New York State College of Agriculture At Cornell University Ithaca, N. Y. Library Cornell University Library HC 33.R6 A large estate in Egypt in tlie third cen 3 1924 013 858 661 Cornell University Library The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924013858661 A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT IN THE THIRD CENTURY B. C A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY BY MICHAEL ROSTOVTZEFF PROFESSOR OF HISTORY MADISON 1922 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES NUMBER 23 SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HISTORY No. 6 MARCH, 1922 PRICE $2.00 Published bi-montbly by the University of Wisccnsiu, at Madison, Wisconsin, Entered as second class matter August 31, 1919, at the postofiSce at Madison, Wisconsin, under the Act of August 24, 19 1 2. ' Accepted for mailing at special rates of postage provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917. Authorized September 17, 1918. No. 1. The colonial citizen of New York City, by Robert Francis Seybolt. 40p. Fifty cents. No. 2. The restoration of the southern railroads, by Carl Russell Fish. 28p. Fifty cents. No. 3. The misinterpretation of Locke as a formalist in educational philosophy, by Vivian Trow Thayer. 24p. Fifty cents. No. 4. Scientific determination of the content of the elementary school course in reading, by Willis Lemon Uhl. 152p. One dollar and fifty cents. No. 5. Cycles of prosperity and depression in the United States, Great Brit- ain, and Germany, by Alvin Harvey Hansen. 112p. One dollar. No. 6. A large estate in Egypt in the third century B.C. — A study in economic history, by Michael Rostovtzefi. 209p. Two dollars. UNIVER-SITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HISTORY NUMBER 6 A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT IN THE THIRD CENTURY B. C. A STUDY IN ECONOMIC HISTORY BY MICHAEL ROSTOVTZEFF PROFESSOR OF HISTORY MADISON 1922 TO BERNARD P. GRENFELL CONTENTS Page Preface vii List of Abbreviations ix Description of Plates xi Chapter I. Introductory 1 II. Philadelphia 8 III. Zenon and Apollonius. The Two Earliest Periods in the Activity of Zenon 16 IV. Zenon and Apollonius. Zenon in Alexan- dria 28 V. Aojpeai 42 VI. The Estate of Apollonius at Philadelphia. Preparation of the Estate for Cultivation 56 VII. The Estate of Apollonius at Philadelphia. Agriculture 71 VIII. The Estate of Apollonius at Philadelphia. Vineyards, Orchards and Market Gardens 93 IX. The Estate of Apollonius at Philadelphia. Stockbreeding, Industry, Commerce and Transportation 107 X. Conclusions 126 Appendix I. The Officials of the Arsinoite Nome men- tioned in the Correspondence of Zenon. 147 II. Zenon under Euergetes 158 III. Apollonius the Dioeketes as a Contractor of Public Works? 162 IV. The History of the Nojuoi TeXwctKoi of Ptolemy Philadelphus 165 V. The Breeding of Horses by Ptolemy Philadelphus 167 Addenda et Corrigenda 169 Indices 185 PREFACE I have but few points to emphasize in this short preface. The most important is to express my conviction that the prog- ress of our studies on papyrology, progress which is of the greatest importance for our knowledge of the ancient and thus of the modern world in general, largely depends on a systematic excavation of as many cities and villages of the Fayum as possible. What has been done up to this time is merely fairly systematic digging for papyri, hunting after documents, mostly regardless of other remains uncovered during the excavations. However the more we deal with the written documents the more we feel the necessity of having before us the scenery in which the Greco-Egyptian life was led. For a better understanding of the documents, sometimes for understanding them at all, we need to have before us a full picture of one or more of the villages of the Fayum, the ruins duly explored, mapped and photographed, the remains of the furniture, the implements and utensils of its inhabitants. Moreover I am sure that such an exploration if systematic and scientific will certainly yield many new papyri or at least will make it certain that no more papyri can be found in this place. I have often discussed this idea with Mr. B. P. Grenfell and he fully agreed with me. Some days ago I received a letter from Mr. C. C. Edgar, another great author- ity in this domain. He writes as follows: "The idea of syste- matically clearing one of the Fayum sites has long attracted me. But it would have to be done by a European or American society; the Egyptian Government, I feel sure, will never under- take it. And if it is to be done it must be begun at once, for the destruction of all these sites has become more and more rapid. In fact I am afraid it is too late to do anything of the sort at Philadelphia, though papyri are still being found there (there was another big find last year) ; but it might still be possible to work Batn Harit (Theadelphia)." Is it Utopian to think that there are men and women in the United States who may grasp the importance of such excava- tions and may help one of the existing organizations to carry out such an excavation? VUl UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES The second point, not less important to me personally, is to express my warmest thanks to those who helped me in bringing together and explaining the important material which forms the subject of this book. I am greatly indebted to Mr. C. C. Edgar for sending me his valuable articles and for supplying me with the photographs of the Cairo papyri which are repro- duced on pi. II and III. Dr. H. J. Bell was kind enough to lend me his copies of the Zenon papyri of the British Museum. Pro- fessor P. Jouguet has sent me the photograph of the top of P. Lille 1, reproduced here on pi. I. But my greatest thanks are due to my colleague and friend, Professor E. H. Byrne, who helped me in the most unselfish way to give to my English respectable form. Many thanks are also due to Professor W. L. Westermann who was good enough to read the proofs of this book. The Index was compiled by my wife, Mrs. S. Rostovt- zeff. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ARCH. — Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung, herausgegeben von U. Wilcken, I-VI, 1901-1920. B. G. U. — Aegyplische Urkunden aus den Museen zu Berlin, herausgegeben von der Generalverwaltung. Griechische Urkunden, I-IV, 1895-1912. DIKAIOMATA. — Dikaiomala, AuszUge aus Alexandrinischen Gesetzen und Verordnungen in einem Papyrus des Philologischen Seminars der Universitdt Hdtle mil einem Anhang weiterer Papyri derselben Sammlung, herausgegeben von der Graeca Halensis, Berlin, 1913. P. ELEPH. — Elephanline-Papyri, bearbeitet von Rubensohn, mit Beitragen von Schubart und Spiegelberg, Berlin, 1907. (Special volume of B. G. U.) P. FREIB. — Miltheilungen aus der Freiburger Papyrussammlung, I-II. Silz- ungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften 1914, 2 Abhand- lung (Ptolemiiische Kleruchenurkunde, herausgegeben von M. Gelzer). P. GEN. — Les papyrus de Geneve, transcrits et publics par J. Nicole, I, Geneve, 1896-1906. P. GIESS. — Griechische Papyri im Museum des Oberhessischcn Geschichlsver- eins zu Giessen, im Verein mit O. Eger herausgegeben und erklart von E. Komemann und P. M. Meyer, I, Leipzig, 1910-1912. P. GRAD. — Griechische Papyri der Sammlung Gradenwilz, herausgegeben von G. Plaumann. Silzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissen- schaften, 1914, 15 Abhandlung. P. GRENFELL I — An Alexandrian Erotic Fragment and other Greek Papyri chiefly Ptolemaic edited by B. P. Grenfell, Oxford, 1896. P. GRENFELL II — New Classical Fragments and other Greek and Latin Papyri edited by B. P. Grenfell and A. Hunt, Oxford, 1897. P. HAL. — See Dikaiomala. P. HAMB. — Griechische Papyruskunden der Hamburger Sladtbibliolhek , heraus- gegeben und erklart von P. M. Meyer, I, 1 and 2, Leipzig, 1911, 1913. P. HTB.— r/jc Hibeh Papyri edited by B. P. Grenfell and A. Hunt, I, London, 1906. P. LILLE — Papyrus Grecs publics sous la direction de P. Jouguet avec la collaboration de P. CoUart, J. Lesquier, M. Xoual, I, Paris, 1907; II (Papyrus de Magdola, seconde Edition par J. Lesquier), Paris, 1912. P. LOND.- — Greek Papyri in the British Museum. Catalogue with Texts, I, 1893 and II, 1898 edited by F. Kenyon; III, 1907, ed. by H. I. Bell and F. Kenyon; IV, 1910 and V, 1917 ed. by H. I. BeU. P. LOND. INV. — unpublished papyri in the British Museum (correspondence of Zenon). P. LOUVRE — Notices et Exlraits des Manuscrits grecs de la Bibliotheque Imperi- ale V. XVIII par Brunet de Presle, Paris, 1865. P. MAGD.— See P. Lille II. X UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES P. MEYER, JURISTISCHE PAPYRI— Jurislische Papyri. Erklarung von Urkunden zur Einjuhrung in die jiiristische Papyruskunde von P. M. Meyer, Berlin, 1920. P. MICH. INV. — unpublished Papyrus in the Library of the University o£ Michigan (correspondence of Zenon). P. OXYR.— r^e Oxyrynchus papyri parts I-XIV, ed. B. P. Grenfell and A. Hunt. London, 1898-1920. P. PARIS.— See P. Louvre. P. PETRIE — The Flinders Petrie Papyri, with transcriptions, commentaries and index, I, II ed. by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy, Dublin, 1891, 1893; III, ed. by the Rev. J. P. Mahaffy and J. A. Smyly, Dublin, 1905. R. L. or REV. LAWS— i?eDew«e Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus ed. by B. P. Grenfell. Oxford. 1896. P. RYL. — Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the John Rylands Library, Manches- ter. Vol. II. ed. by J. de M. Johnson, V.Martin, A. Hunt. Manchester. 1915. ' P. RYL. 8 — unpublished Papyrus in the Rylands Library at Manchester (cor- respondence of Zenon). P.S.I. — Pubblicazioni delta Societd Itaiiana per la ricerca dei Papiri Greci e Latini in Egitto. Papiri Greci e Latini. Firenze vol. IV, V, 1917; VI, 1920. P. TEBT.— rAe Tebtunis Papyri, Part I ed. by B. P. Grenfell, A. Hunt, J. A. Smyly, London, 1902; Part II ed. by B. P. Grenfell, A. Hunt, J. Goodspeed, London, 1907. P.Z. — Selected Papyri from the Archives of Zenon by C. C. Edgar, Annales du Service des Antiquites de I'Egypte XVIII, p. 159 ff., 225 ff.; XIX, p. 13 flE., 81 ff.; XX, p. 19 ff., 181 ff.; XXI, p. 89 ff. ROSTOWZEW, STUDIEN — Sludien zur Geschichte des Romischen Kolonates von M. Rostowzew, Erstes Beiheft zum Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung, Leipzig und BerUn, 1910. SCHUBART, EINFUHRUNG— W. Schubart, EinfUhrung in die Papyrus- kunde, Berlin, 1918. WILCKEN CHREST. and WILCKEN GRUNDZ.— L. Mitteis und U. Wilcken, Grtmdziige und Chrestomathie der Papyrush(nde I, 1 (Grund- ziige); I, 2 (Chrestomathie), Leipzig, 1912. DESCRIPTION OF PLATES I. P. Lille 1, recto. Ghoran. Om. 16 cent. xom. 31 cent. Year 27. Map and device of the irrigation work on the estate of Apollonius — Frontispiece. II. P.Z. 22. Philadelphia. Om. 245 mill. xom. 10 cent. Year 29. Letter from Zenon to Panakestor — p. 39. III. P.Z. 27. Philadelphia. Om. 19 cent. xom. 34 cent. Year 30. Letter from Apollonius to Zenon — p. 49. I. INTRODUCTORY Of the Greek papyri from Egypt the Ptolemaic documents form only a small portion, and among them are relatively few of the third century, i. e. of the first period of the Greek domina- tion in Egypt. Most of the Greek documents bought and excavated in Eg)^t, as is well known, belong to the Roman period, to the first three centuries A.D. Moreover the early Greek papyri of Eg)rpt are mostly fragmentary and in a bad state of preservation, having been extracted for the most part from the cartonnages of mummies found in Greek cemeteries of the Ptolemaic period.^ Most of the early Ptolemaic papyri are found in the Fayum. Such are the valuable documents collected by Petrie at Gurob and published by Mahaffy and Smyly in the three volumes of the Petrie Papyri.^ Another series was collected by Jouguet and Lefebvre in the south-west corner of the Fayum, in the cemeteries near the village of Magdola.' In the Fayum probably was found the largest papyrus of the early Ptolemaic time, the vofioi TiXcoviKol of Ptolemy Philadelphus, his "Revenue Laws," published by Grenfell.* Some interesting early Ptolemaic docu- ments were also exti|acted from the cemetery of Tebtunis in the southern part of the Fayum and will shortly be published by Grenfell and Hunt in the third volume of the Tebtunis Papyri. But there a^'e many and valuable documents of the same period which do not belong to the Fayum, e.g. the Dikaiomata of the time of Philadelphus published by the Graeca Halensis,* ' On the finds of Papyri in general, see the two best introductions to the study of the papyri, L. Mitteis and U. Wilcken, Grundziige und Chresto- maihie der Papyruskunde (Leipzig, 1912), and W. Schubart, Einfuhrung in die Papyruskunde (Berlin, 1918). 2 J. P. Mahaffy and J. G. Smyly, The Flinders Petrie Papyri, 3 vols. (Dublin, 1891-1905). ' P. Jouguet, P. CoUart, J. Lestju^er, M. Xoual, Papyrus grecs, 2 vols. (Paris, 1907-1912); the second volume contains the papyri of Magdola. * B. P. Grenfell, The Revenue Laws of Ptolemy Philadelphus (Oxford, 1896). ' Dikaiomata, Ausziige aus Alexandrinischen Gesetzen und Verord- ungen, herausg. von der Oraeca Halensis (Berlin, 1913). 2 UNIVERSITY or WISCONSIN STUDIES the papyri of Elephantine in Upper Eg5TJt published by Rubensohn,* and those of Hibeh published by Grenfell and Hunt.' The majority of these papyri are, as I have already pointed out, fragmentary, badly preserved and very diflScult to read. But among them we have some large and comparatively well preserved documents of the greatest historical importance; also several series of letters and documents, addressed to the same person, which probably belonged to a larger body of either private or official writings. Among those of the first group I should name the already mentioned Revenue Laws, the Dikaiomata, and an unpublished document of the third century found in Tebtunis, instructions given by the dioeketes (Minister of finances) of Euergetes I to an oeconomus (Secre- tary of finances) of the Fayum (the Arsinoite nome). To the second group belongs for example the correspondence of the engineers of Ptolemy Philadelphus and of Ptolemy Euergetes, who worked in the Fayum, and created by their efforts the flourishing agricultural district, — the Arsinoite nome, formerly partly desert, partly marshy land. Their names were Kleon and Theodorus. The documents of their archives were found by Petrie at Gurob. Another series of connected documents is the find of Magdola, scores of petitions addressed to the military governor of the Fayum, the strategus. They formed probably for a while a part of the archives of the governor at the capital of the Fayum, Crocodilopolis, and later on were sold to some fabricant of cartonnages who furnished the whole nome with his products. Fragments of such extensive groups are found everywhere among the documents of the early Ptolemaic period, sometimes only two or three letters, sometimes a larger group like some groups of the papyri of Gurob, Hibeh and Elephantine. The importance of the early Ptolemaic documents is enor- mous. During the third century B.C. the Ptolemies, especially the two first, Ptolemy Soter (the Saviour) and Philadelphus • O. Rubensohn, Elephantine Papyri (Berlin, 1907). ' B. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, The Hibeh Papyri (London, 1906); cf. G. Plaumann, Griechische Papyri der Sammlung Gradenwitz (Siiz.-Ber. der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschafien, 1914, Lief. IS). ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 3 (loving his sister), carried out a work of first rate importance not only for their own land, Egypt, but for the ancient world in general. In Egypt they met with multisecular traditions, with an organization of the political, social and economic life which had gradually grown out of the special condi- tions presented by this peculiar land of Egypt. This ancient native organization of Egypt, built up by the most creative dynasties of the Ancient, Middle and New Egypt, was of course shattered by the long years of foreign domination, interrupted by national revolutions and by temporary reestab- lishments of a national monarchy, changes preceded and followed by years of struggle and of anarchy. Only partial restoration occurred in the periods of comparative quiet, so that Egypt at the time of Alexander and of his Egyptian ex- pedition was no more a flourishing, well organized state as it had been before the Assyrian and Persian conquest. Its agri- culture suffered from years and years of irregular work on the banks and canals, — a question of life and death for Egypt; its commerce was almost entirely in the hands of foreigners both Greeks and Phoenicians; its industry was to a great extent monopolized by the temples and by the clergy, dominant in the political, social and economic life of the country. The first Ptolemies, if they wanted to make Egypt the centre of a mighty State which would be able to compete with such large and rich monarchies as Syria, the heir of the Persian Empire, and Macedon, the new ruler of the Greek world on the mainland, were faced with the necessity both of restoring the economic life of the country and of consolidating it by means of a good, properly organized administration. A mere restoration of the old administration was of course impossible. With the Ptolemies a new element came into the country, the Greeks. They were the conquerors and on their strength was based the might and power of the Ptolemies. They brought with them their own customs and habits, their own needs, and they claimed the right to be or to become the dominant class in Egypt. On the other hand the organization of the native element was far from perfect. Egypt at the time of Alexander's conquest was no more the centralized and highly developed bureaucratic and autocratic state of the Pharaohs of the 4 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES Eighteenth Dynasty. Feudal elements during the periods of Assyrian, Babylonian and Persian domination had won one victory after another over the idea of centralization. And Egypt of the fourth century B.C., as far as we can judge, was a land of many almost independent temple and feudal terri- tories ruled by the highest clergy and by some feudal lords for their own profit. Any restoration of order and prosperity in Egypt meant first of all the elimination of these elements. Thus the task of the Ptolemies was in no way an easy one. And the lines which they would take would be decisive for the whole future of Egypt, both as a separate and independent state and as a member of the then established balance of power in the Mediterranean. ' The history of Egypt during the last three centuries B.C. shows that the first Ptolemies did succeed in forming a strong and well organized state. They were dominant in the Hellen- istic world for about a century and they preserved their inde- pendence against the renewed attacks of Syria and Macedon in the following century. They were the last among the leading Hellenistic powers to succumb to the world domination of Rome, and the last battle fought by the Orient against the Occident was organized and prepared in Alexandria by the common efforts of Antony and Cleopatra. This shows that Egypt during the Hellenistic period had strong vital forces based on a rational exploitation of the resources of the country. It is therefore highly important to know what were the devices by which the Ptolemies restored to Egypt these vital forces which it seemed to have lost irretrievably. The early Ptolemaic documents enumerated above give a partial answer to this question. They show how systematic and logically progressive was the work of restoration and reformation of the first Ptolemies in Egypt and how lasting were the foundations laid by them in their reforms. The general lines of this work were retained not only by their succes- sors, the Ptolemies of the second and first centuries B.C., but by the Romans as well. Even in the Byzantine and Arabic period some of the remains of this thorough work of the first Ptolemies lived on. I cannot deal with this subject at length. The reader will find my ideas on this topic explained in my article on Ptolemaic ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT Egypt in the Journal of Egyptian Archaeology and in my book on the Hellenistic world and Rome now in course of publi- cation.' But I must emphasize the fact that if the main lines of the reform work of the Ptolemies may be traced with some degree of accuracy, many and highly important points remain still dark and therefore hotly debated. One of the most important and of the darkest questions is that of the part played in the economic life of Egypt by the Greeks and other foreigners, of the relation of the new-comers to the ancient population of Egypt, of the importance of both elements in the restoration of the economic strength of the new Greco- Egyptian state. This is just the point which seems to be to a certain degree elucidated by a recent find made in Egypt during the war. I mean the discovery of a new and exceptionally rich series of documents of the third century B.C. made in 1915 at Kharabet el Gerza in the Fayum, the site of the ancient village of Phila- delphia. The new find forms a unit. All the Greek papyri which belong to it were filed and docketed by a certain Zenon and formed therefore a part of his correspondence, his private archives. The discovery of these papyri was accidental. The discoverers were Egyptian peasants, fellahin digging for sebakh (the fertilizing earth of the ancient ruins used regularly by the Egyptian peasants for fertilizing their fields).' As usual the whole lot of documents (how many they origi- nally were, nobody knows) was acquired by dealers, specialists in the papyri-trade, was divided by them into many parts and ' M. Rostovtzeff, "The Foundations of Social and Economic Life in Egypt in Hellenistic Times," Journal of Egyptian Archaeology, VI, 3 (1920), 161 ff. • We have no evidence about the conditions under which the find was made as the dealers were not willing to disclose their source of supply. What is known is related by C. C. Edgar, "On the Dating of Early Ptole- maic Papyri," Annales du Service des Antiquitis de VEgypte, XVII (1917) 208; cf. the introductions to his subsequent articles in the Annales and the prefaces of Vitelli in P.S.I, (see below, note 10). There is every probabil- ity for the belief that the papyri were found in the ruins of the house which formerly belonged to Zenon, probably in the cellars. Another possibility is that they were thrown out of the house at once and were preserved for centuries in one of the heaps of refuses. 6 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES these parts were sold to different purchasers, gradually, one lot after another. A large part came through the late Gentilli to Florence, another was acquired by the Museum of Cairo which is still buying up one lot after another; two important lots were acquired by the British Museum, and one by the Library in Manchester. One papyrus of the same series came to Hamburg. Some offered for sale to different institutions were not purchased, and may still remain in the hands of the dealers or may have been sold to one or another private collector. It is indeed urgent that everybody who possesses papyri of the correspondence of Zenon should notify the editors of the larger lots and not hide the documents for years and years, as many collectors of papyri sometimes do. , War time was not very favourable for the publication of papyri, nor is the time we are living in any better. Neverthe- less the energy of Vitelli and his collaborators in Italy'" and of Edgar in Cairo" has resulted in the publication of most of the best preserved documents of the Italian and Cairo collections, and Bell and Grenfell will do the same for the documents which are now in England. Thanks to the kindness of Bell and Grenfell I have seen their copies of the English part of the Zenon archives and am acquainted with their content. The papyrus which came to Hamburg was published by P. Meyer.'* Thus we have already a body of more than three hundred and fifty documents published and partly explained. Many new ones will soon appear in the next volume of the Papyri of the British Museum and in the next articles of Edgar. They will certainly bring to light valuable new information on the "• Pubblicazioni delta Societd Italiana per la ricerca dei papiri greet e latini in Egitto. Papiri Greet e Latini, IV, V, and VI (Firenze, 1917, 1920). Quoted as P.S.I, with the number of the papyrus, without the number of the volume. •' C. C. Edgar, "Selected Papyri from the Archives of Zenon," Annates du Service des Ant. de I'Egypte, XVIII and XIX (pt. I, nos. 1-10, vol. XVIII p. 159 B.; pt. II, nos. 11-21, vol. XVIII, p. 225 ff.; pt. Ill, nos. 22-36, vol. XIX, p. 13 ff.; pt. IV, nos. 37-48, vol. XIX, p. 81 ff.). Quoted P. Z. with the number of the papyrus or pt. I, etc., and the page. The papyri from Zenon's archives now in London are quoted by the Inventory number of each. "P. M. Meyer, Griechische Papyrusurkunden der Hamburger Stadt- bibliothek, 2 parts (Leipzig, 1911 and 1913), no. 27. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 7 affairs of Zenon, some fragments will fit into already published documents and make it easier to understand them. Many questions of chronology and of details will certainly arise from the new evidence. Under such conditions it may seem unwise to deal at present with the correspondence as a whole from the historical point of view, or to try, before the series is complete, to point out its scientific value and its enormous importance for our knowledge of the early Ptolemaic Egypt. Nevertheless I have decided to take up this question at once and to publish the results of my investigations. My reasons for doing so are as follows. We possess already suffi- cient evidence for forming a conception of the correspondence as a whole, and the conception which I have formed by means of a close study of the published documents is very much different from that which was formed by the editors of the documents. I should like therefore to make my conception accessible to the editors of the new documents, subject it to their criticism and thus make their work of publishing the new evidence easier, since the reading of the new pieces of evi- dence and commenting upon them depends very much for its value on the right understanding of the series as a whole. Furthermore I am not afraid of committing mistakes. I should be very glad to correct my statements in the light of any new evidence and to modify my opinions. But for the successful progress of the work of editing and commenting on the new papyri in general it is urgent that the new documents be com- pared with the old ones and that this new evidence be assigned its place in the already known series of the same time and the same place. We shall see how close is the connection of the Zenon papyri with those of the Petrie lot on the one hand and with the Revenue Laws on the other. It will appear also that many of the Lille papyri explain and are explained in their turn by the Zenon papyri. I therefore do not regard my labor in compiling this article as a waste of time. Science progresses step by step and nobody should be afraid of committing mistakes in dealing with new and unexplained material, assuming that his study of this material is thorough, animated by a sincere desire to find the truth, and founded on a well established general conception. II. PHILADELPHIA The place where the Zenon correspondence was found is well known to the papyrologists and to the dealers in papyri. Phila- delphia (Gerza near the modern Rubbayat), like Karanis, and Soknopaiu Nesos and some other sites in the Fayum, was one of the first places to be attacked by the sebakh diggers and papyri plunderers in the eighties of the last century. Many papyri in a good state of preservation found in the ruins of Philadelphia were sold in Europe to the Museums of Berlin, London, and Geneva.^' Most of them are published in the papyri publica- tions of Berlin, London and Geneva. Nobody tried to collect them all and to give a picture of Philadelphia and its economic development. The task is not an easy one as the papyri from Philadelphia are but few in number and only a part of them mention the name of the village. New evidence about the earlier times of Philadelphia was brought by the Petrie papyri- and some Lille papyri extracted from the cartonnages of Ptolemaic mummies. Most of the Petrie and the Lille papyri probably belong to the archives of Crocodilopolis, the capital of the Arsinoite nome, and some of them mention Philadelphia among the other villages of the Fayum. The systematic excavations in the Fayum which were begun by Petrie, developed in the nineties of the last century by Grenfell, Hunt and Hogarth, and later on by the French scholars Jouguet and Lefebvre and by the administration of the Cairo Museum, never touched the site and the ruins of Phila- delphia. In 1900 Grenfell and Hunt tried to excavate the necropolis of Philadelphia but soon became discouraged by the bad state of this cemetery which had been repeatedly plundered by the fellahin and papyri dealers." The ruins of the city itself seemed to be entirely exhausted and not worth the expenditure on them of time and money. " Grenfell and Hunt, Fayum Towns and their Papyri, Introduction, p. 11; Grenfell and Hunt, Teblunis Papyri, II, 345; Archaeological Records of the Egypt Exploration Fund, 1900-1901, p. 6 ff. " Grenfell and Hunt, Arch. Rep., loc. cil. 8 ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 9 Nevertheless the activity of the commercial excavators at Philadelphia did not cease. Some papyri from Philadelphia appeared again lately on the market, thus testif)dng to a re- newed activity of the sebakh diggers in Gerza. Some of them were bought by the Library of Hamburg and published recently by P. Meyer, some by Mrs. Rylands. Among the Hamburg lot there was already one of the Zenon papyri. No doubt the Zenon find was one of the results of the activity of papyri robbers. No wonder therefore if our knowledge of the destinies of Philadelphia is scanty and fragmentary! The name of Phila- delphia shows that the village belonged to those which were founded under the second Ptolemy as the result of his work of drainage and irrigation in the marshes and sandy land on the shores of Lake Moeris. Philadelphia was one of the many creations of the Ptolemies in the Fayum. We know how exten- sive and successful this work of the Ptolemies was. In the list of the villages of the Fayum which already existed there in the early Ptolemaic epoch and which are mentioned in the Greek papyri of the Fayum, the list compiled with great care by Grenfell in P. Tebt. II, there are found 114 names of larger and smaller settlements (I take the villages only and leave aside the smaller places: tottoi, fTroUia, x(<)p(a etc.). Of these 114 villages 66 have Greek names and only 48 Egyptian. But even the villages with Egyptian names are in no way altogether pre-Ptolemaic. Most of them as well as the villages with Greek names are creations of the Ptolemies. It is shown by the fact that many, perhaps most of them, bear the same names as some larger and smaller cities in the Delta and in Middle Egjrpt. In the Fayum as in the United States of America, another great land of colonization, we meet with village after village homony- mous to celebrated cities, in this case cities of Lower and Middle EgjT)t with their partly Hellenized, partly native names: AwdWuivos ToKis Koofiri, "Ep/ioD ttoXis kcojuj;, 'HXiou iroXis Ki)ftii, Kwuv ir6Xis KUfiri, AjjtoGs xoXis KUfirj, Me^tt^is Kii/jiri, NeiXou ttoXu koj/it; on the one hand and 'Adpifiis, Bovfiaaros, Bovatpis, Mkv8ris, 'O^vpv- yxa, ^ffitvvvTos, Tavis, ^apPaldos, etc., on the other. No doubt these names recall the names of the places whence the new settlers came to the Fayum, perhaps of the nomes to which they 10 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES formerly belonged, as the recorded names are names of the capi- tals of the nomes of the Delta and of Middle Egypt. Other purely Egyptian names of the villages of the Fayum may have been borrowed in the same way from other less conspicuous places of Egjrpt. But this point requires further investigation. The only difference between the settlements with Greek and those with Egyptian names is probably this, that the former had a Greek majority among the new settlers, the latter an Eg3rptian one, i. e., that the former were mostly settlements of Greek soldiers, the latter of Eg5^tian crown-peasants, the /SoffiXucot yeupyoi. We shall retain this fact as one which is very characteristic of the history of the colonization of the Fay- um of which I shall speak more fully later on. Among the new settlements in the Fayum with Greek and native names Philadelphia occupies a rather exceptional position. It belongs to the small class of Greek settlements with names derived from the names of the rulers of Egypt, — the Ptolemies. It seems strange that in a region settled mostly by mercenary soldiers dynastic names form rather an exception. But the fact in itself is beyond any doubt. In the whole Fayum we have only fourteen KSs/iai with dynastic names out of 66 with Greek names, namely two Btpevids, two 'kpaivbri, one Eirep7«rij, one 6ead€X<^e(a, five IlToXe/ttats, one f>iX&)Tepis, one ^iXojTOTwp and one tXo5^X<^«ta. Much more usual is it to give to the villages names derived either from the names of some gods (e. g., BaKxias, 'H<^ai P. Petrie III, 105. *' P. Petrie HI, 117 (j): hriivtov is the tax on the sale of products in the market. "P. Petrie III, 117 (k). 12 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES owned by the inhabitants of the village.^^ Pasture land and cattle breeding seem to have played an important part in the economic life of the settlement.^ Along with Karanis, Bacchias and Soknopaiu Nesos and other localities situated on the verge of the desert and con- nected with Memphis by a caravan road, Philadelphia was one of the places where custom-duties on import and export were levied by the finance administration of Eg)^t. But the scanty amount of custom-duties receipts discovered at Phila- delphia in comparison with those discovered at Soknopaiu Ne- sos show that Philadelphia was not situated on the main road of traffic.^ It is possible to infer from one of the Zenon papyri that this customs station at Philadelphia was created as early as the foundation of the village itself (see P. Z. 46, year 35 of Philadelphus, cf. ibid., V, p. 21). A peculiar feature in the history of Philadelphia, as was shown recently by the Hamburg and Ryland papyri, part of which belong to the first century A. D. (most of the Roman papyri belong to a later epoch — the third and fourth centuries A. D.), is the fact that a large part of the territory of this , village after the Roman conquest came into the hands of large landowners either members of the family or favorites of Augustus and his successors. The large estates (ouo-iai) e. g. those of Germanicus, Maecenas and Seneca, included large parcels of land in the territory of Philadelphia. All this land was confiscated by Vespasian and formed a special class of the state or imperial land in general (7^ ova-taKif) exploited by a special class of crown peasants, the ytuipyol ovataKoi.^ " See, e. g., P. Hamb. 5 (89 A. D.); B. G. U. 603, 14 (168 A. D.), cf . 604; P. Lond. Ill, p. 69 and p. 44 e (173 A.D.); P. Hamb. 40-53 (213-219 A. D.). These plantations still existed in the fourth century A. D., B. G. U., 519, 1. 13; 456; 1049, cf. 1022 which testifies to the existence of oil factories in Philadelphia. " P. Hamb. 40-53 (213-219 A. D.). " See Wilcken, Grundziige, p. 191. » P. Hamb. 3 (74 A. D.); P. Ryl. II, 383 (second century A. D.); P. Gen. 42, 16 (224 A. D.): ffaaiKucol/Kai obaiaml Kai irfioiroSuml [yewpy]ol K^liij! OKaitKipilas. Cf. M. Rostowzew, Sludien zur Geschichte des Rom- ischen Kotonats (Leipzig, 1910) pp. 119 ff., 218. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 13 Along with this class of crown peasants other parts of the Philadelphian land were farmed by drjfiiaioi and fiacrikiKol ytupyoi, a fact which testifies that an important part of the territory remained in the hands of the state and was rented by the state directly. But along with this state land the same territory included many parcels, mostly vineyards and gardens, owned by private persons among whom we notice some de- scendants of the Ptolemaic military settlers and many Roman veterans, the latter mostly well to do landowners.^' Like most of the villages of the Fayum, especially those which were situated on the border of the desert, Philadelphia did not prosper for very long. A constant and progressive decay of the economic life is felt in Philadelphia as in many other villages of the Fayum as early as the second century A. D. It is explained probably by the negligence of the administration to maintain the dikes and canals in good order and by gradual impoverishment of the population overbur- dened by taxes and liturgies, a process which is characteristic of most of the cities and villages in Egypt from the second century A. D. onwards. This process has been repeatedly described and explained by myself and other scholars.^' " P. Hamb. S (89 A. D.) and 40-53 (213-219 A. D.); the last group of documents forms a splendid parallel to the documents which were investi- gated by W. Westermann in his excellent article, "An Egyptian Farmer,' University of Wisconsin Studies, Language and Literature, no. 3, p. 171 S. The papyri Rylands also brought out a large amount of material which characterizes the agricultural activity of the Roman veterans in the Fayum. One of the most interesting documents, a register of taxes on land, late first century A. D., deals with the territory of Philadelphia and the neigh- boring villages Tanis and Hephaestias, P. Ryl. II, 202, cf. 386 (second century). The land owned by the veterans belonged mostly to the class of catoecic and cleruchic land and thus was formerly owned by the soldiers of the Ptolemaic army who were deprived of their property for the sake of the Roman veterans. But there are also Greek names in the register men- tioned above (cf. P. Ryl. 188), probably those of the descendants of the catoeci and cleruchi of the Ptolemaic period. It is noteworthy that the famous letter of Apion (B. G. U. 423; Wilcken, Chrest., p. 480) was found at Philadelphia. The whole question of veterans as landowners should be investigated anew, even after the treatment of this question by Lesquier, L'armie romaine d'Egypte (Paris, 1919). The Greek, and later the Roman character of the population seems thus to be a feature of Philadelphia all through the seven centuries of its existence. ^' Rostowzew, StTtdien, p. 206 ff. 14 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES For Philadelphia this fact is well illustrated by one of the Hamburg papyri of 160 A. D. (no. 35). It is a petition to the governor of the nome from three men and their associates who were entrusted by the governor to irpoaToJdrjvat kuiois #tXo5e\^eias. These are their complaints: "Inasmuch as the arrears of this village are big and we need help bitterly, and most of the heads of the village neglect their duty of collecting taxes, especially the field-guards, we beg you to make an inquiry into the matter and to order a more careful collection of them." In the third century the situation becomes alarming. The amount of dry land increases steadily. In the fourth century the ruin is almost complete, as is shown by some Geneva papyri which mention a special class of land entirely unproductive booked by the officials under the heading of airopov or atrbpuv ovofiaruv, — entirely unproductive land.^' Very soon the place became completely depopulated and was never settled again. No papyri later than the fourth century A. D. were discovered 'at Philadelphia. At this time the village was abandoned by its inhabitants and became again a part of the sandy desert as it was before the time of the first Ptolemies and as it remained to the time of the discovery of its papyri by the sebakh diggers. Such are the scanty data which we possess on the history of Philadelphia. And we must say that in this respect Philadel- phia is not an exception. The history of most of the places in the Fayum is the same as far as we know it. And yet this poor picture does not correspond to the truth. Philadelphia had its time of feverish activity, of great plans and projects, of inter- esting attempts. The accidental discovery of the correspond- ence of Zenon illuminates this epoch with many minute details and enables us to follow the destinies of this typical place from the very beginning of its development. It is a fascinating study to follow these destinies. It is of course local history, history of a small place which never was connected with the great historical events; but how much light it throws on many historical questions of first importance; how many new data it gives for our appreciation of the Hellenistic period in general; " P. Gen. 66, 67, 69, 70; Wilcken, Chrest., 380, 381. I follow Wilcken in his explanation of the term airopa ovSixara, cf . Nachtrdge, p. VII. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 15 and how instructive it is for our conception of the ancient world in general! But before we take up this subject let me deal first with Zenon, with his career and his relations to the many persons with whom he was connected. III. ZENON AND APOLLONIUS The Two Earliest Periods in the Activity or Zenon The archives of Zenon were found at Philadelphia. But many of the letters kept by Zenon in his archives were not addressed to him in the Fayum. The dates, addresses, dockets and contents of many letters show that they were written before Zenon settled down at Philadelphia (the second half of the year 29 of Philadelphus), at a period when he resided partly in Alexandria, partly in the Syrian provinces of the Ptolemies. It is evident that he brought these letters with him to Phila- delphia and kept them in his archives for one reason or another. This fact explains the paucity of our evidence about Zenon and his affairs before his activity in Philadelphia. Zenon travelled very much during the first periods of his life. No wonder if during these travels he did not keep all the letters which he received. Most of them naturally disappeared and what remained were not always the most important. Such is the impression left on us by the remains of the correspondence of Zenon before his coming to Philadelphia. The further we go back from this date the scantier the remains. We can hardly expect that this impression would be very much modi|fied,by the publication of the other parts of Zenon's archives. Zenon might have kept his archives in order; it is even possible that the letters were found arranged according to some system. But the order in which the letters fell into the hands of the different purchasers shows that this order was not observed by the diggers, that in selling the documents the dealers mixed them up hopelessly. A mere glance at the correspondence of Zenon shows that during all the time of his active intercourse with his correspond- ents he was in close and uninterrupted relations with his chief, Apollonius the dioeketes of King Ptolemy II Philadel- phus, i.e., the manager in the name of the king of the economic life of Egj^t. Before the discovery of Zenon's papyri we knew but little of Apollonius and his career. He was first mentioned in the year 27 of Ptolemy Philadelphus, and the 16 ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 17 last mention of his name belonged to the year 34. Zenon's correspondence allows us to define more accurately both the time of his appointment to the duty of dioeketes and the time when he left this ofl5ce.'° P.S.I. 324 and 325 (of. 322 note 1) show that ApoUonius was already dioeketes in the year 25 of Philadelphus. On the other hand in the R.L. of Philadelphus which were published in the year 27 probably by ApoUonius, we have in the section on the apomoira as an appendix to the irpoypanna and Siaypan/xa of this year, two earlier documents dated in the year 23 by which two declarations preliminary to the collection of apomoira were prescribed: an inventory of the persons who had already paid a part of their yield of the vineyards and gardens to the temples, and an inventory of all the vineyards and gardens. These inventories were ordered to be delivered to those "who work under Satyrus" (rots wapa 'Sarvpov Tpayfiartvofiivois), and the first one moreover "to the accountants who work under Dionysodorus" (toTs wapa AtovvaoSiipov TtrayfiivoLs iyXoyiaTals, R.L. col. 36, 10 and 37, 11-12). From P.Z. 44 (year 34) we know that Dionysodorus was in this year the chief sub- ordinate of ApoUonius (cf. P.Z. 14, 8, year 29), the chief eglogist in Alexandria. There is no doubt therefore that Satyrus and not ApoUonius was dioeketes in the year 23. As in the year 25 ApoUonius was already dioeketes, it is clear that he was appointed to this ofiice between the two dates, probably in the year 24. When did he leave this office? He was still dioeketes in the last year of PhUadelphus (P.S.I. 383), but no longer in the first years of Euergetes. This I deduce from P. Petrie II, 42a — III, 43, 1. This document is a notification by the author of the document to all the officials of the Fayum telling them that "> Almost nothing has been written on ApoUonius. His name does not appear in the Indices of Wilcken's and Schubart's introductions to papy- rology. Even the careful book of Bouchfi-Leclercq, Histoire des Lagides (Paris 1903-1907), mentions his name only once (vol. Ill, p. 266 cf . Ill p. 381, note 2 and IV p. 342) in speaking of the Revenue Laws. The papyri where ApoUonius is mentioned have been quoted by many scholars but mostly in the notes; he seemed unworthy of mention in the text. See, e. g., Preisigke, Klio, VII, p. 241, note; P. Hib. 44, note 3; Dikaiomata, p. 260; P.S.I. 383, note 12 (Vitelli). 18 UNIVERSITY OP WISCONSIN STUDIES instead of Kleon, Theodorus had been appointed by him chief engineer of the nome. Kleon occupied in the nome a very high position and was subordinate to the dioeketes only, by whom he was appointed, if not by the King himself. Now the document in question was sent out not by Apollonius, who was still dioeketes in the last year of Philadelphus, but by Kleandrus, no doubt the dioeketes at the time when the letter was written. The letter of course is not dated. But many documents show (P. Petrie III, 43, 2 fif.) that in the second year of Euergetes Theodorus is the acting chief engineer of the Fayum.'^ Thus he was appointed not later than in the second year of Euergetes, probably in his first year. It is only natural that the new King wanted to have a new manager of his finances, a man personally devoted to him. We may find a corroboration of this hypothesis of mine in P. Petrie III, 53, — a badly preserved private letter. This letter twice mentions the King, once a man called Diotimus, who, as we know, was one of the local dioeketae under Apol- lonius and remained hypodioeketes under Euergetes for some time (see Appendix I), and once a man of the name of Klean- drus. With Diotimus the writer of the letter was on good terms, but Kleandrus is named in a connotation which seems to imply a different attitude of our man towards him although the passage is unfortunately very fragmentary. The author of the letter is in great anxiety. His main fear is to lose " P. Lond. Inv. 2089 shows that Theodorus fulfilled the duties of chief engineer of the Arsinoite as early as the year 36 of Philadelphus. In his letter to 'A.[ . . .]/iios he asked for a salary not less than the salary received by Kleon and promised in this case to do everything possible for the dioeketes and for the man to whom the letter is addressed. If there- fore he was appointed as early as the year 36 as the chief engineer' of the Arsinoite, the letter of Kleandrus was written for the purpose of reappoint- ing him, after Kleandrus had taken the office of Apollonius; or rather for the purpose of informing the officials of the nome that Theodorus had been maintained by him in his commission of the chief engineer of the nome. But it is possible also that Theodorus' commission in the year 36 was only that of a sub-engineer. In this case the letter (P. Lond. Inv. 2089) shows that as such he claimed a salary from the estate of Apollonius equivalent to what was given to Kleon, probably in a private way, as a kind of bribe. Theodorus may have received the special commission to care for the dykes which were built in the estate of Apollonius. Be that as it may, the new document changes nothing in my statement about the career of Apollonius. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 19 his KTrjiia. Was he not one of the higher officials, a sub- ordinate of Kleandrus and Diotimus who has lost his commis- sion contemporaneously with Apollonius? We may safely assume therefore that Apollonius who was appointed about the year 24 remained in the office as long as the rule and life of Philadelphus lasted, enjojdng during his time the full confidence of his King and being his chief collabo- rator for some 15 years. Under Euergetes the conditions were different. In the year 5 the post of the dioeketes is occupied no longer by Kleandrus but by Theogenes (P. Petrie II, 38 (b) — III, 53 (e); cf. P. LiUe 4, 5; P.S.I. VI, p. 70, note 1), in the year 10 the dioeketes is Eutychus (P. Petrie II, 15, 2; III, 43, 7, cf. Hib. 133), in the year 18, Chrysippus (P. Petrie III, 5 (1 and m) , cf . P. Grenf eU II, 14 (b) 2) and our information is probably far from complete. It is possible that in these few years there were more than three dioeketae. This comparison between the two reigns, that of Philadelphus and that of Euergetes, is noteworthy since it shows the great influeiice of ApoUonius with the King and their close friendship.'^ In the letter of Philon to Zenon of the year 34 (P.Z. 44) there is of course a remark which could let us suppose that temporarily at least Apollonius had lost his appointment. Philon adds to his letter "you must know that Apollonius took over all the matters in Alexandria and that Dionysodorus acts as the eglogistes,' ' but this postscript implies no more than a temporary but long absence of both the individuals mentioned from Alexandria during which time somebody else acted as dioeketes and eglogistes. Of the nature of the previous activity of Apollonius, we are ignorant. But we may safely suppose that if he was in the service of Philadelphus before he was appointed dioeketes and was not invited by Philadelphus from abroad (we know of many Athenian refugees in the service of Philadelphus occupy- ing influential positions, see Ferguson, Hellenistic Athens, 188, note 1, cf. 197 and Edgar, P.Z. VII, p. 91, note 1), he prob- " This influence is illustrated by the last section of the Dikaiomata, 1. 158 S., p. 260 ff.,— a letter of Apollonius to Zoilus about the privilege of not being subject to the salt tax, (dXonj), granted to some persons of liberal professions. The tone of the letter is noteworthy. It seems as if it is not Apollonius but the King who speaks. 20 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES ably served in the Ptolemaic army. At that time there was no sharp distinction between the military and civil career and the staff of the king bore an almost purely military character, just as in the time of the early Roman principate which was as personal and as military as was the Hellenistic kingship of the first two generations. The only difference was that the "house" or the "court," to use either the Greek or the Oriental word for it, of the Hellenistic kings was never filled to such an extent with slaves and freedmen, as was that of the early prin- cipes, heirs in this respect of the Republican magnates with their husbandry based on slavery. One word more about the circumstances in which the career of Apollonius ended. New light is thrown on this question by an interesting letter of Zenon's correspondence (P. Lond. Inv. 2087, no date). A certain Sosicrates (cf. P.S.I. 614) writes to Zenon and gives him the order to arrest the slaves who formerly belonged to the ex-dioeketes Apollonius and now belong to a certain Paideas (1.2: tSiv irpoTtpov 6vT(av 'AiroWcoviov rod [ISioi]] ytvo- likvov SioucriTov vvv 5'6vt(iiv HaiStov). There are four slaves: Pin- darus from Lycia, and Philonides, alias Beltenuris, and moreover two who formerly belonged to Alexander, who had been a hostage probably at Alexandria. This singular order, its appearance of haste, the fact that the writer cancelled tov dioi- KtiTov and wrote instead tov ytvofiivov SiotxjjroO, that Zenon is still in Philadelphia managing the estate, furthermore that many slaves of Apollonius having fled from Alexandria are supposed to be in Philadelphia, — all this taken together shows that a catastrophe happened in the household of Apollonius at Alex- andria after his dismissal. I can explain it in one way only: that Apollonius was not only dismissed but that his property was confiscated and some of his slaves came into the hands of Paideas, four of whom used this opportunity for escaping. The official and perhaps the physical life of Apollonius ended there- fore with a catastrophe, King Euergetes having deprived him of his commission and his fortune. Interesting also is the mention in the same document of some slaves who had come into the hands of Apollonius from the property of a certain Alexander residing at Alexandria as a hostage. A hostage who possessed many slaves, — one a Baby- ROSTOVTZEPF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 21 Ionian, a bath-rubber by profession, another a Median coach- man, could not be an ordinary man. He must have been a great personage, probably of royal origin. I would suggest that the man in question was Alexander, the son of Lysimachus and his Odrysian wife; after the death of Lysimachus he remained in Asia (see App. Syr. 64; Bouche-Leclercq, Histoire des Lagides, I, 149, 4). It has always been a puzzle to me how this man could remain quiet in the troubled times after the death of Lysimachus and after the seizure of power by Ptolemaeus Keraunus. We may now suppose that Ptolemaeus Keraunus seized Alexander and having concluded an arrangement with Philadelphus delivered Alexander to him. Alexander was then kept at Alexandria as a hostage in the same way as Demetrius Poliorketes had been kept in Syria. Philadelphus had an interest in having the man in his power, first to secure the throne of Asia and Macedon for Keraunus, thus eliminating a rival to Euergetes, and secondly as a good weapon against Keraunus. Alexander probably died very soon at Alexandria when his possessions came into the hands of Philadelphus and his courtiers. For an understanding of the correspondence of Zenon, his position, the affairs which he managed and his personal relations with the dioeketes it is necessary to have a clear notion of what the office of the dioeketes was. As the word "dioeketes" shows, this official was the manager of the economic affairs of the king and therefore of the kingdom. We must not forget that the rule of the Hellenistic Kings was a purely personal one. They were not appointed by anybody nor even elected by the population. As generals of Alexander they were his satraps and they retained their satrapies because of their military strength and their personal influence on the troops, the deifica- tion coming much later. This personal regime brought with it as a logical consequence the idea that the kingdom as such was the personal property of the Kings, acquired by force of arms. This idea was almost exactly identical with the idea prevailing in Egypt as regards the relations between State and King with this as the only diSerence: the Egyptian royalty was based on religious ideas and had a religious legitimation which of course the Hellenistic Kings were forced to borrow from their pre- decessors. Egypt was thus the private property of the Ptole- 22 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES mies, their estate, so to say, and the dioeketes was the manager of this estate. In the close collaboration of the King and his minister it is not easy to make out what belongs to the King and what to his minister, as everything which touched the economic manage- ment of the State passed through the hands of the dioeketes. For understanding therefore the atmosphere in which both ApoUonius and Zenon lived and worked we must first realize the purely personal character of the ofl&ce held by ApoUonius, and on the other hand the leading ideas of the King on the economic management of his lands. It is not an easy task to grasp these leading ideas, our information being scanty and fragmentary. Moreover we have more or less good information only for the second half of the reign of Philadelphus and almost none for the first half, not to speak of the times of Soter and Alexander. It is a striking phenomenon that the Greek papyri of the early Ptolemaic time rarely belong to the first 50 or 60 years of the Greek domination. Is this phenomenon accidental? Should we not deduce from this very fact that the Greek bureau- cracy whose activity created the Greek archives of the Ptolemies all over the country was itself a creation of the second Ptolemy? The facts agree perfectly with this assumption. There is every reason to assume that Soter, and Philadelphus in his early years, were rather generals of the late Alexander than kings of Eg3rpt. Both were entirely absorbed in the affairs of Alexan- der's world-state and took active part in the conduct of world affairs. Of course Soter was the first to claim for himself an independent position in his satrapy, which was Egypt, but nevertheless he never dissociated himself entirely from the affairs of the other generals. The policy of Philadelphus, based on securing for Egypt the vital conditions of the existence of Egypt as a self-sufficient, strong state," was not free from imperialistic tendencies. The Syrian war and the first failures of Ptolemy •• See my remarks in the Journal of Eg. Arch., VI, 3 (1920), p. 172. In these remarks I have emphasized too strongly the non-imperialistic ideas of the first Ptolemies. The first Ptolemies certainly had no intention of creating a world State; nevertheless Philadelphus, and after him Euergetes, pursued an imperialistic policy aiming at hegemony on the sea, which of course was a vital question for Egypt. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 23 Philadelphus in carrying out his imperialistic program obliged Philadelphus to realize for the first time that his safety depended completely on Egypt and that his first task was to consolidate the foundation of his power, i.e., to organize Egypt as firmly and as consistently as possible. Hence his energetic activity in Eg3^t after the first Syrian war and the minute elaboration of the peculiar economic and administrative system character- istic of his time. I do not mean that the main leading ideas were all his, that Alexander and Soter had not previously traced the main outlines, but I am convinced that Philadelphus was the man who shaped these ideas into the Greco-Egyptian forms which permeated the whole administration as we know it from the papyri of his later years. I shall speak of this organi- zation of his later on, in my last chapter, but I wish here to emphasize the point that the fifteen years of Apollonius' term of office were a time of strenuous work, of energetic activity on partly new lines, the main result being the Hellenization of the Egyptian administrative and economic life as far as the outward forms were concerned. The substance of course could not, and was not intended to be changed or even hellenized. Such then, was the spirit of the time and the atmosphere in which Apollonius, and with him Zenon, worked for fifteen years. Let me now return to the correspondence of Zenon. For the period of the life of Zenon before the year 25 of Philadelphus we have almost no evidence. The earhest docu- ment of the archives of Zenon dates from the year 12 of Phila- delphus and is preserved in two copies (P.S.I. 321 and P.Z. 1). This document, a loan contract which does not even mention Zenon, presents no evidence on his affairs and may have come into the hands of Zenon subsequently (cf. P.S.I. VI, p. IX). More interesting is the second earliest document, — a letter addressed to Zenon by a certain Horus, which mentions the year 13 and is dated by Vitelli in the year 14 of Philadelphus (P.S.I. 551); the letter of course may be of a much later date. Horus describes his interviews and his talks with the King concerning a vineyard of his own. One of these interviews, took place on a silverpooped light ship (tiuloXiov) of the King, — by the way a good illustration of the well known description of the wealth of Philadelphus given by Appian (Prooem. 10) „ 24 UNIVERSITY or WISCONSIN STUDIES where Appian mentions 800 gold-prowed and gold-pooped cabin- ships used by Philadelphus for his travels. For the biography of Zenon the letter has some interest as it shows that Zenon was already a member of the court circle; whether or not he was connected with ApoUonius at this time will probably be shown by papyri not yet published. The second period in the life of Zenon begins with the year 25 and lasts through the years 26 and 27. The evidence is fuller but still scanty. For the first time we get information about the personal position of Zenon. He was a Carian Greek, citizen of Kaunus, the son of Agreophon (P.Z. 3, comp. P. Lond. Inv. 2092). Through his wife he had connections in the city of Kalynda. His brother Epharmostus was also in Egypt (P.S.I. 331). Zenon had children: one son, Kleon, is known to us from some letters. Zenon was therefore a resident of one of the foreign provinces of the Ptolemies and of course tried to place as many of his relatives and compatriots as he could in the service of the Ptolemies. It would be of great interest to know what was the mother-country of ApoUonius himself.'* One of the letters of the year 26 (P.Z. 2) shows Zenon already in relations with ApoUonius, and through a letter of the year 27 we ascertain his semi-official title: he is tS>v irepi 'AxoWdoviov or 6 Tap' 'AiroXKwvlov (P.Z. 3), one of the agents of ApoUonius. Such titles are very common in the Greek papyri of this time and denote merely a subordinate position in general: one may be 6 Trap' olKovofiov or von&pxov or even one of the agents of a less conspicuous official as well as one of the agents of ApoUonius. The title moreover does not imply a position in the service of the State. The contents of the letters of this period first show us Zenon on his way to Syria and then in Syria and Palestine. Two documents of the year 25 (P.S.I. 324, 325), which are not addressed to Zenon, deal with grain trade and are written by ApoUonius. The letters contain orders from ApoUonius to two different persons to make certain merchants who export grain from Syria pay to the bank either the full price of the grain or '* On Zenon and his family relations see Edgar, pt. I, p. 160. Edgar quotes some unpublished papyri testifying to Zenon's relations with Kalynda. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 25 a part of the sum as a pledge. We may suppose that the two letters of ApoUonius were intended to be handed over in Syria to the addressees, were given to Zenon to carry with him to Syria and were never delivered : they have no dockets testifying recep- tion. We may suppose therefore that in the year 25 Zenon was on his way to Syria. In the year 26 he is already somewhere in Syria or in Palestine. The only published letter of this year (P.Z. 2), is the already mentioned first letter of ApoUonius to him informing him of the sending of two persons to Syria and ordering him to prepare a ship for them and to pay them their salaries. More evidence exists from the following year. One letter, (P.S.I. 327), deals with some goods which were sent from Syria to Palestine for ApoUonius, and contains the valuation thereof, probably for the custom-house. Some documents of this year carry us to Palestine. One, (P.Z. 3), is a contract of sale. Zenon bought at Birtha in the Ammanitis from a soldier of the cavalry corps of Tubias a girl-slave of 7 years of the name Sphragis. We shall meet the same Tubias later. He was probably an influential native sheikh entrusted by Ptolemy with the command of an Egyptian cavalry regiment. Another letter of the same year, (P.Z. 4), speaks again of private aSairs of Zenon and his staff. A certain Straton, one of Zenon's stafiF (6 wapa Zrjvwvos), tries to get back some money lent by him or by Zenon to a native of an Ammanitis village by name Jeddus (probably an influential sheikh again). The attempt this time was unsuccessful; Straton, in spite of his military escort and a letter from Zenon, was ejected from the village with violence. Finally in the last letter of this period, (P.S.I. 406), which bears no date but refers to the same locality and must be dated in the same year, we meet some individuals of less importance but turbulent and wicked indeed. They are coachmen {(TvvcopLcrT.aL) and grooms {iinvoKbixoi) who either belong to the army or to a special corps of men buying up horses in the prairie land of the Ammanitis for the supply of the Ptolemaic army. The document is fragmentary and written in bad Greek, but we see how undisciplined and greedy this class of people were and how badly they behaved in the conquered land. They drink, buy and probably steal girls, violate them and disappear with 26 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES them and with the beasts in their care. Zenon seems to be their chief and to him is addressed this complaint of the foreman of these robbers, Herakleides.'* It is not an easy task to form a judgment about the duties which Zenon performed in Syria and Palestine. Does he belong to the regular administration of the province? Is he acting as an envoy of ApoUonius the dioeketes or as the private agent of the same dioeketes? We may assume both, but we have no proofs for either of these assumptions.'* The Syrian »5 On this letter see Wilcken, Arch., VI, 393, 449; cf. P.S.I. 616. Wilcken assumes that the two robbers were agents of Zenon hunting for slaves. But this buying and stealing of slaves is just what Herakleides, the chief of the robbers, objects to. Herakleides did not lend them a carriage with two horses: he does not speak of such a loan in his letter but exclusively of Kr/iini, horses, which were neglected by the two scoundrels, and of a donkey and a wild ass which were sold by them. This implies that the two men were keepers of kt^pt; and not professional slave buyers. We shall see later on that importation of slaves into Egypt from Syria was not allowed by the government. " Almost nothing is known about the organization of the Ptolemaic administration in Syria, Phoenicia and Palestine. See D. Cohen, De magistratihus Aegyptiis external Lagidarum regni provincias adminis- trantibus (Hagae 1912), p. 98 ff. Therefore all the more important are the letters of the correspondence of Zenon. They seem to show that no regular financial administration of the country was sent to the district of Ammani- tis from Egypt. The Ammanitis seemed to have been ruled by native chiefs. The same is shown for Palestine by the well known story of the ruler of Palestine, Josephus. Josephus probably received Palestine from King Euergetes I or from Philopator as a kind of Swpei., with the obligation to pay to the King a kind of tribute, just as the nephew of Euergetes — Ptolemy the son of Lysimachus, received from him Telmessus in Lycia (see below p. 45 S. notes 50, 51). This kind of financial autonomy does not exclude military occupation of the land by the Ptolemies. But even in this respect the Ammanitis seems to have enjoyed a kind of autonomy, as is shown by the fact that the sheikh Tiibias held a military command of Egyptian troops. The system of the Ptolemies in ruling the cities and lands on the seashores was probably different. The Ptolemies certainly drew a regular income from the custom-duties of these ancient commercial cities. I cannot understand the attitude of Cohen towards the story told by Flavius Josephus. If some farms (iivaL) of special revenues were sold in the provinces of Asia Minor and Thrace it does not imply that Palestine could not be handled in a different way and its revenues sold en bloc in Alexandria to the representatives of the country itself. It may be that along with this general farming of the revenues separate aivai of special ROSTOVTZEPF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 27 grain bought by the merchants might have been State grain or the private property of ApoUonius. The horses might have belonged to the army but might have been bought by Apol- lonius for sale afterwards to the State. We shall see that the documents of the following period rather speak for the hypothe- sis that Zenon had no official commission in Syria and Palestine but was a private agent of ApoUonius. But we must not insist upon this distinction for there is no definite line between private and public in the Ptolemaic administration, where the King dealt with the State as with his private estate; his subordinates of the higher ranks hardly drew a sharp line between their private affairs and the affairs entrusted to them by the King. We meet with the same confusion in the early Roman Empire. What status had the procurators of Augustus, ol irapa Avyovn> xn^KoB ipaxiios ir SiaT[f els xbpTaaii\a xois tjTTrots diroSIJpo(c[e" ffin^cj/TijM &i Tiiriv ircpl "AflXt^w 8s itoj kariv [irapd] rots K-airiraSo^L rots kKe[l Tel]/povtTLv. KaXcos av oil/ Troi^crais rots T[e] wauri iratn SiayyelXas Kal yp&\if/as irpis]/ oBs av inroKain^avriis xp^f^l""' ctvfai djTTus S-v oi Trap' iftiSiV kTriKati^[avttiv]/Tai. aOroD ffwavriKh^favral r[c ToB /tjoToiTToflfli'oi abriv irp6\i i/ias]. 'Eppaio-o. Fkj) [. . . Verso. (trous) kij Aiarpov ij kv Miv&iiTi. 'Anivras irtpi xoB liaydpov/rov itroSpivTO!. — Z^vuxt. Cf. P.S.I., VI, p. X; in 1. 3, Vitelli proposes: iKf[i araBniv K6!iias Kai yijv that is to say, "all persons throughout the country who are exempt from taxation or hold villages and land in gift or receive the revenues therefrom as income." And finally in col. 44, 3 ff. we read: 6aai d' iv BupeaL KUfiai eiaiv iv Tabrais Si i\aio{)pyu>v fiTldiv Kadiv xwnaTwv Kal rats a.tpkatai.v J kvTeiX&fttvoi avTUi Koi TTiv i,va/[fio\riv tSiv ^v [tSii vop.S)i x'^M'tT'lajj' (the supplements in the last line are mine) — i. e., "Kleandrus to the oeconomi, the nomarchi, the royal secretaries, the police, the ten thousand arurae men, the komarchi, the village secretaries, greeting. We have left (i. e., appointed) Theodorus the second engineer to guard the dykes and the sluices having entrusted to him also the construction of the dykes in the nome." The enum- eration of the oflScials is characteristic. First the oeconomi, the managers of the economic afiairs of the nome, then the nomarchi, of whom we shall speak later on, and then the royal secretaries, — all officials of the nome who had to do with the management of the land. After them the police officials in general, and finally the myriaruri, the comarchi and the village scribes, the officials of the territories of which the nome consisted. It should be noted that the toparchi and the secretaries of the tottol are not mentioned. It is evident that the fivpiapovpot, the holders of the Soipeat of ten thousand arurae, rank with the village administrators, responsible like the comarchi and the village-secretaries for a territory which corresponded to the territory of a village. It is exactly this position which the R. L. assign to the Scapea: the territory of a Scopea corresponded or rather may have cor- responded to the territory of one or more villages. It is evident also that under Philadelphus and Euergetes, the myriaruri formed a class that was very numerous in the nome, and at the same time they were situated above the regular village administration. 48 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES Moreover, the title myriaruri permits us to grasp the military character of the royal gifts since the terminology is based on the cleruchic terminology. Along with the deKapovpoi, the eiKoo-dpou- poi and the rest up to the (KarovTapovpoi (the holders of ten, twenty, and up to a hundred arurae), we have then a much higher class of cleruchi, the ten-thousand-aruri. In the case of both the cleruchi in general and the myriaruri, the grant of land is a royal gift specified as such of course only in the case of the myriaruri. But the idea of the cleri as royal gifts is common to theHellenistic period; see, e. g., Phoin. Meg. fr. 4 (AiiXijrpiSes) : a hetaera lived with a soldier or officer who convinced her "that he will receive a Scoped from the King. And this he repeated over and again. Now because of this Scoped of which I am speaking this scoundrel had me a whole year for nothing (Scopedf)." If we try to define more closely the legal position of these grants of land, of these gifts of the King, we find first of all that the grant had a purely personal character. This personal character is emphasized by the R. L. 6v 17/tas /caTaXeiiret 'Ato\\6ivlos 6 5ioikt;tiJs; they were, of course, works for the Scopea of ApoUonius. The letter of Petechon is scornful. He reproaches Klearchus and Kleon with their quarrels for which the responsibility will fall upon him, Petechon (5ia tjJv ii/ierkpav aipi/iaxi'O.v e/<[^] iv kyKKijiixaai, y[iviadai.]) and adds that until the dull mind of Klearchus grasps the situation the works may suffer. Such language is only comprehensible if Petechon was protected by the authority of ApoUonius. In the same year Petechon works in the same places as stated by P. Petrie II, 6 — III, 42, 7. This document shows the kind of works Petechon was engaged upon: first the great canal of Kleon, which irrigated sandy land (ii^ajuAios 7^), and a complicated drainage system for the recovery of marshy land (Ttvayri) by means of ditches {oxeroi). The land which was salty (dX/xupts) was of course hopelessly unproductive (P.S.I. 639). The whole system of work within the limits of ApoUonius' estate lies therefore clearly before our eyes. The work is done under the supervision of the regular engineers of the nome, Kleon and his subordinates. The manager of the region covering the estate of ApoUonius is Komoapis. The general contractor and one of Kleon's staff of engineers as well, is Petechon, to whom the works in and around Philadelphia were given out by ApoUonius himself. Petechon in his turn gives out parts of the work to small contractors some of whom were local peasants; but he works also by means of compulsory labour as is shown by P.S.I. 337, where a certain Horus, deka- tarch or foreman of a ten, receives the same sum for the same amount of work as the contractors in other papyri, namely 4 drachmae. The same system of irrigation work seems to prevail in the Memphite Scoped as well. In the year 28 Addaeus writes to Zenon that the peasants of Taitaro are asking that irrigation work of the same kind as that done in other parts (of the , Awptd?) should be carried out on their lands, according to the 62 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES promises of ApoUonius. Addaeus urges that the work be begun at once, as later on it would cost more (P.S.I. 486). I have dealt already with the interesting document P.S.I. 488 of the same year. The contractor who here addresses Zenon and ApoUonius and wants the work on the dykes to be given to him, proposes exactly those conditions with which we are familiar from the other papyri quoted above. As in the P. Lille 1, he makes his work subject to the approval of the oeconome and the engineer. He is probably already working somewhere in the neighborhood, as he informs Zenon that he is busy in registering (airoypatpri) the aclinara, i.e., workmen furnished by the population. If it is now asked, who paid for the irrigation work done on the estates of ApoUonius, I must say that I have no answer to this question. We must not forget that the Soipea of Apol- lonius at Philadelphia consisted of two parts: his clerus, the 10,000 arurae, and the territory under his control, that is, that of the village of PhUadelphia and perhaps of other villages. In the documents quoted above ApoUonius is busy in organizing work not only in Philadelphia but as far as Tanis and Patsonthis. That is probably the reason why the work done at Memphis, although given out by ApoUonius, was paid for by the treasury while the work done at Taitaro was probably paid for by ApoUonius himself. Many data in the Zenon papyri allow me to believe that the work on the 10,000 arurae was paid for either by ApoUonius alone or according to a complicated system whereby certain revenues from the 5cop*a were used in payment for the con- struction of the irrigation works. The fact that it is ApoUonius who accepts the estimates of the work to be done, that the work is given out by his agents and the state engineers, that Horus in P.S.I. 337 is paid by the administration of the estate, and many other details lead me to believe that it was ApoUonius who paid for the work. On the other hand the supervision of the work by the ofl5cials of the nome, especially by the engineers, and the presence of two officials in the estate super- vising the expenditures for irrigation and agricultural works, show that the State took an interest in the work and probably participated in one way or another in financing it. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 63 I do not deny that sometimes parts of the irrigation work were given out to the farmers of certain parcels of land; for example in P.S.I. 577, Dionysius the farmer of 150 arurae of unirrigated land (a/3poxos 7^) is performing some work of reclama- tion: K&.dapaL% or vKoTOfiia (clearing the land of brushwood) and wepix'^o^i-s (constructing dykes). However, this is not the main work of reclamation but a kind of supplementary work made possible by the fact that the main work was already done. The same situation is found in P. Lond. Inv. 2094, where peasants are working on a Spv/ios which is situated within the boundaries of the land leased by them from the 10,000 arurae of ApoUonius. I must emphasize the fact that almost the same relations existed between the State and the cleruchi on whose land irrigation work was carried out by the State. Among the con- tracts of the engineer Theodorus, two documents (P. Petrie III, 43, 2, col. I and II) deal with the lands of the cleruchi. In these contracts before the paragraphs dealing with the warrants, the payment of money and the implements, and after those dealing with the description of the work to be done, there is a fragmentary paragraph, which does not appear in the rest of the contracts. The conditions prescribed by this paragraph are as follows, the beginning being missing: "with the condition that they should pay half of the expense for the work in the third year, the money to be taken from the price of the oil seed which they will pay into the treasury. If they will not deliver their oil seed they shall pay l}/^ times the amount when the money is exacted from them." The publishers of this papyrus suppose that those meant in this paragraph are the members of the commission who gave out the work. But what had the commission to do with the oil seed! Did the members of the commission necessarily deliver oil seed to the State? We know from the R. L. that the ifiopria eXaiKo, were delivered by the producers, who received the price of this seed in money. Now the producers of oil seed in our papyrus are certainly the cleruchi, holders of the lands which were to be irrigated. I presume therefore that these cleruchi were the payers and that the obligation to pay the expense of the work 64 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES done on their lands was theirs. The money for this payment was the income which the cleruchi expected from the newly irrigated or drained land. It is not incidental, as we will see later, that the cleruchi covered the expense with their revenues from the oil seed; the oil plants were the best crop to be raised on newly irrigated or drained lands. It is noteworthy also that the cleruchi paid regular taxes for the maintenance and guarding of the water-works on their fields (see, e.g., P.S.I. 344 of the year 30). According to the order of Apollonius quoted in this papyrus they were treated as the peasants were, KoBoTi Kal Tap a rSiv yeuipycai' and the tax was paid from the revenues (yevfifiaTa) of their fields, which revenues were under suspension as long as the payment was pending. Let me now quote again P.S.I. 500. We remember that along with Diodorus, the supervisor of the expenditures for irrigation works, Damis the nomarch is working on the estate. His duty is the control of the ^uXo/coxia and the kuwvpia/ids, of planting the oil plants and gathering the crops. SvXoKoiria and ifiTTvpicrfios are works making the land, already drained, fit for cultivation. Large tracts of land in the neighborhood of most of the new villages were Spujttoi, i. e., pieces of the lake shore overgrown with brushwood, reeds and weeds. There are scores of references to dpvfioi in the Fayum papyri.^* Almost every new village in the Fayum had its Spvfids or 8pvnoi and its shore land, at7taX6s.^' Another name for brushwood land was 717 JuXitis or ^v\is, see, e. g., P.S.I. 502, 28 where 77) ariaafitTis and JuXitk are measured by Panakestor. In P.S.I. 631, col. II, 1. 1, and P. Lille 5, 1. 13, land sown with grass was formerly Spv/xos. In P. Lille 5, 1. 19, land sown partly with sesame was formerly ^uXiTts; in 1. 23 of the same papyrus are mentioned 200 arurae of land where brushwood ought to be cut ( JuXo/coirio) . In P. Petrie II, 39 (a), seed of croton was delivered for sowing some yij^vXiTu near the shrine of Isis of Attinas. The most common kinds of brushwood in Egypt were willows (irea) and tamarisk {fivpiKri), the latter used frequently for the dykes and bridges. For " The evidence on the dpu/iol was collected by Calderini, Aegyptus, I, 56 ff. " I remind the reader of such names as IXroXe^ais ApujuoB. Philadelphia also had its Spv/ids. P. Gen. 81, 29. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 65 example, a growth of tamarisk is mentioned in P. Magd. 4, year 25 of Euergetes, where some thieving shepherds hid swine stolen by them in a tamarisk growth (1. 3, according to my supplements, says: KoffleiaavTes eis to. ixvplKiva, — having hidden (placed) them in a tamarisk growth). For making such land after drainage fit for agriculture or for pasturage, it was necessary first to cut the wood, fuXoTo/ielc (or vKoroixetv, see P.S.I. 577, 1. 7 ff., ttiv re yrjv €[Kadapevaa]/v\ris lieaTrjv Kal irepixiicras eirortcra, — I cleared the soil which was full of brushwood and irrigated it after having constructed dykes). In P. Lond. Ill, 179, iiXoTOjuta is combined with dpvoKoiria, cutting of reeds. The second operation was to eliminate the stumps by burning them. This is the operation of kpiTvpifffids mentioned many times along with ^vXoKOTria in Panakestor's correspondence of the year 29 (P.S.I. 323, 338, 339, 499, 506, 560; cf. P.S.I. VI, p. IX). 'EinrvpuTfids was probably done a year after the JuXo/coTria (P.S.I. 560: inirvpiffuds r^s vepvcrivfjs, i.e., burning out last year's land). One of these operations is mentioned in P.S.I. 667, cf. 564; a girl (waidlaKri) working in the estate writes to Zenon that she is tired of dragging wood (1. 2 £f., KeK[fnjKvt]a ^v\o-TO(pv\aK(s) ask Zenon to give them their salaries and their rations of grain {i\l/i>vi.ov and aaTonerpia). They end their letter with the usual threat: "Thus if you send us our food and salaries: all right. If not, we shall flee. We can stand no more!" The guards were 68 UNIVERSITY or WISCONSIN STUDIES It is also worthy of note that Theodorus in his request for his salary promises "to work without reproach for the dioeketes" and for the man to whom the letter is addressed (P. Lond. Inv. 2089, 1. 16). Who knows if the salary for which he applies is not private remuneration given to the engineer by ApoUonius, the holder of the Philadelphia estate? Such was the organization of the work by which a large ter- ritory around Philadelphia, and especially the 10,000 arurae of ApoUonius' clerus, were transformed into good arable land, fit for cereals, vineyards, orchards, et cetera; the transforma- tion of land hitherto in part a sandy desert, in part marshy land overgrown with brushwood and reeds, only some of which had been previously watered and drained by the construction of dykes and canals, primarily by the construction of the main canal, the canal of Kleon. We easily understand why Philadelphus in carrying out this work should proceed by granting large plots of land to his best assistants, who were at the same time important oflBcials of the State. The bureaucratic machine alone was powerless to carry out such a gigantic task. There was great need of a combina- tion of private efforts and energies with the resources of the State. Such collaboration was attained by attracting to this work men like ApoUonius. It was the same system as that used in developing the foreign commerce. ApoUonius used his energy, his skill, his influence to push forward the work, and other men of the same standing, other myriaruri, did the same in other places. They worked not only for the State, — most of them, new-comers as they were, did not care very much for Egypt as such, but also and mainly for themselves in the hope of enriching themselves without risking too much, backed as they were by the State. And they succeeded by their common efforts in transforming a marshy and sandy land into fields and villages. After they disappeared having achieved their main object, — their own enrichment, the land which they helped to win for cultivation remained in the hands of the State, in the hands of the King. Thus the King achieved his aim too, the enrichment of himself and the State. certainly peasants of one of the villages of the Supci. and performed their work under compulsion, receiving their allowance from the estate and not from the Government. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 69 In the estate of Apollonius the work which began in or after the year 27 "vas probably finished about the year 30, as we hear nothing of dykes and canals being constructed after that year. It may be that this is accidental, but I am confident that the main work was done during these three years. In other parts of the Fayum it continued much longer as the contracts of Theodorus were concluded in the first years of Euergetes. Along with this work of constructing dykes, digging canals and drainage ditches, cutting wood and reeds, and burning the stumps, the big work of building up the centre of this region, the village of Philadelphia, was going on. We do not know certainly that any settlement existed on the site of Philadelphia before Apollonius received his grant. The fact is probable, as Apollonius went to a place where some canals and dykes already existed and therefore there were probably men working the arable land. But it is certain that only under Apollonius did Philadelphia become a large village, almost a city, as some of the future settlers, to be sure, reverently called the new settlement (P.S.I. 341, year 30: axoiiovrts yap to xXeos ttjs TroXecos, "having heard of the fame of the city," say weavers who want to settle down at Philadelphia; the same expression is used by some peasants who went to settle at Philadelphia, P. Lond. Inv. 2090, 1. 6). Apollonius of course built a residence for himself. We have as yet no papyri which deal with this subject, but Edgar says that the Museum of Cairo possesses such documents. One papyrus at least (P.Z. 21, year 29) speaks of a garden of Apollonius. Apollonius is anxious to make it as Greek as possible in planting the garden olive and the laurel. Along with the palace, scores of buildings were necessary for the estate, stables for the cattle, store-houses of different kinds, wine- cellars, et cetera (see P.S.I. 546, 547). For the religious needs shrines of the Greco-Egyptian type were constructed. Two of them are mentioned : one of Thoeris, the hippopotamus goddess (P.Z. 47) and one of Anubis, the jackal-headed god (inscription for the health of Apollonius and Zenon, Lefebvre^ Annates, XIII, p. 93). The royal cult was also introduced and a shrine built for the deified sister- wife of Philadelphus — Arsinoe (P. Lond. Inv. 2314). A necessary work was the construc- tion of one or several market-places usual in all the Greco- 70 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES Egyptian villages,*^ not excepting the Siapeai. One of them, named awoiKia (P. Petrie III, 73), bears the name of Artem- idorus and has a special manager. Had not the village of Philadelphia a market-place named for ApoUonius? I shall later speak of public baths and beer-shops, important centres of public life. At the same time private houses were built one after another. We have quoted already the papyrus which mentioned the house of Artemidorus. Another house of the same kind occupied the interest of Zenon in the year 31 (P.Z. 31). It was built not for Zenon, although he and the members of his staff certainly possessed houses in Philadelphia, but for somebody else. It is a large house of the Greco-Egyptian type,^' with a court, a monumental pylone, a garden, a special horse-stable — iwirv (the builder was probably a knight — ivirtis), and a large bakery (cf. P.S.I. 669 where a kitchen, a swine-stable and a press for "vinacia," Italian vinello, P.S.I. 554, note 18, are constructed). We have seen that Diodorus of P.S.I. 500 was in charge of this building activity. In P.S.I. 496 of the year 28 (cf. P.S.I. VI, p. XVI) he is sending to Apollonius a report about the situa- tion: the brick and stone work are progressing fairly well, but not the wood work. It is a constant problem in Egyptian life that wood is so scarce and difficult to procure, as we shall see below in discussing the ship-building of Apollonius. With Dio- dorus, Horus, an assistant architect, is making bricks (P.S.I. 625, apparently one of the accounts of Diodorus). The presence of Diodorus may mean that this kind of work was also under state-control and that the expense for it was not entirely on the shoulders of Apollonius, but was covered partly by the revenues of the domain, which were not regarded quite as the private revenues of the land-holder. It is possible that a certain Nicon, one of the constant cor- respondents of Zenon, was also connected with this constructive work of Apollonius and Zenon in Philadelphia (see P.S.I. 350, 492, 493, 595, and especially P.Z. 28). " Grenfell and Hunt, Fayum Towns and their Papyri, p. 24. " F. Luckhard, Das Privathaus in ptolemdischen und romischen Aegyp- ten, (Giessen, 1914); Schubart, Einfiihrung, pp. 437, 445. VII. THE ESTATE OF APOLLONIUS AT PHILADEL- PHIA Agriculture A clerus of 10,000 arurae and the supervision of the territory of one or more villages around this clerus was a complicated business, especially in Egypt, where the largest individual tenures of the soldiers did not exceed 100 arurae and the average tenure of a crown farmer was still smaller. It is not an easy task therefore to grasp the mechanism of such an enor- mous machine in all the details, especially since we have only parts of the correspondence of its chief mechanician, the man- ager of the Scoped. The complicated character of the business of this manager is depicted in two papyri hastily written and without dates, constituting the agenda of Zenon for the next day (P.S.I. 429 and 430). No doubt Zenon could not foresee everything which might occupy his attention the next day and noted the most important matters only. These documents are instructive snapshots of the daily life of the estate, incomplete and incidental as snapshots usually are but highly interesting and full of life. In the first note we read (P.S.I. 429): (1) "To ask Herodotus about the goat wool; (2) to ask Ameinias whether he has sold the mina (of wool probably) ; (3) letter to Dioscorides about the barge; (4) to make an agreement with Timaius about the animals for sacrifice (probably calves or pigs); (5) to sign the contract with ApoUodorus and to write that it should be de- livered; (6) to have the barge loaded with wood; (7) to write to Jason that he should load the wool and to take care that Diony- sius should ship it when cleaned; (8) about the fourth part of the Arabian sheep; (9) to ship also the vinegar; (10) to write to Meli- ton about the vineyard which is in the care (?) of Neoptolemus, that it should be planted, and to write to Alkimus, whether he approves; (11) to write to Theogenes about the 12 pairs of oxen; (12) to give back to ApoUodorus and Kallippus drachmae , . . out of drachmae . . . ." And on the verso of the papy- rus: "(13) letter of Metrodorus to Athenagoras about the 71 72 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES produce of the harvest of the same year; (14) the rescript {(piXavdpwTra) to Theophilus, and about everything concerning the buildings; (15) to write to Jatrocles and Theodorus about the grain before the water of the canal. ..." The second slip of the agenda is shorter and written in a different hand (P.S.I. 430): "(1) to receive the olive seed; (2) olive oil from Heragorus; (3) to buy for the horses 4 scrapers, 4 cloths for rubbing, 4 scrapers (of another kind), and 1 scraper for Phatreus; (4) to receive the saplings (or cuttings) of the royal nuttrees; (5) to verify the list of the wine already shipped, for which nomes it is destined; (6) to get back the slave (?) of Hermon." The agenda of Zenon show how complicated was the husban- dry of the estate for one thing. Almost everything is touched upon: grain, irrigation of the land, vineyards, orchards, beasts both for agriculture and for wool, transportation, money, slaves, buildings, et cetera. The agenda also show how little we know about the estate and about the correspondents of Zenon. Of nineteen names recorded in the agenda we find only six in the letters preserved in the archives: Herodotus and Jason (P.S.I. 360) as the sub-managers of the estate, Dionysius as one of the farmers, Neoptolemus (P.S.I. 434, 10) as con- cerned with the vineyards, and Metrodorus and Athenagorr.s who were probably officials (P.S.I. 353 and 354). Nevertheless the data of the letters are sufficient for illustra- tion of every item of the agenda and for completion of the picture sketched therein. Let me begin with agriculture and especially with the production of grains, wheat, barley and others. We cannot fully grasp the importance of this depart- ment in the life of the estate. Production of grain was routine work in Egypt and did not absorb very much of Zenon's attention. Nevertheless we have many documents which deal with this branch of the husbandry of the estate. These documents may be divided into two classes. The first deals with the relation to the estate of the crown peasants, the \aol fiaaiKiKol, who were bound to ApoUonius and to his agents by understandings concluded en bloc, by collective contracts. In the dealings of the administration of the estate with the peasants an active and important part is played by the state ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 73 officials, the oeconome and the nomarch. Let me produce our evidence from this class of documents first. Who these peasants were and whence they came to Philadel- phia are questions answered by two documents in the British Museum, P. Lond. Inv. 2090 and 2094, both without date. These documents are complaints of the peasants against Damis the nomarch, some addressed to ApoUonius, some to Zoilus. Other documents on the same subject may come to light later as the peasants in 2094 mention that it is their third request addressed to Zoilus, and how many may they not have written to ApoUonius! I doubt that there is any connection between these documents and P.Z. 40, as this last letter deals with the peasants of Hephaestias and is dated in the harvest and not in the sowing season. The subject of the complaint is not yet quite clear. The peasants came to Philadelphia from the Helio- polite nome, whether as permanent settlers or for one season only we do not know. They are numerous, as they have more than three elders (Tpea-fivrepoi); they formed presumably the population of a whole village (see 2090, 1. 3). At Philadelphia they have rented one thousand of the 10,000 arurae, partly brushwood land (Spv/ios).'* They had probably concluded a " The beginning of P. Lond. Inv. 2090 is not clear. The peasants say in 1. 2 £F. that they have tilled and sown 1000 arurae given to them by ApoUonius but the rest of the document shows that they had not. They speak in the document of the prospect of the land remaining unsown in case they receive no hearing or satisfaction. I suppose therefore that in 1. 2 ff. they intended to say that they received the 1000 arurae to be tilled and sown but that Damis prevented them from doing so: o-oD Soktos fifiif 6.p[ov/pa]s a cljs to)v iivplwv ware KaTepy6.tre iiriSriiiovirres i. e., "there are now twenty days since we arrived. We intended (to leave) but cannot and we spent during our stay everything we had." It may be that they came regularly each year to Philadelphia; but this' supposition also is hardly acceptable. 74 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES contract with ApoUonius or Damis. the nomarch, before com- ing. But very soon after they had come their hardships began. They were not allowed by one of the agents of ApoUonius (Zenon himself?) to live in the town (xoXts), and they soon started to quarrel with Damis about the working and sowing of the land. According to their confused complaints Damis deprived them of the one thousand arurae, arrested their elders and forced them to sign a ypaic0a otv GOV tl trot BoKet elffKoKeadai (sic) rit'as ^t^v Kal eiaoKovaai irepi S}v ^ov\6fi^a aoi kvar/yoKai.. Also P. Lond. Inv. 2094, 1. 5: xal ti aoi Soufi tUrayov [sic, — the imperative!] ■^tiS.s rrpAs 'AttoWuviov . icriv/yip nva & fiovXSit^a di'077«Xai 76 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES immediately wrote to Zoilus, to Zopyrion and to the royal secretaries asking them to come to Philadelphia and to act according to the orders of Apollonius. But Zoilus the oeconome was busy. He was on an administrative tour with Telestes." The royal secretaries and the agent of Zopyrion Paues arrived twelve days after the request was sent. In their presence in the course of five days the land was surveyed according to the holders of the different parcels and to the character of the crops. After this had been done the farmers were called up and the rescript (LKi.vdpunra) of Apollonius was read to them. They were afterwards offered the opportunity to conclude agreements about the valuation, according to the orders sent by Apollonius to Panakestor in a special memorandum, and to make a con- tract with Panakestor sealed by both parties. They asked for time to consider the proposal, and after four days went on strike, moving into the sacred precincts of a temple, saying that they didn't want any valuation, be it fair or unfair, and preferred to renounce their rights to the crops. They alleged that Apol- lonius had concluded an agreement with them about the pay- ment of one-third of the harvest. Panakestor and Damis the nomarch tried in vain to persuade them, and both went to Zoilus asking him to come. But he alleged that he was busy dispatch- ing the sailors (to Alexandria?).^* After four days' absence Panakestor and Damis came back to Philadelphia, and accord- ing to the memorandum of Apollonius, as the peasants had refused to accept the valuation and refused also to pay anything in advance, offered the peasants the chance to preseht their own lower valuation {inroTiiirtais) ; this the peasants did. These iiiroTifiriatK were sent by Panakestor to Apollonius.^' After " I suppose that Telestes was the eponyme of the corps of troops called by his name. P. Hibeh 85, 14 and 99, 8. His journey was probably connected with the operation of assigning land to the soldiers of his corps. Telestes himself, as is shown by P. Hibeh 99, 8, had economic interests in Hibeh. The same part is played by Tlepolemus in P.S.I. 513, and perhaps by Pythocles in P. Freiburg 7. Cf. Lesquier, Rev. d. etudes gr., XXXII (1921), 364 ff. " I speak of the diroo-roX^ vavrCiv in my forthcoming commentary on P. Tebt. 703. " I know of no parallel to this practice and of no analogies for the word iiTOTl/jiriais used in a similar connection. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 77 this Panakestor and the royal secretaries began to measure the land to be sown with sesame and the land covered with brush- wood. In conclusion Panakestor asks ApoUonius not to accuse him of negligence: "your servant cannot be negligent." The document is best explained by the R. L., in the part which contains instructions on gathering the- crop of oil plants, R.L., col. 42, 3-43, 2: "When the season comes for gathering the sesame, croton and cnecus, the cultivators shall give notice to the nomarch and the toparch, or where there are no nomarchs or toparchs to the oeconome; and these officials shall summon the contractor and he shall go with them to the fields and assess the crop. The peasants and the other cultivators shall have their different kinds of produce assessed before they gather the crops, and shall make a double contract, sealed, with the contractor, and every peasant shall enter on oath the amount of land which he has sown with seed of each kind, and the amount of his assessment, and shall seal the contract, which shall also be sealed by the representative of the nomarch or toparch." In the following paragraphs (col. 43) the law prescribes that the holders of privileged lands shall deliver to the treasury the whole produce and receive money for it according to the appended list of prices. It is clear therefore that the non- privileged farmers or peasants (ytiopyoi) were not in this position. One part of their crops was due to the State as payment for the seed grain, another as the rent of the land (tKiXa5eX^eias) and the inhabitants or farmers of the bor- ■ derland of the ten thousand arurae (1. 1 : oi iiri rSiv op'uav tt [. . . , cf. 1. 2: sTTi tCiv opiosv tSiv nvpiVnv a.povpSiv\) connected with the wa- ter supply. The men of the borderland dug some pits to get water and were ill treated by the men of Philadelphia. I think that these borderland men were viUagers of Hephaestias and Psenemus was their representative, perhaps the komarch. But in any case we see no important dififerences, from the economic point of view, in the treatment of both kinds of land. Kroll, R. E., Frumenlum; Wilcken, Grundz., p. 180 ff. Cf. P. Tebt. 58; Wilcken, Chrest., 287. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 81 Somewhere in the neighborhood of Hephaestias was situated another small settlement of peasants, Aiweuis KoWri. In P. Lond. Inv. 2097, 37 ff. we meet some TrpecfiiiTepoi, elders of the village, of this place. The peasants of Atyvecos koIti] rented their land from ApoUonius and paid to him an kKipbpiov (rent). The document deals with a tax in money which they had to pay to the State and which was advanced to them by Zenon and his agent Jason. We shall come back later to this document.'"' Such is the first class of documents which inform us about the management of the land in and near Philadelphia in the estate (Scoped) of ApoUonius. Big tracts of the arable land of the ten thousand arurae, and probably almost the whole of the arable land of the other villages, were leased to groups of native peasants, in part residents of the villages, in part coming for this purpose from the neighboring nomes. The second class of documents connected with the agricul- tural exploitation of the 5coptA deals not with groups but with individuals, not with peasants as a body but with individual farmers, mostly of native origin, but partly Greeks. Let me first produce our evidence. One of these individual farmers of the estate of ApoUonius was a Greek, Dionysius. He is connected with Jason, of whose dealings with the pasture land and cattle breeding, as well as with the lands not included in the 10,000 arurae, we shall speak later. Dionysius appears in three documents, P.S.I. 577 (year 38), 432 (no date) and in the agenda of Zenon 429, 14. '* With this series of documents we may compare the fragmentary but very important P.S.I. 490, year 28. Since the names in this document are different from those connected with the Philadelphian estate and since the harvest time is at an earlier date than in Philadelphia, Mecheir the 8th, we may suppose that the document belongs to another JupcA of ApoUonius perhaps that of Memphis. We meet again with disturbances at harvest time, but this time it seems that the trouble is with the guards of the crops, the yai7iiiaTo '• *•. contractors). This would be the first definite mention of contractors occupied in collect- ing the rent in kind, — the iK}4> metr. of wine. A special manager (6 irpoeaTri- Kois) runs another large vineyard which belongs to a woman, Eirene. This vineyard yields 200 metr. of wine (P. Petrie II, 30 (e) — III, 69 (b)). Smaller vineyards are mentioned fre- quently (see, e.g., the document quoted above and also P. Petrie II, 27, 1— III, 69 (a)). The income of the State from these vineyards was certainly very large. For the apomoira of a number of villages in one meris, counting only the /3a(nXiKv yfi (crown land) and the wine valuated in silver, the State received 18,626 dr., and in addition more than 7,000 metr. of wine worth about 20,000 dr. at least. I cannot produce all the data on this topic. It would be a matter of great interest to collect all the material and to investigate it from the historical, economic and archaeological points of view. The reason for the rapid extension of viticulture in the Fayum and for the gradual transformation of the Fayum into a wine land is easily understood. The owners of the vineyards were mostly Greeks, to a great extent military settlers. Vine grow- 93 94 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES ing, as one of the most prominent features of Greek economic life, was a business with which they were thoroughly familiar. Furthermore, as I have shown in my book on the Colonate,^' planting of a plot of land with vines, provided permission had been secured from the State, made the plot the hereditary prop- erty of the planter {ifKpvTtvrris) . The State in its own interest encouraged vine planting by the Greek settlers. The State drew from the vineyards a large income in money. Moreover, vine planting meant the investment of capital in the land by the new settlers and so bound them to the land; thus soldiers of the mercenary troops, officials and some adventurous business men were gradually transformed into permanent settlers in Egypt, attached to the land by important economic interests. The wine market was made secure by the growing Greek popula- tion of Egypt and the State was glad to supply its wine drinking army with local wine instead of spending huge sums of money in buying wine abroad. The native Egyptians of course remained beer-drinkers as always. It is worthy of note that the vineyard owners were mostly Greeks; native owners were rather exceptional. I have no reason to suppose that the natives were not inclined to plant vines and thus to become land owners instead of crown peasants. But I have every reason to assume that the State regarded such a transformation without sympathy. We must not forget that for planting a plot with vines special permission of the State was required. I am sure that the State granted such permission to crown peasants only occasionally. In the mind of the Ptolemies, the prosperity of the land depended on the crown peasants remaining state farmers and producers of grain, bound to their place of origin and to their profession. Vine planting developed rapidly during the early Ptolemaic period. Under Philadelphus large tracts of the newly acquired land were already planted with vines, and this is characteristic not only of the Fayum. A glance at such documents as P. Par. 67 and P. Petrie III, 117 and 122,— lists of revenues of the State from the vineyards, — will fully establish this fact. There is much of general history in this process, of the history of the Hellenization of Egypt under the first Ptolemies. Such modest " Rostowzew, Studien, p. 14 flf. ROSTOVTZEIT — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 95 documents as the letter of Alkaeus to Sosiphon (P. Petrie I, 29) are brilliant illustrations of my statement: Alkaeus informs Sosiphon that he planted three hundred vine roots and among them some trees (dj'o3ej'5pds) ; the plantation is assiduously watered. Vine planting on a large scale was being carried out on the estate of Apollonius also. In the year 29 (P.S.I. 499) Pana- kestor received from Zenon a large amount of cuttings or sets, probably of vines. A part of them had already come on twenty donkeys, another part was expected. In the year 34 this operation was still going on; cuttings are loaded on a ship and sent to Philadelphia (P.S.I. 568). Newly planted vineyards are occasionally mentioned in the year 36 (P.S.I. 371, 1. 10 ff., cf. P. Lond. Inv. 2313). This planting of vineyards was begun at Philadelphia probably at the very beginning of the existence of the estate, as in the year 30 (P.S.I. 345) vintage on a large scale is going on there. Kritias, probably an agent of Zenon, is writing a hasty letter to Zenon: "They are pre- paring to gather the grapes. Send guards, not less than ten, and write to my men to help guard. Write also to Hegesianax lest some violence should occur." In the same year we see Damis dealing with large vineyards (P.S.I. 508) probably as a sub-contractor of taxes paid on them (see further below). This last document shows that Apollonius did not stand alone in Philadelphia as a possessor of large vine- yards. How large a part of the estate was planted with vines we do not know. One of the documents mentions a man named Alkimus, a vinedresser, who was the manager of thirty arurae of vines and also of some new vine plantations (P.S.I. 371, 10: "Wnifios a[ti]Tr(\ovpy6s 6 irpotarrjKois tSjv X [apovpHv] Kai tov/ rXaiiKou ica[l . . .]xov vfoipvruv afiireXuvuv; cf. P.S.I. 429, 23 fif). Large quantities of wine of different kinds were shipped from Philadelphia probably to Alexandria (P.S.I. 428); two kinds are specially mentioned, Knidian and Chian wine, both famous brands and one virtually Zenon's native wine; with them native wine was also shipped (e7rtx'«'P«'s)- Thus we may say that Apollonius was busy in transforming a part of his estate into vineyards planted with the best sorts of Greek vines. There was no danger that anyone would for- 96 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES bid his transforming parts of his personal holding into KTrinara, hereditary property, almost a synonym for vineyard, as he was himself both thfe planter and the one who granted the permis- sion for planting. For a man of such standing as ApoUonius it was not risky to invest money in vineyards and to wait nearly five years before the money began to return interest. How Apollonius managed his vineyards we do not know precisely, but the fact that Zenon with his own hand wrote instructions as to how to deal with vineyards (P.S.I. 624), shows that Zenon himself closely supervised the management. It is a pity that these instructions are in such bad state of preservation, not one s "tence being complete. It seems that his instructions were based on scientific Greek treatises adapted to the peculiar conditions of Egypt. We may trace the exist- ence of such Greco-Egyptian treatises in both the Greek and the Roman treatises on agriculture.^' On the other hand we have many references to vinedressers (aureXovpyoi) , mostly Greeks, who received fixed salaries, one of whom, as we have seen, was the manager of a large vineyard. In P.S.I. 336, year 29, three of them, Peteuris, Onnophris and Theophilus, two natives and one Greek, who were both Ktiitovpol (gardeners) and a^.weKovpyoi (vinedressers), received salaries of 5 dr. for twenty days each. In P.S.I. 371, 10, we meet Alki- mus mentioned above, who appears also in the agenda of Zenon in connection with vineyards (P.S.I. 429, 23). In P.S.I. 414, Menon the vinedresser claims his salary of 3 dr., and complains that he has no other income, from vegetables for example, like the other vinedressers (vegetables often being grown in the vineyards cf. P.S.I. 434). In P.S.I. 628, Hermogenes the vinedresser is credited with his salary, as also in P.S.I. 672, are two vinedressers, Kleon and Herakleides; the latter is also mentioned in the list of people who received sacks and bags (P.S.I. 427, 21, — "HpaicXeiSet a, this being the abbreviation of A/xTreXoupTos or anirtKiiv as found in many Petrie Papyri). Finally " Cf. P. Oxyr. 1631. The practice in Egypt, as illustrated by this papyrus, followed closely the general instructions given by the Greek and Roman manuals of agriculture. The basis of these manuals was certainly the work done by the early Hellenistic scientists and practical men, whose work in turn rested upon the theoretical investigations of Theophrastus. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 97 in P.S.I. 629 and 630, we have two documents dealing with implements such as were especially used by the vinedressers: different kinds of axes {a^ivaL, TreXe/cets), hoes (dixeXXai) and spades (aKaipela) ; the axe is constantly the symbol of wine and of Dionysus on coins of many Greek cities (e.g., Tenedus; see Head, Historia Nummorun, 2, p. 551, and Index under Bipen- nis). One of these documents, P.S.I. 630, speaks of these implements being given to Alkimus whom we know as the manager of one of the large vineyards. The same Alkimus appears in P.S.I. 629 along with many other men, the names of some of whom are identical with names of vinedressers found in other documents; one example besides Alkimus, is Apolloni- des, mentioned as a vinedresser in P.S.I. 434, of which I shall speak later. We may safely assume that the other names in this document are names of vinedressers too, Andron and Timocles, and perhaps Cheilon. Almost all of these men are Greeks, all are specialists in vinedressing, each receives a salary and like Alkimus, has to care for a large or small vineyard. It is probable therefore that most or perhaps all of the vine- yards of the estate were managed by salaried Greeks who received their implements from the estate and probably were given the assistance of unskilled wage earners. One seems to be the chief of all, the general supervisor of the vineyards in general. It is Herakleides. In two interesting documents (P.S.I. 433 and 434) he appears as the superior of a certain gardener and vinedresser who was also a specialist in planting melons, pumpkins, onions and garlic, — Euempolus, another name to add to the list of vinedressers. In P.S.I. 433, Hera- kleides gives to Euempolus land for planting garlic; in P.S.I. 434 he sends a man to accompany him on his inspection of melon, pumpkin and onion plantations in different vineyards. In this inspection he has to deal with the stubborn and, as he says, crazy ApoUonides, whom we have already met, and he mentions the names of two more vinedressers. Python and Neoptolemus; the latter is mentioned with Alkimus in the agenda of Zenon in connection with vineyards (P.S.I. 429, 22; I do not know that Edgar is right in identifying him with Neoptolemus the Macedonian, author of the petition P.Z. 38, of which I shall speak later). 98 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES These statistics show the importance of vine growing in the husbandry of the estate. At least thirteen large vineyards existed there and our list of course is far from complete. Of the conditions under which the vinedressers named above were employed we are not fully informed. That they received salaries, were given manual laborers as help, and were furnished with implements, are facts that do not prove that they had no share in the profits. We have seen that the same conditions apply to the individual farmers of the arable land. I am rather inclined to think that the vinedressers also were at once hired specialists and farmers of the produce. An interesting hint at this is found in P.S.I. 434. Euempolus describes his inspection of the melon, pumpkin and onion plantations in the vineyards; the farmers of these plantations are obliged to pay half of the produce ej awTi/xriatciis, i. e., according to a special agreement on the valuation of this produce; the payments are made in money. Having finished with this topic Euempolus begins to speak of other matters, about the farming of the produce of the vineyards themselves. The operation of farming this produce was fulfilled by Euempolus in the regular form, in the presence of an ofl&cial, Anosis, the village-scribe of Philadelphia (s. Addenda p. 174), and in the form of a public auction, iiro KtipvKa. Thus the same methods were used as on the arable land. A trick in this respect was played by Apollonides, one of the vinedressers, who farmed his vineyard to someone without any such formalities and received much more money. This story of Euempolus shows that the vinedressers had certainly not only their salaries but also a share in the produce both of the vineyard and of the vegetable gardens planted in the vineyards; they were therefore at one and the same time managers and farmers, like the ytupyol of whom I spoke in the preceding chapter. It is possible that some of them were at the same time cleruchi. If the identification of Neoptolemus, the vinedresser, with Neoptolemus the Macedonian, one of the cleruchi of Philadel- phia (P.Z. 38), proposed by Edgar be correct, the fact would be established beyond doubt. A corroboration of Edgar's point of view may be found in P.S.I. 588, where we find Herakleides writing to Zenon about some houses {aradiiol), ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 99 mentioning Onnophris and Timocles whom we know as vine- dressers, and mentioning also (1. 7), kTnydvoiv ne6' 6t\q}v iikPa[\ev], i. e., one of the kTiyopoi (military term) as having been ejected from his house with his weapons. This fragmentary letter seems to point to the fact that Herakleides was himself a soldier (P.S.I. 348, where again two vinedressers, Kleon and Heraklei- des, are mentioned together). A vivid picture of the life in ApoUonius' vineyards is given by the same Euempolus in his long letter P.S.I. 434 (cf. 345, quoted above, p. 98). Euempolus is not a very good stylist but he has the gift of sharp characterization, as is shown when he refers to the violent and half crazy ApoUonides as one who is nevertheless a good business man; he speaks a pointed vulgar Greek and has a good sense of humour. In 1. 15 S. he says: "Nobody prepares the wine vats, neither do they build new ones, and time presses. Last year we began to gather the grapes on Pachons the 28th (the letter is written on Pachons the 2nd). But they don't prepare themselves even to catch a mouse (a proverb, no doubt) ! Thus if you do not come your- self very soon and give orders about everything, stimulating the rest of them, you will lose much." What were the relations of ApoUonius as a large vine grower to the State?^' From the R. L. we know that the vineyards of the Scapfal paid one-sixth or one-tenth of the produce, the apomoira, to the goddess Philadelphus, the deified sister-wife of Ptolemaeus Philadelphus. But the vineyards in general paid more than the apomoira. Besides a series of minor taxes, — Xv, i.e., Ptolemais of the beekeepers (P. Tebt. 609, verso). Honey was shipped by Zenon to Alexandria in great quantities (P.S.I. 428), and Artemidorus asks Zenon to buy honey for him at Philadelphia (P. Z. 42). This honey was certainly produced on the estate. In P.S.I. 426, a man who was probably a beekeeper complained to Zenon that he had received no quarters in Philadelphia and could not get the promised allowance in grain. Moreover, he cannot secure any bees, and it is just the time before the second harvest of honey begins. The man seems to have been invited to Phila- delphia as a specialist in beekeeping. Many times we hear of honey being bought in Philadelphia (P.S.I. 512 and 535; cf. 524). A man of the name of Sostratus is in charge of the matter of honey in the first years of Euergetes (P.S.I. 391 and 524) and also earlier in the year 34 of Philadelphus (P. Lond. Inv. 2092, 1. 1 1 £f.). The last document is interesting as regards the management of this industry by the State and the estate. To Demetrius, the writer of the letter, some money was owed by Zenon. Zenon advised Sostratus to pay the debt out of the sale of the honey. But the honey had already been sold by " The attempts of the first Ptolemies at improving vegetable culture in Egypt are well illustrated by the story of the cultivation of cabbage told by Athenaeus, Deipnosoph. IX, 9, p. 369 ff. After having mentioned different authorities on vegetables in general, especially Euthydemus of Athens (see Pauly-Wissowa, R. E., VI, 1505) and 'I'heophrastus, who had enumerated the diflferent kinds of cabbage which were grown in the Greek world, Athenaeus quotes verbatim Diphilus from Siphnus (the doctor of Lysimachus, Pauly-Wissowa, R. E., V, 1155) who related in his work the attempts of the Ptolemies to improve Egyptian cabbage which was bitter, by importing seed from Rhodes, famous for its cabbage: upaiifi-n St KaWiaTii ylverat Kal jXvkvt&tti iv Kifiy, iv Si 'AXe^avSpeii^ inKpa.. t6 S'iK 'PoSou (pepSiievov airkpiia. (U ' KKt^avSptiav twl iviavrov yXvuiiav troal Tr)v Kpa^i^Tiv, (ifS' 6v xpl""" jriXtK imxwpidf«. Cabbage (paipavos which is identical with kpAjujSti) was produced in great quantities in ApoUonius' estate and a special sort of oil was prepared from the seed (?), P.S.I. 537. On the cultivation of pump- kins in Greece, see Athenaeus, Dei^woiO^/i. IX, 14, p. 372 b ff. 106 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES the agents of Isocrates, the state banker, or treasurer and the agents affirmed that the money received therefrom did not cover their requirements. We may assume from this docu- ment that the beekeepers were dependent both on the State and on Zenon. The first claim was the claim of the State. The produce in honey was therefore sold by the officials of the treasury to cover the requirements of the State and the rest of the honey was divided between Zenon and the beekeeper. Zenon appears here again in the rdle of the farmer of the revenue from the beekeepers. We must not forget that the beekeepers belonged to the class of {nroreXeis (P. Tebt. 5, 1. 168 foil.). 8" The tax paid by the beekeepers was probably calculated in propor- tion to the yield of honey. In P.S.I. 510, Teos the beekeeper who came to Philadelphia from Busiris, paid 66 dr. and 4 ob. for seven months. For the payment of this tax to the admin- istration of Busiris, Teos being a native of Busiris, Zenon was responsible; this shows him again in the role of a tax farmer. Over and again we encounter the same system: the producer, the State taking one part of the produce, the tax farmer and the holder of the Swpeo, who are identical, taking another part. The rest was freely sold by the producer. »» See Wilcken, Grundz., p. 252. IX. THE ESTATE OF APOLLONIUS AT PHILADELPHIA Stock Breeding, Industry, Commerce, and Transportation In discussing stock breeding we must distinguish the various branches of this industry which were handled differently. Live stock in Egyptian economy, both public and private, were divided into four large classes: (1) cattle destined for draft purposes, — oxen and cows; (2) animals for transportation pur- poses, — donkeys, mules, camels and horses; (3) beasts and fowl bred for slaughter and for sacrifices, — calves, lambs, kids, swine and geese; (4) wool-bearing animals, — sheep and goats. Milk cattle as such were not specially bred in Egypt, although cheese was made and eaten in large quantities, especially that made from goat and sheep milk. Let me deal with each class separately. '1 We do not know the number of draft cattle on the estate of Apollonius, but we must assume that the estate kept scores if not hundreds. We have seen that Zenon had to furnish draft cattle to his farmers as they possessed no cattle whatever. This required large numbers of oxen and cows. In P.S.I. 509, year 30, one of the herds of draft cattle on the estate is mentioned. Panakestor makes a contract with the farmers of the pasture tax {kvvbixiov) of the Arsinoite nome in the presence of Zoilus the oeconome, and Diotimus his secretary. Pana- kestor declares fifty cows and oxen and thirty donkeys as liable to the tax. Another herd (P.S.I. 351, year 32) was sent to the pastures of Hephaestias; but the cattle found no pasture there, only Tvplur], i.e., wheat fields already harvested. In P. SI. 409, the number of calves which belonged to Apollonius and »' No good investigation of the treatment of cattle by the State in Egypt exists. I shall make a few suggestions in my commentary on P. Tebt. 703; see meanwhile my article in the Journ. of Eg. Arch., VI (1920), 173 ff. One of the most important questions is to understand what is meant by the term /3a»» P. Petrie III, 43, 2, col. 1, 1. 29, 30; col. Ill, 1. 10; col. IV at the bot- tom; verso, col. IV, 1. 6 fF. Highly important is P. Petrie III, 37 (a); cf. P. Hal. 12. •»• P. Petrie II, 37-III, 44, 2-4, see especially verso, col. Ill; cf. Ill, 41 and 46, 1; II, 13, 20; II, 26, 1 and 2-III, 64 (a). 154 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES by the nomarchi who controlled the works called ^vXoKotia and OpvoKoirla. The fact that the nomarchi acted as contractors shows that they disposed of unlimited quantities of men (o-cd/iaTo) working under compulsion but for a remuneration. It is proved by P. Petrie II, 9, 1, where the engineer Theodorus asks the sub-dioeketes Diotimus to give an order to the nomar- chi to send all their men for hasty work on the dykes. We see therefore that in respect to the engineering work done in the nome the nomarchi took an active part in their capacity as officials who disposed of the manual labour of the population, especially that of the crown peasants, and at the same time in their capacity as the officials who managed the whole of the unproductive land of their section. In this last capacity, for instance, they disposed of the pasture land by giving it out to herdsmen (P.S.I. 367 and 361). When the engineering work had transformed the marshy or sandy land into land virtually arable, the nomarchi had to take care that this land should be plowed and sown and should yield a -revenue to the State. As the chiefs of the crown peasants of their district and, so to say, as agents of immigration,' the nomarchi dealt both with the existing groups of crown peasants and with new groups to be settled on the new lands. We have seen that many new settlements in the Fayum received their names from individuals with Greek names; this is espe- cially true of small settlements like the eTroUia, — hamlets."" These names were probably the names of the men who owned and settled these places. The fact that the sections administered by the nomarchi bear their names testifies therefore that they were the settlers of these districts. I have no doubt that the original three sections, — merides, of the Fayum, which received the names of Polemon, Herakleides and Themistus, preserve in these names the record of their being settled by men bearing these names, probably the first nomarchi of the Fayum. As managers of the new lands the nomarchi entered into agreements with the crown peasants on the conditions of work on the new lands and of the payments to the treasury. They supervised the work of these peasants, tried to settle misunder- "» See the list of Grenfell, P. Tebt., II and above p. 9. ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 155 standings, disturbances and strikes, and had even a certain power of ousting the peasants from their refuges in the temples and sacred precincts (P.S.I. 490, 502, 536; P. Z. 34, 35, 40; P. Lond. Inv. 2090, 2096). In the same capacity as managers of the productiye and un- productive land, the nomarchi took also an active part in the assignment of the new lands to the military holders of these lands and to the holders of the 8upeai, and after the land had been assigned they took care that land properly prepared for cultivation was plowed and sown (P.S.I. 500). For this purpose they again used the masses of the crown peasants, acting as intermediaries between them and the new holders of the land. We must not forget that the land given to the cleruchi and to the holders of the Sopeai remained the property of the King, changing its status only temporarily. It is not surprising that the nomarchi cared also for the lands which came back into the hands of the State (P.S.I. 536). As the managers of the land the nomarchi naturally took charge of a rational distribution of the crops, according to the needs of the State. The famous P. Petrie III, 75 (cf. II, 23, 2-III, 33), which contains a report on the distribution of crops on a territory of 180,000 arurae in the year 12 of Euergetes, was probably compiled by the nomarch for the use of the oeconome on the basis of the reports of his assistants, the toparchi, who in their turn certainly drew their information from the reports of the komarchi and the village scribes. P Petrie III, 75 has been regarded generally"^ as a report dealing with the whole amount of the sown land of the nome. This of course is impossible. 180,000 arurae do not represent "' Even by myself in Pauly-Wissowa-KroU, R. E., Frumenlum; cf. P. Meyer, P. Hamb. 24, Intro. This conception of tlie document is based on the introductory formula: irap' ' A.fx^jLOiv[Lov] vo^iapxov rod 'Apa-Lvolrov r^s/ KaTeairapiikvris 7^s eis t4 17 iros/ ?ms 'Mup X, koBotl kTrkSuiKav ol T[<5]!rapxoi./ ii/ TOIL ' Apa-Lmhrii, follows the list. But this heading, as I see now, does not mean that the crops of the whole of the Arsinoite nome were enumerated but that in this list that portion only of the nomarchy was taken into consideration which formed a part of the Arsinoite nome. It is probable therefore that the area of a nomarchy may have included lands situated in different nomes, and therefore a nomarchy was not a subdivision of a nome but was a special division for special purposes of an economic nature. 156 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES the area of the sown land of the Arsinoite. The fact that the report was compiled by a nomarch shows that it deals with the arable land of one nomarchy only, perhaps with the arable land of one of the three merides. Our papyrus enables us therefore for the first time to judge the size of a nomarchy. Finally, in the same capacity as managers of agriculture, the nomarchi were closely connected with the payments of the rent of this land to the State, whether land sown with cereals or oil plants, or land planted with vines or trees, or land used as pas- tures. To the question of the origin of the nomarchi I cannot give any definite answer. There are two opinions on this subject. Wilcken (Grundz., p. 10) links the nomarchi of the Ptolemies with the nomarchi of Alexander who were probably governors of the nomes. Grenfell on the other hand (see above p. 152), disconnects both and explains the title nomarch as a new formation derived from vt/Ka, i. e., to distribute, the nomarchi being, so to say, chiefs of the distribution of land and crops. Against Wilcken is the fact that in the Fayum the nomarchi never had to do with the whole of the nome, but from the first only with sections of the nome. Against Grenfell is the indefiniteness of the name and its separation from the similar terms Toirapxai and Kcafiapxai- I should propose therefore the solution that vo/jlos, a section, in this case means not a district of Egypt as a whole but a district of the region called Aifivri, — lake. For distinguishing between the two, the name used for these last districts was not vofids but voixapxia., like Tovapxi-a. which is equivalent with roiroi,, places. The first sections of the Lake district were called merides and their chiefs perhaps H€pi5apxa-i; the subsequent subdivisions of these merides received a different name, to distinguish them from the merides, and were called not vofios, — district, but to avoid confusion, voiiapxia. In any case the name has a topographical not an explanatory meaning: like toparch, and not like oeconome or dioeketes. I doubt very much whether between the nomarchi of Alexander and those of Philadelphus there is any historical connection. The explanation for the division of the Limne into merides first and into nomarchies later lies in the important and complicated character of the functions of their chiefs, functions which ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 157 required special acquaintance with local conditions and special ability in dealing with the native population; this is also the reason for employing men of native origin for these oflSces. No one man could master such a task in a large district; the presence of the nomarch might be required at any moment in one or another part of his nomarchy. The nomarch ought to be in constant touch with the population, and in all the compli- cations recorded in our documents we see that the nomarch is always at hand and the oeconome is usually absent. In such provinces as the Fayum the nomarchi naturally played a very important part in the administration of the province, while their role was much more modest in the other nomes of Egypt. It is also only natural that their importance gradually decreased rather than increased, even in the Fayum. The nomarchy as an institution gradually lost its individual character and occupied a modest place in the series of various officials who worked in a nome in the last half of the third and in the second century. If I am right in my description of the office of the nomarchi, their r61e in the life of a Sdspea, their importance for this life, and their constant relations with the manager of the Sospta, need no special explanation. The Soipea of ApoUonius was one of the toparchies of a nomarchy, and the managers of the dupti. therefore were the nearest subordinates of the nomarchi. But as these subordinates were agents of the dioeketes, the r61es were inverted, and the nomarchi were agents of ApoUonius rather than chiefs of the district held by them. APPENDIX II ZENON UNDER EUERGETES I have dealt in the text of my article with the correspondence of Zenon for the last years of Philadelphus, but the corre- spondence did not stop at the year of the death of Philadelphus. We are in possession of some letters and documents dated in the first eight years of Euergetes (see Vitelli, P.S.I. VI, p. XIII, to the no. 397, cf. P.Z. 64), and written by Zenon or for the most part addressed to him. We have rarely had occasion to quote these letters in dealing with the estate of ApoUonius, because the character of the correspondence changes suddenly with the first year of Euergetes. None of the letters of this period can be referred to the afifairs of the Swpsa and none even mentions the name of ApoUonius. Yet Zenon still resides at Philadelphia and his interests remain the same, mostly material interests con- nected with agriculture, viticulture or cattle breeding. I cannot believe that this sudden change is accidental, and I propose an hypothesis for explaining it. Of course it is merely an hypothesis, as our evidence is much more scanty than for the preceding period. We have seen that ApoUonius disappeared from the stage with the first year of Euergetes and we had every reason to suppose that his career did not end in a peaceful way. The Soipta of the former dioeketes disappears apparently at the same time. Is it an accident? Must we not assume that the Soipea of ApoUonius returned to the State and that Philadelphia became an ordinary village? But Zenon did not disappear: he remained at Philadelphia and his corre- spondence is still copious and full of interest. Let us investigate a little more closely the character of this correspondence. Zenon apparently even at this period kept his connections with Alexandria, and still had some influence. In P.S.I. 392, year 6 of Euergetes, Hermocrates writes to him from Alexandria asking for help in his hardships. He has to stand trial before the King and is anxious to be acquitted; the matter seems to be of a financial character, as is shown by the technical expression aTai), and offers to carry out all the work alone as he is well provided with men. Zenon, to whom the letter is addressed, 162 ROSTOVTZEFF — A LARGE ESTATE IN EGYPT 163 should come to measure the work already done and should also send food for the workers. Is it an accident that prison- ers {dtafi&rai) sent by ApoUonius appear again in P. Petrie II, 13, 3 and 4, cf . 4, 10— III, 42 (c), 8 and 9? In P. Petrie II, 13, 3, they are building an bxhpuiixa, that is, walls to strengthen the banks of a canal for the construction of a bridge or sluice. The editors understand oxipoina as a prison! Other papyri of the same series also refer to ApoUonius. In P. Petrie II, 4, 8 — III, 42 (c), 1, one hundred and forty stone cutters are idle; they point out that the dioeketes may be angry as he wants speedy work (toC SioiKijToC airevdovTos) . Similar complaints are found in P. Petrie II, 4, 1, — although ApoUonius the supervisor of the work (epYoStci/cTjjs), of this papyrus is of course not ApoUonius the dioeketes, and also in P. Petrie II, 4, 9— III, 42 (c), 2. How can we explain the active part taken by the dioeketes in this work of the stone cutters? He appears here not only as a person interested in the progress of the work but also as the employer of the stone cutters. The explanation of this fact may be found in P. Petrie II, 13, 18 (b) and 13, 6— III, 42 (g), 7 and 4, no date, which tell us that a certain ApoUonius, "for the purpose of relieving the King" {kov» I do not discuss here the opinions of the other scholars who have dealt with the same series of papyri. See their works quoted above in note 61. APPENDIX IV THE HISTORY OF THE NOMOI TEAONIKOI OF PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS As far as I know nobody as yet has investigated the history of the Revenue Laws, the vouol reKoovLKoi of Ptolemy Philadel- phus. And yet the document itself tells its history. The first part of the papyrus contains the general v6/xos reKcavLKos, which dictates the general conditions on which the farms were given out. It is dated probably in the same year of Philadelphus as the law on the apomoira and the law on the eXatxTj, in the year 27 of his rule. More complicated is the history of the following section which deals with the apomoira. The new organization of the tax called apomoira, a sixth or a tenth of the produce of the vineyards and gardens, was introduced in the year 23 of Philadelphus. In this year are dated two orders (Trpoo-rd- 7/iara) of the King each followed by a single wpoypafiij.a or haypanna. The orders are short and of a very general charac- ter, introducing the Tpoypkixnara or SiaypapinaTa, which in their turn prescribed certain preliminaries to the collection of the apomoira. I have mentioned and described them in the text of my article, p. 42 ff. No detailed measures for the collei tion of the apomoira are published in our document with the orders of the year 23. But such measures originally existed in the series of documents of the year 23. In the existing document they are replaced by the order of the year 27 and by the text of the law on the collection of the apomoira. The history of the law on the apomoira was then as follows. In the year 23 three orders were published by the King: two of them intro- duced orders to collect preliminary statistics necessary for the collection of the apomoira; the third introduced the law on the collection of the apomoira and ordered the collection to be carried out. In the y€(ar 27 this last order and the law were republished with modifications and were dated in the year 27; the first two orders of the year 23 were appended to this order and to the law. The next section of the R. L. contains the vo/ios eXaiK^s. There are no documents appended to this law. The law 165 166 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES apparently was a new one, first introduced in the year 27 by Philadelphus. The first lines of this section are missing. But I presume that there was no Tpbarayna at the beginning but simply a heading, e. g., Aiaypanfia eXaiKrjs like Aiaypafifia rpa- TTi^Giv (col. 73) or Nojuos eXaiKjJs like N6;ttos SeKaTtjs (col. 80). We know too little of the Hellenistic legal terminology to under- stand the difference between vS/xos and 5ia.ypap.ua. The heading of the next section, that on the bdovt.i)pa. (col. 87 ff.), is not preserved. The whole document seems to be an attempt at a codification of the rules which regulated those parts of the State economy which were organized as incomes of the State collected by tax farmers. Some of the taxes which were dealt with in the new law were farmed before the publication of this attempt at a codification; for some taxes the farm system was first intro- duced by the new law. The "Codex" was publisl^ed by the order of the King by the dioeketes ApoUonius and was com- piled by his ofl&cials. The notes in the copy which preserved for us the regulations (col. 22 and 38) were written by the man who was sent to Alexandria to copy the roll for the officials of the Fayum and who made the copy in the office of the dioeketes ApoUonius. If my attempt at tracing the history of the R. L. is correct, we may assume that Satyrus, the predecessor of ApoUonius, was the author of the N6/ios «kt7js,, the law on the apo- moira, and that ApoUonius was the author of the codified N6/iO( T^oiVLKol and of the No/^os eXatK^s. APPENDIX V THE BREEDING OF HORSES BY PTOLEMY PHILADELPHUS In the works on the organization of the Ptolemaic army no attention has been paid to the highly important question as to how the Ptolemies supplied their cavalry with horses. We must keep in mind the fact that cavalry played an important part in the Ptolemaic army in three subdivisions: the horse regiments, the elephants or tanks of the ancients, and the armed chariots which were a heritage from the ancient Orient. On the means by which the army was supplied with elephants, see my articles in Arch. IV, p. 301 and V, p. 18; Lesquier, Les institutions militaires sous les Lagides, p. 353; Wilcken, Grundz., p. 263, and the new evidence in P. Tebt. III. But the question of the horses was never treated in full and there are only a few words in Lesquier, 1. cit., p. 103. If we take into account the picture which is given by Appian of the strength of the Ptolemaic cavalry (Appian, Prooem. 10: xai ToTs e/ioTs /SatriXeOo-i fiovoLs rjv crpaTLo. re Trefoil fivpiaSes i'iKoai Kal fivpiaSes lirveoiu rtaaapes Kal iXeipavres iroktuLaTal TpiaKoaioi /cat apfiara « fiaxas 5tcrxiXta), we must suppose that large studs existed both in Egypt and in the Ptolemaic provinces, especially in such provinces as the Ammanitis, — a large prairie land famous for its horses (see above note 35). We have seen that Tubias, the sheikh of this land on one occasion sent to Phila- delphus as a personal present (^kvLo) horses and donkeys. Horse breeding was certainly carried on in Egypt also in spite of the unfavourable conditions. Studs in Middle Egypt and in the Arsinoite are often mentioned in the Hibeh, Petrie and Tebtunis papyri (see P. Hib. 118, a, col. II and b, col. I; 162; P. Petrie III, 62 (b); P. Tebt. 842 — /SactXtKot IVTrot and lTnroTp6oi). We have seen that ApoUonius himself indulged in horse breeding on his estate. I should like to connect with these documents two documents of the Petrie series. P. Petrie III, 54 deals, with horses of the Ptolemaic soldiers, probably cleruchi. Spe- cial inspectors of horses are mentioned and the duty of lTnroTpoiiv 167 168 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES (feeding the horses) seems to lie with the cleruchi. Can we not assume that the soldiers kept the horses given to them by the State even after the expeditions, when they were spending their time in their quarters (aTadtwl) or on their cleri, under the obligatiort of caring for the horses and of feeding them; by the way, a good parallel to the Roman equites equo publico and equo private. Is the Antiochus mentioned in this papyrus not the same as the Antiochus of P. Hal. 1, 166, Dikaiomata p. 98? More instructive still is the series of documents P. Petrie II, 25 — III, 61, year 21 of Euergetes. The editors call these documents "Accounts of 'vetturini.' " But a mere glance at the documents shows that they are accounts of food delivered to horses and men divided into avvupiSes and ap/tara (chariots of two and four horses?); the men are called fivioxoi. and liriro- KOfiOL, — coachmen and grooms. These horses and men were moving in detachments through Ptolemais Hormu, probably northward, and some of them stopped for a while at this landing place. Food was delivered to them on the order of the oecon- ome according to rriv Tapa ' Aprkijuiivos tov eTnararov tSiv Kara rifv Xtopav (I'lTTrtoj' or linroTpoLo}v?) evroKiiv. The names apuara and avpcopiSis being technical names, the journey of the detach- ments must have had an official character. I have no doubt that the ap/iara and (rvvupiSes were either military chariots moving towards Alexandria for shipment to the place where the army was operating, or perhaps were race horses going to Greece to take part in some world-famous races. Either assumption is possible and both testify to extensive horse breeding in Egypt for the purposes of which a constant supply of fresh horses from Arabia was a prime necessity. ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA CHAPTER I While my manuscript was already in the press Mr. C. C. Edgar published three new articles on the Zenon papyri: V (Annates du Service des Antiquites de I'Egypte, XX, 19 £f.) con- taining nos. 49-54 and additions to nos. 36 and 46; VI {ihid., p. 181 ff.) containing nos. 55-64, and VII {ibid., XXI, p. 89 ff.) containing nos. 65 and 66. The new documents are mostly well preserved and each of them supplies us with new and valuable information. One new papyrus of the Zenon series was acquired by the University of Michigan (Inv. 40, quoted P. Mich.) and was published by Prof. A. E. R. Boak in the Alumni Journal of the University of Michigan for the current year in facsimile and translation. Finally Dr. H. I. Bell has sent me his copies of 22 new letters of the Zenon archives recently purchased by the British Museum. The study of these new documents has corroborated most of the views expressed in my paper. Except for some minor corrections which I was able to insert into the proofs of my book, I had nothing to change in the text. Nevertheless the new evidence is important; it throws new light on several debated questions and gives to some of my hypotheses the character of ascertained facts. Therefore I have thought it useful to report in these "Addenda et Corrigenda" on the content of the new documents and to assign to several of them the place which they should have occupied in my book had I had the opportunity of using the new evidence in time. Most valuable is the information on the end of the career of Apollonius and on the life of Zenon under Euergetes. CHAPTER II Contemporaneously with the Zenon papyri documents of other periods were found in Philadelphia. Philadelphia seems to have been a vast field of haphazard exploration since, 1914 and during the War. Beside those mentioned in the text, this exploration yielded the valuable papyrus containing an edict of the Emperor Hadrian which was lately published by Jouguet 169 170 UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN STUDIES in Rev. d. etudes gr., XXXIII (1920), 375 ff. Some others of the same series and time are in the Caro Museum and will certainly yield new information on the history of Philadelphia in the late Hellenistic and the Roman period. CHAPTER III P. 20. My hypothesis on the disgrace and perhaps the violent death of Apollonius after Euergetes became King of Egypt was fully confirmed by two new documents of the Cairo Museum (P.Z. 61 and 55). The first is dated in the year 5 or 6 of Euergetes. It is a document dealing with the payments due from a surety of an insolvent contractor of Philadelphia. The persons to whom these payments were due are the former and the actual chiefs (^itio-tAtoi) of the territory of Philadelphia which is called now officially "the Philadelphian toparchy" (oi KaT&^i.\a5k\w6 KripvKa) 98, 150, 176. Axes (&^ivai, TeXeKets), 65, 97. Bakeries, private, 70; public, 181. Bankers, 38, 106. Banking, private, 182, v. Loans. Barges (KiBriySs), 34, 35, 7 1, 124, 125, 134, 163. Barley (Kpi9^), 52, 53, 72, 87, 88, 90, 118,119, 184. Baths, 70, 87, 121, 122, 143, 161, 184; business, 122; bath keepers, 122; bath-rubber, slave, 2 1 : V. Farming and Rents. Beasts, v. Animals. Bees, 105; beehives, 183; beekeepers, 51, 105, 106, 109, 110, 141, 161, 179; beekeeping, 117, 123; v. Rents. Beer, 94, 117, 119; brewers (fuTOirotot), 118- 120, 141 ; allowance of raw material {cilvTa- ?«), 118, 119; shops, 50, 70, 118-120, 143, v. Collectors, Controllers and Treasurers; shopkeepers (fUTOTwXat), 118-120, v. Con- tracts; trade, 118, 120, 141; v. Farming and Rents. Boar, wild, 112. Boys trained in the palaestra, 32, 172-174. Branches, dry, 123. Bread, trade, 117, 141. Breeding of animals, v. Animals, Cattle, Geese, Goats, Horses, Sheep, Swine. Bricks, 57, 70. Bridges, 64, 153, 163. Brushwood, fascines, 153; brushwood land, v. Land. Building activity, 56, 57, 69, 70, 72. Burial of Adonis or Osiris, 37. Cabbage (Kpaix^i], fiatpavos), 105; seed oil, 105. Calves, 107-109; royal, 109; for sacrifices (Jcpeta), 52, 71, 107-109, 175; breeders, 175; supervisors (fioaxorpdcpoi), 108, 109; guards, 109; stables (fioaxorpdtpia) , 108, 109; V. Taxes. Camels, 107, 110, HI, 176, 180. Canals, 3, S3, 59, 66, 67, 153, 163; construc- tion, 65, 68, 69, 142, 162; maintenance, 13, 58; estimate of work and expenses of con- structing, 57, 58; canal of Kleon, 61, 68; v. Irrigation. Captains (KvffepvfJTai.), 125. Carpenters, 30, 36. Carpets, 116. Carriages, horse, 52, 111. Cat feeders {aiKovpo^o'£oxot),25,26, 168; Median slave, 21. Cocks, 110,114,175. Codification of the administrative system, 128; of the laws on revenue farming, 166. Coins, 36, 97, 134. Collectors of beershops, 118, 119, v. Beershops- Colonization of the Fayum, 9, 10. Commerce, 3, 129; foreign, 35, 132-135; of Apollonius, 33-39; of the King, 35. Complaints of the individual farmers, 82, 83, 85, 177; of the crown peasants, 73-75, 79, 80, 85. Compulsion as the base of the administrative system, 128, 132; compulsory labour, v. Labour. Concessions, system of State, 140, 141, v. Farming, Licenses and Monopolies. Concessionaires, 140-143, 145, 149, v. Farmers. Confiscations, of 5wpeai, 20, 170, 171, 176; of land for debts to the treasury, 83; of land imder the Romans, 12, 13. Conflicts with peasants, 73-81, 86. Contractors, 142, 149, 170; of building work, 176; of irrigation works, 53, 59-62, 153, 154; for making jars, 181; of public works, 140; of stone work, 163, 164; general contractor of irrigation work (lp7oX(!t/3os), 60, 61; sub- contractors, 60, 140, 163, 164, 183. Contracts, 71, 176, 180; with beer shopkeep- ers, 118-120, collective with peasants, 72-74, 76, 84, 101; for the division of crops, 77-79, 84; for grain, 90; for irrigation works, 53, 58- 60, 63, 153; for land lease, 60; for loans, 23, 46, 122; for the sale of a slave, 25; for stone work, 162; for the collection of the rent in kind, 81: with tax farmers, 107; for wine, 102, 103; approval of the contracts by the administration of the nome, 53; renuncia- tion (ypaipii 6.irotrTCUTLov), 74, 75; titles in, 147. Control of the State, system, 127; over the agriculture, 84, 149;over the beer trade, U8; over concessions, 142; over constructions, 57, 70; over the expenditures of the5uped,57; over the expenditure on irrigation, 57, 58, 66; over the finances of the provincial cities, 172; over the planting and the gathering of crops, 56, 57, 64-66, 84; over the retail trade. 118, 1 19; over seed grain, 83; over the trans- port business, 125; over the watering of land, 66, 67 ; over the trade in wood, 123. Controllers of beer shops, 118-120, .. Beer Cooks (fiaycLpos)t 30, 36. Coordination of the economic activity of the population, 126-128. Corporation of the naucleri, 125, 133, v. Nauderi. Correctores, 172. Court of Apollonius, v. "House." Courts of complaints, 74, 80, 86. Cows, 50, 52, 82, 107, 108, v. Cattle. Croton, 52, 77, 88, 90-92; seed, 64, v. Oilplants. Crown peasants, v. Feasants. Cults religious, 137; royal, 10, 37, 69. Curatores, 172. Custom duties, 12, 26, 27; farmers, v. Farmers; houses, 25, 33, 35; station at Philadelphia, 12. Day expenses, sealing of by State officials, 57. Dekatarchi, v. Tenmen. Diagraphe {Siaypaipii), 101. Dioeketes, 2, 21, 22, 28, 29, 34, 147, v. Apol- lonius, Chrysippus, Eutychus, Kleandrus, Satyrus, Sosibius, Theogenes. Distribution of the crops, 155, 156; of land, v. Land. Ditches (dx«Tol), 61, 69, 162. Division of the crops, 77, 78. Dockyards, 122, 123. Doctors, 31, 36, 105. Dogs, 112, 113, 130. Domus, Roman, 36. Donkeys,26,S0,88,91,95, 107, 110, 111, 112, 114,122,167,175. ^up€&., origin, 143: transitional character of the institution, 145; disappearance, 46; return to the State, 158; confiscation, 20, 170, 171, 176; legal position, 42, 46, 48; substitute for salary, 143; royal grant,42,47,48,49, 129,142; royal land (7? /SttfflXoc^), 48, 49; cleruchic character, 48, 49, 142; temporary, personal character, 48, 49, 144, 155; consists of land and villages, 43, 47, 48, 142; consists of lands in different nomes, 181; administrative powers of the holders over the population of the villages, 47, 49-53, 142-144; relations to the State administration, 143, 147, 155. 157; control of the State, 57, 58, 66, 70; payments to the State, 142; organization of the admin- istrative work, 129; revenues, 62, 89, 90. Acopeai, of Apolloniusin Philadelphia, passim; in the Memphite nome, 38, 39, 51, 53, 54, 61 111, 113, 121, 151; of Chrysermus, 44, 48 ; of Kallixenes, 45 ; of Nicanor, 45 ; of Phil- INDICES 195 inus, 175; of Telestes, 17S; ot Themistus, 151, 175; Palestine as a Supei, 26, 46, 143; Telmessus, 26, 45, 46, 79, 143. Drainage, 9, 61, 64-66, 68, 69, 153, v. Irriga- tion and Land reclamation. Dykes (xiil^ara), 59, 64, 68; construction, 47, 54, 63, 65, 68, 69, 142, 153, 154, 162; con- tractors, 53, 62; building or repair by individual farmers, 82 ; estimate of the work and expenses of constructing, 57, 58; mainte- nance, 13, 18, 47, 53, 58, 60; guards (xu^a- TO^\aK€i), 67; V. Irrigation and Taxes. Edict of Hadrian, 169. Eggs, 110. Eglogist, chief, in Alexandria, 17, 19. Elders of the peasants (7rpe(r/36repot), 53, 73, 74,81,85. Elephants, 167. Engineers, 2, 18, 47, S3, 58-63, 66-68, 137, 153; and contractor, 60, 61; salary, 18, 68; v. Horns, Kleon, £omoapis, Fetechon, Tfaeo- dorus. Engineering works, 11, 154, v. Irrigation. Epigraphe, v. Taxes. Epimeletes, 45. Epistates, 50, 51, 89, 170, 171, 181; of the Arabs,51,114. Epitaph for a dog, 112, 130. Eponyme of a military corps, 44, 45, 76, 175; of a meris, 151. Equites, Roman, 168. Exchange of foreign gold into Ptolemaic, 36, 134; of gold plate, 36; of worn gold coins, 36. Factories, house, 117; oil, 12, 43, 91, 92, 141; of woollen stuffs, 53, 115-117, 135. Farmers of land, individual, 63, 81-89, 98, 107, 108, 110, 111, 117, 119, 138, 142, 177, 178; of plantations of vegetables, 98; of vine- yards, 101; general farmer of land, 84; sub- farmers, 177; salaries, 83 89; v. Peasants. Farmers ot taxes and revenues, 103, 106 117, 129, 140, 141, 144, 166, 184; general farmers, 143, 144; of the bath rent, 122; of the beer industry, 119, 120; of the custom duties, 33-35, 134; of the oil monopoly, 92, 103; of the pasture tax, 107; of the rent in kind (4«c*^Ap^o), 77-79, 81; of the rent paid by the iinroKdfiOt., 1 12; of the revenue from the beekeepers, 106; of the taxes on vineyards, 101, 103; general farmers of the taxes on vineyards, 182, 183; sub-farmers of the taxes on vineyards, 95, 103 ; v. Rents and Taxes. Farming (dived), system, 26, 140, 141, 149, 165, 166; of taxes, 103; of beer industry (ftn-jjpA), 1 19; of cheese and salt meat trade. 115; of fisheries, 153; of hunting, 153; of land revenues, 153;of making of jars, 181;of meat trade, 121; ot the retail trade in oil, 121; of the oil revenues, 153; of the revenues from the pasture land, 153; of the swine trade, 109, 110; of the produce of the vineyards, 98; of the wine revenues, 150, 153; v. Licenses, Rents and Taxes. Feeders of cats (alKovpo^oa-Koi), 51, 54; of ibises, 123. Feudal elements in Egypt, 4 . Fig trees, 104. Fish, 117, 135; salted fish trade, 141; fishing, 112. Fisheries, 153. Flax, 116, 117, 178. Fleet, commercial of Apollonius, 35, 122-125, 133. Flowers, 104. Food for soldiers, 121; for dogs, 113 Foreman of the coachmen and grooms, 26. Fowl, 90, 107, 175, 180. Fruit, 104; gardens, v. Orchards; transporta- tion, 104; trees, 93, 104, 135; introduction of new kinds, 104, 112. Galleys, 125. Game, 135. Games (contests), 173. Gardeners (mjiroupoi), 30, 36, 96, 97, 139. Gardens (irapAS«o-oi), 11,13,17,69,70,139, 142, 145, 165, 177, 178, v. Orchards and Taxes. Gariic, 85, 97, 104, 105. Geese, 52, 107, 110, 115; fox-geese, 110; breeders (x'?''o^o(r/(oJ), 110, 179; v. Rents. Giris, slaves (waiSliTKaL), 25, 54, 65, 115, 116. Glass, 134. Goats, 71, 107, 113, 115, 160, 179, 180; breed- ing, 112, 113; milk, 107; v. Rents and Taxes. Goatherds, 180. Governors of the nome, 14, 156. Grain, 72, 89, 94, 102, 179; (ffiTOS /3o(rtXlltAs), 90; {(TITO! (popilcAs), 90; Syrian, 24, 26, 27; bought on compulsion (fftTos AyopaarSs), 90, 121; buying, 85, 174; collecting, 85, 87; distribution, 90; payments of to the State, 37, 45; rations ((riTO/ierpia), 53, 67, 88-90, 105, 111, 117, V. salaries; registration, 90; release, 90; sale, 89, 90, 178; seed, 77, 82- 85,87,90,91; furnishing of seed {xoPVYf^"), 85; trade, 24, 27, 134; transport, 122, 125. Granaries, public. 66. Grapes, gathering, 95, 99. Grass, 82, 83, 90; seed, 85 ; grass land, v. Land. Grooms I.Ittok6hoi), 25, 26, 111, 112, 168. Gravel (xnXiJ)i extraction, 176. Gromatici, Roman, 58. 196 INDICES Guards, of the calves, 109; of the crops iyturi- liaTotpO\aK(s), 81; of the dykes (xaiMaro- p6Xa)t6S),67; field-guards, 14; of flax, 117; of vineyards, 95, 179; v. Taxes. Gum-styrax, 178. Gymnasium, 161. Harness, 111, 175. Harvesttime, 78, 81,91, 122. Hay (x6pTOs), 30, 45,90,111, 113,121, 179, 184; requisition, 151; transport, 183; dealers, 183; State superintendent of hay (4 hrl xbpTov), 183. Hemp (aTLirTVof), 117. Hens, 110, 114, 175. Herds, 11, 54, 87, 88 107, 109, 113-115, 160, 176, 179, 180, 182, 183. Herdsmen, 113, 115, 127, 140, 141, 154, 160. Hides, 178. Hoes (SImXXoi), 97. Honey, 52, 105, 106, 141, 175. Horses (kt^im;, iir7roi),26, 30, 52, 88, 107, 110- 112, 114, 167, 168, 179, 184; race, 168; royal (txTroi/Soo-iXllcoO, 167; breeding, 167,168; breeders (iirTroTpifpot), 140, 167; buying for the army, 25, 27; sale to the army. 111, 112; maintenance ilinrOTpocpia), 167, 168, 184; State inspectors, 167; superintendent in the estate, lll.v Hegesilaus; studs (t7r7roTp6sP- LOli), 112, 167, 184; carriages, 52, HI; imple- ments for the care, 72; stables (iinr(iv€S),TO. Horsemen (cavalry men, tinrets), 52, 70, 100, 121, 167, 170, 184; secretary, 121, 170, 184; V. Cleruchi and Military settlers. ■'House" {o'tKlat orcourtofApoUonius, 28-32, 35-37, 39, 129-131, 174, 182; of the Hellenis- tic kings, 20. Houses, 52, 69, 70, 98, 99, 139 145, 170, 177; ejection, 99; factories, 117. Hunters, 112; hunting, 112, 153. Hypodioeketes {iyirodiOiKTiTai), v. Sub- dioeketes. Ibis feeders of Mea, 123. Implements for the care of horses, 72; for stone cutters, 162; for vinedressers, 97, 98. Industry, 3, 129, 148, 180; new branches, 144; linen, 116-118, 166; woolen, 116, 118. Industrial activity, 11, 135; technique, 135. Inscription for the health of ApoUonius and Zenon, 69. Inspection journey of ApoUonius, 28, 29; of the King to the Fayum, 163. Iron trade, 35. Irrigation works, 84, 138; in the Fayum, 9, 11, 137, 162, 163; in the esute, 56-69; chart and estimate, 57-59; contractors, v. Contractors; contracts, y. Contracts; financing, 62-64, 66; inspection by the King, 163; mainte- nance, 60, 64; supervision by the State, 62; supervisor of the expenditures, 56-58, 64; watermg of the land, 49, 66 67, 72, 82; v. Engineers. Ivory, 134. Jars for wine, 160, 181. Kids, 107. Kiki, 54, 56, 65, 178, v. Oil plants. Kitchen, 70. Knight (linreus), 70. Komarchi, 47, 50, 51, 80, 143, 155, 156. Labour compulsory but paid, 51, 60, 61, 68, 128, 143, 149, 153, 154, 162; slave labour, v. Slaves. Labourers, v. Workmen. Lambs, 107. Land, arable, 54, 68, 81, 83, 98, 135-138, 153, 154, 156; sown (KaTarirapiikvT] Tc^), 155; sown with cereals, 156; with sesame (crriaa- filTiS yij), 64; with oil plants, 87, 156; grass land, 64, 87; hay land, 90; pasture land, v. Pastures; suitable for vineyards, 135; new, 74, 82, 83, 91, 94, 137, 144, 154, 155; pro- ductive, 155; partially productive, 139; borderland of the desert iweTpa), 104; un- productive (airopoi'), 14, 61,136, 139, 154, 155; fallow, 83; unirrigated (o/3poxos 7^), 45, 63 ; overgrown with brushwood, reeds and weeds (^uXtTts yj] or SpvuM'), 63-65,68,73, 77, 112, 177; marshy (rei-dTi;), 61, 68, 153; salty (dXjuupIs), 61; sandy {vipafifio^ yrj), 61,68; shore Cal'ytaXAs) , 64 ; crown or royal {j3ao-(XiKi) -yij), 13,48,49,66,84,93,108;state (ofio'taKi) yij}, 12; catoecic, 13; cleruchic, V. Cleruchic land; owned by Roman veter- ans, 13; hereditary (icT^jua),108; private, 13, 43; privileged, 77; hdupca, 43, 48, 108; kv ffVVTa^ei as a substitute for salaries, 43, 108, 136, 139, 143; status of different classes of land, 43 ; irrigation, v. Irrigation ; reclama- tion, 2, 61, 63-66, 68, 69, 73, 74, 82, 136-138, 144, 145, 177; improvement, 142; intensifi- cation of the productivity, 49; sowing twice, 49; clearing of brushwood {KaJdaptns, ^yXo- Korla or i\oTop.la), 56, 63-65, 69, 82, 153, 154, 177; cutting of reeds (SpuoKoiria), 65, 153, 154; burning of the stumps ikinrvpta- fl6s), 56, 64, 65, 69; measurement, 77, 88; survey, 76; assignment, 52, 75, 76, 150, ISS; distribution, 137, 138, 156; settlement, 135- 140; contracts, v. Contracts; registration of cultivable land, 137; confiscation, v. Confis- cation; increase of dry land, 14; decrease of cultivable, 145; v. Rents and Taxes. INDICES 197 Laurel, 69. Lead, 123, 181. Lease, 74. Legati, 172. Lending oi money, v. Loans. Lentils trade, 120, 141, v. Rents. Licenses, 109, 140; for brewing and selling beer» 119, 120; to export slaves, 33; for hunting, 112; for the sale of trees, 123; for the sale of wine, 101; to run a shop, 118; for planting one's land with vines, 94, 96, 141; V. Concessions and Fanning. Linen industry (6$ovn}pa.), 116-118, 166; clothes, 115; stuff, 115, 134; weavers (u^&i/Tat), 116,117. Linseed oil, 92. List of the villages of the Fayum, 9; of the revenues of the State from vineyards, 94; of payments for cattle, 52; of goods, 104; of officers, 175, 176. Liturgies, 13. Live stock, 88, 107, v. Cattle and Horses. Loans of money, 25, 81, 85, 122, 159, 161, 182; contracts, 23, 46, 122. Loom manager (Jo'TOUp'yAs;, slave, 117. Lumber, 123. Mai!. State, 112. Managers, chief, of the dccpcA. of ApoUonius in Philadelphia, v. Panakestor and Zenon; of the Su>pe6. of ApoUonius in the Memphite nome, v. Addaeus; of ApoUonius' estate abroad, v. Melas; of the Soipea of Kallix- enes, v. Sarapion; ot the palace of Apol- lonius, v. Arten'Morus; of the servants of ApoUonius, v. Amyntas; of the table of ApoUonius (eXcarpos^ v, Artemidorus. Markets, 143; buildings, 45; places {trvvoiKia), 69, 70; gardens, 104, v. Vegetables; v. Taxes. Master of the table of the King (kdearpos), V. Posidonius. Meat, 117, 179; trade (nayipticfi), 121, 141; retail traders (fi6.y€ipoi), 121; salt meat trade, 115, 141; v. Rents. Melons, 97. Memoirs of Euergetes II, 114. Merchants, 127; foreign, 36, 134; wholesale (^M^opot), 36; associations of Bosporan, 35; the King a wholesale merchant, 35. Merides, 152-154, 156; of Herakleides. 42, 102, 129, 152, 154; of Polemon, 102, 152, 154; of Themistus, 102, 151, 152, 154, 176. Milk, 107, 108, 141, v. Taxes. Militarj- lodgings (aTaBfids), 98, 168, 170. Military settlers, 10, 11, 13, 52, 71, 75. 76. 93, 94, 117, 135-139, 142, 155, 161, 173, 175, 180, v. Cleruchi and Horsemen. Minerals, 135. Money transactions, 71, 72, v. Banking and Loans. Monopolies, oil, 66, 92, 101, 103, 165; salt 51; sale, 142; v. Concessions and Licenses. Mules, 107. Musical instrumeat (opyapov), 173. Myriaruri, 47, 48, 68. Myrrh, 37. Names ot viliage^. 9-1 1 137, 154. Naucleri, 125, 134; corporations, 125, 133. Nomarchi, 10, 47, 77, 84, 137, 138, 151-157, v. Ammonius, Damis, Etearchus, Maimachus. Nomarchies, 152, 153, 155-157; nomarchy of Damis and Etearchus, 42, 152. Nuts (Kapva), 104. Nuttrees, royal, 72, 104, Oeconomes, 2, 29, 37, 39, 47, 53, 59, 62, 66, 73, 74, 77, 78, 84, 85, 100, 101, 107, 119, 120, 123,143,148-151,155-157,168,172,181, 182, V. Ammonius, Aristandnis, Aristophanes, Asclepiades, Dionysius, Hermaphilus, Her- molaus, Metrodorus, Philippus, Philiscus, Theokles, Zoilus; of the "house" of ApoUo- nius: Zenon, 29-34, 37-39, 182; Artemi- dorus, V. Artemidorus. Oil, 54; cabbage seed oil, 105; linseed oil, 92; olive oil, V. Olives; made out of radish, 124; seed ((poprla kXaiKa), 42, 63-66,91; plants, 64, 65, 77, 78, 82, 90, 91; land planted with oU plants, 87, 156; distribution, 92; factories (iXaioup7to»'),12,43,91,92, 141; monopoly (eXatJCi)), 66, 92, 101, 103, 165; production, 66, 91; testing of oil seed iK&Bapats), 91; retaU trade, 117, 118, 121, 141; retail traders (eXaiOKotTnjXou. 92,118,121,150,151; reve- nues, 153, V. Farmers and Farming; makers of I inseed oil (XLvef/oi), 92 ; chief agent for oil [6 eirl TWt kXaiiai), 92. Olives, 104; oU, 33, 34, 66, 72, 103; restrictions on the importation, 34, 66; seed, 72; trees, 11, 93, 103, 112,178;gro\es(^XaiSi'€s), 11. 138 ; garden olive, 69. Onions, 97, 104. Orchards (TrapiSeto-os), 42,43, 68,72. 104, 138. 177, 178. V. Gardens. Oves peUitae, 180. Oxen, 52, 71, 82, 83, 107, 108, v. Cattle. Page corps, 32. Palaestra, 31, 32, 36. 172-174; honorary presi- dents of, 173; managers of, 36, 173. Palm plantations, 11, 12. Papyrus, 134. Park (fiXffos), 177, 178. 198 INDICES Pastures (vofiii), 88, 107, 110, 113, 115, 135, 150, 183; pasture land, 12, 87, 113, 141, 148, 153,154, 156,183; V. Taxes. Payments due to the State, 51, 89, 148, 184, v. Rents and Taxes; in advance, 76; due by the State for the produce, 77, 91, 92; to the naucleri (StaxeipliTTUcAi'), 125; to individ- uals, v. Remunerations and Salaries; for other peoples' cattle pasturing on the pasture land, 113. Peasants (yeoipyol), 46, 59, 60, 63, 64, 75, 77, 82, 84, 88, 98, 122, 152; crown peasants (3a), 13, 23, 43, 68, 71, 72, 93-103, 138, 139, 142, 156, 159, 160, 179, 182, 183; new (i'e6^vro$),95;transfonnationinto hereditary property of land planted with vines (Kr^/iara, inipvTtvriis), 94-96, 139, 145; licenses for planting vines, 94, 96, 141; gathering of grapes, 95, 99; watering, 95; registration, 42; registration of the produce,, 103; valuation of the produce, 100; accounts of the produce, 102; inventory of all the vine- yards, 17; taxes, v. Taxes; treatises on the management, 96; general manager of the vineyards in the estate, 97, v. Herakleides; managers, (6 TrpoaTTijictiis), 93, 95-98; vine- dressers i&iiTtKovpyol) ,95-99, 111, 139-141, 160, 179; implements, 97, 98; salary, 96- 98; guards of the vineyards, 95, 179; manual labourers as help, 97, 98; plantations of vegetables in the vineyards, 96-98, 179, v. Irrigation, Vintage, 11, 95, 101. Viticulture, 93, 112, 158. Warrants, 63, 87, 102, v. Sureties. Water in the canal, 72; supply, 80, 176, v. Irrigation. Wax, 123. Weavers, 69, 140, 141;of carpets, 116; of linen, 116, 117; of women's woolen clothes, 116. Weaving industry, 11. Weeding of fields, 177, 178. Wells ((fipkara), 162. Wheat, 66, 72, 82, 89, 90, 111, 124, 177; three months wheat, 49; harvested wheat fields (irvpivri), 107. Willows (It€o), 64. Wine, 94, 100-103, 116, 117, 151, 153, 160, 179; boiled, 175; native (kjrixiipios), 94, 95; new (7XeCitos), 42; Syrian, 34; sweet, 175; axe symbol of wine, 97; distribution, 102, 103' 151; production, 11, 93, 181; release, 103^ revenues, 150, 153; sale, 100-103, 116; transportation, 72, 95, 102, 103, 178; trade, 117, 118, 141; retail traders (wine shopkeep- ers), 100-103. 151; cellars, 69, 101, 159, 160; contracts, 102, 103; gifts (fiwo), 34; dia- graphe, 101; taxes, v. Taxes. Wood, dragging and piling, 65; loaded, 71; scarcity, 70; trade, 123; wood work, 57, 70. Wool (71/dvaXXo), 71, 115, 116, 141, 161; sale, 113,115; transportation, 71 ; v. Taxes. Woolen clothes, 112, IIS, 116; factories, S3, 115-117, 135; industry, 116, 118; stuffs, 115, 161. Workmen, 74, 98, 117; wage workers, 177, 178; hired (Karaniivioi), 177, (lutrSuToi), 82, 83, 177, 181, (cri/ioTO), 60, 62, 154, 177; registration iairoypaipii), 62; v. Labour. Xenia (|ii/to), 34, 124, 125. 167. INDEX III GREEK TECHNICAL WORDS AND GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES a^poxos yij, 45, 63. 'A^pt^ts, 9. alyioKSi, 64. atf, lis, V. goats. alKovpo^CKTKSs , 51, V. cat feeders. alxfi'k^f'^oSt 114. AXiebetv, 65. AXlteiv, 65. AXuc^, 19. tJLKfXVpis, 61. 6.\(TOS, 177, V. parks. AXws, 92. iLHireKovpySs, 95, 96, v. vinedressers. iLfiweKduv, 96» v. vineyards. AMTcXcIjJ' P€6v, 14, v. unproductive land. ^aaiKiK-fi, 48, 66, 84, 93, v. crown land. h Supeq., 43, 48, 108. KaT^ffirapfiiPij, ISS. -|uXtTts or ^uX£s, 64, 65, v. brushwood land. -ovcrtaKri, 12. -(TTja'ajLttrts, 64. -i^ ffUj^Alet, 43, 108, V. land as sub- stitute for salaries. -vipafjLfLOs, 61, ' sandy land. 7X€0kos, 42. 7»'a^aXXa, 1 16, v. wool. ypantiarevs jSutrtXiKAs, 47, v. royal secre- taries. ypo-ifrq, 162, v. contracts. ypatpii itwotTTOxriov, 74, v. contracts, re- nunciation. ypaifiiov, 45. ScxApoi'pot, 48. dexarApxai, SI, 114, 162, v. tenmen. 8eK&T7], 100. 6&r^d>T7}s, 162 163. diaypafipa, 17, 165, 166. &L6.ypantxa eXatK^s, 166. biiiy pap-fxa. Tpaire^uv, 166. Siaypatpij, 101. SLaTrpaais, 60, v. contracts. dtax^tpia-TiKSv, 125. SUeXXa, 97. SioiKijT^s, 147, V. dioeketes. ApVju^s, 63, 64, 73, 112, v. brushwood land. Sujped, passim. 201 202 INDICES duped, ^ kv Me/i^ei, 17 'AtroWoiviov, 42. (kv) Sojpeat. . . . KcojLtai /cat 7^, 43,48, 108. kySoxevs, 36, V. storehouses. tytlpav, 75. ky\oyiaTrjs (ol irapA. Atovvaodupov rera- yiiivoi), 17. iStaTpos, 34. tiKoaapovpoi, 48. iKaTOVTapovpoL, 48. Skj-i), 100. tx^Apwr, 44, 77, 81, 83, 138, v. rent in kind. bixupiiv, 32. iXaiK^, 165, V. oil monopoly. iXauwdnjXot, 118, v. oil retail traders, (d Itti Tftit) iXaibii, 92. iXaioipYtor, 43, v. oil factories. (6 jrpis T&) kKaiovpylwi, 92. eXauifi', 11, V. olive groves. ^auavOTrapiibaffoi, 11. iXiarpos, 30. ^XcudepoXari/iOS, 162, v. stone cutters. UKaiSipOi, 174. iXe^ai^Tc; 7roX6/xt(rTa£, 167. kfvjreirKeyiiivot, rats irpoff65ots, 140. ifiiropoi, 36. inirvpLtruSs, 64, 65, v. land reclamation. tiAipUTtvriis, 94, v. vineyards. in'6^iov, 85, 107 110, 153, 160, v. pasture tax. (oi) efeiXij^Tts, 81. ^f^Ti/T^s, 44. hrapoipiov, 99, 179. eiri'vovos, 99. iipiypatpii, 99-101, v. taxes on vineyards. kKiKowat, 177. iiruTrdTtjs, 89, 170, v. epistates. kTttTTCiTTJS TOV ^OVffeloV, 44. kirtos, 108. Mouo'eroi', 44. fidpiaL dpovpai, 46, 80. luipiipovpos, 47, V. myriarur[. Iivplici), 64. tivpUaifa, 65. vaiKkripos, 125, v. nauderi. veavtiTKOi, 32; ;3a/ii), 9. vc^co, 156. ve66Xa{, 67. XU^ia, 47, V. dykes. Xpa, 32. Xt^pla, 9. dilT7, 26, 109, 140, 149, 181, v. concessions and farming. INDEX IV PAPYRI" B. G. U. 423.. 456.. 519.. 603.. 604.. 998.. 1012. 1022. 1049. .13 .12 .12 .12 .12 .74 .11 .12 .12 P. ELEPH 14., 99, 100 P. FREIBURG 7 76,136,147 P. GEN. 42.. 66.. 67.. 69., 70., .14 .14 .14 .14 P. GIESS 11. IS. 53. .58 .58 P. GRAD. U(b). P. GRENFELL, II .19 P.HAL. 1 19, 168 12 152, 153 IS 150 P. HAMB. 3 12 5 12,13 24 66,155 27 82, 88, 178 35 14 40-53 12,13 P. HIB. 36 114 44 17 85 76, 176 99 76,176 110 121,149 112 99 118a 167 118b 167 133 19 162 167 P. LILLE 1 57-60, 62 2 152 3 11, 119, 171 4 19,171 5 64,152 9 92,150 19 45 28 42, 44, 45 P. LOND. INV. 121 149 .91, 150, 151 161 41 1912 1994 2079 2081 2083 2084 88, 113, 160, 179, 180 2086 87, 121 2087 20 2088 80 2089 18,68 2090 46, 69, 73, 75, 151, 155 2092 24,113 2093 125 2094 46, 63, 73, 75 2095 83, 87, 110, 111, 115 2096 31, 149, 151, 155, 173 2097 81, 85, 87, 88, 91, 104, 109, 110, 150 2098 110 2305 30. 123 2307 175 2308 176, 180 2309 182 * The papyri marked with a cross are those to which new readings are suggested by the author. 205 206 INDICES 2310 174,181 2311 176 2312 31, 172, 173, 177 2313 177,180 2314 69 2315 103,176 2316 177 2320 124 2323 179 2325 181 2326 178 P. LOND. I,p.49 55 III, p. 44e 12 III, p. 69 12 P. MAGD. •4 65 12 78 P. MEYER, JURISTISCHE PAPYRI 4.a 180 76 171 P. MICH. INV. 40 169,178 P. OXYR. 1631 96 P. PAR. 62 119 63 46,108 67 94 P. PETRIE, I 15-111,2,5-6 45 29 95 II 4,1 163 4, 2-111,42 (C),4 147, 162 4,4-111,42 (C), 6 11 4,8-111,42(0,1 163 4,9-111,42 (C), 2 163 ' 4, lO-III, 42(C), 8-9 163 6-111,42, (C) 7 61 9, l-IIl, 43, 8 147, 154 12,4-111, 42 (E), 1 149 13, 1-111,42 (C), 12 147, 162 13, 3-III, 42(C), 8 163 13,4-111,42(0,9 60, 163 •13, S-III, 42(B), 2 67 13, 6-III,42(G),4 149, 163 13, 9-10-III, 42(B), 3,4 67 13, ll-III, 42(A) 67 13, 13-in, 42(G), 6 150 13, 16-III, 44, 1 149, ISO, 152 13, 17-III, 42(D), 3 147 13, 18(a) 163 13, 18{b)-III, 42(G), 7 163 13, 20-III, 42(G), 8 153 14,4 -. 149 15, 2-III, 43, 7 19 20-ni, 36(C) 90 23, 2-III, 33 152, 155 2S-III, 61 168 26, 1-2-III, 64(a) 39, 152, 153 26,7 39 26,8 39 27, 1-m, 69(a) 93 28-III, 66(a) 11 30(a)-ni, 131 90 30(e)-III, 69(b) 93 31-III, 53(d) 90 37-III, 44, 2-4 153 38(b)-III, 53(e) 19, 171 39(a)-III, 88 64, 152 39(g)-ni, S3(f) 45 39(h)-III, 49 152 •42(a)-III, 43, 1 17, 47 46(b)-III, S7{a)-(b) 11 48-III, 116 90 53(s) 45 III 20 121 37(a) 153 41 153 42 F (a) 149, 153 43, 2 18. 63, 153, 181 43, 7 19 46, 1 153, 163 52(a) 93 52(b) 93 53(i) : 18 53(1) 19 53(s) 45 54 167 58(a) 115,121 62(b) 167 67(b) 93 73 45,70 75 155 87 119 100(b) 45,90 105 U 109 180 113 90 117 94 117(b) 99 in(j) 11 117(k) 11 122 94 122(d) 99 142 104 INDICES 207 p. RYt,. INED. 375 109 S 118, 121 "' 87, 113, 114 379 109 P. RYL. II. 380 54, 113, 179 73 lis '81 109, 113 98 a 112 382 123, 150, 151 188 13 383 17 101,150 202 13 '** 50 109 383 12 385 87, 159, 161 386 13 386 109, 160, 179, 182 387 161 P.S.I. 388 88, 114, 161 321 23, 90 389 159, 161 322 17,27 390 161 323 65, 104, 177 391 105, 161, 173 324 17, 24 391 (b) 31 325 17, 24 392 158 327 25,121 393 159, 160, 183 328 37, 54 394 87, 159 •329 30 395 122, 161 330 33 396 159, 160 331 24, 31 397 158 332 105 399 115, 182 333 104 *00 83, 89, 161, 178 335 37 *02 120, 150 336 96 *04 117, 160, 180 337 61,62 405 Ill 338 65 406 25 339 65 409 107, 109 340 31, 32 410 160 341 54, 69, 116 411 31 344 64 414 96 345 95,99 415 147 346 54, 113 '417 88, 182 348 99 418 60. 178 349 92 419 50, 150 350 70, 1 12 420 160 351 107 421 67 353 51, 72, ISO 422 82, 88, 177, 178 354 54, 72, 121, 150, 151, 163, 179 423 162 355 122 424 Ill 356 85, 150. 174 '425 89, 102, 147, 150, tSl 357 124 426 105 358 91, 150, 151 *427 88, 96, 111, 124, 178 359 50, 150 428 104, 105, 124 •360 40, 72, 87, 88, 113 429.71,81,87,88,95-97,109,113-115,124,179 •361 113, 147, ISO, 152, 154 430 33,71,72,102-104,111 •362 113, 178 '431 109, 160 •363 160, 180 ^432 81. 82 364 109, 1 IS, 173 ^433 97, 111 365 88 434 72, 96-99. 174 366 50, 151, 176 435 38 367 SO, 151, 1S4 437 125 368 87, 88, 113, 115, 178, 179 438 88, 92, 109, 111, 121, 176 369 161 439 88, 102, 111, 178, 183 371 8S, 88, 89, 95, 96, 111. 117, 178 440 51, 54 372 92, 113, 150,151 441 174, 181 374 54, 124 442 116 208 INDICES 443 88, 89, 173 568 95 445 122 569 110, 175, 176 482 37 570 SO 483 30 571 60, 178, 179 ♦485 116 572 160, 180 486 62 573 117 488 S3, 55, 62, 176 576 177 489 104 577 63,65,81,82,87, 108 490. 81, 155 579 87 492 70,89 584 122 493 S 1, 70 587 54, 147, IS 1 494 33 588 98, 178 495 33, 34 589 178 496 57, 70 591 51, 147, ISO 498 SI, 149 593 161 499 65, 91, 95, 104 594 34, 53, 123 500 56, 64, 6S, 70, 80, 87, 91, 151, 155 595 70 501 56, 87 596 178, 179 502.. 39. 40, 64, 75, 79, 80, 86, 91 149, 151, 598 85,182 155. 175 599 116 505 39 600 109, 175 506 65 601 125 508 95, 100, 103, 151 603 83 509 107, 149 604 109 510 SI, 181 605 116 Sll 42 606 US 512 105 609 90, 121 513 44, 52, 76, 150, 1S2, 175 612 : 33 514 124 613 56, 85, 87 517 87 614 20, 33 518 42, 92, 152 61S 53 519 178, 179 616 26, 33, 34 522 88 89. 91, 178 618 US 524 105, 161, 181 619 , . .S3, 125 527 88, 111, 112, 175 620 160,178,180 528 183 624 ' 96 529 159, 161 625 70 531 S4, S5 626 52,87,160 532 161 627 S3 533 30, 37 628 96, 177, 178 534 110 629 54, 65, 88, 97, 160, 180 535 105 630 97 536 52, 155 631 64 537 105, 124 '632 99, 100, 147, 148 538 51, 179 636 88 539 109,121,176 639 61,88,178,182 542 122, 184 640 177 544 42, 150, 151 641 160, 180 546 69 648 34 547 69 650 102 548 175,176 664 174 551 23, 74, 177 '667 65, 177 554 34, 70 669 70 SS9 90, 179 670 177 S60 65 672 96,178 562 110, 176 682 54 S64 65 VI, p. IX 23, 65 566 92, 147, 148 VI, p. X 27, 30, 37 INDICES 209 VI.p.XIII 158 26 31,40 VI, p.XVI 57, 70 27 49 VI, p.XVII 56 28 70 p rpgg 29 103,115,116 58 80 82 58 213 152 609 105 703 76, 101, 107, 108, 123, 148 842 167 5 ; : 105,109 '° «.«» 31 70 32 118 33 50,118 34 155 35 80, 151, 152, 155 36 46,122,174 36a 122 P. Z. 37 88, 147, 148 1 23,90 38 97-100, 147, 148, 150, 151 2 24, 25, 123 39 123 3 24, 25, 116 40 73, 75,80, 152, 155 4 25 41 150 5 36 42 52,91, 105, 110 6 34 43 161 7 38 44 17,19 8 30, 37, 123 45 123 9 30, 37, 123 46 12 10 30, 37 47 69 11 31, 172, 173 48 112 12 33 49 174, 179 13 114 50 174 14 17, 33 51 179 IS 39 52 54, 179, 181 16 29,32 S3 179, 180 17 32 54 172 18 39, 149 55 170 19 40,124 58 182 20 60, 149 60 180, 183 21 69, 177 61 170, 181, 183 22 39 62 171, 182, 183 23 40,60 63 171, 178, 181, 183 24 S3, 114, 116 64 158, 181, 184 25 54, 116 65 44, 180, 182