; PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN I, 438; N.D. PapacHatzis, Pausaniu Hellados Periegesis, vol. 5, 1981, 441f.;J.Fossey, The Ancient Topography of Eastern Phokis, 1986, 32-34; PH. Nrasios, Symbole sten Topographia tes Archaias Phokidos, in: Phokika Chronika 4, 1992, 71-76.

G.D.R.

Stirrup jar. Modern term for a typical vessel, usually painted, of the late Minoan and Mycenaean repertory of pottery. It was developed on Crete in the Middle Minoan III period (after 1700 BC) from an amphoralike vessel by adding three handles, a spout and a false central boss in place of the upper spout. In the Late Helladic IIA period (after 1500 BC), this form was adopted for pottery of the Mycenaean palaces, and in the Late Helladic II[Ar period (after 1400 BC) it was redesigned with two stirrup-like handles. The SJ was probably used for keeping and transporting fragrant and food oils and spread as far as Egypt. P.A. Mountyoy, Mycenaean Pottery. An Introduction, 1993, Late Helladic. RD.

Stoa (otod; stod). [1] Ancient description for a long covered walkway,

gallery or portico resting on columns and structurally enclosed at the back. The earliest examples in Greek architecture occur around 700 BC; the derivation of its style is unclear: features recalling the early Greek architecture of the Geometric Period can no more be substantiated than connections with Oriental tent construction. In the Archaic Period the stoa was largely restricted to sanctuaries; here, as in later times, it generally acted as a structural framework and boundary of the layout of town plazas and supposedly provided space for votive offerings. In the late 7th and the 6th cents. BC, they were concentrated in the regions of Asia Minor (Didyma, Smyrna, Larissa [6] on the Hermos, Samos), Greece (Argos, Acropolis of Athens), Western Greece (Megara [3] Hyblaia) and the Ionian islands (Naxos [1], Delos). In the 5th and 4th cents. BC, the stoa turned into either a form of memorial and monumental architecture or a functional building used by the polis for commerce and administration; the > agora became the preferred location for such ‘secular’ stoai. At the same time Athens assumed a pioneering role (Stoa Basileios, Stoa Poikile). Further significant stoai from the Classical and Late Classical Periods are found — also still in sanctuaries — in Delphi (Athenian Stoa), Sparta (Stoa Persike),

STOA

843

844

Greek stoai from the Archaic to the Hellenistic Periods (schematic ground-plans)

2O2@@

ote

6?

@?

8

2? #2?

8

(Oe

# ¢

*

6

Ce

@

#

OT

*@ @

OO

FE

(O50

0)

8;

8)

.e

Delos, Stoa of the Naxians Athens, Stoa Basileios

Delphi, Stoa of the Athenians Argos, Heraion, North Stoa

Argos, Heraion, South Stoa Olympia, South NORWN

eeoeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eee eels

Stoa

7 Corinth, South Stoa 8 Calydon, Stoa J

9 Delos, Agora 10 Megale Polis, Stoa of Philippus [4] II @

©

e

e

©

e

©

©

©

©

©

©

©

©

8

@

11

Delos, Stoa of Philippus [7] V

WP

Athens,

Stoa

of Attalus

845

846

Argos (South Stoa), Oropos (Amphiareion), Corinth (South Stoa) and Olympia (Echo Hall and South Stoa).

In the Hellenistic Period the stoa became quite simply a type of large building and shaped the appearance of numerous sanctuaries (e.g. Calydon [3], Thermos, Delos, Kos, Rhodes) and of entire municipal complexes, often as a prestigious monarchical seat (e.g. Priene, Miletus, Cassope, Pella, Megale Polis; - town planning). The cost of monarchical stoa establishments was at times exorbitant and went to the extreme of prefabricating and transporting whole marble structures over wide distances to the desired location (Athens, Stoa of Eumenes). In Hellenistic architecture the stoa emerges as a component of broad, architectural heterogeneous elements beside the stoa in its conventional form as a monumental single structure. Here, the portico, in the setting of an elongated building in a plaza, becomes a variable recurrent theme connecting various types of buildings (Kos, Asklepieion; Lindos, Athena sanctuary). The Propylaea on the Acropolis of Athens, built by Mnesicles around 430 BC, were the earliest and probably constitutive example (— Gates; porches). The lengths of Greek stoai vary considerably (from almost 16m in Didyma in the 7th cent. BC to over 160m along the South Stoa in Corinth and the Hellenistic Stoa in Thermos). The buildings were mostly of a singlestoried design, seldom two-storied (until after 300 BC) (Athens, Stoa of Attalos); they followed either the Doric or the Ionian order (— Column). Nevertheless, twostoried structures frequently show an alternation between the Doric order of the base and the Ionian order of the actual building. Building materials changed when the stoa became a representative institution: as well as lightweight constructions made from brick and wood, there are massive, stuccoed poros buildings, and, from the sth cent. BC, also large numbers of marble buildings. As well as the long linear form, the L-shaped stoa and the pi-shaped stoa (risalit stoa) occur in the ground plans; both are particularly suitable for framing and delimiting the layouts of town plazas. The structure of the ground-plan varies: at first a two-part hall was the norm, consisting of a row of rooms en bloc fronted by a colonnade (Camirus). This concept was extensively modified by occasionally combining two rows of inner buildings with multiple-aisled colonnades (Megale Polis, Corinth, Athens). The rooms of the stoa were used either by merchants or administrators (stoai in agoras of Greek poleis) or served to keep votive offerings or the spoils of war (+ War booty) safe or on display (e.g. Delphi, Stoa of the Athenians), or as a kind of memorial in appreciation of the building’s founder. The Roman > porticus developed from the Greek stoa but restricted its commercial function. The > basilica isa Roman counterpart with regard to its business and legal functions as well as in respect of its role in enclosing a town plaza. + Column J.F. BOMMELAER, Les portiques de Delphes, in: RA 1993,

33-51; J.J. Coutron, The Architectural Development of

STOBAEUS

the Greek S., 1976; W. KoEniGs, Die Echohalle, 1984; Id., Zum Entwurf dorischer Hallen, in: MDAI(Ist) 29, 1979, 209-237; M.Korres, Vorfertigung und Ferntransport eines athenischen Grofbaus, in: DiskAB 4, 1984, 201-

207; G.Kuun, Untersuchungen zur Funktion der Saulenhalle in archaischer und klassischer Zeit, in: JDAI 100, 1985, 169-317; H. Lauter, Die Architektur des Hellenismus, 1986, 113-132; Id., Ein archaischer Hallenbau in Poseidonia/ Paestum, in: MDAI(R) 91, 1984, 23-45; W.MULLER-WIENER, Griechisches Bauwesen in der Antike, 1988, 152-154; H.ScHAaF, Untersuchungen zu Gebaudestiftungen hellenistischer Zeit, 1992. C.HO.

[2] see > Stoicism

Stobaeus. Iohannes of > Stobi in Macedonia (Imavvyg Ltofatoc/Iddnnés Stobaios), author of an Anthology dated to the sth cent. AD. His name Iohannes makes a Christian background likely [11. 197]. I. WORK: CONTENT AND STRUCTURE

II. PHILOSO-

PHY I. WORK: CONTENT AND STRUCTURE

The

collection

of

excerpts,

the

Anthology

(AvOoA0ytov/Anthologion; Suda s.v. Iodvvng ZtoBevs),

contained, according to Photius, ‘extracts, sayings and teachings in four books’ (Phot. Bibl. cod. 167) — bk. 1: physics (and metaphysics), bk. 2,1-6: logic (and epistemology), bk. 2,7 ff. and bk. 3: ethics proper, bk. 4: politics and economics. Our information on the work comes from Photius (e.g. a list of authors cited by S. and a summary by chapter). In the almost entirely lost prooemium, S. dedicates the collection to his son, Septimius, with the aim to improve the latter’s reading memory (on the context of the ‘books to the son’ and didactic-pedagogical literature, cf. [15]). The arrangement of the ‘Anthology’ is unique. There is no framework, as e.g. the symposial context (as in — symposium literature; > Buntschriftstelleret). A mosaic of texts is arranged by thematic chapters (e.g. ‘On War’, 4,9; ‘On Beauty’, 4,21a) and linked by lemmata usually giving work titles and authors’ names (but not consistently: [14]). The types of texts from which S. collected passages are diverse: > chreia, ~+ apophthegma, > gnomé, monostichon, > paroimia. The extracts, in verse or prose, are of various lengths (incomplete monostichs, e.g. Soph. TrGF IV F 924 in Stob. 3,4,5, up to presumably complete texts such as Ps.-Aristot. Peri aretés in Stob. 3,1,194) and cover the whole of Greek literature from Homer [1] to Themistius (late 4th cent. AD, terminus post quem), S. being often our only source. The individual chapters generally observe the sequence poetry-prose, a sequence already found in the preceding anthological tradition (PBarns, 2nd cent. BC [r]) and preserved in collections such as that of > Orion [3]. More than 500 Greek authors are presented (in lemmata such as ‘by Socrates’, ‘by Diogenes’; in each case the author to whom the chreia or apophthegm was attributed).

847

848

Of the poets, the most prominent are Euripides [1]

The four books of the so-called Antholdgion are preserved in two separate parts, the Eclogae physicae et ethicae (bks. 1-2) and the Florilegium or Sermones (bks. 3-4). The first part (Eclogae) was considerably abridged in the course of its transmission, as is shown by Photius’ list of chapters (he still had the complete work). The ethical nature of the Florilegium (i.e.: bks. 3-4) helped its dissemination. The MSS transmission, which reflects the division, also proves problematic (only partially studied: [6; 13. 188-216]). The ‘index card’ structure then abetted the infiltration and excision of material (cf. Stob. 3,1, where the poetry-prose arrangement is disturbed). The use of mixed florilegia for textual reconstruction in the edition of WACHSMUTHHENSE makes the original design of the collection even

STOBAEUS

(for whom S. is the most important indirect source), with over 850 quotations [13], and Menander [4] (of whom monostichs are also included). Sophocles [x], Philemon [2], Theognis and Hesiodus [1] are often quo-

ted, while Homer [1] is mostly found in prose passages. Lyric metres are very rare. This limitation is already present in the anthologies known from papyri, of which S. is a direct descendant [12]. Of the prose authors, the most cited are Plato [1], Herodotus, Thucydides (esp. the speeches, probably from a thematic collection), Xenophon and Isocrates (esp. the exhortatory speeches, e.g. Isoc. Or. 1 and 2). Plato is prominent not by virtue of the number of quotations (see below II), but by the range of text. First-hand knowledge has been assumed by some [3]. Among poets and prose authors, there are frequent changes made for epideictic reasons or perhaps in view of current social and political conditions. The multilayered nature of the work makes it difficult to distinguish the hand of S. from his sources. Assumptions of a contextualization in the style of a florilegium [2; 10] or of mechanical reasons [9] are simplifications. The source issue is difficult: an anthology of various authors is a source for both S. and for Theophilus of Antioch’s Ad Autolycum (2nd cent. AD) [4]; other hypotheses remain beyond proof. Theories of direct derivation (esp. for Euripides and Menander) from original alphabetical collections (xat& otovyetov/kata stoicheion) arranged by the initial letters of the titles of works are hardly credible, esp. by comparison with the papyri ([2; 8.

111-118]; contra: [13. 197-206]).

The triple division of the work according to philosophical system is clear (see above). The actual four books (206 chapters) are preceded by a prooemium (2 chapters); the first is a eulogy of philosophy, and the second deals with philosophical schools (also doxai/ ‘opinions’ on geometry, music and arithmetic). Some sections ‘On Arithmetic’ (Iegi Geuuntixfd/Peri arithmeétikés) survive. Each chapter has its own theme, often presenting the polarities épainos — psdgos — synkrisis (praise — censure — comparative evaluation; influence of rhetorical tradition). The overall structure of the work is based on terminological distinctions of a binary type (e.g. aretai/‘virtues’ — kakiai/‘vices’) and questions and subquestions, proceeding from the general to the particular. The structure is didactic and exegetic: the presentation of a theme (e.g. on virtue: that it is good to have sons), presentation of opinions of authoritative people and arrangement in a pattern according to a pyramid structure (from the supreme world hierarchies to human life and everyday life) [15]. Structure and choice of material (esp. for the philosophers) betray a competent collector, who shows doctrinal expertise on the one hand in the systematic nature of his work and his choice of authors (influence of + Neoplatonism; see below II.), and on the other hand is guided by the literary tradition.

more uncertain [5].

~» Encyclopaedia; > Gnome 1 J. Barns, A New Gnomologium I, in: CQ 44, 1950, 1261373 Il, in: CQ 45, 1951, I-19 2 O. BERNHARDT, Quaestiones Stobenses, 1861 3 E.BICKEL, De Ioannis Stobaei

excerptis Platonicis de Phaedone, 1902 4H. DieLs, Eine Quelle des Stobaus, in: RhM 30, 1875, 172-181 5A.L. Dr Letito-Finuo yt, II Florilegio Laurenziano, in: Quaderni Urbinati 4, 1967, 139-173 6lId., A proposito di alcuni codici Trincavelliani, in: Rivista di studi bizantini e slavi 14-16, 1977-1979, 349-376 7 Id., Ateneo e Stobeo alla Biblioteca Vaticana, in: $.LUcA, L.PERRIA (eds.), ’Onwea. FS P. Canart, vol. 3, 1999, 13-55 8 W.GORLER, Mevavdoov yv@uot, Diss. Berlin 1963

9 F.HERNANDEZ

MuNoz, Tipologia de la faltas en las citas euripideas de los manuscritos de Estobeo, in: Cuadernos de Filologia Clasica 23, 1989, 131-155 10S.LurtA, Entstellungen des Klassikertextes bei Stobaios, in: RhM 78, 1929, 81-104; 225-248 11J.MANSFELD, D.T.Runia, Aétiana: The Method and Intellectual Context of a Doxographer, vol. I, 1997, 196-271 12R.M. Picciong, Sulle fonti e le metodologie compilative di Stobeo, in: Eikasmos 5, 1994, 281-317 13 Id., Sulle citazioni euripidee in Stobeo e sulla struttura dell’ ‘Anthologion’, in: RFIC 122, 1994, 175218 14]Id., Caratterizzazione di lemmi nell’ ‘Anthologion’ di Giovanni Stobeo, in: RFIC 127, 1999, 139-175 15Id., Enciclopedismo ed éyxbxdwog maideia?, in: M.Narcy,

A.Laxs

(eds.), Philosophie antique 2, 2002

16 C. WacHSMUTH, Studien zu den griechischen Florilegien, 1882.

EDITIO PRINCEPS: Eclogae: G.CANTER, Antwerpen 1575 (with Lat. transl.); Florilegium: V.TRINCAVELLI, Venetiis 1535. Ep1TIoNs: C.WACHSMUTH, 2 vols. 1884 (Anth. bks. 1-2); O. HENSE, 3 vols. 1894-1912 (repr. 1974). InDeEx: Id., 1923 (repr. 1958). BiBL1oGRAPHY: H.CuHaApDWICk, s.v. Florilegium, RAC 7, 1131-1160; A.ELTER, De Gnomologiorum Graecorum

historia atque origine, vol. 1-3, 1893, 4-6, 1894; Id., De Gnomologiorum Graecorum historia atque origine commentationis ramenta, 1897; R. GOULET, s.v. Jean Stobée, GOULET 3, 2000, 1012-1016; O. HENSE, s.v. Ioannes Stobaios, RE 9, 2549-2586; A. Peretti, Teognide nella tra-

dizione gnomologica,

in: Studi classici ed orientali 4,

1953; A.N. ZouMpPos, Toeic tis piAocodiag totogioyeddot, in: Platon 16, 1964, 205-208.

849

850

Il. PHILOSOPHY Although S.’ huge anthology contains much literary and some historical, rhetorical and medical material, by far the majority of the authors that it cites belong to Greek philosophical tradition. The selection of philosophers covers the whole of antiquity, from the > Seven Sages to > Themistius (4th cent. AD). The basic philosophical tendency of the collection (heightened by the Byzantine process of abridgement)is Neoplatonist, but with a strong emphasis on ethics on account of the paraenetic aim of the work. In bk. of the Eclogae (on physics) S. has made extensive use of the doxographical material of > Aetius [2] (whose reconstruction would be impossible without S. [6]). Consisting mainly of very short lemmata, it is cited under the name of the philosopher without reference to the source. Aetius’ compendium also supplied S. with the basic organization of this book. Intermixed with these placita are extracts from the compendium of ~ Arius Didymus [5]. In bk. 2 of the Eclogae (on ethics) long extracts from the same source have also been anonymously included [3]. S. also includes in his collection a vast number of sayings and maxims attributed to important names in the philosophical tradition (cf. the work’s title; often cited are + Socrates [2], Democritus [1] and > Diogenes [13] of Sinope). The sources of this material are never indicated, but it is clearly compiled from earlier collections of gnomological material (~ Gnome) [4] and distributed according to subject throughout the entire work. The bulk of the philosophical material in the ‘Anthology’, however, consists of excerpts from the writings of philosophers. These vary greatly in length, from a few lines to extracts of ten pages or more. In many cases, not only the author’s name, but also the title of the excerpted work is indicated. The importance of this immense body of material for our knowledge of ancient philosophy can hardly be overestimated. Even when the Neoplatonist bias is taken into account, the range of authors cited is impressive. The most important are: (a) Pythagorean writers, often in the form of later > Pythagorean pseudepigrapha [1; 2]; (b) Plato, cited over 500 times, invaluable evidence for the textual tradition; (c) Xenophon, all works extensively cited; (d) authors of -» diatribes and popular ethical works (> Popular philosophy), such as Teles, Musonius [1], Epictetus [2], Arrianus [2], Favorinus; (e) Plutarch’s [2] moral writings, extensively cited, including fragments from missing works [7]; (f) Neoplatonist authors, esp. Porphyry and Iamblichus [2]; (g) the > Hermetic writings; (h) numerous other extracts from little-known authors (overview [8. to15—1016}). It should not be concluded that S. had direct access to all these works. Often he will have taken over the excerpts from earlier collections. There are almost no quotations from the authentic writings of Presocratics and Hellenistic philosophers. Remarkably, the Corpus Aristotelicum is scarcely cited.

The vast treasure-house of S.’ excerpts has been extensively drawn upon for collected fragments of authors. Insufficient effort has been made, however, to study this material in the light of its Stobaean context. There are almost no separate editions, translations or critical studies. + Doxography

STOECHADES

1H. THESLEFF, The Pythagorean Texts of the Hellenistic Period, 1965 2 B.CENTRONE, Pseudopythagorica ethica, 1990 3D.E. HaHM, The Ethical Doxography of Arius Didymus, in: ANRW II 36.4, 1990, 2935-3055 4R.M. PiccIonE, Sulle fonti e le metodologie compilative di Stobeo, in: Eikasmos 5, 1994, 281-317 5 D.T. Runia, Additional Fragments of Arius Didymus in Physics, in: K. A. AuecRA etal. (eds.), Polyhistor. FS J.Mansfeld, 1996, 363381 6J.MANSFELD, D.T.RuniA, Aétiana: The Method

and Intellectual Context of a Doxographer, 1997, 196271 7R.M. Picciong, Plutarco nell’Anthologion di Giovanni Stobeo, in: I.GaALLo (ed.), L’eredita culturale di Plutarco dall’antichita al rinascimento, 1998, 161-201 8 R. GOULET, s.v. Jean Stobée, in: GOULET 3, 2000, 10o12— 1016. D.T.R.

Stobi (=t6BoW/Stdboi). City in Paeonia (> Paeones, Paeonia) with an Illyrian/Thracian/Macedonian population, on the route through the valley of the Axios from Thessalonica to the > Ister [1] (Danube), at the mouth of the Erigonus (Str. 8,8,5). Macedonian probably since — Antigonus [3], who re-established S. as Antigoneia (Plin. HN 4,34). After the Roman peace of 168 BC the

city belonged to the 2nd meris (‘region’) of Macedonia, and was a transshipment centre for the salt trade of the 3rd meris with the Dardani (Liv. 45,29,8; 13). Until Augustus, S. was oppidum civium Romanorum (Plin. HN 4,34), before Vespasian municipium, tribus Aemi-

lia [x. 111 f.]. S. was a bishop’s seat, metropolis of Macedonia Secunda (+ Macedonia [V]). In 479 the city was plundered by > Theoderic (Malchus fr. 20; Jord. Get. 286). Excavations reveal particular prosperity in the 4th/sth cents. 1 H.Gaersier, Die antiken Miinzen Nordgriechenlands, vol. 2, 1935. F.PapazocGLou, Les villes de Macédoine, 1988, 313 f.; J. WIsEMAN, S.: A Guide to the Excavations, 1973. MA.ER.

Stoechades (Ztowddec viicovStoichddes nésoi), ‘row (from ototyos/stoichos, row). Island group directly offshore, c. 70 km east of > Massalia/Marseille islands’

(Str. 4,1,10; Mela 2,124), present-day les d’Hyeres. Among them are the islands of Prote (‘the first’), Mese (‘the middle one’), as well as Pomponiana, Hypaea (‘the one below’), Sturium, Phoenice, Phila, Lero and Lerina (Plin. HN 3,79). The assignment of the corresponding modern names to the various islands is a matter of debate (present-day Le Levant, Port-Cros, Porquerolles, Ribaudas, Bagaud, Giens). The S. were known for coral

fishing (Plin. HN 32,21).

STOECHADES

852

851

J.-P. Brun, Le village massaliote de La Galére a Porque-

rolles (Var) et la geographie de Stoechades au 1“ siécle av. J.-C., in: M.Bats et al. (eds.), Marseille grecque et la Gaule, 1992, 279-288, in part. 284-287; A.L. F. Rivet, Gallia Narbonensis, 1988, 223. E.O.

les, 1964; A.STUCKELBERGER, Naturwissenschaft, 1988.

Einfiihrung in die antike FR.

Stoicism I. History Ill. Locic

IJ. OVERVIEW IV. PuHysics

OF STOIC PHILOSOPHY V. ETHICS

Stoichedon see > Inscriptions; > Writing; > Writing, I. History

direction of Stoicheion

(otovyetov/stoicheion,

Latin

elementum).

The primarily philosophical concept of stoicheion (originally meaning ‘letter’) denotes the irreducible basic components or the foundations of Being. Probably by analogy of letters with words, the concept represents an attempt to understand the bewilderingly great multiplicity of the natural world as combinations of a limited number of elements. The term stoicheion was in antiquity fundamentally linked to the classical theory, fully formulated by > Empedocles [1], of the four elements earth, water, air and fire (although Empedocles’ technical term for them was not yet stoicheion but ‘roots’, rhizomata; Emp. fr. 6 B 15 DK). The Pythagoreans (+ Pythagorean School) adopted the theory of the basic elements, but saw their main characteristic in their geometric shape (theory of the five regular polyhedrons). > Leucippus and > Democritus further reduced the Empedoclean elements to homogeneous atoms (dtoma). Plato [1] and Aristotle [6] reintroduced the distinction between bodies and their attributes. Plato reclaimed the comparison with letters (Pl. Phlb. 18b-d) and further developed the geometric figures as basic elements (PI. Ti. 48b-c; 53c-57d). Aristotle added ether to the four elements, their main char-

acteristic no longer being the shape but rather the natural movement of the elements (Aristot. Cael. 3,307b); only the principle (arché) remained wholly self-sufficient (Aristot. Metaph. 1070b 23). A reference to the four elementary substances is also found in the Corpus Hippocraticum. In > Galen the four bodily fluids (blood, mucus, yellow and black bile) are regarded as a type of stoicheion

mentum

(- Humoral

theory). The Latin term ele-

usually refers to the four elementary sub-

stances (Sen. Q Nat. 3,12; Cic. Acad. 1,26; Lucr. 1,907914; 2,688—691). In the Roman and Byzantine periods

the word stoicheion took on the additional meaning of heavenly bodies, > constellations, magic symbols, spirits and demons. + Cosmology; > Elements, theories of the; — Metaphysics; - Ontology N.BLOSSNER,

s.v.

Stoicheion,

HWdPh

10,

197-200;

C.BiuM, The Meaning of Stoicheion and Its Derivatives in the Byzantine Age, in: Eranos 44, 1946, 315-326; W.BuRKERT, otoretov, in: Philologus 103, 1959, 167197; C.GaubIW, Platon et l’alphabet, 1990; H. KOLLER, Stoicheion, in: Glotta 34, 1955, 161-174; A. LUMPE, s. v. Elementum,

RAC

4, 1959,

1073-1100;

M.LapPipGE,

Archai and stoicheia: a Problem in Stoic Cosmology, in: Phronesis 18, 1973, 240-78.; W.SCHWABE, “Mischung” und “Elemente” im Griechischen bis Platon, 1980; G.A.

SEECK, Uber die Elemente in der Kosmologie des Aristote-

Stoicism was an intellectual movement rooted in an Athenian school of philosophy founded by > Zeno [2] of Citium in the late 4th cent. BC; it took its name from the place where Zeno’s lessons were held, the Stod Poikilé (‘painted collonade’, - Stoa [1]), and developed most significantly by its next two leaders, > Cleanthes {2] of Assus and > Chrysippus [2] of Soli. It flourished primarily within the context of the school at Athens until the sack of the city by Roman forces in 86 BC; besides Athens, Rhodes was also an important centre of activity in the 2nd cent. BC. By the Augustan Period its activities were more dispersed, and it became a central part of Greco-Roman intellectual life generally. Important Stoic philosophers of the Imperial Period are -» Musonius [1] Rufus (c. AD 30-100), > Seneca [2] (c. 4 BC-AD 65) and the emperor > Marcus [2] Aurelius (AD 121-180). Musonius and his pupil > Epictetus left behind the text of their lectures (speeches and discourses, published by others); Seneca’s philosophical works consist of the ‘Letters to Lucilius’, several treatises and a series of rhetorical works on various subjects (Dialogi), while Marcus Aurelius wrote only ‘Self-reflections’. The foundation by Hadrian (AD 17-138) of a chair of Stoic philosophy returned Athens to importance in the activities of the school. Its institutional life slowly faded with the rise of > Neoplatonism in the 3rd cent. AD, yet its influence on philosophy and religion persisted (if sometimes indirectly) until the end of Antiquity. Its impact on medieval thought was sporadic, but with the revival of classical learning Stoicism was rediscovered and had a profound impact on early modern philosophy. Its influence on the religion, philosophy and literature of European civilizations since then has been intermittent, but at least in ethics it has remained a significant inspiration until the present time (see [4]).

Il. OVERVIEW OF STOIC PHILOSOPHY

The school was rooted deeply in the Socratic tradition (— Socrates [2]; > Socratics), with substantial influences from + Cynicism and Platonism and (at least in its later history) from the Peripatetic tradition (— Peripatos). Socratic and Cynic influences created a strand of radical commitment to ‘nature’ (pboic/physis; Lat. natura) in opposition to the ‘convention’ (vduoc/ nomos) of Greek polis culture; nevertheless the school was culturally conservative, retaining through allegorical interpretation what it regarded as the wisdom of the ancient poets (especially in physics and cosmology; ~ allegoresis) and adapting itself readily to the differing values and institutions of many cultures, especially that of Imperial Rome. The two central ideas of Stoicism

854

853 were

-

nature

(physis;

Lat.

natura)

and

reason

(+ Logos; Lat. ratio) and its most important conviction

was that they converge. They do so in at least two ways. First, nature is fundamentally rational, explicable, and purposive. Second, the natural world sets norms for the rational beings who inhabit it, so that the key to happiness for humans is to ‘live according to nature’ (tO axorOLOWS TH poet Civ/to akolouthos téi physei zen, Diog. Laert. 7,87).

Philosophical activity was divided by the Stoics into ~ logic, > physics and — ethics (with further subdivisions). Most Stoics agreed that these three parts were interdependent (though > Ariston [7] of Chios focussed exclusively on ethics), but there was a healthy disagreement within the school on the relationship among these parts. Some compared philosophy to an animal (logic being the bones and sinews, ethics the flesh, physics the soul); others to an egg (logic being the shell, ethics the white, and physics the yolk); others held that logic was like the wall around an orchard, physics being the land and trees and ethics being the fruit. The culmination of philosophy was held to be either ethics or physics (which included theology). III. Logic Logic included > rhetoric and > dialectics. Rhetoric was regarded by Stoics as a weaker and more diffuse means of persuasion, having the same aim as dialectic: the inculcation of > truth through discourse. Dialectic’s power lay in its capacity to produce knowledge through well grounded argument and in its ability to dissolve sophisms and fallacies which inculcate error and undermine our confidence in reason. It was defined as the knowledge of what is true, what is false and what is neither true nor false (Diog. Laert. 7,41). Two important features of dialectic are its inclusion of a great deal that we would classify as semantics, linguistics, and epistemology, and the development by > Chrysippus [2] of a comprehensive system of propositional logic. Working with propositions rather than the terms (as Aristotelian logic did), Chrysippus set out five basic and indemonstrable forms of inference and several logical rules; from these he generated a system whose rigour and comprehensiveness was not rivalled until the roth cent. Careful analysis of modal concepts, the conditional, and quantification also characterizes Stoic logic. In epistemology, the central concept was the ‘impression’ (davtaota/phantasia, SVF Il 52-70). Sensory impressions are the foundation of all concepts and beliefs, and the ultimate reliability of sensory impressions (in particular of the ‘cataleptic’ impression grasping its object, davtacia xatahknatuxn/phantasia kataleptiké, which was supposed to be self-verifying) was the focus of a prolonged debate between Stoics and the leaders of the sceptical Academy, — Arcesilaus [5] and ~ Carneades [1]. A vital distinction was made between the impression as a physical alteration of the soul and the intelligible content of that experience (10 Aextov/to lekton, ‘that which can be said’) to which only rational perceivers have access.

STOICISM

IV. Puysics Stoic > physics presents a view of the cosmos tied to traditional Greek religious thinking in that it treated + Zeus as a central organizing symbol. Plato’s Timaeus was one of the principal influences and the Stoics too presented the cosmos as a living being made and governed by a beneficent rational god. For the Stoics, though, the divine governor was fully immanent in the world; one might say that in Stoic cosmology the ~ demiourgos and the world-soul were combined. The cosmos was created and destroyed in unending cycles (+ Empedocles [1]). The starting and ending point for the world isa state of fiery perfection (— Fire [D.]). The organization of the cosmos as we know it began with the complete conversion of this fire into a watery starting point containing rational ‘seeds’ (oméguata/ spérmata, hoyou onequatino/logoi spermatikot) which govern the further development of this raw material (> Matter) into the traditional four elements (earth, air, fire, water: Diog. Laert. 7,135; > Elements, theo-

ries of the). The cosmos and all its parts form a single and fully unified whole. It is surrounded by a void of indefinite size which serves to accommodate the expansion accompanying the cosmic conflagration in which the world ends; there is no void within the cosmos and the cosmos is unified by the omnipresence of ‘creative’ fire (xe texvixdv/pyr technikon, SVF II 1027) which Chrysippus [2] replaced with > pneuma, a form of fiery alr.

The creative and governing force in Stoic cosmology is, thus, both immanent and material, and indeed Stoi-

cism is a form of material monism in that everything which exists is corporeal. However, there are two principles which make up any existent object, the active (to mowvv/to poiotin) and the passive (tO mdoxov/to paschon). The active principle is identified with Zeus and the passive with ‘unqualified’ (é&xovo¢/adpoios) matter (Diog. Laert. 7,134). All states and conditions of matter, including qualities and dispositions, are themselves treated as material, a view which sharply distinguished the Stoics from Platonists and Aristotelians. In addition to corporeal reality, however, the Stoics also recognized four incorporeals (Sext. Emp. AM 10,218): time, place, void, and ‘sayables’ (Aexté/lekta which are, roughly speaking, the intelligible content of rational thought and discourse). All objects in the cosmos are structured by their active principle embodied in pneuma, which can have varying degrees of tension (tOvoc/tdnos). Stable inanimate objects are held together by their mere disposition (€t¢/héxis), living things by nature (pbouc/physis), animals by soul (wvyr/psyché), and rational animals by reason (Adyoc/ldgos). Thus each grade of existence can be defined by its highest level of being —a notion which seems to anticipate Neoplatonic ideas but is in fact thoroughly materialistic (+ Materialism). The soul is fully rational, being a highly refined form of pneuma, and yet fully material. It permeates the entire body and yet is distinguishable from it. Hence within Stoic materialism

855

856

a form of body-soul dualism is preserved; one might see this as an attempt to reconcile Aristotelian hylomorphism with Platonic dualism. The causal nexus (-— Causality) which links all objects and events is complete and rational. Hence mature Stoicism rests upon a form of providential determinism which left its adherents exposed to the charge that they threatened ordinary understandings of moral responsibility. The reconciliation of responsibility and determinism (> Predestination, theory of) within the framework of divine providence which Chrysippus [2] developed was important for later forms of compatibilism; similarly, Stoic efforts to reconcile providential determinism with the existence of apparent evil and defect in the world paved the way for the Christian + theodicy in later centuries.

preferred’. Like Socrates, the Stoics held that only virtue was truly useful, since advantages could be misused by those who do not yet comply with the Stoic ideal. Like the Cynics, they used this distinction to challenge conventional values and to emphasize the ultimate autonomy and freedom of the philosophically enlightened agent. Many Stoics, unlike Ariston of Chios and the Cynics, held that a firm understanding of physics and cosmology helped people to see the nature of virtue and the relative unimportance of merely advantageous things. Understanding the place of human beings in the divine rational plan of nature put mundane concerns in perspective. This understanding needed to be an unshakable conviction; hence virtue was held to be a form of knowledge, and the various virtues were united as forms of knowledge of what is good, bad, or indifferent (although the exact nature of this unity was disputed within the school). The kind of rational action which formed the basis for human happiness was termed ‘appropriate’ action (tO xaOfxov/td kathékon, Lat. officium), that is, action which, when done, admits of a rational justification (Diog. Laert. 7,107). Such actions cannot be rigidly specified, since circumstances vary, though it is, of course, always appropriate to act virtuously. The best guide to what is appropriate is an understanding of human and cosmic nature and a firm grasp of values: what is good, what is bad, what preferred and what dispreferred. Within that context an appropriate action is chosen. Much of Stoic moral advice consists in providing broad guidelines for the process of reaching decisions about what is appropriate. When appropriate actions are carried out from a virtuous disposition they are called ‘right actions’ (xatog@mpato/katorthomata, Lat. recte facta). Two central doctrines of Stoic ethics became standard points of debate with other schools, in part because they seem to violate common sense. First, the claim that virtue is sufficient for happiness and that there could be no degrees of happiness once wisdom and virtue were achieved was hotly debated, especially by Peripatetics who followed Aristotle [6] in acknowledging the necessity for positive material conditions of life. Even more contentious was the Stoic claim that the passions (— Affects) should be eliminated rather than being merely moderated, as most other schools contended. The key to understanding the Stoic position is their definition of passion (m&00c/pathos, Lat. affectus): each one is an excessive impulse, a psychophysical reaction to events which goes beyond proper and reasonable bounds (SVFI 205-215, Ill 377-391); any such impulse would be a violation of what is appropriate. Reasonable affective reactions are, however, possible, but only for the wise man (coddc/sophos, Lat. sapiens) whose virtue and reason have been perfected; only he is capable of ‘good affective reactions’ (etindaOeva/eupatheiai) (Diog. Laert. 7,115). When confusions based on terminological differences have been eliminated, the remaining controversy concerns the role of affect in the

STOICISM

VERT HICS Stoic ethics is situated squarely in the eudaimonistic tradition of the Socratic schools. > Ethics justifies philosophy’s claim to be a craft dealing with how one should live (téchné tov biou, Lat. ars vivendi). In the Stoic view this craft is based on a knowledge of the nature of the universe, of man’s place in it and of the value of the various factors which impinge on human life. It is also based on a disposition, i.e. the character of the ethical subject, which will in the ideal case be virtue. It is directed towards a goal for life as a whole, eudaimonia, a flourishing condition which fulfills the nature of a human being (— Happiness). Since that nature is essentially rational, here again we see the convergence of nature and reason which characterizes Stoicism. The goal of life (téAoc/télos) according to the Stoics was to live consistently with nature, both human nature and the nature of the cosmos (see II above; Diog. Laert. 7,89). Human nature is rooted in a fundamental commitment to self-preservation and development, which matures along with the person. From an infantile drive for basic survival and comfort this develops into a commitment to a life according to reason when the agent achieves an adult capacity for rationality. The ideal development of rationality is termed virtue (aoeti/arete, Lat. virtus), so that the life according to nature turns out to be, in its highest form, a life according to reason, i.e. ~ virtue. Equally rooted in human nature is our commitment to social groups, which the Stoics regarded as the foundation of the other-regarding concerns central to many of the virtues. This social instinct is rooted in the primal commitment to family and offspring. Socratic inspiration lies behind the Stoic analysis of value (G&ta/axia, Lat. aestimatio). They distinguished sharply between things which are genuinely good (virtue and things connected with it) and others which are merely advantageous (such as health, wealth, and social standing); there was a parallel distinction between bad things (like vice) and mere disadvantages.

Advantages and disadvantages were ‘indifferent’ (aduahooa/adiaphora, Lat. indifferentia, media) to human happiness, and labelled as ‘preferred’ and ‘dis-

857

858

lives of ordinary people who are making moral progress but are not yet wise. They should, the Stoics say, strive to eliminate passions since affective reactions pose a serious risk to their moral stability and jeopardize their prospects for eventually achieving wisdom. ~ PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY; — Stoicism EDITIONS:

1SVF

2HUtser

3A.A.LoNG,D.N.SED-

LEY, The Hellenistic Philosophers, 1987. BIBLIOGRAPHY:

4L.BECKER, A New Stoicism, 1998

5 S. BoBZIEN, Die stoische Modallogik, 1986 6 E.BrEHIER, Chrysippe et l’ancien stoicisme, 1951 7 M.FoRSCHNER, Die stoische Ethik, ‘1981, 1995 8 M.Frepe, Die stoische Logik, 1974 9 V.GOLDSCHMIDT, Le systéme stoicien et |’idée du temps, 1977 10 D.E. Hau, The Origins of Stoic Cosmology, 1977

STORAGE

ECONOMY

221-226; J. POUILLOUx, Salaminiens de Chypre a Delos, in: BCH Suppl. 1, 1973, 406-411.

W.A.

[2] (Zt@doc; Stdlos). Inland city to the east of > Olynthus (Str. 9,2,23: Zx@Aoc/SkOlos; Plin. HN 4,37: Telos),

represented in the Athenian tribute lists with a tribute varying between 4000 and 6000 drachmai (ATL 1,414 f.) and hence by far the richest city in the interior of the Chalcidian peninsula. In 432 BC S. seceded from Athens (> Peloponnesian War), in the Peace of Nicias (421 BC) S. was declared autonomous, but liable to pay a tribute to Athens (Thuc. 5,18,5). At the beginning and again before the middle of the 4th cent. S. was part of the Chalcidian League. There is as yet no archaeological evidence of S.

Skepsis,

M.B. Hatzopou.os, Actes de vente de la Chalcidique

*¥995 12 B.INwoop, Ethics and Human Action in Early Stoicism, 1985 13 A.A. Lone, Hellenistic Philosophy, 1974 14]1d., Stoic Studies, 1996 15 M.POHLENZ, Die Stoa, 1948 16 J.M. Rist (ed.), The Stoics, 1978 17 F.H. SANDBACH, The Stoics, 1975. BL.

centrale, 1988, 70-72; id., Grecs et barbares dans les cités

11 M. HossEFELDER,

Stoa,

Epikureismus

uns

de l’arriére-pays de la Chalcidique, in: Klio 71, 1989, 6065; M.ZAHRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 244247. M.Z.

Stone worship see > Cult image Stola. The stola was the garment worn in public by Roman matrons (— Matrona [1]), i.e. free-born women (Plin. HN 33,40), over a fairly close-fitting > tunica or a looser calasis and under a palla, so that their bodies were entirely enveloped (cf. Hor. Sat. 1,2,99). It reached to the ankles and was capacious, pleated and cinc-

Storage economy I. ANCIENT NEAR East

II. GREECE

III. ROME

I. ANCIENT NEAR EAST The creation of stores, esp. of less perishable food-

tured at bust or waist level (Mart. 3,93,4). The stola

stuffs (esp.

consisted of a tube of material which the wearer slipped into; it was held on the shoulders by means of twisted ribbons or strings. It had trimming (instita) on the lower selvage, presumably a purple ribbon sewn on. The stola was probably in use by the 3rd cent. BC, there is, however, no certain evidence of it until the rst cent. BC; it was worn until the 2nd cent. AD, increasingly replaced by the palla. Scholars also understand by instita the attachment of the stola to the shoulders [1. 26], in con-

societies whose — agriculture is strongly exposed to environmental and political risks. The paradigm for such

trast, however,

to Ov. Ars am.

1,32 and Hor. Sat.

TAG) + Clothing; > Pallium 1 B.J. ScHouz, Untersuchungen zur Tracht der romichen Matrona, 1992.

R.H.

Stolo. Roman cognomen (‘runner’, ‘stolon’), according to Varro (Rust. 1,2,9) and Plinius (HN 17,7) ‘somebody

who prunes wild shoots’; recorded only for the Licinii family (> Licinius [I 43-44; II 24]). KajANTO, Cognomina, 337; WALDE/HOFMANN 2, 599.

KLE.

Stolus [1] (2tod0c; Stélos). Son of Theon, probably from Cyrene, later honoured with Athenian citizenship; archedéatros in Cyrene in 108 BC, later admiral of Pto-

lemaeus [15] IX on Cyprus between 107 and ro4. R.S. BAGNALL, S. the Admiral, in: Phoenix 26, 1972, 3 58368; H. HAUBEN, Was S. a Cyrenaean?, in: ZPE 25, 1977,

> grain), is essential to the existence of

experiences is found in the OT story, referring to an-

cient Egypt, of the seven ‘fat’ and seven ‘lean’ years (Gn 41:25-36). The > economy (I.) of Mesopotamia, centralized from the 4th millennium BC, also had a central SE, but it is known only from texts. In the > oikos economy system which predominated to the end of the 3rd millennium BC in Mesopotamia, the risks of poor harvests or total harvest failures could be compensated for by centrally controlled storage management in the institutional households, and the — rations necessary for subsistence could to a large extent be provided to household-dependent subjects. In the individualized agricultural production from the early 2nd millennium, supply and SE was a matter for individual producers, who were thus often exposed without protection to the risks of harvest failures. Legal documents recording loans of consumables (+ Loan I.) show how the inability to establish sufficient stores led to serious shortages, esp. during the period immediately preceding the next harvest [4. 196-198]. Several successive failed harvests led to > debts that could never be repaid, and the consequence was debt bondage. This experience is described paradigmatically in the Joseph story, esp. in Gn 47:13-26. The best-preserved storage facilities are those of the Hittite capital of > Hattusa (15th-13th cents. BC), the storehouse buildings with pithoi in Urartian KarmirBlur (rst millennium; - Urartu) and storehouses in Palestine (Bét Yerah, Tall Gama), which are reminiscent of

STORAGE ECONOMY

859

860

Egyptian facilities of the Middle and New Kingdoms. From Egypt, along with documentary records, SE activities are known esp. from the Middle and New Kingdoms (beehive-shaped grain storehouses with domed roofs, attested e.g. in wall-paintings at Bani Hasan, Tall al-‘Amarina and > Thebes [1]). Central storehouses in the form of rows of narrow storage spaces along a corridor served the storage of various goods, e.g. in the Ramesseum and Madinat Habu at Thebes (New King-

various types of grain were stored separately (Xen. Oec.

dom, > Ramesses [2] II and > Ramesses [3] III).

+ Agriculture;

> Economy

1 T. BRECKWOLDT, Management of Grain Storage in Old Babylonian Larsa, in: AfO 42-43, 1995/96, 64-88 2 J.D. Currip, The Beehive Granaries of Ancient Palestine, in: ZPalV tor, 1985, 97-110 3 Id., Rectangular Storehouse Construction during the Israelite Iron Age, in: ZPalV 108, 1992, 99-121

4J.RENGER, On Economic

Structures in Ancient Mesopotamia, in: Orientalia 63, 1994, 157-208 5 J.SEEHER, Getreidelagerung in unterirdischen Grofspeichern, in: SMEA 42.2, 2000, 261-301 6 T.F. STRASSER, Storage and States on Prehistoric Crete, in: Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 10.1, 1997, 73-100. J.RE.

Il. GREECE Because > grain, the most important staple foodstuff of ancient societies, was harvested in a relatively short period towards the end of spring, but was needed throughout the year for the > nutrition of the population, it was necessary to store it for at least twelve months. Moreover, stores of seed grain had to be made for the next sowing. The same applied to > wine and olive oil (— oils for cooking), which were also staple foodstuffs and were stored in > pottery vessels. As harvests could fail because of unfavourable weather conditions, it was undoubtedly prudent to have stores which would suffice for more than one year. Storage thus constituted a fundamental strategy in assuring the subsistence of esp. farming families, but also of the urban population. Hesiod (— Hesiodus) already stresses the importance of the SE for the peasant household. Like work in the fields, the creation of stores of grain was necessary to preserve the peasant family from starvation. The poet also advises that grain should only be used sparingly, so that the stores would indeed last until the next harvest (Hes. Op. 301; 307; 361-369; 411; 600 f.). In the portrayal of > agriculture in > Xenophon [2], the SE also plays a central part. Because of the division of labour between the man working outside the house and the > woman working inside it, Xenophon ascribes the SE to the sphere of wifely duties. In this context, the wife’s work is explicitly acknowledged as of equal value to that of the husband: without a careful SE, the obtaining of produce for the household will be worthless. Women had to ensure that the stored produce was not used up too quickly, that stored grain retained its quality for the preparation of food, that > wool was processed for the manufacture of - clothing, and that the

7,22-40; 8,9).

Although SE is otherwise mentioned only very rarely and mostly incidentally, it seems to have been usual in ancient Greece. It is significant that a law of the city of Selymbria, regulating the delivery of private grain stores, allowed citizens to retain their stores for one year (Aristot. Oec. 2,2,17; 1348b-1349a).

At Manti-

nea, the stores of grain were so large in the year after a good harvest that the Spartans had to anticipate a long siege of the city (Xen. Hell. 5,2,4). Literature gives the first indications of vermin, esp. mice (~ Mouse), eating some of the grain (Aristot. Hist. an. 580b; Theophr. Char. 16,6). III. ROME A. THE ROMAN

ESTATE ECONOMY

B. THE SUPPLY

PROBLEM IN ROMAN CITIES C. PUBLIC STORAGE ECONOMY AT ROME: THE HORREA

A. THE ROMAN ESTATE ECONOMY In + Cato [x], the SE no longer primarily serves the subsistence of a landowner, his family and labour force, but above all the economic purpose of awaiting the season in which the > price was high before selling goods. This purpose finds clear expression in the equipment of country estates: large storage capacities were set up, e.g. 100 dolia olearia for an oil farm and 800 dolia for a wine-growing estate (> dolium), which would suffice to store the - wine from five grape harvests. Cato also pays attention to combating vermin. He recommends a special plastering of the grain store (granarium) for deterring granary weevils and mice (Cato InNiier, BopI aoyy eeTaio)

There is a similar tone among the later > agrarian writers. > Varro [2] gives a detailed description of the granaria. Grain should not be stored directly on the floor or exposed to the east or north wind, and it should be protected from damp air. Varro also mentions subterranean grain stores (sirus) outside Italy, e.g. in Cappadocia and Thrace. It is worthy of note that Varro does not only discuss the storage of grain, wine and oil, but also of fruit and other estate produce. SE undoubtedly became an important factor in the market-orientated estate economy (Varro, Rust. 1,13,1; 1,56—-69). Similar,

too, are the accounts of > Columella, who, in his section dealing with the commercial building of a > villa, treats the storage rooms and spaces in detail. Seeing damp floors as a crucial problem for grain storage, Columella recommends siting the granaria on an upper storey, accessible by a flight of stairs. Apart from damp, he views attacks by the granary weevil as the most common cause of losses (Columella 1,4,7; 1,6,9-17; 2,20,6; 12,2; cf. Verg. G. 1,181-186; 655525103654):

B. THE SUPPLY PROBLEM

Vitr. De arch.

IN ROMAN CITIES

Most of the population in the urban environment was unable to make stores, because small apartments

861

862

generally offered no space for such facilities (+ Housing conditions). Daily needs for provisions and consumer goods had to be met by purchase (Dion Chrys. 7,105 f.). The poorer strata of urban society — for example, at Rome, the > plebs urbana — were therefore dependent on the market to provide, and they were exposed to extreme inflation in grain prices in times of scarcity. A potential for political conflict arose here, and in the latter years of the Republic, this prompted the populares to ensure the provision of grain to the urban Roman population by means of > grain laws. It was in consequence of this political intervention into the function of the market that the Republic and, from Augustus, the princeps, were committed to providing protection against grain shortage at Rome by the crea-

Principate Galbana, ILS 3445), Lolliana (ILS 1620), Seiana (ILS 3665) and Aniciana. The horrea Lolliana seem to have consisted of two adjacent building complexes, indicating different functions. By contrast, the horrea Agrippiana, built on the orders of M. Agrippa [x] near the Forum on the western slope of the Palatine, had a > macellum with shops, which opened into the porticus of the peristyle. It is probable that only the three upper floors served for the storage of grain.

tion of large stores (> cura annonae). + Food; — Grain; > Malnutrition, Famine; > Nutri-

tion 1 A. BurFoRD, Land and Labor in the Greek World, 1993, t41f. 2 7.W. GaLiant, Risk and Survival in Ancient Greece, 1991, 94-98;179-181 3 WHITE, Farming, 426-

431.

H.SCHN.

C. PUBLIC STORAGE ECONOMY AT ROME: THE HORREA I. TERM 2. CONSTRUCTION 3. FUNCTIONS 4. HORREA OUTSIDE ROME

1. TERM

From the early 2nd cent. BC, the storage and preservation of > food, esp. of > grain, necessitated the construction of granaries and storehouses at Rome. Before

such urban buildings came to be termed horreum (derived from hordeum, ‘barley’), the Romans used the less precise word — porticus. 2. CONSTRUCTION On the > Forma Urbis, the marble map of the city of Rome of the Severan period (late 2nd-early 3rd cents.), the public horrea on ground between the Aventine and the Tiber are recognizable by their names and their particular shape (> Rome III map 1., nos. 87; 88). The ground-plan of the building known as the horrea Lolliana was characterized by long, narrow chambers (cellae), laid out around two courtyards and opening onto them, in clear distinction from the building which can be identified (by the last letters of its name) as the Porticus Aemilia. In 193 BC, the new trading port of Rome, which Livy (— Livius [III 2]) calls > emporion, was furnished with large storehouses, called porticus, on the initiative of M. Aemilius [I 10] Lepidus (Liv. 35,10,12; cf. 41,27,8). Constructed in seven vaulted naves, they extended over land sloping steeply towards the Tiber. From the late 2nd cent. BC and the lex frumentaria of C. Sempronius [I rr] Gracchus, which provided for distribution of public grain to the plebs urbana (> Grain laws), prominent noble families began to take initiatives on the construction of public granaries (horrea publica). These generally bore the name of their developer: horrea Sempronia (ILS 5727), Sulpicia (in the

STORAGE ECONOMY

3. FUNCTIONS

Various granaries and storehouses became the property of the > princeps by bequest or confiscation. Their storage function was indeed important for the princeps, who was responsible for supplying the city with grain, distributing it (> cura annonae) and, latterly, also distributing oil (> Oils for cooking). The principes therefore constructed more horrea. For instance, the porticus Minucia frumentaria was the place at which grain was distributed to those entitled to it. However, the location of this building is disputed. Recently, [11] has suggested identifying it with the building remains on the via Arenula, near the Tiber. The princeps, meanwhile, had no monopoly on such storehouses, of which many continued in private ownership. Such owners, like the principes, rented out the cellae. The terms of such tenancy agreements are preserved epigraphically in the leges horreorum (ILS 5914). Shop owners (such as C. Julius Lucifer, vestiarius de horreis Agrippianis: CIL VI 9972 = ILS 7571) gave indications of their activities in inscriptions. The horrea also served as guarded places of safekeeping for items of value. Thus, it was possible to rent a single cupboard (— armarium), a safe (— arca) or a whole room (cella). In this way, the horrea of the Principate seem to have competed with the temples, and may even have superseded them in this function. In view of the constant threats of theft and fire, the horrea were under the special protection of a > genius (ILS 3663-3665; 3668). Likewise at Ostia and in the provinces. 4. HORREA OUTSIDE ROME The horrea built at Ostia, the port of Rome at the mouth of the Tiber, date from the Principate. Only the horrea Epagathiana (AD 140-150; > Ostia with site map, no. 63) can be identified by an inscription found at the actual location. The good standard of preservation of these various storage facilities has made it possible to study their internal subdivision, their construction and peculiarities of their layout. For example, grain was protected from damp by means of an intervening space between the ground and the floor of the granary, while an intervening space 2 m wide between neighbouring buildings served to protect against fire. Such storage facilities were also built around the harbours of + Claudius [III 1] and Trajan (> Traianus [x]) at — Portus [1] (NW of Ostia). Similar buildings were also to be found in the provinces, e.g. in Gallia Narbonensis (at St.-Romain-en-Gal, the part of Vienne on the right bank of the Rhéne), in Lycia (in the neighbouring cities of Myra, modern

STORAGE

ECONOMY

Demre, and Patara) and in Africa (Leptis Magna, Cuicul, modern Djémila). Some have been identified as horrea by reason of their location on the Rh6ne or in the port of — Leptis Magna, others from inscriptions describing them as horrea. Legionary horrea, built of wood or stone, were close by the living quarters or, occasionally, near the headquarters building (— principia) of the legionary camp. 1 M. Corsier, Trésor et greniers dans la Rome impeériale (I*'-IlI* siécles), in: E. Lévy (ed.), Le systéme palatial en Orient, en Gréce et a Rome, 1987, 411-443

2 R. ETIENNE, Extra portam Trigeminam: Espace politique et espace €conomique 4 |’emporium de Rome, in: L’Urbs. Espace urbain et histoire (I* siécle av. J.-C.-III® siécle ap. J.-C.; Actes du colloque, Rome 1985), 1987, 235-249 3 P.Gros,

Greniers et entrepots, in: Id., L’architecture

romaine, vol. 1: Les monuments publics, 1996, 465-474 4J.P. Moret, La topographie de l’artisanat et du commerce

dans

la Rome

864

863

antique,

in: s.

[2],

127-155

5 C.PAvoLinI, Ostia, 1983, 32 f.; 74 ff.; 111 f.5 226 ff. 6 RICHARDSON, 191-195 7G.E. RicKMAN, Roman Granaries and Store Buildings, 1971 8 E. RODRIGUEZALMEIDA, Il Monte Testaccio, 1984, 35-39 9E.M. STEINBY (ed.), Lexicon topographicum urbis Romae, vol. 3, 1996, s. v. horrea, 37-50

10 C. VIRLOUVET, Tessera

frumentaria. Les procédures de la distribution du ble public a Rome, 1995, 81-117. 11 F. Zev, Per l’identificazione della Porticus Minucia frumentaria, in: MEFRA 105, 1993, 661-708.

MI.CO.

places, such as the Bosporus. They therefore gathered in large numbers on the coast on Asia Minor waiting for favourable weather for flying (Plin. HN. 10,61-62). The destination of the autumn migration was not known. The agricultural calendar noted the times of their departure and return as sowing and harvesting times (Verg. G. 2,319-322). The parent birds’ careful raising of their young was correctly observed, their compensation by being reverently cared for when old (Aristoph. Av. 1353 ff.; Aristot. Hist. an. 8(9),13,615b 28; Plin. HN 10,63 etc.), however, is as much an arbitrary invention as is the transportation of aged storks to eternal bliss in human form on islands in the ocean (Ael. NA. 3,23). According to Schol. Aristoph. Av. 1355 storks were a symbol of justice on sceptres, as in Aesop’s fable of the crane and the stork ([{3. 13]; Aphthonios 14 p. 139 Hausratu). Other fables [4. 570, 576] represent them as slow-witted. The eating of storks was known only in the late Roman Republic (Hor. Sat. 2,2,49 f.; cf. Juv. 14,74 f.5 cf. > Sempronius [I 19]). Consumption of the flesh of a young stork was supposed to prevent watering eyes for the length of a year (Plin. ibid. 29,128) and its stomach to help against poisons (Plin. ibid. 29,105) and get rid of boils (Plin. ibid. 30,108). As killers of snakes they were protected in Thessaly (Plin. HN 10,62). The claim that storks healed their own wounds incurred in fights by applying oregano

(Aristot. Hist. an. 8(9),6,612a

32;

Plin. HN 8,98; Ael. NA 5,46) persisted until the Middle Storax see > Styrax

Store houses see > Storage economy Stork (6 meXagydc/ho pelargos, according to EM 659,8 derived form sedtoc/pelids ‘black’ and dGeydc/argds ‘white’, diminutive mehagyidevc/pelargideus in Aristoph. Av. 1356 et passim, Latin ciconia, conea in Plaut. Truc. 691), the White Stork (Ciconia ciconia L.; see

Verg. G. 2,319: candida avis, cf. Ov. Met. 6,96). The Black Stork (Ciconia nigra L.), which comes into contact with the Mediterranean area only during migration, was evidently unknown in Antiquity. In terms of size storks were compared to cormorants (Aristot. Hist. an. 7(8),3,593b 21), ibises and pelicans; their long necks earned them the epithet doAtydc/dolichéds (‘the long one’) or paxedc/makros (‘the large one’); their long red bill is described in Phaedr. 1,26 and their solemn stride in Plin. HN 10,111. According to Suet. fr. p. 251 and 311 ReFr. the term for their characteristic clattering, particularly on the nest, was crotolare, glottorare or crepitare (Ov. Met. 6,97). They allegedly have no tongue (Plin. HN. 10,62). In search of their food, frogs, snakes and lizards (Verg. G. 2,319; Sen. Epist. 108,29), they stop at rivers and lakes (Aristot. Hist. an. 7(8),3,593b 5). They nest on the roofs of houses. As migratory birds (Varro Men. 272; Ael. NA 3,23) —according to Aristotle (Hist. an. 7(8),16,600a 10), however, they hibernate — they could soar, carried on warm air currents, and they crossed the sea at the narrowest

Ages.

A late comedy by Aristophanes of unknown content was called Pelargoi (‘Storks’). In Ov. Met. 6,93-97 the Trojan Antigone [4] is turned into a stork. An imitation, called ciconia, of a stork’s neck moving up and down behind the back of a human was meant to satirise him (Pers. 1,58). On ancient gems the bird is a common motif ([{1. table 18,47 and 22,3-5, 7-8 and 13], cf. [2523)3)]): 1 F.IMHooF-BLuMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (reprint 1972) 2 TOYNBEE, Tierwelt 3 BLE. Perry (ed.), Aesopica, 1952 4 Id. (ed.), Babrius, Fabulae, 1965. KELLER 2, 193-197; D’Arcy W. THompson, A Glossary of Greek Birds, 1936 (reprint 1966), 221-225; A. STEIER, s. v. S., RE 4 A, 67-73. C.HU.

Stotzas (ZtotCac; Stdtzas). Member of > Martinus’ [2]

guard, accompanying him on ~ Belisarius’ campaign against the + Vandali in AD 533. Rebelling troops in Africa chose him as their leader in 536. After a failed attempt to conquer Carthage, he was defeated in 537 by ~ Germanus [1] and fled to Mauretania. In 541 he rebelled again, assumed the title of emperor and tried to extend his power in northern Africa until in 545 he was killed in a battle. A. KAZHDAN, s.v. S., ODB 3, 1959f.; PLRE 3B, r199f.

BT.

865

866

Strabo [1] (2teaBwv/Strabon). Greek geographer and historian, Augustan Period.

criticism of predecessors (bks. 1-2); the Iberian penin-

I. Lire IJ. HisroricaAL work IV. LEGACY, TEXTUALHISTORY

III. GEOGRAPHY V. SIGNIFICANCE

I. LIFE

Our only source is S.’s own work. The years of his birth and death are not established, but S. describes as

‘my time’ the period beginning with + Pompeius’ [I 3] re-organization of Asia Minor (62 BC) [x]; the latest event mentioned by S. is the death of > Juba [2] II (probably AD 23/4; 17,3,7 = C 828,32 ff.; 17,3,9 = C 829,28 f.3 17,3,25 = C 840,15 f.; references in accordance with [16] and the line-numbering of the Casaubon pages, repr. 1620, as cited in [15]), and, as he describes the city of > Cyzicus, which lost its freedom in AD 25, as a ‘free city’ (12,8,11 = C 576,7 f.), we may assume that he died between these two events. He was born in ~ Amasea in Pontus. His family on his mother’s side had been close to > Mithridates [6] VI, under whom they had held high office; his grandfather, however, had eventually espoused the Roman cause (10,4,10 = C 477516 ff.5 12,3,33 = C 557,21 ff.). When still quite young in > Nysa [3], S. heard the rhetorician and grammarian Aristodemus (14,1,48 = C 650,27 f.); other teachers were the philosopher — Xenarchus [4] of Seleucia (14,5,4 = C 670,25) and the grammarian — Tyrannion [1] (12,3,16 =C 548,14), perhaps also the Peripatetic + Boethus [4] (cf. 16,2,24 =C 757,28 f.).S. repeatedly avows his own Stoicism (cf. 1,2,2 = C TSE2 OMCs =| Ghd T.24.02 ge Si= |ONrO4e 4) -anduin Steph. Byz. s.v. Apcoeva (Amdseia) he is even called ‘the Stoic philosopher’. Several passages in his work (4,5,2 = Ce oo ih6,2560= Ciera roth. 7.2.3) =) G2 90,26; Ge

—(C Aiea ane eae

a OCor naira

— (6

609,20) show that he lived in Rome for a lengthy period, and wrote at least a part of his geographical work there. In 25/4 BC he travelled to Egypt in the entourage of the new > praefectus Aegypti, his friend > Aelius {II xx] Gallus (2,5,r2 = C 118,10 f.), and lived ‘for a long period’, perhaps until 20 BC [2], in Alexandria [1] (3355 = Gon,23):

Il. HisTORICAL WORK S.’s historical work (‘Iotoguma txouvquata/Historika hypomnemata), in, it appears, 47 books, has been lost; the few fragments are given in FGrH 91. It was a continuation of the work of —> Polybius [2]; thus it began in 145/4 BC, and extended, in any event, to the end of the Roman civil wars (cf. FGrH 91 F 18); the first four books provided an overview of (all?) previous Greek history [3; 4]. III]. GEOGRAPHY S.’s geographical work (Tewyeadixa/Gedgraphika), however, written after the historical work (cf. 1,1,23 = C 13,22), has survived complete, apart from the close of book 7. It comprises 17 books: general introduction,

STRABO

sula (bk. 3); Gallia, Britannia, Hibernia, Thule (bk. 4); Italy and Sicilia (bks. 5-6); Germania and the further

north-east of Europe as far as the Tanais (the modern Don), which was regarded as the frontier of Asia (bk. 7); Hellas, Creta, the Cyclades, the Sporades (bks. 8-10); the lands of the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea, and lands further to the east (bk. rr); Asia Minor with its offshore islands (bks. 12-14); India and Persis (bk. 15); Mesopotamia, Syria, Phoenicia, Judaea, Arabia

(bk. 16); Egypt, Ethiopia and North Africa (bk. 17). This description of the entire then-known world relies in part on first-hand knowledge: thus, of course, S. knew his homeland of Pontus (12,3,1-40 = C 5 40,30562,19) and many other localities in Asia Minor; he expressly mentions his personal knowledge in the cases of Comana [1] (12,2,3 = C 535,25 f.), Ephesus (14,1,23 = C 641,12 ff.), Hierapolis [1] (13,4,14 = C 630,2 ff.) and Nysa [3] (see above); however, first-hand knowledge is also apparent in his descriptions of the river Pyramus [1] (12,2,4 = C 536,4 ff.), the Charonion in Acharaca (14,1,44 = C 649,27 ff.), and the inscription on a statue-base in the theatre at Magnesia [2] (14,1,41 = C 648,19 ff.); he also knew many places in Egypt, where he had travelled up the Nile in the entourage of Aeliuisy Gemsicrss p=) Oy 1Ss2 cet area) de Ons OAaaates 17,1,29 = C 806,15 ff.; 17,1,46 = C 816,10 ff.); we have to thank his residence of many years in > Alexandria [x] for our best description of the ancient city (17,1,6-10 = C 791,14-795,24); he also knew Rome, where he lived for a long period, and provides enthusiastic descriptions of its magnificent buildings and spaces (5,3,8 = C 235,20-236,28); from Rome he visited > Populonia (5,2,6 = C 223,29 ff.), and, journeying to Rome, climbed the citadel of > Corinth (8,6,19 = C 377A Ges Os6s2 = Gi 379.10; 8893 Outs) byatanethe major part of his information, however, as he himself expressly declares (2,5,11 = C 117,20 ff.), is secondhand. He relies most of all on his immediate predecessor + Artemidorus [3],on > Apollodorus’ [7] commentary on Homer’s catalogue of ships and > Demetrius [34] on Homer’s Trojan catalogue, on > Polybius [2] and ~+ Ephorus (both of whom had devoted sections of their historical works to geography), on the > Alexander historians and > Megasthenes, and the accounts of + Pompeius’ [I 3] campaigns in the East by > Theophanes of Mytilene, and not least on > Poseidonius [3] (not only his text On the Ocean, but also the Historiai [5]). He often names his sources, but often does not; the upshot of which is that, for a while, S. scholarship was almost entirely devoted to the fullest possible categorization of his work on the basis of presumed sources. S. intended the work for the educated layman, and especially for people in leading positions (cf. 1,1,1 = C aries TeptnS — (CCyrity neg se aun (©, ine Koliny), |Ooyenl the mass of material at his disposal he chooses the celebrated and the interesting, and enlivens his account with historical and ethnographical details, excursions and anecdotes. As a consequence, and owing to his un-

STRABO

pretentious style and lack of Atticist mannerisms, the work is pleasant reading (unlike the geographical sections in > Plinius [x], and the geographical work of > Ptolemaeus [65]). The only irritating touch is that, in disputing the field with other writers, he often loses himself in finicky fault-finding. On the other hand, we cannot criticize him for the fact that, from the vantage point of our present state of knowledge, much of his data is false: not only as regards his geography (cf. for example the considerable underestimation of the extent of Brittany (4,4,1 = C 195,14 ff.), the north-south orientation of the —> Pyrene [2]/Pyrenees (2,5,28 = C 128,6 f.), the condemnation of — Pytheas [4] as a fantast (1,4,3 = C 63,11 f.)), but also in historical matters (cf. [6]); we can not blame hime either, of course, for

not always telling us what we would have liked to know. Surprising for the modern reader is the extensive role given to > Homerus [tr] in S.: in bk. 1 we have the dispute with > Eratosthenes [2] over Homer’s geographical knowledge, and in the description of Hellas and Asia Minor abundant use of the commentaries of Apollodorus and Demetrius on Homer’s catalogue of ships and Trojan catalogue (but cf. the fundamental remark at 8,3,3 = C 337,20-25, showing how central Homer was to S. and his public). In his descriptions of foreign peoples, S. demonstrates the openness shown by the Greeks to foreigners from time immemorial; but he expressly sees Graeco-Roman culture as the goal of cultural development, and the Romans as civilizers [7]. There has been much speculation over the date of the work (cf. [9. 3-6; 6. 356-67; 8]), but everything indicates that S. kept his manuscript by him until the end of his life, constantly adding to it, and that it was not published until after his death (cf. esp. his description of the + Campus Martius (5,3,8 = C 236,25 ff.), where the

publisher has wrongly placed an addition obviously written after Augustus’ funeral [1o]). IV. LEGACY, TEXTUAL HISTORY

During the first centuries after S.’s death, evidence for any awareness of his geographical work is sparse. Pliny, who read everything, does not mention him: presumably, the work had not yet been published at all in Pliny’s time. The first writer clearly known to have used S.’s work is > Dionysius [27] at the beginning of the 2nd cent. AD [9.7 f.]. In the following centuries too, however, quotations from S. are few and far between. His great period comes much later: > Stephanus [7] of Byzantium quotes him constantly, and for > Eustathius [4] he is the quintessential geographer. The West became aware of S. in the 15th cent. via PLETHON or his visitor CIRIACO; pope Nicolas V commissioned Guarino VERONESE and Gregorio TIFERNATE to undertake a Latin translation; this was printed in 1469 by SwEYNHEYM and PANNARTZ in Rome, and during the subsequent 90 years reprinted at least twelve times [11. 35-7]; Columbus was able to derive from it the two accounts

868

867

by S. (1,4,6 = C 64,31-3;

2,3,6 = C

102,24 f.) that encouraged him in his plan of a west-

ward voyage to India [12; 13]. The Greek text was first printed in 1516 at the Aldine Press in Venice. The commented edition of CASAUBON (1587) then became definitive until the beginning of the r9th cent. Napoleon I commissioned a French translation, which appeared in a magnificent edition between 1805 and 1819. One of the translators was Adamantios Korats, who then himself published a much-improved Greek text (18151819). Gustav KRAMER was the first to produce an edition (1844-1852) based on systematic comparison of the MSS. On the textual history cf. [9]. V. SIGNIFICANCE S.s Geographikd is the only surviving ancient work of its kind, and in consequence an invaluable source, not only for geographical knowledge at the time, but also for those authors used by S. that are no longer extant today (the majority of geographical fragments from — Eratosthenes [2] and > Hipparchus [6] come from S.; Karl REINHARDT, when planning a new edition of S., became sidetracked into a work on > Poseidonius [3] [14. 306 f.]). At the same time, the work of S. has supplied a large amount of historical data (particularly noteworthy examples are the great excursus on the Curetes (10,3,6-23 = C 466,9-474,15), the bizarre history of the fate of the Aristotle MSS [6] (13,1,54 = C 608,30-609,21), the account of the failed Arabian expedition of Aelius Gallus (16,4,22-24 = C780,1782,26)). In his introduction, S. also discusses such questions as ‘poetry and truth’, or the function of myth (1,2,7 = C 18,31 ff.), and the origin of prose (1,2,6 = C 18,5 ff.). Through the considerable role given to Homer in his work, S. is also an important witness for ancient Homeric scholarship. 1S.PorHecary, The Expression ‘Our Times’ in Strabo’s Geography, in: CPh 92, 1997, 235-246 2P.M. FRASER, Ptolemaic Alexandria, vol. 2, 1972, 12f., n. 29 3 F.JAcoBy on FGrH 91 (291f.) 4 E.HONIGMANN, s.v. Strabon (3), RE 4 A, 85, Z. 8ff. 5 J. Martz, Die Histo-

rien des Poseidonios

(Zetemata

79),

1983,

6 R.SyME, Anatolica. Studies in Strabo, 1995

42-46

7E.Cu.L.

VAN DER VLIET, L’ethnographie de S., in: F. PRONTERA (ed.), Strabone. Contributi allo studio della personalita e

dell’opera, vol. 1, 1984, 27-86 8 H.Linpsay, Syme’s Anatolica and the Date of Strabo’s Geography, in: Klio 79, 1997, 484-507.

9A.DILLER, The Textual Tradition

of Strabo’s Geography, 1975 10 P. Meyer, Straboniana (Abhandlungen zum Jahresbericht der Fiirsten- und Landesschule zu Grimma 1889-90), 1890, 20 f. 11 M.Birascui et al., Strabone. Saggio di bibliografia 1469-1978, 1981 12M.V. Anastos, Pletho, Strabo and Columbus, in: Annuaire de |’Institut de Philologie et d’Histoire Orientales et Slaves de Université Libre de Bruxelles 12, 1952, 1-18 13 N.G. WiLson, From Byzantium to Italy, 1992, 55 f. 14S.L.Rapr, Eine neue

S. ausgabe, in: Mnemosyne 44, 1991, 305-326. EDITIONS: 15 S.RADT, ro vols., 2002 ff. (with German transl.andcomm.) 16 G. KRAMER, 3 vols., 1844-1852 17 A. MEINEKE, 3 vols., 1852 f. 18H.L. Jones, 8 vols., 1917-1932 (with Engl. transl.) Bks.

1-12:

19 F.LAssErRE, G.Aujac, R.BALADI£,

10

869

870

vols., BxKs. Reihe Bks.

1969-1996 (with French transl.). 1-6: 20 W. ALY, 2 vols., 1968 und 1972 (Antiquitas 1, 9 und 19). 1-6: 21 F.SBORDONE, 2 vols., 1963 and 1970.

[2] Roman cognomen (‘squinter’, cf. Plin. HN 11,150); attested as a personal name in C. > Fannius [I 6] S., C. > Tulius [I 11] Caesar S., Cn. + Pompeius [I 8] S. et al. DeGrRASsI, FCIR, 269; KAJANTO, Cognomina, 239.

K-L.E.

Stragulum see > Blanket Strangers see > Barbarians Stratagus (=teatayos; Strdtagos). Greek comic poet of

the 3rd cent. BC, known only from an honorary inscription by Dionysus technitai found in Ptolemais in Egypt (c. 273-246 BC). PCG VII, 1989, 616.

Strategemata

(oteatnynuata/stratégemata,

‘war

ruses’) were systematically studied and used from the Hellenistic period onwards. Three types of strategemata were distinguished: at first, strategemata permitted strategic advantage to be gained even before direct military confrontation by deceiving the opponent as to the actual strength of one’s own forces, choosing a suitable time for the battle or making use of particular climatic or geographical conditions (cf. e.g. Frontin. Str. Be Aasulecm tine: moa tan5 smplacesmo2>2>7))ualnu battle. one important > tactic was the pretence of flight, by which the enemy was to be lured into an ambush or encouraged to reckless pursuit (battle of Lake Trasimene, 217 BC: Liv. 22,3—-6; cf. also: Frontin. Str. 4,5). In the siege of a city, the time of conquest was significant (Syracuse: Pol. 8,37; Jerusalem: Frontin. Str. 2,1,17). The deception of the besieged — including the disguising of soldiers as women (Frontin. Str. 3,2,7) — played a decisive role (Frontin. Str. 3,2; 3,10 f.). The Romans had an ambivalent attitude towards strategemata. They condemned them if they helped the enemy to victory and saw them as proof of the capability of the commander if a Roman used them. Collections of strategemata were made in the Roman period. — Valerius Maximus included some examples in his collection of exempla (Val. Max. 7,4). Only with ~» Frontinus was a comprehensive and systematic compilation of strategemata made for Roman generals (late rst cent. AD). Conversely, the work of Polyaenus [4] (2nd cent. AD) was aimed more at an interested general

readership. + Military writers; > Tactics 1 V. GruFFRE, La letteratura de re militari, 1974 2E.L. WHEELER, Stratagem and the Vocabulary of Military Trickery, 1988. YOLB.

STRATEGOS

Strategikon (oteatnyinov; stratégikon). A military manual, also called Taktik6n, with accounts of military tactics, training and leadership, and weapon and siege technology. From the Early Byzantine Period we have the Stratégikd of Urbicius (c. AD 500), the Naumachiai of Syrianus Magister (6th cent., on naval warfare), an anonymous treatise, and, most importantly, the socalled Strategikon of Mauricius. Attribution of the latter text to the emperor > Mauricius (582-602) is uncertain, although it must date from before the 630s, as the wars against the Islamic Arabs are not mentioned. Unlike older strategika, that of Mauricius gives a central role to the cavalry. Rich ethnographical and historical material is provided by a description of neighbouring peoples and potential enemies. The writing of strategika experienced a renaissance in the roth cent., with the works of the emperor - Leo [9] VI (886-912) and Nikephoros Uranos and a number of anonymous texts, some of which should be attributed to the circle of the emperors > Nikephoros [3] Il Phokas and > Basilius [6] II. — Military writers; > Taktika EpiTions:

1G.T. DENNIS, E. GAMILLSCHEG, Das S. des

Maurikios, 1981 (with German trans.) 2 G.T. DENNIS, Three Byzantine Military Treatises, 1985 (with English trans.)

3 G.Dacron, H.MIHAESCU, Le traité sur la gué-

rilla (De velitatione) de l’empereur Nicéphore Phocas, 1986 (with French trans.).

LITERATURE: 4 F.AUSSARESSES, L’armée byzantine a la fin du VI* siécle, 1909 5 A. Dain, Les stratégistes byzantins, in: Travaux et Mémoires 6 HunGER, Literatur 2, 321-338

2, 1967, 317-392 7 A.KoLLautz, Das

militarwissenschaftliche Werk des sogenannten Maurikios, in: Byzantiaka 5, 1985, 87-136 8 E.McGEkrr, The Byzantine Army in the roth Century, 1990. ALB.

Strategius [1] see > Musonianus [2] (Strategios). Eastern Roman official, praef. Augu-

stalis at Alexandria c. AD 518-523, received the title ~ patrikios by 530 at the latest, and was head of the exchequer (comes sacrarum largitionum) from AD 535 toc. 538. PLRE 2, 1034-1036, Nr. 9; STEIN, Spatromische Repu-

blik 2, 433, 476f.

RT.

Strategos (oteatnydc/stratégos, ‘army leader’; pl. strategoi). In many Greek states the formal title for a military commander. I. CLASSICAL GREECE JJ. HELLENISTIC STATES III]. BYZANTINE PERIOD

I. CLASSICAL GREECE In Athens, strategoi are occasionally mentioned earlier (e.g. > Peisistratus [4] as strategos; Hdt. 1,59,4; {Aristot.] Ath. pol. 17,2), but it was only after the tribal reorganization of — Cleisthenes [2], probably first in 5ot/o BC, that a regular board of strategoi was ap-

871

872

pointed: one from each of the ro phylai, elected annually by the assembly (but candidates may have been preselected in the phylai, see [2]), and eligible for re-election ({Aristot.] Ath. pol. 22,2; cf. 62,3). They replaced the > polémarchos as Athens’ principal commanders [4]. In the middle of the sth cent., when Athens was militarily successful, they were political as well as military leaders (though they had little formal power except as military commanders), but in the later 5th cent., political leadership passed to rhetores who did not regularly hold any office, and thereafter the strategoi were primarily military leaders again. Sometimes a particular strategos was allied with a particular rhetor, e.g. ~ Chabrias with Callistratus [I 2]. In Athens, the strategoi commanded the navy as well as the army, but some states had a separate naval commander (e.g. nau-

1 K.J. Dover, Aéxatog attéc, in: JHS 80, 1960, 61-77 (= Id., The Greeks and their Legacy, 1988, 159-80) 2L.G. MrrcHet, A New Look at the Election of Generals at Athens, in: Klio 82, 2000 3 M.Prérart, A propos de Pélection des stratéges athéniens, in: BCH 98, 1974, 125—

STRATEGOS

archos). By 441/440 BC (Androtion FGrH

324 F 38), the strict dependence of the choice of strategos on the phylai was dissolving. It was possible now, at any rate for one phyle to provide two strategoi and another to provide none, and there could perhaps be more than one exception to the tribal rule. The 10 strategoi remained equal in power [1], and it is probable that the modification was adopted because some phylai sometimes had no strong candidate [3]. The modified system was probably still in use in 3 57/6 (ToD 153,20-24), but by the time of the Aristotelean Athénaion politeia (> Aristoteles,[6] F) (c. 330 BC), the strategoi were appointed regardless of phyle (Ath. pol. 61,1). The number of strategoi remained ten even in the Hellenistic period, when the number of phylai was increased. Originally, strategoi were appointed to particular commands ad hoc (often three strategoi to command one expedition), but from the mid—4th cent., regular assignments for particular strategoi are found. The earliest attestation is the strdtégos epi ten choran for the defence of Attica (352/1 BC: IG II* 204,19-20); Athenaion politeia (61,1) also mentions strdtégoi epi tous hoplitas (for expeditions outside Attica), two strdtégoi epi ton Peiraiéa (in charge of the military stores at the —» Piraeus) and one epi tas symmorias, in charge of the trierarchic organization(— trierarchia). In the Hellenistic period, regular duties were assigned to all ten strategoi, and in Roman Athens, the stratégos epi ta hopla became one of the major officers of the state. For other states, the occurrence of the term strategos in literary texts cannot always be relied on, as authors may not always reflect official language, but we should assume the existence of strategoi at any rate for Syracuse in the late 5th cent. BC (e.g. Thuc. 6,72,3; Diod. Sic. 13,91-95) and for the Arcadian federation in the 360s (> Arcadians, Arcadia) (e.g. Diod. Sic. 15,62,2; Xen. Hell. 7,3,1). Strategoi are attested epigraphically in the 4th cent. BC among the proposers of decrees in Erythrae (e.g. SEG 31, 969). Sometimes, as in Syracuse, strategoi are described as autokratores (‘with full power’): this indicates that they have enhanced powers, but it is frequently unclear in what ways and to what extent their powers are enhanced.

146.

PJ.R.

II. HELLENISTIC STATES In the extensive territorial states of the Hellenistic period, the king was no longer able to be omnipresent, or to lead every campaign in person. Beginning with Philip II, strategoi were entrusted with campaigns by the king, and exercised command in his name in regions in which the achievement of military control was more important than administrative integration (first: Thrace). Antipater [1], Antigonus [1] (and later Eumenes [1r]), as leading representatives of the central power, thus retained the title strategos (e.g. as stratégos tés Europes or autokrator tés Asias). The stratégia of the Classical period (see above) lived on in the Greek polis but had no influence on Hellenistic developments. For the same reason, outlying possessions of the great Hellenistic states were controlled by strategoi, who had civil as well as military duties and who often had a subordinate oikondmos to deal with economic issues. There were strategoi in the Hellenistic kingdoms too, but only in the case of the Ptolemaic strategoi is there detailed information. It may be assumed that arrangements among the Antigonids (v. [1. 257 f., 549]), Seleucids (v. [2. 15 ff.]) and their successor states did not differ radically. In Egypt, provincial administration at first remained the responsibility of indigenous civil servants, but strategoi were responsible for the > klérouchoi settled in many areas. Gradually a Greek strategos appeared alongside the nomdadrchai (- nomdarchés) in every ~ nomos [2]; not only did he have military command over the klerouchoi, but he also controlled a measure of their civil concerns. The strategos was senior to the nomarchs already by the reign of Ptolemaeus [3] II, becoming the sole leader of civilian administration of his province (Columbia Papyri, Greek Series IV 120). The dismantling of the strategos’ military powers was a consequence of the demilitarization of the klerouchoi. Under Ptolemaeus [8] V, an epistrategos was placed above the provincial strategoi, with military, civil and judicial powers. The combination of epistrategos and strategoi of the Thebaid occurs frequently. The epistrategos had the military command and the strategos was now merely a civil official exercising the powers of the nomarchés and oikonémos. On special occasions, hypostrategoi could be appointed to provinces to support them, and a number of toparchiai could be appointed to serve a strategos. In the Roman Imperial period, the office of the epistrategos was divided into three or four smaller offices, and the strategoi became subordinate to the procuratores ad epistrategiam. The civil provincial administration continued to rest with them, and they were ap-

873

874

pointed on nomination by the Greek inhabitants of the métropoleis by the > praefectus Aegypti, whom they were compelled to obey. Changes in the duties of the strategoi during the Imperial period arose from the changing structure of Egypt. In the 4th cent., the strategos still had powers in tax and land administration and was equated with the > exactor, and the sole subsequent reference to a strategos from AD 369 is probably to be understood as such (PStrasburgensis 272).

The stratiotikon was probably supplied from the usual merismos, and indeed from the surpluses of other funds. It thus competed with the theorikon. Demosthenes [2] and his circle attempted on several occasions and in the face of considerable opposition to draw more funds into the stratiotikon. Only in 339/8 did he succeed in having all monies put into this fund during war-

1 M.Harzoproutos, Macedonian Institutions under the Kings, vol.1,1996 2 C.Carsana, Le dirigenze cittadine nello stato seleucido, 1996

BENGTSON 1-3; H.A. RuppRECcHT, Kleine Einfiihrung in die Papyrus-Kunde, 1994, 51, 59, 70 f. (with bibliography). W.A.

Ill. BYZANTINE PERIOD Greek ‘general’, became a technical term in the Byzantine period from the late 7th/8th cents. AD denoting the administrative head of a military province (> theme), in whom considerable powers were vested, especially in the period of the first four great themata in Asia Minor (Opsikion, Anatolikon, Armeniakon, Kibyrrhaiotai). As the large themes were divided into smaller military provinces, the number of strategoi rose (c. 850: 18; c. 900: 26; c. 970: 90) and their powers declined, until the title was replaced by others, e.g. S0vE/dorix (> dux [2]), xeuyc/krités. Strategos, however, was by no means only used in this sense in Byzantine sources, but also as a term for a commanding officer, replacing various titles of high rank such as xdum¢/ kémés (comes) and dopéotxoc/doméstikos (— domesticus). A.KAzHDAN, s. v. S., ODB 3, 1964; Id., s. v. Theme, ODB

3, 2034 f.

ET.

STRATOCLES

time (FGrH 328 F 56a).

In charge of the fund was a treasurer (— tamias), who was elected for one year or four years ({Aristot.] Ath. pol. 43,1 is ambiguous; cf. [1. 513 f.]). He was present at the leasing of state incomes and seems also to have provided resources for purposes that were not directly military (e.g. prizes and honorific inscriptions). The office appears to have vanished at the time of Lycurgus [9] (4th cent. BC), but it re-emerges later. Its precise history in the Hellenistic period is difficult to reconstruct (on developments up to 229 BC cf. [2]). The treasurer of the stratiotikon may have been in competition with the tamias epi téi dioikései. Probably the last attestation of the treasurer dates from 49/8 BC (IG I?

1047,5)— Taxes 1RuHopes

2A.S. Henry, Athenian Financial Officials

after 303 B. C., in: Chiron 14, 1984, 49-92 H. Leppin, Zur Entwicklung der Verwaltung 6ffentlicher Gelder im Athen des 4. Jahrhundert v. Chr., in: EDER, Demokratie, 557-571. HLL.

Stratocles (ZteatoxA/Stratokleés). [1] Athenian, son of Charidemus of the Oion deme, relative and part heir of the wealthy Hagnias. After S.’ death (c. 360 BC), there was a legal dispute between his brother Theopompus and the guardian of his son for half of the Hagnias legacy (Isaeus 11). BLASS 2, 565-570; A.SCHAFER, Demosthenes und seine Zeit

Stratiotic property see > Military lands

(Beilagen),

1858,

229-236;

PA

12942;

W.E.

THompson, De Hagniae Hereditate, 1976.

Stratiotika, Stratiotikon (otgatwwtxd, pl. = stratidtikd, oteAaTWTLXOV, sing. = stratidtikon). The stratiotika were financial resources available for military purposes

[2] Athenian, son of Euthydemus of the Diomea deme, c. 360/350 to after 292 BC; first emerged as one of the public prosecutors in the trial of > Harpalus (324/3;

in the city of Athens from a fund (the stratiotikon) which was historically closely connected with the devel-

Din. 1,1; 1,20; [1. 125-127]). His motion to grant post-

opment of the festival fund (> thedrikon). The stratiotikon probably served the flexible management of expenditure in times of war, freeing it from the rigidity of the usual system for distributing tax incomes (merismos). The stratiotikon may also have served as a counterweight to the theorikon. The first pieces of evidence of financial records using this term are from the 370s (Ps.-Dem. Or. 49,12 and 16) and 360s BC (Ps.-Dem. Or. 50,10). It is unclear whether these are non-technical uses of the term or if they are the direct precursors of the subsequent fund. There is reliable evidence of a fund for stratiotika in 349/8 (IG II* 207 B 1x1; cf. 212,44; 1443,12 f.).

humous honour to > Lycurgus [9] (307/6: Syll.3 326; [2.

51-5 6]) attests to a strong commitment to democra-

cy. The same tendency is evident in his active advocacy of > Demetrius [2] Poliorketes (more than 20 motions for honours are attested), for which, however, S. met with increasing hostility (Ath. 13,596 f; Plut. Demetrius II; 12,1; 24; 26; Diod. Sic. 20,46,2). After the battle of Ipsus (301), S. probably temporarily lost influence, but re-emerges in 294/3 as a petitioner (IG II/III*

649). 1 J.WorTHINGTON, A Historical Commentary on Dinarchus, 1992 2 A.N. Orkonomipes, The Epigraph. Tradition of the Decree of S., Honoring post mortem the Orator Lykourgos, in: Ancient World 14, 1986, 51-56.

STRATOCLES

DAVIES, 494-495; BLASS 3.2, 333-335; HABICHT, 76-90;

PA 12938; S.V. Tracy, Athenian Politicians and Inscriptions, in: Hesperia 69, 2000, 227-233.

U.WAL.

[3] Famous Athenian of the 4th cent. BC known only from one reference in a speech by > Demosthenes [2], Against Pantaenetus (Or. 37,48; given c. 345). He is

described as the “most pliant and scurrilous of all men”, and is mentioned along with others of whom Demosthenes expected that they would bear false witness to the benefit of his adversary Pantaenetus. Mw. [4] S. of Rhodes. Student of the Stoic > Panaetius [4] (late 2nd-early 1st cents. BC). He wrote biographical

accounts of leading Stoics used by > Philodemus (Philod. col. 17, also col. 79, cf. [1]). He is mentioned by Strabo (14,2,13) ina

list of Rhodians prominent in civic

life and in prose-writing (/6goz) and philosophy. da Zenone a Panezio, 1994.

BL.

Straton (Ltodtwy; Straton). [1] Attic comedy writer of the 4th cent. BC, according to the Suda belonging to the Middle Comedy [t. test. r], but on the basis of fr. 1,43 (mentioning Philitas [1] of Cos) certainly to the New Comedy [2.62 f.]. At the Dionysia of 302, S. attained the fourth place [1. test. 2]. Of the comedy Phoinikides (fr. 1 PCG) a > rhesis survives

11; 13-15; 17-21; 23-253 34-503

cf. [3]) and in a divergent version in Athenaeus (fr. 1,147; cf. [1.621 f.]); the speaker portrays his annoyance

with a cook who expresses himself only in incomprehensible Homeric glosses. 1PCG VII, 1989, 617-622 2H.-G.NESSELRATH, Die attische Mittlere Komédie, 1990 3 R.KassEL, KS, 1991, 310-316.

air, water and earth) are not in pairs differentiated by weight and lightness as in Aristotle, but all of them possess weight, albeit of different magnitudes; thus S. distances himself from Aristotelian theory of the natural > motions of the elementary bodies (fr. 88). S.’s

theory of > vacuum is debated by scholars; in order to be able to explain certain physical phenomena (such as the fact that heat and light can penetrate solid bodies), S., in contrast to Aristotle, seems to have assumed that every body contains tiny empty cavities (frr. 54-67). The idea is probably influenced by Theophrastus’ pore theory, less by the + Atomists. By contrast S. rejects both the Epicurean concept of an empty > space between the worldly bodies and the assumption of an infinite empty space outside the universe. S.’s psychology exhibits particular originality (> Soul, theory of the). The soul is a pneumatic unit (fr. 108); no part of it is

1 T. Doranpr (Ed.), Filodemo, Storia dei filosofi: La stoa

on papyrus (fr. 1,4-8;

876

875

B.BA.

separable or, a possibility Aristotle considered, immortal; S. explicitly objected to the arguments for the immortality of the soul in Plato’s Phaidon (fr. 123). Since the soul is integral, all the psychic processes in the central part of the soul are inseparably linked to one another: without sensory perception there is neither thinking nor feeling. EDITION: 1 WEHRLI, Schule, vol. 5. BIBLIOGRAPHY: K.ALGRA, Concepts of Space in Greek Thought, 1995, 58-69; J.E. ANNas, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, 1992, 28-30; H.Drexs, Uber das physikalische System des S., in: Id., KS, 1969, 239-265; D. FurLEY, Strato’s Theory of the Void, in: Id., Cosmic Problems, 1989, 149-160; M.GATZEMEIER, Die Naturphilosophie des S. von Lampsakos, 1970; H. B. GOTTSCHALK, Strato of

Lampsacus. Some Texts, in: Proc. of the Leeds Philosophical and Literary Soc., Literary and Historical Section 11.6, 1963, 95-182; J.E. ANNAS, Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind, L. Repici, La natura e l’anima, 1988; R.SHARPLES, The Peripatetic School, in: D. J. FURLEY (ed.), From

Aristotle to Augustine. Routledge History of Philosophy,

[2] S. of Lampsacus, from c. 287/6 until his death c. 269/8 BC, the successor to Theophrastus as third head of the School of Aristoteles [6] (> Peripatos). For a while he served in Alexandria [1] as tutor to the young Ptolemaeus [3] I Philadelphus (308-246 BC). Ina catalogue of his writings Diog. Laert. 5,59—-60 lists 48 titles; S.’s works covered the main questions of Hellenistic philosophy: logic and topics, physics and metaphysics, cosmology and biology, epistemology and psychology, ethics and politics. Except for a few fragments (in [1]) his works are lost. Although S.’s philosophy was based on Aristotelian thought, accounts of him, which need to be interpreted carefully, imply that on many points he diverged constructively and critically from the founder of the School. In physics, S. turned against the assumption of a cosmic theistic teleology and believed he could explain natural phenomena in a materialistic and mechanical way. He rejected Aristotle’s hypothesis of a fifth element (aether; -» Elements, theories of the) for the heavenly bodies and returned to the pre-Aristotelian idea of the fiery nature of the heavens (fr. 84). The four sublunar elements (fire,

vol. 2, 1999, 147-187; F. WEHRLI, Der Peripatos bis zum

Beginn der romischen Kaiserzeit, § 28, in: GGPh* 3, 569574-

CH.WI.

[3] Son of Straton, Samian in the service of Ptolemaeus

[3] Il; the latter sent S., who was presumably serving as gazophylax (‘treasurer’) in Halicarnassus in 257 BC, to Samos to collect money which had accrued in the context of trade or jurisdiction there (IG XII 6,1,10 with bibliogr.). PP VI 15157 (=I 139; VI 15738; 164722). WA, [4] Physician, pupil of > Erasistratus and teacher of Apollonius of Memphis (Gal. 11,196; 8,759 KUHN), active c. 270 BC. He rejected > phlebotomy, not least because of the difficulty of distinguishing veins from arteries, and because patients could die of fear of the consequences (Gal. 11,151 K.). He was considered the first to treat the skin disease > leprosy (Orib. Collectiones 4,63). His annotations on lemmata from the Corpus Hippocraticum (-> Hippocrates [6]) are from orthopaedic (cf. Erotianus 23,8) and therapeutic (Sor. Gyn. 44,143 4,15,36) works rather than special commen-

877

878

taries. Possibly identical with the S. whose recipes for poisonous bites are cited by Aetius [3] (13,7), Philu-

lamis [2] by > Ptolemaeus [I 1], and honourably released (Plut. Demetrios 3 5,5; 38,1). S. is not referred to

menus (9; 27; 28; 30; 36; 40) and other pharmacologi-

again.

cal authors. VN. [5] S. Soter Dicaeus Epiphanes (Zwthe Aixatog “Emtavyc; Sdter Dikaios Epiphanes). Indo-Greek king in the Punjab and Gandhara c. 100 BC, son of Menander [6] land Agathoclea [4].

[3] Daughter of — Demetrius [2] Poliorketes and + Phila [2], married to > Seleucus [2] in 299/8 BC to cement his alliance with Demetrius (Plut. Demetrius 31,5). She bore him > Phila [3]. In 294/3, Demetrius ceded her to his son > Antiochus [2], an event which lent itself to novelistic embellishment (Plut. Demetrius 38 et passim). By him, she had > Seleucus [3], > Antiochus [3], > Apama [3] and — Stratonice [4]. In a number of Greek cities, she was deified, apparently after her death, and she was often identified with Aphrodite [1.100 f.].

BOPEARACHCHI 88-93, 251-265.

[6] S. Soter (Zwtje; Sotér), Indo-Greek king in the Punjab, possibly a grandson of S. [5], c. AD 1. There may have beena third S. Philopator, a son and co-regent of S. -+ Indo-Greeks BOPEARACHCHI 139-141, 369-372.

[7] Greek

historian,

mentioned

K.K.

only by Diogenes

Laertius (5,61). He was the author of a work on the

Macedonian kings Philippus [7] V and Perseus [2]. FGrH 168 with comm.

K.MEI.

[8] S. of Sardeis. Epigrammatist (Diog. Laert. 5, 61;

origin: Anth. Pal. [1]). Lived between the rst cent. BC and the 2nd cent. AD [2]. Author of a collection of paederotic verse (satirically only Anth. Pal. 11,117, for which his authorship is disputed, but cf. [5]). Some 100 poems survive, almost all in Anth. Pal. 12 (1-4 presumably the beginning of the collection, 258 the coda). The topical motifs are embellished with often quite scurril-

ous features. EDITIONS: 1R.AUBRETON et al., Anthologie grecque II,1994,2 2 M.GONZALEZ RINCON, Estraton de Sardes: Epigramas, 1996, 23 (with Span. transl. and comm.). BIBLIOGRAPHY: 3P.G. MAxwWELL-STUART, Strato and the Musa Puerilis, in: Hermes too, 1972, 215-240

4 W.M. CrarkeE, The Manuscript of S.’s Musa Puerilis, in: GRBS 17, 1976, 371-384 5 A.CAMERON, The Greek Anthology from Meleager to Planudes, 1993, 65-69 et passim 6 W.STEINBICHLER, Die Epigramme des Dichters S. von Sardes, 1998 7 K.J. GUTZWILLER, Poetic Garlands. Hellenistic Epigrams in Context, 1998, 12, 158, 282, 285. M.G.A.

1Cu.

STRATONICE

Hasicut,

Gottmenschentum

und

Stadte, 71970.

_griechische EB.

[4] Daughter of > Antiochus [2] I and > Stratonice [3], wife of > Demetrius [3] Il of Macedonia. Because of the latter’s second marriage to the Epirote princess ~» Phthia [2], she approached her brother > Antiochus [3] Il to incite him against Demetrius. When her nephew -» Seleucus [4] II rejected marriage with her, she attempted (perhaps in connection with the independence agitations of Seleucus’ brother Antiochus Hierax) to foment rebellion in > Antiochia [1]. When it failed, she fled to > Seleucia [2]. She was killed there (Agatharchides FGrH 86 F 20; lust. Epit. 28,1,1-4). G.H. Macurpy, Hellenistic Queens, 1932, 70 f.; J. SEIBERT, Historische Beitrage zu den dynastischen Verbindungen in hellenistischer Zeit, 1967, 34-36; WILL 1, 299 f.

[5] Married by her father, > Antiochus [3] II, to — Ariarathes [3] III as part of a straightforward dynastic marriage policy, probably for the sake of the accessibility of traffic routes between western Asia Minor and northern Syria. Ariarathes, perhaps even in consequence of this marriage, was from c. 255 BC the first recognized king of Cappadocia. Their son was > Ariarathes [4] IV (> Cappadocia; Diod. Sic. 31,19,6). G.H.

Macurpy,

Hellenistic Queens,

1932,

83; J.SEI-

BERT, Historische Beitrage zu den dynastischen Verbin-

Stratonice (=teatovixn; Stratoniké).

[1] Daughter of the Macedonian king > Alexander [II 2] I. In the winter of 429/8 BC, she was married by her brother > Perdiccas [2] II to > Seuthes [1], nephew of the Odrysian king —> Sitalces [1], in exchange for Seuthes’ having achieved the withdrawal of Thracian troops M.Z. from Macedonia (Thuc. 2,101,§ f.). [2] Daughter of one Corrhagus, married to > Antigonus [1], mother of + Demetrius [2] Poliorketes and a Philippus, who died young. In 317 BC, she helped +» Docimus, who was interned in a fortress with > Attalus [2], to flee (Diod. Sic. 19,16,4), probably to enable him to join forces with Antigonus. After Antigonus’ death, she fled with Demetrius and his children to Cyprus (Diod. Sic. 21,1,4b). As Demetrius was con-

quering Macedonia, they were taken prisoner at > Sa-

dungen in hellenistischer Zeit, 1967, 56 f.; WILL I, 292.

A.ME. [6] Daughter of > Ariarathes [4] IV of Cappadocia, married from 188 BC to > Eumenes [3] II of > Pergamum (Liv. 38,39; 42,29). When Eumenes was attacked at Cirrha in Greece in 172 BC, and was at first believed dead, she married his brother > Attalus [5] II (Liv. 42,16; Diod. Sic. 29,34). However, when his brother returned home, he relinquished her to him. The definitive marriage between S. and Attalus II thus came only on Eumenes’ death (159/8). S. died in the reign of > Attalus [6] II, who regarded her as his mother (Pomp. Trog. prol. 36; Iust. Epit. 36,4,1; 36,4,53 stemma see > Attalus). J. Hopp, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der letzten Attaliden, 1977, 27-29. M.SCH.

STRATONICE

[7] Daughter of a kithara player, herself proficient in the art, one of the wives of -» Mithridates [6] VI, and a particular favourite of the king. In the spring of 64 BC, when he had departed, fleeing before Pompey (+ Pompeius [I 3]), she yielded to the Romans the castle (Symphorion? Sinoria?) which the king had entrusted to her. Mithridates executed her son > Xiphares in revenge for his mother’s betrayal (App. Mithr. 503-506; Plut. Pompeius 36,3—6; Cass. Dio 37,7,5). C. HaBICHT,

s.v. Xiphares, RE 9 A, 2131 f.; L. BALLE-

STEROS Pastor, Mitridates Eupator, 1996, 276.

E.O.

[8] City on the eastern shore of the Chalcidian peninsula, modern Stratoni, one of the Hellenistic foundations

of the 3rd cent. BC. S. owed its name either to the daughter of > Demetrius [2] Poliorketes or to the sister of > Antigonus [2] Gonatas. S. probably served as an export harbour for the nearby mines, exploitation of which had begun in the reign of Philip (> Philippus [I

4}) i. F.PapazoGLou,

Les villes de Macédoine

a l’epoque

romaine, 1988, 432 f.; M. ZAHRNT, Olynth und die Chalkidier, 1971, 244. M.Z.

Stratoniceia [1] (Zteatovixeva/Stratonikeia, Zteatovixn/Stratoniké, Latin Stratonice). City on the upper Caicus near modern Siledik. Possibly a Seleucid polis foundation (named after Stratonice [3]), from the beginning of the 2nd cent. BC under Pergamum. It was probably here — not in S. [2] — that Aristonicus [4] was taken prisoner by Perperna [3] in 130 BC (Eutr. 4,20,2; Oros. 5,10,5). In

the first half of the 2nd cent. AD, S. had sympolity (+ Sympoliteia) with the Ind(e)ipediatae (in the plain of Kirkagag¢). After Hadrian visited in AD 123 (‘second founder’, inscription see [1]) also called Hadrianopolis (IGR 4, 1156-1159). Bishopric (cf. Not. Episc. 1,184). Abandoned in the mid- Byzantine period in favour of Calandus (modern Gelenbe). 1

L.RoBERT,

880

879

Documents

d’Asie Mineure

IX, in: BCH

102, 1978, 437-452. MaGIgE 2, 978; W.RuGE, s.v. S.-Hadrianopolis, RE Suppl. 7, 1244-1250; T.R. S. BRouGHTON, S. and Aristonicus, in: CPh 29, 1934, 252-254; J. Hopp, Untersu-

chungen zur Geschichte der letzten Attaliden, 1977, 122 f.; ROBERT, Villes, 43-82, 261-271; E.S. G. RoBINSON, Cistophori in the Name of King Eumenes, in: NC 14, 1954, 1-8; V. VAVRINEK, La révolte d’Aristonicos, 1957,

47 f. [2] (Zteatovixevo/Stratonikeia).

City

in Caria

(Str.

14,2,22), c. 36 km east of Mylasa, modern Eskihisar.

Seleucid foundation (first half of 3rd. cent. BC; Str. 14,2,25), named after Stratonice [3] (Steph. Byz. s. v.

conquered by Antigonus [3] III or in 201 by Philippus [7] V, in 197 given back to Rhodes by Antiochus [5] III (Liv. 33,18,22; [1. 71, 78]) and in 166 declared free by Rome (Pol. 30,21,3 ff.). Laid waste by Mithradates [6] VI in 88 BC (App. Mithr. 21), S. was honoured for its loyalty to Rome by Cornelius [I 90] Sulla and in 81 declared free (IK 22,1, 505; [2. tos—111 no. 18]). In 40 BC S. was unsuccessfully besieged by the Parthians under Labienus [2] (Cass. Dio 48,26,3 f.; Tac. Ann. 3,62) and in reward for its loyalty, it became again free and autonomous ([2. 158-162 no. 27]; IK 21,1, 11 f.; 22,1, 509, cf. 512). The orator Menippus [5] and the Olympic victor Aristeas (AD 13: IK 22,1, 1042; Paus.

5,21,10) both came from S.

Archaeological finds: bouleuterion (Finding place of a fragment of the Edictum [3] Diocletiani), an exedra, a

gymnasium, a double gate with a nymphaeum, a fort built to defend the city and a Roman theatre. With its territory (in the rst cent. BC) stretching as far as the Gulf of Ceramus, S$. was a suburb of the Chrysaoric League of the Carians (> Idrias; league sanctuary of Zeus Chrysaoreus to the east of the city). The sanctuary of Hecate at Lagina and the sanctuary of Zeus at Panamara near modern Bagyaka belonged to S. (cf. IK 21,1, 10; Tac. Ann. 3,62). S. was the see of a bishop (Hierocles, Synecdemus 688,1; cf. Not. Episc. 1,336). 1H.H. ScHmitr, Rom und Rhodos, 1957 2 Rake SHERK, Roman Documents from the Greek East, 1969

MaAGIE 2, 972 f., 995-998, 1031 f., 1281 f.; L.ROBERT, Etudes Anatoliennes, 1937, 516-566; F. VARINLIOGLU, Inschriften von S. in Karien, in: EA 12, 1988, 79-118; G.E. BEAN, Kleinasien, vol. 3, 1974, 91-96, 102-104; R.Ozcan, D.SruTziNGER, Untersuchungen zur Portrat-

plastik des 5. Jahrhundert n. Chr., in: MDAI(Ist) 35, 1985, 237-274; F.PRayon, A. WITTKE, Kleinasien vom 12. bis 6. Jh. v. Chr. (TAVO 82), 1994, 123; M.C. SAHIN,

The Political and Religious Structure in the Territory of S. in Caria, 1976.

H.KA.

Stratonicus (Zteatovixoc/Straténikos) from Athens, 4th cent. BC [1], kithara teacher. Tradition claims that he was the first to play on multiple strings, to teach music theory to his students and to compose a table of modes (6utyeauuo/didgramma) [3; 4. 367 f.]; “he was also a brilliant master of witticisms (geloion)” (Ath. 8,352d). In fact, S. was famous for his clever speech (eutrapeloi logoi; Ath. 8,348c) and the ready wit of his answers (eustochia; ibid. 8,352d). A collection of his ~ jokes can be found in Ath. 8,40-46, pp. 347f-3 52d (for other jokes, see [3]). — Music; > Musical instruments 1K. ABEL,s. v. Zethos (3), RE1to A, 247 2 P.Maas,s. v. Tedwmtonowi, RE7.1, ro19-1021 3 Id.,s. v. Stratonikos (2), RE 4A,326f. 4M.L. West, Ancient Greek Music, 1992. H.A.G.

>.). Bronze burial objects, late geometric ceramics and

two burial chambers 3 km north on the Akdag tepesi indicate earlier settlement. In around 240 BC, S. was given to Rhodes (Pol. 30,3156 to [he 012.52 09)|))s 10227

Stratos (6 or f Xtectoc/Stratos (m/f)). The most important city of Acarnania (Thuc. 2,80; — Acarnanians, Acarnania, with map); on the right bank of the > Ache-

881

882

lous [1], upstream of the modern Stratos; chief city of the Acarnanian confederacy in the 5th and 4th cents. BC. After the partition of Acarnania in 260 BC, S. became Aetolian; with the foundation of > Nicopolis [3] in 30 BC, S. was abandoned, although the land remained settled. The city and environs were excavated in the 1990s: the city, possessing an orthogonal street system and measuring 70 ha., already had city walls in the 5th cent.; the agora and theatre were enlarged in the 4th cent. to accommodate 6000-8000 visitors. The temple of Zeus at the edge of the city, and two sanctuaries in the environs [1], date from the Archaic period. Coins: BMC, Gr Thessalia-Aetolia 168, 191; inscriptions: IG

3,92), the strawberry grows on the ground. In Ovid

Strawberry tree. In the macchia shrubland of Mediterranean countries the genus Arbutus L. of the Ericaceae family is represented by two of its total of 20 evergreen

IX 1,22, 390-417; SEG 16, 371; 19, 410; 19, 6753 25,

species, namely a) the ST Arbutus unedo L. (uxduagos;

6341.5 29, 475-7. Numerous inscriptions are unpub-

komaros) with its strawberry-like sour-tasting drupes (arbuta Verg. G. 3,301 and 4,181), which ripen in a year, and b) the > andrachle, Arbutus andrachle L. (avdoaxvn; andrachné), spread from Greece to the east as far as the coast of the Black Sea, with small orangeyellow inedible fruits. The fruits of the arbutus, which grows as far west as the Atlantic coast of Ireland, and acorns (glandes, Oak) were considered the topical food of the mythical early period, particularly of the Golden Age (— Period, era) (Lucr. 5,940; Verg. G. 1,148f.; Varro Rust. 2,1,4; Ov. Fast. 6,1orff.). Columella recommends the fruits for fattening captive thrushes (8,10,4), as fish bait (8,17,13) and as a natural food for game in zoos (vivaria: 9,1,5). In Pliny (HN. 15,99) the unedo, which takes its name from the fact that only one of the fruit the Greeks called puwaixvdrov (mimaikylon) could be eaten at once, is considered to be related to the > strawberry. There is a good description of the tree and its fruit in Theophrastus (H. plant. 3,16,4). Dioscorides (1,122 [1.112] and 1,175 [2. 141]) and Pliny (HN. 23,151) characterize it as hard to digest and upsetting to the stomach. In the story of the nymph Cranea (Ov. Fast. 6, rorff.) the foliage of the ST is used as a miracle cure.

lished.

1 E.-L. SCHWANDNER, Spathari — Tempel ohne Saulen und Gebalk?, in: DiskAB 6, 1996, 48-54. F.CourBy, CH. PicarbD, Recherches archéologiques a Stratos d’Acarnanie, 1924; F.LANG, Veranderungen des Landschaftsbildes in Akarnanien, in: Klio 76, 1994, 239254; P.FUNKE, Acheloos’ Homeland, in: I.IsaGER (Ed.), Foundation and Administration ..., 2001, 189-203; D.Srraucu, Romische Politik und griechische Tradition, 1996, 361-366.

D.S.

Strattis ([toedttc/Strattis). [1] Tyrant of > Chios, who took part in the Scythian campaign in 513 BC as an adviser of > Darius [1] (Hdt. 4,138). It can not be determined whether he was deposed at the beginning of the > Ionian Revolt. Nevertheless, he was able to resume his reign after the Persians’ victory (in 493/2 BC). In 479 he was able to elude a conspiracy (Hdt. 8,132). At the liberation of Ionia after the battle of Mycale in 479 S. may also have been toppled. ES-H. [2] Attic comic poet, of whose quite long period of creativity (perhaps 409-375 BC, cf. [3]) only a victory at the Lenaea [1. test. 4] is documented. 91 fragments and 19 titles of plays survive; of these a quarter to at most a half suggest mythical content [2. 203]. His Anthroporéstés (fr. 1-2), Médeia (fr. 34-36), Phoinissai (fr. 46-53) and Chrysippos (fr. 54-56) contain parodies of Euripides, Troilos (fr. 42-43) and Philoktetés (fr. 44-45) of Sophocles, and Myrmidones (fr. 37) perhaps of Aeschylus. Kinésias (fr. 14-22) satirised a poet of dithyrambs of the same name, and Kallippidés (fr. 11-13) satirised a tragic actor of that name; probably the latest play, Ataldante (fr. 3-8), mocked Isocrates’ love for the hetaera Lagisca.

STRENA

(Met. 1,104), its delicious fruit grows spontaneously to

provide food in the Golden Age (cf. Plin. HN 21,86). The name fragaria is claimed to have appeared first in Matthaeus Silvaticus (c. 1344; Lyon 1541) [x]. In Greek, it is called toidvAkov pogodeeés (triphyllon moropherés). 1 Matthaeus Silvaticus, Pandectae medicinae, 1541, etc.

C.HU.

1 WELLMANN

I

2 BERENDES.

F. Otck, s.v. Erdbeerbaum, RE 6, 399-401.

Streets, layout of see > Town planning

1 PCG VII, 1989, 623-660 2 H.-G. NESSELRATH, Die attische Mittlere Komédie, 1990 3 A. KOERTE, s.v. S. BBA. (3), RE 4 A, 336-338.

Strena. Verdant branch(es), dates and figs, which in Rome were given as benedictions at the beginning of the year or arranged in front of the door of the house. A continuation of the Roman custom is the placing or exchanging of spring branches in front of the official residences of the > rex sacrorum and the > flamines, in front of the + Curia and the Temple of > Vesta (Ov. Fast. 3,137-143; Macrob. Sat. 1,12,6). In the Republican period strena signifies an omen for the new year

Strawberry. Pliny (HN 15,98) erroneously believes that the fragum, i.e. the Rosacee Fragaria L. with its three types vesca, viridis collina and moschata, was related to the > strawberry tree. According to Virgil (ecl.

the gifts that were exchanged to celebrate a new year (+ New Year’s celebration), i.e. especially gifts of money, > lamps, > money boxes. The personification of the benedictional power of the branch is the goddess Strenia (Varro Ling. 5,47),

(omen novi anni), in the Imperial period strena means

883

884

who had a sanctuary on the Via Sacra near the Carinae on the western slopes of the Esquiline hill. The branches were cut in the associated grove.

[4] In Spain, according to Plin. HN 33,62, a small piece of indigenous gold was called a strigilis (or, in a different reading, strix). W.H.GR.

STRENA

D. Baupy, Strenarum Commercium. Uber Geschenke und

Gliickwiinsche

zum

rémischen

Neujahrsfest,

in: RhM

130, 1987, 1-28.

Strix (Striges) see

> Owls

AV.S.

Stroma see > Blanket Strenia see > Strena

Strombichides (Ztooupiyidyc/Strombichides). Son of Diotimus [r], Attic strategos in 412/1 BC. His opera-

Strepsa (=teéwa/Strépsa). A city — probably in the west of the region > Anthemus to the south of Basilica — first mentioned for the time of > Xerxes’ campaign (Hellanikos FGrH 4 F 61) and from 45 4/3 BC in the Athenian tribute lists with an unchanging tribute of one talent (ATL 1, 412 f.). In 432 S. seceded from Athens and probably could not be won back. For one last time, S. is mentioned in Aeschin. Leg. 27 among the cities conquered in 370 BC from Calindoea by Pausanias [5], the pretender to the Macedonian throne,.

tions against + Teos in 412 BC were unsuccessful (Thuc. 8,15,1; 8,16,1-2) and he, - Onomacles and Euctemon besieged — Chios in vain (Thuc. 8,30; 8,33,2-34; 8,38; 8,40 f.; 8,55,2-56,1; 8,61-63). From

M.B. Hatzorou os, L.D. Loukopou.Lou, Two Studies in Ancient Macedonian Topography, 1987, 21 f., 54-60;

Id., Une donation du roi Lysimaque, 1988, 40-43.

Strigilis (Greek otieyyic/stlengis, Evotea/xystra). [1] Ancient implement for sports and cosmetics, pri-

marily of bronze or iron, for scraping off oil, sweat and dirt after practising sport and after visiting a steam bath (laconica or sudatoria)

in the balnea or — thermal baths. It was part of a grooming set, which for the Greeks also included a > sponge and a small bottle of oil (> Alabastron, — Lekythos[r1]), and for the Romans an ampulla (small bottle of oil) and a > patera (hand-dish for pouring water on the body or for holding oil). A strigilis consisted of a handle and a sickle-shaped curved blade. In ancient art there are numerous depictions, primarily in Greek vase paintings, of athletes with strigiles, but the best known was an athlete scraping himself by the Greek sculptor > Lysippus [2] (Plin. HN 34,62). Numerous examples survive from the 6th cent. BC until the 3rd cent. AD. — Sport; > Sports equipment E. KoTERA-FEYER, Die S.., 1993; Id., Die S. in der attischrotfigurigen Vasenmalerei: Bildformeln und ihre Deutung, RH.

[2] Also stria, 64B50c/rhabdos (SEG 4,448,7), a vertical concave groove (flute) in Greek + columns according to Vitr. 4,4,3W.H.GR. [3] In medicine also used as an auxiliary instrument for instilling medicaments into the ears (Celsus, De medicina 6,7,1; Marcellus 9,1; Scribonius Largus 39); but

not part of the normal range of > surgical instruments. J.S. MiLneg, Surgical Instruments in Greek and Roman Times, 1907 (repr. 1970).

30,14).

M.Z.

Streptinda see + Games of dexterity

in: Nikephoros 11, 1998, 107-136.

there he went to the Hellespontus in the spring of 411 in order to salvage Athens’s lost authority there (conquest of Lampsacus and Sestus, Thuc. 8,62). In 411 he remained true to democracy and was active in the navy at Samos (Thuc. 8,79). In 404 he was incarcerated for resisting the treaty with Sparta (Lys. 13,13-34) and then executed by the Thirty (> Tridkonta; Lys. 13,34-43;

E.KU.

PA 13016.

WS.

Strongyle (ZteoyybAn/Strongylé). Volcanic island in the north east of the > Aeoliae Insulae (12,6 km*, 924 m high; Ptol. 3,4,16; Mela 2,120), present-day Stromboli. The island was named (S.: ‘the round’) after the form of the volcano, which has been active from Antiquity (Str. 6,2,11; cf. Thuc. 3,88,2; Diod. Sic. 5,7,1; App. B Civ. 5,105). The island has been settled from c. 3000 BC. In mythology, it was considered to be the seat of > Aeolus {2] (Plin. HN 3,94) or > Hephaestus (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 4,761). E. Manni, Geografia fisica e politica della Sicilia antica, 1981, 76f. E.O.

Strongylion (Zteoyyvdwv/Strongylion). Bronze sculptor (last third of the 5th cent. to the first third of the 4th cent. BC). None of his works attested in literature survives. Parts of the base of a detailed depiction of the Trojan horse, named doves (dourios, ‘The wooden one’, Paus. 1,23,8), have been identified on the Acropolis in Athens; it can be dated to before 414 BC. As well as some devotional images, S. and > Cephisodotus [4] created some statues of the Muses on Mt Helicon. Small bronzes by S. were famous among Roman collectors, such as the so-called Puer Bruti and an Amazon, owned by Nero, with the nickname eucnemos (Plin. HN 34,82; evxvypoc/euknémos, ‘with handsome legs’). According to

Pausanias

(9,30,1),

S.’s horses

and

oxen

were

praised, although it remains purely hypothetical to attribute further animal representations to him. OVERBECK, no. 877-880; 884; 886-892; LoEWy, no. 52; A. RAUBITSCHEK, Dedications from the Athenian Akro-

polis, 1949, no. 176; LIPPOLD, 189 f.; P. MORENO, s. v. S., EAA 7, 1966, 518 f.; L. Topisco, Scultura greca del IV secolo, 1993, 42. RN.

885

886

Strongylos style see > Uncials

Strues. Roman sacrificial cake (Fest. 408), always men-

Strophades (Zteoadec; Strophddes). Two small, flat, barren, uninhabited islands belonging to Cyparissia [1] (Str. 8,4,3) located 44 km south of Zacynthos in the open sea, with the original name of Plotae (Mela 2,110; Plin. HN 4,55), Strophadia ever since the Roman Peri-

od (Hierocles, Synecdemus 648,10). According to legend, the sons of > Boreas turned about there during their pursuit of the > Harpies (aition for the place name in Apoll. Rhod. 2,285-297). R. BaLapi£, Le Péloponnése de Strabon, 1980, 5f.; PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN, 541-545; L. ROBERT, Epigramme votive d’Olbia, in: Hellenica 11/12, 1960, 272-274. DS.

STRUGGLE OF THE ORDERS

tioned in conjunction with fertum; these two kinds of sacred pastries are not identical, but in their context are hard to distinguish. Only Cato (Agr. 134 and 141) differentiates: strues for > lanus, fertum for — Iuppiter. The > Flamen Dialis had to have boxes with these two cakes constantly hanging on the bedposts (Gell. NA 10,15,14). Strues were used in — sacrifice to expiate lightning-struck trees by means of so-called strufertarii (Paul. Fest. 75; 377); asa preliminary sacrifice at animal sacrifices; at a > lustratio pagi between the procession and the slaughter of the sacrificial animals. J. ANDRE, L’alimentation et la cuisine 4 Rome, 1961, 2-15; A.Haurti-KarrerR, Lateinische Gebacksbezeichnungen, 1972, 51-54. ANS.

Strophe see > Metre I. and V. Strophium (oteddtovw/strophion). A band wound round something or twisted together. [1] A breast band worn by women in Greece and Rome (Aristoph. Thesm. 139; 251; 255; 638; Aristoph. Lys. 931; Catull. 64,65), also called pitea/mitra (Anth. Pal. 5,13,4; Apoll. Rhod. 3,867), pnrotyoc/mélotichos (Anth. Pal. 6,211), otnOddeopoc/stethddesmos (Poll. 7,66), mamillare (Mart. 14,66 lem.), fascia pectoralis (Mart. 14,134 Lem., cf. Ov. Ars am. 3,274; Prop. 4,9,49). Women are variously portrayed in art wearing strophia or putting on strophia. Straps across the shoul-

ders often gave the strophium a firmer hold. Atalante and Aphrodite in particular were portrayed with strophia. Plaut. Aul. 516 calls the maker of a strophium a strophiarius. [2] Ribbon worn by Greek priests (Plut. Aratos 53,6; Plut. Aristides 5,7), by philosophers (Dion Chrys. 72,2) and the painter Parrhasius (Ath. 12,543 f). [3] In Philostr. de gymnastica 10,14, the boxers’ belt is called a strophium; in Apul. Met. 11,16,7, the twisted anchor rope is called strophium ancorale. — Fasciae; > Tainia 1 M.Pauscu, Mosaik der ‘Bikini-Madchen’ von Piazza

Armerina, in: Nikephoros 9, 1996, 169-171 2 J.RUMSCHEID, Krone und Kranz. Zu Insignien, Siege-

spreisen 2000,

und

2-4.

Ehrenzeichen

der rémischen

Kaiserzeit, R.H.

Strophius (Zteddios/Strophios). Foster-father of ~ Orestes [1]. As son of Crisus and Antipatheia (schol. Eur. Or. 33), S. ruled Crisa in Phocis, which was named after his father, together with his wife, a sister of his friend Agamemnon (Paus. 2,29,4). He was the father of — Pylades [1] (Eur. Or. 1402; Ov. Pont. 2,6,25) and Astydameia. Before Agamemnon’s murder, Clytaemnestra (or Electra) entrusted Orestes to S. (Aesch. Ag. 880 f.; Hyg. Fab. 117), who brought him up. According to the divergent account of Dictys (6,3), > Orestes [1] went to S. with men gathered at Athens to obtain S.’ participation in the campaign against Mycenae.

Struggle of the Orders. Modern term for the confrontation between the patricians (— patricii) and plebeians (— plebs) at Rome, which began in 494 foundation of the people’s tribunate and BC with the recognition of the decisions (+ plebiscitum) as generally binding laws

BC with the ended in 287 of the plebs (- lex, leges)

(but s. [1], who puts the end only as late as 2147/6). Only

the relatively homogenous patriciate should here be understood as an ‘order’. The plebs was highly fragmented both socially and economically, and moreover the plebeian > clientes of the patricians were not able to co-operate with those plebeians who were unconstrained by clientship. Because the plebs tended to use the weapon of withdrawing military service to exert pressure in the course of this ‘struggle’, which never became a civil war, the demonstration of military potency became a decisive element for both sides in the internal political conflict. Hence, the end result of the Roman SO was not only the accommodation between the ‘orders’, but also the domination of Italy, and a new performance ethic, primarily defined in military terms, for the new elite, which was composed of both patricians and plebeians (> nobiles). This became a precondition for Roman expansion in the Mediterranean region. It is also improbable that the various aims of the plebs arose simultaneously. The poor hoped for the relief of debts and the abolition of debt-bondage (> nexum; — debt, debt redemption). Those of moderate means who qualified for military service sought political co-determination. The wealthy aspired to admission to governance. Overall, the plebs strove for a recognition as citizens with political rights which they had already enjoyed during the Monarchy (Servius > Tullius) and which the patricians now denied them. They thus pursued a collective concept of commonwealth. To this, the ‘federative’ concept of the patricians was in opposition. They isolated themselves from the plebs (ban on marriage), even seeking to preserve the independence of the individual gentes [2. 25-27; 3. 143169].

STRUGGLE

OF THE ORDERS

The two sides formed up in the first phase (494-450). The plebs made use of the Latin threat. In 494, by withdrawing their men who were fit for military service to the Aventine (> Latini D; > Mons Aventinus) or to the ‘sacred mount’ (mons sacer,

888

887

> secessio; Liv. 2,32,2-4),

they exacted the toleration of their own institutions, viz. the two people’s tribunes (— tribunus plebis), who were sacrosanct (> sacrosanctus) and legally empowered (— intercessio) by sworn covenant. After the peace with the Latini of 493 BC (> Cassius [I 19]), which relieved the pressure on the patricians, the plebs further reinforced their organization (10 people’s tribunes; sacral centre in the Temple of > Ceres; temple cared for and market supervised by two plebeian > aediles). It was probably only following a failed attempt to do without the military potential of the plebs (> Fabius {1 37]: Cremera) that the patricians formed up, probably using the Senate as an organ of consent and control (cf. [3.171 f.]), perhaps also introducing the double consulship at its head [2. 28 f.], and, in 450, attempting by the publication of the Laws of the Twelve Tables (> tabulae duodecim) to tie the plebs to established law in order to bring an end to the arrogated ius auxilii of the people’s tribunes [4. 119]. The second phase of the SO (449-c. 390) again began with a military ‘strike’ in 449 (2nd secessio; Liv. 3,55; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 11,15), which again led to the recognition of the people’s tribunate. The ban on marriage was then abolished (445; > Canuleius [1]), and the plebeians were admitted to a new rank of military command (444, > tribunus militum consulari potestate; first used by the plebs in 4oo: Liv. 5,12,9). With the office of the censor, created in 443, the patricians controlled access to the popular assembly, in which plebeians were to be found from 450 at the latest (Lex XII tab. 9,1-2: comitiatus maximus). As the military pressure from the aggressive mountain tribes (— Aequi, — Volsci) was mostly a burden on eastern and southern Latium, the SO lost impetus (supposed election of a plebeian quaestor in 409; Liv. 4,54,6). Rome could devote herself to westward and northward expansion (429: Fidenae, 406-396: war against Veii), almost doubling her territory and, by new settlement including by the plebs (e.g. at Veii), diminishing social tensions. The third phase (c. 390-287) began with the conquest of Rome by the Gauls (> Brennus [1]) and the consequent weakening of Rome in Latium. The great economic and military efforts of both sides in securing the city (construction of the walls) and regaining primacy in Latium led to greater demands from the plebs and, finally, in 366, to the admission of one plebeian to the double consulship (leges Liciniae Sextiae; — Licinius [I 43]; Liv. 6,35,4 f.). The simultaneous (and compensatory?) creation of the offices of the > praetor and two curule > aediles reserved for the patricians could not prevent the advance of plebeian families into positions of political and sacral power (> magister equitum from 368; — dictator 356; — censor 3513 praetor 336; + augures und > pontifices 300; > Ogulnius [1]). The

demands for economic and personal protection so prominent in ancient tradition were the last to be fulfilled. Debt-bondage was abolished in 326 or 313 (> Poetelius [3]); affirmation of right of + provocatio in 300 (M. > Valerius Maximus Corvus). The final establishment of equivalence between the — plebiscita and the leges (—> lex) in the lex Hortensia (287, > Hortensius [4]) entailed no risk to the new elite of patrician and plebeian nobiles, because the coherence of this new aristocracy proved greater than that of the plebs, which split into a wealthy stratum eligible for office and a remainder of more limited means. Plebs became the term denoting the impoverished portion of the Roman people, the wishes and expectations of which could now, however, be used by patrician and plebeian nobiles in internal political competition for position (+ Flaminius [r]). + Roma I D; > Social conflicts; > Tribunus 1 J. v. UNGERN-STERNBERG, The End of the Conflict of the Orders, in: K. RAAFLAUB, M. TOHER (ed.), Social Struggles in Archaic Rome, 1986, 353-377 2 W.EpeErR, Der Birger und sein Staat, in: EDER, Staat, 12-32 3 B. LINKE, Von der Verwandtschaft zum Staat, 1995 4 W.EDER,

Zwischen Monarchie und Republik: Das Volkstribunat in der friihen rémischen

Republik,

in: F.GaBRIELI

(ed.),

Bilancio critico su Roma arcaica fra Monarchia e Repubblica, 1993, 97-127. J. BLEICKEN, Geschichte der romischen Republik, 51999, 16-31, 121-134; 1. J.CORNELL, The Beginnings of Rome, 1995, 242-344; K.J. HOLKEsKamp, Die Entstehung der Nobilitat, 1987. W.ED.

Struthas

(Zteo0vGac/Strouthas;

Top,

Nr.

1173:

Lteovon¢/Strousés). Persian satrap in Ionia [1.216], in-

stalled by Artaxerxes [2] II in 391 BC in place of > Tiribazus. He was supposed to introduce anti-Spartan politics, immediately approached Athens and defeated the army of > Thibron, whom Sparta had dispatched to Asia Minor and who had gained control over the Plain of Maeander from Ephesus after his arrival but then acted carelessly and fell in the battle against S. (Xen. Hell. 4,8,17—19; Diod. Sic. 14,99,1-3). 1 A. HORNBLOWER, in: CAH VI, *1994.

K.-W.W.

Strychnos (Greek 6/f otevyvoc/strychnos, Latin solanum and strumus). Various species of the nightshade family (Solanaceae). They comprise (1) the edible vegetable plants (=%5aSusoc/edddimos; f\uegoc/hemeros = ‘tame, cultivated’, xnmoloc/képaios = ‘belonging to the garden’) and those used as medicinal herbs (e.g. externally for itching, Plin. HN 26,120), such as Black Nightshade (Solanum nigrum; Theophr. Hist. pl. 3,18,11; 7,7,2 and 7,15,4; Dioscorides 4,70 WELLMANN = 4,71 BERENDES; Plin. HN 27,132) and its varieties (including the tomato, which was first introduced into Europe in the 16th cent.); and (2) the species with narcotic effect. The latter, in strongish doses, can cause madness and death (Theophr. ibidem 7,15,4 and

STUPRUM

889

890

9,11,5). According to Dioscorides they can be classified as Chinese Lantern (Physalis alkegengi; 4,71 WELLMANN = 4,71-72 BERENDES), Deadly Nightshade (Atropa belladonna; 4,73 WELLMANN = 4,74 BERENpbES; Theophr. Hist. pl. 9,2,6) and Jimson Weed

with brittle stone, and also both in marble sculpture and in marble architecture as an ideal material for repairing (patching) the results of mis-strikes. Inside buildings, stucco could be moulded into all kinds of shapes for sculptural wall decoration (‘ashlar style’), esp. from the Hellenistic period on; this decorative technique achieved its greatest extension in the 2nd cent. AD.

(Datura stramonium;

Dioscorides loc. cit.; Theophr.

loc. cit., cf. Plin. HN 21,177-179). A. STEIER, s. v. S., RE 4 A, 385-390.

C.HU.

Strymon (=tevpwv; Strymon). Thracian-Macedonian river, which rises in the > Scombrus mountains (Hdt. 8,115), flows through the settlement areas of the Maedi, the Agrianes, the Laeii, the Sinti, the Bisaltae and the Odomanti (Thuc. 2,96,3; Str. 7,7,4), then

through the — Prasias Limne and, after 408 km, into the + Aegean Sea to the west of Eion, modern Struma. The S. was navigable in its lower reaches. Xerxes had a bridge built over the S. at Ennea Hodoi (later Amphipolis) in 481 BC (Hdt. 7,24-25,1). Before Philippus [4] II, the S. formed the border between Thrace and Macedon (Str. 7 fr. 4; 3.4; 36f.). MULLER, 104-106.

Stucco, Pargetting I. ANCIENT NEAR East II]. CARTHAGE

II. CLAssicaL ANTIQUITY

I. ANCIENT NEAR East Mouldable, quickly hardening material of gypsum, lime, sand and water, occasionally with stone powder, which was used in many places (in Egypt from the Old Kingdom onwards, c. 2700-2190 BC) to smooth walls and as a base for painting. Figurines, vases and moulds for casting metal were also made from stucco. From the Parthian period onwards (1st cent. BC), figured or geometric stucco reliefs covering long walls are attested. They were modelled by hand or using templates; in the Sassanid and early Islamic periods they were also carved. R.Fucus, s.v. Stuck, LA 6, 1986, 87-92; J.KROGER, Sasanidischer Stuckdekor, 1982.

HIN.

II. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

For as early as the Mycenaean period (stucco reliefs from Cnossos), there is evidence of the use of a mixture of sand, stone powder, water and various binders,

which can easily be shaped and coloured while it is moist and which later cures. Stucco was used by the Etruscans and later the Romans as a preferred base for painting (— Fresco; — Painting; > Wall paintings). In architecture stucco can be found in Classical Antiquity from the Archaic period onwards as a smoothing and later mostly coloured coating (> Polychromy) for buildings with porous stone. Stucco was frequently applied in > sculpture for smoothing the surface, as a material for amendments, particularly when working

N.BLAnc, Les stucateurs romains, in: MEFRA

95, 1983,

859-907; C.BLUMEL, Stuckfrisuren an K6pfen griechischen Skulpturen des 6. und 5. Jahrhunderts v. Chr., in: AA 1968, 11-24; A. LarDLaw, The First Style in Pompeii. Painting and Architecture, 1985; R. Line, Gli Stucchi, in: F. Zevi (ed.), Pompei 79. Raccolta di studi per il decimonono centenario dell’ eruzione vesuviana, 1979, 145-160; H.Mietscu, Romische Stuckreliefs (MDAI(R), supplement no. 21), 1975; W. MULLER-WIENER, Griechisches Bauwesen in der Antike, 1988, Index s. v. Stuck; U. RIE-

MENSCHNEIDER, Pompejanische Stuckgesimse des Dritten und Vierten

Stils, 1986;

R.-B.

WaRTKE,

Hellenistische

Stuckdekorationen aus Priene, in: Forschungen und Berichte. Staatliche Museen zu Berlin 18, 1977, 21-58. C.HO.

Ill. CARTHAGE The elaborate stucco technique of > Carthage, as admired by Diod. 20,8, derives from the fact that the indigenous soft and porous building material always needed to be protected against erosion by plastering. The stucco cladding was white if limestone or marble powder was added, which is first attested on the walls of the Sanctuary of Tanit under the decumanus maximus in Carthage (end of 5th cent. BC), and after that in living quarters of the 3rd/znd cents. BC, with rich ornamentation. The ‘Chapelle Carton’ (znd cent. BC) had sculpted stucco cladding of the highest quality. The Greek or Hellenistic models are evident. N. FERCHIOU, Deux témoignages de l’architecture religieuse et funéraire de la Carthage hellénistique, in: Rivista di Studi Fenici 15, 1987, 15-45; A.LarpLaw, Report on Punic Plaster, in: F.Rakos (ed.), Karthago 2. Die deutschen Ausgrabungen in Karthago, 1997, 215-228; S. LAN-

CEL, Carthage, 1992, 336-340.

H.GN.

Stuprum. A sexual offence punishable in Roman law. Originally stuprum was synonymous with turpitudo (‘violation of morals’), later restricted to a sexual relationship between a man and a free, respectable and unmarried (thereby legally distinguished from ~ adulterium, ‘adultery’, Mod. Dig. 48,5,35) woman. Violence may (then a > crimen vis, crime of violence), but in no way has to be connected with stuprum. Prosecuting it in the Roman Republic is obscure (perhaps lynching; iudicium domesticum (‘domestic trial’); indictment through an aedile in the comitium; unknown laws?). There is no certain evidence of a criminal-law standard until the lex Iulia de adulteriis of Augustus (‘Julian law of adultery’: confiscation of half the wealth of the offender, for humiliores (+ Honestiores) — relegatio (‘banishment’) and corporal punishment, Just. Epit. 4,18,4). It requires, how-

STUPRUM

892

891

ever, wilful (sciens dolo malo) performance of the deed (Ulp. Dig. 48,5,13). An attempt is, under certain circumstances, merely a tort (> Iniuria). Later qualification (e.g. guardian with ward, pre-pubic girl: virgo

nondum vir potens) with increased penalty. In a narrower sense stuprum means — paederasty (stuprum cum masculo): from the lex Scatinia (Scanti-

nia?), c. 149 BC, onwards punished with a fine and under the Christian emperors with the death penalty. — Sexuality I. PFAFF, s. v. S., RE 4 A, 423 f.; G. RIZZELLI, ‘S.’ e ‘adulterium’ nella cultura augustea e la ‘lex Iulia de adulteriis’, in: Bullettino dell’Istituto di diritto romano 90, 1987, 355-388; E. CANTARELLA, Etica sessuale e diritto. L’omosessualita maschile a Roma, in: Rechtshistorisches Journal 6, 1987, 263-292; Ead., Secondo natura. La bisessualita nel mondo antico, 1988. A.VO.

Sturgeons. In Antiquity — as it still is —- the ancient Chondrostei family was represented by the Common Sturgeon (Acipenser sturio L.) and the smaller Sterlet (Acipenser ruthenus L.). The latter is described by +» Apion and —> Archestratus [2] (in Ath. 7,294e-f) as an dxxintyouoc/akkipesios (Latin acupenserlaccipenser)

and identified with the £\(h)oy/él(l)ops (etymology still unclear: [1. 1,500], cf. schol. Theoc. Syrinx 18; Plut.

Mor. 728e; Ath. 7,308c) and the yadedc/galeds (cf. Varro Rust. 2,6,2; elsewhere always meaning > shark). Dorion (in Ath. 7,282) and Plut. Mor. 981d attempted

other explanations. Catches of the expensive and delicious fish (Plin. HN. 9,60: piscium nobilissimus, cf. Lucil. 1240 M.) was celebrated by Roman fishermen, serving slaves and guests invited to a festive meal with music and festal wreaths (Archestratus in Ath. 7,29 4e-f; Macrob. Sat. 3,16,7; similarly by the Pamphylians: Plut. loc.cit. and Ael. NA 8,28). Its price was very high (according to Archestratus in Ath. 7,294f at least 1,000 Attic drachmai, cf. e.g. Epicharmus CGF 71 and Varro Sat. Men. 549 BUECHELER). Pliny (HN 9,60), in contrast, claims that in his time, despite its scarcity sturgeon had gone out of fashion. Stewing in vinegar and oil is considered by Timocles (in Ath. 7,29 5b) to be the best way of preparing it. The seas around Sicily and Asia Minor (e.g. Rhodes, Varro Rust. 2,6,2) were the best fishing grounds for this sea fish, which spawns in rivers. Little was known zoologically about sturgeon. Aristotle (Hist. an. 2,13,505a 14 f. and 2,15,506b 15 f.) describes only the four simple gills and the location of the gallbladder next to the intestines. The characteristic five rows of bony plates are erroneously called by Nigidius Figulus in Macrob. Sat. 3,16,7 squamae adversae (‘counter-scales’). The only type of coin showing a common sturgeon known is from the Black Sea [2. pl.

6,43]. 1 FRIsK 2 F.IMHOOF-BLUMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972).

KELLER 2,374 f.; DDARcy W. THompson, A Glossary of Greek Fishes, 1947, 42 and 62 f.; O. KELLER, s. v. Pahedc, RE 7, 594-597. C.HU.

Style, stylistic figures I. GENERAL DEFINITION [J]. A PERSONAL PHENOMENON III. RHETORICAL ELEMENT (STYLISTIC FIGURES)

I. GENERAL DEFINITION Style (from Lat. stilus, ‘stilt’ > ‘stylus’ > ‘writing style’; Gk. AéEuc/léxis) refers to the individual manner in

which a person expresses himself orally or in writing. Its specific character is formed through the (more or less intentional) use of shaping elements such as stylistic figures during the process of turning thought concepts into language with the conscious or subconscious purpose of achieving certain situational effects. According to the Greek theory of — rhetoric, style is supposed to be governed by the type of oration to be given (forensic oration, political oration, occasional or festival orations; > genera causarum). In written wording, the con-

tent of the text and the target audience play a role. II.

A PERSONAL PHENOMENON A speaker’s or author’s particular use of language is always characterized by a highly specific number of phenomena on a variety of levels. A characteristic trait might be the frequent appearance of certain elements, or the partial or at times even complete lack thereof. Thus, the style of > Sallustius [II 3] with his terse, incongruous and abrupt sentences is a clear and conscious departure from > Cicero’s well-honed periods. The following characteristics can be typical for individual ways of formulating: the design of the sentence length (short paratactic sentences or periods with extensive hypotaxis) or of units of meaning (perhaps through ring composition), a preference for certain types of sentences (e.g. relative clauses), a preference for noun phrases (such as verb-abstractions instead of verbs), the clustering or avoidance of attributes, the trend towards archaic language (in the choice of words or grammatical forms), taking pleasure in creating neologisms, poetic expressions (esp. outside of poetry) or in rhythmic and resonant expressions (> Prose rhythm), the type of the vocabulary used (+ Technical terminology with its special terms or a more general vocabulary) and the representation (linear, continuous structure or breaks

through insertions such as > speech or digressions). III. RHETORICAL ELEMENT (STYLISTIC FIGURES)

From a rhetorical point of view, style refers to the well-measured use of certain linguistic means that deviate from conventional language use. These phenomena are usually elements that since Antiquity have been divided into + tropes and > figures and have been referred to by the corresponding Greek or Latin technical terms. The number and combination of these linguistic means used by a particular speaker or author is an important criterion of personal style. Trope (Lat. tropus < Gk. tedmoc/trépos, ‘turn’, ‘direction’) refers to words or phrases that provide an improper designation, that is, they are used not in their

STYLUS

893

894

actual sense but in a figurative sense, sometimes as imagery (cf. Quint. Inst. 8,6,1: “todsoc est verbi vel sermonis a propria significatione in aliam cum virtute mutatio”). There is a distinction between 1) tropes of transgression, in which the content of the substitution is related to that of the replaced element, and where the shift can take place a) within or b) outside of the level of the word’s semantic content, and 2) tropes of semantic leaps, in which the substitution and the replaced element are not directly contiguous in meaning, so that the conceptual connection between the two elements requires the bridging of a certain gap [5.8-21]. Figures (Lat. figura, Gk. oyfwa/schéma) refer to the collection of deliberately created, sometimes artificial forms of expression that are deliberately different from dominant language use (cf. Quint. Inst. 9,1,14: “ergo figura sit arte aliqua novata forma dicendi”). Ancient rhetoric differentiated between figures of expression or word figures (Lat. figurae verborum or figurae elocutionis, Quint. Inst. 9,3,1-102) on the one hand, and figures of thought or meaning (Lat. figurae sententia-

step of the krepis as a whole). The stylobate was a central objective in planning temples (— Building trade). In an archaic Doric temple it is mostly in the (usually very elongated) stylobate that one of the leading proportions of the structure can be found, and this shows the significance of this area as an essential point of departure for the building concept; attempts, which can be seen from the late Archaic Period onwards, to achieve equal

rum, Quint. Inst. 9,2,1-107) on the other hand. The

first group manifests itself in a renunciation of the normal ways of expression, while the second applies to the structure and the development of thoughts. ~ Figures; > Rhetoric; + Tropes 1 F.CuparuoLo, Bibliografia della lingua latina (19491991), 1993, 356-442

2 HOFMANN/SZANTYR,

XLIX—

XCVIT 3 W.G. MUtier, Topik des Stilbegriffs. Zur Geschichte des Stil-Verstandnisses von der Antike bis zur Gegenwart, 1981

4 NORDEN, Kunstprosa

5 J. RICHTER-

REICHHELM, Compendium scholare troporum et figurarum. Schmuckformen literarischer Rhetorik, 1988 6 SCHANZ/Hostus (see the individual Latin authors) 7 SCHMID/STAHLIN I/II (see the individual Greek authors).

RP. Stylites. A special form of Christian asceticism common esp. in > Syria, characterised by the ascetic’s permanent abode on the top of a column (otviitye/ stylités, ‘column-stander’ of 6 otddoc/ho st¥los, ‘column’). A connection to non-Christian forms (cf. the daddofatavphallobatai in Lucian Syr. D. 28 f.) seems unlikely (differently [1]). The initiator and most important representative is > Simeon the Elder (d. in AD 459) whose column became a destination for pilgrims. Other stylites of renown were the Simeon the Younger, Daniel, Alypius of Adrianopolis, Lazarus and Lucas. 1D.T.

M. FRANKFURTER,

Stylites and Phallobates, in:

Vigiliae Christianae 44, 1990, 168-198 Les stylites syriens, 1975.

21.PENAetal., JRL.

Stylobate (otvAoBatn¢/stylobatés, Lat. stylobates). Ancient term belonging to construction technique [1]; in Greek buildings with columns, the term for the surface of the uppermost step of the > krepis [1] or the individual slabs of it on which the columns stand (not, as is commonly and mistakenly assumed, the uppermost

intercolumniations (+ Spacing, interaxial) all around

the building make the proportion and dimension of the stylobate increasingly secondary factors (a late exception is the Periclean > Parthenon on the Athenian Acropolis; leading proportion of the stylobate = 4:9). In classical temple construction, as a rule, there is a logical connection between the rectangle of the stylobate, in the sense of a > proportion, with the rectangles of the axis span (an imagined line joining the centres of the four corner columns) and the dimensions of the cella (e.g. in the temple of Concordia at Acragas: 3:7, 2:5, 1:3). The rest of the ground-plan is often specified by means of tracing on the stylobate (— Tracing (in full size); Olympia, temple of Zeus; Athens, Propylaea of Mnesicles).

Furthermore,

in the Doric order (— Co-

lumn) the stylobate was often an object of > optical refinements (— Curvature). 1 EBERT, 9, 11 (with epigraphic evidence).

J.J. CoULTON, Towards Understanding Doric Design: The Stylobate and Intercolumnations, in: Papers of the British School at Athens 69, 1974, 61-86; CH. H6ckeEr, Planung und Konzeption der klassischen Ringhallentempel von

Agrigent, 1993,

129-132.

C.HO.

Stylus (yeadic/graphis, yoadetov/grapheion; Latin stilus, graphium). [1] Tool for drawing, also called a drawing- (or ruling)pen, see > Construction technique, — Building trade. [2] Implement for writing on a wooden tablet covered with wax (> Cera). The pointed (lower) end of a stylus was used to engrave the text to be written on the tablet and, by inverting it, the flat (upper) end could be used to correct mistakes by re-smoothing the wax (stilum ver-

tere, e.g. Hor. Sat. 1,10,72). Representations on Greek (e.g. bowl, Berlin, SM Inv. F 2285 [1]) and Roman monuments [2] illustrate writing with a stylus (while

standing or sitting). Numerous Etruscan, Greek and Roman examples in bronze, brass, iron, bone and ivory

have survived. Stili were kept in a graphiaria theca (SraPeny suctm @laidansiscemctm Marta we4s2n-s((aamcom Thessaloniki, Mus. Inv. 7437 from Vergina, also an inkwell; 4. 221-225 fig. 1-6]). C. Iulius Caesar defended himself with such a pointed dagger-like object, without success, against his assassins (Suet. Iul. 82,2); to prevent the potential use of a stylus as a weapon, the emperor Claudius forbade anybody to approach him with calamariae aut graphiariae thecae (Suet. Claud. 35,2). — Writing materials 1 D. Burrron-OLiver, Douris, 1995, plate 59 2 H. EscHEBACH, Pompeji, 1978, fig. 193/194

895

896

3 J.VoKOTOPOULOU, Fuhrer durch das Archeologisches Museum Thessaloniki, 1996 4D.v. BOESELAGER,

sanctuary of Athena, the fortification works and the lower town.

STYLUS

Funde und Darstellungen rémischer Schreibzeugfutterale, in: K6lner Jahrbuch fir Vor- und Frihgeschichte 22, 1989, 221-239.

On [1]: H. BANKEL, Griechische Bleistifte, in: AA, 1984, 409-411; H. DRESCHER, ROmisches Schreibgerat aus dem Hafen von Ostia Antica, in: Arch. Korrespondenzblatt 18, 1988, 285-289

On [2]: H. BLanck, Das Buch in der Antike, 1992, 64-71; A.L. BOEGEHOLD, The Lawcourts at Athens. The Athenian Agora 28, 1995, 240 plate 20. R.H.

Stymphalian birds. According to Apollod. 2,5 the sixth (and hence the last to be carried out in the Peloponnese) of the labours imposed on > Heracles [1] by

+ Eurystheus: combatting the birds that make their homes in the forests on Lake > Stymphalus in Arcadia, destroy the crops there and fire their brass feathers at the people and animals. Heracles gets rid of them by using a bronze clapper, a gift from Athena made by ~» Hephaestus, to scare the birds into flight in order to shoot them with his arrows.

IPArk, no.17, 158-251; H.Katcyx, B. Hernricu, Antiker Wasserbau, Antike Welt 17, 1986 (2nd supplement); J. Knauss, Der Graben des Herakles im Becken von Pheneos

..., in: MDAI(A)

tos,

1990,

1-52;

H. WILLIAMS,

Excavations at Stymphalos, in: Echos du monde classique 39, 1995, I-22; 40, 1996, 75-98; Id., Excavations at Ancient Stymphalos, in: Ibid. 41, 1997, 23-73; 42, 1998,

261-319; S. LAUFFER, s. v. Stymphalia, in: LAUFFER, Griechenland, 639.

Styppax. Bronze sculptor from Cyprus in the 5th century BC. He was famous for his statue of a splanchnoptes (Plin. HN 34,19,81), a slave who blows on the fire to roast the entrails at a sacrifice. It was erected on the orders of — Pericles [x] as a votive offering after his slave was injured during the building of a temple and miraculously healed. The work does not survive. OveERBECK, Nr. 868-869; 1966, 535-536.

P. MORENO,

s. v. S., EAA

7, RN.

swampy lake occasionally dried out by infiltration into the soil. Communication routes led to Pheneus in the west, Phlius in the east and Alea [3] and Orchomenus [3] in the south; in the north, the Cyllene [1] mountains formed a barrier (2376 m elevation). Whereas there may have been an earlier settlement southwest of the lake (Paus. 8,22,1), the 4th cent. BC city was located on a rock spur on the northern shore of the lake. Heracles is supposed to have completed his sixth labour there

Styra (Ztve0/Styra). Port in the southwest of Euboea [x], 4 km to the west of modern S. facing the island of Aegilia, probably founded by Dryopes (Hom. Il. 2,539; Hdt. 8,46; Paus. 4,3 4,11). S. capitulated to the Persians in 490 BC, fought at Salamis [1] on the Greek side in 480 BC (Hdt. 8,1; 8,46; 9,28; Paus. 5,23,2) and was a member of the > Delian League (cf. ATL 1, 414 f.). Partially destroyed by Athens in the —~ Lamian War in 323/2 BC (Str. 10,1,6), in the 3rd century BC S. belonged to Eretria [1]. In the Roman period S. was famous for its > marble (quarries at Hagios Nikolaos, at the site of the ‘dragon houses’, ancient workers’ accommodation). Remains of the city wall and the harbour survive; lead tablets were found there with names (5th

(> Stymphalian

cent. BC): IG XII 9, 52-71.

Stymphalus Stymphélos).

(ZtWydarod/Stymphalos, —=rbudndoc/ City in northeastern Arcadia on the

northern edge of a karst basin (590 m elevation) with no outlet, the majority of which is occupied by a

birds; Apollod.

2,5;

6,92 f.). S. is

known from the period before the 4th cent. BC for the Olympic champion Dromeus (Paus. 6,7,10) and the mercenary leader Sophaenetus (Xen. An. 1,1,113 5,3,1).

PHILIPPSON/KIRSTEN I, 625; E. FREUND,sS. v. S., in: LAUF-

FER, Griechenland, 640; MULLER, 423 f.

AKU.

Being a Spartan gateway to Corinth and the Argolid, S. was an important strategic point. No later than 366 BC (Aeneas from S. strategos of the League: Xen. Hell. 7,3,1), S. was a member of the Arcadian League (— Ar-

cadians, Arcadia, with map). In 315 S., allied with Polyperchon [1], was captured by - Cassander’s strategos Apollonides (Diod. Sic. 19,63,1); after that it was a

member of the Achaean League, and also in the war against Cleomenes [6] III (Pol. 2,55,8). A treaty of legal assistance between Demetrias [1] (not Aegira; but cf. StV 3.no. 567) and S., which survives in an inscription, can be dated to about 300 BC. It was at S. that Philippus [7] V was victorious over troops from Elis in the winter of 219 BC (Pol. 4,67,9 ff.; > Social Wars [2]). In AD 125, Hadrian had an aqueduct built from S. to Corinth (remains survive). Excavations have uncovered necro-

poleis, a well-house, a sanctuary, walls on the acropolis

and parts ofthe city; recent scholarship has focused ona

Styrax (Greek f} owweak/hé styrax, e.g. Theophr. Hist. pl. 9,7,3: the styrax tree or shrub; 10 otveak/to styrax,

Latin styrax or later storax: the balsamic resin extracted from it is called Styrax officinalis). The fragrant resin was much in demand in Rome in the Imperial Period, and because of its high price, it was often adulterated (including with cedar resin, honey or bitter almonds, Plin. HN 12,125). It was imported (at the time of Hdt. 3,107 with the help of the Phoenicians) from Syria and Asia minor (e.g. Cilicia), rolled in leaves of reeds (hence the earlier name Storax calamitus) or palms, in Plin. HN 12,81 even in goatskins. However, the shrub also grew in Greece, e.g. near > Haliartus (Plut. Lysandros 28,7). The drug was used in cults as incense and for making perfume. According to Hdt. ibid. (cf. Plin. HN 10,195 and 12,81), the Arabs used styrax smoke to fend off the small winged snakes that plagued them when

SUASORIAE

897

898

extracting incense. Plin. HN 12,124 describes the tree as similar to the quince. Combined with the cistus resin labdanum, styrax resin was supposed to be a remedy for persistent coughing (Plin. HN 26,48), certain poisons, scrofula and, internally, inflammation of the throat and chest (Plin. ibid. 24,24; cf. Dioscurides 1,66 WELLMANN = 1,79 BERENDES). The tree [1 pl. 10,15 and 18] and the leaves [1 pl. 10,16-17] are sometimes depicted on coins.

the Etruscan settlement which belongs to > Volci/Vulci territory, it lies on a steep-sided tuff outcrop at the confluence of two water courses. Excavations by the University of Pisa and surveys by the Tuscan Monument Authority have mainly studied the necropoleis. Two periods of prosperity have been identified, the 7th and early 6th cents., and the late 3rd and 2nd cents. BC. Numerous Hellenistic rock tombs were hewn into the escarpments facing the city, so-called ‘cube’, ‘aedicula’ and ‘porticus’ tombs, the latter with tympana, and ‘temple’ tombs. The cube tombs resemble those of ~ Castel d’Asso and > Norchia. The largest sites are the aedicula tomb Tomba della Sirena and the temple tombs Tomba Pola and Tomba IIdebranda. + Funerary architecture III. C.

1 F.IMHOOF-BLUMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972).

A. STEIER, s. v. Stylax, RE 4 A, 64-67; V.HEHN, Kulturpflanzen und Haustiere (ed. O.SCHRADER), ®r9r1 (repr. 1963), 428 f., 431; A.SCHMIDT, Drogen und Drogenhandel im Altertum, 1924 (repr. 1979), 122. C.HU.

Styx (2wé/Styx). From Homer (Hom. Il. 2,755; 14,2713; 15,36-38 et passim), who exclusively uses the phrase Xtvyos tdwe/Stygos hyddr (‘Water of Horror’), onwards a river (in Pl. Phd. 1130: lake) in the > Under-

world and besides + Gaia and — Uranus the most important of the gods’ witnesses to oaths. It appears for the first time in Hes. Theog. 361; 383-403; 775-806 as a mythical figure. The S. is the earliest of the > Oceanids and the mother with Pallas of > Zelus, > Nike, Cratus and — Bia and, according to Epimenides (FGrH 457 F 5), with Peiras [1] of > Echidna. As a reward for her support in a battle with the > Titans she is elevated by Zeus to the most powerful divine oath (cf. Apoll. Rhod. 2,291 f.; Apollod. 1,8 f. and 1,13, where S. is the mother with Zeus of + Persephone; Verg. Aen. 6,323 f.; 6,439; 12,816 f.; Ov. Met. 3,290 f.). This mythological idea may be traceable [2.460-462] to an approximately 200-m-high waterfall (modern Mavronéri, ‘black water’; on the black coloration cf. Ptol. Chennos in Phot. Bibl. cod. 190, 148a BEKKER, |. 14-19) on the northern slopes of Chelmus/Helmus (— Aroania ore) mountains near — Nonacris [1] in Arcadia (Hdt. 6,74; Str. 5,4,53 8,8,4; Paus. 8,17,6-18,6; 8,19,3). Because of their icy coldness its waters were considered deadly to humans and animals and, according to legend, could be transported only in vessels made from the hooves or horns of animals. It was with this poison that > Alexander [4] the Great, too, is supposed to have been killed (Theophr. fr. 160 WIMMER; Callim. fr. 413; Plut. Mor. 954c-d; Plut. Alexandros 77,707a-b; Ael. NA 10,40; Vitrs De arch. 83,16; Plin. IN 2,235; 30,149; 31,26 f.). + Acheron [2]; + Cocytus [1]; > Phlegeton [2] 1 E. BETHE, s.v. S. (3), RE 4A, 464f. 2F.BOLTE, s.v. S. (1), RE 4 A, 457-463 3 ¥F.Gutupice, s.v. S., LIMC 7.1, 818-820 (with bibliogr.). SLA.

Suana/Sovana. The now almost entirely abandoned episcopal city of S. near Pitigliano, to the west of Lake Bolsena, was called Suana in the Roman period. Like

R.BIANCHI BANDINELLI, S. Topografia ed Arte, 1929; A.MacGIANI, s. v. S., EAA 2. Suppl. 1971-1994, vol. 5, 1997, 332 f.; R. VATTI, S. Pitigliano-Sorano, 1979. MM.

Suarii. In Late Antiquity, the population of the city of Rome was supplied by central administration not only with > grain, but also with pork (> Meat, consumption of) and > wine. The suarii, on whose estates or lands the functio suaria was imposed and who formed a corporation (— collegia, corpora), accordingly had the duty of bringing the pigs provided as tax in kind from southern Italy to Rome (Cod. Theod. 14,4,1, AD 334). The landowners had the option of providing pigs or paying a sum of money (adaeratio); in the latter case the suarii had to buy the necessary animals in Rome (Cod. Theod. 14,4,2). Risks incurred by death, loss of weight and transport costs remained the responsibility of the suarit. The determination of the exact weight on delivery, the question of the substitute price (price on the spot or in Rome) and the liability were organized so unfavourably for the suarii that the corporation’s continued existence was constantly under threat (Cod. Theod. 14,4,1). Neither did state compensation payments (Cod. Theod. 14,4,3; CIL 6,1771) offer a remedy, until Aétius [2] allowed the provinces charged with providing the animals to replace the provision in kind with a money payment and let the suarii choose where they acquired the animals (Nov. Valentiniani 36; AD 452). The annona of Rome (> cura annonae) therefore received from October to February around 1000 tonnes of meat for free distribution to 120,000 recipients (in 5 months a total of c. 8 kg per recipient). 1S.J. B. BarNisH, Pigs, Plebeians and Potentes. Rome’s Economic Hinterland c. 350-600 A.D., in: PBSR 55, 1987, 157-185 2 P.HeRz, Studien zur romischen Wirtschaftsgesetzgebung. Die Lebensmittelversorgung, 1988, 277-294

3 JONES, LRE, 702-704.

PH.

Suasoriae. In the schools of rhetoric during the Imperial period, exercise speeches of the genus deliberativum (cf. > genera causarum) and as such one of the two forms of ~—declamationes along with the + controversiae (genus iudiciale). The themes of the

SUASORIAE

900

899

suasoriae emerged from the progymnastic theseis (cf. + progymnasmata) by the addition of specific persons (Quint. Inst. 2,4,25): mythological or historical figures or panels placed before an important decision are advised pro or contra. The historical situations were sometimes quite freely constructed (Sen. Suas. 6,14). As the suasoriae posed lesser argumentative challenges than the controversiae (Tac. Dial. 35,4), they were sometimes even treated on the level of the

[10]; the 3rd-cent. AD > Antoninianus, coated with silver, cannot be described as a subaeratus coin. — Coins, control of; Coin counterfeit 1 E. BERNAREGGI, Nummi pelliculati, in: Riv. It. di Numismatica 67, 1965, 5-31 2 W.CAMPBELL, Greek and Roman Plated Coins, 1933

~ Exercitatio;

> Progymnasmata; - Rhetoric

1 Erasmus, Opera omnia 1.2, 1971, 135 f.

S.F. BoNNER, Roman Declamation in the Late Republic and Early Empire, 1949; L.A. SussMAN, The Elder Seneca, 1978; J. FAIRWEATHER, Seneca the Elder, 1981; J.CHOMaARAT, Grammaire et rhétorique chez Erasme, 1981; M.G. M. vAN DER PoEL, De declamatio bij de humanisten, 1987. TH.ZL.

Mitteilungen

iron cores that can be found in Noricum (modern term

‘subferratus coins’) were probably produced officially

Numismatischen

5 A.GIOVANNINI,

Gesell-

Athenian

Currency in the Late Fifth and Early Fourth Century B. C., in: GRBS 16, 1975, 185-195

P.R.FraNKe,

Antike

6H.Moksta,

Metallurgie

und

Minzpragung,

1995 7M.Perer, Eine Werkstatte zur Herstellung von subaeraten Denaren in Augusta Raurica, 1990 8 SCHROTTER, 669f., s.v.S. 9 V.ZEDELIUS, Nummi subferrati, in: Riv. It. di Numismatica 90, 1988, 125-130 10 U. Zwicker, G. DEMBskKI, Technisch-chemische Unter-

suchungen an subferraten Sesterzen, in: Mitteilungen der Osterreichischen Numismatischen Gesellschaft 28, 1988, 12-17.

GES.

Subarean. Designation of a language that is attested in Sumerian and Akkadian from the beginning of the 2nd millennium BC: Sumerian eme.su.bir,*'; Akkadian Suberii(m). It is found: 1) in a postscript to an incantation that is difficult to understand and possibly written in Hurrian [x]; 2) in a didactic text in the context of writing skills, next to Sumerian; 3) in a letter in the context of language skills, next to Akkadian and Amorite [2]; 4) in lexical — lists enumerating languages, next to Sumerian, Akkadian, Amorite, Sutaean, Elamite and Gutaean [2]. The probable identification of Subarean in 1) and the absence of Hurrian in 3) and 4) indicate that the two may be identical. ~ Hurrian 1 J.J. A. vAN Dijk, Fremdsprachige Beschworungstexte in der siidmesopotamischen literarischen Uberlieferung, in: J.RENGER

from the 6th cent. BC until the Roman Imperial period [1; 2; 6.35 f.; 93 ro]. Caps, which were struck with positive blocks into the shape of a blank made of thin gold or silver foil, were placed around an arched, lensshaped blank made of non-precious metal; then it was heated intensely and possibly solder was used. Another technique consisted in heating blanks covered with a silver foil and then minting coins, hot or cold [4. 32-3 5; 6. 106-109]. Subaeratus coins were detected by a coinchecker (dokimastés) e.g. by making an incision. It is debatable whether subaeratus coins came from state production [1] or predominantly from (private) counterfeiting shops [3; 5], such as the one discovered in Kaiseraugst in Switzerland [7]. The > sestertii with

der Bayerischen

schaft 48, 1929, 27-38

Subaeratus (Pers. 5,106, Greek txdyahnoc/hypdchalROS@aR OEE Se SGseS EG axoxo menoi76/ 74a Os bropnodupdoc/ hypomolybdos: SEG XXVI, 1976/7, 71 |. rr). Clad or plated coins of precious metal with a non-precious core of bronze, lead or iron, recorded

4 E.DarM-

STAEDTER, Subaerate Miinzen und ihre Herstellung, in:

+ grammaticus (Quint. Inst. 2,1,2; 8). Their dramatic

materials permitted a solemn but not affected style of speech (ibid. 3,8,61). In conjunction with the role-play (prosopopoeia), they were good training for prospective poets and historians (Sen. Contr. 2,2,12 on Ovid; Quint. Inst. 3,8,49). Suasoriae as a term denoting school speeches is not attested before > Seneca [1] the Elder. His Suasoriarum liber, with excerpts from the speeches of rhetors of his day on seven themes, offers the only extant Roman specimens of the genre. However, the practice of this exercise dates back at least to the Hellenistic period (cf. Aristot. Rh. 2,22,8,1396a 23-31; Philostr. VS 1,481). Complete Greek suasoriae survive from the > Second Sophistic (e.g. Lucian. Phalaris B.; Aristid. or. 52). The suasoriae came into use again in the Humanist schools (Erasmus, De ratione studii, in: [1. 135 f.]), but generally the theseis were preferred for their purely philosophical content.

3 M.H. CraAwForp, Plated

Coins — False Coins, in: NC 1968, 55-59

(ed.), Mesopotamien

1987, 97-110, esp. 98 und 102

amurritische

Onomastikon

und

seine Nachbarn,

+2 M.P. Srreck, Das

der altbabylonischen

Vol. 1, 2000, 76 f.

Subferratus see

Zeit, MS.

Subaeratus

Sublaqueum. According to Tac. Ann. 14,22,2 and Plin. HN

3,109

one of the emperor

Nero’s

(— Nero [r])

~ villas downstream from a chain of lakes created by damming the > Anio (cf. Frontin. Aq. 93). F. CAVALLIERE (ed.), Sublaqueum-Subiaco. Tra Nerone e S. Benedetto, 1995. C.HO.

Subligaculum. Men’s item of clothing to cover the abdomen (Varro, Ling. 6,21; Non. 29,17). Originally, it

was probably worn under the Roman

> toga (Non.

29,17; Isid. Orig. 19,22,5) and was later replaced by the

+ tunica. The subligar, on the other hand, is a cloth worn for special occasions, such as by actors (Juv. 6,70)

and by women in the bath (Mart. 3,87,3), or generally by labourers (Plin. HN 12,59). -» Perizoma

901

SUBSCRIPTIO

902 M.Pauscu, Neues zur Bekleidung im Mosaik der ‘BikiniMadchen’ von Piazza Armerina in Sizilien, in: Nikephoros

hypographe is attested as subscriptio at Rome in evidence documents from at least the rst cent. BC. With

9, 1996, 171-173.

the increasing use of documents (> Literacy/orality), the subscriptio also finally attained constitutive standing, i.e. the standing necessary for the desired legal consequence, in Late Antiquity. Subscriptio was also the technical term for the reply written beneath the petition of a supplicant to the Roman Emperor or, more commonly, beneath its tran-

RH.

Submissio (‘placing as alternative’) in Roman law is found as replacement acquisition in case of usufruct, in dotal law (> dos) and in the > fideicommissum. For example, if usufruct (> ususfructus) of a herd were bequeathed (on this in detail, Dig. 7,1,68-70), the usufructuary first had to replace dead or unfit animals with young from the herd. Otherwise, he was liable towards the owner. The ownership situation in the submissio was disputed. According to > Iulianus [1] and Ulpian, it was in abeyance until the submissio, while according to Pomponius the usufructuary was initially the owner. The submissio was an actual procedure with which the legal consequences of the herd owner’s property acquisition were connected. KaseEr, RPR, vol. 1, 450 Anm. 24; B. KUBLER, s. v. S. L., RE 4 A, 483; E.A. DAUBERMANN, Die Sachgesamtheit als Gegenstand des klassischen romischen Rechts, 1993, 5 5—

ae

D.SCH.

Subrius. Sex. S. Dexter. Tribune of a praetorian cohort, who in January of AD 69 made an unsuccessful attempt to keep the soldiers from revolting against > Galba [2] (Tac. Hist. 1,31,4). He is identical with the procurator et praefectus of the province of Sardinia in 74 [1.80f.]. His name appears again as cos. of 104 and procos. of Asia

in 120/121,

Sex.

S. Dexter

Cornelius

Priscus

[2nsa5 210): 1 PFLAUM, vol.1 2 W.Ecxk, Jahres- und Provinzialfasten der senatorischen Statthalter, in: Chiron 13, 1983, 147PEAT SYME, RP 7, 481; 490.

W.E.

Subscript see > Writing styles II. A. Subscriptio (‘subscription, signature’). I. ANCIENT LEGALDOCUMENTS

IJ. MANUSCRIPTS

I. ANCIENT LEGAL DOCUMENTS The ‘subscription/signature’ (Gk. txoyeadbt/hypographe, Lat. subscriptio.) is an element of ancient — documents. From the znd cent. BC onwards, private documents on papyrus in Egypt were given a signature (hypographeé). This probably not only consisted of the mark or full written name, but also contained a brief recapitulation of the most important content of the document, e.g. the admission of owing a certain amount of money. Thus the debtor indicated his awareness of the obligation assumed. However, the subscriptio did not create the transaction documented. According to modern legal terminology, it should be considered as part of a declaration of awareness (i.e. an expression of acknowledgment) rather than of will (by which a legal relationship would be formed, e.g. an obligation established to repay a loan). In this sense, the

script (> rescriptum).

Kaser, RPR, vol. 1, 232, vol. 2, 79, 479; WOLFF, 164166.

GS.

II]. MANUSCRIPTS

A. DEFINITION

B. GREEK MANUSCRIPTS

CelLAT-

IN MANUSCRIPTS

A. DEFINITION The term subscriptio (subscription or colophon) has, since Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages, denoted the note (also kolophon, lit. top, finishing, end) generally appended to > manuscripts of all kinds, giving information about the author, commissioning client, evaluation of the content, and the time and place of its composition. By indicating the identity of the scribe or purchaser of the manuscript, the closing annotation is placed in its historical context. Subscriptiones are an indispensable source for the textual history of classical and mediaeval authors, but their study is also useful for research into prosopography and cultural history. In palaeography, dated and localized codices (+ codex) define reference points in the development of > writing. In a wider sense, the term subscriptio also denotes those remarks left by a reader at the end of a text in order to call attention to an emendation carried out in the text itself (the subscriptiones surviving from Late Antiquity in recensions of classical texts are of great importance for contemporary knowledge of the transmission of ancient texts) [1]. Finally, a distinction is made between a subscriptio and the explicit (with which the former is sometimes confused), which reproduces the final words of a transmitted text [2. 145, 148].

B. GREEK MANUSCRIPTS In the 9th and xoth cents., subscriptiones were often written in + majuscule in order to differentiate them from the copied text (> display scripts). From the rth cent. onwards, cursive elements began to be used in subscriptions, a tendency which, by the 13th and r4th cents., led to extreme cases where the text script and the subscriptio were produced in digraphy (i.e. use of two different scripts by a single copyist) [3]. The monokondylion (derived from povoxdvévho0d/monokondylos, i.e. the combination of as many letters as possible in a single stroke, even across gaps between words) is attested in documents as a spine mark or a signature element in official documents. Names and official designations were written in a single stroke, observable in subscriptiones from the 13th cent. onwards.

SUBSCRIPTIO

904

903

1 O. Jann, Uber die S. in den Handschriften rém. Classi-

of the work) or, conversely, an expression of affection

ker, in: Bericht tiber die Verhandlungen der k6nigich Sachischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften 3, 1851, 327372 2/J.HaAmesse, Approche de la terminologie spécifique des scribes dans les colophons, in: E. CONDELLO,

or emotions (which might be encoded in standard phraseology or refrains, e.g. Detur pro penna scriptori pulchra puella (“Instead of the quill, let a pretty girl be given to the scribe”)) [4]. Subscriptiones, then, can contain just one of these elements or can combine them, in prose or in verse. The spectrum ranges from very simple subscriptiones to relatively long and complex formulations, e.g. those of Petrus Ursuleus, a 15th-cent. copyist (cf. Cod. Vatica-

G. DE Grecorio (ed.), Scribi e colofoni, 1995, 145-165

3 G.DE GREGORIO, Kaddvyoadetv/tayvyeadetv. Qualche riflessione sull’educazione grafica di scribi bizantini, in: Id. 423-448. E. GAMILLSCHEG, Struktur und Aussagen der S. griechischen Hanschriften, in: s. [2], 417-421; Id., S. griechischer Handschriften als historische Quelle, in: F. BERGER (ed.), Symbolae Berolinenses. Festschrift D. Harlfinger, 1993, 293-306; E.GAMILLSCHEG et al., Repertorium der griechischen Kopisten 800-1600, 3 vols. 1981-1997; Id., L.SEVCENKO, s. v. Colophon, ODB 1, 481 f. (with bibliography); H. HuNGeR, Schreiben und Lesen in Byzanz, 1989 (esp. 95-99); A.Kazpan, s. v. Monocondyle, ODB 2, 1396.

nus Lat. 167, 298, 3084).

+ CODICOLOGY 1E.A. Lowe, Codices latini antiquiores, 11 vols, 19341966 2 P.SupINo Martini, Il libro e il tempo, in: E. CONDELLO, G.DE GREGORIO (ed.), Scribi e colofoni,

1995, 3-33 3 Colophons de manuscrits occidentaux des origines au XVI siécle (ed. by the Bénédictins du Bouveret), 6 vols, 1965-1982

4 L.REYNOUTH, Pour une typo-

logie des colophons de manuscrits occidentaux, in: Ga-

C. LATIN MANUSCRIPTS The oldest surviving Latin subscriptiones date from late antiquity, i.e. from the first books which survive as codices (+ codex). Among the oldest dated subscriptiones is that of the lector Ursicinus, who completed his transcription of the Codex Veronensis XXXVIII.36 (containing Sulpicius Severus) in AD 517 [1. vol. 4, 494]. During the High Middle Ages, subscriptiones are rare, except from the Iberian peninsula, where many roth-cent. codices contain a subscriptio dated according to the calendar era [2. 6-8]. From the rrth/12th cents. onwards and up until the 15th cent., the evidence gradually becomes more plentiful. Although over time subscriptiones reached a standard format through their repetitive and rather similar formulation (according to place and region of composition), there is no

fixed, standardized structure to them. The subscriptio might consist of the name of the copyist alone [3. no. 8383], sometimes followed by an indication of origins (very rarely and only in the later period also the surname) [3. no. 2249] and social status (layman, cleric, notary, student etc.) [3. 17493]. The copyist might also omit his name in an act of humility, signalled by expressions such as indignus monachus (“an unworthy monk”), ego peccator (“I, sinner”) etc. Nor is the practice of indicating the date on which the copying of a MS was completed a constant. The forms by which the date is given vary radically according to the scribe’s era and location [2]. For instance, it might be supplemented with references to historical events (e.g. the conquest of a city) or natural occurrences (earthquakes, plagues etc.). Occasionally, the place of copying is also indicated within the subscriptio (rarely in the High Middle Ages, more often in the Late Middle Ages). The identity (or identities) of whoever commissioned the document might also appear in the subscriptio, apparently with the intention ofgiving praise [3. no. 16693]. Sometimes the subscriptio consists merely of a prayer formula (or is rounded off by one), directed towards God or the reader. It could also consist of imprecations (on the excessive duration and difficulty

zette du livre médiéval 13, 1988, 1-4.

E. CONDELLO, G.DE Grecorio (ed.), Scribi e colofoni, 1995; S.ZAMPONI, Esperienze di catalogazione di manoscritti medievali, in: G.AVARUCCI et al. (ed.), Libro, scrittura, documento della civilta monastica e conventuale nel Basso Medioevo, 1999, 471-498. E.CA.

Subsellium (840e0v/bathron). Long, narrow four-legged bench, lower than a sella, Varro Ling. 5,128 (+ Seat); usually without a back, occasionally with a rest (Suet. Iul. 84,3; Suet. Claud. 41; Suet. Nero 26,2); made from wood, marble and bronze. Subsellia could be found in every Roman household, and were also used as seats for customers to wait on in shops and workshops; at auctions (Suet. Claud. 39) or public lectures and recitals those present sat on subsellia (Suet. Claud. 41; Juv. 7,45; 7,86). Pupils also sat on a subsellium (Diog. Laert. 2,130; 7,22). Since everybody but the quaesitor present at Roman court proceedings sat on a

subsellium (Suet. Aug. 56), subsellium could be used as a synonym for ‘court’ (Suet. Nero 17). Furthermore, Plebeian aediles and people’s tribunes saw to their official duties sitting on a subsellium, as did the emperor in his capacity as a people’s tribune (Suet. Tul. 78,2; Suet. Claud. 23,2; Cass. Dio 60,16,3); rows of seats in a ~ theatre were also called subsellia (Suet. Aug. 43,4; Suet. Nero 26,2). Various subsellia of marble and bronze survive from the Vesuvius cities; on Roman coins there are also officials sitting on subsellia, and in

the murals of Pompeii we find subsellia in tavern and handicraft scenes. T. SCHAFER, Imperii Insignia. Sella curulis und fasces. Zur Reprasentation

rémischer

Suppl.), 1989, 73 f., 87 f.

Magistrate,

(MDAI(R)

29.

RH.

Subsistence farming. The term SF or subsistence economy (= SE) is used to describe an economy which is oriented to self sufficiency and whose basis is > agriculture. SF was of fundamental significance precisely for

906

905

the farming economy of Antiquity; it is described primarily in Hesiod and Virgil (Hes. Erg. 383-608; Verg. G. 1,43-350; 2,458-540; cf. also the > Moretum). A peasant family produced for itself the food, clothing and implements necessary for living, and was dependent only to a limited extent on trade at local markets (which were not characterized by competition and the pursuit of profit). The equipment needed for land work was also made by farmers themselves, albeit with the help of craftsmen (Hes. Erg. 414-440; Verg. G. 1,160175). In winter a family’s food was augmented by gathering wild fruits, catching birds or hunting (Verg. G 1,259-310). City dwellers — and not the rural population — were dependent on > markets and > commerce. SF was based on division of labour within the > family and on distribution within the household of the goods produced. The Graeco-Roman economy was on the whole not representative of SE: there were market-oriented production, long-distance trade in agricultural produce, such as > grain, oil and > wine, or markets in the cities at which goods could be exchanged for payment. Without doubt the dynamism of the ancient economy proceeded from the growth of the cities, a large part of whose population no longer had the use of land, were hence not able to provide for themselves and so had to buy food and consumer goods at the market (Dion Chrys. 7,104-106). Furthermore, objects of high quality were increasingly produced by urban craftsmen (> Crafts, trade); the production of such luxury products required the craftsmen to be particularly qualified and was no longer possible within a peasant family. A further reason for the SE being repressed, can be seen in the unequal distribution of > mineral resources and fertile areas under cultivation in the Mediterranean. With the subsequent supra-regional division of labour, the ideal of a self-sufficient city was no longer realisable. The moment a city was dependent on imports its economy was bound into supra-regional market relationships. The raising of > taxes or tributes was also an important factor in economic development; farmers who had dues to pay had to sell produce at the market in order to be in a position to do so. Monetary rents had the same effect as the raising of taxes. The rise of the urban economy, of crafts, trade and the > money economy, by no means resulted in the ancient SF being entirely repressed or the ancient economy being transformed into a market economy. In pre-modern, pre-industrial agrarian societies SF remained, despite all its restrictions, characteristic of peasant households; on the large estates of the late Republic and the Principate, too, production for internal needs was ona not inconsiderable scale, since the slaves were by and large fed with produce of the estates. In this way > slavery removed from the market a large number of people working on the land. ~+ Agriculture; > Economy; > Market; > Town, city 1 M. Austin, P. VipaAL-NAQUET, Economies et sociétés en

Gréce ancienne, 71972 (Engl. transl.: Economic and Social

SUBSTITUTIO

History of Ancient Greece, 1981) 2 C.CLarK, M. HasWELL, The Economics of Subsistence Agriculture, 41970 3 Martino, WG 4M.FINLEy, Die antike Wirtschaft, 31993 5J.M. FRayn, Subsistence Farming in Roman

Italy, 1979 6 Ead., Markets and Fairs in Roman Italy, 1993 7M.W. FREDERIKSEN, Theory, Evidence and the Ancient Economy, in: JRS 65, 1975, 164-171 8 P. GARNSEY, Cities, Peasants and Food in Classical An-

tiquity, 1998 9 W.V. Harris, Between Archaic and Modern: Some Current Problems in the History of the Roman Economy, in: Id. (ed.), The Inscribed Economy,

1993, 11-29

10K.Hopxins, Taxes and Trade in the

Roman Empire, 200 B. C.-A. D. 400, in: JRS 70, 1980,

1oI-125

11Jones,LRE

12 R.Mac MULLEN, Market-

Days in the Roman Empire, Phoenix 24, 1970, 333-341 13 R. OsBorRNE, Classical Landscape with Figures, 1987 14 H.W. PLexet, Wirtschaft, in: VITTINGHOFF, 25-160 15K.PoLanyl, The Great Transformation, 1944

16 R.SALLareEs, The Ecology of the Ancient Greek World, 1991 17 H.SCHNEIDER, Das Imperium Romanum: Subsistenzproduktion -— Redistribution - Markt, in: P. KNEISSL, V. LOSEMANN (ed.), Imperium Romanum. FS

Karl Christ, 1998, 654-673 18 B.D. SHaw, Rural Markets in North Africa and the Political Economy of the Roman Empire, in: Antiquités Africaines 17, 1981, 37-83 19 P. VEYNE, Mythe et réalité de l’autarcie REA 81, 1979, 261-280.

4 Rome, in: J.M.A-N.

Substance see > Hypostasis [2]

Substitute king see > Rulers Substitutio. In Roman law the appointment of a substitute heir (substitutus), so as to avoid the danger that a will might become ineffective through the potential absence of the heir appointed by it (as a consequence of prior death or refusal; > Succession, laws of III. D.). Instances of the modern-day persistence of substitutio vulgaris (‘common substitution’) are ‘gemeine Substitutio’ (§ 604 Austrian ABGB) and ‘Ersatzerbeinsetzung (§ 2096 German BGB).

In the case of dependent minors of either sex, a Roman testator could prepare a second will settling the succession of the estate after the death of the minor (pupillus), for the event that this occurred before the minor reached the age of majority, and thus before he could draw up his own will. Termed substitutio pupillaris (substitution for minors), this arrangement prevented the danger of intestacy in the event of the death of the minor; it lapsed upon the minor’s achieving majority. For the minor’s safety, the second will was not opened upon the death of the testator, but only upon that of the minor (Gai. Inst. 3,179-183). Justinian permitted such arrangements in the case of mentally defective descendents (Cod. lust. Epit. 6,26,9, ‘quasi-pupillary substitution’). Pupillary substitution is no longer possible today. If the testator instructed the testamentary heir to pass the inheritance to another person, either immediately or at some future time (fidei-commissary inheritance, — fideicommissum), the final inheritor, while not

SUBSTITUTIO

908

907

becoming the heir (heres) in civil law, was appointed

heir according to praetorian law. Termed ‘fidei-commissary substitution’ (Inst. Iust. Epit. 2,16,9, cf. Gai. Inst. 2,184), this arrangement persists today as fideikommissarische Substitutio (§ 608 Austrian ABGB) or Nacherbschaft (§ 2100 German BGB). G. Finazzi, La sostituzione pupillare, 1997; HONSELL/ MaAyYER-MALY/SELB, 455-457, 499; KARLOoWwA, vol. 2, 874-879; KAsER, RPR, vol. 1, 688-690; vol. 2, 493-494; P. Voci, Diritto ereditario romano, vol. 2, *1963, 160223; A.WaTsoNn, The Law of Succession in the Later Roman Republic, 1971, 52-60; B.WINDSCHEID, Tu. Kipp, Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, vol. 3, 91906, 276-290.

ULM.

Substrate see > Language contact Subura. Ancient topographical designation for an area in + Rome the precise location of which is unclear or ambivalent. Apparently, S. at first referred to the area in the valley between Oppius and Caelius; S. marks the first of four urban regions (Varro, Ling. 5,48; > Tribus). Later, in everyday language S. was used to refer to only one part of this regio IV, and that is the densely populated quarter between Quirinalis, Cispius, Viminalis and Esquiline which housed many craftsmen and stood in ill repute (Mart. 12,18; Juv. 11,51). + Roma A. Fripu, Esquiliae, Fagutal, and Subura Once Again, in: Eranos 88, 1990, 139-161; RICHARDSON, 373, S.V. S. (1), S5\(2): C.HO.

The inheritance passed automatically to the legitimate sons (natural and adopted within the lifetime of the devisor), such that they could take possession of it without further ado (> embatevein). External heirs, however, required admission into the inheritance by a special procedure, the > epidikasia, carried out on their application. If there were pretenders to the will, a + diadikasia took place. If there were multiple, legitimate heirs and they were unable to resolve the dispute, ~ datétai could be called upon as arbitrators at Athens. A.R. W. Harrison, The Law of Athens I, 1968.

GT.

II]. ROMAN A. PRINCIPLES B. ADMISSION TO SUCCESSION AND ACQUISITION OF INHERITANCE C. INTESTATE SUCCESSION D. TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION E. EMERGENCY SUCCESSION F. APPOINTMENT

OF

INHERITORS G. INDIVIDUAL PROVISIONS H. MortTIs CAUSA CAPIO

A. PRINCIPLES Within the full inheritance of the heir, Roman law distinguished the legal status of the deceased and the acquisition of individual objects from the inheritance (bequests). Since the Monarchy, it had been possible for the devisor to regulate the inheritance by a final disposal by testament. Roman inheritance provisions were based on the agnatic family structure. According to the ius civile, only agnates (in the first place familial heirs, sui heredes) were entitled to inherit in the absence of a testa-

ment. From the end of the Republic, cognates too were Succession, laws of I. ANCIENT NEAR East

granted a (praetorian) right of inheritance (> agnatio, II. GREEK

III. ROMAN

IV. JEWISH

I. ANCIENT NEAR East see > Cuneiform, legal texts in Il. GREEK Succession laws in Greece primarily followed the concept of family succession. Greek law therefore contained several provisions to secure succession within the family group even where there were no legitimate sons (gnesioi). For example, > eispoiésis allowed the nomination of a non-testamentary heir, a process akin to

adoption. Where such a replacement heir was also absent, the inheritance (- kléros) either passed to lateral kin (> anchisteia) or via the daughters to descendants

in the female line (— epikléros). In addition to the transfer of the inheritance to these heirs variously, so to speak, ‘born’ or (in the case of the eispoiesis) ‘chosen’, the apportioning of individual objects of bequest within the inheritance or of the entire inheritance by will (in detail s. + diathéké) was also widespread in Greek law. However, freedom of testatorship was by no means recognized throughout Greece.

~ cognatio). All heirs who were not at the same time sui heredes (i.e. all agnatic lateral kin, non-agnatic cognati and outsiders) were extranet heredes. Manumitted slaves, having been born in bondage, had neither ancestors nor lateral kin. Their patron inherited as if agnatus proximus. If they were named as heirs by their patron, they were, as heredes necessarii, treated as sui heredes. Anyone entitled to succession under ius civile was heres. Anyone admitted by the praetor irrespective of ius civile did not become heres, but received only the bonorum > possessio.

B. ADMISSION TO SUCCESSION AND ACQUISITION OF INHERITANCE Roman law recognized three grounds for admission: intestate succession, testament and emergency succession. A testament wholly excluded the possibility of intestate succession. If it did not cover the entire inheritance, the unallocated portions or portions released by the disallowance of devises accrued to the other heirs (accrescence). Emergency succession (see below) overrode the testament. The distinction between sui and extranei heredes had a bearing on the acquisition of inheritance. Sui heredes received the inheritance, whether assigned by law or testament, immediately on

909

910

the death of the devisor, and once acquired, their status

the Classical period was created by the devisor’s giving of his estate into the charge of an executor (familiae emptor) and publishing by nuncupatio the testament document in which the provisions were listed (Gai. Inst. 2,104; > testamentum; > codicilli). Wills could be made in favour only of free citizens or citizens or slaves under guardianship (those under guardianship inherited on behalf of their pater familias or dominus). The lex Voconia (169 BC; partially obsolete from the Imperial period) removed the right of inheritance of women of the first census class. If one of several inheritors lapsed through premature death or relinquishment, accrescence (see above) arose. If all lapsed, intestate inheritance applied. To forestall this, the testator could designate a substitute heir (> substitutio). The regulation of the caducum ruled out accrescence, but could be averted by substitution.

as heirs was indefeasible by civil law (the praetor allowed them to refuse by > abstentio). Extranei heredes

acquired the inheritance by accession. For as long as an extraneus had not accepted the inheritance offered to him, it was unowned (hereditas iacens). Anyone could take possession of a hereditas iacens. If such possession were maintained uncontested for one year, the possessor became heres by acquisitive prescription (usucapio pro herede). The origin of this provision is to be found in the acquisition of inheritance by extranei. An extraneus only acquired the inheritance by the formal declaration of accession (cretio). If this was not done, it was fabricated by the usucapio. In the Classical period, in place of the declaration of accession (unless this was required by the testament), any explicit action demonstrating the intent of accession sufficed (pro herede gestio): the extraneus thus had no more need of the usucapio

(— aditio

hereditatis).

However,

usucapio

overcame not only the lack of aditio, but also any lack of basis of competence, with the result that those unentitled could also acquire an inheritance by the exercise of usucaption (until the 2nd cent. AD even one acquiring in bad faith).

SUCCESSION, LAWS OF

E. EMERGENCY SUCCESSION ‘Formal’: Under ius civile, all sui heredes had to be mentioned in the testament (cf. > praeteritio). Ifa filius suus was not mentioned by name, the entire testament was thereby rendered invalid (ruptio), even if the son

concerned had only been born or adopted after the creation of the testament. In such a case, intestate succession

C. INTESTATE SUCCESSION Where there was no testament, the > sui heredes inherited under the ius civile. If there were no sui, the next agnates in rank at succession acquired the inheritance, but became heredes only by aditio or usucapio (see above). In the Classical period, female agnates except sisters were excluded from acquiring inheritance. If the agnati proximi refrained from acquiring the inheritance, it fell to the gens, and, from the Imperial period, the state treasury (vacantia bona).

Manumitted slaves were succeeded by their sui, otherwise by the patronus and his agnatic descendants. The lex Papia assured the patron of a civil right of inheritance even against the sui heredes. The praetor divided the bonorum possessio into four categories, each of which was applied if no application was made in the category above: 1. liberi (for manumitted children and all sui), 2. legitimi (for the civil heirs: sui or agnati proximi), 3. cognati (for the blood relations, > cognatio), 4. vir et uxor (for spouses). For the bonorum possessio of freedmen, seven categories were distinguished. Anyone who had missed an application in a category could place it in a subsequent category. The first and second categories prevailed over an intestate inheritance but not a testament. The other categories were inferior to civil inheritance (Gai. Inst. 3,3 5ff.). Classical intestate inheritance was abolished by Nov. 118 and Nov. 127 (AD 543, 548) in favour of cognate inheritance. D. TESTAMENTARY SUCCESSION

Only Roman citizens could make a testament, and women only with the auctoritas tutoris, until the reign of Hadrian (1st half, 2nd cent. AD), when their right to do so independently was introduced. The testament of

applied. For the other sui heredes, mention but not necessarily by name was required. If any of them was omitted, the testament did remain in effect under ius civile, but the praetor awarded bonorum possessio contra tabulas. ‘Material’: From the Imperial period, close relatives entitled to intestate inheritance could contest the will by the querela inofficiosi testamenti, if they were disinherited by the testator in a way that was formally valid, but groundless. They received a quarter of their share of the intestate inheritance. Otherwise, the testament was enacted. Justinian assimilated the formal and material emergency succession to one another (Nov. 18 and II5).

F. APPOINTMENT OF INHERITORS On admission to succession and acquisition of inheritance, see above, B. A civil heres could demand the inheritance from its possessor by the hereditatis + petitio, a bonorum possessor by the interdictum quorum bonorum. Multiple heirs formed a community of heirs except in case of dispute (> Inheritance, division of). Every co-heir was a participant creditor for claims on the part of the estate, and bore a share of liability for the estate’s debts.

G. INDIVIDUAL PROVISIONS The Twelve Tables permitted the inclusion of bequests (> legatum), guardianship appointments and manumissions (+ manumissio) in the testament. From

the late Republic, informal requests to heirs for individual objects or the entire legacy to be issued to persons who could not be officially favoured (see above) or

lacked capacitas became commonplace. From the reign of Augustus, such — fideicommissa were contestable.

SUCCESSION, LAWS OF

H. Mortis CAUSA CAPIO This term (s. > mortis causa capio) included any acquisition by last will which did not come in the form of an acquisition of inheritance or bequest. > INHERITANCE LAW 1 H.Honsetit,

TH. Mayer-Maty,

W.SELB,

Romisches

Recht, +1987, 434ff. 2KaRLOwA II 842ff. 3 KaAsER, RPR I, orff., 668ff.; II, 463ff. 4H.L. W. NELson, U. MANTHE, Gai Institutiones III] 1-87, 1992 ~=5 P. Vocl, Diritto ereditario romano vol. 1, 71967; vol. 2, 71963 6 A. Watson, The Law of Succession in the Later Roman

Republic, 1971.

U.M.

IV. JEwIsH

Rabbinical inheritance law amplified, and expanded upon, various Biblical provisions (cf. Nm 27:8-11; 36,6-7; Dt 21:16-17). It formulated a linear parentela

system favouring male descendants. The testator’s wife and her relatives were excluded from inheriting. The first parentela consisted of the testator’s offspring, followed by the paternal line, the father of the testator and his offspring. The third parentela was the line of the grandfather, i.e. the grandfather and his offspring. Only when there were no sons could daughters be considered. However, they were then obliged to marry within their own kin. This particular disadvantage to daughters, as given in the Pharisaic Halakhah, was criticized

by the > Sadducees. Their view coincided with that of Roman law, according to which son and daughter were regarded as equal in respect of inheritance (tYad 2,20; yBB 8,1 [16a]). Brothers had to pay for the maintenance of their unmarried sisters. In place of an inheritance, the surviving widow was entitled to property claims fixed in the contract of marriage, and, where applicable, also to maintenance and accommodation. ~> Halakhah SH. SHILO, s.v. Succession, Encyclopedia Judaica 15, 475481 (Lit); T.ILAN, Jewish Women in Greco-Roman Pales-

tine. An Inquiry into Image and Status, Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 44, 1995, 167-174 (literature). B.E.

Succhabar. City in Mauretania Caesariensis (Plin. HN 5,21: Succhabar; Ptol. 4,2,25: ZovyapBaevZouchabbari; Amm. Marc. 29,5,20: ‘municipium Sugabarritanum’; cf. CIL VIII 2, 9607-9641; suppl. 3, 2148121493) in the valley of Wadi Chéliff, modern Miliana (in Algeria). Punic names in inscriptions (CIL VIII 2,

9618; VIII suppl. 3, 21484) suggest Punic influence. Augustus founded the ‘Colonia Iulia Augusta Zucchabar there (AE 1940, 20). S. protected the route between

Caesarea [1] and the interior of Mauretania. Roman Catholic bishops are recorded from AD 41x (PL 11, 1312: ‘Episcopus plebis Sugabbaritanae’; 1326: ‘Eptscopus Zugabbaritanus’). AAAIg, p. 13, no. 70;

912

git

M. Lecray, s. v. Z., RE 10 A, 855 f.

W.HU.

Sucel(l)us. Celtic god known from inscriptions ([1]; CIL XIII 6730 can be ruled out) who was also called mallet or hammer god because he is often seen holding a sceptre-like long-shafted mallet. The iconography of S. is substantiated by the altar of Saarburg, adorned with inscriptions (CIL XIII 4542), showing him with his cultic consort Nantosuelta: S. is here carrying his canonic attributes, the mallet and bowl (olla), while the goddess holds a sceptre topped by a house-shaped object and a > patera. A large number of pictorial dedications, predominantly on the Rhéne and Sa6éne in Gallia Narbonensis and Lugdunensis, but also in Gallia Aquitania, Belgica and Germania superior can be associated with this depiction and that from Vichy [2. no. 497]. Sometimes S. is holding other vessels instead of the olla, such as a purse (?), a club, a knife or bunches of grapes. His cultic consort on unnamed reliefs usually carries a cornucopia and a patera; the Mainz Stone (EsPERANDIEU, Rec. VII 5752) shows S. possibly next to > Diana. This combination and attributes that S. shares with — Silvanus, as well as overlaps in the area of circulation, bring the two gods closer together, without any certainty of S. being an > interpretatio of Silvanus (CIL XIII 6224 should therefore be ruled out as proof of this, owing to the order of the names). S.’ function has not so far been clarified. Interpretation as > Dis Pater and comparisons with the Etruscan god of death ~» Charon [1] are unsubstantiated. 1S.Deyrs, L. RoussEL, Une inscription a S. découverte a Ancey-Malain

(Céte d’Or), in: Revue archéologique de

PEst et du Centre-Est 40, 1989, 243-247 2 P. WUILLEUMIER (ed.), Inscriptions latines des Trois Gaules, 1963.

G. BaratTra, Una divinita gallo-romana: S., in: ArchCl 45, 1993, 233-247; S. BOUCHER, L’image et les fonctions du dieu S., in: Caesarodunum 23, 1988, 77-86; M.KorTERBA, S. und Nantosuelta (unpublished dissertation Freiburg 2000); A.M. Nacy, s. v. S., LIMC 7.1, 820-823.

M.E.

Suchus see > Sobek

Suda (fh Lotda; hé Sotida). The name S. (or Suidas) refers to a large extant Greek-Byzantine historical ~ encyclopaedia compiled in the roth cent. AD (possibly under Iohannes Tzimiskes, 969-976) and organised lexically and alphabetically by key-words. In the S., the compilers combined the entirety of material accessible to them by referring to older compilations, among other things (in this sense, the S. is a ‘compilation from compilations’). The form and meaning of the name S. have long been debated: until c. 1930, it was assumed to be the author’s name but this claim was rebutted by ADLER [3] and, above all, in the light of Stephanus [13] on Aristot. Rh. 1373a 23 = CAG 21.2, 285,18 RaBE. According to present-day scholarship, S. is the title of the monumental work, either derived from the misunderstood vulgar Latin guida (‘guidance’) [9] (the use of which, however,

913

914

SUEBI

is not documented until the late Middle Ages), or interpreted as the acrostichon (Zvuvaywy} “Ovouaowxts "Ying Av ’Addbabytov/Synagoge Onomastikés Hylés Di’ Alphabétou, ‘Collection of lexical materials in alphabetical order’, or — less probably — Atadoedv “Avéeav/Diaphorén Andrén) [7]. On the other hand (here esp. [6]), in Byzantine Greek so#da usually means ‘fence’, ‘palisade’ (in the sense of a ‘bastion against ignorance’); further imaginative hypotheses suggested, for instance, the combination with Latin sudare (‘to sweat’) [5] or a reference to the name Iudas [11]. The work comprises c. 30,000 lemmata of varying length in which diverse materials from highly different sources are listed side by side without any efforts to place them into an organic context which is otherwise common. However, a certain critical capacity in the compilers’ work has been recognized by recent scholarship — for instance by [14] who notes their historical erudition (although, as [4] had already demonstrated, the largest part of the historical quotations stems from the Excerpta by Constantine [1] Porphyrogennetus) or [12] who discovered a critical revision of the text with numerous corrections. The S. presents itself as a colossal encyclopaedia that aims at adopting and fostering everything that is knowable by dividing it into lemmata that are organized according to the antistoichic alphabet (that is, according to an alphabet that takes into account Byzantine pronunciation: words with vowels or diphthongs that have different graphemes yet identical phonemes, such as ai and e, are placed together ‘out of order’: at, €; et, 1, u, 0, @; ot, v). Asa result, the S. isan important collection of disparate and often lost materials (e.g. for fragments of ‘minor’ historians and of Callimachus [3]). Many quotations remain anonymous, some of them have only recently been assigned to an author by [12]. The main sources of the S. are Greek lexical and grammatical works. The traditional explanation — since [x3] — assumes a single main source: an expanded version of the comprehensive lexicographical collection with the title Suvaywyh (Synagoge; transmitted in two revisions: codd. Coislinianus 345 and 347), while [12] strongly limits the significance of this version and assumes several lexicographic sources (among them the lexicon of > Photius ). Other important models were (x) a lexicon of orators (one of the sources of the fifth lexicon in the Anecdota Graeca by BEKKER), (2) the epitome of > Harpocration, (3) an excerpt of Diogenianus (a lexicon contained in the codex Ambrosianus 83), (4) the AéEeuc ‘Popaixat (Léxeis Rhomatkail ‘Latin Words’ in the codex Baroccianus 50, (5) a lexicon of military strategy (the Taktikd by > Aelianus [1]) contained in the codex Coislinianus 3 47, and (6), according to [xo] an etymologically oriented work similar to the Eklogai of the codex Baroccianus 50. Furthermore, the compilers of the S. had access to several MSS of texts by classical Greek authors furnished with — scholia, definitely of Homerus [1] (from whom they adopted the so-called ‘Scholia by Didymus’

[x] in particular), Sophocles [1], Aristophanes [3], Herodotus, Thucydides, Lucian, Gregorius [3] of

Nazianzus. Further sources: the historical Excerpta by Constantine [1] Porphyrogennetus; a work that belongs to the paroemiographic vulgate; the epitome of Onomatologos by Hesychius [4] of Miletus as well as Athenaeus [3]; works from the fields of > biography (e.g. the Vita Homeri by Herodotus, Philostratus’ [5] vita of Apollonius [14] of Tyana, Damascius’ vita Isidori, Marinus’ [4] Vita of Proclus), philosophy (Diogenes [17] Laertius, Alexander [26] of Aphrodisias, Johannes Philoponus, Marcus [2] Aurelius), dream interpretation (Artemidorus [8] of Daldis) and theology (above all comm. on Bible texts — esp. on the psalms — and the works of Basileius [1] the Great, Gregorius [3] of Nazianzus, Iohannes [4] Chrysostomus and Theodoretus of Cyrus). Worth mentioning as well are the numerous quotations from Callimachus [3] whose source, according to [8], was a commentary on the Hekale (probably by Salustius [1]). ~ Encyclopaedia; > Lexicography EpITIoNns: 1A.ADLER, Suidae Lexicon, 5 vols., 19281938 2 G.BERNHARDY, Suidae Lexicon, 5 vols., 18341853.

BIBLIOGRAPHY: 3 A.ADLER, s.v. Suidas, RE 4 A, 675717. 4C.De Boor, S. und die konstantinische Exzerptsammlung, in: ByzZ 21, 1912, 381-424; ibid. 23, 1914/20, 1-127. 5 F.D6xLGER, Zur Lotvtda-Frage, ByzZ 38, 1938, 36-57 6 H.GARTNER, s.v. Suda, KIP 5, 407408 7 H.Grécorre, Suidas et son mystére, in: Les Etudes Classiques 6, 1937, 346-355 8 A. HECKER,

Commentationum Callimachearum capita duo, Groningen 1842,79-152 9S.G. Mercaty, Intorno al titolo dei lessici di Suida-Suda e di Papia (Memorie dell’Accademia dei Lincei 8,10,1), 1960 Geschichte der griechischen

10 R. REITZENSTEIN, Etymologika, 1897, 190

11 G.ScarpaT, Una nuova ipotesi nell’autore del lessico detto di Suida, in: Atti del Sodalizio glottologico milanese 1960-1961, 3-11 12C.THEODORIDIS, Photii Patriarchae Lexicon, vol. 2, 1998, XXVII-CI

13 G. WENTZEL,

Beitrage zur Geschichte der griechischen Lexikographen (SPrAW 1895)

14 G.ZEccHinI (ed.), Il lessico Suda e la

memoria del passato a Bisanzio, 1999, 477-487.

Ree

Suebi. The Suebi, an association of Germanic tribes or groups of Germanic peoples, numerous and strong (Str. 4,343 7,153), between the Rhenus [2] (Rhine), Istrus [2] (Danube), Albis (Elbe) and as far as the > Mare Suebicum (Baltic Sea) area. The nucleus of their territory was Lusatia, later Saxony and Thuringia. Although first recorded in the rst century BC (Caes. Gall. 1,37,3 f.; cf. Tac. Germ. 2,2), their name had been coined by the 2nd century BC. The S. included e.g. the + Marcomanni, the > Semnones, the > Hermunduri, the > Langobardi, the peoples of the > Nerthus cult, the > Naristi, the > Quadi and other peoples further east and northeast (Tac. Germ. 38-45). Changes of ethnic identity and self-attribution as S. may also have caused expansion of the term S. (cf. also Cass. Dio 51,22,6), as did the ending of Suebian westward expansion by Roman cam-

SUEBI

915

paigns and the subsequent rise of a new Suebian nucleus to the east of the Elbe river, which assumed political form in the kingdom of the Marcomanni [1. 299-302]. From the Augustan period onwards the S. were part of the general tribal world of Germania (~ Germani) and were, albeit large and segmented, nevertheless a structurally ‘normal’ gens. Characteristic of the expansion of the S. are small, mobile bands of people. In 58 BC, in the army of ~ Ariovistus there were S. (Caes. Gall. 1,51,2), who settled on the Main river and far beyond it (Caes. Gall. 4,3; 6,10,5). When Caesar crossed the Rhine (55 and 53 BC) they withdrew. Caesar (Gall. 4,1-3) dedicates a long excursus to evidencing their dangerousness; Tacitus too (Germ. 38-45) highlights them among the Germani, but without marking them out as a particular danger to Rome. In 30 BC, an attack by the S. on Gaul was beaten back by the Romans. In rr and 9 BC, the S. fought as allies of the > Sugambri and the > Cherusci against Claudius [II 24] Drusus. In 8 BC, a number of these S. were settled together with the Sugambri on the left bank of the Rhine, others marched off to the east. In the time of the early Roman Empire, there is evidence of groups of Suebian settlers also on the upper Rhine, on the lower Nicer/Neckar (+ Lopodunum;

Civitas Sue-

borum Nicrensium) and in the area of the upper Main. They were probably responsible for the territorial term Suebia (Tac. Germ. 39-46; Cass. Dio 55,1,2) for the

region between the Main and Argentorate (modern Strasbourg, Tab. Peut. 3,3). Under Claudius, Domitianus and evidently also Nerva there were alliances between the Suebian Marcomanni and Quadi and the lazygian Sarmates against Rome. Nevertheless, the Suebian tribes did not always form a unified front (cf. Tac. Ann. 2,45,1; Cass. Dio 67,5,3). Under Marcus [2] Aurelius (161-180 AD) there was a war between Rome

and the Marcomanni on the Danube. The > Alamanni and the > Juthungi are other Suebian groups that advanced on the Roman Empire from the 3rd century AD onwards. From the 2nd century AD at the latest, the history of the S. is primarily that of their constituent peoples. 1D. Timpe, Der Sueben-Begriff bei Tacitus, in: G. NEuMANN, H.SEEMANN (eds.), Beitrage zum Verstandnis der Germania des Tacitus, Part II (AAWG 3. ser. 195), 1992.

R. Wenskus, Stammesbildung und Verfassung, *1977, 255-272; K.PescHEL, Die S. in Ethnographie und Archaologie,

in: Klio

60, 1978,

259-309;

H.KoTHE,

Centum pagi Sueborum, in: Philologus 129, 1985, 213246; B.KRUGER u. a., Die Germanen, 2 vols., 51988; A.A.

Lunp, Zu den Suebenbegriffen in der taciteischen Germania, in: Klio 71, 1989, 620-635; id., Kritischer Forschungsbericht zur “Germania” des Tacitus, in: ANRW II 33.3, 1991, 1989-2382, esp. 2157-2181; G. NEUMANN, Der Name der S., in: see [1], 153-166; E.C. Potomg, Die Religion der S., in: s. [1], 167-189; M. SEIDEL, Friihe Germanen am unteren Main, in: Germania 74, 1996, 238-

247.

RA.WI.

916

Sueius. Roman poet of the late Republican Period, author of rural idylls in Alexandrian style (Moretum, Pulli, Nidus, cf. Charisius, Gramm. p. 132 B.) and a poem also in hexameters; he can hardly be identical to the grammarian Sevius Nicanor or the equestrian M. Seius. FRAGMENTS: J.GRANAROLO, L’époque néotérique, in: ANRW I 3, 1973, 291f., 331-334; COURTNEY, I12-117; FPL? (BLANSDORF), 122-126; A. TRAGLIA, Poetae novi,

*7962, 4f., 122-124.

Suessa Aurunca. Capital of the Aurunci (Vell. Pat. 1,14,4) between Minturnae and Teanum Sidicinum, modern Sessa, settled since the 8th cent. BC. After it was

destroyed by the Sidicini and resettled, the Romans established a colony there in 313 BC (with ius Latii: Liv. 9,28,7; Vell. Pat. 1,14,4). Minting (280-268 BC; HN 42). In 90/89 BC municipium, tribus Aemilia (CIL X 4776; Cic. Phil. 13,18). In 30/28 BC the establishment of the colony colonia Iulia Felix Classica S. followed (CIL X 4832; Plin. HN 3,63; [1]). Archaeology: remains of the city walls (two phases of building), of a theatre with a cryptoporticus (opus reticulatum) to the west of the city and of an amphitheatre to the east of the city; 2 km to the west the Ronaco (or Aurunco) bridge with 21 arches. Aurunca.

Lucilius

[16] was

born

in Suessa

1 T.Co.tetra, La struttura antica del territorio di Sessa Aurunca, 1989.

A. VALLETRISCO, Note sulla topografia di S. A., in: Rendiconti dell’ Accademia di Archeologia, Lettere e Belle Arti di Napoli, N. S. 51, 1976, 59-73; A.M. Vittuccl, S. A., 1995; Studia Suessana, 1979 ff. GU.

Suessa Pometia. City in Latium, not located. Colony of ~ Alba Longa, occupied by the Volsci, destroyed by ~ Tarquinius Superbus (Liv. 1,53,2; Dion. Hal. Ant.

Rom. 4,50; Tac. Hist. 3,72); conquered again by the Romans in 495 BC (Liv. 2,17,15; 2,25,6; Dion. Hal. Ant.

Rom. 6,29). According to [1; 2], SP refers to the preVolscan phase of Satricum (roth—6th cent. BC), accord-

ing to [3; 4], itis identical to Apiolae or can be located in a pre-Roman city discovered at Cisterna di Latina. 1C.M. Stipse, Satricum e Pometia, in: MededRom

47,

1988, 7-16 21d., La Valle Pontina nell’antichita, 1990, 33-38 3 G.COLONNA,s. v. Cisterna di Latina, in: EAA 2. Suppl. vol. 2, 1994, 171 f. 4 F.MeE is, S.QurLicr GIGLI, Proposta per l’ubicazione di Pometia, in: ArchCl 24, 1972, 219-247. GU.

Suessetani. Iberian tribe (Liv. 25,34,6; 28,24,43 34,20,1 on events in the years 210 to 184 BC; Plin. HN 3,24: ‘Suessetania’) between the Iberus [1] (Ebro) and the Pyrenees [2], between Vascones in the west, Sedetani in the south and Lacetani in the east; Corbio [2] (location unknown) was one of its settlement centres (Liv. 39,42,1). The S. may have been identical with the > Cessetani. TIR K 30 Madrid, 1993, 215.

PB.

917

918

Suessiones (Ovéooovec/Ouéssones, Ptol. 2,9,11). People in Gallia Belgica in the particularly fertile modern Soissonais (departement of Aisne/Oise). With the + Remi to the east, the S$. formed a cultural identity, linked by the same law, the same magistrates and a unified commander-in-chief (Caes. B Gall. 2,3,4 f.). In about 80 BC, Diviciacus [1] gained supremacy as far as the southeast of Britain. When Caesar invaded in 58/7 BC, the state unity of the S. and the pro-Roman Remi disintegrated. The king Galba [1] placed himself at the forefront of a Belgian coalition against Caesar (B Gall. 2,4,6-8). After his defeat, (ibid. 2,9 f.) the S. came under the domination of the Remi (ibid. 2,12 f.; 8,6,2), but were soon able to attain the status of S. liberi, ‘free S.’ (Plin. HN 4,106).

Vitellius, and escape punishment (Tac. Hist. 2,60,r). It

J.DEBorD, L’histoire monétaire des S. et la conquéte romaine, in: Bull. de la Soc. Francaise de Numismatique 48, 1993, 649-655; S.FicHTL, Les Gaulois du nord de la Gaule, 1994, 67-82. F.SCH.

Suessula. City in Campania (Str. 5,4,11: LoveooodAa/

Souessotila) between Capua and Nola (Liv. 7,37,4; 23 LANIS 3123552,25 24903593 buns LUN) 3.64s lab; Peut.

6,4), modern Piazza Vecchia near Acerra. In 343 BC the Samnites were here decisively defeated by the Romans (Liv. 7,37,4). In 338 BC the place became a civitas sine suffragio (Liv. 8,14,11; Fest. 262,11: praefectura). Because of its strategically favourable location, S. was a base for Roman troops several times during the Second — Punic War (cf. Liv. 7,37; 23,143 17; 31 f£.3 39; 24,463 25533 5373 22). Sullan colony (Liber coloniarum 237,5), later a municipium (CIL X 3760-3771). M. GiGanTeE et al., S. Contributi alla conoscenza di una antica citta della Campania, 1989. S.D.V.

Suetonius [1] C. S. Paullinus A senator, already of praetorian rank in AD 42, thus born AD rr at the latest (Cass. Dio 60,9). As legate to Claudius [III 1], he founded his repu-

tation as a military commander by penetrating deep into Moorish territory across the Atlas in 42. As Tacitus (Hist. 2,37,1) calls him vetustissimus consularium, his consulate probably dates from before 45. It is uncertain whether he accompanied Claudius to Britannia in 43. Probably in 58 he took over the governorship of Britannia from Q. Veranius [1. 765 f.]. He conquered Wales and the island of > Mona where he eradicated the Druidic cult (+ druidae). In 60 he was able to suppress the revolts of > Boudicca after heavy losses (Tac. Ann. 14,31-7). A dispute having arisen between S. and Classicianus, the new procurator of the province, the imperial freedman — Polyclitus [8] was sent to mediate between them. S. was relieved of his post shortly thereafter, but did not fall into disfavour: a homonymous senator, presumably his son, would not otherwise have received the ordinary consulate in 66. S. supported + Otho in 69, and advised him to await reinforcements (Tac. Hist. 2,32). He was able to justify his actions to

SUETONIUS

is not known how long he lived after this time. 1 SyME, Tacitus.

BIRLEY 54-57.

W.E.

[2] S. Tranquillus, C. Roman biographer and antiquarian (fundamental: [1-5]). I. Lire IJ. LivEs OF THE EMPERORS III. PRATUM DE REBUS VARIIS IV. FURTHER WORKS

I. LIFE Born c. AD 70 (in Hippo [6]?) the son of the eques-

trian S. Laetus, tribune of the 13th legion, S. was trained in Rome as a legal advocate (orator, Suet. Gram. 4,9),

and, under Trajan, enjoyed the protection of — Plinius [2] the younger (Plin. Ep. 1,18; 3,24; 3,8; 10,94) whom

he evidently accompanied to the province of Bithynia. He became a court official under Hadrian, and, according to the honorific inscription AE 1953,73 (from Hippo Regius), he was a studiis, a bybliothecis, eventually holding the influential office of ab > epistulis. He was also flamen sacerdotalis and pontifex Volcanalis in Ostia [6]. The downfall of his friend the praetorian prefect > Septicius Clarus in 121/2 also brought S.’ career to an end; but, from 128 at the latest [7], many years of prolific scholarly production followed (year of death unknown). S. is known most of all for his twelve emperor biographies (Caesar to Domitian); parts of the texts De grammaticis et rhetoribus and De poetis also survive, besides numerous, but often dubious, fragments of the compilation Pratum. Il. Lives OF THE EMPERORS

As, in consequence of the loss of a folio from the archetype MS of De Caesarum vita libri octo, the beginning of the life of Caesar is missing, along with the dedication to Septicius Clarus and probably a programmatic introduction, our assessment of this biographical sequence, initially dismissed as scurrilous > light reading [8], must rely on the author’s editorial remarks (Suet. Iul. 44,4; Aug. 9,1; 61,1; Tib. 42,1; Calig. 22,1; Nero

19,33 40,1) and broader-based evidence [9; ro]. While the structure conforms to certain constant patterns, with origin, childhood, education, professional debut, and, finally, the circumstances of death, dates and burial in chronological order, and then, in the body of the biography, separate sections devoted to personal characteristics, private life, achievements in civil, military and political life etc., each vita, in terms of its scope, structure and viewpoint, nevertheless preserves an individual profile, assuring the personal and private identity of the individual being described. S. developed this form from the Peripatetic-Alexandrian biographies of men of letters; it was to become definitive for his successors (> Marius ~ Kaisergeschichte,

[Il 10] Maximus, Enmann’s > Historia Augusta, Einhard), al-

though it can scarcely be said that any of them ever again realized its potential [11]. It derives its force from

SUETONIUS

919

the tension between the description of the career and the aspects of the personality which emerge (with respect for chronology within the various sections), and (as in Tacitus) allows the inner portrait to emerge by the significant placing of baldly stated facts without additional commentary. Thus, while leaving behind the purely career-based vitae of Cornelius > Nepos [2], S. also distances himself clearly from the Peripatetic character-biographies of > Plutarchus [2] who was only slightly his senior. At the same time, in his depiction of the two lines of decadence (1. Caesar to Nero; 2. Vespasian to Domi-

tian) S. pursues a particular historical agenda, seeking to interpret the — Principate in the sense of individualized embodiments of imperial history in the persons of the emperors [12; 13]: how Caesar’s conception of the Principate [14] was calculated to preserve republican institutions; how Augustus [15] (longest vita!) tentatively realized that conception, Tiberius [16] usurped it for his own ends, Gaius (Caligula) [17; 18] cynically abused it, Claudius [19] administered it as a good bureaucrat, Nero [20; 21] used it as an instrument to realize his private artistic ambitions; and how, after the

abortive initiatives of the > year of four emperors [22], the pattern was repeated on a lesser scale under the Flavians [23-27]. S.’ use of his sources — essentially the same as those of Tacitus (+ Cluvius [II 3] Rufus, > Plinius [1] the Elder, in addition to archive material and private letters of the imperial families) — remains within the bounds of what was normal in Antiquity, and by no means concentrates on the chronique scandaleuse [28]. Accordingly, this ‘historical/private biography’ must now be accorded equal standing with the pragmatic form of the annals (> Annalists) and histories, although with a certain shift of emphasis from utility to entertainment. Our text relies on an already mutilated minuscule archetype manuscript from Fulda, dating from the beginning of the 9th cent.; this was sent for by Lupus of Ferriéres (Ep. 91,4), and probably used by Einhard. Besides the pure traditions (family X: above all the Codex Memmianus, Paris. Lat. 6115, c. 820), a group exists with a textual transposition in the Galba vita (family Z: e.g. Dunelmensis Cath. C III 18, rrth cent.), alongside contaminated manuscripts. The strong reception in Late Antiquity (Ausonius) declined during the Middle Ages [29]; during the modern period, while decidedly in the shadow ofTacitus, S. has been a favourite source for literary writers (Albert Camus, Caligula, 1938; Robert Graves, I Claudius; Claudius the God, 1934). III. PRATUM DE REBUS VARIIS

S.’ major antiquarian work Pratum de rebus variis (Pasture; according to the new reconstruction by [30]) appears to follow current fashions of curiositas rather than adhering to a systematic conceptual structure such as that striven for by M. Terentius > Varro, whose Antiquitates and De gente populi Romani, along with ~ Verrius Flaccus’ De significatu verborum and > Plinius [1] Dubius sermo were S.’ main sources.

920

The 20 books fall into larger groups: 1-8 Roman antiquities (1-4 objects of antiquity owned by the state and by private individuals, 5-8 festivals and calendars); 9-10 the natural world; 11-14 myth and history (history of Rome’s origins); 15-20 literary and historical biographies. It is uncertain whether this relaxed approach in respect of themes derives from S.’ great model, the Leimon peri onomaton kai gloss6n (‘Pasture of names and languages’) by the Alexandrian grammarian + Pamphilus. S.’ adoption of current literary fashions (certainly: > archaism) may be indicated by the reception accorded this work soon after its appearance, not only in his own Caesares, but in > Gellius, > Censorinus, > Solinus, later in > Ausonius, > Hieronymus [8] Jerome (Chronicon), — Ambrosius, — Cassiodorus, and finally in > Isidorus [9] of Seville (Etymologiae, Differentiae: even, in places, following the textual structure of the Pratum). The fragments assembled most imaginatively and provided with a tentative structure by REIFFERSCHEID indicate the following order in detail: bks. 1-2 Tegi “Paouys xal tov év adh vouiuwv xal yOav (Peri kai ton en autéi nomimon kai éthén; ‘On Rome and its laws and customs’; Suda); bk. 3 De genere vestium (costume; Serv. Aen. 7,612); bk. 4 De institutione officiorum (public offices; Prisc. 6 = GL 2,231,8); bks. 5-6 THegi TOV TAEG “Pwyaiors DewEeL@v xail &ywvav (perhaps De spectaculis Romanorum, Roman spectacles; Suda); bk. 7 De puerorum lusibus (children’s games; Serv. Aen. 5,602; Gell. Pat. 9,7,3 in the title Historia ludicra is perhaps referring to bks. 5-7); bk. 8 Megi tod xata ‘Pwpuaiovg éviavtod (perhaps De anno Romanorum, calendars; Suda; traces in Censorinus, DN 20,2; cf. Varro, Ling. 6,6-11); bk. 9 De naturis rerum (inanimate nature?; REIFFERSCHEID fr. 161 after Isidorus); bk. 10 De naturis animantium (living creatures; Giraldus Cambrensis, Itinerarium Cambriae 1,7; as a book De homine is missing, De vitiis corporalibus fr. 272 REIFFERSCHEID may fit here, unless this is a separate work); bks. 11-13 De regibus libri tres (kings; Auson. Ep. 23,16 (409) p. 267 Peiper); bk. 14 Tegi émonudv moevav (perhaps De meretricibus claris: famous prostitutes; Lydus, Mag. 3,64); bk. 15 De poetis (sc. lyricis; on Horace, Virgil, Varius, Passienus Crispus, Cornelius Gallus, Tibullus, Calpurnius Piso, Lucan, partially extant in altered form through the grammarians); bk. 16 De poetis tragicis, comicis, satiricis (on Terence, Per-

sius; ibid. extant); bk. 17 De oratoribus (on Cicero, Hortensius, C. Memmius, Cornelius Nepos); Iegi tis Kixeewvoc mohiteiag (Peri tés Kikéronos politeias; ‘On

Cicero’s state’, Suda) is more likely to have been a separate text; bk. 18 De grammaticis et rhetoribus (the vitae of 20 grammarians and 16 orators are extant); bk. 19 De historicis et philosophis (on Cornelius Nepos, Fenestella, Asconius, Plinius Maior; Cato Minor, Nigidius Figulus, M. Varro, Seneca; deduced from Jer. Chron.); bks. 15-19 are mentioned in Suda Ttéupa “Popaiay avde@v eémionu®v (perhaps Catalogus virorum illustrium; this gave Jerome the literary-historical additions

921

922

to his Chronicon, data of the greatest scholarly importance); bk. 20 Iegi tov év tots BiBAlots onueiwv (perhaps De notis; Suda, cf. Isid. Orig. 1,21 on symbols in textual criticism, and 1,22 on Tironian > tachygraphy). IV. FURTHER WORKS Titles of further works are known most of all from the catalogue of works in the Suda (4 p. 581 ADLER). Epitomes of two Greek texts by S. are extant: 1) Iegi Pracmynutov xai woBev Excotn (aetiological investigation of swearwords) and 2) Negi t@v mag’ “EAAjvov matdvov (‘parlour’ and children’s games). Linguistically, S. is beholden to the conservative style favoured by Quintilian; the content and intellectual spirit of his work prepare the way for the ‘knowledge culture’ and ‘archaeophilia’ of the mid—2nd cent. + Biography; > Historiography 1F.DeLLA Corre, Suetonio, eques Romanus, *1967 2 A. WALLACE-HADRILL, S., 1983 3 R.C. LounsBury,

The Arts of S.,1987 4 ANRWII33.5, 1991, 3576-3851 (with bibliography of P.GALAND-HALLYN 3576-3622) 5 D.T. BENEpikTson, A Survey of S. Scholarship. 193 81987, in: CW

86, 1992/93, 377-447

1900

9 W.STEIDLE,

S.

und die antike Biographie, *1963 ("1951) 10H.GuGEL, Studien zur biographischen Technik Suetons, 1977 11 G.B. TOWNEND, S. and His Influence, in: T. A.DoREY (ed.), Latin Biography, 1967, 79-111

12 U.LamBREcHT, Herrscherbild und Prinzipatsidee in Suetons Kaiserbiographien, 1984 13 K.R. BRADLEY, The Imperial Idea in S.’s ‘Caesares’, in: ANRW II 33.5, 1991, 3701-3732

Die Augustusvita

Suetons,

in: WS

67,

1954,99-114 16 M.Baar, Das Bild des Kaisers Tiberius bei Tacitus, Sueton und Cassius Dio, 1990 17 H.Linpsay, S.’ Caligula, 1993 18 D. WaRDLE, S.’ Life of Caligula, 1994 19 K.SCHERBERICH, Untersuchungen zur Vita Claudii des S.,1995 20K.HeE1nz, Das Bild Kaiser Neros bei Seneca, Tacitus, Sueton und Cassius Dio, 1948 21K.R. BrapLey, S.’ Life of Nero, 1978 22 P. VENINI, Sulle vite suetoniane di Galba, Otone e Vitellio, in: RIL 108, 1974, 991-1014 23 H.R. Grar, Kaiser Vespasian, 1937 24 H.Martinet, C. S. T., Divus Titus, 1981 25 F.GALLI, Suetonio, Vita di Domiziano, 1991 26 U. LAMBRECHT, Suetons Domitian-Vita, in: Gymnasium 102, 1995, 508-536 27F.G. D’Amsrosio, The

End

Suetrius. C. Octavius Appius S. Sabinus. Senator from + Histonium; his father was already a senator. Admitted to the Senate under Septimius [II 7] Severus. After junior posts, legate to the legio XXII Primigenia; took part as dux vexillationis in > Caracalla’s expeditio Germanica; governor of Raetia in AD 213, cos. ord. in 214; then iudex instead of the emperor in a province; praefectus alimentorum and appointed ad corrigendum statum Italiae. Governor of Pannonia inferior in 216/17 and of a further consular province; procos. of Africa c. 230. In 240 for the second time cos. ord.; cf. CIL X 5178 =ILS 1159 and CIL VI 41193, with full commentary. On his family connections cf. CIL VI 37061 = 41236 and [1. ro1-6]. é 1 M. Peacni, ludex vice Caesaris, 1996.

W.E.

Sufenas. P. S. Verus. Legate of Lycia-Pamphylia c. AD 129-131 (most recently [1.36-40, 43]), cos. suff. probably 132 or 133 (CIL XVI 174; cf. RMD 3, 159 anda diploma of 9th September [2]). 1M. WorrLE, Stadt und Fest, 1988 2 Catalogue Lanz, Auction 104: Orden und Ehrenzeichen, Miinchen 2001, 5 Nr. 1 and Plate 1, Nr. 1. WE.

14 C.BRUTSCHER, Analysen zu Sue-

tons Divus Iulius und die Paralleliiberlieferung, 1958 15 R.Hansiik,

R.A. KasTER, 1995 (gramm.); A.ROSTAGNI, 1944 (De poetis; cf. E.PARATORE, Una nuova ricostruzione del De poetis di Suetonio, *1946); A. REIFFERSCHEID, C. S. T. praeter Caesarum libros reliquiae, 1860 (Pratum); J. TAILLARDAT, 1967 (Graeca); A.A. Howarp, C.N. JACKSON, 1922 (Index verborum) KL.SA.

6 PIR’ S 695

7 J.Gascou, Nouvelles données chronologiques sur la carriére de Suétone, in: Latomus 37, 1978, 436-444 8 A.Macgé, Essai sur Suétone,

SUFETULA

of the Flavians,

in: RIL

114,

28 J.Gascou, Suétone historien, 1984

1980,

232-241

29E.K. Ranp,

On the History of the De Vita Caesarum of S. in the Early Middle Ages, in: HSPh 37, 1926, 1-48 30IRA: SCHMIDT, Suetons ‘Pratum seit Wessner ANRW II 33.5, 1991, 3794-3825.

(1917),

in:

Sufetes (Punic sptm = ‘judge’; Latin sufetes). Highestranking functionaries of the civil administration in Punic and probably also in Libyan and Sardo-Punic cities [1. 461, 467 note 7, 470, 473 note 58]. From at least the 6th cent. BC, sufetes are also attested in > Carthage [1. 458-460; 2. 69 note 10], where (instead of the usual two) there is occasionally evidence of four sufetes. In addition to certain religious duties, it fell to the sufetes to control judicial and financial affairs and preside over meetings of councils and people’s assemblies [x. 461]. Since sufetes are not recorded as holding military command [2. 81, 94], their office did not develop out of an earlier (Carthaginian) kingdom [2. 69 note 10, 91-93]. Senior officials of northern African cities were still designated as sufetes [1. 551] after the Punic period. 1 Huss

2 W.AMELING, Karthago, 1993.

L.-M.G.

1907 (De vita Caesarum); J.GEEL,

Sufetula. City in Africa Byzacena, modern Sbeitla in

1828 (reprint 1966; scholia); H.E. BurLer, M.Cary, 1927 (Iul.); J.M. CarTER, 1982 (Aug.); W.VoGT, 1975 (Tib.); G.GUASTELLA, 1992 (Cal.); J.MOTTERSHEAD, 1986 (Claud.); N.BADURINA, 1984 (Nero); D.SHOTTER, 1993 (Galba, Otho, Vit.); G.W. Mooney, 1930 (Vesp.);

Tunisia (cf. It. Ant. 46,6), founded in the second half of

EpiTions:

M.IHM,

H. Prick, 1915 (Tit.); F.GaLii, 1991 (Dom.); G. BRuGNOLI, *1963 (gramm.); M.-C. VACHER, 1993 (gramm.);

the rst cent. AD, soon afterwards a municipium and a colonia (CIL VIII suppl. 1, 11340), significant road junction; in 256 a bishop’s see (Cypr. Sententiae episcopales 19). Remains survive of two honorary arches, a forum (temple), baths, a theatre, churches. Inscrip-

SUFETULA

tions: CIL VIII 1,228-252a; 2567; 2586; suppl. 1,11221(?); 11318-11415 and 11417;4, 23216-23233 and 23233¢; Inscriptions latines d’Afrique 116-146; Inscriptions latines de la Tunisie 349; AE 1987, 1063; 1989, 876(?); 882. AATun 100, sheet Sbeitla, Nr. 18; N. Duvat, Inscriptions

de Sbeitla et des environs I, in: Bull. archéologique du comité des trauvaux historiques 6, 1970, 254-312; Id., L’urbanisme de S., in: ANRW II 10.2, 1982, 596-632; Id., S., in: L’Afrique dans l’Occident romain (Actes du colloque, Rom 1987), 1990, 495-535; R.B. HiITCHNER,

Studies in the History and Archaeology of S., 1985; C. LEPELLEY, Les cités de l’Afrique romaine, vol. 2, 1981, 308-

S02.

W.HU.

Suffect consul. Roman magistrates (-> Magistratus) were, on principle, elected for one year only. When, however, a magistrate resigned or died during his term of office, a successor had to be appointed for the rest of that year. This successor was called suffectus (from sufficere, ‘to grow again’). While by-elections were rare during the Republic, it became normal during the period of the > Triumvirate (43-30 BC) and then from 5 BC, to appoint more than two consuls per year from the outset who were to hold office in succession and in pairs. At first, there were usually only two suffecti per year, but the number soon grew to four to six, and later to an average of eight [1]. Even more suffecti would be appointed in the first years of an emperor’s reign, as, in addition to the senators who expected a consulship on the basis of the point they had reached in their career, the emperor had to satisfy those who had supported him on his way to the throne. This is, for example, very evident during the first years of Domitian and in the case of Trajan during the years 98-100 (cf. [2]). Until the early period of Trajan, even a second and third consulship could be undertaken as suffectus (see [1] on the years 69, 70, 74, 80, 98, 100; on the year 85 [3. 44]). Whereas, until the time of Septimius [II 7] Severus, suffecti were also eponym, in official usage, from the beginning of the 3rd cent. even official texts were dated only on the basis of the consules ordinarii |4. 15-44]. + Consul; > Magistratus 1 Decrassi, FCIR 2 W.Ecx, An Emperor is Made: Senatorial Politics and Trajan’s Adoption by Nerva in 97, in: G.CLarK, T. Rajak (eds.), Philosophy and Power in the Graeco-Roman World, 2002 3FO* 4W.EcK, Consules ordinarii und consules suffecti als eponyme

Amtstrager, in: Epigrafia. Actes du colloque en mémoire de Attilio Degrassi, 1991.

924

923

WE.

Suffectio see > Suffect consul Suffix see > Inflection; > Word formation Suffragium (etymologically probably from sub- and fragor, din’). Describes a military assembly’s indication of approval by clashing weapons [5], but the meaning of the term changed several times [4]). In the Repub-

lic, technically suffragium means an electing body, ballot or vote in legislative, judicial and elective votes in the People’s Assembly (-» Comitia) and in a + quaestio court, not the method of voting (Cic. Leg. 3,15,33-39). Under the emperors suffragium predominantly describes the personal assistance given by a suffragator — also found in the Republic as a canvasser in a secret ballot — to a candidate for office; suffragatores was then the general term for everybody exerting influence on a decision-maker (Suet. Vit. 7,1). The suffragatio of the emperor, which is mentioned in the > lex de imperio Vespasiani (|. 11), amounted to the direct appointment of the candidate. At the beginning of the 2nd century AD suffragium could still describe the act of voting (Senate: Plin. Ep. 3,20,7 £.3 4,25,1; Tac. Ann. 15,21,5), but became a non-technical term for personal patronage (Plin. Ep. 2,1,8; 2,9,2; cf. [1]). In Late Antiquity

attempts were made to put an end (e.g. Cod. Theod. I,32,1; 6,22,2 f.; 12,1,36; [2; 3]) to the saleability of suffragium (venale suffragium: Cod. lust. Epit. 12,32,1) or regulate it by contract (contractus suffragit: Cod. Theod. 11,30,6; [3]). In the end > Iustinianus [1] sought to prohibit the sale of governorships [3. 161167]. 1 J.K. Evans, The Role of S. in Imperial Political DecisionMaking, in: Historia 27, 1978, 102-128 2 W.GOFFART, Did Julian Combat Venal S.?, in: CPh 65, 1970, 145-151 3 D.Liess, Amterkauf und Amterpatronage in der Spatantike, in: ZRG 95, 1978, 158-186 4G.E. M. DE STE. Croix, S.: from Vote to Patronage, in: British Journal of Sociology 5,1954,33-48 5 J. VAAHTERA, The Origins of Latin s., in: Glotta 71, 1993, 66-80.

U.HE.

Sufism (tasawwuf). As early as the initial period of > Islam, Islamic mysticism developed out of a striving for an ascetic way of life and renunciation of the world, partly under the influence of Christian > monasticism, but also of Neoplatonic philosophy (+ Neoplatonism) and Iranian elements of learning. According to the beliefs of Sufism, the fear of God and faith in God, with the aid of meditation and remembrance of God (recitations, standardized in content and technique, of religious formulas and litanies), lead to a higher level of love and knowledge of God. Sufic theories and, above all, religious practices — listening to spiritual music, as well as the + Qur’an or religious poetry, often accompanied by movement and dance, sometimes even unto ecstasy — provoked criticism from Islamic orthodoxy (+ Heresy II.). Centres of Islamic mysticism developed in the 9th cent. AD in Iraq and in Persia. From the 12th/13th cents. onwards orders with masters and pupils developed throughout the Islamic world, some continuing until the present. L. MAsSIGNON et al., s.v. Tasawwuf, EI 10, 313b-340b; A.SCHIMMEL, Mystische Dimensionen des Islam, *1992. H.SCHO.

926

925

Sugambri. People of the Germanic Istaevones (Plin. HN 4,100) on the right bank of the Rhenus [2] opposite the Eburones and between the Ubii and the Bructeri. To the east, they bordered on the Chatti and the Cherusci.

In 55 BC they absorbed the the Usipetes and the Tencteri, whom Caesar had defeated, and crossed the river into their territory (Caes. B Gall. 4,16—19; Plut. Caesar 22; Cass. Dio 39,48,3-5). In 53 BC they played a successful part in the fighting around Atuatuca (Caes. B Gall. 6,3 5-42; Cass. Dio 40,32,2-5). In 17 BC they annihilated a Roman army under Lollius [II r], but 16 BC concluded a treaty with the Romans (Hor. Carm. 4,14,51f.; Vell. Pat. 2,97,1; Cass. Dio 54,20,4-6). Drusus (Claudius [II 24]) turned against them several times between 13 and ro BC, until in 8 BC Tiberius settled 40,000 S. on the left bank of the Rhenus (Cass. Dio 55,6,1—-3; Suet. Aug. 21,1; Suet. Tib. 9,2; Tac. Ann.

2,26,3). They can presumably be identified again among the Cugerni in the area of the later Colonia Ulpia Traiana (modern Xanten), the remainder were absorbed by various Germanic tribes. But we encounter cohortes Sugambrorum as late as the early Imperial period. Cu.B. RUGER, Germania

Inferior, 1968, 8, 23-25, 97;

G.ALFOLDy, Die Hilfstruppen der rémischen Provinz Germania inferior, 1968, 84 f.; R.WoLTERS, Rémische Eroberung und Herrschaftsorganisation in Gallien und Germanien, 1990. RA.WI.

Sugar see > Saccharon Sui heredes (‘house heirs’) in Roman law were the offspring subject to the power of the testator who, on his death, immediately became independent (sui iuris) (Gai. Inst. 3,2-5), i.e. children, grandchildren, whose father predeceased them, etc., the uxor in manu (‘wife in the manus’, i.e. subject to the legal power of the husband), who was in inheritance law on an equal footing with a daughter of the house (> manus), also adoptive and posthumous children (— postumus [2]), but not those released by > emancipatio or from manus marriages. SH, immediately consequent upon the death of the testator, inherited the estate, irrespective of whether they were named by testament or legally appointed (cf. —» intestatus). Provided that they had not yet intervened in the inheritance (— immiscere, se), they could reject it (> abstentio). SH enjoyed the formal right of emergency succession (— Succession, laws of [III E]; + praeteritio), and a substitute heir could be named for them if they died before coming of age (Gai. Inst. 2,184; — substitutio). All other heirs were extranei (‘external heirs’). They inherited the legacy by testamentary or legal appointment only by entering upon it (> aditio hereditatis), or where appropriate by acquisitive prescription (+ Succession, laws of [III B]). Modern law has abandoned the distinction between sui and extranei heredes which was fundamental to Roman law. ~ Succession, laws of

SUICIDE

HONSELL/MAYER-MALY/SELB, 879-881;

442 f.; KARLOWA, vol. 2,

Kaser, RPR, vol. 1, 95-101,

695, 713-7153

A. MANnick, s. v. S.h., RE 4 A, 664-675; P. Voci, Diritto ereditario romano, vol. 2, *1963, 5-7. U.M.

Suicide. Suicide, from neo-Latin suicidium (‘self-killing’), a parallel formation on > homicidium, was a subject of lively intellectual debate in Greek and Roman Antiquity: in schematic comparison it can be said that the followers of and successors to Plato, as well as Aristotle [6] and > Neo-Platonism, condemned suicide, whereas some > Sophists, and the Cynics (~ Cynicism) even more, acknowledged suicide as an expression of individual freedom, even expressly endorsing it. This point of view was shared by many Stoics (— Stoicism): the fame of the Stoic suicide and opponent of Caesar, M. > Porcius [I 7] Cato, was so great that he shone even in mediaeval Christianity, which was opposed to suicide on principle, and in DANTE’s Purgatorium. A no less prominent Roman suicide, — Seneca [2] (1st cent. AD), as a philosopher of the later Stoa, concerned himself intensively with suicide and asked, e.g., matter-offactly whether one might not be permitted to guide the soul out of a body which had become unfit for its purpose (Sen. Ep. 58,32-36). These positive attitudes to suicide were presumably echoed in a distinction made by the Roman lawyer > Neratius [5] in about AD roo (Dig. 3,2,11,3): whereas suicide by those tired of life (taedium vitae) and — as probably has to be added — performed in an honourable fashion legally and socially acceptable, those committing suicide from a bad conscience (mala conscientia) and those who have hanged themselves are considered without honour. The widow of a suicide participates in his + infamia. He himself is not given an honourable burial (+ Dead, cult of the). The primary ‘honourable’ method of suicide was considered to be by the sword. Whether the somewhat positive view of self-strangulation with a cord (> laqueus) merely reflects the opinion of Cynics and Epicureans or is part of a collective social appraisal (as an exception to the shamefulness of hanging) requires more precise study. In contrast to earlier assumption, in general there was no punishment in Roman law for suicide. Confiscation of wealth, which in the early modern period was traditionally regarded as an after-death punishment, affected only those suicides who would have fallen prey to this penalty without killing themselves. For Roman soldiers there was an exception: for reasons of military discipline attempted suicide was punished with death or dishonourable discharge (Dig. 48,19,38,12), the sole case of attempted suicide being punishable in Roman law. A slave who tried to commit suicide was considered deficient, because possibly dangerous to his master (Ulp. Dig. 21,1,23,3). In the case of attempted suicide by a master slaves were obliged to rescue and render assistance (Dig. 29,5,1,22).

— Death

SUICIDE

1 R.H1rzeL, Der Selbstmord, in: ARW 11, 1908, 75-206 2 A. Wacke, Der Selbstmord im rémischen Recht und in der Rechtsentwicklung, in: ZRG 97, 1980, 26-77. 3 Id., II suicidio nel diritto romano e nella storia del diritto, in: Studi in onore di C. Sanfilippo, vol. 3, 1983, 679-731 4A.J. L. vaN Hoorr, From Autothanasia to Suicide,

1990

928

927

=5 E. CANTARELLA, I supplizi capitali in Grecia e a

Roma, *1991, 140-143, 183-186.

GS.

Suillius [1] S. Caesoninus. Probably son of S. [3]; his second name comes from the family of Caesonia Milonia, the wife of Caligula. He was part of Messalina’s [2] circle; since he was homosexual, he was not drawn into her downfail (Tac. Ann. 11,36). [2] M. S. Nerullinus. Son of S. [3]. In AD 50, probably through the influence of his father, he was given a regular consulship together with C. Antistius [II 9] Vetus. Nero rescued him from a conviction in 58 together with his father (Tac. Ann. 13,43,5). He did not become procos. of Asia until 69/70 [1. 285, note 12]. On the person as a whole see [2. 394 f.]. 1 W.Eck, Jahres- und Provinzialfasten der senatorischen Statthalter, in: Chiron 12, 1982, 281-362 WEIDEMANN.

2 VOGEL-

[3] P. S. Rufus. Senator; son of — Vistilia, acquiring through her numerous half-siblings who were of great significance to him (Plin. HN 7,39). Connected with the poet > Ovidius whose step-daughter he married (Ov. Pont. 4,8,11 f.). Quaestor under Germanicus [2]. In AD 24, perhaps during his praetorship, he was convicted of corruption in the Senate and, also at the express wish of ~» Tiberius, was banished to an island (Tac. Ann. 4,31).

It was not until the reign of + Caligula that he was recalled, probably through the influence of his half-sister Caesonia Milonia, Caligula’s wife. Suffect consul together with Q. Ostorius [7] Scapula in 41 or 43/45 [x. no. 1; 2. 704 f.]. Under Claudius [III 1], feared as a litigant, he attained the highest influence. Accordingly, as the author of many convictions he was hated, but he retained the backing of Claudius. When in 47 the consul Silius [II 1] attempted to forbid remuneration for prosecutors, Claudius authorized a honorarium of up to 10,000 sesterces (Tac. Ann. 11,6). Probably in 53/4 he attained the pro-consulship of Asia (Tac. Ann. 13,43). After Claudius’s death his influence weakened; in 58 he was prosecuted at the instigation of Seneca [2] the Younger and banished to the — Baliares; he kept a part of his wealth, however, as did his children. S. [1] and S. [2] are his sons. 1 G.CamMopeEca, Tabulae Pompeianae Sulpiciorum, 1999 2 Id., Nuovi documenti, in: SDHI 61, 1995, 704 f. VOGEL-WEIDEMANN, 387-397.

Sul. Celtic goddess of springs and healing, eponym of the Roman cure and bathing resort of > Aquae [III 7] Sulis (Bath, in Somerset) and, according to the testimo-

ny of inscriptions and the head of a gilded bronze and larger than life size cult statue, an > interpretatio of + Minerva (Medica). The temple at the hot springs belonged to Sul Minerva, as the building inscription CIL VII 39¢ proves; the cult is attested by the burial stone of one of her priests (CIL VII 53). There are seven altars in Bath of soldiers of low rank, of a stonemason, and of freed slaves, dedicated to Sul or Sul Minerva, who was consistently invoked by the epithet Dea. Metal vessels with votive inscriptions and numerous ~ defixiones on metal tablets calling on S., together with about 12,000 coins, have been found in the sediments

of the sacred springs (— Votive offerings in springs). That S. was probably only of local significance is not contradicted by the single dedication outside Britain, CIL XIII 6266, from Alzey (in Rheinhessen). B. CUNLIFFE (et al.), The Temple of Sulis Minerva at Bath, vol. 1: The Site, 1985; vol. 2: The Finds from the Sacred Spring, 1988. M.E.

Sulci(s) (Phoenician S/ky). Phoenician settlement (founded between 730 and 700 BC; Str. 5,2,7; Plin. HN 3,84f.; Ptol. 3,3,3; Zon. 8,12; Bell. Afr. 4,1f.) in the eastern part of the peninsula of San Antioco southwest of Sardinia with two natural harbours north and south of the isthmus, present-day San Antioco. A fortress on the Monte Sirai on the mainland guarded access to the mountainous area which was rich in ore and supplied the revenue for the economical prosperity of S. (CIL X 7514; 7516; 7518f.; Inscriptiones Latinae Sardiniae 1; 3 £3316): C. TRONCHETTI, San Antioco, 1989; M. MELONI, Sardegna romana *1990, 516-520; P. BARTILONI, Sulcis, 1989; V.SanTOoNI (ed.), Carbonia e il Sulcis, 1995.

Sulla. Roman

cognomen

(not of Etruscan

origin

[2. 250]), passed down in the family of the dictator L. Cornelius [I 90] S., according to Plutarch (Sulla 2,2) allegedly because of the pale colour of his face (+ Cornelius [I 87—90; II 57-61]). 1 KayANTO, Cognomina, 106

Cognomen, 1963.

2 H.Rix, Das etruskische

K-LE.

Sulmo (Zovayav; Soulmén). City of the > Paeligni (Str. 55452; Ptol. 3,1,64), regio IV, present-day Sulmona (L’Aquila). The city became a Roman ally in 304 BC (Liv. 9,45; Diod. Sic. 20,101), municipium, tribus Sergia from 89 BC. The design of the city is orthogonal (400 X 400 m), centres of the Paeligni were located on the hills to the south around the basin of S. (cf. Colle Mitra, Piano della Civitella, Colle Tassito). Remnants of a sanctuary of Hercules Curinus were found on the slopes of Monte Morrone in the north. S. was the birthplace of the poet P. > Ovidius Naso. V.CIANFARANI, Santuari nel Sannio, 1960; E.MarttT1occo, Centri fortificati preromani, 1981; Id., S., in: Storia Urbana 5.14, 1981, 27-50; Id., Il santuario di

930

929

Ercole Curino, 1985; F.VAN WONTERGHEM, Superaequum, Corfinium, S. (Forma Italiae 4.1), 1984, 223-238; G.F. La Torre, Dalla villa di Ovidio al santuario di Ercole, 1989. GU.

Sulphur (0etov/theion, Epic Oéevov/théeion or Oivov/ theion, Latin sulphur). Because of its alleged power to ward off evil, derived from theios (‘divine’), mentioned

as early as in Homer (Od. 14,307; 22,481 f. and 493 f.: as a means of purification after the killing of the suitors by Odysseus). Aristotle (Mete. 3,6, 378a 23) mentions it as an example of fossil substances burnt by dry exhalation (Enea &va0uplaotdxéra anathymiasis) [1. 42 f.]. Sulphur was mined, primarily in Sicily, and was used to combat vermin and to preserve wine (‘sulphuration’ of wine bottles up to modern times). It found an application in salves and sulphur baths for disinfecting the skin. 1 D.E. EicHHo1z (ed.), Theophrastus De lapidibus, 1965. C.HU.

Sulpicia

[4] Poetess during the reign of Domitian, who freely expressed love for her husband Calenus in verse in the Neoteric tradition (Mart. 10,35; 38); she continued to be famous as late as the 4th/sth cents. AD as is attested by a satire of this period directed against Domitian, which bears her name in its title (> Sulpiciae conquestio; cf. > Epigrammata Bobiensia 37; [1-4]). + Sulpiciae conquestio, > Women authors II EpiTrons: 11.LANA,1949 2H.FucuHs, in: M. SIEBER (ed.), Discordia concors. FS E. Bonjour, 1968, 31-47 (with a Germantranslation) 3 A.GIORDANO RAMPIONI, 1982

BIBLIOGRAPHY: 4J.SOUBIRAN, Un curieux effet métrique dans la Sulpiciae Conquestio, in: Vichiana 11, 1982,

295-304 5 J.P. Hatietr, Martial’s S., in: CW 86, 1992/93, 99-123 6 A.RICHLIN, S. the Satirist, in: s. [5], 125-140

[5] S. Dryantilla. Probably from a Lycian background, in AD 260 elevated to Augusta when her husband ~ Regalianus was appointed anti-emperor to > Gallienus; cf. the couple depicted on coins (RIC 5.2, 588;

[1] Wife of Cornelius Lentulus Cruscellio (MRR

2,

391), who after having been proscribed in 43 BC, fled to Sex. Pompeius [I 5] in Sicily. Dressed as a servant she followed him into exile (Val. Max. 6,7,3, App. B Civ. 4539). ME.SCH. [2] Granddaughter of Servius Sulpicius [I 23] (cf. [3]),

niece of M. > Valerius Messala Corvinus. Author of a small collection of poems in the Corpus Tibullianum (3,13-18) in which she expresses her love for a man whom she calls by the pseudonym Cerinthus; the motifs of this relationship are literarily expanded by the poet of elegies 3,8—12 (> Tibullus?). — Women authors II Epition:

SULPICIAE CONQUESTIO

1H.TRANKLE,

Appendix Tibulliana, 1990,

47-493 299-322 BIBLIOGRAPHY: 2H.MacL. Currie, The Poems of S., in: ANRW II 30.3, 1983, 1751-1764 3 D.Lress, Eine

Enkelin des Juristen Servius Sulpicius Rufus, in: Sodalitas 3, 1984, 1455-1457. 4M.S. Santirocco, S. Reconsidered, in: C] 74, 1978/79, 229-239 5 A. KEITH, Tandem venit amor, in: J.P. HaLierr, M.B. SKINNER (eds.), Roman Sexualities, 1997, 295-310 6R.PiaAsTRI, I carmi

di S., in: Quaderni del Dipartimento di filologia classica, Universita di Torino, 1998, 137-170 7 B.L. FLASCHENRIEM, S. and the Rhetoric of Disclosure, in: CPh 94, 1999,

36-54

[3] Daughter of Sulpicius [II 9] Galus, granddaughter and great-granddaughter of a certain Servius Sulpicius, wife of L. Fulcinius [II 4] Trio. In the reign of Tiberius, she accompanied her husband to Lusitania when he was the governor of this province. As a result, she was honoured by the colony of Augusta [2] Emerita (modern Mérida) with a statue in her villa at Tusculum [1. 233 ff.]. CIL XV 2737 also refers to her. 1 M.G. Granino CECERE, I Sulpicii e il Tuscolano, in: RPAA 69, 1996/7 W.E.

[r}). 1 R.GO6BL, Regalianus und Dryantilla, 1970 KIENAST, *1996, 244; PIRS 741; PLRE 1,273

MESCH.

[6] S. Galbilla. In CIL VI 9754 two sisters with this name are mentioned. They may be daughters of C. Sulpicius [II 7] Galba, cos. in AD 22. RAEPSAET-CHARLIER no. 741/2

[7] S. Praetextata. Daughter of Q. Sulpicius [II 4] Camerinus Peticus, wife of M. Licinius [II ro] Crassus Frugi, cos. in AD 64 who was executed or exiled in 67 together with his son > Scribonianus Camerinus. The

marriage produced three other children (Tac. Hist. 4542,1). PIR S 744; RAEPSAET-CHARLIER NO. 745

ME.SCH.

Sulpiciae conquestio. The Sulpiciae conquestio de statu rei publicae et temporibus Domitiani (‘Sulpicia’s complaint on the state of the nation and the age of Domitian’) is preserved within the Corpus Ausonianum (> Ausonius) and the > Epigrammata Bobiensia (no. 37). It consists of 70 hexameters which, according to title and content, are supposed to have been written by the — Sulpicia [4] known from Martial (10,3 5,38). Its language and line of thought suggest it to be the work of a Roman citizen from the beginning of the 5th cent. AD who venerates ancient Roman religious ideals, as revealed by mentions of the Muse (Calliope), > Numa, ~ Egeria [1] and Romanus > Apollo. It is possible that the poem is following an anti-Christian agenda: the figure of Domitianus, who appears as an anti-educational tyrant, suppresses academic study and banishes the wise men from the city, could be a reference to a Chris-

SULPICIAE CONQUESTIO

931

932

tian emperor, who persecutes educated non-Christians

in 449: 3,31,83 33533 50,15). It is impossible to clarify conclusively whether P. S. and Ser. S. are identical.

(on Honorius, Cod. Theod. 16, 10; |5]). For sources see [2; 3]; SHA Car. 3,1/3.

R.M. Ocitvie,

» Epigrammata Bobiensia; > Women authors II. Ep.:

A.GIORDANO

RAMPIONI,

1982.

Bibliogr.:;

1 W.KROLL, s. v. Sulpicius (115=Sulpicia), RE 4 A, 880882 21.Lana, La satira di Sulpicia, 1949 3 Sc. MariomTl, s. v. Epigrammata Bobiensia, RE Suppl. 9, 37-64,

esp. 62

4H.Fucus, Das Klagelied der Sulpicia ..., in:

M.S1EBER (ed.), Discordia concors, FS E. Bonjour, 1968,

31-47

5 K.L. NoerHuicus,

s. v. Heidenverfolgung,

RAC 13, 1149-1190, esp. 1171-1174.

WO.SP.

{1 5] S. Camerinus Praetextatus, Q. Cos. or consular

tribune in 434 BC (regarding the uncertainty of the ancient records: Liv. 4,23,1-3; cf. InscrIt 13,1,95; 3726.5 see also [1.257f.]). According to Liv. 4,27,9, he fought under the dictator Postumius [I 17] against the Aequi and Volsci in 431 BC. 1 BELOCH, RG.

Sulpicius. Name of a Roman patrician family, probably originally from > Cameria (hence the cognomen Camerinus); documented in the fasti from c. 500 BC. The otherwise rare praenomen ~ Servius appears com-

paratively frequently and at times is even used in place of the nomen gentile (Tac. Hist. 2,48; Plut. Galba 3,1). The number of cognomina within the gens is high, but it has been impossible to identify clear branches. The link between the S. from the 3rd to the 2nd and rst cent. BC is unclear. In the 2nd cent. BC, the most important branch of the family was that of the Sulpicii Galbae; it finally died out with the emperor > Galba [2]. The branch of the Sulpicii Rufi produced the most famous jurist of the Republican Period: Ser. S. Rufus [I 23]. K.-LE. I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD II. IMPERIAL PERIOD I. REPUBLICAN PERIOD {I 1] S. (Galus), C. Cos. 243 BC, the earliest recorded

representative of the Sulpicii Gali. TA.S. {I 2] S. Camerinus, C. Cos. 393 BC (according to the Fasti Capitolini probably as cos. suff.; InscrIt 13,1,3 rf.; 100; 386f.); consular tribune in 391; interrex in 387 (MRR 1,91-933 99); for possible identity with S. [I 21] see MRR 1,99". {I 3] S. Camerinus Cornutus, Ser. According to Dion.

Hal. Ant. Rom. 5,52,1-57,5, S. thwarted a conspiracy to restore the Tarquinians during his term of office as cos. in 500 BC (MRR 1,10). Because of the close parallels of this report to the conspiracy of > Catilina (S.’ co-consul a Tullius (!) [1.283]), S. is probably as unlikely to be historical as the references to S. for 496 and 494 BC (Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 6,20,1; 69,3). According to Liv. 3,7,6, S. died as > curio [2] maximus in 463 BC. 1R.M.

Ocitvie,

A Commentary

on Livy Books

1-5,

1965.

[I 4] S. Camerinus Cornutus, Ser. (or P.) Son of S. [I 2];

cos. in 461 BC (MRR 1,36f.). Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 10,I,I;

10,52,4;

10,56,2

(in contrast

with

A Commentary on Livy Books 1-5, 1965,

415.

corrupt

manuscript transmissions, his name should be correctly read as ‘Servius’) lists a Ser. S. amongst the members of a delegation in 454 BC, dispatched to study Greek laws, and for 451 as decemvir (> Decemviri [1]), whereas in both cases Livy refers to a P. S. (also referred to by name as a delegate during the second secession of the > plebs

C.MU.

[I 6] S. Galba, C. Historian of the rst. cent. BC, grandfather of the emperor > Galba [2] (Suet. Galba 3,3). His historical work, probably antiquarian in orientation and style, dealt with the period from Romulus to the Late Republic; it was used by Livius [III 2], Juba [2] and Plinius [1] (Pliny the Elder). Fragments in HRR 2, Siete: Wie

[I 7] S. Galba, P. Pontifex, praetor in 66 BC, unsuccessful candidate for the consulship of 63 BC (MRR 2,134;

136"'; 3,201). S. is possibly identical with the praetorian Galba killed in 47 BC by Caesar’s mutinous soldiers (Plut. Caesar 51,1). JOR. [I 8] S. Galba, Ser. 209 BC curule aedile (Liv. 27,21,9); in 209 he was a member of the delegation who went to fetch the > Mater Magna from Pessinus to Rome (Liv. 29,11,3). From 203 to his death in 199 BC, he held the office of pontifex (Liv. 30,26,103 32,7,15). {I 9] S. Galba, Ser. Aedile in 189 BC, praetor in 187; despite several attempts, he did not attain consular office (Liv. 39,32,6-13). He liked to take a walk on Aventine Hill with his neighbour > Ennius [1] (Cic. Acad. 2 Sil) s

[1 10] S. Galba, Ser. Fought as military tribune against Perseus [2]. In 167 BC, for reasons of personal enmity,

he tried to prevent the triumph of the victor L. Aemilius [1 32] Paullus. With an impressive speech and through obstruction, he got malcontent soldiers to vote against the triumph in the popular assembly. Only massive intimidation by other nobiles such as M. Servilius [I 25] Geminus and M. Porcius Cato [1] ultimately thwarted S.’ plans (Liv. 45,35,3-39,20). As praetor in Hispania ulterior against the Lusitani in 151, he only narrowly escaped catastrophe. The following year, he talked his opponents into downing their weapons with all kind of assurances, but then had them killed in great numbers or sold into slavery. > Viriatus managed to escape the massacre and was to become one of Rome’s fiercest enemies for the next decade. Back in Rome, S.’ action gave rise to a heated debate. The aged Cato [1] attacked him in his last public speech which he also published as the concluding item in his Origines. S. also published his defence (Liv. Per. 49). Changes in the way in which political controversies were conducted were also evident in the institution of the first permanent court established to secure compensation for the illegal extortion of money or property by Romans in authority

235

abroad (> Repetundarum crimen). In 144 S. finally became consul. In 138 it was his brilliant speech that secured the acquittal of agroup of > publicani who stood accused of severe abuse in Bruttium (Cic. Brut. 85-89).

Later he headed a senatorial delegation to Crete. His reputation as summus orator (‘best orator’) of his period who presented himself in a new style lived on long after his speeches themselves had almost been forgotten (Cic. Brut. 72). {1 11] S. Galba, Ser. In r1z BC praetor in Hispania ulterior, cos. in 108 BC, owned estates near Tarracina and

on Aventine Hill (CIL X 6323; ILS 863). TA.S. {1 12] S. Galba, Ser. Grandson of S. [I 11] (different in Suet. Galba 3,2), augur, legate to Gallia in 61/60 BC under C. Pomptinus (to whose triumph in 54 S. contributed as a praetor: MRR 2,222) and 58-56 under ~— Caesar. Suffered serious losses at Octodurum (Caes. B Gall. 3,6,2). In 47 BC he still tried to get repayment from Caesar of a surety paid for Pompeius [I 3] in 52 (Val. Max. 6,2,11). In 50 BC he failed in the consular elections for 49 because of the general atmosphere of opposition against Caesar (Caes. B Gall. 8,50,4). But even after Caesar’s victory, S. did not become consul. For that reason, 44 BC saw him as one of Caesar’s assassins (Cic. Phil. 13,33). In 43 BC he acted as courier for Iunius [I 12] Brutus, fought in the battle of Forum Gallorum and was proscribed by the triumviri. His subsequent fate — death in the Civil War or execution — is uncertain. JOR. {1 13] S. Galba Maximus, P. Became consul in 211 BC without ever having held another curule office (Liv. 25,41,11). Together with his fellow consul, he organized Rome’s defence against Hannibal’s [4] direct attack [1]. At the end of the year, he was put in charge of the war against > Philippus [7] V. From 210 to 205, mainly with the help of the > socii navales, he conduc-

ted this war for the first time ever also in the Aegean (for the chronology cf. [2; 3]; for information regarding his troops and equipment: Liv. 26,28,9; 27,7,15). An important success was the capture of > Aegina: S. sold the inhabitants into slavery and then handed the island over to the > Aetolians, as agreed by treaty (Pol. 9,42). His subsequent strategy was characterized by a series of raids, speedy changes of location to support his allies, limited expense, but also the attempt to tie Philippus down through the continuation of hostilities, but there was a definite slowing in the dynamics. Only the Aetolian-Macedonian agreement in 206 sparked greater military efforts, but they were entrusted to S.’ successor. S. became dictator in 203 to supervise the elections [4]. As consul of 200, Greece fell under his remit (Enn. Ann. fr. 324: Graecia). He pushed the decision for war against Philippus through the hesitant > comitia. After substantial preparations, he led an army to Illyria where he spent the winter. In 199 he advanced as far as Macedonia, but then ordered his army to return to Apollonia [x]. Only Mount Pelion was secured as an outpost (Liv. 31,33,4-40,6). The command then passed to consul P. — Villius Tappulus whose first task was to deal with a

934

SULPICIUS

mutiny (Liv. 32,3,2-7; for the naval operations in the Aegean at the same time, see Liv. 31,22,5-23,123 44,I47,3 in conjunction with [5]). From 197, S. was one of the legates of T. Quinctius [I 14] Flamininus and was

involved in the conclusion and implementation of the peace treaty in Greece and also in the simultaneous negotiations with Antiochus [5] III. In 193-192 he was the oldest member of a further delegation to the > Seleu-

cids (Liv. 34,57,45 34,595 3513-17). — Macedonian Wars 1 H.Sacx, Hannibals Marsch auf Rom im Jahre 211 v. Chr., Diss. Frankfurt 1937 2 F.W.WALBANK, A Historical Commentary on Polybios 2, 1967, II-13 3 H.TRANKLE, Livius und Polybios, 1977, 213-215 4W.Huss, Geschichte der Karthager, 1985, 4137° 5 V.M. Warrior, The Initiation of the Second Macedonian War, 1996.

{1 14] S. Galus, C. Roman politician and author of works on astronomy. In the early stage of his career, he is mainly referred to in conjunction with L. Aemilius [I 32] Paullus; it is possible that he accompanied him as early as 191 BC, when the latter took up his post as governor of Spain. In 182-181 S. took part in the campaign against the Ligurians (Liv. 40,28,8). In 171 both

S. and Paullus acted as patroni for Hispania citerior (Liv. 43,2,5-7). As praetor of 169, he blamed difficulties in raising troops on the ambitiousness of the consuls and was appointed in their stead to oversee this task (Liv. 43,14-15,5). In 168, back in Paullus’ army in the campaign against — Perseus [2], it is said that by explaining the total eclipse of the moon he alleviated the soldiers’ fear on the eve of the battle of Pydna (Third — Macedonian War); this episode clearly mirrors a similar report about Pericles [1] and > Thales, based on the fact that S. had written a treatise on astronomy (Cic. Cato 14,49; Plin. HN 2,53; cf. [r]). As consul of 166, he fought in Liguria and was awarded a triumph. On diplomatic mission to the East in 164, he was noted for the harshness of his actions (Pol. 31,1,6-8; 31,6; Paus. 7,11,1-3). When his wife appeared unveiled in public, he divorced her, an example for his strict morality (Val. Max. 6,3,10; Plut. Quaest. Rom. 14). 1 F.W. WaxBank, A Historical Commentary on Polybios

3, 1979, 386f.

TASS.

[I 15] S. Longus, C. Probably grandson of S. [I 16]. Cos. 3375323, 314 and censor in 319 BC. (MRR 1,138; 149;

1543157). As cos. I, he unsuccessfully opposed the election of Publilius [I 3] Philo as the first ever plebeian praetor (Liv. 8,15,9; for the background [1.67-69]). Even though sources are contradictory, it is undisputed that as cos. III in 314, S. achieved an important victory over the Samnites for which the Acta Triumphalia record the award of a triumph — but this is the only mention of that triumph (InscrIt 13,1,70f.; Liv. 9,24f.). For 312, the Fasti Capitolini document a dictatorship of S. without any special events (InscrIt 13,1,36f.; 420f.; cf. Liv. 9,29,3-5).

935

936

1 T.C. BRENNAN, The Praetorship in the Roman Republic I, 2000.

maximum debts of senators. By means of a plebiscite, he removed the military command in the war against Mithridates [6] VI from Sulla and gave it to Marius instead, in reward for the latter’s support. Sulla then marched on Rome and took the city; S. was declared an enemy of the state (+ Hostis) by the Senate and was

SULPICIUS

[I 16] S. Longus, Q. According to tradition, S. as consular tribune of 390 BC (MRR 1,94f.) performed the ill-omened sacrifice prior to the battle at the > Allia. Subsequently, he was in command of the > Capitolium during the Gallic siege and negotiator with > Brennus [x] (Live 5547510; 554858; 6,1,02; Gell: INNA’ 5,217,253 Macrob. Sat. 1,16,22f.). R.M. Ocitviz,

A Commentary on Livy Books 1-5, 1965,

Index, s.v. S.

C.MU.

{I 17] S. Paterculus, C. Consul in 258 BC; according to Polybius (1,24,9), he held military command in Sicily, while the annalistic tradition (foremost Zon. 8,12,4-5; InscrIt 13,3,77) attributes him with military success on Sardinia and a naval victory which earned him a tri-

umph.

TA.S.

[I 18] S. Peticus, C. Consular tribune in 380 BC, cos. in 364, 361, 3555 353, 351, censor in 366 (resigning from

office after the death of his colleague). According to the Acta Triumphalia, as dictator S. celebrated a second triumph over the Gauls (reported in Liv. 7,12,9-18,5 with details that are hardly historical), while the other-

wise unmentioned first triumph was probably recorded there for S. as cos. IJ on account of a victory over the + Hernici (InscrIt 13,1,68f.; 540; cf. Liv. 7,7,1-3). Despite the stipulations of the leges Liciniae Sextiae, both office holders in his consulates III-V were patrician. S. was interrex before both his third and his fifth consulate (for S. role in contemporary politics see [1]). Als cos. V, S. concluded a 40-year peace-treaty with the Tarquinii (Liv. 7,22,4f.). S. was undoubtedly one of the outstanding personalities of his age (cf. Liv. 9,17,8). 1 HOLKESKAMP, Index, s.v. S.

C.MU.

[1 19] S. Rufus, P. Born in 124 or 123 BC, people’s tribune in 88 (by defecting to the plebs from his patrician family). He began his career as a court orator (in 94 BC charges against C. > Norbanus [I 1]); he was generally regarded to be the outstanding orator of his generation (Cic. De or. 1,993 3,31; Cic. Brut. 203). In 91 he belonged to the circle of friends of M. Livius [I 7] Drusus

whose conservative reforms he wanted to perpetuate. S. envisaged the equal distribution of all new citizens enfranchised in the Social War [3] across all of the ~ tribus, a plan fiercely opposed by the Optimates. In the end, S. sought support from C. > Marius [I 1] (Liv. Per. 77). The consuls of that year, L. Cornelius [I 90] Sulla and Q. Pompeius [I 6] Rufus (S.’ former friend), continued to block S.’ legislation, until he used force to break their opposition. Pompeius’ son lost his life in the ensuing fight, while it was only due to Marius’ help that Sulla himself managed to escape to his troops. S. deposed Pompeius as cos. and successfully introduced his law on citizenship and other laws regarding the recall of political exiles (probably supporters of Drusus, Rhet. Her. 2,45; see Q. > Varius) as well as a law on the

killed, while his laws were repealed (Liv. Per. 82; gen-

eral: Plut. Sulla 8—ro; Plut. Marius 34-35; App. B Civ. 1,242-272). E.BADIAN,

Quaestiones

Variae, in: Historia

18, 1969,

481-490; H.B. Martrincty, The consilium of Cn. Pompeius Strabo in 89 B. C., in: Athenaeum 53, 1975, 262266; A. KEAVENEY, What Happened in 887, in: Eirene 20, 1983, 54-71; J.G. F. PowELt, The Tribune Sulpicius, in: Historia

39, 1990,

1994, 165-171.

446-490;

R.SEAGER,

in: CAH

9’, K.-L.E.

[I 20] S. Rufus, P. Probably the son of S. [I 19], served as a legate under Caesar in Gaul 5 5-50 BC and also in the Civil War. In August 49, he negotiated at Ilerda. As praetor in 48 (MRR 2,273), S. was in command of a fleet off Sicily, where C. Cassius, [I ro] Longinus almost defeated him at Vibo (Caes. B Civ. 3,101,4—-6); in 4746, he fought as propraetor in Illyricum against M. Octavius [I 12], was proclaimed imperator and received a > supplicatio (Cic. Fam. 13,77). Together with C. Antonius [I 2], S. served as censor of 42 BC (InscrIt 13,1,504). The eponymous propraetor of Bithynia et Pontus in 46/5 who founded a colonia in Sinope is probably the quaestor of 69 and a brother of S. [1 23] (MRR 2,299; 3,202f.).

JOR. {I 21] S. Rufus, Ser. Consular tribune in 388, 384, 383 und 377 (?) BC (MRR 1,99; ro2f.; 108). If he is identical with S. [I 2], he also bore the cognomina Camerinus and Rufus which are indeed confirmed for Ser. S. Camerinus Rufus, cos. in 345, who would then probably be his son. Regarding his consular tribunate in 377, cf. S. {I 24]. C.MU. [I 22] S. Rufus, Ser. Son of S. [I 23] and Postumia, was to see Caesar in 50 BC to plead for his father. Cicero feared that the family would change allegiance (Cic. Att. 9,18,2; 9,19,2), but hoped to see S. as future husband of > Tullia nevertheless and held him in high regard (Cic. Fam. 4,2—6 and elsewhere; Cic. Phil. 9,12). S., who cannot be traced after 43 BC (Cic. Fam. 11,24,2; cf. by contrast Hor. Sat. 1,10,86 of 36/5), was probably the father of the poetess > Sulpicia [2] and may even have written poetry himself (Ov. Tr. 2,441; Plin. Ep. 5,3,5); he is likely to have been the author of some of the speeches attributed to his father [1.141 51422]. 1 SyMeE, RP 3.

JOP.

[1 23] S. Rufus, Ser. Roman politician and jurist. Praetor in 65 BC, consul in 51, died in 43. After an initial career as court orator, he moved to jurisprudence which he studied under L. Lucilius [I 3] Balbus and C. > Aquilius [I 12] Gallus (Dig. 1,2,2,43). S. was a prolific author of books totalling more than 180 scrolls which

937

938

were still available in the Principate [4.604-607], though only their titles survive today: monographs on De dotibus (‘On the Dowry’) and De sacris detestandis (‘On Sacral Law’; a controversy with Q. > Mucius [I 9] Scaevola Pontifex (Reprehensa Scaevolae capita: Gell. NA 4,1,20 or Notata Mucii: Dig. 17,2,30; see also [5.196]) as well as the earliest Roman commentaries on edicts (Ad Brutum, 2 bks.; see also [2.170]; > edictum [x]). His Responsa (‘Legal Reports’) were only published by two of his many pupils (Dig. 1,2,2,44: auditores; see also [3.70ff.]), > Alfenus [4] Varus and + Aufidius [I 7] Namusa [4.606, 608]. It is not certain whether S. also wrote a commentary on the Twelve Tablets (+ Tabulae duodecim) [4.605; 5.5of.]. As a respondent, he practiced the art of consistency in decision-making with the aid of Hellenistic logic (Cic. Brut. 152ff.; see also [6]), while as an author, he corrected and expanded the classification of legal institutions according to genera and species, a process started by Scaevola Pontifex [4.63 5ff.], e.g. in respect of theft (Gai. Inst. 3,183; see also [1.177, 184]). It is not clear whether S. had been the originator of the actio Serviana by a pawnee (— Pignus) and of the bonorum emptor (‘buyer of an estate’) [2.2623 4.452].

Aulus > Gellius [6]). S.’? audience included the future emperor Helvius > Pertinax und Aulus -> Gellius [6]. It is likely that S. dealt with various aspects of grammar (grammar in the modern sense, but also lexicography, metrics and antiquities) in a series of letters which were later compiled into a second book. Extant are six Periochae Terentianae, explicitly attributed to S. (brief summaries of the content of > Terentius’ comedies, transmitted in MSS of the latter). It is hardly credible to credit him as the author of an anonymous Accessus (schematic introduction to a particular author) to Virgil (Anth. Lat. 487c). Furthermore, S. is not identical with the S. Carthaginiensis who in addition to three elegiac distichs on the posthumous edition of the Aeneid (Suet. Vita Vergilii 38) is attributed with a number of sixains on the Aeneid (Anth. Lat. 653); they are most likely of a later date.

1 P. STEIN, The Place of Servius S. in the Development of the Roman Legal Science, in: FS F. Wieacker, 1978, 175184 2B.W. Frier, The Rise of the Roman Jurists, 1985 3 R.A. BauMAN, Lawyers in the Roman Transitional Politics, 1985 4 Wieacker,RRG 5 M.BRETONE, Storia del diritto romano, 1987. 6 O.BEHRENDS, Die Grundbegriffe der Romanistik, in: Index 24, 1996, 36-57. IG:

{I 24] S. Praetextatus, Ser. Consular tribune of 377 (?), 376, 370, 368 BC (MRR 1, 108f.; r10-112). According

SULPICIUS

G. BRUGNOLI, s.v. S., EV 4, 1068-1071; P. L. SCHMIDT, in: HLL, vol. 4, §436. P.G.

[II 3] Q. S. Camerinus. Patrician, from whose family no consul has been recorded after 345 BC [1.98]. Cos. ord. in AD 9. Possibly identical with the poet Camerinus in Ov. Pont. 4,16,19. 1 Syme, AA.

{1 4] Q. S. Camerinus Peticus. Son of S. [II 3]. Cos. suff. in AD 46, procos. of Africa in 56/7 as successor to Pompeius [II 22] Silvanus. In 58 he faced charges, less because of extortion (repetundarum crimen) than for private reasons (Tac. Ann. 13,52,1f.). In 67 he was charged with maiestas and executed together with his son, allegedly because he had not dropped the cognomen Pythicus (=Peticus), thus disregarding the honours awarded

to the iteration in the Fasti Capitolini, S. was consular tribune in 377 (III or IV respectively in 370 and 368: InscrIt 13,1,396; 398; by contrast, Cass. Dio fr. 29,1 cites a S. Rufus for 377, which might point to S. [I 21]). S.’ consular tribunate is linked to a family dispute which was to culminate in the leges Liciniae Sextiae (Liv.

to Nero (Cass. Dio 63,18,2).

6,34,5-10; > Licinius [I 43]).

mended him to Claudius [II 64] Severus and Aelius

C.MU.

[I 25] S. Saverrio, P. Consul in 279 BC, suffered defeat in the battle of Asculum at the hands of > Pyrrhus [3] together with his colleague P. Decius [I 3] Mus. Tas. II. IMPERIAL PERIOD {0 1] S. Alexander. Author of an historical work on the Late Roman Imperial Period. The work itself is lost and only known through Gregorius [4] of Tours, who referred to him several times in the 2nd book of his Historiarum libri decem (also called Historia Francorum) and seems to have consulted his work particularly for the early history of the Franci. Gregory mentions S.’ Historia (2,9) and quotes lengthy passages from books 3 and 4 (I.c.) which refer to battles amongst the Romans under Maximus and Valentinianus II. ULE. [If 2] C. S. Apollinaris. Latin grammarian who worked in Rome in the rst half of the 2nd cent. AD; terminus ante quem: 160 (publication of the Noctes Atticae by

VOGEL-WEIDEMANN, 170-173.

{0 5] S. Cornelianus. Close amicus of Cornelius Fronto

[6]; S. was an expert in rhetoric, but no philosopher (Fronto Ep. 1,1 and 2 VAN DEN Hout). Fronto recom-

[II x] Apollonides [1]. He is possibly identical with a Cornelianus, ab epistulis Graecis under Marcus [II 2] Aurelius [2.50]. 1 W.Eck, P. Aelius Apollonides, ab epistulis Graecis, in: ZPE 91, 1992, 236-242 bus patefactus, 1992.

2A.R. Brriey, Locus virtuti-

{II 6] C. S. Galba. Patrician, son of a C. S. Galba; cos. suff. in 5 BC. Married to Mummia [1] Achaica who bore him the sons S. [II 7] and the future emperor Galba [2]. His second wife was Livia Ocellina, who adopted Galba. VOGEL-WEIDEMANN, I4I.

{I 7] C. S$. Galba. Son of S. [I] 6] and brother of the

emperor Galba [2]. Cos. ord. in AD 22, preceded possibly by the office of procos. of Achaea. When Tiberius excluded him from the draw for the proconsulship in

939

940

Asia and Africa, he committed suicide in AD 36 (Suet.

torical problems linked with this increased even further because the titulus Tiburtinus (CIL XIV 3613 =ILS 918

SULPICIUS

Galba 3).

= InscrIt IV 1,130), attributed to Quirinius, was used to

VOGEL-WEIDEMANN, I41I.

{II 8] Ser. S. Galba. Roman emperor, see > Galba [2]. {Il 9] S. Galus. Two senators of this name are known

from the Augustan period; one was suffect consul in 4 BC (Decrassi, FCIR 5), the other triumvir monetalis

between 9 and 5 BC (RIC I’ 33); it is possible that they were father and son, probably identical with the father and grandfather of a Sulpicia [3] from the Tiberian period [1.233ff.]; the praenomen would then be Servius. 1 M.G. Granino Cecerg, I Sulpicii e il Tuscolano, in: RPAA 69, 1996/97.

W.E.

{fl 10] S. S. Hecataeus. Son of an Apollonius. Active around AD 68, was honoured on account of his ben-

derive two Syrian governorships for him; but this cannot be correct (most recently on the inscription: [2.199f.]). S. remained very influential under Tiberius. He was married to Aemilia [4] Lepida, whom he divorced in AD 20. He was given a censorial funeral after his death in 21 (Tac. Ann. 3,48,1). 1 H.Corron, Some Aspects of the Roman Administration of Iudaea/Syria-Palaestina, in: W. Eck (ed.), Lokale Autonomie und rémische Ordnungsmacht, 1999, 75-91 2 G. ALFOLDY, Un celebre frammento epigrafico tiburtino anonimo (P. Sulpicius Quirinius?), in: I. pl STEFANO Man-

ZELLA (ed.), Le iscrizioni dei Cristiani in Vaticano, 1997, 199-208.

WE.

Syria from 2 W.Eck, P. Weiss, Tusidius Campester, cos. suff. unter Antoninus Pius, und die Fasti Ostienses der J. 141/142 n. Chr., in: ZPE 134, 2001, 251-260.

[I 14] S. Severus. Latin hagiographer, born c. AD 363, died c. 420, descendant of Aquitaine nobility; his wife came froma consular family. Like his friend > Paulinus [5] of Nola, S. is a representative of the wave of conversiones amongst the nobility. After a successful career as a lawyer, he renounced ‘the world’ with the support of > Martinus [1] of Tours in 394 and from then on lived in a monastic community on the Primuliacum estate which he had founded and purchased with his inherited wealth; the community also included other members of the Gallic nobility. His writings all date

{M1 12] C. S. Platorinus. Son of a senatorial family who

back to the period after his conversio; his most important work was the Vita Martini (‘Life of St. Martin’),

efactions to the people of Cnidus and as a ‘physician and friend of the emperor’ (IKnidos 90), by his nomen gentile probably the emperor Ser. S. > Galba [2]. V.N. {ff 11] S. Iulianus. Senator; consular governor of Syria under Antoninus [1] Pius c. 147-149/150 probably cos. suff. in AD 142 [2.253ff.].

[1.103f.],

1E.DaBrowa, The Governors of Roman Augustus to Septimius Severus, 1998

died before taking up his seat in the Senate. His tomb, probably from the time of Tiberius, has been found close to the Tiber. G. ALFOLDY, in: CIL VI.8.3, p. 4783 to VI 31761.

{11 13] P.S. Quirinius. (the governor of Syria mentioned in the NT). He hailed from a family without senatorial

ancestors,

was

born

near

Lanuvium.

His

competence and ability gained him Augustus’ confidence and favour. Probably procos. of Creta-Cyrenae in around 15 BC, where he was victorious in the fight against the > Garamantes (Flor. Epit. 2,31,41); cos. in 12 BC, then legate of Galatia-Pamphylia, where he led the fight against the Homonadenses, possibly between 5 and 3 BC. This gained him the > ornamenta triumphalia, provided the titulus Tiburtinus refers to him (see below). His next appointment may have been as procos. of Asia. In AD 2/3 he was to accompany C. Iulius [II 32] Caesar as rector (‘tutor’) on his mission to the East, which confirms his close links with Augustus (Tac. Ann. 3,48,1). A short time later, he was appointed governor of Syria, where he conducted a — census which also included Iudaea, annexed in AD 6. The census was conducted because Judaea had become part of the province of Syria (Jos. Ant. Iud. 17,355; 18,1f.); cf. [1.77-79]. This census gained great historical importance because it is mentioned in the NT by Luke (2,2) and there linked to the birth of Christ. However, > Jesus was more likely born before the death of Herodes in 4 BC. The his-

written in 396 in defence of asceticism. Martin is praised as the founder of the ascetic movement in Gaul

and his philosophy is justified; the main addressee of this work was the traditionally educated aristocracy. This is confirmed by his style which is rich in classical reminiscences and references [1; 2]. The vita sold very successfully (Sulp. Sev. Dial. 1,23,4) and became the model for many later accounts of the life of St. Martin. Both his work and the Latin adaptation of the life of Antonius by > Evagrius [2] were seminal in the development of the Latin and particularly Gallic [3] biography, in the Middle Ages also used as models for the biographies of secular personalities [4]. Connected to the ‘Life of St. Martin’ are topics dealt with in three extant letters written in 397-398, as well as the Dialogi written in 403/4 [5]. These ‘Dialogues’ also closely follow the tradition ofclassical erudition, as evident in the reference to Cic. Acad. 1. In his Chronicorum libri I, S. also employs traditional styles of literary description, especially those of Tacitus, for the dissemination of Christian content (cf. 1,1). In this brief overview of the history of the world from its creation to about AD 400, which he finished in c. 404, S. harked back to the tradition of Eusebius and Jerome, but worked independently in his contemporary accounts which are thus an important source, particularly for the contemporary history of sth cent. Gaul. ~» Biography (III.);

tinus [1] of Tours

> HtsrorroGrapny

(IV.); > Mar-

941

SUMERIAN

942 1 J. FONTAINE (ed.), S. Severus, Vie de Saint Martin, SChr 133, 1967 (with Fr. transl.), 121 2R.KLEIN, Die Prae-

fatio der Martinsvita des S. Severus, in: Antike und Unter-

richt 31.4, 1988, 5-32

3 W.BERSCHIN, Biographie und

Epochenstil im lateinischen MA, vol. 2, 1988, VII 4 H. BeuMaNN, Topos und Gedankengefiige bei Einhard, in: Archiv fiir Kulturgeschichte 33, 1951, 337-350 5 B.R. Voss, Der Dialog in der frihchristlichen Literatur, 1970, 308-314.

Ep1TIon: C.Haim (CSEL 1), 1866, 109-135 (vita Mar-

tini); 138-151

(epistulae);

152-216

(dialogi);

3-105

(chronica). TRANSLATIONS:

K.-S.FRANK, Frihes Monchtum im Abendland, vol. 2, 1975, 20-52 (vita Martini); P. BrH1MEYER (BKV* 20), 1914, 70-147 (dialogi). BIBLIOGRAPHY:

F,GHIZZONI,

Sulpicio

Severo,

1983;

C.STANCLIFFE, St. Martin and His Hagiographer, 1983; S. WeBeEr, Die Chronik des S. Severus, 1997. U.E.

{1 15] Ser. S. Similis. Equestrian who had advanced through centurion career (Cass. Dio 69,19,1); served in

Rome as praef. annonae in c. 103-107, and from 107 to 112 as praef. Aegypti; he was promoted by Trajan to praef. praet. alongside P. Acilius [II 1] Attianus. In this position, he took part in the Parthian War, where he was probably decorated with the > dona militaria. He played an important role in Hadrian’s assumption of power in 117. He was released from his post as praef. praet. in 119 and on that occasion was probably awarded — ornamenta (most likely 0. consularia). He died seven years later. Cassius Dio (69,19) describes him as an outstanding personality. M.CurisToL,

$.DEMOUGIN,

Les ornements

de Ser. S.

Similis, in: ZPE 74, 1988, 1-21.

Sumelocenna.

1 ALFOLDY, Konsulat.

WE.

{1 17] S. Victor (also Sulpitius). Roman rhetor, probably of the 4th cent. AD (he used +> Marcomannus), author of a short rhetoric textbook (Institutiones oratoriae). The book, written at the request and for the

exclusive personal use of his son-in-law M. Silo, to whom it was also dedicated, deals in its first part with fundamental aspects of > rhetoric (definition, purpose of the orator, parts of speech), while its second part deals more comprehensively with the theory of stasis (> Status [1]). As S. confirms in his introductory letter, he mainly follows the system established by Zeno, but allows himself to deviate in certain, clearly marked aspects. EpiTron: C. Hau, Rhetores Latini minores, 1863, 3 11-

352. BIBLIOGRAPHY: C.Loutscu, A Short Note on S. V., in: BICS 31, 1984, 137f.; M. WinTERBOTTOM, The Text of S. V., in: BICS 31, 1984, 62-66. M.W.

settlement

on

the

> Nicer/

caused destruction, but settlement continued

on the

area of the civitas. 1 F.Hauc, G.Srxt, Die rémischen Inschriften und Bildwerke Wiirttembergs, *1914 2H.SCHONBERGER, Die

romischen Truppenlager der friihen und mittleren Kaiserzeit zwischen Nordsee und Inn, in: BRGK 66, 1985, 321497

3 A.GAUBATZ-SATTLER, S., 1999.

K. HEILIGMANN,

S., 1992; W.SCHNEIDER,

friihen Geschichte von Rottenburg, 1993.

Beitrage zur

RA.WI.

Sumerian. Language of the southern quarter of ~» Mesopotamia, approximately from the Persian Gulf up to Nippur. Whether the oldest cuneiform texts from + Uruk

[II 16] Sex. S. Tertullus. Cos. ord. in AD 158, procos. of Asia c. 173/4 [1.170, 217].

Celtic

Neckar (Tab. Peut. 4,1; [1. 199-271, 693f.], cf. [3. 357-382]), modern Rottenburg. Settled in the Roman period, probably after AD 90 [3. 399-402]; there is no evidence of a fort [2. 469 f. D 89], but there is evidence of an ala Vallensium (CIL XIII 6361). Inscriptions attest to a procurator (administrator of the imperial saltus S., ILS 8855, probably at the beginning of the 2nd cent. AD), an ordo and magistri of the saltus (ILS 7100, middle of the 2nd cent.). S. was in the periphery of a civitas, probably from the time of Marcus [2] Aurelius onwards. It is debatable whether this (ILS 7099; 4603) replaced the status of an imperial estate or existed beside it [3. 414-419]. There is evidence of buildings with portico architecture, of baths, latrines, an aqueduct, an approximately 5 metre-high wall with defensive walkway (2nd/3rd cents.); sculpture and small finds survive; finds in the area of the Siilchen district. > Alamanni raids (second half of the 3rd cent.)

(end of the 4th millennium

BC) represent

Sumerian is debated, but it is plausible, given the lack of attestations of other language traditions in younger texts (> Proto-Euphratic). The large majority of cuneiform texts from 3rd-millennium Sumer are written in Sumerian; yet the fact that the orthography only gains accuracy over time prevents a certain interpretation of

the older texts in this group. The most important collections of texts from that time are the archaic texts from > Ur (c. 2700), the texts from Fara (c. 2600), from pre-Sargonian > LagaS (c. 2400-2300) and from the Ur III period (c. 2050-1950). The most important textual genre are administrative documents; in addition, there are smaller numbers of royal inscriptions, legal documents, letters, and literary texts. With the onset of the Dynasty of Akkad (c. 2335), Sumerian was increasingly replaced by > Akkadian. Eventually, this development — after a phase at the beginning of the 2nd millennium in which Sumerian literature was being written down — led to the death of Sumerian as the commonly spoken language. From around 1700, even written Sumerian was only employed in cults and magic, and in the lexical — lists used in the training of > scribes; however, Akkadian was dominant in these areas as well.

SUMERIAN

Sumerian is one of the isolated languages of the ancient Near East. Linguistic similarities are found mostly with Akkadian, > Elamite and > Hurrian. They show that Sumerian can hardly have been imported from afar, but was one of the autochthonous languages of Mesopotamia. Typological features include split ergativity, a morphology that combines agglutination and inflection, distinct personal and impersonal word classes as well as SOV word order. Due to its limited geographic spread, no dialects can be discerned in the written language. A distinguishing feature of the internal chronological development is the increasing number of Akkadianisms at the end of the 3rd and the beginning of the 2nd millennium. Remnants of a sociolect that was both phonetically and lexically distinct can be found in Emesal, a form of female speech, which is optionally used in literary texts. ~ Cuneiform script; > Sumerians 1 P. AtTINGER, Eléments de linguistique sumérienne, 1993 2 R.K. ENGLUND, The Sumerian Question, in: P. ATTINGER, M.WAFLER (ed.), Mesopotamien. Spaturuk-Zeit und Fruhdynastische Zeit (OBO 160/1), 1998, 73-81 3 A.W. SyOBERG (ed.), The Sumerian Dictionary of the

University Museum

944

943

of the University of Pennsylvania,

1984 ff. 4M.P.Srreck, The Tense Systems in the Sumerian-Akkadian Linguistic Area, in: Acta Sumerologica 20, 1998, 181-199 5M.L. THOMSEN, The Sumerian Language, *2001.

M.S.

Sumerian law see > Cuneiform, legal texts in > Sumerians

Sumerians. Akkadian term (of unclear etymology) [2. 33 f.] for the predominant ethnicity of southern -» Mesopotamia (Babylonia) towards the end of the 4th and in the 3rd millennium BC, defined by their Sumerian writing culture (~ Sumerian). By the early 3rd millennium, Semitic-speaking ethnicities (called Akkadians in scholarly literature; > Akkadian) also played a role in Mesopotamia. In addition, there were population groups in southern Mesopotamia that can

be defined through the substrate languages they spoke. The coexistence of the Sumerians and the Akkadians passed — as far as we can see — without ethnic conflicts. There are many indications that members of both ethnicities intermarried over a long period, giving rise to a new element in the population which was faced with newly immigrant nomads and groups of hill tribes, who in the course of time were each absorbed by the settled population. + Akkadian; — Cuneiform, legal texts in; - Mesopotamia I. D. 1 H. CRAWFORD, Sumer and the Sumerians, 1991

2F.R.

Kraus, Sumerer und Akkader. Ein Problem der altmeso-

potamischen Geschichte, 1970.

J.RE.

Summaria Alexandrinorum. In Late Antiquity in Alexandria [1] writings by > Galenus and to a lesser extent by + Hippocrates [6] were assembled into a medical compendium. Known as the ’16 Books of Galen’, it covers the basic areas of medicine (including anatomy, physiology and therapeutics). According to Arab sources [1], a number of teachers (+ latrosophistés) in Alexandria are supposed to have written a series of summaries or abridgements of the books contained in this compendium, which were then collected under the title SA and translated into Arabic and perhaps also into Hebrew [2]. In compass and compilation technique they are rather varied. For instance, the abridgement of Galen’s De sectis consists only of extracts and explanatory notes, that of Galenus’s De pulsibus of two independent treatises and that of Ad Glauconem proves to be a comprehensive commentary on Galen’s Therapeutics [3]. In all, the authors summarise Galen’s teachings appropriately, but in the process of revision they give his writings an impression of greater coherence than the originals exhibit. The famous mediaeval doctrine, that health depended on the correct regulation of sex res non naturales (environment; motion and rest; eating and drinking; sleeping and waking; excretions; emotions), derives from the SA, in which material from Galen’s treatises De pulsibus and Ars medica was linked together in order to enhance the aetiology [4]. — Galenus 1 F. Sezcin, Geschichte des arabischen Schrifttums, vol. 3, 1970, I4I-I50 2 E.LreBer, Galen in Hebrew, in: V.NutTTon (ed.), Galen: Problems and Prospects, 1981, 167-186 31.GAROFALO, La traduzione araba dei com-

pendi alessandrini delle opere de! canone di Galeno. Il compendio dell’ Ad Glauconem, in: Medicina dei Secoli, 1994, 329-348 4N.PALmieRI, La théorie de la médecine des alexandrins aux arabes, in: D.JacQuart (ed.), Les voies de la science grecque, 1997, 33-134. V.N.

Sun (idoc/hélios; Latin sol). I. GENERAL POINTS II. SYMBOLISM PHY III. THE MODERN ERA

IN PHILOSO-

I. GENERAL POINTS In Antiquity, the Sun was usually included among the + planets. In the order of the planets, seen from the Earth, Venus and Mercury were placed above the Sun by some authors (for example by Plato [x] and Eudoxus [x] of Cnidus; see fig. 1), and below it by others. The latter series — Earth, Moon, Mercury, Venus (or also: Venus, Mercury, e.g. by Ptolemaeus [65]), Sun, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn — was later generally accepted and applied until Copernicus introduced the heliocentric system in the modern era (see fig. 2). In the Hellenistic period, the predominant geocentric view of the cosmos was called into question by > Aristarchus [3] of Samos (around 3 10-230 BC), who was the first to propose the heliocentric hypothesis. He is also known for his attempt to measure the sizes and distances of the Sun

946

945

SUN

difficulties which cannot be solved within Aristotelian

~ cosmology [10. 305; 4. 94 f.].

Earth Saturn

@

@

e

Mats

Venus

@

Moon

Juppiter Mercury

Fig.1:

SUN

The sequence of the planets from the centre (=Earth) according to Plato

Fig. 2:

The Ptolemaic system

and Moon; a separate (extant) treatise is devoted to this

attempt: Peri megethén kai apostémdton Heéliou kai Selénés (‘On the Sizes and Distances of the Sun and Moon’; [2]).

Greek scholars developed various theories on the nature of the Sun, primarily with the aim of explaining its light and warmth. Aristotle [6] ascribes the light and warmth of the Sun not to the heavenly body itself (which in his view consists of aether like the other heavenly bodies and the heavens in general), but to the fact that the air of the higher regions heats and ignites through the friction caused by the rotation of the heavenly spheres, especially at the point at which the Sun is fixed (Aristot. Cael. 2,7,289a 19-333; Aristot. Mete. 1,3,340a 22-341a 36). However, this theory implies

Il. SYMBOLISM IN PHILOSOPHY The symbolism of light, strength, warmth and sight traditionally associated with the Sun led to its association with the concepts of knowledge, the distinction between right and wrong, and rulership. Thus even the Greek philosopher Heraclitus I [1] claimed that “the Sun is new every day” (fr. 6 DK); undoubtedly, this image was intended to illustrate his concept of the universe as an infinite process of death and rebirth. > Parmenides also resorts to the imagery of the Sun; in the proem of his didactic poem (fr. 1,1-28 DK), he reports how he was led far from the house of Night (+ Nyx) to the Light by the Heliads, the daughters of the Sun. At the gate, through which the paths of Night and Day lead and through which the goddess (6ed/thed), who teaches Parmenides about the two paths (that of unvarying truth and that of misguided fancy), is reached, the Heliads in turn move > Dike, Justice, guardian of the gate, with sweet words to allow the philosopher to enter. With the image of the Heliads, Parmenides invokes the symbolic connection of the Sun with the sight of that which really (i.e. truly) exists, and therefore with the ability to distinguish between true and false. This imagery was adopted and expanded by Plato [x]. In the 6th book of the Republic, he assigns the Sun the highest degree of grandeur and strength in the visible world and ascribes the generative power of the good directly to it (Pl. Resp. 6,508bc; the Sun is the “offspring of the good”). Likewise in the Republic, in his famous allegory of the cave (ibid. 7,514a-517¢c), Plato affirms the correspondence between the highest powers (the good and the Sun) and develops it on the three-fold (gnosiological, ontological and_ ethical) plains of knowledge, existence and good; this analogy forms the background of the path to truth which the philosopher must cover. These elements were revived in ~ Neoplatonism. For the Christian view of the Sun, cf. > Sol II.

Ill. THE MODERN ERA At the beginning of the modern era, under the influence of Platonic and Neoplatonic thought, many thinkers attributed an important, almost ‘hegemonial’ role to the Sun, cf. e.g. Marsilio Ficino (1433-1499), Liber de Sole. This new attitude was associated with the increasing dissatisfaction with the astronomical model of Ptolemaeus [65] and with the (albeit limited) knowledge of non-geocentric systems which had been developed in Antiquity (especially the heliocentric model of Aristarchus, see above I.), and encouraged the Copernican revolution. In an impressive transfer to modern problems, ancient scientific and philosophical conceptions associated with the Sun were ultimately taken up in the science fiction novel Solaris (1961) by the Polish philosopher and author Stanislaw Lem (born 1921) [6] and in

947

948

the film version (1971) of the same name by the Russian Andrei TARKOVSKY (1932-1986). The storyline of the novel revolves around the ‘living’ planet Solaris, whose name goes back to the Sun (Latin sol). Like the Platonic Sun, Solaris is a source of life, value and ‘perceptibility’, although in a unique and disturbing way: this life-giving ‘ocean’ brings to life distressing fantasy figures from the subconscious of visitors to the space station which circles the planet; thus, it confronts the human beings with the dark and agonizing sides of their own inner being in a dramatic way [3]. + Cosmology; — Fixed stars; - Moon; — Planets; + Sol; > Shooting stars; > NATURAL SCIENCES III. AsTRONOMY

bek-Re in Faiyum and Chnum-Re (— Chnubis [r]) in Esna. This solar attribution surfaced in particular when a local god gained importance as a result of political or other changes. Creation gods almost always had a solar nature with a correlation between the creation of the world (+ World, creation of the) and daily perpetuation. By far the majority of Egyptian hymns are addressed to a sun god. Even the Graeco-Egyptian > magical papyri reveal the rank of the Egyptian sun god [1].

SUN

1D.R. Dicks, Early Greek Astronomy, 1970 2TH. Heat, Aristarchus of Samos. The Ancient Copernicus, 1913

3A.Jort, Lem, Stanislaw: “Solaris”, in: J.-F. MAT-

TEI (ed.), Encyclopédie philosophique universelle, Part 3. Les ceuvres philosophiques. Dictionnaire, vol. 2, 1992, 3469 41d. (ed.), Aristotele: Il cielo, 1999 =©5 TH.S.

KuuHNn, The Copernican Revolution, Solaris, 1961

1957

6 S. LEM,

7 O.NEUGEBAUER, A History of Ancient

Mathematical Astronomy, vol. 3, 1975 8 G.V. SCHIAPARELLI, Scritti sulla storia dell’astronomia antica, 3 vols., 1925-1927

9U.Bewer

(ed.),

Die

Sonne,

1999

10 F.SoLMSEN, Aristotle’s System of the Physical World, 1960 11£E.ZiNNeER, Entstehung und Ausbreitung der copernicanischen Lehre, *1988.

Sun god I. Mesopotamia ANATOLIA

II. Ecypt

III. HITTITE

IV. GREECE AND ROME

I. MESOPOTAMIA In Mesopotamia, the Sumerian sun god Utu (written with the Sumerian sign for day, ud, which may be an etymological connection) was regarded as the city god of South Babylonian Larsa [2. 287-291] and the Akkadian god Samaé (also common Semitic for ‘sun’) as the city god of North Babylonian — Sippar. The sun god was never at the top of the Mesopotamian > pantheon [1] which was dominated by > Enlil (3rd/early 2nd millennium), — Marduk (zst millennium) and + Assur [2]. As the god of daylight, Sama was the lord of justice and divination. Similarly, other godly figures such as > Baal or > El formed the top of the pantheon in Syria. ~ Religion II. 1D.O.

Epzarpb,

s.v.

Sonnengott,

WbMyth

1, 1965,

126f. 2TH. RIcHTER, Untersuchungen zu den lokalen Panthea Siid- und Mittelbabyloniens in altbabylonischer Zeit, 1999.

J.RE.

II. Ecyer

Egyptian sun gods were always male. As a result of the enormous significance of the sun in Egypt they always stood at the top of the > pantheon. The most important sun god in Egypt was > Re. Each main god was attributed with the solar nature of Re, which is particularly obvious in > Amun-Re in Thebes, > So-

1 H. Fautn, Helios Megistos, 1995 terglaube im alten Agypten, 1941.

2 H.KeEes, Der GotA.v.L.

Ill. HirrirE ANATOLIA Hittite religion distinguished several sun gods that emerged from separate cult traditions [4; 5]. The sun goddess (as the sun of the day, Estan ‘source of light’, ‘day’, Hittite I8tanu) belonged to the Hattian pantheon of central Anatolia [4; 5. 420 f.; 10. 70; 7]. Although she was also worshipped in her chthonic aspect of sinking below the earth during the night, the notion that the Old-Anatolian sun goddess was a chthonic mother goddess as such [9] is not tenable. Local manifestations of the sun goddess are referred to by their own epithets. The most important is the sun goddess of Arinna [5. 423 ff.; 10. 70 f., 90, 112], frequently documented in Old-Hittite texts [2. 11, 15; 5.378; 10. 89]. Her solar nature is evoked in the epithets ‘queen of heaven’ and ‘the torch of the Hatti land’. Her chthonic aspect is suggested by the epithets ‘mother earth’ [10. 70; 7] and ‘queen of the earth’. She is regarded as the highest goddess of the state pantheon (‘queen of all the lands’, ‘queen of the land of Hatti’). She protected the kingdom and aided in oaths and battles. In the state pantheon of the Middle-Hittite Period (c. 14th cent. BC), she forms the main triad along with the — weather god, her husband, and the LAMMA god. From the time of Suppiluliuma I (c. 13 55-1320) onwards, she occasionally appeared next to the sun god of the sky [6]. The sun goddess of the earth rules over the Underworld [5. 421 ff.]. As a counterpart to the heavenly sun god, she stands beside him as early as in an Old-Hittite text [1. vol. 17, no. 7+, col. IV(?), ll. 7’ff.]; the notion that gave rise to this constellation probably emerged not from central Anatolia but from the south and the south east. During the Middle Kingdom, she was largely identified with the Hurritic Allani and was invoked as ‘the one who determines fate’ in numerous incantations. Her cult, which was widespread in the Period of the Great Kingdom (c. the 13th cent. BC), is documented in the Hittite catalogue of gods [1, vol. 24. 203 III] where her various local manifestations are listed. The name of the Luwian sun god Tiwaz as well as that of Palaic Tiyaz was derived from the Indo-European root *diéu. However, this god displays certain qualities of the Hurritic Simige, who in turn had adopted characteristics of the Babylonian Samaé [5. 378]. Both strongly influenced the notion ofthe sun god in the Middle Hittite pantheon [5. 379 f.; 10. 89, 92]. In the

949

950

Middle Hittite Period, a Hittite hymn to the sun in the Babylonian tradition of Sama’ was created, which was then transferred to the sun goddess of Arinna [3; 8] during the era of the Great Kingdom. The sun god of heaven is ‘the light in the ambit of heaven and earth, king of heaven, witness’ and ‘father’. During the era of the Great Kingdom, he often appears in first place [6] in the lists of the gods of oaths. In incantations, he appears as a counterpart to the sun goddess of the earth. + Hattusa II. D.

are recorded in inscriptions (cf. the Heracleum of the

1 Keilschrifttexte aus Boghazk6i, 1923 ff. (58 volumes so far), repr.1970 2 A.ARCHI, Eine Anrufung der Sonnengottin von Arinna, in: E. Neu (ed.), Documentum Asiae Minoris antiquae. FS H. Otten, 1988, 5-32 SuialCe

GUTERBOCK, The Composition of Hittite Prayers to the Sun, in: Journ. of the American Oriental Soc. 78, 1958,

237-245 41d.,s. v. 8tanu, RLA 5, 1976-1980, 209 f. 5 V.Haas, Geschichte der hethitischen Religion, 1994

6 G. KESTEMONT, Le panthéon des instruments hittites de droit

public,

in:

Orientalia

7 J.KLINGER, Untersuchungen

45,

1976,

147-177

zur Rekonstruktion

der

hattischen Kultschicht, 1996, 141-147 8 E.LAROCHE, Recherches sur les noms des dieux hittites, 1947, 25, 105107. 9 J.G. MacqQuEEN, Hattian Mythology and Hittite Monarchy, in: Anatolian Studies 9, 1959, 171-188 10 M. Porxo, Religions of Asia Minor, 1995 11 £E.voNn SCHULER, S. v. Kleinasien. S.,WbMyth Vol. 1, *1983, 196198.

IV. GREECE AND ROME

s. > Sol I.

SUOVETAURILIA

Salaminii [4], who, like the Aeginetae (Hdt. 6,90), settled in S. in the late Archaic Period [1. 72]). S. was fortified in 4143/2 BC (Thuc. 8,4), the city wall was enlarged in the 3rd cent. BC with spolia from late Classical tombs, including a boathouse for two coastguard ships [z. 55; 3.16]. In the > Chremonidean War, S. was Macedonian [3. 33]. The temenos of Athena Sounias, with a temple mentioned by Vitruvius (De arch. 4,8,4), was on a low hill 500 m outside the city to the northeast. The economic blossoming of S. in the Classical Period was based chiefly on mining, (tower) farmsteads are evidence of agriculture [1. 78-86]; ergasteria (some with towers [1. 86-90]) were used for preparing ore. The astiké hodos (‘city road’) connected S. with Athens, and a dense network of roads the individual mining areas with one another. With the decline of mining at the end of the 4th cent. BC depopulation and desolation began; the city still existed, however, when in 104 BC rebelling slaves occupied S. (Ath. 6,272ef). Literary sources: Hom. Od. 3,278; Soph. Aj. 1218 ff.; Eur. Cyc. Zostesldi6, Conbause hs inns ktoluags lysis CicwAtte 7,3,10. Inscriptions: [1. 51-55]; IG P 8,6; 1024; IG II* LI80;

1260;

1300;

1742,60—-66;

1752,21—-25;

1H.R. GoeETTE, ‘O GEtWhoyos Sijyuos Lovvov, 1999 2G.GruBEN, Die Tempel der Griechen, +1986 3 H.Lauter, Das Teichos von Sounion, in: MarbWPr,

1988, 11-33

Sunday see - Week

1270;

Hesperia 30, 1961, 33 (SEG 19,149), 195 ff.; SEG LOM OssLOs22.7a UGVOUs Dias 27 VAS a 3Ae

4 H.LOHMANN, Wo lag das Herakleion der

Salaminioi émi Tlog0ud?, in: ZPE 133, 2000, 91-102. V.Srais, TO Lovviov, 1920; TRAILL, Attica, 6, 18, 45, 63,

Sundial see > Analemma; > Clocks Sunium (Zovvov/Sounion). Cape in the southeast of Attica, Attic paralia deme (Str. 9,1,22), phyle of Leontis, from 201/o BC Attalis, four (six) bouleutai. The

territory of S. (c. 28 km’) bordered on Amphitrope in the west (border inscription on the Spitharopussi [x. x1 f. pl. 3]), and Thoricus in the north and, in Nape and Thrasymus, encompassedtwo significant mining districts of + Laurium. The cults of Poseidon and Athena Sounias on the cape stretched back into the late Geometric Period. In c. 600 BC colossal kouroi were constructed here, and in the late Archaic Period a limestone Doric temple (6x13 columns), which was destroyed before being completed in the > Persian Wars [x] in 480 BC. A settlement on the cape can be assumed as early as the Archaic Period. In rebuilding the city and sanctuary after 480, the orthogonal grid of streets (blocks of roo feetxroo feet; + Hippodamus) was orientated on the axis of the Sanctuary of Poseidon. At the height of the Classical Period a stonemason’s guild from the Ionian Islands created, on the plans of an Athenian architect, a still well-preserved Agrileza marble [x. 90 f.] Doric peripteros, unusual in many details, with 6x13 columns on a wide podium [2. 212-216] and architectural sculpture of Parian > marble. Other cults

67, 98, 112 Nr. 128, table 4; TRAVLOS, Attika, 404-429 ill. 508-542; WHITEHEAD, Index s.v. S. H.LO.

Sunnites (ah! as-sunna). Islamic orthodoxy based primarily on the sunna (that is, the exemplary words and deeds) of the prophet + Muhammad and on the — Quran. The S., who constitute the majority of Muslims (more than four fifth), distinguish themselves from the > Shiites i.a. in their interpretation of the Koran, in the relatively low significance of martyrdom and in areas of law. Even within the S., various schools of law have developed (> Islam). + Islam; > Kalam G.H. A. JuyNBOLL, D. W. Brown, s.v. Sunna, El 9, 878a—

881b.

H.SCHO.

Suovetaurilia also Suovitaurilia. The combination, tra-

ditional in Roman religion, of three sacrificial animals — pig (sus), sheep (ovis) and bull (taurus) — that were led, as part of ritual purification (> Lustratio), round a place (e.g. a piece of land: Cato Agr. 141; [1. 103-125]) or group of people to be lustrated, and subsequently sacrificed. A distinction was made between suovetaurilia lactentia or minora (piglet, lamb and calf: Cato Agr. 141) and adult suovetaurilia maiora (e.g. boar,

SUOVETAURILIA

951

ram, bull: Varro Rust. 2,1,10; cf. Plin. HN 8,206). The suovetaurilia seem originally to have been intended as a sacrifice to > Mars (Fest. 154 L.), as e.g. also in the case of the lustration of the Roman army (Liv. 1,44,1; 8,10,14;

Dye HoNSELL/MAYER-MALY/SELB,

194; KAsER, RPR vol. 1,

456; Id., RPR vol. 2, 289 f., 306-308; J.M. RAINgR, S. und Stockwerkseigentum im klassischen rémischen Recht, in: ZRG 106, 1989, 327-357: D.SCH.

> Lustrum;— Census). Suovetaurilia could be

offered to any deity, however, in whose domain an

Superindictio. One of several terms (others are e.g.

expiation (— Piaculum) was meant to take place (e.g.

adscriptio, extraordinaria munera) for special taxes levied by imperial decree in the Roman and Byzantine Empires to offset extraordinary expenses, e.g. in times of crisis, either from all or only from rich landowners. As unanticipated burdens, they were universally detested.

the grove of Dea Dia: Commentarii fratrum Arvalium 94,1,23;3 11,8; 105b,7 SCHEID et passim), including, from the rst cent. AD onwards, deities that were not part of the Roman > pantheon [1]. In the Severan Period, for instance, suovetaurilia can be found in the cult of + Mithras [2. 180-183] and in other parts of the Roman Empire (Beaujeu near Lyon: [3]; Moesia; Moesia superior). ~ Expiatory rites 1D.Baupy, Romische Umgangsriten (RGVV 43), 1998 2 R. MERKELBACH, Mithras, 1984 3 J.J. Hatr, Le double suovetaurile de Beaujeu et le culte des Deesses-Meres et de Tutelle a Lyon, in: Revue archéologique de l’Est et du Centre-Est 37, 1986, 252-267. U.W.

ScHo1z,

S. und Solitaurilia, in: Philologus

117,

1973, 3-28; S. TORTORELLA, I rilievi del Louvre con suovetaurile: un documento del culto imperiale, in: Ostraka 1.1, 1992, 81-104 (bibliogr.).

AVS.

Superficies. In Roman law, the hereditary authority to maintain a building on another’s land (heritable building right). This right was at first granted by communities (cf. FIRA III no. 109), later also by private individuals. Its basis was a lease, generally of unlimited duration, or a purchase, also donations or liabilities (> Leasehold). The owner of the superficies was protected against the landowner by an appeal of purchase or contract of services on the object of concern, against third parties by the relinquishment of the right of appeal to which the owner was entitled, and by the praetor through an interdict, viz. the interdictum de superficiebus, modelled on the > interdictum uti possidetis, and following a judicial examination (causa cognita) in the case of a superficies of unlimited duration, by an appeal quasi in rem (quasi in rem actio), cf. Ulp. Dig. 43,18,1 pr.—3. If the land did not belong to the vendor, the actio Publiciana was available to the purchaser of the superficies (Ulp. Dig. 6,2,12,3). In spite of the superficies, the building remained ‘by civil and natural law’ the property of the landowner (Gai. Dig. 43,18,2): ‘the building yields to the land’ (superficies solo cedit, Gai. Inst. 2,73). If the superficiary declined to take issue with the defensive appeal of the owner, he lost possession (Dig. 39,2,45). The superficiary’s right was alienable (Dig. 18,1,32) and pledgeable (Dig. 13,7,16,2), and could be the object of a legacy, even to the landowner himself

—+ Taxes

J. KARAYANNOPULOS, Das Finanzwesen des friihbyzantinischen Staates, 1958, 138-141; N.OIKONOMIDES, s.v. Secondary Taxes, ODB 3, 1863f. FT.

Supernomen. Additional personal name. In the Roman Empire outside of Italy, the nomen gentile system (— Personal names III.) was uncommon. Thus, from the 2nd century AD, names consisting of just one word reappear, first in the East, where people often had an indigenous name in addition to a Greek name, e.g. Avovvovosg 6 xai “Audic, AD 79 [r. 5,119]. The supernomen (only in Ouirace/Kugianh supernomen Micines/ ‘little one’, CIL V 6260) oder signum (‘distinguishing mark’) was added to the Roman name by means of qui/ quae et or qui vocatur or signo etc. (P. Tadius Saturninus qui et Sterceius/‘litterbug’, CIL XIV 1654; M. Aur(elius) Sabinus cui fuit et signum Vagulus/‘vagabond’, CIL VI 13213). The supernomen sometimes was an indigenous name (C. Ravonius Celer qui et Bato Scenobarbi nation(e) Dal[mata], CIL X 3618), but usually a nickname that had been acquired at some later point. A special case is the supernomen ending in -ius, which originally indicated membership of a tribe (Sagitti, Leucadii), but then came to be more generally used and often was the only (or the only known) name. It is derived from personal names or from nouns (including Greek nouns): Dalmatius, Honorius, Lactantius, Eusebius (list at [3. 76-90]). 1 M.Lamsertz, Zur Ausbreitung des Supernomen oder Signum im romischen Reiche, in: Glotta 4, 1913, 78-143; 5,1914,99-170 2 A, 2448-2452

2 W.KUBITSCHEK, s. v. Signum (2), RE 31. KajANTO, Supernomen, 1966.

H.R. Superscript see > Writing styles Superstitio A. INTRODUCTION

RELIGIONS

B. POLEMIC

C. WOMEN

BETWEEN

D. COLLECTIVE CRISES

(Dig. 30,86,4; 43,18,1,7). In Late Antiquity, it seems to

have become possible to arrange special ownership of the building at construction with the consent of the landowner (cf. Gai. Epit. 2,1,4). Justinian (6th cent. AD), however, no longer permitted the erector to become an owner (Dig. 43,18,2).

A. INTRODUCTION The etymology of superstitio cannot be determined with any certainty (from superstes in the extended sense of the ‘remains left’ after a sacrifice, or from superstitiosus in the sense of ‘telling fortunes or prophesying’:

953

954

Cic. Nat. D. 2,28,72). It is of no particular relevance for

thus more circumstantially a particular ‘subservience’ to the gods. This tendency to magic and crisis-induced ‘excessive’ religiosity, already ascribed to women in Antiquity, appears to have continued into the Middle Ages and beyond in the form of the witch phenomenon [8.

our understanding of the concept in different contexts [t. 387; 5. 633; 7. 1or], as the discourse of ancient commentators is based on various concepts of superstitio. Outside the field of religion, into Late Antiquity (and beyond) superstitio and superstitiosus are used in the sense of ‘ignorant/foolish’ (i.a. Plin. HN 30,7; Quint. 1,1,3) and ‘timid’ (Quint. Inst. 9,4,25; 10,6,5 passim).

B. POLEMIC BETWEEN RELIGIONS In a religious context, depending on time and place the term superstitio might in practice be directed disapprovingly against any form of religion seen to be foreign, obscure, or harmful to society [2. 387]. In Roman society, aspects of the religions of other peoples not integrated into Roman religion, or not apt to be thus integrated (especially in the context of — divination), such as those of the Germans, Gauls/druids, Celts, Chaldaeans and Etruscans (> Harioli), as well as the Jews, were called superstitio [3. 66f.; 9. 22f.]; and,

from the rst/2nd cents. onward, increasingly the Christian religion (cf. Plin. Ep. 10,96). At the same time, Christians in their turn adopted the term for pejorative use against any form of ‘pagan’ religion (cf. i.a. Acts 17:22, where the Greek term > deisidaimonia is used). Inter-religious polemic on the part of a particular society and its political functionaries and representatives also found expression in legislation directed towards eliminating elements of ‘superstitio’ seen to represent a danger to society, repelling such elements or removing them from the centre of the ancient civitas or polis (e.g. Dig. 48,19,30; Cod. Theod. 16,10,2; for a full account: [4. 55 ff.]). At the level of philosophy and theology, superstitio was defined by Latin authors, adopting and furthering Greek concepts (esp. > atheism and — deisidaimonia),

as being the opposite of the ‘true’ and ‘correct’ religion (see > Religion I.) of the philosophers (Varro in Aug. @iva.6,9-4Scn Clem 2,550) Gics Nata 2.28.72 aCic: Div. 2,149); this mode of argument was subsequently taken up by Christian writers, who, in place of superstitio (as an ultimately ‘false style’ of religion pursued ‘excessively’ or ‘insufficiently’), set religion itself as being either false or true. Not until the medieval reception of the ancient discussion of superstitio was the internal argument resumed, after Christendom had developed its own forms of > demonology, as well as different forms of divination [5. 634 f.].

C. WOMEN Cicero uses the adjective superstitiosus particularly often when he is referring to women (esp. elderly women), implying rather than making more explicit mention of associated knowledge and practices in the field of + magic (Cic. Nat. D. 2,70; 3,92; Dom. 105; Div. 1,7;

2,19 and 125). Cic. Tusc. 3,72 sees the superstitio of women, as well as their propensity for magic, most of all in the context of excessive grief after a death, and

SUPPLETION

193-5]. D. COLLECTIVE CRISES The majority of references in Livy discuss the context of collective crises, where, in reaction to epidemics (Liv. 1,31,6; 4,30,93 7,2,3) or military defeats (6,5,6;

29,14,2), either the population of the city of Rome or Italian communities resort to extraordinary religious observances (‘new sacrificial customs’, or perhaps the inauguration of ludi scaenici), described as superstitio. After the theft of cult images by Verres (Cic. Verr. 2,4,113), Cicero describes the inhabitants of the province of Sicilia as having fallen into a state of collective anxiety (superstitio), fearing the anger of the gods. — Magic, Magi 1S.CALDERONE, S., in: ANRW I 2, 1972, 377-396 2 B.Giapicow, s.v. Aberglaube, HrwG 1, 387-388

3 F. GraF, La magie dans l’antiquité gréco-romaine, 1994 (Engl. transl.: Magic in the Ancient World, 1999) 4D.Gropzynski, S., in: REA 76, 1974, 36-60 5 D. HARMENING, Ss. v. Superstition; Aberglaube, HWdPh

10, 633-636

6 C.LECOUTEUxX, Das Reich der Nacht-

damonen, 2001 7G.LucxK, Witches and Sorcerers in Classical Literature, in: B. ANKARLOO, S.CLARK (ed.), Witchcraft and Magic in Europe, 1999, vol. 2, 91-158 8 R.PortER, Witchcraft and Magic in Enlightenment,

Romantic and Liberal Thought, in: s. [7], vol. 5, 193-273 9 J.ScHEID, Religion et superstition a l’époque de Tacite, in: Religion, supersticion y magia en el mundo romano, 1985, 19-34.

CE:

Suppletion (From Latin suppleére, ‘to fill, supplement, complete’.) The term is used to describe the formal combination of words that are related semantically, but not etymologically. Suppletion is found a) in adjectives, when the forms used in gradation are derived from different roots, e.g. English good — better — best, Latin bonus — melior — optimus; b) in verbs, when different tense stems are found within the same paradigm, e.g. English be —is — was; Latin sum — fui; fero — tuli —latum; Greek Aéyw — 00 — eimov (lég6 — er6 — eipon); 6edw — bpouat — eidov (hordd — 6psomai — eidon). Within a given language, suppletion can be inherited from an ancestor language, or can have developed in the language itself. While ancient grammarians do not employ the technical term ‘suppletion’, they are aware both of this phenomenon (which they describe as ‘supplementing’, e.g. explere, subrogare) and of its counterpart, defectiveness (e.g. missing tense stems, defectiva verborum species, Diom. 1,346,12). O.SZEMERENYI, Einfiihrung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft, 41990, 213 f., 327 f.; K.STRUNK, Uberlegungen zur Defektivitat und Suppletion im Griechischen und Indogermanischen, in: Glotta 55, 1977, 2-34.

SUPPLICATIO

955

Supplicatio (‘Ceremony of supplication’or ‘propitiation’ or ‘thanksgiving’). In Roman religion, supplicatio denoted in the wider sense an offering of wine and incense (ture ac vino supplicare), and in the narrower sense a ceremony of the commonwealth arranged by the authorities. Such supplicationes were recommended in emergencies by the > quindecimviri sacris faciundis upon consulting the — Sibyllini libri, and by the ~ pontifices or the > haruspices, and were approved by the Senate. There was a distinction between supplicationes of supplication and expiation on the one hand and those supplicationes that were celebrations of thanksgiving. The supplicatio as a supplication was arranged to avert threats of danger, often in connection with a + prodigium (e.g. plagues: Liv. 41,21,11; war: Liv. 31,9). A procession of all participants went from temple to temple, the temples being opened during this period. The quindecimviri spoke the prayer (obsecratio) and the participants gave responses. The ceremonial of the supplicatio generally lasted one day, but in case of grave events it could be longer (Liv. 10,23,1; 22,1,153 35,40,7; 40,3733 up to 50 days: Liv. 10,10; 10,47). It

has not been conclusively demonstrated whether a ~ lectisternium was carried out in connection with the supplicatio. A supplicatio as a thanksgiving celebration was performed e.g. after the lifting of an external danger (e.g. victorious return from battle: Liv. 37,47; uncovering of

a conspiracy: Cic. Cat. 3,15), and the honour associated with it was awarded to whoever was credited with the success (Cic. Phil. 1,12). The duration of the supplicatio reflected the importance of the event. In the Imperial period, the importance of the supplicatio declined. It became a venue for the avowal of loyalty to the Imperial house (— Ruler cult). + Expiatory rites; > Sacrifice G.FREYBURGER,

Supplication

grecque

et supplication

romaine, in: Latomus 47, 1988, 501-525; L. HALKIN, La

supplication d’action de graces chez les Romains, 1953;

LaTTE, 245 f.

ANS.

Supplicium (‘Punishment’) is used in Roman law similarly to > poena, but confined to ‘public’ punishment (+ Penal Law) and more specifically the death penalty. One can only speculate on how supplicium (originally probably a plea for forgiveness) came to acquire the meaning of a punishment. The Twelve Tables (5th cent. BC) do recognize the death penalty in some cases, but primarily as a private punishment; it is not called supplicium in reports on the law. A supplicium more maiorum (‘punishment according to the tradition of the forefathers’) is mentioned several times in the sources (references [1. 204-207, 343 f.]). This is to be understood as enforcement of the death penalty by tying the offender to an infelix arbor (‘ill-fated’, infertile tree) and whipping him to death. This sanction was probably provided for treason and high treason (— perduellio) in the Republican period. Others [2. 1614 f.] believe, on

956 the other hand, that whipping was just a secondary punishment before subsequent beheading with an axe or hanging on an infelix arbor (according to Liv. 1,26,6). In criminal law doctrine of the 2nd and 3rd cents. AD, supplicium is regularly the expression for the most serious punishment (ultimum supplicium, Celsus, Dig. 48,19,21; saummum supplicium, Callistratus, Dig. 48,19,28 pr.). The method of enforcing it changed, but remained varied (beheading by sword, hanging ona forked cross, burying alive, etc). + Death penalty ; Punishment, Criminal law 1 E. CANTARELLA, I supplizi capitali in Grecia e a Roma, 1991

2K.Larre,s. v. Todesstrafe, RE Suppl. 7, 1599-

1619.

GS.

Supplies see > Logistics Suppositio partus. In Roman law the punishable act of substituting children, > partus suppositus. GS. Sur(r)ina. The small Etruscan settlement of S. was on

the Colle di San Lorenzo in Viterbo near the papal palace and the cathedral which is separated by a passage from an adjacent hill which was also built over by mediaeval Viterbo. Parts of the encircling wall and the sewerage system are still visible. Of the Roman municipium of Surrina Nova, on a hill between Viterbo and Lake Bullicame, there are only limited remains. Finds from the surrounding area, e.g. from — Acquarossa, + Blera, — Ferentis, Ferentium, — Manturanum, + Musarna [2], > Norchia and > San Giovenale are preserved in the Museo Civico in Viterbo. A.EmiLiozzi1, La collezione Rossi Danielli nel Museo Civico di V., 1974; Ead., Il Museo Civico di V. Storia delle raccolte archeologiche, 1986; A.SCRIATTOLI, V. nei suoi monumenti, 1920.

M.M.

Sura [1] Roman cognomen (‘calf bone’), recorded for L. Cornelius [I 56] Lentulus S. etc. Decrassli, FCIR, 269; KAJANTO, Cognomina, 63; 226.

K-LE.

[2] Aemilius S. In a gloss on Vell. Pat. 1,6,6, an excerpt from a work by a certain Aemilius S. with the title De annis populi Romani is cited as a supplement to Velleius’ presentation of the genealogical derivation of the Macedonian royal house. The excerpt contains an account of the successive five empires of the Assyrians, the Medes, the Persians, the Macedonians and the Romans. [1] supposes that S., who is not mentioned anywhere else, is the author of a short chronicle of the world. 1 TH. Mommskn, Litterarhistorisches, in: RhM 16, 1861,

282-287, here: 282-284.

U.E.

[3] Northern Syrian city on the Euphrates, modern ruins of al-Suriyya with an extent of 1700 mx 450 m.

227

958

Probably a fortification of the border with the Parthian empire in the rst cent. AD, S. is first mentioned in Plin. HN 5,87 and 5,89. In Late Antiquity, S. appears to have again been of military significance. According to Not. Dign. Or. 33,6,28, S. was the seat of the prefect of the legio XVI Flavia Firma. A legionary camp was integrated into the city wall. The fortification of the see of S. was renovated under Iustinianus [1] I (Procop. Aed.

in Mesopotamian cuneiform texts from the mid—3rd millennium BC [2. 253] into the Hellenistic period [3. 64-69], using different terminologies and in different forms. The Gestellungsbiirgschaft (‘surety of appearance’) was common (promise of the guarantor to deliv-

2.9) E. HONIGMANN, s. v. S., RE 4 A, 953-60.

K.KE.

[4] (Hebrew Sird). City in southern Babylonia on the

Euphrates. According to Gaonic tradition (+ Gaon), in AD 219 after his years of study in Palestine (> Palaestina) the Rabbinic scholar Abba Arika, commonly called Rab, established a kind of Jewish house of instruction there, in which he assembled a circle of pupils for the purpose of studying the Torah. With interruptions, even after the death of Rab in 254, the city remained — alongside and in competition with ~ Pumbedita — a religious and cultural centre of Babylonian > Judaism until the roth cent. AD. E. BASHAN, Ss. v. S., Encyclopaedia Judaica 15, 1972, 521523; J.NEusNER, A History of the Jews in Babylonia, vol. 2, 1966, 232-234.

B.E.

[5] Probably pre-Celtic name of the Sauer, a left tributary of the + Mosella (Auson. Mos. 354-358; Ven. Fort. 7,4,15; 10,9,17-20). On the banks of the navigable S., there are numerous prehistoric and Roman settlements and villae (e.g. Ferschweiler Plateau, Bolldendorf, Echternach). H. Cuppers (ed.), Die Romer in Rheinland-Pfalz, 1990.

RA.WL.

Suren. Name of an Iranian noble family [1], attested from the rst cent. BC (Plut. Crassus 21 et passim) until the 9th cent. AD [2]. The S. crowned the Parthian kings and served as commanders-in-chief under the Arsacids and Sassanids. It remains unclear whether the S. owned

estates in > Sacastane and thereby had family connections with the Indo-Parthian dynasty (as in [3]). — Abdagaeses; > Sinnaces 1 R.ScHmMiTT, Sirén aber Karin. Zu den Namen zweier

Parthergeschlechter, in: Munchner Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft 42, 1983, 197-205

2 W.SUNDERMANN,

T.TuHILo, Zur mittelpersisch-chinesischen Grabinschrift aus Xi’an, in: Mitteilungen des Instituts fiir Orientforschung 11, 1966, 437-450 3 E.HERZFELD, Sakastan, in: AMI 4, 1932, I-1I16.

M.SCH.

Surety A. ANCIENT NEAR East

B. GREECE

C. ROME

A. ANCIENT NEAR EAST There is evidence of personal (corporal) liability through surety (especially standing surety for another, rarely for oneself) as a means of guaranteeing a contract

SURETY

er the debtor to the creditor for enforcement). In the late

Babylonian (6th-4th cents. BC) Stillesitzbtirgschaft (‘surety of immobility’), the guarantor stood surety for the debtor’s remaining at the place of fulfilment. Distinct from these forms, and linked to them, there was also a guarantee of payment. If there were multiple debtors, the debtors were mutual guarantors of the total debt. Where a claim was made of the guarantor, he could in turn pursue the debtor [5. 73-86; 4. 25-57]. The form of the subsurety is attested from the 6th cent. BC [6]. The first textual evidence of the surety in Egypt dates only from the late 3rd cent. BC [9. 51f.; 10. 160162]. > Loan 1 P.KoscHaKER, recht, 1911

Babylonisch-assyrisches

Biirgschafts-

2 J. KRECHER, in: ZA 63, 1973

3 U. LewenTon, Studien zur keilschriftlichen Rechtspraxis Babyloniens in hellenistischer Zeit, 1970

4 H. PerscHow, Ein neubabylonischer Biirgschaftsregrefs gegen einen Nachlaf, in: Revue d’histoire du droit 19, 1951 5G.Rues, Zu Haftung und Rickgriff des Birgen in altbabylonischer Zeit, in: ZA 71, 1981 6 M.SAN NICOL6, in: SBAW, 1937/6 7/Id.,s.v. B., RLA 2, 77-80

8 H.SauREN,

Zum

Birgschaftrecht

Zeit, in: ZA 60, 1970, 70-87

in neusumerischer

9 E.SErpL, Einfiihrung in

die agyptische Rechtsgeschichte bis zum Ende des NR, 1957 101d., Ptolemaische Rechtsgeschichte, *1962. HN.

B. GREECE In Greek law, suretyship (on all details, s. > engye) was widespread from early times, not only to guarantee contractual claims but also in the forms of the ‘surety of appearance’, i.e. in judicial proceedings, and of the security pledged for enforcement. GS. C. ROME In respect of sureties as in so many other respects,

Roman law offered the most differentiated structure of regulation of all ancient legal systems. The procedural sureties (vades, praedes and > vadimonium) originally did not guarantee security for the performance of the party primarily liable, but for the party to the proceedings’ presenting himself at the court at a particular time or for an object’s being presented before the court (‘surety of appearance’). Later, the party himself provided security through the — stipulatio, and where guarantors took this upon themselves, they did so according to the model of the classical surety for the performance of another. Roman law knew three legally valid forms of the surety: the > sponsio, the fidepromissio and the fideiussio. In each case, the guarantor promised the creditor by stipulation that he would stand for the commitment of a third party (i.e. the party primarily liable).

SURETY

959

Gai. Inst. 3,118ff. points out the similarity of the sponsio to the fidepromissio. Both served only to guarantee verbal obligations (— contractus) and were nonhereditable. While the sponsio was only available to Roman citizens, the fidepromissio was also open to foreigners. By contrast, the fideiussio could guarantee any kind of contractual or natural obligation (> obligatio, Gai. Inst. 3,119a) and was hereditable. It was the most recent form, but was already the dominant form during the Principate, and it was the only form to be recognized in Justinianic law. In general, accessoriness applied (at least to the fideiussio), i.e. the surety obligation depended upon the existence of a valid primary liability. Hence, the guarantor has the exceptions of the party primarily liable (Marcian. Dig. 44,1,19) besides certain personal exceptions (cf. Paul. Dig. 44,1,7 pr.). Republican /eges regulate the circumstance in which multiple sponsores or fidepromissores are liable for the same debt (Gai. Inst. 3,121ff.). By the lex Apuleia, a guarantor against whom a claim has been made has a proportionate claim to recourse against his fellow guarantors. By the (somewhat later) lex Furia de sponsu, the application of which was limited to Italy, a creditor of multiple guarantors could categorically only make claims against them in proportion to their shares. A lex Cicereia obliged the creditor to declare publicly for which claim he was receiving sureties, and how many. Conversely, for fideiussores, only an epistula Hadriani provides for their only being liable to outsiders proportionately. During the Principate, the creditor was free to claim either against the party primarily liable or the guarantor. However, when the suit was filed against either, the other was excluded. Justinian (Iust. Nov.4,1) gave the guarantor the right to require the creditor first to excuss against the party primarily liable (beneficium excussionis). Only subsequently could he bring an action against the guarantor (Solutionskonkurrenz; i.e. a principle of concurrence of solutiones). The guarantor against whom a claim was made could, in the case of the sponsio, demand the duplum from the party primarily liable by an actio depenst. In other respects, the guarantor’s recourse depended on the particular mutual relationship with the party primarily liable. In particular, the actio mandati contraria (— mandatum) and the actio negotiorum gestorum contraria (— gestio) constituted potential routes for claims for reimbursement. Another potential recourse lay in the cession of the claim (— cessio) of the creditor against the guarantor through an action mandate. There is a general right of the guarantor to exact cession of the claim (non-Roman beneficium cedendarum actionum) in Justinian (lust. Nov. 4,1). Transactions similar to the surety were the mandate to provide credit (cf. Ulp. Dig. 17,1,6,4) and the constitutum debiti alieni. ~+ Beneficium; — Exceptio; — Intercessio (civil law); ~ Mandatum; > Stipulatio; > Vadimonium

960 Kaser, RPR I, 660-666; II, 457-461;

H. HonseELL, Tu.

Mayer-Maty, W.SELB, R6misches Recht, 41987, 286292; W.FLume, Rechtsakt und Rechtsverhaltnis, 1990, 29-38; R. ZIMMERMANN, The Law of Obligations, 1990, I14-I45.

F.ME.

Surgery A. EGypTiaAn B. BABYLONIAN C. HOMERIC D. Hippocratic E. HELLENISTIC F. ROMAN G. LATE ANTIQUITY

A. EGYPTIAN The high prestige widely accorded to Egyptian medical practitioners for their surgical skills (Hdt. 3,129), was well-earned. Skeletal finds show the successful treatment of bone fractures, esp. in the arms, and rare cases of trepanation. However, there is no reliable indication of surgical intervention in body cavities [1; 2]. The great diversity of knives, spoons, saws and needles reflects a highly-developed specialism, rooted in wideranging medical practice. Early papyri, esp. Pap. Breasted and Pap. Edwin Smith, contain well-founded advice for the management of dislocations and fractures (e.g. using splints), the removal of tumours and the treatment of wounds (e.g. by suturing). The neurological consequences of trauma were known, although they remained untreated. Honey poultices probably countered swelling and averted bacterial infection. Other than alcohol, no anaesthetic is mentioned in the surgical papyri. It is not known what the relationship was between Egyptian surgery and mummification practices or their respective practitioners, but there is no indication that complex surgical interventions were carried out before the Hellenistic period. B. BABYLONIAN Although the legal corpus of + Hammurapi (c. 1700 BC) did formulate framework conditions for the practice of surgery and, in doing so, document the resolution of dislocations and sprains, medical texts of the Babylonian period have no methods of treatment to offer other than compresses and bandaging against open wounds and swellings. One fragmentary tablet from c. 650 BC mentions a drainage incision in the region of the ribs, and a second mentions scraping the cranium [3].

C. HOMERIC Palaeopathological finds from Crete attest to successful trepanation. Clay models of poppy plants have been taken as indications of early analgesia. The Iliad describes 147 wounds with a terminological precision which presupposes a certain familiarity with medicine and battlefield action [4]. Wounds are generally treated with medicines and bandages (Il. 13,599; Od. 19,45 5-7), the wound occasionally being enlarged with an incision (Il. 11,844).

961

962

D. Hippocratic Some authors of Hippocratic treatises distinguish their medical activities from surgical intervention, which they leave to those more experienced, esp. in the fields of military medicine and lithotomy (Hippocrates, lusiurandum). Others believe that the physician must have recourse to the knife and the cautery in the course of his practice. The surgical treatises in the Corpus Hippocraticum (Artic., Fract., Vuln. cap., Mochl., Off. med.) and some case histories in the Epid. attest to a diversity of techniques to set fractures (with bandaging instructions also being given for hygienic as well as clinical reasons), carry out reductions (apparatus such as the ‘Hippocratic bench’ being used, allowing the optimum exploitation of leverage), clean and close wounds and perform relief incisions in the thoracic area. The author of Vuln. cap. is aware of the serious consequences of craniocerebral trauma, and considers himself capable of operating to relieve a cranial impression fracture and remove sharp splinters of bone from the area of the fracture. However, although swabbing with wine and vinegar may have reduced the risk of infection, many injuries led to an excruciating death (Epid. 5, 26; 7,297), unless the tissue was left to mortify so that, although limbs might be lost, at least the patient’s survival was assured (Art. 69).

sure on the wound, by twisting the blood vessel, by clamps and forceps, and some recommended the use of tourniquets (Scribonius, Comp. 84). New instruments such as rectal specula facilitated operations in the area of the anus and rectum. Although surgical interventions were often carried out by medici, there were increasingly found specialized, even highly-specialized surgeons, whose field might be the eyes, ears, hernias or fistulae. There were also specialists in setting fractures. Finally, Gallo-Roman oculists also often carried surgical bags as well as their stamps and ointments.

E. HELLENISTIC

Only in the Hellenistic period were important accomplishments seen in the field of surgery. Alongside the introduction of new instruments, e.g. the spoon developed by > Diocles [6] c. 320 BC for the removal of arrow-heads (Celsus, Med. 7,5,3a), or the complicated instrument invented by > Andreas [1] around 220 BC to treat a dislocated lower jaw, it was above all the anatomical discoveries made at Alexandria which emboldened a new generation of surgeons, esp. among the Herophileans and Empiricists, to experiment and to take more initiative in their profession [5; 6]. Praxagoras removed a diseased uvula around 400 BC. Birth defects, e.g. club foot, and their consequences were treated or made more bearable by orthopaedic apparatus. Surgeons even began to specialize, some using mechanical instruments, others operating mainly with the scalpel [7]. F. ROMAN Celsus (Med. 7) conveys an impression of the accomplishments of the Greek surgeons as they were known in the Latinophone world. He describes in considerable detail lithotomy as well as procedures for trepanning, cleaning and suturing fistulae, pulling teeth (and snags) and replacing them with prostheses [8], the successful treatment of trichiasis, tending mutilations around the ears, lips and nose and removing bladder stones by catheterization. He gives clear and practical instructions on dressing techniques and suturing, even dealing with wounds to the omentum (on a case description, cf. Plut. Cato Min. 70,6). Bleeding was staunched by pres-

SURGERY

G. LaTE ANTIQUITY

By the time of > Galen (129-216), surgeons dared far more adventurous interventions. > Antyllus [2] describes the treatment of aneurysms and abscesses in the uterine region, the removal of hydatid cysts, cosmetic operations and a possibly successful tracheotomy technique. Similar operations are described by the author of the pseudo-Galenic Introductio. He also mentions the repair of an intestinal or uterine prolapse and various procedures for treating a cranial impression fracture, removing tumours, carcinomas and varicose veins and for draining empyema (Gal. 14,780791 K) [9]. Galen did not manage to complete his planned book on surgery, unless the last two books of Meth. Med. are what is meant. Still, his own case studies are impressive, e.g. the removal of a suppurative sternum (2,632 K), or the treatment of a gladiator’s abdominal wounds (10,412 K). Galen expected a good surgeon of his time to be experienced in dealing with bladder stones, aneurysms, fistulae, tonsil operations, cataracts and trichiasis, operating on tumours and the uvula and treating fractures (CMG Suppl. Or. 4,14,1-10). However, he naturally regarded as the best surgeon one who knew how to treat such complaints mostly pharmaceutically and through diet, i.e. non-invasively. We know relatively little of surgery after Galen, although Alexandrian surgeons continued to enjoy much renown for their training and skills. > Ionicus of Sardis, who was active around AD 370 (Eunap. VP 499), was renowned for his skilful treatment of wounds and his amputation technique. Many Greek authors continued to reproduce Galen’s instructions for the treatment of ulcers and tumours. > Paulus [I 5] of Aegina offers a thorough overview of old surgical procedures (book 6), including a description of the history of surgical techniques for the removal of projectiles [ro]. It is difficult to tell to what extent such operations were actually carried out, in view of the restricted conditions in intellectual and economic life which prevailed in Late Antiquity. To render dispensable surgical intervention, which was always risky in view of operative trauma and the danger of infection, Latin authors often emphasized the value of self-help. Nonetheless, medical texts, at least from the Graecophone world, continued to contain descriptions of the most diverse forms of surgical treatment, so that, pace many contemporary historians,

963

964

there are no grounds for speaking of ‘Dark Ages’ in the history of surgery. + Andreas; > Antyllus; > Celsus, [II 7]; > Diocles [6]; + Empiricists; > Galen; + Hammurapi; > Herophilus; — Hippocrates; — Ionicus; — Ophthalmology; +> Paulus of Aegina; > Praxagoras; — Surgical instruments

simple forms of knife. There was a variety of lancets (phlebotomy). Tweezers (aPic/labis, widvov/mydion;

SURGERY

1 H.Grarow,

Uber die anatomischen

alten Agypter, 1935

Kenntnisse

der

2 J.F. Nunn, Ancient Egyptian

medicine, 1996 3R.Lasart, A propos de la chirurgie babylonienne, in: Journal Asiatique 1954, 207-218 4H.FROHLICH, Die Militarmedizin Homers, 1879; 5 P.M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria, 1972, 360-366

6 STADEN, 452-453 7 M.MIcHLER, Das Spezialisierungsproblem und die antike Chirurgie, 1969 8 L. BLIQUEZ, Prosthetics in Classical Antiquity, ANRW II 37.3, 2640-2676 9L.TOLEDO-PEREYRA, Galen’s contribution to surgery, in: JHM 1973, 357-375 10 H.ScH6NE, Aus der antiken Kriegschirurgie, in: BJ 1909, 1-11 11 G.Mayjno, The Healing Hand, 1975. L.BLiQquEZz, Roman Surgical Instruments, 1994; E.Gur.tT, Geschichte der Chirurgie 1, 1898; W. HorrMANN-AXTHELM, Geschichte der Zahnheilkunde, 1985; R. Jackson, Doctors and Diseases in the Roman Empire, 1988; M. MicHLER, Die hellenistische Chirurgie 1, 1968; V.Nutron, Ancient Medicine, 2004. VN.

Surgical instruments. Little is known of Mesopotamian and Egyptian SI. Etruscan burial finds are rare (Chiusi; Volterra). The Celtic graves of the 3rd/2nd cents. BC (Munich-Obermenzing in Germany; Batina in Hungary; Galatii Bistritei in Romania) contain trepanning saws (for boring through the top of the skull). The metal crown saw was a Hellenistic import (Celtic graves with trepanned skulls at Katzelsdorf and Guntramsdorf in Austria). Publications on Greek SI are few (Mycenaean grave in Nauplia; Lambros Collection, Athens, NM). Greek cupping-vessels are well known (graves: Ialysus; Thebes; Tanagra; Corinth). The ‘spoon of Diocles’ in the Meyer-Steineg Collection in Jena is presumably not ancient. Most ancient SI are from the Roman Principate of the rst to 3rd cents. AD. Their types are well known (physicians’ graves of the rst-3rd cents.; settlement finds, esp. from the towns destroyed by Vesuvius until 79 AD; shipwrecks). The earliest datable finds are from the Roman army in Germania. The most important written sources, also on specialist physicians (dentists, ophthalmologists, gynaecologists, veterinary surgeons, lithotomists, cosmetic surgeons): Celsus [7] (rst cent. AD) and Paul of Aegina (6th/7th cent. AD); additionally: Corpus Hippocraticum (— Hippocrates [6]); fragments of the Hellenistic surgeons; Rufus; Soranus; Galen. — Manufacturer’s stamps are rare. The material is almost always bronze/brass; iron has mostly corroded. Typology: scalpel (ouitn/smile; culter, scalper, scalpellus): myrtle-leaf-shaped blunt spatula (see fig. rf.); the blades could be replaced. In addition there were

vulsella, volsella; see fig. 16f.): used for cosmetic pur-

poses from pre-historic times. Tooth and bone forceps (forceps, see fig. 4): evidence from the late rst cent. AD onwards; bayonet-shaped

(dental forceps); bone forceps with curved jaws (see fig. 5); specially shaped: tonsil or uvula forceps (AaPic; forceps; see fig. 8). Bone lever (avaBorevc/anaboleus; elevatorium; see fig. 15): the earliest types from the zone of Roman occupation in Germania (Haltern; Kalkriese). Hook (&yxtoteov/ ankistron; hamus; see fig. 13f.): blunt or sharp. Saw (neiwv/prion; serrula): instrument for amputations; hardly any survive, like larger knives. File (Evotyo/ xystér; raspatorium): barely any surviving. Chisel (éxxonevc/ekRopeus; scalper, scalprum planum; see fig. 7): finds from Italy and Xanten; sharp iron blade. Metal crown trepan (modiolus): two finds in a grave in Bingen in Germany; trepan bows are quite commonly documented. Anal and gynaecological specula (diontea/dioptra, Sionteiov/didptrion; speculum, speculum magnum matricis): most striking SI, some with screw threads (see fig. 6). Cautery (xavtietov/ kauterion; ferrum candens): barely surviving. Needle (Berovn/beldneé; acus): slightly curved wound needles survive; cataract needle: solid cataract needles often survive (see fig. 11); two hollow needles for extracting a cataract are recorded (Montbellet in France). Catheter (abvatoxoc/auliskos; fistula; see fig. 10): male and female

forms. Cupping-vessel (owda/sikya; ventosa): sharp kink in the side (see fig. 9). - Numerous probes (unAn/ melé, ona0opurdn/spathomelé, undrwric/meéldtis; spathomela, cyathiscomela, auriscalpium) and plates for grinding ointments for medicine, pharmacy and cosmetics. Medicine containers (theca): of wood, glass and metal; round boxes and rectangular caskets with sliding lids. Oculists’ stamps (stone eye ointment stamps; signacula oculariorum, see > Ophthalmology): 2nd/3rd cents., almost exclusively from the provinces of Germania, Gaul and Britain, presumably because of the Roman customs activities. From the 4th cent. AD onwards Byzantine and early Islamic SI show only slightly modified forms. Finds e.g. from Syria, Greece and Egypt. The bulk of Byzantine finds are from the 6th and 7th cents. AD (before the iconoclasm that began in 717). L.J. BLiquez, Roman Surgical Instruments and Other Minor Objects in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples. With a Catalogue of the Surgical Instruments in the “Antiquarium” at Pompeii by Ralph Jackson, 1994; M. FeuGereE, E.KUNZL, U. Weisser, Die Starnadeln von Montbellet (Sa6ne-et-Loire). Ein Beitrag zur antiken und

islamischen Augenheilkunde in: JRGZ 32, 1985, 436508; R. Jackson, Roman Doctors and their Instruments: Recent Research into Ancient Practice, in: Journal of Roman Archaeology 3, 1990, 5-27; E.KUNZL, Medizinische Instrumente aus Sepulkralfunden der rémischen Kaiserzeit (Kunst und Altertum am Rhein 115), 1983; Id., Spatantike und byzantinische medizinische Instrumente,

965

966

SURGICAL

INSTRUMENTS

Surgical instruments of the Roman Period

C26

\\

()

—

on

0

&

?

1)

‘ Ki

kj

7

10

1-2 Scalpels 3 Lithotomy

scoop

© 12

13

14

4 Tooth forceps

7 Chisel

10 Catheter

5 Bone forceps

8 Uvula forceps

11 Cataract needle

6 Speculum

9 Cupping vessel

12 Cataract needle holder

\

) 45

|

LID

16 E

13-14 Hooks

Copper alloy

15 Bone lever

16-17 Tweezers

17 ld (J @g

(bronze, brass)

a

in

SURGICAL INSTRUMENTS

967

in: PACT 34, 1992, 210-244; Id., Forschungs-Bericht zu den antiken medizinischen Instrumenten, in: ANRW II 37-3, 1996, 2433-2639; J.ST. MILNE, Surgical Instruments in Greek and Roman Times, 1907 (repr. 1970).

E.KU.

Surrentum. City (Plin. HN. 3,62; Ptol. 3,1,7: Loveevtov/Sourenton) on a peninsula (modern Punta della Campanella; Str. 5,4,8: Zevonvovoo@v cxowthovov/Seirénoussén akroterion; Plin. HN 3,62; Ov. Met. 15,709: promunturium Minervae), separated from — Capreae (Capri) by a narrow stretch of sea (cf. Tac. Ann. 4,67,1; 6,1,1; Cass. Dio 52,43,2; Tab. Peut. 6,5), modern Sorrento. Settled by Greeks in the 6th cent. BC (Liber coloniarum 236,22), at the beginning of the sth cent. by Etrusci, from 420 ruled by Osci (Steph. Byz.s. v. Dveeévttoy; Str. loc.cit.), S. participated on the side of the rebels in the > Social Wars [3]. Colonies were established there by Cornelius [I 90] Sulla and Augustus; before Hadrian, S. was a municipium, tribus Menenia (CIL X 676). From the 1st cent. BC, magnificent villae were built in S. (Suet. Aug. 65,1). A sanctuary of Athena (Str. 1,2,123 5,4,8) and a cult of the Sirens are known (Aristot. Mir. 103; Str. 1,1,12; Liber colo-

niarum /oc.cit.), as well as one of Hercules Surrentinus (Stat. Silv. 3 prooem. ro). The pleasant and healthy climate of S. was famous (Hor. Epist. 1,17,52; Pun. 5,466; 8,543). On the Surrentini Montes (Plin. HN. 3,60) high-quality vines were grown (Str. /oc.cit.; Plin. HN 14,64; Ov. Met. loc.cit.; Stat. Silv. 3,5,102; 4,8,9). Archaeology: finds of votive gifts and ceramic, coin and metal fragments. Inscriptions: CIL X 675-762; 81288130. J. BELocu, S. im Altertum, 1874; P. MINGAzzINI, F. PFISTER, Formae Italiae, 1946; S.DE Caro, E.Greco, Cam-

pania, 1981, 98-102; C.ALBore Livapig, Archeologia a Piano di Sorrento, 1990. S.D.V.

Surus. A — Haedui nobleman with a name which is probably Celtic [1.472f.; 2.1678-1682], enemy of the Romans. In 51 BC he was taken prisoner by T. Labienus in a cavalry skirmish in > Treveri territory (Caes. B Gall. 8,45,2). 1 Evans

2 HOLDER 2.

Surveyors. Marking out fields or extensive farmlands, cities, temple districts and military camps and determining the directions of roads, aqueducts, etc., presupposed a number of measuring tasks which were carried out by technically trained surveyors. In Roman sources, from which our only knowledge of the variety of problems of this specific discipline comes, these workers

were termed, e.g. mensores (agrorum), agrimensores, metatores, finitores and gromatici. The last term is derived from — groma, the bearing apparatus used for measuring tasks. The Latin technical term comes from the Greek yv@pa/yvapwv (gnoma/gnomon; by way of Etruscan?).

968

Drawing boundaries was connected with a particular sacred procedure for which the augurs were originally responsible. It is likely that surveyors initially served the augurs as auxiliary workers. The practice of surveying temple buildings and city districts evidently developed in Rome under Etruscan influence. The chief task of surveyors consisted in establishing in each case an orientation cross, i.e. in determining the north-south and east-west axis at a concrete central point, and in fixing parallels in the two directions at given distances. The intensive development of cities under the Roman Empire from the 2nd cent. BC onwards, the rising number of coloniae in the 1st cent., and the growing number of military buildings in the Imperial period led to the measurement work that was being performed in various areas needing an ever increasing workforce. In the profane sphere, the discipline of surveying developed now on an independent and professional basis. An important aspect of the surveyors’ activities was drawing up cadastral maps, allocating fields and deciding disputes that might arise in connexion with land rights. Besides the civil sphere, in the Roman military surveyors played a particularly significant part. For surveying camps (castrametationes; > Castra), legionaries of great experience were employed as surveyors for a long time. Caesar simply used his centuriones for this purpose. In the Imperial period, every legion had a certain number of specialized surveyors, and there are also records of these for auxiliary troops. It is likely that surveyors released from military service continued working in their discipline as civilians. There are still surveyors (mensores) serving the Empire in Late Antiquity: the primicerius at their head was subordinate to the magister officiorum (Cod. Theod. 6,34 = Cod. lust E22 7s

The results achieved by Roman surveyors are noteworthy: cf. e.g. the surviving remains of the Roman division of land into centuriae quadratae (centuriatio), the structure and street network of Roman cities (e.g. Lambaesis in North Africa and Pompeii in Campania), the layout of camps and other military buildings, etc. The accuracy of the measurements in these was achieved with relatively simple technical means. The problems accompanying marking out areas provoked a great deal of attention, which was reflected ina relatively rich specialist literature. Among such authors are e.g. Frontinus (rst cent. AD), Celsus, Balbus, Hyginus, M. Iunius Nipsus, Siculus Flaccus (2nd cent.) and Agennius Urbicus (4th/5th cents.). Text editions: [1; 2]. 1 F.BLume, K.LACHMANN, T.MOMMSEN, A.RUDORFF (eds.), Die Schriften der rémischen Feldmesser, 2 vols.,

1848/1852

2C. THULIN (ed.), Opuscula agrimensorum

Romanorum I r, 1913. A.SCHULTEN, SEPHSON,

Die

Casae

rémische litterarum,

Flurteilung, 1950;

1898;

A.Jo-

F.CASTAGNOLI,

Le

ricerche sui resti della centuriazione romana, 1958; A. P1GANIOL, Les documents cadastraux de la colonie romaine d’Orange, 1962. J.BU.

970

969

Susa (ta Lotoa/ta Soisa, Elamite/Babylonian Susim, modern Sas, also Sa Daniel because of the alleged grave of the prophet Daniel in Huzestan, in Iran). Capital of the kingdom of > Elam (> Elymais, > Susiana, Ancient Persian U(va)ja). Political centre from 4000, particularly between the 3rd and rst millennia BC; between 645 and 640, S. was destroyed by > Assurbanipal. > Darius [1] I (521-486) chose S. for one of his capital cities: on a high terrace a > palace was built in the north with an Elamite-Mesopotamian plan and an Achaemenid colonnade (Apadana); decoration in bricks/tiles with coloured enamel reliefs; a building inscription in Ancient Persian, Babylonian and Elamite mentions e.g. the involvement of Greek craftsmen. After being conquered by Alexander [4] the Great, S. was given the name Seleucia-upon-Eulaeus; near the ancient palace a Hellenistic building was built (peristyle, tiled roof). The administration was in the south of the city, however, where almost all the Greek inscriptions and Hellenizing and Parthian sculptures have been found. As an important city in the Parthian Empire, S. had a mint, which remained active even when S. underwent a decline between the 3rd and 6th cents. AD (destroyed by > Sapor [2] II). Its resurgence at the end of the Sassanid Period lasted until the Mongolian Period (13th cent.). R.BoucHaRLaT,

Suse a l’époque sassanide, in: Meso-

potamia 22, 1987, 316-322; Id., Suse et la Susiane a |’€poque achéménide. Données archéologiques, in: AchHist 4, 1990, 149-175; P. HARPER et al. (eds.), The Royal City of S., 1992; G. LE RIDER, Suse sous les Séleucides et les Parthes (Mémoires de la Délégation en Perse 38), 1965; J. WIESEHOFER, Das antike Persien, 1993.

Susarion (Lovoagiwv/Sousarion). Allegedly the earliest Attic comic poet [1. test. 1] and even the inventor of + comedy [I. test. 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9]. His origin is given as either the Attic deme of Icaria (> Icarium; [T. test. 1, 2], cf. [1. test. 7]) or Tripodiscus in the region of — Megara [2] [1. test. 8 and ro]. Different versions of the origins of + comedy are connected with these: Icaria as the location of an ancient cult of Dionysus would point to an autochthonous Attic basis for comedy, Megara by contrast would support the Dorian claim (cf. Aristot. Poet. 3,1448a 31). S. himself remains entirely shadowy: he has been considered an exemplum [2] already cited in the Old Comedy or a Megaran iambographer (> Iambographers) of the 6th or 5th cent. BC ([3], cf. IEG II’ 167 f.); since his earliest attestation does not trace back to before 264 BC [t. test. 1], however, it is most likely that his existence was not construed until the post-Aristotelian period. This is also confirmed by the only citation ascribed to him, five iambic trimeters (fr. 1), whose attestation (in extent varying between two and five verses) cannot be shown to be earlier than Late Antiquity. The core of this citation (v. 3-4: women’s scolding) seems like an imitation of Men. frr. 801 and 846 K.-A.

SUSIANA

1 PCG VII, 1989, 661-665 son, in: WS 54, 1936, 20-23

2 L. RADERMACHER,

Mai-

3 M.L. West, Studies in H.-G.NE. Greek Elegy and Iambus, 1974, 183 f.

Susceptor (inodéutys/hypodéktés, dnodéxtns/apodéktés, nodxtwolpraktor, émmehntic/epimeletes; in Lat. also > procurator [1]) describes in particular a Roman tax-collector (for other uses see e.g. susceptor causarum, Cod. Theod. 2,12,6: agent, representative). Susceptor was a technical term in financial administration during Late Antiquity; the susceptor was generally a member of the local leading elite, charged by + nominatio of the ordo decurionum (> decurio [1]}) by way of > munus (> Liturgy) with receiving the + — taxes that are due from the local community, that is to say with organizing their collection. The nominatio normally applied separately to the different types of contribution (grain, money, meat, wine, clothing); thus

several susceptores would be active each year, sometimes working in concert; they had aides (adiutores,

BonPoi/boéthoi) to support them. As compensation for their expenses they were entitled to charge a premium on the amount of tax to be collected, although this legal epimetrum could scarcely have enhanced the attractiveness of the task; on the other hand, the literary tradition exaggerates the ruinous risks of liability. Responsibility for outstanding amounts (reliqua) may have fallen upon the exactor civitatis (attested in Egypt from AD 309), who was also appointed by the municipality, but was higher-ranking. In the villages, combined into pagi (+ Pagus), taxes were collected by praefecti pagi. We occasionally come across susceptores with or in place of praefecti horreorum engaged in paying (erogatio) the proceeds of taxation to those entitled to receive them, usually members of the military. The attempt to remedy the deficiencies of a curia-based tax-collection system by the recruitment of local > principales and honorati, or imperial employees or > vindices, remained restricted to the periods of Valentinian/Valens and > Anastasius [1] I. — Taxes 1R.S. BAGNALL, Egypt in Late Antiquity, 1993 2 J.-M. Carri£, Patronage et propriété militaires au IV* siécle, in: BCH 100, 1976, 159-176 3 Ders., A. ROUSSELLE, L’Empire romain en mutation, 1999, 192-337 4R.DELMAIRE, Largesses sacrees et res privata, 1989

5 G.DepEyrotT, Crises et inflation entre Antiquité et Moyen Age, 1991 6 L.De SALvo, I munera curialia nel IV secolo, in: Atti dell’Accademia Romanistica Costantiniana, X Convegno Internazionale in onore di A. Biscardi, 1995, 291-318 7JoNnES, LRE 8 C.LEPELLEY, Quot curiales tot tyranni, in: E. FREZOULS (ed.), Crise et redressement dans les provinces européennes de |’Empire, 1983, 143-156.

EP.

Susiana (f Zovovavi/hé Sousiane), cf. OGIS 54,17; Pol.

5,46,7); today the plain forming part of Huzestan in Iran. From the 3rd millennium onwards the main region of the kingdom of > Elam, satrapy of the Achae-

SUSIANA

971

972

menid kingdom, in the Seleucid-Sassanid period referred to as > Elymais. Its most significant town (from 4000 BC onwards) was — Susa.

grave of a Getic king (dromos with relief frieze of bucra-

E.CarTER, M.W. SToLper, Elam: Surveys of Political History and Archaeology, 1984; J. WIESEHOFER, Das antike Persien, 1993. HJ.N.

Suthul. Numidian town (> Numidae). Storage place of ~ Tugurtha’s treasures, which the legatus A. Postumius (cf. Postumius [I 9]), acting as pro-praetor, wanted to seize (Sall. Iug. 37,3; 38,2). S. lay on top of a steep “mountain” and was “surrounded by a muddy plain” (Sall. ug. 37,4). According to Oros. Hist. 5,15,6, “the royal treasures lay near the town of Calama”. However, since S. cannot be identified with > Calama, its location remains unknown. E. HONIGMANN, s.v. S., RE 4 A, 989.

Sutorius. Q. Naevius Cordus S. Macro see > Naevius [II 3]. W.E. Sutrium. City in southern Etruria (Etruscan suri) ona tuff spur (291 m high) between the Cimini and the Sabatini mountains (Str. 5,2,9), modern Sutri. The site was settled from the roth cent. BC onwards. Conquered by Furius [I 13] Camillus in 394 BC after the fall of > Veii, S. was a Latin colonia from 383 BC (Vell. 1,14,2; Liv. 27,9,7; 29,15,53 Diod. Sic. 14,117,4), later a municipium. In the rst cent. BC colonia coniuncta Iulia Sutrina, tribus Papiria (CIL XI 3254; Plin. HN 3,51). Archaeology: remains of a tuff city wall (opus quadratum), forum with entrance arches (modern Piazza del Comune), small baths; at the foot of the city an amphitheatre carved into the tuff slopes (arena 49 mx 40 m) and a necropolis dug into the tuff; the church of Madonna del Parto may have developed from a Mithraeum. S. was a see from no later than AD 465. G. Duncan, S., in: PBSR 26, 1958, 63-134;

C.MORSELLI,

S., 1991; Id., s.v. S., EAA 2. Suppl. 5, 503-505; S. MESCHINI, S., in: Archeologia della Tuscia, 1982, 128-132. G.U.

Sutton Hoo. In one of the burial mounds at SH near Woodbridge in Suffolk a wooden ship was found with a rich treasure (Gaulish, Scandinavian and Eastern English goods, Byzantine silver bowls, including one with the stamp of Anastasius [1] I, also Frankish coins of the period around AD 625). It is presumably the tomb of Redwald (6th/7th cent. AD), a king of East Anglia. R. BRucE-MITFoRD, The S. H. Ship-Burial, 3 vols., 19751983.

M.TO.

Sveshtari. To the north of S. (district of Razgrad Oblast in Bulgaria) a Thracian burial complex (first half of the 3rd cent. BC) was discovered in 1982. In the southeastern part of the Ginina Mogila burial mound is the

nia, rosettes and garlands, three square chambers, i.e. ante-, burial and side chambers); 12 caryatids on the burial chamber, which can be linked to Thracian after-

life beliefs. In the chamber there are two stone catafalques, and above the larger one also wall paintings (heroization scenes). The tomb had been robbed twice in Antiquity. In the vicinity of this burial complex a 4th/3rd-cents. BC Thracian sanctuary was discovered in the courtyard of the Alian monastery of Demir Baba, a cult centre on the Kamen Rid plateau and a fortified settlement in modern Vodna Centrala. A Greek votive inscription (early 3rd cent. BC) was found near the city gate. Numerous > amphora stamps and coins attest to vigorous trading relations e.g. with > Thasos and > Sinope. In the surrounding area it was possible to discern further Thracian settlements and a fairly small necropolis. Doubtless this is where the centre of the Getic kingdom was in the 4th and 3rd cents. BC. + Funerary architecture; > Getae; > Thraci M. Cié1Kkova, Grobnicata ot S., in: Izkustvo 4, 1983, 1827; A.Fotr et al., The Thracian Tomb near the Village of Sveshtari, 1986; D. GERGova, Deset godini prou¢vanija v ‘Sborjanovo’, in: Helis 1, 1992, 9-23.

Lv.B.

Swaddling Clothes (onagyavov/spdrganon; Latin incunabula). SC in their modern form were not known in Antiquity; instead, a baby would be wrapped entirely — apart from the head — with narrow strips of wool. Wrapping was supposed to ensure the striaght growth of the body and the limbs (Sen. Ben. 6,24,1, cf. Plin. HN 7,3). In Thessaly only the lower half of the body was wrapped, in Sparta SC were dispensed with entirely (Plut. Lycurgus 16,3). Depictions of babies survive from the Bronze Age onwards (e.g. [1. 104 f., cat. no. 14]), usually lying in a > cradle; there are also some of naked babies in cradles, primarily from the Greek world. ~ Child, Childhood 1 V. KARAGEORGHIS, Cypriote Antiquities in the Pierides Collection Larnaca Cyprus, 1982. H.RUuHFEL, Ammen und Kinderfrauen Athen, in: Ant. Welt 19.4, 1988, 43-57.

im klassischen R.H.

Swallow. In Greece and southern Italy today the following species occur: 1. Barn Swallow (Hirundo rustica), 2. Crag Martin (Ptyonoprogne rupestris), 3. RedRumped Swallow (Cecropis daurica), 4. Sand Martin

(Riparia riparia) and 5. House Martin (Delichon urbica). Whether ancient accounts of the yektdav/chelidon, Latin hirundo, refer to species other than 1 or 5 or the swift (Apus apus L.) is almost always uncertain. For the most part broods are raised in skilfully constructed mud nests (Aristot. Hist. an. 8(9),7,612b 23; Varro Rust. 3,5,6; Ov. Fast. 1,175 f.; Calp. Ecl. 6,1; Plut. De sollertia animalium 10 = Mor. 966d) on houses (Aristot. Hist. an. 6,1,559a 11); those of the house

974

973

martin were well observed: two clutches a year (Aristot. ibid. 5,13,544a 26 and 6,5,563a 13; Plin. HN 10,147) each of 4-5 eggs (Aristot. Gen. an. 774b 29; Ael. NA 3,25), the chicks are initially blind (e.g. Aristot. Gen. an. 774b 29; Plin. HN 10,92; Theoc. 14,39 f.; Verg. Aen.

12,473);

they

eat

meat

(Aristot.

Hist.

an.

7(8),3,592b 16), i.e. insects (Plut. De sollertia animalium mor. = Mor. 976d; Ael. NA 8,6), which both parents catch in their nimble (cf. Hom. Od. 22,24) flight (Plin. HN 10,73; Plut. Symp. 8,7,3) and feed to the chicks (e.g. Plin. HN 10,92; Theoc. 14,39 f.; Verg. Aen. 12,473). A self-sacrificing mother swallow is de-

scribed by Oppianus (Hal. 5,579-586). As a summer migrant

(&vavovoc/enausios;

Hdn.

Vita

Homeri

33,10 f.) they fly with the wind Chelidonias (Theophr. Hist. pl. 7,15,1; Plin. HN 2,122) to Greece, on about 23 February (Ov. Fast. 2,853; Columella r1,2,21) they ar-

rive in Italy. Their departure takes place in the middle of September (Democr. B 14,7DK; Plin. HN

18,311). In

Egypt (Hdt. 2,22; Paus. 10,4,9) and Palestine (Jer 8:7; Is 38:14) swallows are also present in winter. Aristotle (Hist. an. 7(8),16,600a 18; cf. Plin. HN 10,70; Ael. NA

1,52) claims that unfledged swallows had been found in caves in rocks, and that this was an exception among birds. As harbingers of spring (Hes. Erg. 568 f.; Stesich. 3.4 P.; Aristoph. Pax 800; Hor. Ep. 1,7,13; Ov. Fast. 2,853

et passim) they are celebrated in folk songs (Anac. 49a P.; song from Rhodes in Ath. 8,360 c-d). Their singing (technical terms: yeddovitew, tittuPiCew, piOveiterv, toavvitervy, Tove, xwtiAdew) is sometimes interpreted as a barbarous chatter (e.g. Aesch. Ag. ro5o0 f.; Aristoph. Av. 1681) or as melancholic (Anth. Pal. 5,273 and 9,57; Mosch. 3,39). In myth Philomela is turned into a swallow (> Procne). In medicine many applications were found for swallows [1. 322 f.]. Stones from the stomachs of swallows (called chelidonii) were used in magic (Plin. HN 11,203; Dioscorides 2,60 BERENDES = 2,56 WELLMANN). The appearance or the nesting of a swallow could be interpreted as a good (Aristoph. Lys. 770 ff.) or bad omen (Plut. Antonius 60; Arr. Anab. 1,25; Ael. NA 10,34). They foretold rain (Arat. 944; Verg. G. 1,377). Lhe island of Isis, Copton in Egypt, was protected from inundation by a wall built by swallows (chelid6nion teichos) (Ps.-Plut. De fluviis 16,2; Plin. HN 10,94 f.). > Isis herself appeared as a swallow (Plut. Is. 16). In fables (Aesop. 39 PERRY) they seek protection among humans. Aesop. 63 puts a fable with a swallow in the mouth of the orator + Demades. The proverb ‘One swallow doth not a summer make’ (e.g. Aristot. Eth. Nic. 1,7,1098a 18; Aristoph. Av. 1417) is well known. It occurs only rarely on coins [2. pls. 5,27] and gems [2. pls. 21,20]. 1 D’Arcy

W.THompson,

A Glossary of Greek Birds,

1936 (repr. 1966), 314-325 2 F.IMHOOF-BLUMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972).

SWAN H. Gossen, s. v. Schwalbe und Segler, RE 2 A, 768-777; KELLER 2, 114-118. C.HU.

Swamp. In the ancient Mediterranean area, inland and coastal swamps were widespread. For the most part literary evidence permits their identification, although the terminology is not unambiguous. Even though the terms éhoc (hélos) and palus correspond to the modern ‘swamp’ in both geographical and metaphorical senses, nevertheless, it is more difficult to discern the meaning of Aiwvy (limne), since the terms lake and swamp were less clearly distinguished than they are today. Furthermore, swamps were not so undervalued; the aversion to swamps attested primarily in the Roman period (e.g. foeda palus, ‘hideous swamp’: AE 1960, 249), was mainly an ideologically conditioned phenomenon (cf. Stat. Silv. 1,1; 3,2; 4,3). On the other hand, the development of techniques of hydraulic engineering made the draining of swamps entirely possible in politically and economically favourable. contexts (Pomptinae Paludes, Lacus Fucinus). G. Traina, Paludi e bonifiche del mondo antico, 1988;

P. HorDEN, N.PuRcELL, The Corrupting Sea, 2000.

Swan (Ktxvoc/kyknos, Latin cygnus or olor) is the term

not only for the mute swan., Cygnus olor, which breeds in Europe, but also for the Nordic whooper swan, C. cygnus (L.), which migrated as a winter visitor, probably occasionally as far as Greece and Italy. Hom. Il. 2,460-463 has them gather with geese and cranes in Lydia on the ‘Asian meadow’ (cf. Str. 14,1,45). Homer’s Hymn 21 to Apollo locates them on the river + Peneius in Thessaly, Aristoph. Av. 768 on the ~ Hebrus in Thrace, Ov. Epist. 7,1 on the > Maeander [2], Ps. Aristot. Mir. 839a 24 on Lacus Avernus in lower Italy, later authors on the > Padus (modern Po) (e.g. Sil. Pun. 14,189; Claud. Carm. minora 31,12; Claud. Epi-

thalamium 109). Noted physical characteristics were its long sinuous neck (e.g. Hom. Il. 2,460 and 15,692: dovdAyodeleos/ doulichodeiros, ‘long necked’; Bacchyl. 16(15),6; Eur. Iph. A. 793), its white plumage (Eur. HF. r1o; Aristoph. Vesp. 1064; Paus. 8,17,3; Verg. Ecl. 7,38; Verg. G. 2,199), and for this reason olorinus (‘of a swan’) also means ‘white’ (Verg. Aen. 10,187; Ov. Met. 10,718). Hor. Carm. 4,1,10 uses purpureus to describe its lustrous colouring. By contrast, in Juv. 6,165 a black swan is an impossibility. The song and alleged wisdom of swans (Anth. Pal. 5,134; Opp. Cyn. 2,547-550) was much admired. As fighters (e.g. Aristot. fr. 344; Aristot. Hist. an. 8(9), 1,610a 1 f. and 615a 33-b 1; Ael. NA 5,34) they were superior to eagles (Hom. II. 15,690; Verg. Aen. 1,393-95) and snakes (Ael. NA. 5,48). Their flying in ‘wedges’ was described in Plin. HN 10,63 as striking. The whooper swan was famous for its voice (e.g. Hes. Sc. 316; Eur. Iph. T. r104 and fr. 775; Anth. Pal. 5,124), with which its could allegedly sing (Hom. H. 21; Anth. Pal. 9,363; Lucr. 2,505 f.; Verg. Ecl. 8,55;

SWAN

975

Verg. Aen. 7,699-701). Despite a number of doubts (Alex. Myndius in Ath. 9,393d; Plin. HN 10,63) the idea of its song presaging its own death (‘swan song’; PI. Phd. 84e-f; Aristot. fr. 344; Cic. Tusc. 1,73) was believed throughout Antiquity [1. 181 f.]. Swans also became a metaphor for poets/singers (Eur. Herc. 691; Eur. Bacch. 1365) such as + Orpheus in the Underworld (Plat. Resp. 10,620a), Anacreon (Anth. Pal. 7,30), Pindar (Hor. Carm. 4,2,25) and Horace (ibid. 2,20; cf. Prop. 3,3,39). It symbolizes an older poet with his art perfected, in contrast to ravens (Callim. fr. 260,65 PFEIFFER; Mart. 1,53,7; Apul. De deo Socratis pr.), swallows (Lucr. 3,6 f.), cranes (Lucr. 4,181), owls (Verg. Ecl. 8,55) or geese (ibid. 9,36; Prop. 2,34,83 f.). Antipater of Tarsus judges its song to be inferior to that of cicadas (Anth. Pal. 9,92), but equal to that of larks (ibid. 9,307 and 380). The white of its plumage and its song are found in many proverbs and in Aesop’s fables (233, 396, 398 and 399 PERRY). The swan is often encountered on coins [2. pls. 6,1 1-18] and gems [2. pls. 22,20-29]. In myth the swan is the bird of + Apollo (Aristoph. Av. 772; Callim. Fr. 260,56 PFEIFFER; Cic. Tusc. 1,73), being present at his birth (Callim. H. 2,5; Callim. H. 4,249 ff.); a swan carries him through the air (Sappho fr. 208) and through him gives prophecies (PI. Phd. 8 4e; Verg. Aen. 1,393). For the Romans a swan pulls Venus’s chariot (Ov. Met. 10,708; Sil. Pun. 7,441; Stat. Silv. 34,22). Zeus appears to > Leda as a swan (not before Eur. Hel. 16-19; Eur. Or. 1386), and this is often represented in Roman art (e.g. in a marble relief from Argos [3. 217, fig. 81]). In Greek and Roman myth a number of characters (e.g. Apollo’s son Cycnus and his mother — Hyrie, Ov. Met. 7,371 ff.) are turned into swans. 1D’Arcy

W.THompson,

A Glossary of Greek

Birds,

1936 (repr. 1966), 179-186 2 F.IMHOOF-BLUMER, O.KELLER, Tier- und Pflanzenbilder auf Miinzen und

Gemmen des klassischen Altertums, 1889 (repr. 1972) 3 KELLER 2, 213-220. H.Gossen,

s. v. Schwan, RE 2 A, 782-792; P. CASSEL,

Der Schwan in Sage und Leben, 1872.

C.HU.

Swastika (Sanskrit, from Old Indic swasti, ‘well-be-

ing’), crux gammata, ‘gammadion’. Graphical symbol belonging to the language of ornamentation, occurring in Eurasia, northern Africa and central America. The earliest representations appear in Mesopotamia on pot-

tery of the 4th millennium BC; there is later evidence in the Linear Pottery of the Danube area, in idols from Troy Il and from Minoan Crete. In Attic-Geometric + ornaments the — clockwise or anti-clockwise — swastika is part of the decorative syntax and is associated there with the + meander [2]. Like this, it is presumably also a stylized reduction of natural (plant) forms. Swastikas occur in the local pottery of Apulia (7th—5th cents. BC), appear in Celtic and Scythian art and can be found in Christian inscriptions from the 3rd cent. AD

976

onwards. The swastika is often interpreted as a symbol of good fortune and/or as a sunwheel. L. Witser, Das Hakenkreuz nach Ursprung, Vorkommen und Bedeutung, 1918, repr. 1981; EAA 7, 1966, 573 f., s.v. Svastica; P.RotH, S. und Trikvetrum in der thrakischen Kunst, in: Listy filologické 111, 1988, 1-4. DI.WI.

Swat. Region (Xovaotynvi/Souasténé at Ptol. 7,1,42) around the homonymous tributary of the River Kabul (Greek

26(u)aotocd/S6(u)astos,

Sanskrit

Suvdstu)

in

modern northwestern Pakistan. After fierce fighting, the area was conquered by Alexander [4] the Great. Later it became part of the Indo-Greek kingdom and a centre of Buddhism. The exact location of the ancient capital > Massaga is unknown, but excavations in Birkot Ghwandai (probably Bazira at Arr. Anab. 4,27,5 ff.) have revealed remains of Hellenistic walls, ceramics, Indo-Greek coins and a small fragment of a Greek inscription [1]. Further archaeological find sites, such as Aligram, Mingara and Ora provide evidence of the rich cultural heritage of S. ~ Indo-Greeks 1P.Carirerr

et

al..,

Bir-kot-ghwandai

1990-1992

(Suppl. 73 agli Annali dell’ Istituto Universitario Orientale di Napoli vol. 52, 1992, fasc. 4)

Id. et al., Excavation at Bir-Kot-Ghwandai, S.: 1987, in: Pakistan Archaeology 25, 1990, 163-192.; G. Tucc!, On Swat. The Dards and Connected Problems, in: East and West 27, 1977, 9-103.

K.K.

Swearwords; terms of abuse can be defined in terms of a speech act: the deliberate disparaging of a person (or thing) by means of a verbal attack on characteristic traits, personal circumstances, and so forth. For the constitution of an insult, it is not absolutely necessary to apply an abusive term in the narrow sense as a particular lexical device, i.e. nominally hostile forms of address (or hostile terminology) [7. 18; 9. 1190]. In ancient literature, abusive language is used in the most varied genres, e.g. in iambic poetry (> Iambographers), — invective, > epigrams, in > Fescennini versus, also in texts which approximate colloquial speech, as in > comedy or > Petronius [5], and in certain passages of epic and elegy. Graffiti are also a rich source [3], in which terms of abuse and sexual/obscene vocabulary cannot always be clearly distinguished [2. 6]. A modern reader may be astonished at terms of abuse in forensic oratory (e.g. Latin belua, ‘monster’); but factual arguments and personal matters were not kept separate, and praise and criticism were important components not only of political oratory [1]. Ancient manuals of rhetoric give practical advice (e.g. Aphthonius 2,40-42 SPENGEL; Theon, 2,109-112 SPENGEL; Cic. Inv. 1,22; 2,108) as to what aspects can give occasion to criticism (which does not have to be valid, just not entirely unlikely, cf. Cic. Font. 37); such a critical presentation can easily become abusive. Christian

SWIMMING

De

978

authors also exercise little restraint with respect to nonChristians, Jews and heretics ([8]; > Heresy I.). Ancient theoretical statements on the use of terms of abuse are rare. In the context of thoughts on metaphor, Cicero (Cic. De or. 3,164 f.) says that offensive imagery should be avoided (even if apt), e.g. ‘excrement of the

on the Red Sea. Plin. HN 18,13 1f. and 314, Columella 2,10,22-24 and Pall. Agric. 8,2,1-3 describe sowing it in July/August on loose, well fertilized soil and the alleged transition of the rapa (turnip) into the napus and vice versa (also in Isid. Orig. 17,10,8).

+ Cabbage

CHU.

Curia’ (stercus curiae).

Although violent invectives are recorded and verbal aggression was evidently tolerated to a great extent, under certain circumstances the writing and distribution of defamatory songs and libels was punishable as ~ iniuria in the Roman Empire, for endangering the community [6].

The repertory of terms of abuse has been categorized in various ways: HOFFMANN [4] e.g. proceeds from the original meaning and arranges individual terms of abuse according to the areas they are taken from (e.g. physical appearance, age, moral shortcomings, profession). OPELT’s [7] typology, in contrast, is organized according to speech situations (e.g. master and slave, abuse in the military, in legal disputes, literary polemics). Terms of abuse predominantly signify moral judgments on conduct or character [7. 264]. Stylistically, they cover a broad scale ranging from obscenities (‘fucker’, Latin fututor), plain everyday words (‘evil’, Greek xaxdc/kakos; ‘stupid, mad’, Latin stultus, insa-

Swimming (Egyptian 1bj; Greek xodvuBav/kolymban; Latin natare). Swimming was a basic cultural skill as early as in ancient Egypt ([1]; likewise later in Greece, Pl. Leg. 689d; in Rome, Suet. Aug. 64,3: Augustus teaches his grandsons to swim) and was part of the education syllabus of high-ranking people, even of the king’s children (biography of nomarch Cheti, end of 3rd millennium BC [2. document 3]). There are also sufficient sources for the Ancient Near East to assume that swimming was known [3]. In both the Ancient Near East and in Egypt, it occurs in myth in the form of diving: Gilgamesh fetches a herb from the depths of the ocean (TUAT III 4, 737, Il. 271a-275b’; [3. 149151]), the Egyptian gods > Horus and > Seth hold a diving competition for world rule [2. doc. 36]. Swimming as a sport is extremely rare in the GrecoRoman

period. According to Paus. (2,35,1), ~ Her-

mione holds a swimming competition (&purdAa xodbpBov/hamilla kolymbou); the motif appears in two pas-

nus), animal and criminal metaphors (e.g. ‘dog’, Greek

sages of later epic (Nonnus, Dion.

xvov/kyon; ‘thief’, Latin fur) to fantastic metaphors (e.g. heretics as ‘moths gnawing at the garments of the Church’, Latin tinea, Ambr. De spiritu sancto 1,16,164) and those that can only be understood as terms of abuse with a knowledge of myth (‘Paris’), history (‘Hannibal’), society (‘dancer’, Latin saltator) or ecclesiastical history (‘apostate’, Latin lapsus, during the persecution of Christians).

423). Swimming was a necessary skill for i.a. fishing, diving for sponges, in war (Caesar at Alexandria: Suet. lul. 64) and in the event of shipwreck (Hom. Od. 5,342345). Roman baths had swimming pools (natatio, + piscina [2], xodvupPea/kolymbethra [4; 5]), the depth of which presupposes the ability to swim. A dominant technique in Antiquity was swimming with alternate strokes (similar to modern crawl). The motif of swimming occurs frequently in art. Cosmetic spoons with handles shaped like female swimmers are known from Egypt [6]. Neo-Assyrian reliefs show people swimming the crawl and non-swimmers floating in the water on inflated animal skins (palace of ASSurnasirpal II [3. figs. 2-6]. A well-known example is the Greek tomb illustration of a springboard diver (Poseidonia/Paestum, 5th cent. BC [7. fig. 63]).

1 G. ACHARD, Pratique rhétorique et idéologie politique dans les discours optimates de Cicéron, 1981, 187-355 2J.N. Apams, The Latin Sexual Vocabulary, 1982 3 E.DieHL, Pompejanische Wandinschriften und Verwandtes, 71930 4 G.HoFFMANN, Schimpfworter der Griechen und Romer, 1892 5 J.B. HOFMANN, Lateinische Umgangssprache, 31951, § 82 6 MomMsen, Straf-

recht, 794f., 800f. 71.OPELT, Die lateinischen Schimpfworter und verwandte sprachliche Erscheinungen, 1965 8 Ead., Die Polemik in der christlichen lateinischen Literatur von Tertullian bis Augustin, 1980 9 W.SEIBICKE,

Das Schimpfworterbuch,

in: Worterbii-

cher (Handbuch zur Sprach- und Kommunikationswissenschaft, vol. 5.2), 1990, 1190-1193.

Swede. The words Bovvidc/bounids, vanv/napy, Latin napus probably refer to the swede (Brassica napus L. var. napobrassica). According to Ath. 9,369b Theophrastus was not familiar with it, while > Nicander fr. 70 SCHN. was. In Greece, according to Plin. HN 19,75 (five local varieties distinguished by Greek physicians) and 20,21 (two kinds: bovinion and bouinias), it is supposed to have been used only as a medicine; Ath. 1,4d knows swedes from Thebes. Diod. Sic. 3,24,1 describes it as similar to the food plants of the Hylophagi people

11,7-55;

11,406-

1 W.DeEcKeER, Sport und Spiel im Alten Agypten, 1987, 96-103 21d., Quellentexte zu Sport und Korperkultur im alten Agypten, 1975 3 R.ROLLINGER, Schwimmen und Nichtschwimmen im Alten Orient, in: CH. ULF (ed.), Ideologie-Sport-AuGenseiter, 2000, 148-165 4I.Nietsen, Thermae et balnea, 1991, 153-156 5 F.YeEGUL, Baths and Bathing in Classical Antiquity, 1992, 37 f.,158-160 61. WALLERT, Der verzierte Léffel, 1967 + 7/1.SCHEIBLER, Griech. Malerei in der Antike,

1994. E. Ment, Antike Schwimmkunst, 1927; Id., s. v. Schwimmen, RE Suppl. 5, 847-864; F. MANISCALCO, II nuoto nel mondo greco-romano, 1995;J.AUBERGER, Quand la nage devint natation, in: Latomus 55, 1996, 48-62.

W.D.

SWING PAINTER

Swing Painter. Attic black-figure vase painter, c. 540520 BC, named after a swing scene on an amphora (Boston, MFA 98.918). Since his drawing style is quite easy to recognise, he has been attributed 167 vases to date, primarily amphorae. Of particular interest is the multiplicity and originality of his depictions, including unique scenes such as costumed men on stilts, a bodyguard of > Peisistratus [4] armed with clubs, a Nekyia scene with — Ajax [1] turned away grumbling (Hom. Od. 11,541-564) and Heracles rescuing — Alcestis. Due to the SP’s increasingly sketchy and simplifying drawing style, his figures become highly formulaic, with heads pushed forward and over-large feet. ~ Vase painting, black-figured E. BOurR, Der Schaukelmaler, 1982; Ead., Weitere Werke des Schaukelmaler, in: B. vON FREYTAG GEN. LORINGHOFF et al. (ed.) Praestant Interna. FS U. Hausmann, 1982, 213-220.

H.M.

Sword I. CLASsIcAL ANTIQUITY AREA

II. CELTIC-GERMANIC

I. CLASSICAL ANTIQUITY

The sword used in Rome’s early period is referred to as ensis or gladius in the transmission (Verg. Aen. 757433 95431; 12,458; Liv. 1,43,2). According to Livy, the soldiers of the first three classes (‘divisions’) in the

Servian

order

980

a7o

of — centuriae

were

equipped

with

swords (Liv. 1,43,2). The Gallic sword was longer and had no pointed tip, the Hispanic sword was short, hada tip and was more suitable for thrusting than for slashing (Liv. 22,46,5). In the period of the > 2nd Punic War, a new type of sword became popular. The heavily armed soldiers of the three battle ranks (hastati; principes;

triarii) fought with this weapon whose blade was c. 60-70 cm long and which was equally suitable for thrusting and for cutting (Pol. 2,30,8). Due to its sturdiness, it was superior to the bronze sword of the Gauls (Pol. 2,33,5). As a result of contacts with the Celtiberians in the

2nd Punic War, the Romans adopted a sword referred to as ‘Spanish sword’ in the literature (Pol. 6,23,6-7; Liv. 31,34,4), which was worn on the right side. This

weapon could have terrible effects: In the 2nd > Macedonian War, the injuries caused by sword strikes were particularly horrible, arms, shoulders or heads were

severed from the bodies of enemy soldiers, the bodies themselves slit open (Liv. 31,34,4-5). For the rst cent. AD, Tacitus distinguishes the sword of the legionary soldiers (gladius) from that of the > auxilia (spatha; Tac. Ann. 12,35,3). The spatha, a weapon of Germanic origin was longer than the Roman sword and was worn on the left side. However, this distinction is not generally valid, since the spatha did not become common until the 3rd cent. In his excursus about the Roman army, losephus reports that the legionaries had two swords, a longer one on the left side and a much shorter one on the right; the cavalry had a longer sword than

the infantry (Jos. BI 3,93-96). In late Antiquity, the spatha was the common weapon of Roman soldiers (Veg. Mil. 2,15,43 3,14,13); this sword had a length of c. 0,70-0,90 m. On the Greek sword (int. al. tO Eidoc/ xiphos) s. > Armament I., + Weapons. + Armament; > Weapons 1M.C.

BisHop,

J.C.N.

Courtston,

Roman

Military

Equipment from the Punic Wars to the Fall of Rome, 1993 2 M.FruGcére,

Armes

des

Romains,

1993,

144-146

3 C.SAULNIER, L’armée et la guerre dans le monde étrus4Id., L’armée et la guerre chez les co-romain, 1980 Y.LB. peuples samnites, 1983.

I]. CELTIC-GERMANIC AREA For the Celts and Germans, the sword was the most important weapon for hand-to-hand combat. It did, however, not emerge until the development of the > La Téne culture (mid 5th cent. BC) — probably as a result of Mediterranean influences — and was used intensively until the end of the La Téne culture (late rst cent. BC). Iron swords with bronze or sheet iron blades sometimes richly decorated with typical Celtic ornaments were worn on iron sword-chains or weapon-belts. At first, the swords were relatively short (c. 60 cm) with a pointed tip and were used for cutting and thrusting; towards the end of the La Téne period (znd/rst cent. BC), they became longer (c. 80 cm) with a blunt tip to be used primarily for cutting. Swords have survived mostly as funerary gifts in the rich burial of warriors and through sacrificial finds; they displayed the special rank of a warrior. Occasionally, swords and their high-ranking owners were represented on images as well, such as the ‘warrior prince’ of ~ Glauberg. Swords therefore were of high social as well as material value, a value that was documented through a rich and characteristic (‘sword-style’) ornamentation of the blades as well as through the commonly occurring ‘mark’ of the smithy. Partially, one also finds Celtic swords that were forged with an elaborate lamellar technique in a damascene style which made them particularly stable and pliable. For the Germans, (— Germanic archaeology), swords played no particular role in the Pre-Roman Period. In the period of the birth of Christ, a few oneedged cutting swords from local traditions appeared, above all long Celtic-style swords, but usually without the metal sheaths and weapon belts which were to characterize German armament in the rst/znd cents. AD. Beginning in the 3rd cent. AD, swords grew shorter again due to Roman influence. In funerary and sacrificial customs, swords held a similar significance for the Germans and the Celts. + Celtic archaeology; - Weapons W. ADLER, Studien zur germanischen Bewaffnung, 1993; K.Rappatz et al., s. v. Bewaffnung, RGA 2, 361-430; A. HaFENER, Das Schwert der Laténezeit, in: R. CORDIEHACKENBERG (ed.), Hundert Meisterwerke keltischer Kunst, 1992, 129-136; J.M.pE Navarro, The Finds from the Site of La Téne, vol. 1: Scabbards and the Swords Found in Them, 1972; R.PLEINER, The Celtic Sword,

981

SYBOTA

982 1993; K. RappDATz, Die germanische Bewaffnung der vorromischen Eisenzeit, 1967; Id., Die Bewaffnung der Germanen

in der jiingeren

rOmischen

Kaiserzeit,

1967;

M.Szano, E.F.Perres, Decorated Weapons of the La Téne Iron Age in the Carpathian Bassin, 1992; T. WEsKI,

Waffen in germanischen Grabern der Alteren romischen Kaiserzeit siidlich der Ostsee (British Archaeological Reports, International Ser. 147), 1982; K.W. ZELLER,

Kriegswesen und Bewaffnung der Kelten, in: L.PauLi (ed.), Die Kelten in Mitteleuropa, 1980, 111-132. VP.

Syagrius [1] In AD 379 procos. Africae, in 380-382 praetorian prefect, in 381 cos. The assignment of offices is debatable, since S. [2] became prominent at the same time. [2] In AD 369 dishonourably dismissed as a notarius; in 379-381 (2) magister officiorum, in 381 city prefect in Rome, in 382 cos. Correspondent of Q. A. > Symmachus [4] Eusebius. CLauss, 192 f.; A.DEMANDT, Die Konsuln der Jahre 381 und 382 namens S., in: ByzZ 64, 1971, 38-45; PLRE 1, 862 (dated).

[3] Son of > Aegidius. During the collapse of rule in Gaul, he gradually managed, building resources of his father and possibly under the magister militum, to construct his own power

Roman on the title of base in

the region of Augusta Suessionum (modern Soissons),

which did not formally cede from the Roman Empire, but was de facto autonomous and geographically separated from it. The title of rex or patrician is traditionally applied to him. He was defeated in AD 486/7 by the king > Clovis I (Chlodovechus) of the Franks. PLRE 2, ro4t f. D. HENNING, Periclitans res publica, 1999, 300-305.

HL.

Sybaris (ZbBagic; Sybaris). [1] Monster on the mountain > Cirphis near > Crisa, also called Lamia (— Lamia [1]). In order to keep the area free of S.’ regular visitations, a youth called Alcyoneus was to be sacrificed. Out of love for him, however, Eurybatus spontaneously took his place. He managed to overcome S. and throw it from a rock. On the site of its fall the spring S. arises (Antoninus Liberalis 8, according to Nicander). [2] Name of a youth, possibly a river god, in a picture described in Paus. 6,6,11 in connexion with Euthymus’ expulsion of the heros of > Temesa. The interpretation of the figure is debatable. S. EITREM, s.v. S. (2), RE 4 A,1, 1002-1005; s.v. S. I, LIMC 7.1, 824 f.

P. MULLER,

formed a large fertile swampland. In the Bronze Age joint settlements of the Oenotri and the Mycenaeans developed in this region, in the early Iron Age there was contact with the Greeks. In c. 720 BC S. was founded as an agricultural colony by Achaei from Elis (Str. 6,1,13);

the city became rich from cultivating corn and vines (Varro Rust. 1,44,2; Ath. 12,519d), breeding cattle, and catching birds and fish (Theocr. 5,1f.; Diod. Sic. 7,191; Timaeus FGrH 566 F 9; Ael. VH 12,24). Its preferred trading partner was Miletus [2] (Hdt. 6,21,1; Ath. 12,518c-519d; 521b-d). S. was the leader of a hegemonical symmachy (Str. 6,1,13; cf. also the treaty with the Serdaei of c. 530 BC: StV 2, no. 120). Inthe 7th cent. BC, S. founded the colonies of Laus (> Laus [1]), Scidrus and > Poseidonia (Paistos, Paestum). Under the tyrant > Telys a conflict developed with — Croton, which led to the destruction of S. in the year 510 BC (Diod. Sic. 12,9,1-10,3). The victors are supposed to have altered the course of the Crathis in order to obliterate S. entirely (Str. 6,1,13); the survivors fled into the hinterland and the colonies of S. (Hdt. 6,21; 5,44f.). After a number of unsuccessful initiatives to re-found S., the ‘Panhellenic’ colony of > Thurii was founded on its site in 444 BC. Knowledge of S. is impaired by floods of the Crathis and of S., the overbuilding of the city site by the Thurii, the Roman colony of Copia established there in 194 BC (+ Thurii) and by a rise in sea level. Parts of the residential area with wells and kilns and of a public building have been excavated. There is evidence of cults of Hera (Ael. VH 3,43; Ath. 12,521e-f; Steph. Byz. s.v. 2.) and Athena (Hdt. 5,45,1; cf. IG XIV 643). S. enjoyed strong links with the sanctuary in Delphi (Theop. FGrH 81 F 45; Str. 9,3,8), had a treasury in - Olympia and itself staged corresponding games (Paus. 6,19,9; Heraclid. Pont. fr. 49 WEHRLI). ~ Colonization IV. (with map and stemma) §.SeTTIs (ed.), Storia della Calabria antica, vol. 1, 1988; M.Osanna, Chorai coloniali da Taranto a Locri, 1992,

115-138; Sibari e la Sibaritide. Atti XXIII Convegno di Studi sulla Magna Grecia (Taranto 1992), 1993; A. Muccia, L’area di rispetto nelle colonie magno-greche e siceliote, 1997, 59-63; M. BuGno, Da Sibari a Thurii, 1999.

A.MU.

Sybota (2bBota/Sybota). {1] Island group off the coast of Epirus opposite the southern tip of Corcyra [1]. In 433 BC a sea battle took place there between Corcyra and Corinth ([1]; Thuc. Tig A oils 5 On3 sOLED 25 20585755) LE

ay jelatheaslands

were plundered by the — Ostrogoths (Procop. Goth. 4,22,30). 1J.S. Morrison

et al., The Athenian Trireme, *2000,

62-69.

[3] According to Plut. Themistocles 3 2,128c a daughter of > Themistocles. [4] City in the territory of the > Oenotri (Hecat. FGrH 1 F 64-71) on the Ionios Kolpos in Lucania, where the rivers Crathis (modern Crati) and S. (modern Coscile)

[2] Harbour on the coast of Epirus opposite the S. [1] island group, modern Limani Murzo. In the 5th cent. BC, S. was part of the territory of Thesprotia (> Thesproti). In 433 BC the harbour was used by the Corin-

SYBOTA thians, in 427 BC by a Peloponnesian

983

984

fleet (Thuc.

J.D. Secer, s. v. Shechem, The Oxford Encyclopedia of Archaeology in the Near East 5, 1997, 19-23. jp.

150,33 3,76515 Str. 7,7,53 Cic. Att. 5,9,15 Ptol. 3,14,55 Steph. Byz. s. v. 2.). N.G. L. HAMMOND, Epirus, 1969, 498.

KF.

Sybridae (ZvuPeidai; Sybridai). Attic paralia(?) deme of the Erechtheis phyle, before 307/6 BC with one bouleutes in alternation with > Pambotadae, near which S. may have been. There is speculation on a connexion with the River Syverus (Siberus) in Plin. HN 37,114. The sculptor Cephisodotus [5] was from S. E. MEYER, s.v. S., RE Suppl. 10, 925-927; TRAILL, Attica,

6, 14, 59, 62, 69, 112 No. 131, Table. 1; J.S. TRAIL, Demos and Trittys, 1986, 126. H.LO.

Sycophants see > Sykophantes Sycyrium (Zvxveuov; Sykyrion). Place in the + Dotium region at the western end of the Tempe valley, used by Perseus [2] as a permanent camp for actions against the Roman army in the third of the > Macedonian Wars, in 171 BC (Liv. 42,54; 62; 64; 67). The location is uncertain, the assignment of the name to modern S. (formerly Makrokeserli) is arbitrary. H.KRAMOLISCH, land, 644f.

s.v. Sykyrion, in: LAUFFER, GriechenHE.KR.

Syedra (Zvedea; Syedra). City in > Cilicia Tracheia Syceon (Zuxedv/Sykedn, Lxewv/Sikeon). Place in +> Galatia (Proc. Aed. 5,4,1) where the road from

Nicaea [5] to Ancyra crosses the > Siberis, about 10 km to the south-southwest of modern Beypazari, as a road station Fines Galatiae (Tab. Peut. 9,4, but incorrectly Fines Cilicie). Saint Theodorus lived and worked in S. BELKE, 228 f.; S.MITCHELL, Anatolia, vol. 2, 1993, 122150. K.ST.

Sychaeus see > Dido

near the modern Seki, 17 km to the southeast of Coracesium. With its first literary mention (Luc. 8,259f.; Flor. Epit. 2,13,51) in the middle of the rst cent. BC, after a phase of unclear power relations S. belonged to the province of Pamphylia no later than the time of Tiberius (AD 14-37) [1.49-51]. The settlement, on a rounded mountain top near the coast, is very well preserved (theatre, baths, cisterns, late antique city wall; {2] with map). 1K.Tomascuitz, Unpublizierte Inschriften Westkilikiens aus dem Nachlafs Terence B. Mitfords, 1998 2 G. Huser, S., in: AAWW

Sychem

130, 1993, 27-78.

Key

(Hebrew Sake@m; Suxep, cf. Gn 12:6, Latin

Sychem). City in > Samaria c. 2 km to the southeast of Nablus between the mountains of Ebal and Garizim on the hill of Tall Balata and today partly covered by an Arab village called Balata. S. acquired strategic and economic significance because of its location at a central junction in the road network of Samaria. Settled by 3500 BC, S. was attacked and destroyed by Egypt several times in the 2nd millennium. After the death of + Solomon [1], the election of Jeroboam as the first king of the Northern Kingdom (> Judah and Israel) took place there due to the religious significance of the location, and S. became the capital of the Northern Kingdom. With the relocation of the seat of government to the city of Samaria, however, S. receded to a secondary position and was abandoned in the 5th century BC. Only after the destruction of Samaria by Alexander [4] the Great in 331 BC, did the Samaritans, who built their main temple on Mount Garizim, resettle S. In the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC, S. was affected by the Ptolemaic-Seleucid conflicts. During the expansion of the Jewish state the king Johannes Hyrcanus [2] I destroyed the Samaritan temple on Mount Garizim in 126 BC, and the city itself in 107. Neapolis [11] (Nablus), newly founded under the emperor Vespasianus in AD 72/3, replaced the abandoned S. E.F. CAMPBELL, s. v. Shechem, The New Encyclopedia of Archaeological Excavations in the Holy Land 3, 1993, 1345-1354; D.A. Dorsey, Shechem and the Road Network of Central Samaria, in: BASO 268, 1987, 57-70;

Syene (Zuyvr/Syené, Egyptian Swnw/‘place of commerce’), present-day Assuan, city on the western shore of the Nile across from the island of > Elephantine, first mentioned on a border stone under — Sesostris I [1]. Although S. was an important market as well as a staple market and the starting point of Nubian expeditions, it was not important at first from an administrative and military point of view. Aramaic papyri in S. document that it was occupied by a Persian garrison. In the Roman Period, three cohorts.were stationed there. Juvenal was the commander of the occupying forces of S. A small temple consecrated to Isis-Sathis by Ptolemaeus [6] III is still extant. 1 Annales du Service des Antiquités de Egypte 49, 1949, 258. 2 J.LocuER, Topographie und Geschichte der Region am 1. Nilkatarakt in griechisch-rémischer Zeit, 1999.

Syennesis (Zvévveoic/Syénnesis). Term for indigenous Cilician dynasts with their centre at Tarsus (Xen. An. 1,2,23). According to Hdt. 1,74, one S. is supposed to

have mediated the accord between the Lydians and the Medes; in the war between > Croesus and > Cyrus [2], Cilicia was on the Persian side (Hdt. 1,28). Another S. took part in Xerxes’s campaign against Hellas (Hdt. 7,98; Aesch. Pers. 326-328). It is generally assumed that the duplicity of the third known S., the husband of Epyaxa, during Cyrus [3] the Younger’s campaign in

SYLLAEUS

985

986

40x BC (Xen. An. 1,2,123 1,2,21; 1,252.6 f£.; Diod. Sic.

anybody who had encountered injustice (Plut. Solon 18,6-7). According to Aristotle this right was one of the fundamental principles of the Solonic politeia (Aristot. Pol. 9,1). However, individual prosecutors could also make use of this right for self-serving reasons. Modern discussion has concentrated on whether sykophantes was more than just a derogatory expression for an opponent in court, and on what role people described as sykophantai in fact played in the judicial system. The activities of sykophantai were almost exclusively limited to cases in which a charge was permitted by a third party and there was a prospect of reward. Here it was accepted that, out of resentment or for financial motives, unfounded charges that were also not without risk for the sykophantes, however, were also brought. In a lawsuit, the idea suggested itself in this situation to claim that the accuser was a sykophantes. The alternative to excessive litigiousness, however, was Athens, where the power of the wealthy families could prevail against the law. Hence the activities of sykophantai were absolutely indispensable to the preservation of democracy. Criticism of sykophantai contributed to reducing the misuse of prosecutions. In addition, for wealthy aristocrats there were further possibilities for defending themselves against sykophantai

14,20,2 f.) led to the end of the dynasty, but this is as disputed as the nature of Cilicia’s autonomy in the Persian Empire and identification of the ‘dynasts’ on Tarsian coins. 1 BRIANT, 627-629 2O.CASABONNE, Le S. cilicien et Cyrus: le rapport des sources numismatiques, in: P. BRIANT (ed.), Dans les pas des Dix-Mille, 1995, 147-172 3 Id., Conquéte perse et phenoméne monétaire: le exemple cilicien, in: Id. (ed.), Mécanismes et innovations monétaires dans |’Anatolie achaménide (Actes de la table ronde, Istanbul 1997), 2000, 21-93. jw.

Sykophantes (ovxoddvine/sykophantés, ‘sycophant’). The term first appears in Old Comedy (Aristoph. fr. 228, 427 BC). The origin of the word is unknown, with ancient conjectures on the etymology (sykophantes as a man who ‘reveals figs’) being unconvincing. In Comedy, sykophantai are linked with threats, demands for money and extortion; their acting as prosecutors in court is also characteristic (Aristoph. Av. 1410-1469; Aristoph. Plut. 850-959). This perception of sykophantai is echoed in numerous mentions in the orators; for instance, Lysias [1] alleges that sykophantai accuse the innocent for financial reasons, Demosthenes [2] claims that sykophantai formulated accusations without anything to prove, and Isocrates portrays them as good but poor orators 25155)):

(Lys. 25,3; Dem.

Or. 57,34; Isoc. Or.

The actions of a sykophantes are not always associated only with financial motives, however: the expression is also used metaphorically (cf. Aristot. Top. 13.9b; Dem. Or. 23,61). Whereas the earliest mentions in Comedy view the sykophantes as a prosecutor, forensic orators relate the term equally to prosecutors, court orators (ovviyogoc/> synégoros) and even witnesses.

Thus, anybody whose appearance in court is to be criticised or disparaged is described as a sykophantes (cf.

(Xen. Mem. 2,9).

+ Criminal procedure; > Penal law (III.) 1 P. CARTLEDGE et al. (ed.), Nomos. Essays in Athenian Law, Politics and Society, 1990 2M.R. Curist, Ostra-

cism, Sycophancy and Deception of the. Demos: Aristot. Ath. pol. 43,5, in: CQ 42, 1992, 336-346 31d., The Litigious Athenian, 1998 4 D.Harvey, The Sykophant and Sykophancy: Vexatious Redefinition?, in: [1], 103r2x 5 D.M.MacDoweE Lt, The Law in Classical Athens, 1978, 62-68 6R.G. OsBORNE, Vexatious Litigation in

Classical Athens: Sykophancy and the Sykophant, in: [1], 83-102.

R.O.

| Ei 2373, it),

Syleus (ZvAev métoikoi; Aristot. Ath. pol. 43,5). Such probolai were motions of censure which did not entail punishment. In addition there were also other forms of complaint against sykophantai (Aristot. Ath. pol. 59,3; Isoc. Or. 15,313-315). There is a record of proceedings against sykophantai under the Tyranny of the Thirty (> Tridkonta) in 404 BC. It becomes clear that the activities of syRophantai are primarily directed against the members of rich aristocratic families (Xen. Hell. 2,3,12; Aristot. Ath. Pol. 35533 for other poleis cf. Aristot. Pol. 1304b—130§a). Appearances by sykophantai are closely connected with the Athenian system of justice, which had no public prosecutor. From the time of Solon [x] onwards any citizen (6 BovAduevoc; ho boulémenos) had the right to invoke the courts (> Dikastérion) on behalf of

passing strangers in Aulis to dig his vineyards. Heracles [x], in the service of queen > Omphale of Lydia, punishes him by uprooting his vines and killing him and his daughter Xenodoce (Apollod. 2,132; Diod. Sic. 4,31; Tzetz. Chil. 2,429-435). There is a deviating version in a satyr play by Euripides (T'GF* 575), in which Heracles —not S., who has purchased him as a slave — appears as the actual monster (other variants: Speusippus, Epistolae

Socraticorum

30; Konon

FGrH

26 F

1,17).

CA.BL Syllable see - Phonetics and phonology; — Prosody

— Metre;

Syllaeus. Nabataean (> Nabataei), leading officebearer of the Nabataean king Obodas II: > epitropos [x] (in Jos. BI 1,487; Str. 16,4,23 f.); > dioiketes (Nicolaus of Damascus, Excerpta Historica 3,1,1 BorssEVAIN). When Aelius [II 11] Gallus, the prefect of Egypt, went into battle against southern Arabia in 24 BC, S.

SYLLAEUS

advised on the route the army took. Because it was a failure, Strabo accuses him (16,4,23 f.) of treason. S. played a substantial role in the competition between the local rulers in the area of Syria, Judaea and Nabataea; at the same time he endeavoured to strengthen his own position by a marriage with Salome [r], the sister of Herod [1] the Great. When Herod refused the alliance, S. became his bitter enemy (Jos. Ant. Iud. 16,220-228; cf. 17,10). He supported rebels against Herod in the Trachonitis

(countryside

south of Damascus).

After

fruitless negotiations before > Sentius [II 4] Saturninus, the governor of Syria, the dispute was dealt with before Augustus in Rome. S. initially prevailed. When Obodas II died and Aretas [4] IV came to power, S. lost influence. Finally, Nicolaus [3] of Damascus, as advocate of Herod the Great, succeeded in convincing Augustus of S.’s guilt; this was helped by the fact that Aretas also turned against him. S. was executed in Rome (Str. 16,4,24). G.W.

988

987

Bowersockx,

Roman

Arabia,

1983,

47-533

N.Koxxinos, The Herodian Dynasty, 1998, 182-186; M. Sartre, D’Alexandre 4 Zénobie, 2001, 489-492; 5 18520.

W.E.

Syllogism see > Logic; > Probatio Syloson (ZvAoo@v/Sylosén). Younger brother of + Polycrates [1] of Samos. With the latter he achieved > tyrannis in about 540 BC, but was then expelled (Hdt. 3,39). Egypt c. 525 BC is the scene of an anecdote that made him the ‘benefactor’ (euergétés) of Darius [1]

(Hdt. 3,139 f.). After the latter came to power in 522, S. won him over to making him the successor ofPolycrates [x], who had been killed in the meantime. An army under Otanes [1] marched against Maeandrius [1], the tyrant ruling in Samos, (Hdt. 3,140-149) whose underhandedness prompted the Persians to ‘scour’ and almost depopulate the island (Hdt. 3,149; 6,31). S. then ruled on good terms with Otanes and Darius (Hdt. 3,149), the first tyrant installed by the Persians in Ionia. His son Aeaces [2] and others later protected Darius’ bridge across the Danube (Hdt. 4,138). The image of the depopulated island is proverbially linked to S., ‘by S.’s will a spacious land’ (eurychorié; Str. 14,1,17 et passim). H.Berve, Die Tyrannis bei den Griechen, 1967, 114 f.; 587; L. pe Lipero, Die archaische Tyrannis, 1996, 307 f.

J.co. Syllium (ZvA(A)etov/Syl(l)eion, TbAMov/Syllion, Latin Sylleum). City in the territory of the tyrant Moagetes in Cibyratis in northern Lycia (Pol. 21,34,11; Liv. 38,14,10). Not located. W.RuGE, s. v. S. (2), RE 3 A, 101; H. BERvE, Die Tyrannis

bei den Griechen, 1967, 427-429.

U.HA.

-wwwbrill nl ISBN 978 90 04 14218-3

9 "789004"142183