American Journal of Ancient History 9781463206260, 1463206267

Citation preview

American Journal of Ancient History

American Journal of Ancient History

1.2

The American Journal of Ancient History is a peer-reviewed academic journal covering ancient history and classical studies. It was established in 1976 and edited by Ernst Badian until 2001. It is continued by the American Journal of Ancient History: New Series, edited by T. Corey Brennan.

American Journal of Ancient History

Volume 1.2 Edited by

Ernst Badian

gp 2016

Gorgias Press LLC, 954 River Road, Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2016 by Gorgias Press LLC Originally published in May 1976 All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. ‫ܛ‬

1

2016

ISBN 978-1-4632-0626-0

Printed in the United States of America

TABLE

OF CONTENTS

Editor's Note ...............................................

65

Frank J. Frost: Tribal Politic• and the Civic State ...................

66

SusanTreggiari:Jobsfor Women...............................

76

E. Badian: Rome, Athensand Mithridat•s.........................

May 1976 by E. BadJan.All rightsreserved.

105

EDITOR'S

NOTE

The presentissuehasbeendelayedby printingdifficulties,inevitablein a new iournal, and the Editor must ask the readers'indulgence.We shall aim at a more reliable schedule in future.

The first issue has been well received. We have sold about half the first

printing, with new orderscomingin every day. About 50 orders,so far, are from institutions.All this althoughthe issuehasonly begunto reachscholars overseas.We are also receivingarticles,both from youngerand from established(and evendistinguished) scholars. The Editor and the Editorial Board would like to.thank our subscribers

and contributorsfor their confidence.Wehopeit will continue,andwe hope we canjustify it.

65

TRIBAL

POLITICS

I.

AND THE CIVIC

STATE*

The Problem

Greek political theoriststendedto believethat the Athenianpolity had entered the fifth centurywith a democraticform but wasguidedby a wise and virtuousaristocracy.A mere two generations later, it wasagreed,radical democracyhad run rampant: tradesmendominateda sovereignassembly packedwith day laborersand sailorsand madelaws from day to day in defianceof the constitution.It often seemeddangerouseven to belongto a noble family. Modern commentators havegenerallyacceptedthis pictureat face value, adding thereto their own valuejudgmentsof aristocratsand democrats. 1 Both ancient and modern studentsof the Athenianconstitution agreethat it is necessary to explain this changein politicalbehavior,particularly sinceinstitutionalchangewithin the constitutionitself,sofar asanyone

cansee,wasminimalbetween theeraof Cleisthenes andthatof Cleon. 2 How thenis oneto explainthe vastlydifferentpoliticalclimate? Plato blamedan earliergenerationof Athenianleaderswho in an orgy of popularity-seeking had lost sightof virtueandhadinstructedthe peoplein the pleasuresof materialism;they had accustomedthe demosto think in terms of crassand worldly rewards. When the mob saw that their leaders were competingfor their affections,they gainedconfidenceand eventually turned on their old leaders,displacingthem in favor of any politicianwho

wouldpromise prosperity? Aristotlespeaks several timesof thegrowthin pop'ilarstrength andconfidence, 4 but hisonlyspecific answer to whythe commonsshouldhave grown so in poweris the absurdallegationthat only the better classeswere killed in the variousbattles of the Pentecontaetia. s Actually, there is a strongelementof truth in the basictheoriesof both Plato and Aristotle;it is theirdetailedreasoning that is not satisfactory. 1 also

findit hardto dgree withW. RobertConnor, whenheattributes thegrowing strengthof 'the new politicians'during the fifth century to an innovative styleof politicalrhetoric.Thereis no doubtthat a newstylewasdeveloping, but asI haveobserved elsewhere, thiskind of changein thewaysandmeans

of politicsis more a symptomof societalchangethan an explanationof

it.6 It ismycontention thatthegrowth of theDelianLeague anditsmetamorphosis into an AthenianEmpirewroughtvasteconomicanddemographic changesin Attica, and that changingmodesof politicscan be seenas an inevitableoutgrowthof theseevents.I shall try to define the traditional structureof Atheniansocietybefore the PersianWarsand then describethe procedures by whichthisstructurewasalteredby war andby empire. 66

TRIBAL

POLITICS

II.

AND THE

CIVIC

STATE

67

AthenianSocietyBefore480 (a) SocialStructure

Atheniansocietyin the sixthcenturywasstill a ratherrigidstructureof kinshipgroups.Every youth growingup in archaicAttica wasawareof the ancestral relationships that woulddeterminehis placein theworldfor the rest of his life. Outsidethe family circle of father and brotherswere the unclesand cousins,andperhapsgrandparents, who constituted the genos. Beyond the genoswas a circle of more distantlyrelatedgene collectively knownasthephratry.At a certainage,at theancient,sacred ceremony of the Apaturia,the youth was introducedto his phratry,was enteredon the

phratry rollsandthusbegan to havea legally recognized existence. 7 There werethreephratriesin eachof the fourAttic phylae,andtheoretically every phratrymembercouldtracehis ancestrybackto a founding heroandthence

to oneof thefoursonsof Ion,whohadcreated thephylae. s Thephratries have been called a state within the state, but this is a misleadingcl•ch•;very few citizensof archaicAthenscould conceiveof an abstractconceptof the

state outsideof the phratries.For them, the collectiveauthorityof the phratrieswasthe state. As in so many traditionalsocieties,a structurebasedon kinshipgroups wasalsobasedon land ownership;in fact, the two can scarcelybe discussed separatelyso long as Attica remaineda pr.edominantlyrural community. With a few exceptions,phratry,genosand family namesall refer aswell to

specificpiecesof realestate:theoikoiof thevariousmembers of thatparticular phratry.The landwasa primarysourceof tribal stability,for on a mgn's oilcos werethe graves of hisancestors, andsometimes the shrineof a founding hero; there he would live out his life and there his children and their descendantswould live for the foreseeablefuture. For all intentsand purposes,

land'wasinalienable. "Whenfarming is almost theonly•ainfulandacceptablefamilyoccut•ation, landismoreor lessbeyondprice."• It changed hands only in the form of dowriesand in the unfortunatecaseof debt forfeiture. Landownership wasso importantbecause it formedalmostexclusively the economicbaseof the early.Athenianstate.It usedto be thoughtthat the

troublesof Soton'sday were symptomatic of a highlyurbanAthensswollen

withmerchants, tradesmen andartisans, xøbutarchaeqlogy does no.tsupport thispicture.With the exception of Kerameikos, whosepottershadbrought Athensinto the world trade orbit by mid-sixthcentury, the city itself seems

to haveremainedsmallandlittle morethan a marketingcehterfor the rural. hinterland?

(b) PoliticsandGovernment

Suchgovernment asexistedin the archaicstatewassimplythe equivalent, o• the level of phyle and phratry, of the authorityof the father within the

family. x•' Because Atticahadneverbeenconquered, therewereno legally inferior classesof inhabitantsother than slaves.Leadershipwasbasedon the

intuitiverespectaccorded an aristocracy of birth. These' leadersare called

68

FRANK

J. FROST

epieikeis,kaloi k'agathoiand other namesby our later sources. Theirleadershipderivedpartlyfrom theirancestors' statusasownersof thelargestestates in Attica and partly from their ability to prove satisfactorilytheir descent from foundingheroes,whoseshrinesand sacredprecinctslay on their land. As eldersand leadersof the phratriesthey doubledaspriestsof the family cults. As men of substancethey servedas judges,givingrough and ready interpretationsof the tribal ethic when disputesarose.They displayedtheir

wealthby spending it magnanimously in thepublic good. is Asaccomplished warriorstheyconvenedthe tribeunderarmswhenquestions of war andpeace arose, and they led their contingentsof the phylae into battle; other than these duties, governmentscarcelyexisted. By the sixth century, certain functions of personalleadershiphad becomeregularizedin the form of Boule

and archons. In these institutions

we can see an intuitive

search for

stableformsof authoritythat would put the leadersof greathouseson more or lessequal footingand help to preventstasis.The reorganization of the archonsduringthe constitutional crisisof the 580sgivesa revealingpicture of the distributionof power: of the ten newlycreatedarchons,five are to be eupatrids,three are agroikoi (probably meamnglanded gentry other than

eupatrids) andtwoaredOmiourgoi, whichprobably refersto thegrowing class of city dwellers whosewealthwasnot measured in land?

Political adtivity, sofar aswe canidentifyit in thearchaic Athenian state,wasprimarily a competitivequestfor honors.We may assumethat the competingaristocraticfamiliesof Attica had graduallydevelopeda code of politicalstyleas a subtopic of the tribalethic.Thiscodewasmoresuccessful than that of otheraristocracies, for Athenswassparedtheperiodicvendettas

that seemto havebeenendemicelsewhere in the Greekworld,andyet was still thesceneof a continualvigorous competition for honorson thepartof

its noble families.is

In many Greekstates,the hereditarytribal aristocracy wasearlydispersdd or obscured or displaced by immigration andcolonization or by hard timesand resultingsocialupheaval.But in Athensaristocraticleadership survivedalmostunchallenged well into the fourth century.A tradition of commonorigin contributedto one of the moststablekinshipstructuresin

Greece.An agricultural economyandrelativelyproductive landkept both geographical and'socialmobilityat a minimum.The Athenians neithersent outcolonies norencouraged immigration, exceptin themostlimitedway.x6 Mostimportant, by fortunateaccident, wiseleadership coincided with critical issues and averted threats that had led to stasis in other states. The tribal

leadersof Attica acquiescedin the tyranny of Peisistratus,for he was'oneof

themandheupheldthetribalethic. 17 In thesame waytheyjoinedforces to obtain the expulsionof l-lippiaswhenthe tyrannyseemedto havebecomean

outrightthreatto thesurvival of thearistocracy anditsprerogatives. The retbrmsof Cle•sthenes tookawaythe politicalandmilitaryfunctionsof the old phylaeand assigned them to the arb•trarily-createcl ten phylae.Politicaltheoristsfrom the late fifth centuryto thisdayhaveattributed to Cleistlaenes a desireto create a democraticconstitution,but there ns

noevidence thatthisiswhatheactually intended. is Having cometo power

TRIBAL

POLITICS

AND

THE

CIVIC

STATE

69

throughpopularsupport,he probablyintendedmerelyto createfor the tuture a constitutionalaccessto the demos,in the sameway that Romanpoliticians of all persuasions duringthe !ate Republicwantedlegalaccess to tribunician legislation and a sovereign assembly. Cleisthenes' creationof anartificialnew systemensuredthat all his fellow aristocratswould now have accessto the demoson the sameterms.The kinshipgroupdominatedby the Philaids,for instance,might outnumber those of another noble house ten to one. No matter-underthe new systemof representation, whateverpoliticalinfluence the phratrieshadhad wasdispersed amongthe newphylae. But it is hard to believethat Cleisthenes wishedto weakenthe phratries

in anyotherway)9 Bysecularizing politics, lawandthemilitary, Cleisthenes relievedthe phratriesof many causesof discord,but their religiousfunction, and particularlytheir role in honoringand strengthening family ties, could now continue unimpededby issueswhich might otherwisedivide family

loyalties. The Apaturiacontinued to bea solemn fe'stival of greatimportance. Registrationwith the phratry was more decisivethan political registration

with the deme,sofar asrightsof inheritance wereconcerned? ø And the Athenian aristocracy continued to think of thern•o•vesaq tribal patriarchs.

Havingmade their honestconcessions to nomosand dike, they preparedto guide the land of Attica as they alwayshad, resolvingthe pressingissuesof the day amongstthemselves so far as possible,seekingpopularsupportwhen it seemednecessary, andin general,enjoyingtheirtraditionalcompetitionfor honorandreputebeforethenowgreateraudience of thedemos. (c) Persistenceof tribal consciousness

In h•ristotle's schemeof politicaldevelopment (Politicsinit.) menintuitively form koinoniai.which overthe courseof time tend to unite and mergeinto larger associations. First comesthe family household,or oikos;next is the kom& or village,formed by the inevitableproliferationof households. Finally, the villagesunite to form the polls proper. In analyzingmen'sbeliefs, motivesand goals,it is supremelyimportantto be awareof whichgroupthey are mostconscious of belongingto. I would contendthat in late sixth century Attica, the polls stage as describedby Aristotle was a fait accompliin a political sensebut that psychologically the sequencewasarrestedat the village mentality. The state did in fact exist, mainly becausea few political leadershad had the imaginationto conceiveof an abstractstateandwerein touch with an alreadywell-developedIonian political theory. But the vast majority of the inhabitantsof Attica retainedwhat anthropologists call a tribal consciousness. In other words,the groupthey were most conscious of belongingto, and to which they gavetheir deepestloyalties,was the village community,with its shrinesof tribal heroes,gravesof tribal ancestorsand the familiart31otsof •round tb, had belongedto one_familyor anotheras long as anyonecould remember.Herekinshipwassucha unifyingfactorthat

villagerscould think of themselves as homogalaktai (Arist.Pol. 1252t• 18). Eventhecity of Athenswasstilljusta ratherdensecollection of villages, with only Agora and Acropolisgiving a senseof somebroader community. It

70

FRANK

J. FROST

would take drasticchanges in thissocietybeforea widespread acceptance of the civicstatecouldbeginto replacetribalconsciousness, "...that fundamental evolutionfrom tribal to civicsociety(or culture)whichunderlayall postSolonianpoliticaldevelopments in Athensand indeedprovidedtheprincipal dialectic of Attic drama.'m

III.

The New Athenians

(a) EconomicGrowth

In spiteof the politicalandeconomicvisionof Solon,in spiteof the intellectual growth of Athens under the Peisistratids and the greatbroadeningof the political baseby the reformsof Cleisthenes, Atheniansocietychangedin a slow and evolutionaryfashionduringthe sixth centuryand throughthe first two decadesof the fifth. But the PersianWarsand the mandatefor imperial leadershipthat Athenian statesmenso eagerlygraspedmade revolutionary

demands uponthe structureof the greaterAttic community. The first industryto expandsignificantly was that of shipbuilding. In the 480s, Athenshad to borrow shipsfrom Corinth and washard-pressed to maintainequalityin a long and bitter strugglewith tiny Aegina(Hdt. 5.81,89; 6.87-93). But between483 and480, two hundredtriremeswereconstructed. The foundationof the Delian Leaguemeantthat this numberof shipshad to

be maintainedor replacedeveryyear. Wholenew professional classes came into existence:navalarchitects,shipbuilding contractors, merchants who now dealtexclusively in timberandpitch from the northernAegean,cinnabarfrom

Kea,2• hempandflax,•3 and leather-that ancient substitute for everything made today from rubber or plastic.On a lower levelwere day laborersand sailorsby the thousands.

The buildingindustryreceivedthe next stimulus.The fortificationsof Athenswere restoredby a cory& of the generalpopulationon an emergency basis,as memorablydescribedby Thucydides(I 90.3,93.1-2). The new constructionthat followed,however,startingwith the Themistocleancircuit of Piraeus,was done to the highestprofessional standardsand requiredskilled workmen:architects,masons,carpenters, muleteersand all the otherprofessionswhich our inscriptionsattest.The secondwaveof buildingwas started

by Clmonandincludedsuchprojectsas the southwall of theAcropolis,the

Theseion, TholosandStoaPoikile. 24 The450ssawtheconstruction of the LongWalls,the beginning of the Hephaestieion andperhapsthe designof

Piraeus by Hippodamus? s Thenin 447 beganthemajorbuilding program associatedwith Pericles:Middle Wall, Parthenon, Lykeion, Odeion and other public buildingst'rom Eleusisto Sounion. Plutarch naively thought all th•s

building relieved unemployment; 26 thetruthmustbethatbothshipbuilding industry and public works could have developedonly at the samerate asthe work force. As therewas no labor pool in Attica prior to the PersianWars, this.meansthat a considerable populationof artisansandlaborerswascreated

TRIBAL POLITICS AND THE CIVIC STATE

71

outof peoplewhohadoncebeenotherwise employed. Foreigners, meticsand slavescontributed their share,but the singlelargestclassmust have come from the erstwhilefarmingpopulationof ruralAttica. (b) BureaucraticGrowth At the same time the economy was undergoingsuch major expansion,

parallelchanges weretakingplacein the personnel andin thepaceof public business. Everydaypolicyhadoncebeendetermined by a narrowcircleof aristocrats serving asmagistrates andbouleutai,andthepaperworkinvolved hadbeenminimal,perhaps handled by thepersonal household staffsof the archonsand prytanyofficials.The empiremusthaveoverloaded sucha systemalmostinstantly-although we shouldalwaysrememberthe surprisingly long-lived effectiveness of archaicstaffworkin theRomanRepublicandin seventeenth-century France. We think perhapsof the increasein treasury officialsfirst, becausethe tribute listsare the most obviousevidenceof im-

perialpublicbusiness. But by mid-century, thereweredozensof other departments of government, both domestic andimperial,with a continuing

needfor minorstaff,e.g.,auditors, accountants andclerical' help? ? To realize the magnitudeof the bureaucracy which grew up during the

Pentecontaetia,one need think only of the judicial apparatus,particularly

after the Atheniansbeganto bringimperialcasesto Athensfor adjudica-

tion?s Onceagain, we arefacedwiththequestion: whatwasthesource of sucha largenumberof bureaucrats in a countrythathadonceI•eenrun by gentlemen farmers 9. The answer,onceagain,mustbe the Attic countryside. Other developing urbansocieties havehad to turn to foreigners, slavesor clergyfor theirclericalstaffs,but theGreekshavealwaysbeenprepared for bureaucracy by reasonof a highliteracyrateandby a talentfor organization (or, assomemightsay,a passion for meddling).Althoughthe storymay be apocryphalthat Aristeidesinvitedall the farmersof Attica to cometo the

citytotake care ofpublic business, wemust b,e impressed bytheconfidence

implied by thetale? Thereisnever amoment sdoubtthatfarmboys would be able to lay downtheir manureforksand turn to adding. columnsof pi's and deltas.

Calculatingthe populationof Attica in antiquityis a thankless task because of the frustrating numberof unknowntactorsandthelackof agreementoverwhat evidence andcriteriato use.soNevertheless, thereis general agreement thatthispopulationdidmoveduringthe fifth centuryandthat the movementwas from the countrysideto the city of Athens.It may be asked how sucha largeandpreviously unaccounted for populationcouldhavecome from the rural demesof Attica. The answeris that agriculturalcommunities

all throughhistoryhavebeenableto serveasbottomless poolsof manpower becauseof the ability of a farmingeconomyto supportlargefamilies.The urbanfamily is concernedover extra mouthsto feed;on the farm, food is

rarelya concern andextralaboraround thehouse andfieldsiswelcome. sx Modern studieshave shown that on the nineteenth-centuryAmericanfarm,

enormousfamilieswere the rule rather than the exception.The Franceof

72

FRANK

J. FROST

Louis XIV and the Roman Republicboth had a seeminglyendlessability to absorbhugemilitary lossesandstill put new armiesin the field; both societies relied on rich farmingeconomies to producea bumpercropof youngmenfor the military to harvestevery few years.In the sameway, the Attic countryside concealeda largeand hitherto unsuspected populationsurplusuntil more attractiveopportunitiesaroseand lured youngmen to the city.

IV.

The Growth

of Civic Consciousness

In an agelike ours,when great mobility is taken for granted,we must make everyeffort to understandand appreciatethe psychological impactof suchan uprootingon a peoplewho proudlyclaimedto be autochthonous. "Caelum,

nonanimummutantqui transmarecurruntis not soundsociology. "a2In leavingthe soil where ancestorswere buried and where dozensof relatives still lived and worked, a youngman wasleavinga cocoonof familiar tribal attitudes and traditions. In the city there was the dangerthat tribal consciousness could fade away to be replacedby a feelingof anonymityand alienation,which sociologists identify as one of the major drawbacksof urbanization.But fifth-centuryAthenswas no aimlessmegalopolis,as Alexandria was later to be-and this is the exact point: empire had createdthe tasksthat brought men to Athens;the job of runningan empireand maintaining its administrativecenter createdan atmospherein which tribal ties andloyaltieswere forgottenonly to be replacedby a senseof communitythat can be called civic consciousness.

The wave of newly urbanized Athenians, by mid-fifth century, had dramaticallychangedthe proportionof citizenswho wereable to conceiveof a civicstate.They were the first generationto put their city before their tribal ethic. They had left ancestralgravesand shrinesbehind them in rural demes and spenteveryday in the midstof taskswhichinevitablyremindedthemof the power, the wealth and the missionof the civic state. During the Pentecontaetia, civic consciousness came to full maturity. It can be seenin every aspectof Athenian life, from the buildingsthat came to adorn the acropolis

to the bitter dialoguebetweentribal and civic virtue that forms the central theme of the Antigone. The Funeral Oration of Periclesis its sublimestexpression.

V.

The Decline of Tribal Politics in the Civic State

Thesechangesin economy,in urban populationand in attitudescouldnot fail to have profound effects upon Athenianpolitics.ProfessorConnorhas admirablydescribedthe politicalstyleof the menhe callsthe newpoliticians

of Athens? It ismy contention that thisstylewasmerelya learnedresponse to the changing natureof the electorate.Athemans werelongcontents•mply to haveisonomia-equality beforethe law-and to havethe franchise andto useit in supportof oneor anotherof theleaders of theHouses Major.Such

TRIBAL

POLITICS

AND THE

CIVIC

STATE

73

long-livedawe of the tribal aristocracyis easyto uncterstand. The nobleshalt created the constitutionthat made democracypossible.They had led the Atheniansthroughthe crisisof the PersianWarsandhadclearlyperceivedthe opportunitiesfor Athenianleadershipafter the wars.Every aspectof tribal life reinforceda deeprespectfor the aristocraticfamilies.Theywerepriests, judges,generals,landlords;,their sonswere famousathletesand charioteers and were memorializedfor their beautyon elegantvases.They werethe only segmentof the population actually trained to lead. But during the first decadeof the empire, their statuswas simplydiluted away.No longerdid their estatesprovidethe entire military budget;the assemblynow voted to appropriaterequiredsumsfrom the statetreasury.No longerwere they the only rich men in Attica; fortuneswere now beingmade.everyday in such

peculiar pursuits asshield making, ortheimporting ofhemp, orfleeces? The aristocratsstill monopolizedthe highestpostsin government,but now when they left office, their accountswere scrutinizedby logistaiand they could

legallybe prosecuted by cobblers anddonkeydrivers?In theold tribal society,a rigid hierarchyof birth determinedstatus;in the new civic stateall men were potentially equal. All could contributeand all could sharethe

rewards.Periclescertainly-knewthat this new electoratewas not to be placidly governedby someold-boy network of landowninggentry. This is why he devotedso much attention to rhetoricand to what might be called politicalpsychology (Plato,Phaedr.270AB), notbeEause hewas"far-sighted

enough toseethepossibility ofquiteanewairangement ofpolitics. "a•There was no time left to be far-sighted;a new day had come,and old-fashioned politicianslike ThucydidesMelesiou,who reliedon a narrowcoalitionof chrestoi,and who lacked the vision to recognizethe Parthenonand other buildingsasan outburstof new-borncivicpride,wereto riskoblivion. Commonerswho had alreadyacquiredwealth and respecteventually demandedpolitical power as well and were possiblyoccupyingminor magis-

traciesby mid-century.The process wascompletewhenthehighestpowerin the statewaswieldedby menwho soldsomething, asAristophanes characterized them in the Knights(128-147). By the eveof the Peloponnesian War,

empirehadchanged thepolitic.al balance of powerin theAegean to thebenefit and glory of Athens.But in their purposefulmarchto empire,Athenian aristocratsunwittinglymolded the populationof Attica into a different configuration,changedits loyalties,goalsandmentality,andthuspermanently red.ucedtheir own prestige.No longer was politics to be a tribal rite reserved for playersof noblebirth. University of California Santa Barbara

Frank J. Frost

74

FRANK

J. FROST

NOTES

*A version of this paper was presented as part of a sessionon the Athenian Empire organized by the Friends of Ancient History at the 1973 meeting of the American Philological Associationin St. Louis. 1. E.g.H. Berve, Ftirstliche Herten zur Zeit der Perserkriege,"Die Antilee 12 (1936)3ff; Ed. Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums IV i 786f. 2. That no ancient author seemsable to explain exactly what powers were taken from the Areopagus in 462 convincesme that no real constitutional revision was involved. For a thorough exposition of this argument, R. Sealey, "Ephialtes," CP 59 (1964) 1 lff. 3. A frequent theme: e.g. Gorgias 517b-519a. 4. A thenaion Politeia [hereafter AP] 24.1; 25.1; 27.1.

5. AP 26.1; Politics1303a8. 6. W. Robert Connor, The new politicians of Athens (Princeton, 1971 ); see my review in CP 67 (1972) 199f. 7. Hdt. 1.147; Schol. Arist. Acharn. 146. 8. For the myth, Euripides, Ion 1579f. and passim; Hdt. 5.66. Because I use the words "tribe" and "tribal" frequently in the anthropological sense,I use phyle to refer specifically to the Attic tribes.

9. A. French., Growth of the Atheniah economy (London, 1964) • 178. A well-documented argument for inalienability is J. V. Fine, Horoi (Hesperia, Suppl. IX [ 1951]) 178-208, supported by N. G. L. Hammond, "Land tenure in Athens," JHS 81 (1961) 83-90. Opposing arguments and a

review of the literature by E. Ruschenbusch, "Ober das Bodenrechtim archaischen Athen," Historia 21 (1972) 753-55. 10. Plutarch, Solon 22.1 is obviously a projection backward of later conditions.

11. Thuc. II 14.2, 16.1: the historian repeats the observation twice,

that "most" Athenians(robe•ro3,3,o6½, oi •rXelov½) still lived in the country on

the eveof the war;cf. Arist.Pol. 1305a 18sq.for the sixthcentury.According to AP 16.3, Peisistratusused agricultural subsidiesto move the poor out of the dity and into the countryside. The archaeologicalargument is mostly from silence: public buildings scarcelyexist until 511; the pace picks up after the reforms of Cleisthenes, followed by the explosive proliferation of buildings after 479. See the summary of Homer Thompson, The Athenian agora (Athens, 1962) 19-22; J. S. Boersma, Athenian building policy (Groningen, 1970) 11-64.

12. Arist.Pol. 1252620-22,quotingHomer,Od. 9.114f. 13. As J. K. Davies has pointed out, Athenian propertied families

(Oxford, 1971) xx-xxiv, the servingof a liturgy may be the singlemost important criterion for identifying an "aristocrat." 14. AP 13.2; T. J. Cadoux, "The Athenian Archons from Kreon to Hypsichides," JHS 68 (1948) 103. All argument about the term of office and functions of the archons must remain speculative. 15. About the factions of paralia, pedion and diakria/hyperakria (AP 13.4; Hdt. 1.59) we can say only that they were territorial and led by rival noble houses. Statements like C. Hignett's, "The party of the Paraloi had originally been formed to defend Solon's legislation against reaction" (History of the Athenian constitution 109), tell us more about the politics of their authors than they do about archaic Athens. 16.

Plut. Solon

24.4.

TRIBAL 17.

AP

POLITICS

AND

THE

CIVIC

STATE

75

16.2-9.

18. See my review of M. Ostwald, Nomos and the beginningsof the Athenian democracy (Oxford, 1969), in CP 65 (1970) 263-4..

19. Aristotlethoughthe did sointend:Pol. 1319621sq., followedby D. M. Lewis, "Cleisthenes and Attica," Historia 12 (1963) 34f. But Lewis admits that even if Cleisthenes did so intend, it did not work out that way. 20. E.g. Isaeus, 7.15-17, 27.

21. Review ot M. I. Finl.ey, Early Greece(London, 1970), in Times Literary Supplement, 28 Aug. 1970, 937. 22. The cinnabar trade (vital for ships' paint) became a monopoly in the fourth century: H. Bengtson,Die Staatsvertrdgedes Altertums II (Munich and Berlin, 1962) no. 320. 23. ortm•reiop,used for cordage,and with pitch for caulkingseams. Cf. Eucratesb orO•'•ra•,At. Knights 129 with Schol. 24. Boersma,Athenian building policy 51-59. 25. Ibid. 46-50; 59-63. 26. Plut. Per. 12.5. See my remarks in "Pericles, Thucydides, son of Melesias, and politics before the war," Historia 13 (1964) 391.

27. Perhaps referred to in AP 24.3' •oxo• $' •v•?#ot I,t•v eiq •r • agootov½'drYpac. 28. Thuc. I 77; [Xenophon], Athenaion Politeia 1.16, and for the pressof businessin general, see 3.2-8 - the classicalconservativecriticism of democratic bureaucracy, at any time in history. 29. AP 24.1; on this passage see J. Day and M. H. Chambers, Aristotle• history of Athenian democracy (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1962) 34-35.

30. A. W. Gomme, The population of Athens in the fifth and fourth centuries B.C. (Oxford, 1933) 1-36; A.H.M. Jones, "The economic basisof the Athenian democracy," Athenian democracy (Oxford, 1966) 8-10. 31. I believe French's picture of rural hardship, Growth of the Athenian economy 10ff, is exaggerated. Rural Attica today still supports a large farming population on the crops of antiquity-wheat, barley, vines, olives, sheepand goats-with very little in the way of irrigation or fertilizers. 32. S.C. Humphreys, "Economy and society in classical Athens," Annall della ScuolaNormale Superloredi Pisa,Classedi Lett. e Fil. 39 (1970) 22. Humphreys maintains that the age of Pericles was not "golden" but one of shattering social change. 33. Connor, New politicians 99ff. 34. E.g. Lysias' father Cephalus, whose home is the scene of the beginning of Plato's Republic. Also Eucrates [n. 23 above] and Lysicles the fleece dealer, Schol. Plato Menex. 235E; Dio Chrys. 55.22. 35. Sealey argues that accountability was the major reform of Ephialtes, loc. cit. [n. 2] 18-20. 36. Connor, New politicians 120.

JOBS FOR

WOMEN*

If thereis a shortageof womenin historyin general,the shortage is even more noticeablein the historyof Romanslavery]How manyancillaeor libertinaeappearin the historybooks?FeceniaHispala,VolumniaCytheris,

Claudia Acte,Epichafts, Antonia Caenis, anda handful of others?Allwomen ofa certain type,demi-mondaines orimperial concubines•.women whomoved out of slaveclassand madean impacton upper-class history.The present

paperaimsto collectinformation on lessdashing slavewomenin private domestic service?Information will be drawnfromthe City of Romeand concernsthe urban staff of upper-class slave-owners (rich equestriansand

senators andmembers of theimperialfamily)in theperiodfromAugustus to the early secondcentury A.D.

The natureof the evidencemakesit impossible to reconstruct in its entirety the slavestaff of any one Romanowner.It doesnot seemlikely that we shalleverdig up the registerof hisfamiliaurbanakept by a Romanpater-

familias. 4 Cicerogivesus a sample,but latterletter-writers eschew such banality. 5 Thereisnomanual ontheorganisation of thehousehold tocompare with the estate-owner'shandbooksof Cato, Varro and Columella,which

givesuchusefulinsights into the structureof theslavestaffin agriculture. Inscriptions, particularlythoseof the columbariabuilt for societieswithin privatehouseholds, giveus a samplereasonably delimitedin termsof time-

spread andnumber ofdomini.Thebestdocumented individual istheempress

Livia?Groups of dominisuchastheothermembers of theJulio-Claudian family,the Statiliior the Volusii,swellthe list for the earlyPrincipate. Flavianandlaterinscriptions adda little. It is simplest, easiest andperhaps bestto followtheorderofjobswhich hasbeenadoptedin earlierarticles, eventhoughit maynot coincide with the

Roman's ideaof theorganisation of a household. Wecanthendealin turn withadministrators, withstaffattachedto particular rooms,personal servants,

craftsmen, "professionals" andoutdoorstart.In somecategories weshallfind fewor nowomen.An attemptwill be madeto excludeslaves andfreedwomen whowerenot in domestic service, but doingthe sameworkcommercially (e.g.somesewing-women).

Privateservants sometimes nametheir employer.The formulaego

like this:

(a) Secundio IuliaeAug(ustae) aquarius. 3936 (b) M. LiviusAugustae l(ibertus) Menander aurifex.3949 (c) Auctus lanip(endus) Augustae l(ibertus).3976 (d) Geminal(iberta)Augustae ornatrix.3994 In (a) we shouldsupplyservus afterthegenitiveandread"Secundio slaveof JuliaAugusta, aquarius." Similarlyin (b) we have"MarcusLiviusMenander, 76

JOBS

FOR

WOMEN

77

freedman of Augusta,goldsmith" and in (c) "Auctus, the wool-weigher, freedmanof Augusta."But in (d) the genitiveis to be takenwith the job

title: "Gemina,freedwoman,dresserof Augusta."The sam•will moreobviouslybe true of the followingexamples: (e) StatiliusPhilerosCorneliaescubicularius.6264

(f) Diopantius Ti. Caesaris ornatorglabr(orum)... 8956 (g) M. LiviusAugustae lib. PrytanisLiviaeDrusipaedag(ogus). 33787 (h) PrimaAugustiet Augustae1.nutfix IuliaeGermanicif'iliae.4352 In the last threecases,the slaveor freedmanhasoneowneror patronbut his work concerns a third party.Type(f), (g) or (h) occursmorefrequentlythan (d) or (e), since(a), (b) and (c) providethe usualpatternwhereownerand employerare one and the same.

Besidessuchevidencefrom the inscriptionitself that a personis of slaveor freedstatuswith a privateowneror employer,the provenance of a plaquefrom a colurnbariurn reserved for the servants of onefamilyor group of familieswill often allowus to presumeprivateservice.So sometimes will the natureof thejob. Whilefullers,goldsmiths, doctors,cooksor hairdressers (ornatrices)couldbe domesticservants or in trade or freelancepractice, wardrobemen, waitersand chamberlains will alwaysbe privatelyemployed.

The inscriptional evidence usedcomesfromRomeandchieflyfromthe sixth volumeof the CorpusInscriptionurnLatt'narurn.Sincejobswerenot, at

the time of writing,indexedfor CIL vi, therewasno quickwayto assemble the data for whichwe were looking.It has thereforeseemedadvisableto

quoteinscr)ptions in fullasfaraspossible. Dots(...) indicate omission' of nonfactualmaterial,suchas verseeulogies.Detailsof the donor of the stone, because they often giveilluminatinginformationaboutfamilyor socialconnections,have been given. For the principaljobs open to women domestics, lists have been drawn up, so that the reader will have at his disposaldata which he can check and which will form the basis for the conclusions drawn

at theend.Theselistscanbe skipped by thosewhofindthemtedious; nevertheless it maybe arguedthat with all their conventionalities, odd spellings and varyingchoiceof materialthe inscriptions allowus to graspsomethingof the personalities and livesof the slavesand freedwomento whomtheywere set up, which genuinestatisticalevidence,unavailableto the ancienthistorian, might not reveal.

We will firstdiscuss thejobsopento womenin a fully-developed slave household, listingattestedindividuals in eachmajorjob group.In administrationthenumberis,asonewouldexpect,low.Not for womenjobsasstewards, cashiersor accountants.In the country,the bailiff's wife substitutedfor the mistressand thereforeconcernedherselfwith all the jobs in and near the

house,suchaswoolmanufacture, storage of produce, preserving, cooking, the careof the slaves in sickness andhealth,andthe rearingof animals(justasto-

daythefarmer's wifeoftentakes careof the'poultry andkeeps orphan lambs by her stove). 7 But in the townhousesuchsupervisory functions fell to a steward(dispensator), or evento a procurator,andhissubordinates. Women occuronly in the lower clericallevels,aslibrariaeanda manuor amanuenses (clerksandsecretaries). Hereisa list of womenin secretarial posts:

78

SUSAN I.

TREGGIARI

Librariae and A Manu

1. Olla[m] --Corinnae-cell(ariae) libr(ariae).3979[MLJ 2. SciathisMagiaelibrar(ia)vixit annosxviii. Eros P. Octavicubicul(arius) fecit. fecit coniugisuaeet sibi. 9301 3. Pyrrhe Rubriae Helviae librariae P. Rubflus Optatus contubemali suae. 9525

4. -- Aug.1.librariacon(iugi)suopiissim(o)et benemer(enti) et sibi.8882 5. VergiliaC. 1.Euprhosynelibraria. 37802 6. Dis manib(us) Grapte EgnatiaeMaximillae a manu coniugi karissimae C. Egnatius Arogus. 9540

7. Tyche a manu BalbllesHermes coniugi bene me(renti) f(ecit). 9541 8. Dis manibusPlaetoriaelole [a] manuensiPlatori[ae] --[?b]rici et Plaeto[rio] --- [Pe?]lopi et Plae---.9542 The two a manu and the amanuensiswill have been employedprimarily for writing letters, as personalsecretaries, while libraHae had more generalclericalfunctions.No. 1. for instance,is a store-roomclerk,perhaps

working under astorekeeper, cellarius. 8 Staff attached to particular rooms in grand houses,such as the atHenses (the majordomoand his underlings,roughlycomparablewith footmen) and the variousreceptionroomstaff,suchastheab admissione, diningroom supervisor(tricliniarcha,a grandfunctionarywho is only known from the emperor'sown staff and from the time of Claudiusor Nero onwards), tasters,waiters,carvers,cupbearers and so on, are all male,a traditionwhich has had a long life in the best housesand placesof public entertainment. Humbler people might use women for someof thesejobs: we hear of

waitresses andevena female doorkeeper? For personalservantsthe picture •s necessarilydifferent. A domina

neededsomefemaleattendants.In the bedroom,thoughthe supervisory a cut)lCUtO or supracubiculariosandthe cubicularii(chamberlains) employed

by aristocrats weremale, •ø a femaleownerwouldalsohavefemaledressers and maids.They are a part of the familiarbackground of comedyand love poetry from Plautusand Ovid (and the Greeksbeforethem) to Shakespeare, Moli&e or Shei'idan.From the drier data of the inscriptionsand jurists further information

accrues.

II.

Ornatrices

(a) of Livia 1. Aucta Libiae 1. ornatrix. 3993 (ML)

2. Gemina1. Augustaeornatrix. Irene I. suaedat olla(m). 3994 (ML) 3. Nice Liviae1. ornatr.Aristo Liviae1. 8944 (cf. 4717) 4 .... DorcadisIuliae AugustaeI. vernaeCaprensisornatricis... 8958 5. DionysiaeTi. CaesarisAug. ornatrici re[a] tern(ae) posuit Tertius libraflus et Anta conservi. 8880

JOBS FOR WOMEN

79

{b} of otherJulio-Claudianwomen 6. Pamphila ornatrix Antoniaeshave. 33370a (From a columbartum of the staff of Octavia;probablyrefersto Antonia the Younger) 7. Iucundaornatr.Agrippin(ae).Comaruslibrat. 8879

8. --- [Agripp]inaiornatrix Iv.] ann. xxii. [Her]mesconservos 8960 _

9. Paezusae OctaviaeCaesarisAugustif. ornatricivix. ann.xviii Philetus OctaviaeCaesaris Augustif. ab argentofecit coniugisuaecarissimae et sibi. 5539 (MIAL V [Octaviawife of Nero])

{c} ofJulio-Claudian men • 10. [Chl]oeTi. Caesaris [pu]erorum ornatr.vixit ann. xx. tuit Mal--osi soror. 33099

11. Dis manibusClaudia Aug. 1. Parata ornatrix v. a. xxvi•. Ti. Iulius Romanus,Ti. ClaudiusPriscus,NedimusAug. set. coniugeseiusde

suo.8957 (AltarfromVia Salaria) •a {d} of later dynasties 12. D. M. SecundaeRufinaen(ostrae)et T(iti) Aug. ornatricivix. ann. xix m. viii. cons(ervae)benemerentiduo Zosimifecer. 33784 13. D. M. Telesphoridivix. an. xxv m. iii d. xi Domitiae Domitiani omatriciTheopompuscoiugisuae. 8959

14. D. M. Ael[iaEelruol[a Aug.]lib. or[natfix] puer[orum]Cae[s(aris) n(ostri)] qu---. 8977 {e} of others 15. GnomePiefidisancilla ornatrix elata est a.d. v K. Februariasimp. Caesar.xiii, M. PlautioSilvanocos. 9730 (2 B.C.) 16. PsamateFuriae ornatrix v. a. xiix. Mithrodatespistor Flacci Thori facit. 9732 (There was a Thorius proconsulof Bithyniaunder Augustus.) 17. D. M. Elate ornatrix CorneliaeVolusiaev.a. xx. t(ecit) Hellanicus coniugib.m. 7296 (Corneliais the daughterof the consulof A.D. 3.) 18. D. M. S. Panope ornatrix Torquate Q. Volusi vixit annis xxii ... Spendo contubernalibussuis bene me•entibusfecit ... 7297 (MV: Torquatais the wife of the consulof A.D. 56.) 19. Cn. DomitiusDomit(iae)Bibuli1.Agathemerus pius.PloceDomitiae Bibuli ornatrixpia. 5876 (MIAL) 20. Serapias ornatrix. 34274 (Sep.libb.M. AemiliiLepidi) 21. CineribusHamillae Alpioniae Quintae ornatrici FestusM. Septimi Galli dispen(sator) contubernalib.m. fecitet sibi. 9345 22.

Prima ornat. 1. 9462a4

23. Morphe orna[tr.] vixs. ann. xix. Felix nomencl(ator)coniu[gi] libens et meritae.

9690

24. EuprosyneIuliae Seonisornatrici hunc 1ocumemit Hiceros contub(.ernalis).9729

25. [S]perata[olrnatrixAt--- [vixi]t an.xxii. 9733 26.

--oero Crustidiae ornatrix.

9734

27. [Dis M]anib.---aevixit ---xxviifecit Sabinido(mina)[an]cillaesuae ornatrici.

9735

80

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

28. D. M. MagnaeIuliae ProculaeornatricibenemerentimulieriinconparabilifecitM. Caecilius Chrestus animaeinnocentissimae quaevixit annis xxii.

37811a

Other ornatricesfrom Rome are, or may be, in tradelike modernhairdressers? Omatricesare by no meansthe only womenservantsaroundthe bed-

room.Thereweremenandwomento fold,putaway.•and carefor clothes. They arecalledvestiplici,vestiplicaeandvestispicae.

III. Vestiplicae / Vestispicae

1. Heraclae Asiniae Agrippin[ae] Celerisf'diae TMstratorivix. ann.xxx-----pisaAgrippinae vestip[lica coni]ugibenemeren[ti]. 9901

2. Cestilia D.1.Chreste vestipica Pinilib. 33393 x6 (M.Cestiliorum) 3. EphyreCestiliaes vestipica Pinil.... 3395 (M. Cestiliorum) (ageunder20) 4. Ossasitahi [c] CocaeSiliaevestispicae. 37825 5. Secundioni Caeliaesumptuario annor.xxv Philemavestispica fratri.9912

Apart from thesewomen,we know of somefour malevestiplici,to VolusiusSaturninus, Domitian,Plotinaandan undefinedCaesar(7301,8558, 8559, 8560, anda fragment- a personof undetermined sex-9981). So even in the serviceof a woman, female clothes-folderswere not inevitable in the

secondcentury.They were probablysupervised in wealthyhouseholds by a muchgranderofficial,thea vesteor ad vestem.But not everyonewho boasted a clothes-folder would also have a master of the wardrobe.

In the best bedrooms,there might also be other specialists.Barbers were employedin privatehousesto cut hair and nails.We hear of a woman barber,to(n}strix, in the houseof the Statilii (6368) and thereis alsoan Iole Pomp. tonstr. and a Gallonia D. 1. Paschusawho may havebeen domestics

(5865,9941).t6 Oneof theladiesof theVolusiiemployed a slav•-girl to hold her mirror, with the title of ad speculum(7297). When a Roman lady went to the baths, she would take her own masseuse. In the inscriptionsthey areusuallycalledunctrices,but thereis one

fromRomecalleda tractatrix,a wordwhichoccurs in Martial. i? IV. Unctrices/ Tractatrices

1. GaleneLiviaeunctrix. 4045 (ML) 2. Chiae Antoniae Drusi unctric.

9097

3. C. PopiliusAlbaeusvix. an. xxxv. AthenaisAugustaesunct. posit fratri b.m.

9096

4. AethidisCaesiaePriscaetractatricis. 37823ta

Thereisnoindication thatanyot these isfreed:status maybelow?

JOBS FOR WOMEN

81

A rich woman would take an assortmentof thesespecialised personal servants when she went out:

ducitur familia tota,

vestispica, unctor,auricustos, flabelliferae, sandaligerulae, cantrices,cistellatrices,nuntii, renuntii, raptorespaniset peni ... (Plautus,Trin. 252ø254)

But the usualgeneralattendantwouldbe qalledpedisequus. A ladywould have enough"foot-followers" to ensureher dignityand safety,but also pedisequae for any feminineerrands.

V. Pedisequae

1. DascylusTi. Aug. ministrat(or)luliae NebridiAugustae pedis(equae) coiugisuaecarissim(ae) locumsepulcrisibi et suis.5200 (MIAL IV:

Livia) TM 2. LogasMessallin(ae) pedis.v. a. xvi. Aprodisiamater fecit. 6335 (MS: StatiliaMessallina) 3. PosisStatiliaespedisequa.6336 (MS)

4. Doris StatiliaeMino[ris] pediseq.Erotisad inpediment[a]vixit an. xxiiii.

9775

5. Philusa Andraei

liberti

uxor

oilam

et titulum

datlam ab consentas

pedisequas. 4355(MFLD) (Assuming Philusa isalsol•ediseclua) 6. ThyiasAug(?ustae) pedisqua (sic)P. Sergius Apolonius.5821 7. Methepediseq. v. a. xx. 7410 (M. C. AnniiPollionis, ca.principate of Tiberius) 8. Arax cocus.Alchepediseq.9266 9. Anthusapediseq.9773

10. Chloe ped.Apollonidae f. 97742a 11. Galateapedis.vix. an. xxxi. Syntomusconiunx.9776 12. GrataeLarxi---pedissequae. pa---Homerustit-- coniugisuaeo-- colunt. 9777

13. fun[ia] LaI'age pediseq. 9778 (Morecouldbelostfrommargin). -14. Notispedesequa vix. anosxxvii. 9779

15. Pl.otepedis--vixitan.xxv.posuerunt Fideliset Thoascons[ervi]. 9780 16. Rufa pedisequa hic sitaest.9781 17. Lyde pedisequa.33477 18. CledoAeliaespedisequa.AE 1945, 110 Theremay alsobe pedisequae in 9767 and9782.

We turn now to more productiveworkers.On countryproperties

women wereusedto prepare thesimple foodofthelabourers, TMbutintown houses,at least thoseluxurioushousesof which we are informed,catering,

storage andcookingweretheprovince of malespecialists. Wool-manufacture,

82

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

lanificium, was more of a feminine task. In the country, wherewool could be

workedon the farm whichproducedit, womenworkerspredominated, their

products beingusedespecially forslaves?Spinning andweaving alsowent on in town houses.Where the jurists talk of wool-workers,lanificae,the inscriptionsdistinguishspinners,quasillariae,andweavers,textores,textrices, staminariae.In the former classI find the following:

VI.

Quasillariae

1. Acte quasil. 6339 (MS)

2. AugeSuraquasillari[a]. 6340 (MS) 3. Hedonequasillariavix. ann.xxx. 6341 (MS) 4. Italia quasillariavixit ann. xx. ScaevatabellariusTauri coniugi suae fecit. 6342 (MS) 5. MessiaDardanaquasillaria.fecit IacinthusunctorDardanus.6343 (MS) 6. Plectequasillaria.6344 (MS) 7. Sigequasiliar.Faustus1.egit ossa. 6345 (MS)

8. Urbana veteran(a) quasillaria ...634624 (MS) 9. Musaquasill.vix. an. xxx. Cratinuslanipend(us)de suo. 9495 10. MelisAproniaequasillaria.9849a 11. --4isquasilla.---aa Pandateria[vix a] n. xx. 9850 A strikingpoint is that 1-8 are all from the monumentof the Statilii. Did they do morewool-workor were their spinningwomenprouderof their job than thoseof other aristocratsof the earlyprincipate?The formerseems more likely, especiallyas the consistentomissionof any employer'sname suggests a factoryatmosphere. Whenwe cometo weaving,men are alsoinvolved.Evidenceis scantyfor privateweaversof either sexin town. VII.

Textrices/ Staminariae

1. OssaItaliae texttic(is). 6362 (MS) 2. Laudicastarninaria... 333712•

There are two men from the Statilii (6361. ?6360). All four weavers are slaves?6

Althoughwool-workers arenot wellattestedoutsidethe Statiliangroup, their existence in other households can often be deduced from the much

morefrequentevidencefor supervisory staffwhoweighedout thewool to be worked.Male wool-weighers are listedas an appendixto the followingtable: Vlll.

(a) Lanipendae

1. Crecusalanipenda. 9496 2. D. M. Ireneslanipendaev. a. xxviii. Olympuscontubernalibenemerenti fecit.

9497

JOBS FOR

WOMEN

83

3. D. M. Iuliae Soteridilanipendaev. a. lxxx. feceruntM. Iulius Primus, lulia Musa,Iulia Thisbe,Iulia Ampliata,Iulia Roman. 9498 4. Epictesis lanipenda.34273 [Sep.libb.M. Aem.Lepidi] 5. LucretiaeslanipendaThalaxa.37721 [M. Stertiniorum] 6. Lezbialanipend.vixit a. xxi. AE 1969-70,49

VIII.

{bj Lanipendi

{aJAuctus lanip. Augustae 1.3976 (ML:ofLivia) {bj Blastus lanipend---Iulia Praena[stina].3977 (ML.' of Livia) {cJ Felix Messalinae lanipend.6300 (MS: of StatiliaMessallina) {d} ... Ti. ClaudiusAug.1.Moschus lanip .... 37755 (of Claudiusor Nero) {eJ ... T. FlaviusAug.1.Zosimuslanipendus Caesaris fi.... 8870 (Flavian) {fj Musaquasill.vix. an. xxx. Cratinuslanipend.de suo.9495 This list confirmsthe view that in the imperialhousemale supervisors

wereused, whileoutside it females wereregular?Theonlypossible exception, c, who mighthaveworkedfor StatiliawhileshewasNero'swife, belongs

to anexceptional aristocratic familywhichapedtheCaesars. Still,noneof the lanipendaeare known to work for aristocrats.So it may be we should

draw the dividingline, as so often, between the,œaesars and a few "top families" on the one side, and the middle classof slave-ownerson the other.

Lanipendi appear to havebeen in chargeof the whole operationof wool manufacture,from the distributionof the wool to the spinnersto the finishingof the garment,in households whichundertookthe entireprocess. It is no surpriseto find that 3, a, d and e are of freed status.What may at first sightbe surprisingis to find womenwith a supervisory function,evenin a comparativelymodesthousehold.But the reasonis probablythat lanipendae are regardedas deputiesfor the materfamilia&Lanificium,as is well known

fromtombeulogies andfromliterature, wasoneof theprincipaloccupations of the virtuoushousewife,but by the time of Augustusan aristocraticlady was unlikely to devote as much of her time to it as had Lucretia: hencethe

charm of Livy'.• 'picture of herworking by lampiight among hermaids likea Homericqueen.Augustus wasunusual(or gullibleor disingenuous) whenhe

.claimed that histogaswerethe unaidedworkof Liviaor Julia? But the basicresponsibilityfor seeingthat wool-workwasc'arriedout continuedto

belongto the matron,asi.sindicated,for example,by thispassage (which doesnot seemmereantiquarianism) from the earlysecondcentury'

Dig. 24.1.31 pr. (Pomponius):Sed si vir lana sua vestimentum muliericonfecerit,quamvisid uxoriconrectumruetitet uxoriscura, tamen viri esse neque impedire, quod in ea re uxor tamquam

lanipendiaruetit et viri negotiumprocurarit.(1) Si uxor lana sua, operisancillarum viri,vestimenta suinomineconfecerit muliebria,et vestimenta mulierisesseet pro operisancillarumviropraestare nihil debere' sed viri nomine vestimenta conrecta virilia viri esse, ut is

lanae uxori praestet pretium: sed si non virilia vestimentasuo nomine mulier confecit, sed ea viro donavit, norrvaleredonationem,

84

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

cum illa valeat, cum viri nomineconfecit:nec umquamoperasvin ancillarum

aestimari convenit.

"But if the husbandmakesa garmentlot his wife with his wool, althoughit is made for the wife and under the wife's supervision, still it belongsto the husband,nor doesthe fact that the wife acted in the matter as thoughshewere a wool-weigher,and took care of the job for her husband,makeany difference.If the wife, with her

ownwoolandthelabourof her husband's '•naidservants, makes

women'sgarments in her ownname,thenthe garments belongto the wife andshedoesnot owe the husbandanythingfor the maids'work. But men's clothes made in the husband'sname are the husband's, as

long ashe paysthe wife for the wool. But if the wife makesclothes which are not men's, in her own name, but givesthem to her husband, the gift is invalid,while the gift is valid if shemakesthem in her husband'sname. It is never fitting that the labour of the husband's maids should be taken into account."

It is clear that it would usuallybe the riominawho controlledwhat work was

done, even if the ancillaewere her husband's.Although the questionof ownershipand of the invalidity of donationesinter virurnet uxorernis what interestedthejurists,what concerns us in the presentcontextis the assumption that the wife will direct the labours of her own and her husband'smaids,

that the wool may belongto either husbandor wife, and that in generalthe wife controlsand clothesthe women servants, while male garmentsare, to someextent, the concernand the businessof her husband.In ordinaryhouse-

holds,the matron'sdeputywouldnaturallybe a womanandwould,it seems, probablybelongto the wife, sinceeven lanipendimay do so, aswe seefrom a, c and probablyb. Lanipendientail wool-workby other slaves.The advantage of spinning

is that, like knitting,it canbe donein odd moments.The ancillaewho spun will thereforenot alwaysbe specialised quasillariae who signalthemselves to

us.aøWeaving, a morecumbrous andcomplicated process, wouldoftenbe doneoutsidethe household, by professionals, for only somebighouseholds, such as that of the Statilii, had the facilities and staff to handle cloth manu-

facture fromspinning to weaving andfulling. a• The finishedcloth might be made into garmentsin the houseby vestifices,vestificior vestificae.Clothes-manufacturers who kept shopsare calledvestiariiand a few domestics with thistitle areprobablyto be counted as makers and not listed with clothes-folders.

IX.

Vestificae

1. ChrysaspisAgripinae supra veste. Heliconis Narcissi Augustianiet Heliconidisfilia vixit ann. iii. HeliconisAgrippinaevestificavix. ann.

xxvi.Posttriennium decessit eadem diequafilia.5206a2(MIAL IV)

JOBS FOR

WOMEN

85

2. Italiae CocceiaePhyllidis vestificaeveixsit anneisxx. Acastusconservus

pro pauperiefecitsua. 9980 3. (frag.) ...vestificae.... 9744 4. D. M. TerpsidisPlotinaevestiariaefecit Fidelisconiugibenemerentisibi et suisposterisque eorum. 8557 There are four male clothes-makersin domestic service?

Patchingand mendingof clotheswas doneby sarcinatores and sarcinatrices.Sinceno overlapis evidentbetweenownersof vestificiandowners of sarcinatores,it seemslikely that mendersalso turned their hands to tailoring.Womenmenderspredominate. X.

Sarcinatrices

(a) of Livia 1. AmpelioLiviae1.sarc.Zenonis.Zeno Liviae1. 4028 (ML) 2. Fausta Liviae 1. sarcinatr.

9038

3. HyginusLiviaemedicus.CallitycheLiviaesarcinatr.8903 4. DiadumenusLiviae mensordec(urio) dat Lochiadi Liviae sacinatr.

coiugisuae.3988a4 5. Damalis Liviae sarcinatrixdat Alexandro vi.to suo ollam. 4029 (ML/

6. lucunda Liv[iae] sarcinatrixvix. annos xxv. fecit Plato Neronis Caesaris ffii servos.5357 (bIIAL IV) (b) of other imperialwomen 7. Tychius Marcell. dec(urio) quaestorbis. Irena Marcellae1. sarcin. 4467 (MM)

8. ClaudiaLyde. Irena Marcellaesarcinatrix.9039 (Possiblythe same Ireneas7, but countedasdifferenthere,sincesheshouldnot occupy two ollae) 9. OnomasteLaricisa bybliot(heca).Athenai[s] Antoniaesarcin.-4434

10. [V]aleriaCleoparu [sic}sarcinatrix. [S]alviusMessallinae. 4468 11. ExtricataOctaviaeAug. f. sarcinatrixv. a. xx. 9037 (c} of the Statilii

12. Daphnesarcinatri.6349 (MS} ! 3. Musa •arciaatrix hic sita est. 6350 [MS]

14. PhyllisStatiliaesarcinatr.S9phroconiugisuaemerenti.6351 [MS}

To setbesidethese,thereis onesolitaryman,not surprisingly from the industriousStatilii. There are two fragments,from the columbariaof Livia and of the Statilii, where the odds fayour women. I find 12 other women (6726, 9875-9884, 33907) whom I countasopificeset tabernariae. In the productionof tabricsand clothes,women workerstherefore predominateand work primarilyfor the mistressof the house.Other crafts are male-dominated. We would not, however,expectto fifid womenbuilders,

86

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

glaziers or plumbers, or evengoldsmiths,jewellers andperfumers in theurban familia, thoughwomenare foundamongcommercial workersin the three

lattercategories? Although looking aftervaluables wasoneof thejobsof the materfarnilias, it wasmen in the imperialhousehold who wereguardians of gold, silver,pictures,statuary,furniture.The only exceptionis the vestiplica, who lookedafterclothes,but thegrander masterof thewardrobe,

a veste, wasalways male? Among"professionals" womenareindispensablebecause of theirsexin certainareasof medicine,educationand entertainment.But althoughfreelancefemaledoctorsareknown,I find only four in privatehouses.

XI. 1. Secunda Livillaes mea•ca..

Medicae

8711

2. [Dis] manibus---ti a frumento [minist]ratorumAug. -- . ---Caesaris medica---[ca]strensi coniugi---[f]ecit et sibiposterisque suis.8926 3. Melitine medicaAppulei. 6851 (M. vin. Aq.) 4. Minucia D. 1. Astte medica.

33812

A tendencytbr womento employwomendoctorsmightbe thought natural,but is not shownby the abovelist. Womenemploymany more men doctors: at least 8 are attested for Livia and odd ones for other women of the

imperialhouse,besides generous samples of the medicalstaffof maleCaesars. Midwives, on the other hand, were always women. Ideally, only suitable womenwould be chosenfor trainingasmidwivesand Soranus'textbook on

gynecology,which is perhapsaimed partly at midwives,lays down strict standards for thefirst-class practitioner.The basicqualifications areasfollows: A suitablepersonwill be literate, with her wits abouther, possessed

of a goodmemory,lovingwork,respectable andgenerally not unduly handicapped as regardsher senses, soundof limb, robust,and, according to somepeople,endowedwith longslimfingersandshort

nailsat herfingertips. (Gyn. 1.3,tr. Temkin). Shewasexpectedto masterthe theoryof gynecology and to be capable of makingdecisionsin a crisis.Even if a doctor waspresentat a birth, he appearsto haveexpectedto leavethe practicalwork to the midwife, asking her what stagelabourhad reached(Galen3.3.151). In normalcircumstances, she would supervisepregnancyand parturitionand treat gynecological disorders, and she might even undertakesurgery.It seemsclear that only Soranus'idealmidwifewould be capableof doingall this, and shewouldbe almostup to modernstandards. Not'all dominaewould find a suitabletrainee amongtheir slave-girls or be able to buy sucha paragon.But the rich were well staffed:

JOBS FOR WOMEN

XII.

87

Opstetrices

1. [lul]iae [div]aeAug.1.---siae[ops]tetrici.8949 2. PrimaLiviaeopstetrix... 8948 3. HygiaMarcellae1.obstetrix. 4458 (MM) 4. AntoniaeAug. 1.Thallusaeopstetric. 8947 5. SecundaopstetrixStatiliaemaioris. 6325 (MS)

6. Hygia Fla•iae Sabinaeopstetr.vixit ann. xxx. MariusOrthruset Apolloniuscontubernalicarissimae.6647 (MPPP)

7. Sempronia PelorisAtratinaeobstetrix... 6832 (M. vin.Aq.) 8. Q. Sallustius Diogae1. Dioges.SallustiaArtemidori1. Athen[ai]s opstet-

rix. 8192s7(M. libb.Q.Sallustii) Otherknown midwivesfrom Romeare probablytreelance(9721,9723, 9720, 9722,9724, 9725): only the first two areknown to be ex-slaves; all are free. This confirmswhat we shouldguessfrom the demandsof thejob, that free womenmighttrain for thiswork and that only in domesticservicewould slaves be the rule.

Midwivesanddoctorswereemployedin privatehousesto look after the slavesaswell asthedomini.The latter mightplacemorerelianceon freelance, often free alien, doctors. Considerablespecialisationarisesin the palace, whereby the time of Trajan one findsan ab aegriscubiculariorum(33749), but evenearlierthere was nursingstaff for the slavehospitalswhich were common in wealthy households,and this staff is of both sexes,presumably for'segregated wards.We find a femalead valetudinarium in Livia'shousehold (9084) andanotherin a guildof imperialstaffat the time of Nero(8639.b.9), aswell asa scatteringof men(9085, Livia;4475, Messala: 33917). Child care was mostly in the handsof women.The first, and one of the most important, of the slaveswith whom a child came in contact, was his

wet-nurse.It appearsfrom Tacitus(Dial. 28.4, Germ. 20.1) that upper-class mothers automatically delegatedlactation to slavenurses.Pseudo-Plutarch argues(de educ. liberis 3C) that mothersshouldsuckle their own children becausethey love them and becausethe processstimulateslove, but concedes that paid nursesmay be used if the mother is unable to nurseor wants to

conserveher energy for a new pregnancy.Paid nursesmust be "of Greek character".He is writing for the upperclass,but for Greeks.Sotanus(Gyn. 2.87) makesmuch the samepoint aboutmother-love,but saysthat if circumstances allow a choice of women who are able to feed the child, one must

selectthe best, and not necessarilythe mother, unlesssheshowsthe attributes of the best nurses.Lactation may be too exhaustingfor the mother. But if a nurseis used she must come up to a high standard,which he describesin detail. For choice she should be between 20 and 40 and have two or three

babiesof her own. Tacitus'generalisation thereforeprobablyappliesonly to a small sectionof Greco-Romansociety.

88

SUSAN Xlll.

TREGGIARI Nutrices

1. Asinia Hos--nutri[x]Agrippi[nae]. 9901b 38 2. Prima Augustiet Augustae1. nutfix luliae Germa[nici] ffliae. 4352 {MFLD}

3. IuliaIucunda nutrixDrusiet Drusillae. 520139(MIAL IV) 4. M. Aemilius Paulli1.Demetrius. ValeriaZosmanutrix. 4ø4457{MM} 5. Valeria Hilara nutfix OctaviaeCaesarisAugustihic. requiescitcum Ti. Claudio Fructo

viro suo carissimo. Ti. Claudius Primus et Ti. Claudius

Aster bene merentibusfecerunt R9434•

6. EchonisStatiliaeminorisfill nutrix (sic). 6323 (MS)

7. Atticusf. Stactes nutricis Sisennae 0 2 conlacteus v. ann.iv.6324(MS) 8. VolusiaeStratonice L. VolusiL. f. Saturninipontif(icis) 43 nutriciL. VolusiusZosimusf. matri suaepiissimaefecit et L. Volusio Zosimo L. VolusipatruicollactioTampiaPriscillaconiugisuopiissimoet sanctissimo fecit et sibi. 7393

9. [Dis] manibus[sacru]mPrimigenius L. Volusi L. f. Saturniniser. ab hospitiset paedagog. pueror.Charidicont(ubernali) s(uae)b.m.T. Iulius Antigonus gener eius Spurinniae Niceni Torquatianae nutrici suae

benemerenti sanctaepiaeamantissimae feceruntsibiet suisposterisq.eor. 7290 (MV). (Lettersitalicisedwereattestedby Amati in 1831.) 10. VolusiaeRu-- VolusiaPhiletenutfix benemerenti. 7355 (MVJ 11. RubriaeEutychiaenutrici Helviae. 5063 (MIAL III) 12. TatiaBaucyl---[nu]trixseptemlib [erorumpronepotum]divi Vespasian [i,

filiorumFl.Clementis et] FlaviaeDomitil[laeuxoriseiusdivi] Vespasiani neptisa[ccepto1ocoe] iusbeneficiohoc sephulcru [m feci] meislibertis libertabus vo[sterisq. eor.] 8942•

13. [---aleAlcenutri[cidivaeF]austinae [quaevixit] ann.xxx .... 894145 14. Dis manibussacru---Ti. Claudio Neothyrsoqui vix. annisxxiii dies xi--- Ti. ClaudiusStephanuspatronobenemerito de seet CaciaRestituta nutfix eiuset sibiet suispoterisque (sic)eoru.... 6686 (MPP, P, tombX) While a mistressmight prefer to use one ot her own slavesor freed-

womenas nursefor her child, it might often happenthat there was none available.Messallinaprobablyfinds one of her own servants for Octavia(5), but Julia Livilla, the youngestdaughterof Germanicus,born in 18, is nursed by a womanbelongingto 'llOeriusandLivia (2), a slaveprobablyinheritedby them from Augustus. The nurseof Domitilla'schildren(12) doesnot bearthe nameFlaviaand may evenhavebeena free-bornpaidnurse.Only wherethe slavehouseholdwas largecould the mistressexpectthe luxury of a slave nurse.In the Greekworld at leastnursingwasoneof thejobsopento a poor

buthonest free-born woman. •8 Nursing of slave children maybeattested by 9, 10 and 14. In 10, both nurseand nurselingare now free,but arelikely to havebeenslaves,and they belongto the samefamily group.In 9, Ti. Iulius Antigonus(a freedmanof Tiberius or a freedmanor son of a freedman derivinghis name from 'l'•berius)is the son-in-lawof a Volusiandomesticand

JOBS FOR WOMEN

89

the nurselingof SpurinniaNice. (This form of the dativeoccurselsewhere, e.g. 22941, 22945.) If Amati teally saw 'Torquatianae'on the stone,then this inscriptionis paralleledby 7303, as Mommsenpointedout (CIL vi p. 1043). Nice will then havebelongedat one stageof her life to a Torquata,

apparently wifeol;Q.Volusius, consul in56.Shewassubsequently freedbya Spurinniusor Spurinnia.So either a slaveof Tiberiusis nursedby a woman from anotherslavehousehold,o.rAntigonushad beenborn andrearedin the Volusian householdand only subsequentlypassedto Tiberius. Similarly in 14, the nurse'andnurselinghave different gentilenamesand either of the sameexplanationswill apply.

The nurse'sdutiesare described in detailby Soranus(Gyn.2.93-12'6). They cover the whole routine of child care. Cerealswere to be addedto the

diet at aboutsix monthsandthe childwasto be takengraduallyoff the breast as the teeth camethroughin the secondyear. A secondnursemightbe kept in reservein casethe first had healthproblems(Gyn. 2.97-98). Since the wet-nurse'sdutieswere not confinedto feedingthe child, it seemslikely that shecontinuedto look after him evenafter weaning,until he was old enoughto be handedover to the paedagogus and to go to school? and that her job lastedlongerwith girls. The relationshipoften continued close,ascan be seenfrom the insistence in the inscriptions on the identityof the child rather than on that of the owner,in the provisionsof the Lex Aelia Sentia for the early manumissionof nursesby minors, and instancessuchas that of a particularlydeprivedchild, the future Nero, who was eventually

buriedby a concubine andtwonurses. 48 The relationship of manyyoung Romans with

their nurses will have been much like that of Julia with her

nurse,of Anglo-Indians withtheirayahsor of Churchill withhisnanny. •8 These servicesnormally earnedmanumission, probablyafter the child had passedinfancy. Nor mustwe forgetthe favouredpositionin which the nurse's own child (that essentialprecondition)would find itself. Even if it died

young, it might geta special e,pitaph (7);if ritgoverned survived it might riseto equestrian rankandwealth:NerosfosterJorothe, Egypt? There would be other women, the Greek girls to teach the language (Tac. Dial. 29.1), dry-nurses(cunariae)to rock the cradle, and eventually tutors.Cunarii/ cunariaeare rare:only oneof eachsexfrom the inscriptions

of Rome,onefreedman who attendedtheinfantNero5xandthecunariaof a VestalVirgin(27134: Te•aI hreptecunanaRufinaev(irginis)V(ostalis)). Two womenwith the grandiloquenttitle a lacte et augendo(37753) may be drynurseswho bottle-fed a baby. An educatrix of an unnamed vir clarissimusis

alsoattested,from the late secondor earlythird century(9792). The slightly older child had paedagogt,who were normallymale for girlsas well as for boys. For example,we know of M. Livius Prytanis,freedmanof Livia and paedagogus to her granddaughter Livia (33787); Hymnus,paedagogus to Julia (Livilla) daughterof Germanicus(3998); and two paedagogiof Nero'sfuture wife Statilia Messallina(6327, 63301. Paedagogiwere needed also to look

atter the slavechildren,andwe hearonly o! men(e.g.8989, 33426). In short,

froma sample of some 90b2onlythreearewomen.

90

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

XIV. Paedagogae

1. [St]atiliaT. 1.Tyranispaedagoga Statiliaes.6331 (MS) 2. C. $ulpiciusC. 1. Venustus.SulpiciaC. I. Ammia. SulpiciaeC. f(iliae) Galbillaepaedagogis suis. 9754 3. Urbanapaedagoga v. an. xxv. 9758 The child in 1 is the same Statilia whose two male attendants have

already been mentioned:althoughit cannot be provedthat they worked concurrently,it seemslikely that the paedagoga was an optionalextra. The two youngdaughters of Galbain 2 havea tutor of eachsex. The paedagogimight start off primary education,but were morechildmindersthan teachers.Teachingwasin the handsof male schoolmasters or private tutors, litteratores,grarnrnatici,rhetores.Only rarely would women slaveshavethemselves receivedenougheducationto qualify asteachers,even

hadtheirowners considered sucha rolepossible?Theymight,however, receive an education which would fit them to be entertainers. More than bare

literacywasrequiredof readers, lectores/ lectrices, anagnostae / anagnostriae. XV. Lectrices/ Anagnostriae

1. [I]renaeiLiviaeDrusicubic(ulari)ser.colit ossaeiusCnidelectrix coniunx eius. 8786

2. DaphneIhliaanagnos. P. Longenius P. I. Licinus.33830 3. DercetoAureliaevirginislectrixann.vicensumum exsigens miseraoccidi. 33473

4. Lexis D(ecimi) angnostria.PereliaLaudicamater Lexinis.34270 (Sep. lib& M. Aem. Lepidi) 5. Sulpiciaecinereslectriciscerneviatot quoi serviledatum nomenerat Petale. ter denosnumeroquattorplusvixeratannos natumquein tetris Aglaonediderat. omnianaturaebonavideratarte vigebat splendebatformacreveratingenio invidaforsvita Ionginquom degereternpus noluit hanc.fatisdefuit ipseColus. AE 1928,73

The statisticson readersin CIL vi are weightedin favourof women. There is only one pre-Christian lector:he belongsto Livia (3978). Other entertainers,musicians,singersand dancers,may be more summarilylisted, sincenumbersin the inscriptions are small. XVI.

Women

Entertainers

1. Demetriae Acts (sc. Acres) Aug. I. set. acroamat(icae)Graecaevix. a. xxxv. Trophimuscubicul(arius)conservaebenemet. D. M. 8693

JOBS FOR

WOMEN

91

2. Maritimi Antoniae Drusi rogatoris.Quintiae Antoniae Drusi 1. cantricis. 33794

3. Chrysanthecantrici Volusi Elaini vix. ann. xx. Philodespothus conserus fecit. 7285 (MV) 4. Cnismi sutoris et Pelorinis cantricis vix. ann. xxx. 9230

5.-6. Thelxis Cottia v(iva) ChelysCottiae sororesgemellaeamantissimae

cantrices carae utraeques sueis. 37783s4 7. LiciniaM. Crassilib. Selenechoraule... vix. ann.xx---.Cerialisfra[ter] Agathopus vicariu[s]. 7286 There are some 7 male entertainers,2 comoedi,4 symphoniaciand a

lyre-player, to setbeside these.S. s A number of musicians andsingers who seemlikely not to have been in private servicehavebeen omitted.Despite

richliteraryevidence fortheextravagant custom ofkeeping private troupes? inscriptionaldata are meagre.Most of the womenare singers,a branchof entertainmentin which they would not competedirectlywith men.While the sevenmen are all slaves,there are 3 freedwomen(2,75,7). Femaleslavesalso had a place amongthe delicia,child pets,and dwarfsand slaveswith other physicalpeculiaritieswere.cherished by someowners.

Thereappear to hav•beennooutdoor jobsaround a townhouse for which women were considered suitable.

To sumup resultsso far, we havefound that w,omen areentirelyabsent from outdoorwork in town, almostcompletelyexcludedfrom administrative jobs, and most prominentas personalservantsto women, as specialists in variousareaswhere they excludemen (midwives,nurses),asentertainers,and in clothesproduction,where they outnumbermen approximatelythree to one. Table I illustratesthe situationin lanificiurnand relatedcrafts.

TABLE

I

QuasillariaeTextores Lanipendi Vestifici SarcinatoresTotals Men

ß0

2

6

4

1

13

Women

11

2

6

4

14

37

Totals

11

4

12

8

15

50

It is possibleto seeroughlywhat the normalsituationmightbe, in the householdof a womanor of a marriedcouple,from TableII, whichillustrates

theproportion of womento men-on thestaffof Livia. s7A woman would employ more women than would a bachelormaster;on the other hand, the matronawhosehusbandwasalivemight needfewer men-servants. Sinceour sampleof Livia'sstaffcomesfrombothbeforeandafter the deathof Augustus,

92

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

the evidenceis skewed,but it may be takenasa roughguideto the staff of a

wealthy woman.We have to allow for the fact that Livia was extremely wealthyand maintaineda greaterpositioneventhan contemporaries suchas AntoniaandAgrippinathe Elder(to whomshe,aswife of the princepsand then as Augusta,was senior)and for individualtasteor the accidentsof evidence-for instance the lack of female entertainers.

TABLE

Men Women

Totals

II

10

4

9

5

10

9

11

I

2

61

1

0

4

2

7

0

4

0

0

18

11

4

13

7

17

9

13

I

2

79

To arrive at a roughidea of a male owner'sstaff, we shouldhaveto reducethe ratioof employedancillaeconsiderably. How far?It is not possible to obtaina largeenoughsampleto givea convincing answer.Of thewomenin lists I-XVI, about 70 demonstrablyworked for women and only a dozenfor

men.Thereareno womenamongthe servants of Augustus wffose jobsare listedby Boulvert(p. 34), or amongthe 11 (a queersample)belongingto Claudiusin the Monumenturnfamiliae liberorum Drusi, and only the nurse

whom he sharedwith Livia amongthe servantsof Tiberius in the same

tomb? I havenotedelsewhere that in the Statiliant6mb,whereowners are of both sexesbut mostlymen,menwhosejobsareknownoutnumberwomen

in thesamecategory by 157to20? Using these figures, I should beinclined to put the averagemale owner'sworking femaleslavesat lessthan a quarter of the numberemployedby Livia. But we may rememberthat mostdomini would have female relationsabout the housewho would employ women slaves.Even if a man had no wife, he would probablyhavea concubina,who wouldhaveher own servants. The staff of Acte,whosepositionwasunusually

favourable, isknowntohavebeenlargeandcomplex. sø There is little to be gleanedfrom the data already given about the recruitment,training and organisationof female staff. Slavesduring the Principate were chiefly born into slaveryor imported from outside the empire.It was a distinctionto be born into thefamilia in which oneworkeel:

JOBS

FOR

WOMEN

93

of our 141, one freedwoman of Livia is mentioned as a verna from the im-

perialestateof Capri(II.4). Severalof the slavesof the Statiliigivetheir racial or geographical origin (VI.2, Sura, and VI.5, Dardana;cf. Prima Sura, 6338. and PrimaCappadoca, 6510). Only one of the womenlistedhere(xvii 9, if

thetextisright)uses anagnomen denoting aprevious owner. 6• Thismaybe an indication that there lives were less career-oriented:just as men civil

servants stressthe fact that they b.elonged to the emperor(Caes.ser.or Aug. l.), while their wivesdo not, so men carry their previousowner'snameas a guarantee of trainingor job experience. Training will have been necessaryfor almost all the jobs discussed. Reading,writing and wool-workwould presumablybe taughtat home to

futurelectrices,librariae,spinners, asit usuallywasto the daughters of the house.We hear of certainslavesbeingtrainedoutsidethe household. This would be desirable fo• doctors and midwives. It is attested for ornatrices:

Dig. 32.65.3: Ornatricibuslegatis Celsusscripsiteas, quae duos tantum mensesapud magistrumfuerunt, legatonon cedere,alii et has cedere ne necessesit nullam cedere, cum omnes adhuc discere

possint et omne'artificium incrementurn recipit..? Women, like men, might sometimesbe fitted' lbr more. than one

jobfia It appears fromthe Plautine verses alreadyquoted(p. 81) that indoor specialists might attendtheir mistressout of doorslike anypedisequa: it is not hard to imaginethat a dominaof only moderatewealthmight find employmentfor her hairdresserin spinningand runningerrandsafter the toilette was over. But in the more elaborate householdssl•ecialisationwas, if

not economicalin man-hours,effectivein maintainingmoraleamongthe

servants andprestige for theemployertl 4 It wasconsidered themarkof a cheese-paring ownerif one slavedid two jobs (Cic. Pis. 67; Ael. Arist.Rom. Or. 71 B). What "pluralism"therewas for womenprobablytook the form it takestoday:the femaleslavemighthavea job, ztcontubernalis andchildren. But the complexorganisationof the householdwill havemeant that shedid not perform for her family group as many choresas doesthe servantless workingwomanof the twentiethcentury,for probablymealsandsomeof the work of child:rearing were communallyorganised. There is evidencethat the

domestic, likethemodern woman,mightbeexempted fromworkonmarriage (concubernium for the slave),in orderto devoteherenergies to childbearing, with the differencethat her childrenwere of economicimportanceto her owner.

Dt•,. 40.4.59 pr. (Scaevola):'l'•tiaservisquibusdam et ancillis nominatimdirectaslibertatesdedit,deindeita scripsit:"et pedisequas omnes, quarum nomina in rationibusmeis scriptasunt, liberasesse rolo." Quaesitumest, an Eutychia,quae testamentifacti tempore inter pedisequaslibertatem acceperat,mortis autem temporeinveniaturactoriin contuberniotradita,ex generalicapitepedisequarum libertatem consequiposset. responditnihil 'impediri libertatem pedisequae, quodmortisdemuntemporepedisequa essedesiit.

94

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

There are many women in the columbariawhosejobs are not known. The total number of women in domesticjobswhom we havebeendiscussing makesa smallsampleif we comparethemwith men domesticsor with the

totalof persons of slave or freedstatus inCILvi.65Thepassage fromScaevola suggests that the functionof women,asthe slave-owner sawit, mightbe to be

contubernales ratherthanpedisequae. Paulus alsodefines theposition of somewomenin the job structureby that of theirhusbands. Discussing which slavesare included in the term instrumenturn,he says.."Uxoreseorum qui

operanturmagisest ut instrumentocedant"(Sent. 3.6.38), while "uxores... eorum qui mercedespraestareconsueverantneque instructionisneque •nstrumentiappellatione continentur"(ib. 40). Sincemuchthe sameattitude hassurvivedinto the twentiethcentury,despitethe developmentof economic theory, suchlack of intereston the part of wealthyRomansin finding"jobs" for womenslavesneednot surprise us.Openings for womenwere,aswe have seen, limited. The. familia Caesaris will show an extreme situation: the

daughtersof imperial"civil servants" wereineligibleto follow their fathersas clerks or accountants,nor, probably, could they all be absorbedinto the

domesticserviceof the Caesars. Theirnomenclature doesnot emphasise their membershipof the familia. They usually marry consemi or conliberti, in contrastto male "civil servants",who often marry ingenuae.So once again there is a low ratio of women and a scarcityof employmentother than marriage.

Little emergesabout the organisationof women staff. Amongmenwe find supervisors,such as supracubicularios,supramedicos,or chiefsof a certainservice,with subordinatestaff (a cubiculo,tricliniarchaor diaetarcha in the palace)or divisionsof the staff in a particularbranchinto shifts,or specialistsattachedto a branch,suchas the secretaries,caterersandmedical

staff of the imperialchamberlains. 6e Althoughsuchorganisation is less marked in private houses,it existedin someform wherevertherewere more than a handful of slaves. But we do not find clear evidence for it in relation to

womenslaves,exceptfor the lanipendaewho supervised the spinners.There are no head nursesor chief dressers. Yet it is likely that a mistresslike Livia employedmore than one ornatrix at a time and that one of them would be senior.It maybe that distinctions of slaveor freedstatushelpedto distinguish

gradesof womenservants. Perhaps if we knewasmuchaboutthe staffof a Faustinaaswe do of Livia's,we would discovera systemaselaborateasthat of the male staff of a Caesar.For groupingof women staff there is some evidence.A number of pedisequaejoin togetherto commemoratea dead

friend(V.5). In the Volusiancolumbanum, ancillae(a vaguergroup)do the same(7350). This mightindicatesomegroupingfor work purposes, but it might alsobe linked with the organisation'ofthe burial college. The manumission rate for women in lists I-XVI

is as follows:

JOBS FOR WOMEN

95

96

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

Two factorswill affect thesefigures.One is that somefreedwomen's statusis not givenandtheyaretherefore classed with theslaves. Theotheris that longevityincreases the chanceof manumission: peopledyingunder30 will usuallybe slaves. If freedwomen did not go on working(full-timeor in performance of operae)andthusdid not mentiontheirjob (freedstatusor familyconnections beingof moreimportance on the epitaphthana long-past slavepost),thenthesefiguresdo not reflecttheproportionof womenwith specific jobswho couldhopeto be freed.Sincefreedotnwasan incentive, ownersmay well haveheld out that hope to morethan onein four. Since there were not manyjobs for women,but their presence in the household was importantfor the moraleof the maleslaves, manywouldprobablybe freedyoungas redundantworkers,but continueascontubernales to menstill in slavery.Womenalso had a better chancethan men of beingboughtand

freedbyacontubernalis (normally older)whohadbeenmanumitted. 67 It may, however,be possible.to draw tentativeconclusions about the relativechancesof manumission for womenin differentjobs.Thusout of 14 nursesat least12 arefree.We haveseenthat thereis a possibilitythat ingenuae are includedon this list, a possibilitythat existsnowhereelsein the inscriptionsof domestics. No otherjob showsanythinglike thisproportionof freeor freed women, but then in no other job did emotional ties continue so stronglyafter retirement.25% of theornatrices areattestedasfree(7 of 28), just overhalf the midwives(5 of 8) and about a third of the menders(5 of 14). Of the other groups,we couldconjecture thatpedisequae or quasillariae have lesschanceof freedom.So, not unexpectedly,it would seemthat the more valuable a slave, the more chance of freedom she had, and the more

prestigious or specialised the job, the more likely a womanwasto keepit or at least to mention it after manumission. It was said above that women slaves

mightbe released from work on marriage.Freedwomen who marriedwith the patron'sconsentwere exemptedfrom operae,but if they had apatronathey might go on working.Sincea job might be mentionedon an epitapheven when the woman had retired from it some time before she died, we cannot

distinguishwhat proportion of the women worked during their marriage

(whethercontubernium or legalRomanmarriage). In Table IV, women from lists I-XVI are categonsedaccordingto attested marital status. Under "Marital

status unknown"

are listed all those for

whom marriageis not attested; 68 under "Married"thosefor whom contubernium,full legal marriageor parenthoodis directly attested;under "Probablymarried" thoseattestedwith a man who may havebeen a husband. Clearlythereis somepossibilityof inaccuracyin the lastcategory,sincesome men will be friends,sons,fathersor other relations.This inaccuracywill be reducedby a tendencyfor suchrelationships to be explicitlystated,but will be offset still more by the fact that the first categorycertainlyexaggerates the figuresfor unmarried women.It isevident,for example,thatnutriceshad had at least one child of their own, yet elevenof them, who do not attest marriageor motherhood,appearin the first category.It may thereforebe assumed that all "unknowns"are not unmarried,and though30 will not be absolutelyaccuratefor probablewives,63 out of 141 is still an underestimate for thesecond andthirdcategories together.

JOBS FOR WOMEN

97

98

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

If roughly45% is a low estimateof marriedwomen in all jobs, it is noticeable that of the ornatrices and sarcinatrices,for whom we have un-

usuallyfull samples, morethanhalf aremarried. A full surveyof the proportionof maleslavesand freedmenmarrying hasnot beenundertaken.It would be desirableasa checkon the abovefigures to discoverwhat proportionof men of knownjob is married.Sincethereare so many more male employeesattested,it is necessary to choosea sample, which may fail to be exactly comparablewith our groupof all the female employees found.Theremay be a greatertendencyto givedetailsof marital status for women. Fashionsvary from colurnbariurnto colurnbariurn:job data are prominentin the Statilian tomb and family data in the Volusian. There wasl•ttle room for both on the standardplaque.A spotcheckon 50

malesubjects of epitaphs among domestics in theinscriptions of officiales 69 gives 64% of unknown marital status, 18% probably married and 18% married-a total of.36% in the latter two categories. It doesnot seemlikely that our percentages for either women or men reflect anythingmore than commemorativepractice.

It is only rarely that the jobsof both husbandandwife arespecifiedin thesameinscription.If thepassage of Scaevola quotedon p. 93 suggests that dorninisometimessanctioneda marriageby "handingover" the womanto a

contubernalis, TMthislist,ontheotherhand,mayinpartattestthevariety of slaves'inclinationsin choosinga partner. Bracketedcouplesare thosenot explicitlysaidto be contube.rnales or conluges. I. 2

libraria x cubicularius

II. II. II. II. II.

{ornatrixx librarius} {ornatrixx libraflus} ornatnSc x ab argento

5 7 9 16 21

{ornatrix x pistor} ornatrix x dispensator

II. 23

ornatrix x nornenclator

III. 1 V. 1 V. 4

VI. 5 VI. 9 X. 3

vestiplicax strator pedisequax rninistrator {pedisequax ad inpedimenta} {pedisequa x cocus} quasillariax tabellarius {quasillariax unctor} (quasillariax lanipendus} {sarcinatrixx medicus}

X. 4

sarcinatrix

XI. 2

rnedicax a frurnentorninistratbrurn

V. 8 V. 4

x mensor

XV. 1

lectrix x cubicularius

XVI. 1 XVI. 2

{acroamaticax cubicularius} cantrix x rogator

XVI. 4

can trix x sutor

JOBS FOR

WOMEN

99

There is alsoa clothes-folderwhosebrotherwasa cashier(111.5). Only one of the abovecoupleshasan obviousjob connection- the spinnerwho is probablymarriedto the lanipendus.There is not enoughevidenceto establish that dressers were likely to marry clerks.Perhapsit may be conjecturedthat pedisequaeand spinnerswould be more likely to marry husbandsof lower status than would the women closer to the mistress, such as entertainers or

dressers,but it is hard to pre. ss this when a singermarriesa cobbleror a dresser marriesa baker.On the whole,the evidenceof the colurnbariasuggests

thatjobstratification didnotproduce rigidsocial barriers. TM Ovid or Apuleiusmay give us a vivid sketchof how a man of the slaveowning classperceiveda slave-woman,but our evidenceon the workaday livesof domesticsis sparse.Many basicquestions havebeenleft unanswered. Some might better be askedin a broaderstudyof domesticsof both sexes, others need to be linked

with

other

areas in the lives of women slaves:

marriageand children, for example, are more thoroughlydocumentedby tomb inscriptionsthan are jobs. Comparativematerial, suchas the wealth of

documentation on ladies'maidsin morerecenttimes, TMis of somehelpin filling in part of the outline of the ornatrix, but there is nothing in more moderndomesticserviceto parallelthe varietyof jobs opento womenin the rich householdsof a slavesociety. University of Ottawa

SusanTreggiari

NOTES

'I acknowledge with gratitude the support of the Canada Council, which financed research for this paper. A shorter version was read at the Berkshire

Conference

in October

1974.

1. Citation of modern work will be kept to a minimum. The reader will often find further information in RE, the Dizionario Epigrafico or J. Marquardt and A. Mau, Das Privatleben der ROmer (2nd ed., Leipzig 1886, cited here as Marquardt). The following other abbreviations are used:

Boulvert= G•ra_rdBoulvert,Esclaveset affranchisim.pgriauxsousle haut empireromain:r3le politiqueet administra tif (Naples1970) Brizio = Edoardo Brizio, Pitture e sepolcri scoperti sull' Esquilino dalla compagniafondiaria iraliana nell'anno 1875 (Rome 1876) Chantraine = Heinrich Chantraine, Freigelassene und Sklaven im Dienst der rOmischenKaiser.' Studien zu ihrer Nomenklatur (Wiesbaden 1967)

Le Gall = J. Le Gall, "Mdtiersde femmesau CorpusInscriptionumLatinarum" (RœL 47 bis (1969) 123-130) Weaver = P.R.C. Weaver, Familia Caesaris' a social study of the emperor•

freedmen and slaves(Cambridge 1972) I regret that E.J. Jory and D.G. Moore, CIL 6, vii.' Index vocabulorum (Berlin, de Gruyter, 1974- ) was not available to me at the time of writing, as it would no doubt have enabled me to make the lists more complete.

100

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

Inscriptionsfrom CIL vi are cited by numberalone. Figuressuchas I. 3 refer to lists in this paper. Names of columbaria are abbreviated as follows: M. C. Annii Pollionis = Monumentum C. Annii Pollionis M. Cestiliorum -- Monumen tum Cestiliorum

MIAL = Monumenta inter Appiam et Latinam M. libb. Q. Sallustii = Monumentum libertorum Q. Sallustli ML = Monumen

tum Liviae

MFLD = Monumentum œamiliaeliberorum Neronis Drusi MM = Monumen

tum Marcellae

MPPP-- Monumenta prope Portam Praenestinam MS = Monumentum Statilorum M. Stertiniorum = Monumenturn

Stertiniorum

M. vin. Aq. -- MonumentumvineaeAquariorum Sep. libb. M. Aemilii Lepidi = Sepulcrum libertorum M. Aemilii Lepidi 2. These notorious women, with others less well known, can be tracked down in the indexes of J.P.V.D. Balsdon, Roman women: their

history and habits (London 1962, reviseded. 1974), with one exception. 3. Women in trade and industry have been dealt with by Loane, Industry and Commerce of the City of Rome 50 B.C.-A.D. 200 (diss. Baltimore, 1938) and specifically,though not fully, by Le Gall. The work of ancillae (mostly in the country) is documented by Mima Maxey, Occupations of the lower classesin Roman society (diss. Chicago, 1938). See too the usefuldiscussionin P.A. Brunt'sItalian Manpower 225 B.C.-A.D. 14 (Oxford 1971 ) pp. 143-144. 4. Or materœamilias. They were called rationes (Dig. 40.4.59 pt.: Scaevola);urbicae rationes (Dig. 33.7.27 pr.: Scaevola). Cf. Dig. 32.99.1 (Paulus): libellis familiae item cibariis.

5. Cf. G & R n.s. 16 (1969) 195-204. Cicero names no woman

servant.There is very little in Pliny's letters, occasionalmention of types of staff in SidoniusApollinaris,lessstill in Fronto or Symmachus.• 6. Cf. "Jobs in the householdof Livia" (forthcomingin PBSR n.s. 43 [ 1975 ] ), and Histoire Sociale6 (1973) 241-255. 7. Colurn. 4 pr., especially 1-9 on the matrona, pr. 10 - 4.4. on the viiica. For a solitary actrix c--domus seeCIL xi 1730, with Le Gall 126. 8. Nos. 2, 3, 6, 7, 8 and probably I work for women. I have not found womenclericalworkersbelongingto men. 9. The vulgar Fortunata supervisesher own dining-room(t'etr. Sat.

37.67). Waitresses:9637: Nice minor ministra in famil.; 9638a: Vipsania Soterisministr. in familia lalysi et Asmectimater; 9639: PyrricaPindari min. v. a. L;' 9640: Advena 1..ministra; 9290 b: Hilara minor Midaes ministra (Mida is a cubicularius;probably understand"Midaes uxor"). I have no parallelsfor the use of minor after two of these,but take it to be "Nice the younger," "Hilara the younger," sincetheseare common names."In familia"

may mean that they waited on slaves.Doorkeeper:6326: Optata Pasaes ostiaria.

'10. In the 4th or 5th centurytherewerecubiculariae to the empress (9313, 9314, 9315; two otherinscriptions cited in CIœad loc. 5748, 5942, mustbe readasreferringto wivesof cubiculariiandnot to cubiculariae). I 1. These women probably worked on the pagesand never on the dominus(cf. 10, 14). Thereweremaleornatoresglabrorumtoo (8956).

JOBS

FOR

WOMEN

101

12. Of the three men who claim to be her husbands, the first derives his name from Tiberius, the second from Claudius or Nero (as does Parata herself), the third is still a slave. The slave may be put' last for reasonsof

status,not chronology.Sinceall three are presumablyalive to make the' dedication, two of the marriages must have been dissolved (contubernium with Nedimus at least could have been interrupted by a third party) and it seems remarkable that the three men collaborate. (Other comments: Weaver

p. 102 n. 1, p. 130 n.5.)

13.' 9726-9728, 9731, 9736, 9174, 37469, ?7656,?33425.lhavenot seen F.E. Guasct),Della ornatrice e de' loro uffizi ed insieme della superstizione dei gentill nella chioma e della cultura della medesima presso le antiche donne romane (Naples 1775), but possibly the title (cited here according to the entry in the British Museum Catalogue) describesthe contents sufficiently. 14. Grandchild of Vipsania and Gallus. 15. I read 2 "Cestilia, freedwoman of a woman (sc. Cestilia), vestispica, wife of the freedman Pinus." 3 ought to mean "Ephyre, slave of Cestilia, vestispica, wife of the freedman Pinus." If Pinus is the same man in both inscriptions, which seems likely, then he married two women with the'same job. Since it is 3 which givesdetails of age at death and must therefore postdate 0eath, we cannot here regard Cestilia the freedwoman as Ephyre at a later stage in her career. 16. Tonsor / tonstrix is possibly ambiguous (below n.31) but domestics are likely to be barbers and manicurists. Le Gall however (125 n.6) does

not supply"n" andinterprets9941 as"r•tisseuse." 17. 3.82. 13-14; cf. Boulvert p. 83. The unctrix used oil, the tractatrix did not.

18. Cf. H.L. Wilson, AJP31 (1910) 38. 19. The status of male unctores varied. The job was of dubious respectability, but imperial masseurscould rise high, e.g. a freedman tractator

of Tiberiusand Claudiusbecamesubprefectof the Alexandrianfleet (33131 ), and in the second century a praepositus of masseurswas procurator of the lighthouse at Alexandria (8582). By the time of Trajan, iml•erial mass'eurs

were organisedas a group(85 12), but thereis no evidencetor organisationof masseuses.

20.

Livia has only one pedisequa to 4-6-men

(4002, 4005, 4006,

4245, ?4003, ?4004).

21. I read this "Chloe pedisequaApollonidae [ dative] f(ecit)." 22. Dig. 33.7.12.5, Trebatius: ...et mulieres, quae panem coquant ... item focariam ...et quae pulmentaria rusticis coquant .... Cf. Paul. Sent. 3.6.37. 2J. Dig. 1.c. (n.22): ...lamticas quae tamiham rusticam vestiunt ...; Paul. 1.c. (n.22): ancillae quae vestimenta rusticis faciunt .... 24. "Veteranus/a" is rare in the urban inscriptions, but occurs three times in the MS. The other two instances are less illuminating: Euticus Corneliae (servus) veteranus ... (6371) and Ismyme veterana (6383). Dig. 39.4.16.2 (Marcianus) shows that veterani are contrasted with novicii, the new slaves: Sunt autem veterana (sc. mancipia) quae anno continuo in urbe servierint, novicia autem mancipia intelleguntur quae annum nondum servier•nt. Quintilian mentions (1.12.9) that novicii laad to learn Latin. Brizio had conjectured wrongly (p. 81) that veteranaewere slavespast breeding, while ancillae were those bought to breed.

102

SUSAN TREGGIARI 25.

From

a colurnbariurn

which

contains

members

of

the

staff

of

Octavia, sister of Augustus. 26. There is also a silk-worker: 9892: Thymele Marcellaesiftcafta. 27.

M. Iulius Primus derives his name from Livia, whose freedmen

.after A.D. 14 became Iulii (after her adoptive father) and MM. (after her natural father), but we cannot tell whether Primus was freed by Livia or by one of her freedmen (or libertl libertus / filius) or was libertl filius etc., and the same holds for Sotefts, except that as a domestic she will be libertina. 28. Diz. Epig. iv 370. 29. Suet. DA 73: the clothes for wearing in the house were made by his sister, wife, daughter Or granddaughters;forensia presumably might be made by others. Cf. Marquardt i p. 58 on the domina's responsibility for wool-work.

30. I previously suggested(Histoire Sociale 6 [1973] 245)as an explanation for the shortage of spinners in the sources that they may have lived out and collected work from the lanipendus. I still think that nonresident domestics are likely in many categories,but now prefer the reason suggestedin the text, though not to the exclusionof my first guess. 31. Fullones 6287-6290. Tonsores and to{njstrix (6368) could have been cloth-finishers (cf. Dig. 33.7.12.6; 9493:lanarius and tonstrix in trade), but are more likely to be barbers. 32. The date of other epitaphs in this tomb shows that Agrippina is probably the wife of Germanicus. The supra yestern is linked by some tie of friendship or kinship with a family consisting of the vestifica Heliconis, her daughter of the same name and her husband Narcissus,who had previously belonged to an Augustus/a,either Augustus,Livia or Tiberius (cf. Chantraine p. 305 no. 76). It is conceivable that Helico, vestilex of Scribonia (7467), was father of Heliconis, for slaves might passnames down in the family (e.g. 7303). 33. 7467, 8554, 9979, 37724. Tailors in businessare mostly men: e.g. 9969-9977, vestiarii. 34. Freed, if she is the same as the patroness of M. Livius Pyrsus Lochiadis 1. (3966). 35. A uri netrix: 9213; brattiaria: 921 I ;auri vestrix: 9213; ? gemmaria: 9435; margaritaria : 5972; unguentaria: 10006. 36. Boulvert is wrong in discoveringa female a rnappis(p.238 n.236):

the lady in the fragmentary8892 is the wife of the custodianof napkins.Nor does his numrnularia (p.85 n.492) appear to exist under the abbreviation numrn. (8639 b.6.21). 37. Only 8 had belongedto a man, a freedman of Q. Sallustius,who may have had her trained to be employed in his patron's household (cf., in Livia's house, 3928, 3966, 3976, 4232, 4237, 4243, 8958) or for public practice.

38. The nurse of Asinia Agrippina, freed probably by her or by her father, Asinius Celer, son of Asinius Gallus and Vipsania. 39. Drusus was born in 7, Drusilla probably in 16. Iucunda is freed and derives her nomen from a Julius or Julia, who could be either of the children, or Germanicus or Tiberius or Livia. 40. Zosima may owe her nomen to Messalia (son of Marcella the

younger) or to his daughter, Valeria Messallina.Demetrius (? her husband) may be a freedman of the Paullus Aemilius Regillus who was grandson of

JOBS

FOR

WOMEN

103

Marcellaby anothermarriage.I follow Groag(PIR• A 396) and Stein(PIR• C 1103).

41. 42.

Hilara is probably freed by Messallina,her husband by Claudius. Sisennais son of Sisenna Statilius Taurus (cos. 16).

43.

The pontilex is son of the consul suffect of 3 and uncle of consuls

of 87 and 92.

44. Tatia as a gentile name is rare in Roman annals after T. Tatius, but occurs in the urban inscriptions of humble people. Baucyl- may be a variant

of Bafikalosand we may make it fern. nora., though Baucyl[i uxor] is possible.

45. If Alce nursed Faustina - and none of the other inscriptionswill allow us to interpret "nutfix Faustinae" as meaning that she worked for Faustina and nursed her children - and herselflived to the age of 30, then the epitaph was put up well after her death, since Faustina had, if the restoration is accepted, already been deified. It could be either Faustina: the elder married Pius ca. 110 and was deified in 140/141; the younger married M. Aurelius

46.

in 145 and was deified

in 175.

Dio Prusias, Eub. 14, Ps.-Plut. de educ. lib. 3C; RE xvii.2. 1496-

1497. Other Roman referencesin Balsdon(op. cit. (n.2)) p. 201. 47. Cf. HA, Marcus 2.1: at ubi egressusest annos qui nutricum foventur auxilio, magnis praecep.toribustraditus ad philosophiae scita pervenit ... 48. Suet. Nero 50. A nurse also appears to console him when he receives news of Galba's revolt (ib. 42.1 ). 49. Cf. J. Vogt, "Wege zur Menschlichkeit in der antiken Sklaverei" in Sklaverei und Humanitiit, pp. 71-74. 50. C. Caecina Tuscus (Suet. Nero 35.5: Tuscum nutricis filium relegavit, quod in procuratione Aegypti balineis in adventurn suum exstructis

lavisset). The full name comes from Pap. Rylands ii. 119. 3-6; other ref-

erencesin H.G. Pflaum, Les Carribresprocuratorienneskquestressous le

haut-empire romain(Paris1960)pp.44-46 or PIR• C 104(Stein)or RE iii 1243 no. 26 (Stein). Stein and Pflaum both accept the foster-brother relationship without question. The identity and status of the nurse are unspecified: she does not have to be one of the two who buried Nero (n.48), Egloge and Alexandria, nor,-if she is, is she necessarilyGreek, as Pflaum supposes.C. Caecina Tuscus must be an eques and (unless the rules were bent, in which case we ought to hear of it) ingenuus, so the nurse has to have been free at the time of his'birth. We can only guessif she Was a freedwoman of Nero's family or of another family, or freeborn. "Tuscus"is a proper cognomenfor a

Caecina(W. Schulze,Zur GeschichtelateinischerEigennamen(Ber.lin 1904 [repr. 1966] pp. 75, 89), whether of originally servile family or not. If we

want• ?positafreedman fatherforTuscus, C. Caecina Largus (cos.42,PIR• C 101) couldhavesuppliedthe praenomen.Conlacteus/ conlactaneus:e.g. 9745, 9901a, Aœ 1967, 59. 51. 37752. Cf. Boulvert p. 180. 52. 1052, 2210, 3998, 3999, 4718, 5563, 6327-6331, 7011, 7290, 7298, 7657, 8012, 8968-8985, 8988-8990, 9739-9758, 33392, 33426, 33756, 33787, 33894, 37761a, 37812, 37812a, Aœ 1964.82. No women are

mentioned by R. Boulogne, De plaats van de paedagogus in de romeinse cultuur (Groningen, Wolters, 1951 ). 53. There is a female philosopher, Euphrosyne, of unknown status (33898).

104

SUSAN

TREGGIARI

54. Cf. H.L. Wilson, AJP 31 (1910) 31-32. I would not follow CIL and emend to "Thelxis Cottiae" (sc. serva). Unemended, the text states that one sister was free or freed.

The "v" is smaller

than the other letters

and is

inserted just above and before the "C" of "Chelys". It must therefore refer to her and indicate that she was still alive: "Thelxis Cottia. Chelys (slave)of Cottia, living. Twin sisters who loved each other dearly, singers,both dear to their friends."

55. 56. 57.

6252, 6253, 4472, 6356, 6888, 33373, 7286. Marquardt, pp. 151-152. Documentation in "Jobs in the household of Livia" (PBSR 43

[19751, forthcoming).

58. Clauchus: 4334, 4338, 4340, 4345, 4346, 4348, 4353, 4356, 4359, 4360, 4362; Tiberius: 4339, 4341,4351,4354, 4358, 4409, nurse XII.2. 59. TAPA 105 (1974), forthcoming. 60. e.g. 8693 (XV.1); 8760 a cubiculo (normally an imperial post); 8767 scriba cubiculariorum; 9030 t•rocurator. It is conceivable that some of her slaves and freedmen worked for Nero {cf. n.37). 61. In the context of the Volusian tomb, it is natural for Nice's con-

nection with the family to be made explicit. Agnomina are rare for women. On Chantraine's list of imperial slaves/freedmenwith agnomina (pp. 299-388) nos. 2, 80, 85, 88, 124, 127, 218, 231, 290, 363, 365, 390 are the only women. Cf. Weaver, p. 160.

62. On the tra•mngof slavesin the liberalartssee'S.L.Mohler, TAPA 71 (1940) 262-280; for apprenticeship see C.A. Forbes, TAP•4 86 (1955) 321-359. The only women Forbes cites, apart from the passageon ornatrices,

which he partly misinterprets, are Egyptian weavers (331-333). To his material add Dig. 33.7.20.6 (Scaevola) and Paul. Sent. 3.6.52 on farm slaves, and (probably) an apprentice cellarius (9249). The very full evidence on the paedagogia given by Mohler makes no mention of girls: they seem to appear neither among the paedagogiani nor among the inscriptions to school-mates, compedagogitae (9760-9764). 63. PBSR 43 (1975), forthcoming. 64. PBSR 43 (1975), forthcoming. For a very modest household cf. Plaut. Me rc. 416: ...ea molet, coquet, conficiet pensum, pinsetu•-flagro. 65. Cf. TAPA 105 (1974), forthcoming. 66. PBSR 43 (1975), forthcoming. 67. Cf. Weaver pp. 102-104, 170-171, 178 etal.

68. Although contubernium was not legal marriage, the terms uxor, coniunx etc. are used by contubernales, while freedmen living in legal marriagesometimesstill use the word contubernalis,as can he seenfrom examples in the lists. (Cf. also Weaver pp. 105, 179.) 69. The inscriptions at the beginning of the CIL vi section on officiales

were checked(9102-9291). Men who were not the occupantsof the olla, who were not in domestic jobs, or who were of late date, were excluded. The domestics extracted were actarii, actores, supra aedificia, aquarii, arcarii, architecti, argentarii, armigeri, atrienses, cellarii, coci, cubicularii. 70. Cf. Cato, Ag. 143. 71. Cf. Weaver p. 116. 72. See,for example, D.M. Stuart, The English Abigail (London 1946);

J. Jean Hecht, The Domestic servant class in eighteenth-centuryEngland (London 1956).

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES•

Athensat the beginning of the firstcenturyB.C.is a fascinating puzzlefor the historian.The evidenceof inscriptionsand coinsis relativelyabundantand there is a plethoraof attestedpersons.But alas,thereis no connectedliterary tradition telling us what they were all up to, exceptfor the brief and confused accounts of Athens' role in the Mithridatic

War.

In the English-speaking world and to some extent beyond, discussionhas been dominatedby W.S. Ferguson'sbrilliant accountin HellenisticAthens, based on erudite Vorstudienand presentedin his usual exciting style and

manner. Buthisinterpretation of socialandpolitical history wasfounded 'on certain simple principles,dear to his ageand background,which for a long time offered a ready interpretationof vast tracts of antiquity. A conflict between an 'oligarchic'and a 'democratic'party could be the thread of Ariadne for first-century history no less than for that of the fifth, or for that

matterthat of the earlyandthe late RomanRepublic:it is not soverylong sincethe partiesof Optimatesand Populatesgaveup their honouredplacein our textbooks.At a higherlevel, a conflict betweenold aristocracies and new commercialclasses,as in much of the 18th-and 19th-centuryEurope, provided the clue to many strugglesfor politicalleadershipin the ancientworld: to look at Athens alone, Solonian and Pisistratid Athens thus fell into line

with Athehs of the time of Cleon,and the first-centurypower strugglefound its natural counterpartsin earlier Athenian history. Again, the late Roman Republic(Senate and Equites,whom even quite recentlyscholarslike M. Gelzer and Christian Meier have depicted as rivals for power) offered a natural parallel, and useful connectionscould be established.Fergusondiscoveredan 'oligarchicrevolution'in Athens around 103/2 B.C., stagedby new commercialinterestsbased on Delos and helped by a Roman proconsul (the orator M. Antonius)who happenedto be passingthrough--allto the satisfaction of business interests in 'the Rome of Marius'. Some historical

acrobaticswere necessary:thus the old aristocracyin Athens,supplantedby

the oligarchic nouveauxriches,became,in an tinparalleled development, the championsof traditional democracy. And Fergusonhad strangeviews on

Roman publiclawnolessthanonRoman policy. 2 The framework of historical interpretationwithin which Ferguson's theory of the 'oligarchicrevolution'was conceivedhaslongbeenabandoned for most other periodsof ancienthistory.Yet it still commandswide accept-

ancefor the periodherediscussed. 3 Paul MacKendrick, who followed Ferguson'saccount of Athens in most respects,showedthat there was at

leastnevera take-over bywealthyparvenus: 4 Ferguson's beliefthat,withthe exceptionof Medeiusof Piraeus,all the eminent.menafter c. 102 come of 105

106

E. BADIAN

familiesnot knownbefore 167 is simplyfalse.The greatsocialand political registerof the list of contributorsto the Pythaidfor the years103/2-97/6 showsmuch power held by men of old stock,or at leastclaimingto be. It is lesswell known that before the end of his life Fergusonhad abandonedthe most striking'support'for his originaltheory: the view that the archonship was at this time made electiveand re-electionpermitted,as witnessthe two successive Archonships of Argeius(98/7, 97/6) and the four Archonships of Medeius.In his reviewof U. Kahrstedt(AJPh lix, 1938, 23• he admittedthat S. Dow had demonstrated the regularityof Argeius'Archonship:it wasin fact confinedto 98/7. And he implicitlyretractedthe viewthat archonships were officially made elective, or that iteration was permitted,before 91: the latter is clearlyfalse,while for the formerthereis simplyno evidenceandno meansof judging. This has passedalmostunnoticed.A view once brilliantly presentedis not easilyabandoned,in the annalsof scholarship, and the worksof scholars like Margaret Thompsonand Daniel J. Geaganstill accept the 'oligarchic

revolution' asa factbeyond dispute. 5 Yet thereisverylittleleftto support it now.Detailswould take us beyondour provincehere,but note that the Boule and Demos continue to passtheir customarydecreesin the nineties;it no

longerappears thatthecycleof secretaries wasinterrupted at thistime;6and suchchangesas therewere cannot,on the whole, be preciselydated andwere

probably gradual. 7 The 'oligarchicrevolu.tion'of 103/2 deserveshonourableburial amid the gravesof its relativesamongnineteenth-century interpretations.Yet the stow is not easy to rewrite. We must rememberhow little we know about Athensas comparedwith contemporawRome. All reconstructions can only be cautious,likely to be overturnedby a new find or a new argument.But it is high time that at leasta limited beginningweremade.

I1

The Pythaid list enablesus to seethe Atheniansystemactuallyworking, over

a shortspanof years: 8 we havea massive prosopography of magistrates, priestsand giversof gamesover two to sevenyears.If one thingis clear,it is that thereis no small'oligarchic faction'runningthecity. Yet two menstand out: Medeius son ot Medeiusof Piraeusand Sarapionson of Sarapionof Melite. One is of ancientpriestlylineage,the other the very type of Ferguson's parvenu.Medeius,Archon 101/0, is strategosepi ta hopla99/8, andeither in that year or in the next he holdsa galaxyof appointments:commissioner for the publicbank in Delos,Commissioner for Delos,giverof Panathenaea and

Delia. 9 The importance of thesecharges andtheirexpense canbegathered from the fact that the officeseach rate 200 drachmasin the Pythaid assessment and the agonothesiae 250 each- the highestassessment of all. In 98/7

Sarapionof Meliteobviously aimsat far surpassing him.Strategos epi ta hopla for (on our evidence)the secondtime, he gaveno fewer than four major

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

107

games(2 in Athens,2 in Delos),for which alonehe was assessed 950 drachmas, in addition to the 200 for his office. Interestinglyenough,no further agonothesiae appearon the wholelist. Wedo not know, e.g.,what Pyrrhusof Lamptraedid for the city in 97/6, when he succeededSarapionand his brother Byttacusbecamecommissionerfor the bank. (Pyrrhushad been Herald of the Areopagus,probably in 98/7.)'Some form of competitive generosity obviouslycontinued., but it is quite clearthat MedeiusandSarapion carriedrivalryto unparalleled excess:it is interesting that nothingof the sort is on recordin the year of Sarapion'sfirstknownstrategia(102/1). Not only are Medeius and Sarapion the only men who enter and pay for their agonothesiae in thosetwo years,but for somereasonthat at presentescapes us Medeius'namewas enteredlate and out of placeand standsin rasura. Thesepaymentsclearly cannot have been compulsory:howeverinefficient the Athenian state machinery,a record of a mere two requiredpayments collectedin sevenyears cannot be imagined.Personalrivalry between two men has led to competitivedisplay,and considerable voluntary expenseto immortalise

it.

This is indeeda far cry from Ferguson's 'oligarchicparty', monolithically fighting againstthe 'democrats'.Nor are Delian interestsparticularly relevant.The Delianoffices(especiallythe governorship andthe chargeof the bank) were amongthe most highly prized distinctionsof aristocraticAthenians: Sundwall long ago thought (and nothing has disprovedit) that the Commissionership for Deloswas at this time confinedto ex-archons, just as

thestrategia epita hoplawas. 10Ferguson's iraplausible modelisshattered by scrutiny of the best evidence.

Onc.ewe abandonit, Medeius'secondArchonshipin 91/0 and its two cofftinuationsappear in a new and somewhatsinisterlight: no longer the

success of an 'oligarchic'or 'pro-Roman'party(the latterlabelis pureex post facto assumption)againsta 'democratic'and 'pro-Pontic'one. For one thing, we shall see that 'democracy'was not committed to anti-Roman sentiment, nor was the upper classinitially pro-Roman.*Wehavetendedto be misledby Ferguson,and perhapsby Thucydideanreminiscences. In the springof 91, when Medeiuswaselected(as he presumablywas) to his office, the SocialWar could not yet be foreseenby anyone:M. LiviusDrususwastrying to avertit, and for the moment seemedto be succeeding, and troublesamongthe kings of Asia (see Livy, per. lxxiii,fin.) had not in many generationsled to conflict between any of them and Rome. Theseeventscould not producea state of emergency in Athens,or becomethe chief pointsof politicaldivision.Medeius, to put it simply,seemsmerely to haveseizedcontrol of the city from his rivals.

Other - purely internal - causesai• attested, thougl• ½y no means clear. Posidonius, m the famous extract in Athenaeus v 212a, mentions

epipheromenaophl•mata as the main bar to homonoia, and Athenion in his dispatchesto Athens from the King'scourt promisedto removethem with

the help of the King. Democracy,and gifts (public and private) from Mithridates, are held out as additional benefactions, marked as incidental. As

so often, Posidonius'languageis, to us, excruciatinglyunclear:we simplydo

108

E. BADIAN

not haveenoughofhisworkto understand his Greek.We do not know whether he refersto debtsbeingincurredor exacted,andwhethertheywerepublicor private debts.The word ophl•matacertainlyoften hasan overtoneof debts to the state,andepiphereinsoundssomewhatlegal. In any case,it is mistakento think in terms of the simplemodel of a broad massof Athenianshopelesslyindebtedto a smallupperclass.Contemporary Rome offers a stateof politicsnot unlike what we haveobservedin the caseof Medeiusand Sarapionand providesan obviousialternative or supplementarymodel.In viewof thevastexpenditure by politicalrivals,we must inevitablybelievethat the resources of someof the politicianshad in the end been drained;that they werein debt to the stateand to privatecreditors;and that competitiveextravagancehad landed them where it landed L. Catilina and (for a time) C. Caesar.Perhapsthe seizureof powerwas in part an attemptto staveoff financialandpoliticalruin;perhaps,on the otherhand,it was a coup to anticipatesomeAthenianCatiline. Certainly,oncein power, Medeiusrefusedto let go. Naturally, there was an appealto Rome: by which side, we do not know; quite probablyby both - or all. In preciselythe sameway, a few years earlier,the city of Halaesain Sicily,rackedby struggles overthe composition of its Senate(againan issueof oligarchicpolitics,it seems),hadappealedto Rome for a settlement, and a commission under C. Claudius Pulcher had

issued one(Cic.2 Verr.ii 129).Thistime,however, Romewastoobusy:by the time the disputereachedthe Senate,the Socialwar had brokenout, and Mithridates'aggression had begunin.the East.The SenateaskedMedeiusto carry on until it couldgivethe matter its attention.Althoughthe simplistic view, that this impl.ies that he had been head of a 'Romanparty' and was

therefore officially supported by theSenate onprinciple, haslittleto recommend it (in fact, the Senateaboveall favouredstability,and in a factional disputewould supportthe continuationof the existingsettledstatewhile a decisionwas beingconsidered),it does,of course,follow that he was not 'anti-Roman'.In anycase,he musthavebeenempowered by Rometo stayon in the interim;and as the Socialand the MithridaticWarsdeveloped,strong

authority wasnodoubttheSenate's overriding concern. 11 Like Damasias, in another time of aristocratic stasis five centuries

earlier(cf. [Aristot.]Ath. pol. 13,2),Medeius succeeded in givinghisnameto threeyearson end. Unlike that predecessor, he disappears from our record without our getting any indicationof how, when and why; and he is succeededby a year of anarchia.As we shallsee,he certainlyfailed to retain controlof the statein thelatterhalf of hislastyear:he mayhavediedbefore it ended(for we do not hearany more of him) or even,like Damasias, have been forced out of office.12 111

At thispointwe mustturn to someveryvexedchronological questions. And the mostvexedof themhas,of course, beenthat of the datingof thenew stylesilvercoinage. EversinceMargaretThompson, with impeccable industry

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

109

and akribeia,createdorder out or'what had alwaysbeentotal chaos,we have

known (with only a few debatableexceptions) what issuesbelongto the Athenianseries,and therehasbeengeneralagreement on the sequence in whichtheyshouldbeput. Rigorous logicledher,however,intowhatmanyat oncefelt to be gravehistoricalimprobability in the absolute datingof the series - in particular, in dissociatingthe 'Mithridatic' issuesfrom the MithridaticWar by a whole generation- and D.M. Lewisshowedthat her

'MiddlePeriod'shouldbe lowe'red by aboutthirtyyearsin absolute terms. 13 Thecasehasrecently beenreinforced byH.B.Mattingly, 14andI canonlysay that I mustheretreatthematterassettledin favourof the'low' chronology. Mattinglyalsopointedout, however,that the chronology, on Thompson'ssequence andon thisinterpretation, requiresa yearwithoutcoinage in

orderto agree withthepresent viewsof experts ontheAthenian year15- a hypothesis which, both in generaland in the particularcase,historians familiar with the casualmethodsof ancient c•tieswill have lessdifficulty in acceptingthan numismatists with their scientificrigourandhorror vacui.The questionis: which year?- and,of course,no certainansweris possible.Each issuemust be consideredin its suggested historicalcontext. Detailed discus-

sionof thishighlytechnical pointisimpossible here; 16I canonlypointout that Mattinglyhimself,within a very shorttime, changedhis mind on this, with his usual readinessto be convincedby evidence.We should,however,

consider a possibility differentfrom the onehe suggests: that theyearwithout coinagemay be the firstyearof Medeius'tyranny(i.e. hissecondArchonship in 91,/0). This would put a break betweenthe secondand third issuesof the moneyersXenocles andHarmoxenus - two issues which,perhaps surprisingly in sucha case,are not (to our knowledge)die-linked.It alsoputsthe issueof

Apdlliconof Teos(with hiscolleague Gorgias) backin 88/7, whereLewis placedit andwhereit fits in quitewell.Thismayhelpusin thedatingof the involvedeventsof that year.

Next, the detailedsequence of eventsthat led to the siegeof Athens. Much must remainconjecture,but much of what appearsin the textbooksis in fact befoggedby modernmyth, whichproperscrutinyshouldbe ableto disperse.The consequences (it will be seen)involveRome and Asia aswell as Athens.

That unlikely sourcefor precision,the Periochaeof Livy, must be our starting-point,since it can be shown (see n. 21) that Appian, our most detailedsource,cannothere be followed.Per. lxxiv puts the restorationof Ariobarzanesin 90: the break between90 and 89 comesstraightafter, with

thevictoryofCn. Pompeius Straboasconsul(i.e. 89) overthe Marsi(cf. App. b.c. i 50, 216 - January-Februaryaccordingto Gabbaad lot.) and the death of the praetor A. SemproniusAsellio(January27, 89? - seeHistoriaxviii,

1969,476 f.) the first Italianeventsof theyear? It wasin 89 that,after futile negotiations, Mithridatesdrove the two kingsfrom their kingdoms oncemore (per. lxxvi - we cannot, of course,specifythe time of year, but

presumably nearits end).18That, incidentally, waswhyby thetimeof the consular elections for 88, in December 89, it was well known in Rome that

one of the consulswould get a Mithridatic command;and variousmen in

11o

E. BADIAN

Romecoveted it.19Thedefeatof M' Aquillius in Cappadocia stillseems to be partof thatsamecampaign of 89.20Aftera winterwhichbothsides spent in organizingtheir forcesand (in the King'scase)gains,the war continuedwith

theinvasion ofPhrygia earlyin88.21 Per. lxxviii coversthe eventsof the year 88 in the war, andlxxix then turnsto Romanaffairsduring87. The arrangement adoptedby the epitomator is orderly and trustworthy throughout. Unfortunately, once more, he can

nevergiveus a precisechronologywithin a year. All wa can seeis that the

occupation ofAthens byArchelaus must have been near thee endoftheyear: the epitomatorreports it just before his usual concludinghotchpotch (praeterea... continet).This takesus, most probably,to the end of Appian,

Mith.28,with29 moreprobably (butnotcertainly) belonging toearly87.22 The chronology,as usual,is importantasa framework.Let us return to Athens. As we have seen, a decision from Rome must have seemedfurther away than ever, as the Mithridatic War developed.Meanwhileit looks as if

Medeiuswasno longerin control. For sometime not later than early 88 or even late 89, we find the cautiousAthenianssendingan official envoy to Mithridates,who was at that very moment attacking the Roman protectorates

in Asia.It is incrediblethat Medeius,kept in power(at leastfor the moment) by the Senate, would have countenancedthis; and the fact that the year is

namedafterhim is no guarantee that he survivedto the end of it. The facts,at any rate, are clear: Athenion is described as the envoy 'elected by the

Athenians' (Ath. v 212a).23 Hisletters,too, arecitedasaddressed to 'the Athenians'. It will not do to make him - conveniently for some theories- an

envoy of the 'democraticparty'. He had been sent by the People.And he stayedwith Mithridateslongenoughto risehighin his favourand to send'the Athenians'periodicreports.This givesan indicationof the time of his appointment, clearly severalmonths before summer88, indeedprobablystill in 89.

The time of his returncanonlybe approximately determinedfrom the courseof eventsin Asia. Speechesin historian, s are the poot'estsort of evidence, and the extensiverhetoric in Posidoniuswill have to be ignored;yet

Posidonius was a contemporaryand well informed,and he wrote in the first place for readersto whom these eventsmust have been unforgettable:we must believe him on the facts of the situation,as indeed scholarsgenerally havedone.Athenionreportedthat, by the time of hisspeechto theAthenians,Mithridateswasmasterof Bithyniaand inlandCappadocia (i.e. whatwe

callCappadocia) 24 andof all AsiaMinorasfar asPamphylia andCilicia. Q. Oppiushad beencaptured(at Laodicea- seeApp. Mith. 20, 79), and M' Aquilliushad beencapturedbut not yet executed(cf. ibid. 21,80). The most interestingobservation,however,is that we are clearlystill before the 'AsianVespers'.Romancitizensare depictedastakingrefugein sa•ctuariesor denyingtheir (acquired)Roman status;but no massacre is mentioned.Yet Athenion,as depictedby Posidonius, wouldsurelyhavevulgarlygloatedover

it, ratherthantastefully concealing thebloodytruth.25It wouldgreatly have strengthened his casethat Romewasnow powerless. We mustconcludethat the massacre, thoughit was obvio•usly feared(as it wouldbe), had not yet

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

111

taken place.A fortiori, we aresometime beforethe attackon Rhodes,which came later still.26

This cannot afford precision.But it is clear that we are still quite early in the year. The campaignagainstRhodesand the siegeof the city (App. Mith. 24-27) went on for a long time, until the personalinterventionof the goddessIsis apparentlygaveMithridatesa face-saving reasonfor abandoning the enterprise.There followed another lengthy and unsuccessful siegein Lycia, and it was only after this that Mithridates himself decidedto stop

riskinghispersonal prestige,to withdrawfrom.activecampaigning and,i.a., to entrustArchelauswith the forcesfor his sweepthroughthe Aegean.(On all this,seeApp.Mith. 27,106 ff.) The latter, surely,cannotbe placedlater than October, since Mithridates would not want to court disasterat sea. Again: precisionseemsimpossible.But it is hard to see how th'e massacreof the Italians,precedingso many operations,could be put later than the middleof 88. And for that matter, the spectacular executionof Aquilliusin Pergamum will not havebeen longdelayed,after the captureof the greatcity. It follows that we can confidentlyplace Athenionin Athensby the middleof the year - not later than Juneor July, and probably earlier. We know that he was at onceelectedstrategosepi ta hopla and had his friendselectedas tousallousarchontas(Ath. v 213e). This, thoughobviously not confined to archonsin the strict sense,must as obviously include them. A look at the archonsof the year 88/7 shouldtherefom,.prove illuminating.

By a piece of good fortune rare in Athenian history of any period, it so happensthat we .actuallyhavea completelist of archonsfor that year. It is the only encouragingfact in a bleaksituationregardingpreciseevidence,and it is what really makes our task worth undertaking.S. Dow (Hesperiaiii,

1934,444 ff.)established thefactthatIG ii2 1714never hadaneponymous Archon at its head and must therefore be the list for the year ofanarchia, as

theyearfollowing theArchonships of Medeius ismarked onIG ii2 1713.The simple fact stood revealedthat anarchia, as a term of public law, meant

precisely what'i• hadmeantcenturies before-theabsence of aneponymous Archon for the year. As it happens,Athenion, in his speechin Athenaeus, Aescribesthe absenceof public activity in Athensunder Roman pressureas

anarchia.It is now clear- as mightbe expectedin'a literarytext that has passedthroughtwo handsandwashighlyrhetoricalin the first place- that that term is by no meansintendediv,its constitutionalsense..Inotherwords,

we mustclearlydistinguish artarch[a, the technical term,from'anarchy' in Posidonius' sense. 27 Onewouldhavethought thiswasclearenough: thefacts as set out by Athenion - no meetingsof the assemblyor of the schools,even

the templeof the Two Goddesses closedandIacchussilent- havenothingto do with the absenceof an eponymous Archon,exceptthat a technicalterm appropriateto the one can be usedmetaphorically and rhetoricallyfor the other. Yet what is once firmly implantedin scholarlytradition can neverbe

whollydislodged: we needonlycompare the'two Archsnships of Argeius'.

112

E. BADIAN

Confusion between the constitutional

term on the list and the rhetorical term

in the speechcontinues,and they arejoined andconnectedin wondrousways in the scholarlyjournals. V

It is no lessclear that no magistrates for 88/7 (not merelyno eponymous Archon) were in office when Athenionarrived.No p•perly constituted magistrates arereportedashavingbeendisgracefully turnedout of officeby Athenion's creatures - a charge that Posidonius,scrapingtogether what

supporthe couldfor his caricatureof Athenionasan arch-demagogue and rascal,wouldnot havemissedfor worlds.Most probably,asour time-tablehas

shown,he arrivedbeforethe regularelections (howeverthey were'meantto be conducted);or it is possiblethat the electionshadbeenpostponed- but, from our information,more probablyto permit him time to reachAthens than as a result of Roman orders.Why, then, the anarchiaon our list? The reasonmust be - as wasat oncesuggested asa possibili.tyby Dow - that the post-Sullangovernmentand its Roman patronswould not want to immortal-

isethenameof oneof Athenion's men:28thelistmusthavebeenengraved afterthecapture of thecity.. It mightbeasked: whatabouttheothers? 29Whyshould onearchon be removedand the others left unaltered?The questionis justified, and the

answerilluminating. But first,a simpletechnical point. The Archonwho gavehis nameto the year wasin a totally different classfromtheothers.A generation later,only antiquarians andproudmembers of aristocratic familieswouldknow or carewho had beenbasileus in a given

year.ButtheArchonstoodthere,forallto see,andhisnamelived(literally) for aslongasthe city stood.He wastrulyimmortal.Oneneedonlycompare the numberof eponymous Archonsknownto us,two thousandor moreyears later; with the total numberof incumbents of the othereightarchonships we can name,to appreciate the difference.And let usnot forgetthat Athenswas now the centre of the Greek culturalworld. The Archon'simmortalityextendedthroughoutit. Next - and this is the point reallyworth making- the ninenameson

thislist (eightarchonsandthe Heraldof theAreopagus) nowmorethanever demand scrutiny.They are certainly friendsof Athenion, about the middle of

88, yet mostof themdemonstrably (andin factno doubtall of them)belong

to goodfamilies, distinguished by priesthoods andhighoffices. 30Thebasileus Oinophilusis found as an associateof Medeiushimself a little earlier.The polemarchPhiIotasis the nephewof a Delian gymnasiarch in Medeius'first

Archonship. Of the thesmothetes, one (Moschion)is the sonof a priestof Sarapis, another (Patron) the son of a Commissionerfor Delos, a third

(Athenodorus) the son of a Heraldof the Areopagus of a fewyearsearlier; yet another(Poses)a memberof a distinguished familyof poets,whohimself had beengymnasiarch on Delos.The Heraldof the Areopagus, of course,was at the least an ex-archon.31

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

1 13

Thesemenareno democraticmob,nor maywe suppose themall aristocraticdemagogues. They showushow it happenedthat, a few monthsearlier, 'the Athenians'(and that meansmenjust like these- the politicalclassin Athens) had sent Athenion to Mithridateson an official mission.For that matter, Dies, to whosehouseAthenion'wastaken on his triumphantreturn, must be of their class.He is known from a list headedby none other than

l•ledeius(ID 2607). It is absurdto claim,ashasbeendonefor that reason, that Dies' housewas being usedwithout his permission.And we must, of course,rid our.mindsof anyscrapof beliefin Posidonius' storyof Athenion's murkyorigins:it belongsto a classot topoiknownfrom Aristophanes through Demosthenesto Cicero and well beyond, and we havelearnt to discountit in

cases likethatofCleonandperhaps evenDemades. 32 More than this we cannot tell. Were these men who had resisted Medeius'

usurpation,from the start or at leastat the end?Had they drivenhim out of office, or had they merely, once his hand wasnaturallyremoved,actedto adopt a wiselytemporising policyasbetweenRomeandMithridates?Certainly, it can only havebeenby turninghimselfinto a tyrant that Atheniondrove them into Rome'sarms-at a time when that samepoliticalwisdommight more than ever havedictated caution.For in the meantime,althoughhe had held Mithridatesup to admirationfrom the start,Athenionby no meansfully committed himself againstRome: no more so, it seems,than to ignorethe

Senate's instruction on whichthe 'anarchy' wasbased. 33Thatmightbeforgivable.Let us recall,for further backgroundon Athenion at this time, that the DionysiacArtists,whohad consistently profiredfrom Romansupport(cf. especiallyRDGE 15 (1 12/1) ), were amongthe first to acclaimhim. We neednot carry distrustof Posidoniusso far asto deny that Athenion wanled tyranny: after all, Medeiushad, before him. But he had embarkedon a course he could not have reversed had he wanted to. One of the first effects

was the revolt of Delos,no doubt (as generallythought) led by its Italian element,which could brook no temporisingafter the 'AsianVespers'.Athens could not do without the island.We haveseenhow importantit was in the lives of upper-class Athenian families,quite apart from economicfactors; therewill not havebeenmany Athenianswho disagreed with the decisionto sendout Apelliconof Teosto recaptureit - probablyearlyin October,if we

mayarguefromApellicon's coinage. 34Thereisnorecordof civilwar- of Atheniansfightingin the invasion,other than on Apellicon's,i.e. on the losing

side. 35 Asfor thelocalpopulation, presumably Athenian settlers, theygave' refugeto many of the defeatedin their farmhouses,which the Romancommander Orbius' men then burnt to the ground.Whateverhis originalintention, the die wasnow cast,and Athenionhad no choice.Scarcityof food and resources, and failureitself, increasedopposition,repression and ferocity: the usualviciousspiralwassetup. It is at this time that we mustput theworstof the scenesso vividly describedby Posidonius,and the victimswill havebeen preciselymen who had supportedAthenion. Let us now return to some of thosemen, to the archonsof 88/7. We

haveglancedat theirpast.Theirfutureis equally, revealing. Though(asusual) the evidence is not good,it is clearthatit leastsomeof themsurvived - not

114

E. BADIAN

merely their families(for Sulla fully pardonedthe sonsof his enemies,un-

likewhathewasto doin Romelater)? butthementhemselves. WhenSulla puttodeath allwhohadheldofficeunder thetyranny,37 thiswaspresumably limited to Aristion's.In any case,and for whateverreason(wisdomor compulsion),they endedup on the right side.Oinophilus,thebasileus, maybe a mint magistrateabout 80, with a relative;and he is quite likely to be the

moverof a decree aboutthesame time? Moreimportant still,PhiIotas, the polemarch,advances to be Heraldof the Areopagus, wherehe ishonouredby his archons. 39 The thesmothetePasionbecomescommissionerfor Delos -

whereRousselsuggested c. 89/8 againstall parallels,simplybecause he could not accepthis survival.We need no longerhesitateto follow wherethe

evidence leads. 40 It wasonlytheArchonwhohadto become anunperson. Presumably (and it neednot surprise us), Athenionhadhandpickeda close

associate forimmortality, andhadretained hisloyaltyto theend. 41 Let us note, incidentally,that otherssurvived,lesseminentin politics. It hasoften beenconjecturedthat Peripatetics and Epicureans, evenbeyond the two tyrantsrepresenting them,mayhavebeenat oddswith the Athenian 'Establishment' (thoughwe shouldnot thereforeregardthem as 'democrats' opposing 'oligarchs'). The PeripateticApelliconis a well-knownexampleof his school.An eminent family in Pontic Amisus,which called a son Theo-

phrastusandat sometime (we do not knowwhen,nor evenhisdateof birth) seemsto have sent him on a studytrip to Athens,wherehe confirmedhis Peripateticallegiance,was s.urelyin touch with Apellicon.The youngman, whom we know as Tyrannion, certainly knew about Apellicon'simportant

private library. 42 Epicurus'schoolstandsout evenmoreclearly.The contentiousZenoof Sidon(acriculussenexCicerocallshim), thoughtto havebroughtaboutthe death of a Stoic who libelled Epicurus,had to eo into exile for it. It was

Suggested longagothat thisincidentis bestput'underAristaoh's tyranny, whenfora shorttimetheGarden enjoyed approval andpower. 43Theheadof the Garden at this time was Phaedrus- and he evidently stayed in Athens,

since Cicero firstmethimtheremuchlater. 44Ofcourse, hepreached abstentionfrompubliclife,45 whichthe Masterhaddemanded andwhichfew disciples werethenprepared to accept. Perhaps thissaved himwhenAristion fell;or perhaps it wasonly thatexperience whichledhim backto the truth of the Master'sneglectedwords.Thereis no doubt, though,that Zeno remained in goodstandingwith hisfellows,evenin exile. We may add that thesefactsset the background for a very odd feature of the 'anarchy'of early88: the closingof the philosophical schools. Perhaps the dangerhad beenapparentevena few yearsearlier.An anecdotein Cicero,

considered in thiscontext, seems toacquire a startling relevance. 46 ¾1

Whether Athenion and Aristion are identical will continue to be indecisively debated,unlessAthenion turnsup on a document.'There are excellentargumen.ts on both sides,and new discussionis pointless.I must only state that I

ROME, ATHENS

AND MITHRIDATES

115

inclineto the 'separatist'position,with all its awkwardimplications,chiefly becausePosidonius,bitterly hostileto Epicurusashe was,would hardlyhave representedhis Athenion as a Peripateticin mere error. But in historical perspectiveit hardly matterswhether Athenion fled to join Archelausand came back with him or whether that was a different tyrant. Athens went throughher tragiccatharsis.

More importantwould be the questionof what the 'Optimates'who flocked to Rome'sshelterdid when they soonfound civil war there aswell. Alas, we haveno readyanswer.Apart from Philo the Academicand the two youngmen with Sulla'sforcesat the captureof Athens,I havenot found a singlenamementioned.Onewouldexpectthat learnedhistorianof the period, L. Sisenna, to have noted eminent Athenians; and Atticus must have met

them,sincehe soondecidedto join themin their'liberated' city.No one, however, has transmitted any information. Much more than the Roman aristocracy,whosetemporisingand final acceptance of the victoriousrebelas their championcan be traced,their Athenianpeersare a puzzleto us,except

in so far as political survivalprovideslimited evidence.There may be one slenderclue: aswe haveseen,Sulla - not a forgivingman - wasmuchmore merciful in Athens, where'he had beenviciouslytaunted, than later in Rome, and decidedto pardonthe whole of the youngergenerationand exact very limited vengeance evenfrom thosewho had foughtagainsthim. Sullahad a streak of solid political realism,apparentin his tate'rwork. If the Athenian system that he chose to instal was to function, there had to be men to run it

and (in particular)to pay the highpriceof office - not aneasytaskafter the devastationof Attica and destructionof the Piraeus.He could not destroythe politicalclassor its economicbase.The remarkablemoderationin punishment suggests that strict 'justice', in accordancewith the standardlater applied in Rome, would not have left that essentialminimum. As far as i.t goes,it thus

suggests that few of the 'Optimates'were actuallyon his sidewhen he took the city. It is worth recallingthat few of their Romancounterparts were,

early in 86.47 OnewouldhardlyexpecttheirAthenianfriendsto have outguessedthem. VII

The form of the constitutionimposedby Sullahasbe'enadmirablytracedfor

us,in sofar astheevidence allowsit, by D.J.Geagan. 48 Unfortunately little survives from the generationimmedia•tely succeeding Sulla,andchanges may havebeenmadealongthe way. We'timplydo not knowtheanswers evento basicquestions,suchaswhetherthe secretarycyclewas restored(and when),

or whetherarchons weredrawnby lot or elected(andif so,by whom). 49 There is one stray fact recorded:Appian claimsthat Sulla restoredthe

constitution givento Athensby the Romans. so Now, Appianshows good knowledgeof factsconcerningSulla,whichseemto reston goodauthorityultimately,we may suspect,Sulla'sown. We must take the comment- not, of course,necessarilyas a truthful accountof the facts, but as a true reflection of Sulla'schosenimage.Much debatehas taken placeon this point:

116

E. BADIAN

Fergusonusedit to bolsterhis theory of an 'oligarchicrevolution'supported

by Romein 103/2. 51 He rightlyobserved - andhisarguments standagainst all who have opted for other dates - that no other occasionfor such an

earliergrantof a constitution canbe found:not 146,certainlynot 196.52 Unfortunatelyfor Fergusonand all who would acceptthe existenceof that first constitution,one of thesetwo datesis demonstrably what Appianhasin mind: he explicitlyconnectsthe 'restoration'of that constitutionwith Sulla's punishmentof 'all who had ... done anythingcontrary't• what had beenlaid

downfor them [i.e. the Athenians]previously after Greecewascapturedby the Romans[i.e. 196 or 146]'. In viewof this,andespecially with thefading away of Ferguson's theoryof the oligarchicrevolution,we oughtsimplyto facethe fact that Sullawaslying. It wasnot the only time. The massive destructionhe wroughtin Athens, progressivelyrevealed to us by archaeologistsand nowadays taken for granted,seemsto havebeen underemphasized, and the flagrantmisstatement

aboutthecampaign of Brettius Suraiswellknown. 53 Sullalikedto depict himselfas a conscientious magistrateand goodconservative, oncehe decided to gain the approvalof the Romanaristocracy.In fact, whateverthe constitution he imposedand whatevertraditionalfeaturesit will haveretained,it was clearlythe first Romanconstitution imposedon Athens:Geaganwasrightto regardit asa landmark.If we but knew, it wasprobablyjust aspragmaticas

thatlaterimposed onRome. 54 VIII

Let us concludeby showing,in an excitingexample,how the removalof an outdatedhistoricalmodelmay at oncemakesenseof importantevidencethat hadhithertobeenmoreof an embarrassment thana help. Sulla'sconstitutionmusthavetaken the placeof the one introducedby

Athenion.This (like so manytyrants'constitutions) canonly.havebeenan ostensiblydemocraticone: we rememberAthenion'spromisesand slogans,at the time when he still had broad support.Nor will that 'democracy'readily have undergoneformal changeduringthe period that followed,sinceit was the only sloganleft. As it happens,we haverecentlyrecovereda fragmentof a fascinating document,difficult to interpretin detail, which was publishedby Geaganin

Hesperiaxl, 1971, 101 ff. At a time early in the firstcentury(it appears), it seemsto showa democracy,usingsortition(perhapsmixedwith election)for office, superseding a constitutionunder which the Areopagus was charged with large (clearly includinglegislative)powers.Naturally, the changetakes placein due form, with the Demosratifyinga resolutionby the Areopagus. Geaganwas embarrassedhow to fit the documentin. He could not readily

find a historicalcontext,and in theendhe uneasilytriedto interpretit asan oligarchicrestorationafter Sulla'sconquest,'despitethe appearance of the word demokratia'(p. 107), by acceptance of a highlyspeculative reconstruc-

tion of the secretary cycle;thisisnot helpedby thefact thatthecrucialfragmentcanbe restored to referto anyoneof threetribes. 55

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

1 17

Why not the obviousdate of Athenion's'democracy'?That duringthe 'anarchy' imposedby Rome, the Areopaguswas officially in 'chargeof the state(and evenmore so after Medeius'disappearance) will not be questioned by anyone: there is no good alternativeto suggest.But Geaganassociates the mover of the decree,Demeasof Azenia,with the pro-Romanparty: 'it is unlikely that his name would occur during the revolution inspired by Mithridates.'

Now,Demeas wasperhaps at onetimeassociated withMedeius. 56 But so was Dies, so was Oinophilusof Aphidna,,to mention no others.By following Ferguson,evendown to the 'oligarchicmovementof 103/2' (p. 103 with

n. 26),57 Geagan hasdeprived hisadmirable workof itsproper culmination. Having seen the broad basisof initial support on which Athenion rose to power, as shown both in Posidonius'narrative and in the documents,we need

no longerhesitate to put thisfragment in itsobvious place. 58AfterMedeius' departure,after the missionof Athenion and the 'anarchy',the restorationof democracywas not as 'Mithridatic' - or indeed as controversial-a move as we havebeen accustomedto believe.59 Harvard University

E. Badian

APPENDIX .I The Coins

Mattingly suggested that the coinage of Apellicon cannot easily be put in 88/7, where Lewis put it: he moves it to 89/8, the last year of Medeius, and has to assume that Apellicon's political sympathies were 'successfully concealed': I think it unlikely that the man who had had to depart because he had been convicted of abstracting documents from the state archives would return, and regain eminence and office, before the move that put his fellowPeripatetic Athenion in power. Posidonius' wording certainly suggeststhat the men who, after Medeius' loss of power, sent 'Athenion to Mithridates

were the very bneswhom Apetiiconsuccessfully courtedandwho permitted him to return, He cannot easily have returned before late 89. However, Mattingly's new idea raisesan even more serious diffi,culty. In 91/0 (on this view), Xenocles and Harmoxenus put the head of ,Roma on their coins -

likely.enough, in viewof theappealto Romefora settlement. 60 In thenext year, on the coins of Quintus and Cleas, that same Roma appears crowned by Nike. This clearly refers to the Social War, then raging in Italy: in the summer of 90 there was no major war anywhere else. 'At its outset', says Mattingly, ßsuch confident support from Athens must have been indeed welcome.' But the trouble is that a crowning by Nike is not an obvious way to express

loyalty:its obvious meaning is to celebrate victory. 61 AsMattingly himself says,victory was far to seek, early in 90. The issuemight even risk being taken for sarcasm. It was probably only in the late autumn of that year that the series of disasters was relieved by the successesof L. Caesar and Cn. Pompeius

118

E. BADIAN

Strabo, which allowed the Senate and magistrates to resume ceremonial

dress. 62 A Nikecrowning Romacanonnoaccount precede those victories. HenceQuintus-Cleas must go in 89/8, the Romaissueof Xenocles-Harmoxenus in the precedingyear (90/89), and Apellicon-Gorgias in the next (88/7). After this is recognised,where we then put the year without coinage can only be a guess.There are no firm criteria. But the year of Medeius' second archonship(91/0), i.e. the beginningof his tyranny, seemsat least a reasonable guess. For one thing, we may narrow the time down by loo!•.. ing at the issueof

Aristion-Philon with the Mithridaticsymbol•ofPegasus drinking,whichon Mattingly's date (97/6) seemsmore appropfi/ate than on Lewis's. Early in 97

Mithridates wastryingto defend hisclaimto Cappadocia beforetheSenate. 63 By the spring of 96, that matter had baen decided: Ariobarzanes had been recognisedas king and Mithridates had accepted the decision. Conspicuous loyalty to a humiliated king is perhaps not to be expected in the public coinage of Athens; certainly not for an entire year. About that very time, Sulla, on his way to the East to instal Ariobarzanes, must have passedthrough

Athens.64 That Apellicon politically survived his defeat on Delos, on the other hand, need not surprise us. The defeat by a Roman force must not be seen as the utter disgraceit appears in Posidonius' hostile account. At most, the fact that no coins are known for the fifth and sixth months of his year may con-

ceivably bea signof temporary eclipse. 65 The size of the issuesis also important. It plainly mirrors the political vicissitudes. The second issue of Xenocles and 14amoxenus (92/1 Mattingly)

is 'the secondlargestsingleissueof the New Style series'(NSSCA 359:12 months, 42 obverse dies, 121 known tetradrachms). A politically exciting year with much use of money can be conjectured from this alone; and it is the preface to Medeius' takeover. There may well have been little need of more money in the year following. With political activity now greatly restricted, the next two issuesare much smaller: the third of Xenocles and Harmo-

xenusis only one third the size of their previousissue(ibid. 361:7 months, 14 obverse dies, 40 known tetradrachms). With Apellicon-Gorgias there is a sudden jump to 'one of the last sizable issuesput out by the Athenian mint' (ibid. 367, cf. 653:9 months, as far as known (5, 6, 8 not on record), 12 obverse dies, 85 known tetradrachms). The year of Athenion's arrival with

gifts from Mithridates, of the restoration of 'democracy' and the costly

expeditionto Delos,is almostunmistakable. 66 The next year(87/6), with Mithridates and his representativeAristion appearingon the coinagetogether with the royal star and crescents,reflects the pathetic mockery of hopes and promises: only 3 months of coinage known (1, 2, 6), 3 obversedies, 6 actual tetradrachms. With the city under siege, few new coins would be produced or used.67

Finally,a wordneedsto be saidaboutthe puzzling'Demos'coins. 68 Thompson has shown beyond present refutation that they cannot be fitted into the official Athenian seriesand also that, becauseof their message,they must be taken to claim official standing: i.e. that they were issued by what claimed to be the Athenian Demos in exile. She is less convincing, however, when, from the fact that one of the coins was found at Samsun(Amisus), she argues that they were a Mithridatic coinage. (The.specimen acquired on the Istanbul market may,•aswe all know, havecome from almost anywhere.) The

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

119

fact is that three specimenswere found in a savingshoard at Carystus

('CarystusI' in NSSCA) - the only hoardthat hasproducedany specimens of that very small issue. It seemsclear (and has indeed been said) that they were

struckby Athenian exilesnot far fromhome- probably onEuboea itself. 69 Thompson notes that the Quintus-Cleascoinagewith Roma and Nike and the coinage of Mithridates-Aristion are missing from the hoard, while that of Apellicon-Gorgiaswas representedby very good specimens.Now, MithridatesAristion is so small that it may be ignored: moreover, few of the coins will have got out of Athens at all. But it is at least an obviouspossibility - though one that Thompson, who (paradoxically) pul all the rest of the coinsa gener-

ationearlier, TMwasdebarredfrom arguing- that the 'Demos'coinsarea conterblast to Quintus-Cleas. As we have seen, there is good reason to believe that in the third year of Medeius' tyranny support for him had eroded. That year (89/8) seems a time when extreme opponents may have withdrawn

(perhaps to Euboea) andcontested thelegitimacy of hisregime. TM However, even the Quintus-Cleas issue is so small that this interpretation cannot be advanced as more than an attractive possibility. [Additional

Note: It was only after this discussion was written that I saw

Chr. Boehringer, Zur Chronologie mittelhellenistischer Mi•nzserien 222-160t v. Chr. (1972). Boehring4r,.in order to avoid the difficulties over Athenian years met by Mattingly's assumption of a year without coinage, suggests moving the small issue of Mnaseas-Nestorup by a few years, to fill up a year. He does not discussthe historical background or try.•o fix a precise year. But

his argument from control combinations (p. 25) seems persuasive,and I would now accept Mnaseas-Nestor for 91/0 as a plausible alternative to a year without coinage. However, I must repeat that there is nothing to worry the historian in the assumptionof a year without coinage.]

APPENDIX

II

The Archon List 88/7 B.C. ß

(IG ii2 1714;seeDow,Hesperia iii, 1934,444fl.) THERE

IS NO EPONYMOUS BASILEUS

Oinophilussonof Amphias9f Aphidrka POLEMARCH

PhiIotassonof Sophoclesof Suniurn THESMOTHETES Moschion son of Menander of Philaidae

Attinas sonof Heracleidesof Phlya Patron son of Polemon of Perithoidae

ARCHON

120

E. BADIAN

Athenodorus son of Athenodoms Poses son of Ariston of Phalerum

of Aixonae

Pasionsonof Hermaiscus of Anaphlystus HERALD OF THE AREOPAGUS Eirenaeus son of Eirenaeus of Scambonidae NOTES

1. In addition to the usual and generally understood abbreviations

(includingjournalsslightly adaptedfrom L 'Annie philologique)the following will be used for convenience:

NSSCA - M. Thompson, The new style silver coinage of Athens, ANS Numismatic studies x, 1961

Dow -- S. Dow, 'The first eneeteric Delian Pytha¾s',HSCPh li, 1940, 111-24

Ferguson - W.S. Ferguson, Hellenistic A thens, 1911 Lewis = D.M. Lewis, 'The chronology of the Athenian new style coinage', NC s.7, ii, 1962, 275-300

Mattingly - H.B. Mattingly, 'Some third magistrates in the Athenian new style silver coinage', JHS xci, 1971,85-93 Other works by these authors will be cited in full form.

All dates, unless otherwise specified, are B.C. For convenience, I use 'Archon' for the eponymous office, 'archon' for any of the nine. 2. The well-known SC on the Dionysiac artists (Sherk, RDGE 15) provided proof that the Roman governor of Macedonia constantly intervened in Athenian affairs. That decree mentions a 'renewal of friendship' - a meaningless polite formula - in 112/1: perhaps the 'treaty with Athens' (sic) was again renewed nine or so years later, with a request that a timocratic constitution be imposed! Then the clinching argument from correlation: 'Perhaps it was the same Senate which constituted Cilicia a province' (Klio iv, 1904, 13). It is an interesting glimpse into a chapter of the history of historical scholarship.

3. Thoughtherewere doubtsevenat that time, expressed by erudite French scholars familiar with the epigraphic material. See, e.g., P. Roussel,

Ddlos Colonie ath•nienne, 1916, 120, n.l. 4.

The Athenian aristocracy 399-31

B.C., Martin Lectures xiii, 1969,

58f.

5. Geagan bases importanl historical interpretations of documents on it (e.g. Hesperia xl, 1971, 103: see below, p. XX). Even the 'two Archonships of Argeius' still appear in unlikely scholarly places, e.g. (without question) D.J. Geagan, The Athenian constitution after Sulla, Hesperia. Suppl. xii, 1967, 5; J. Deininger, Der pol. Widerstand gegen Rom in Griechenland 21 7-86 v. Chr., 197 1,247. 6. See (conveniently) B.D. Meritt, The Athenian )'ear, 1961, 238. 7. Cf. J. Touloumakos, Der EinJluss Roms auf die StaatsJ•)rm d. griech. Stadtstaaten des Festlandes u. d. Inseh• im cr,'ten u. zweiten Jhdt. v.

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

121

Chr., Diss. GOttingen, 1967, 86 t'. See also the useful lists in P.J. Rhodes, The Athenian Boule, 1972, Tables C, D, G. Professor Stephen V. Tracy informs

me that the omission of the auditin ii2 1028,anotherof Ferguson's arguments, can be shown to be due simply to lack of space: he has argued this in a forthcoming article. 8. At present the document must still be cited according to Dow. But Professor Tracy is working on a new text and commentary, which will soon be ready for publication. I am grateful to him for allowing me to see his provisional text and to use the information that there are now no major lacunae in the ,text. In particular, the long lacuna suggestedby Dow at line 75 does not exist, or amounts at most to two lines.

9. Unfortunately, the lists here begin to get out of order and the exact dates cannot always be known. Medeius' charges are all entered under his generalship (99/8). But the Delian Commissionership is in fact known (by a correlation with Roman consuls) to have covered part of 97, and it is in any case iraplausible that Delian offices could be held together with the chief city strategia. The Delian offices (and perhaps the Delian games) must come in the year(s) after the strategia, thus overlapping with Sarapion's year of display (which, for all we can prove, may also in fact be more than one year). It is not certain that Sarapion is identical with the Archon of 116/5, though it is quite l•robable and is usually accepted. 10. Roussel (Ddlos 99, 119 f.) would not accept Sundwall's view, but produced no counter-example, and there is still none. He himself admits the extraordinary prestige of the post and accepts three instances in the first decade of the century where it is held after an archonship: in view of the paucity of our data, this can be taken as decisive; and it has important consequences. (Cf. n. 40 below.) 11. Athenion (ap. Ath. v 213c f.) blames the cessation of public actiyity on'the Senate. In its extreme form, it was no doubt recent, and due to the tensions caused i.a. by the Mithridatic War (and, of course, by the Senate's failure to act). But the tyranny of Medeius surely in fact coincides with the period of waiting for the Senate's decision: it is hard to imagine that complaints to Rome would not start when he seized power. Even his moneyers (and we must exclude Apellicon-Gorgias) show a narrow base of support. 12. The exile Medeius who pleaded with Sulla on behalf of Athens (Plut. Sulla 14, 9) was probably his son, Archon (it seems) some time in the sixties (PA 10099): he is associated in his plea with Calliphon, clearly the Archon of 58/7 (thus rightly PA 8231);cf. NSSCA 571. But I would agree with those who put the mint magistracy about the same time (see immediately below). 13. Lewis (cit. n. 1). Thompson's learned reply (ibid. 300 ff.) is vigorously argued, but (especially for the middle period) not wholly convinc-

ing. (Whether she is right in her date for the beginning of the coinage - i.e., whether there were in l'act a number of years without coins, with the Athenians issuing them only when they were needed - is beyond my competence to discuss.) As between the two views, the prosopography is marginally in favour of Lewis (though there is not very much in this, as Thompson points out, owing to Athenian habits ol' nomenclature); the hoard evidence, as far as a non-expert can judge, more clearly points the same way: and on the historical interpretation of the Mithridates coins Thompson's case is very weak. For some further points, see Appendix I.

122

E. BADIAN

14. A/C s. 7, ix, 1969, 327 ff. (review or' The Agrinion hoardJ; Historia xx, 1971, 40 ff.; and op. cit. (n. 1). The slight changesin the order which he proposesdo not concernus here. It is really astonishingthat this long and important debateis totally unknownto somescholarsspecialising in

this field. Thus Geagan,MacKendrick(opp. citt.) and O. Reinmuth(BCH xc, 1966, 93 ff.) use the Thompsonchronologyas a matter of uncontested fact and seem unaware of any difference of opinion. Whatever one's personal judgment, it is essential that the difference of opinion be conspicuously pointed out, since views advancedon one interpretation may be nonsenseon the other.

15. Most recently Mattingly, op. cit. (n. 1), suggested88/7. But see Additional Note to Apl>endix I.

16. Since discussionof this question is essentialfor the seriousreader

of thispaperand severalof its resultsare assumedin the text, I haveappended a specialdiscussionof it. 17. The invasion is correctly dated in Greenidge-Clay-Gray 149, but is

unfortunately listed under 89 in MRR ii 35 f., perhapsfollowing the very arbitrary treatment in Th. Reinach'sauthoritative work Mithridate Eupator, 1890, 116. No doubt the error in many recent works goes back to these sources.

18. It is the last event recorded by the epitomator before his

praeterea... continet (Thracian raids). Per. lxxvii begins88 in Rome with the account of the 'perniciouslaws' of P. Sulpicius.(Greenidge-Clay-Gray168 is misleading.)

19. For the chronology see E. BadJan,Foreign Clientelae 230 f. (and cf. Historia xviii, 1969, 481 L); it is essentialfor any proper interpretation of the development of Sulpicius' tribunate. Inability to follow the arguments there advanced(e.g. CQ n.s. xxi, 1971,446 f.) sometimesvitiates any further discussionof Sulpicius.Thomas N. Mitchell (CP lxx, 1975, 187 ff.)has now presented a serious reconsiderationof the events SurroundingSulpicius, which will need detailed examination. But his attempt to return to the 88 dating for the elections is not at all required by his principal thesisand seems unconvincing.

20. As reported by Appian, Mith., up to the end of ch. 1•1.The winter is indicated by the collection of new forces by the Romans in Asia and Mithridates' organization of Bithynia: Mith. 19, 74 - 20, 76. Livy, per. lxxvii (88: see n. 18 above) relates the occupation of Bithynia and Cappadocia, rather misleadingly,in a past participle, as somethingalready past (as we saw,

it is.duly recordedin lxxvi), at the end of its Romanaccount.It includeswith this (also in a past participle) the defeat of M' Aquillius which was part of that campaign, but which the epitomator had not recorded in lxxvi: we must take it that this also had in fact been related earlier by Livy. The participial constructionsare probably taken from Livy himself, where such formal scenesettingat a change-overin theatresof action is common. Next, the invasionof Phrygia is told as a new event with a finite verb. In Livy's text too this was probably the end of a book, as the next book dramatically opens with the invasion of the Roman province of Asia and the direct challenge. The epitomator's statement 'Phrygiare, prouinciam populi Romani' is, incidentally, the only support for the view that Phrygia was a Roman province before the Mithridatic War, and it has given rise to the very common belief that Phygia was annexed about thirty years earlier. (See, most recently, T.

ROME.',ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

123

Drew-Bear, Hhtoria xxi, 1972, 79 ff., who, in an excellent reinterpretation of

the crucial document RDGE 13, takes this 'historical' background for granted and merely tries to fit the document into it.) For the epitomator's trustworthiness on such matters, of. per. lxxiii' 'Nola colonia' (in 90) which, since we here have the evidence, no one has yet believed. The comrollnix opinio on Phrygia would require much better support to be tenable. 21. Much harm has been done by acceptance of Appian's supposed

date of 'about •Karbv Kai •35ola•ovra rpd• 6Xvlam•aq' for the beginning of the war (Mith. 17, 64, before the invasion of Bithynia). Reinach (op. cit. 214) rightly pointed out that this will work at all (i.e. refer to 88) only if Appian took the Olympiad to begin in January instead of in summer. This did not deter him from accepting the figure and basing his chronology on it, in preference to Livy's. (It is, as far as I know, the only support for actually putting the invasion of Bithynia and Cappadocia in 88. Vague statements on the beginning of the 'Mithridatic War' are irrelevant.) Nor has it prevented many other scholars from following him in this, i.e. choosing a vague and demonstrably inaccurate date in preference to a precisely indicated year. What he failed to mention is that Appian's text (see apparatus in Viereck-

Roos-Gabbaad lot.)in

fact reads •arbv

•al •35ola•no•ra OXvla•rt&Saq:

the (rpei½}appears to be a guessinserted by old editors and retained by their successors,for no very good reason. If anything at all is to be inserted (i.e., if we believe Appian got the date right in the first place), it is presumably (r56o),On such foundationsare scholarly theories raiged, and good sources corrected

from

bad.

22. Of this we cannot be sure. Ch. _9, with its account of the actions of 'Bruttius' (i.e. Brettius Sura), must be compared with Plut. Sulla I 1, which contains the incident of L. Lucullus' ordering him to go back to Macedonia and leave the war to Sulla. Sulla certainly left Italy in 87, not in 88 (Plut. Sulla 10, .fin. ). and it is perhaps unlikely that Lucullus would have removed a successfulRoman force from Greece at a time when Mithridates was attracting adherents, if Sulla had not been close behind.

23. The phrasedefining the time of the election,}5?6 r& rrpd7/ac•rct •uerd•pet, cannot be interpreted with any confidence' neither the meaning of the noun (in the context) nor that of the verb is clear. 24. 'Upper Cappadocia' is specified, as Pontus itself was included in 'Cappadocia'. Mithridates is frequently referred to as 'the Cappadocian' and his party as the Kappadokizontes. For 'documentary' evidence, cf. the epigram in Ath. v 215b. 25. Moreover, the description in Appian, 31ith. 22, 85 f. makes it perfectly clear th'at, when it came to the actual massacre, the sanctuaries provided little protection for Italians. It may be suggestedthat the rhetorical language Posidonius here chooses is affected by his own knowledge of the death o1' many Italians who had taken refuge in the sanctuaries: he is, in fact, here painting the scene he imagines as leadi•g up to the massacrethat he and his readers

well

knew.

26. Memnon, b•trHtst 434 F 22, is the only source that inverts this order, and he is clearly wrong, in this as in some other respects. This is already noted by Re,hath (op. C'lt. 131, n. 5). 27. See J. Deininger, op. ctt. (n. 5 above) 252, with n. 25. 28. The suggestion that the lack of an Archon, at this particular time, was due to unwillingness on the part of any rich Athenians to assume that

124

E. BADIAN

liturgy has at times been made, but had better be buried in charitable silence. A glance at the Pythaid list of only a few years before, not to mention the exciting events of the year itself, should suffice. We cannot guessthe identity of the Archon. (See n. 41 below.) 29. Thus, reasonably, Dow, l.c.; Mattingly, 87. Mattingly does not set

up a detailed chronology,but thinks that Athenion only returned to Athens in the autumn. Presumably'he has started from the erroneouschronology of Mithridates'

movements discussed above. If (as in Reinach and MRR)

the

invasion of Bithynia is put in 88, then (of course) there is practically no room for all the events that legitimately belong to that year, and at the best they will be crowded

towards

the end. It will also be clear that I cannot

follow

Mattingly in the arguments he bases on his identification of the technical term anarchia with Athenion's 'anarchy'.

30. I give some details about these men here. Routine ephebe or Pythaid service is not worth listing: see the standard works, especially PA. Oinophilus son of'Amphias of Aphidna (Basileus}: honoured by Boule with Medeius, Hesperia xxxiii, 1964, 193 f.; probably on a prytany list of Ptolemais (109/877), ibid, xxxvii, 1968, 274 f. May well be identical with the proposer of a decree mentioned ibid. 277 (dated by Meritt c. 80), though Meritt suggestsanother man (also possible).For his possiblesurvivalto this time, see Lewis, 291 (Amphias and Oinophilus moneyers) - but Amphias as his father is hard to accept, and the homonymous man on the prytany list

IG ii2 1755,datedby Dow(Hesperia Suppl.i 170)aboutmid-firstcentury, shows that the stemma may be complicated.

Philotas son of Sophocles of Sunium (Polemarch): See ad PA 12836 (date adjusted from Dow).

Moschion son of Menander of Philaidae : See PA 9887.

Patronson of Polemonof Perithoidae:seeRoussel,Ddlos 106; 426. Athenodorus son of Athenodorus of Aixonae: See Dow, 121,owith the new reading by Tracy reported Hesperia xxxix, 1970, 312. (The Herald of 98/7 is son of Athenogenes. Kirchner, PA 266, had quite unaccountably postulated identity of the two, presumablymisled by the belief that Argeius' two Archonshipsproved that one could be archon twice !) Poses son of Ariston of Phalerum: See Lewis, 292 f.

For A ttinas son of Heracleides of Phlya and Pasion son of Hermaiscus of Anaphlystus no special earlier distinction is known. On Pasion, see further below.

31. The year of his archonship does not at present appear to be known. 32. Though in Demades' case,less often studied, it can still apparently be used as a basis for serious prosopographical argument (J.K. Davies, A th. Propertied Families ( 1971 ), 100). 33. See Ath. v 214 b - the text is bad, but the meaning survives. It was, of course, only the 'anarchy' that he is said to have attacked. The

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

125

evidence, contradicting Posidonius' general thesis, is explicit and must be accepted. (Cf. n. 41 .) 34. See discussion in Appendix I: the break in the coinage in the

fifth and sixth months would fit in well with a period of eclipse after the failure of his campaign, and also with a probable date for Archelaus' sweep, which soon recaptured the island from Orbius.

35. That the victorious Orbius was a Roman commander in charge of a special contingent (probably a prefect with a few ships), and not a Delian merchant who turned himself into a successfulgeneral and admiral overnight,

shouldnot need to be demonstrated(see,e:g., Roussel,Ddlos323 f.), were not the opposite so tenaciously held, and defended with bad arguments (e.g. Mt•nzer, RE s.v. 3). He was swept off the seas by Archelaus later. (Note the learned P. Orbius, Cicero's fete aequalis and L. Flaccus' successorin Asia, no doubt of the same family.) He deserves inclusion in a supplement to MRR. 36. App. Mith. 38, 150 - see below. 37. 38. set out

Ibid. 39, 151. See n. 29 above: his case is not certain, and the evidence has been

there.

39.

P. Graindor, RA s. 5, vi, 1917, 2 ff. Graindor had no doubt about

the identification of the manandof hisfather.J. Kirchner(IG ii/iii2 3540) assignedthe inscription beybnd doubt to the secondhalf of the first century A.D. (there is only the lettering to go on) and hence had to postulate two homonymous men of later generations. Professor Dow (one of the few men

who could properly be askedto judge betweenthesiS' greatepigraphists) tells me that Kirchner erred through concentratihgon serifs.He thinks the first century A.D. excluded, i.a. by the shape of the •,

and finds the second

quarter of the first century B.C. quite acceptable. 40. We appear to know of no other case where that office precedes the

archonship (i.e. is not held by a member of the Areopagus): see n. 10 above with text. This assuresa date after 88 (i.e. in fact after 86.) As a boy Pythaist in 128/7, he was certainly not too old. It is interesting to observe how each item contradicting the standard model for this period tends to be individually denied, to avoid changing the model. 41. Professor Habicht has suggestedto me that the name removed

may be that of Mithridateshimself.That bold suggestion can, of course,be amply supporte.dby parallels of. rulers as chief magistratesin the Hellenistic world and is technically unimpe'achable.It seemsto me, however, historically unacceptable in view of Athenion's acknowledged failure to break wholly with Rome even some time after his election, when he could still claim to be supporting Rome (see n. 33 above). Fiery pre-electioh speechescan easily be forgotten by politicians once they are in office: it requires nO formal parallels

to demonstratethat. But decisiveanq provocativeactionsuchasthe Archon-ship of Mithridates himself would 'be irreversible. It is most improbable, moreover, that the other archons of the year (whose background we have examined in detail) would have consented to serve under such an eponymus. And for the time being, at least, Athenion clearly needed their cooperation and obtained

it.

Mithridates might, however, be considei-edas the original Archon of the

followingyear (87/86). By now the tyrannywaswhollycommitted,anc](we recall)all the magistrates who servedin that yearwerepun.ished astraitorsby Sulla. The whole executive would have to be reconstituted after his capture

126

E. BADIAN

of Athens and none of the original names would be engraved(or, at least, would survive). It is true that Mithridates appears as a mint magistrate in the same year and may therefore have been technically ineligible. But whatever the legal position of mint magistrates(on this see L. Robert, RN xv, 1973, 43 ff.), this need not be taken as a decisive counter-argument in a year of tyranny and extreme emergency. If we want to fit Mithridates in, this year seems- guessfor guess- the only possibleone on historical grounds.

42. Sources in RE, s.v.'Tyrann•on'2, citingPlanerfor thesuggestion that he must have visited Athens. His date of birth is not kl•own, but in view

of his great emin4nce at the time of the capture of Amisushe can hardly have been as little as thirty at the time, i.e. he was born in the last decade of the second century. It agrees with this that Dionysius Thrax, under whom he

studied at Rhodes, is describedas a pupil of Aristarchus(which suggestsan early date for him). A study visit to Athens must therefore precede 80 and is very likely to precede 88: it would be tempting (but unprovable) to put it precisely under Athenion's tyranny, when the Peripatetics were triumphant. As is generally agreed, the ascription of Tyrannion's akme to the time of Pompey the Great refers merely to his activity at Rome and shedsno light on

his age. Strabo xiii 1, 54, p. 609, attests his Peripatetic convictions.F. Wehrli, Die Schule d. Arist. ix, 108, suggeststha.t DionysiusThrax may himself be connectedwith a Peripatetictradition of grammarstudy. 43.

On all this see Zeller, Die Philos. d. Griechen in ihrer gesch.

Entwicklung, 5th ed. (by E. Wellmann), iii 1, 386, and cf. K. v. Fritz, RE s.v. 'Zenon' •. But Zeno's scholarchy, maintained by Zeller, is unattested and fits baaty into the series. It is mere modern construction from the incident here recorded. The list in Diogenes Laertius x 25 is not a list of scholarchs. 44. K. Philippson, RE, s.v. 'Phaidros' 8, strangely takes Cic. fam. xiii 1, 2 ('qui nobis, cure pueri essemus .... ualde ut philosophus,posteatamen ut uir bonus et suauis et officiosus probabatur') to mean that Cicero heard Phaedrus in Rome as puer! (Accepted by A.E. Raubitschek, Hesperia xviii, 1949, 98, in an otherwise excellent study of Phaedrus.) In fact it obviously meansthe opposite: Cicero is contrastinghis early esteem basedon his reading

of tile philosophicalworks with hislater personalacquaintance with the man in Athens.

45. Cf. Att. xvi 7, 4. 46. One wonders whether L. Gellius, who, on a visit to Athens in 93, on his way to take up a proconsular appointment in the East, asked the philosophical schoolsto submit their disputes to him for arbitration, and who

is laughed at by Cicero for the offer (leg. i 53), did not have more sensethan Cicero (too young to know Athenian politics at the time) later gives him credit for. The attested troubles of 89/8 must make us see the incident in a somewhat different light. 47. See E. Badian, Studies in Greek and Roman History, 1964, 215 ff. 48. Op. cit. (n. 5 above). 49.

It would not matter as much as we are often told, since there were

few who could support the burden of public office. During the period before 91, when prosperity was obviously much greater and when (as Ferguson finally admitted) the archons were probably chosen by lot, many eminent men gained the Archonship, and more gained entry to the Areopagus. This makes •t difficult to judge, without explicit evidence, whether election or sortition was used throughout this period.

ROME, ATHENS AND MITHRIDATES

127

50. App. Mith. 39, 152. 51. Klio iv, 1904, 16. 52. Nor, one should add, the period 91-88, in view of Posidonius. In the light of what was going on in Rome at the time, it would be special

pleading of the worst sort to suggest that late in 88, when Athens was no longer willing to listen, the requested constitutional settlement at last came forth. It would also completely contradict Appian's context (for which, see text). 53. For the latter item, see E. BadJan, Lucius Sulla, the deadly reformer (1970) 17 f. For the minimising tradition on the severity of the destruction, cf. Plut. Luc. 19, 5 (Lucullus at Amisus). Lucullus was the man to whom Sulla dedicated his Memoirs, and he may have edited them (ibid. 1,4). 54. BadJan,op. cit. 20 ff. 55. I or IX or XI. The date he thu.ssettled on, 84/3, seemsone of the least likely ones for the historian. As regards the cycle, it appears to me almost inconceivable that any regularity can be postulated under Medeius' tyranny. After it, a new start might be made with tribe I. But this is hardly worth speculating about at present. No positive evidence has emerged until mid-century. Geagan recognizes (p. 108, n. 46) that Notopoulos's fanciful views on the cycle after Sulla 'must be accepted only with great caution'.

But he concludesthat th• new decreeand his historicalcommentson it 'tend to support Notopoulos' reconstruction'. It is difficult to see how a decree

containingthe words•v br/po•pa•'iat (to mention nothing else)can be taken as introducing an oligarchic reaction. In fact, the.'very fragmentary initial portion of the decree, in which the phrase occurs and which is restored by

Geaganasan •retbf• clause,shouldprobablybe taken asa purposeclause'the phrase about living under a democracy (and in freedom? - see Geaga.n's excellent alternative suggestionfor line 7) is much more obviously in place providing a needed statement of purpose. 56. SeeID' 2255 - not really illuminating, alas.

57. Geaganat leastspeaksof a 'movement'rather than-a 'revolution' (cf. hisp. 106, n. 39). 58. The prescript,asplausiblyrestoredby Geagan,bore the nameof the Archon. It is a pity that it did not survive. 59. This studywas first presentedat the Sixth Inter'national Congress of ClassicalStudiesin Madrid in September,1974, and the originalversionis

scheduled to hppear, in duecourse,. in theActaof thatCongress. I wishto thank ProfessorM. Fernfindez-Galiano for invitingme to delivera paperand

foragreeing toearlier publication ofanamended version inthisjournal. My thanksare alsodue to severalcolleagues who havekindly readthis

studyandcommented onit. In additionto thosethanked ab'ove forparticular: suggestions, I shouldlike to record-mygratitudeto Professors Christian Habicht and H.B. Mattingly for generalcomments.Needlessto say, none of the scholars to whom I am thusindebtednecessarily shares my viewson any particularpoint. Finally, it is a pleasantduty to recordmy thanksto the American Council of Learned Societiesfor a Fellowship,of which this is a partial outcome.

128

E. BADIAN

60. Mattingly himself, of course, seemsto put the appeal later (in autumn 88?): cf. p. 87. His chronology and interpretation seem to me to cause difficulties in various places. Thus these moneyers, by their Roma symbol, 'proclaim their pro-Roman sympathies'(86). But we do not know that in spring or summer 91 anyone in Athens proclaimed anti-Roman sympathies, or why pro-Roman sympathiesshould then need proclaiming. See also next

note with

61.

text.

Lewis (277), dating the coins 89/8, oddly refers to 'loyalty to

Romein a 1oom!ng eastern war',strangely missing the obvious reference to the very present war in Italy.

62. Livy, per. lxxiv; Oros. v 18, 17. For the chronologyseeGabba ad App. BC i 42, 188 (August - which seemsslightlytoo early); 47,205 (before November).

63. See op. cit. (n. 47) 168 ff. 64. But it is a little far-fetched to interpret the gorgoneion on the coins of the preceding year (Nicetes-Dionysius) as a Pontic symbol. (Thus NSSCA 422 f., acceptedLewis 276, n. 2.) It is surely, in an Athenian context, a reference to Athena and her service by an aristocratic and priestly family.

For Chrysis, daughter of Nicetes, aspriestess of AthenaPolias, seeIG ii/iii2 3184 (and cf. 1136:106/5 B.C.). This, of course, is Nicetes of Pergase. 65. Hardly that of the expedition to Delos (thus Lewis 278). It seems too late in the year for this; and why should not Apellicon's coinage continue in his name during his absence? 66.

See Lewis, 1.c.

66. See Lewis, 1.c. This alone, properly noted, almost suffices to destroy Thompson's dating of this issue to 121/0 and her conjecture of a generousgift by Mithridates as the occasionfor it. Nothing would explain the massivesize of the issue, on that hypothesis. 68.

NSSCA

69.

She arguesthat the three specimensmay well have been brought to

444 ff.

Euboeaby Mithridate.•'army. But, of course,it is far more likely that the one spec)menat Amisuswasbroughtover from Euboeain that sameway. [Two more specimens have been found in Asia Minor, relatively strengthening Thompson'scase:seeF. Kleiner, ANSMusN xix, 1974, 19.] 70.

Cf. Lewis 281.

71. But note that no reference to Mithridates on the coins may be claimed. The figure shown is hardly Perseus(even if Perseusas such be admitted to be a Mithridatic symbol), for, as Thompson (hesitantly suggesting that identification) admits, there are no attributes to identify him. It would be very strange to use what on this view is a challenging symbol with a revolutionary significance,and to take pains to make its point in such a way that few would understand

it.

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ANCIENT HISTORY

Editor: E. Badian, Harvard University

EditorialAdvisoryBoard: T.B. Barnes,Universityof Toronto W.R. Connor, PrincetonUniversity FrankJ. Frost,Universityof California,SantaBarbara ErichS. Gruen,Universityof California,Berkeley ChristianHabicht, Institutefor AdvancedStudy, Princeton,NJ RamsayMacMuilen,Yale University The officeof theJourna/isat RobinsonHall, HarvardUniversity,Cambridge,

MA 02138.'Uffpescripts forpublication andeditorial correspondence should be addressed to the Editor,ordersandcorrespondence on subscriptions to the

Secretary. Comments andsuggestions fromreaders will be welcomed. 'Uffpescripts intended forpublication mustbeat leastdouble-spaced (text andnotes),withthenotesnumbered consecutively andfollowingthetext.All

pagesmustbe numbered. The pedantic useof GreekandLatinshouldbe avoided,but the languages may be usedwhereneeded.Journals shouldbe abbreviated asin L'Ann•ephilologique; modifications customary in English will beaccepted. Otheraccepted andrecognizable abbreviations for standard worksmay be usedwithoutexplanation. No indicationof theauthor'sidentityshouldappearonthetypescript: the nameandaddress shouldbeona separate page.References totheauthor'sown workshouldbe in thesamestyleasreferences to theworkof others.Personal

acknowledgments should notbe included: theymaybeaddedafterthearticle hasbeenaccepted for publication. lypescripts notcomplying withtheseinstructions WIllnormally bereturned to theauthor.Authors whowantrejected articles returned should enclose postage. Contributors willreceive 20copies of their articlesfree andmay ordermoreagainstpayment.

The Editoris notresponsible for the safetyof materialsubmitted. Volume1(1976)waspublished in threeissues of 64 pages; subsequent volumes comprise twoissues of 96 pages.Subscription ratesareasfollows:U.S.A. and Canada,$12.50directfrom the publisher,$14.50throughbooksellers and

agents; all othercountries, $15.00(U.S.) directfromthepublisher, $17.50 (U.S.) throughbooksellers andagents.Full members of theAssociation of AncientHistoriansmay orderone subscription THROUGH THE SECRETARY OF THE ASSOCIATION at $10.00 per volume. Some individual numbers of volumes I and 2 are available from the Journal Office.