Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:39:42.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Unpublished lists of gerontes and magistrates of Roman Sparta

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

George Steinhauer
George Steinhauer
Affiliation:
Athens
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Fourteen unpublished inscriptions from Sparta are discussed in this article. They were found in 1950–1980 by the Fifth Ephorate of Prehistoric and Classical Antiquities and date from the Roman period, first century BC—second century AD. Eight of the inscriptions are lists of gerontes.

Type
Articles
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 93 , November 1998 , pp. 427 - 447
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Spawforth, A. J. S., BSA 71 (1976), 139–45Google Scholar, 73 (1978), 249–60, 75 (1980), 203–20, 79 (1984), 263–88, 80 (1985), 191–258, 81 (1986), 313–32. Cartledge, P. and Spawforth, A., Hellenistic and Roman Sparta: A Tale of Two Cities (London, 1989)Google Scholar. Bradford, A., A Prosopography of Lacaedaimonians from the Death of Alexander the Great, 323 BC, to the Sack of Sparta by Alaric, AD 396 (Munich, 1977)Google Scholar.

2 Kennell, N. M., ‘The Public Institutions of Roman Sparta’, doctoral dissertation (Toronto, 1985)Google Scholar.

3 Steinhauer, G., Γὰϊος ᾿Ιοὺλιος Εὺρυκλη̄ς, Συμβολὴ στὴν ὶστορὶα τη̄ς ρωμαϊκη̄ς Σπὰρτης, (Doctoral thesis; Athens, 1988 (1989))Google Scholar.

4 Spawforth, A., ‘Excavations at Sparta: the Roman Stoa, 1988–1991. The Inscriptions’, BSA 89 (1994), 435–6Google Scholar no. 2. The list, which is dated by Spawforth to the ‘late first century BC or early first century AD’, should be assigned to about 20 BC on the basis of the inscription published here.

5 This list, which was dated with some reservation to the 1st cent. AD, may now be certainly assigned to the 1st century BC on the basis of the inscription published here.

6 Damares, : IG v. 1. 135, 136Google Scholar. Hoerschelmann, S. Grunauer-von, Die Münzprägung der Lakedaimonier (Berlin, 1978), 19Google Scholar. Mnasistratos, : IG v. 1. 49, 125, 170Google Scholar = SEG xi. 881. Timarchos, : IG v. 1.262Google Scholar.

7 Box, H., ‘Roman Citizenship in Laconia I’ JHS 21 (1931), 200–14Google Scholar, id. ‘Roman Citizenship in Laconia II’, JHS 22 (1932), 165–83Google Scholar.

8 Nikephoros son of Markos was geron in the year of Seipompos (SEG xi. 575).

9 For the date, see Steinhauer, op. cit. (n. 3). The death of C. Julius Eurykles Herklanos in the year of Neikephoros son of Markos (which is attested in an inscription published in the above) is firmly dated by the fact that he was succeeded as high priest by C. Pomponius Alcastus at the time of Caesar's, L. death in IG v. 1. 59Google Scholar (SEG xi. 521, 548); cf. Spawforth, A., BSA 73 (1978), 251–2Google Scholar.

10 Chrimes, K. M. T. (Atkinson), Ancient Sparta, A Re-Examination of the Evidence (Manchester, 1949), 44, 64, 467Google Scholar.

11 Bradford, s.n. Kallikrates.

12 For him, see recently Spawforth, A., BSA 79 (1984), 273–4Google Scholar.

13 See recently Spawforth, A., BSA 79 (1984), 209Google Scholar.

14 Dawkins, R. M., The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at Sparta, (JHS suppl. paper 5; London, 1929), 70Google Scholar, no. 169.26.

15 For the family links of the Publii Memmii with the cult of the Dioskouroi, see recently Spawforth, A., BSA 80 (1985), 212–13Google Scholar, Steinhauer, G., ‘Η εὶκονογραφὶα τω̄ν Διοσκοὺρων στὴ ρωμαϊκἠ Σπὰρτη’, Sculpture from Arkadia and Laconia: Proceedings of an International Conference held at the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, April 10–14, 1992, ed. Palagia, O. and Coulson, W. (Oxbow Monograph 30; 1993), 227Google Scholar.

16 For the date of the reforms (neoterismoi) at Sparta, see Woodward, A., BSA 43 (1948), 219–23Google Scholar, Oliver, J., Marcus Aurelius, Aspects of Civic and Cultural Policy in the East (Hesp. Suppl. 23; Princeton, 1970), 78–83Google Scholar.

17 This inscription is included in Steinhauer, Εὺρυκλη̄ς , ᾿Επἰμετρο ΙΙ Γ 'Ο τελευταῑος Εὺρυκλεὶδης).

18 Spawforth, A., BSA 73 (1978), 252–3Google Scholar and BSA 79 (1984), 277–8Google Scholar.

19 (a) Sex. P. Onasikrates, high priest of the Augusti about 195 (IG v. 1. 557, see Spawforth, A., BSA 79 (1984), 278Google Scholar, no. 4). (b) Sex. P. Eudamos, high priest of the Augusti, μζ' ἀπὸ Διοσκούρων, after 217 (IG v. 1. 559, see A. Spawforth, ibid. 279–80 no. 13 and 282–3). Spawforth, ibid. 278 no. 3, does not associate with them the geron in the inscription published here.

20 The Spartan Sosidamos is known to have been elected to the gerousia three times in the 150s, the first time in the year of an unknown patronomos (IG v. 1. 112, 7), and the other two in the two successive years 150 and 151, the years of Sejanus (SEG xi. 584, 9) and Biadas (SEG xi. 585, 7).

21 Bradford's prosopography includes four Spartans with the name of Gaius (as patronymic). The closest chronologically to the inscription published here is the father of Secundus, πρὶοβυς γερὐντων in the year of P. Memmius Pratolaos Dexter (IG v. 1. 117, early 2nd c. AD).

22 Cf the parallel of Γαὶὶου]ουλὶου Φιλὶππου (SEG xi 526) correction of the incorrect reading FAIOY as the patronymic of Epaphroditos, ephor in the year of Kallikrates (IG v. 1. 71).

23 For the patronymic, see SEG xi. 584.

24 For the sequence of patronomoi Kleon–Hermogenes–Cl. Aristoteles–Biadas, see the cursus of Isochrysos, , SEG xi. 493Google Scholar.

25 For the restoration of the career of this highly important representative of the Spartan royal families, see Bradford, A. S., ‘A Spartan Career Restored IG v. 1. 36’, Ancient World, 13 (1986), 123–8Google Scholar.

26 The omission of the Roman name in the case of Onasikleidas son of Philostratos is a common phenomenon with members of the Spartan aristocracy.

27 For the association of the titles of ϕιλόκαισαρ and ϕιλόπατρις, with the imperial cult, see Oliver, J., The Sacred Gerousia (Hesperia suppl. 6 (1941), 87Google Scholar, cf. Münsterberg, R., ‘Verkannte Titel auf griechischen Münzen’, OJH 18 (1951)Google Scholar, Beibl. 297–324, especially pp. 315–321. For Sparta, see IG v. 1. 464 503, 504. 528, 529, 530, 531, 544, 547, 549, 551, 552, 553, 554, 555, 556, 562, 680. The title of high priest of the Augusti refers collectively to the emperors living and dead (see A. Spawforth (n. 19), p. 281). The title of ύιὸς πόλεως was probably one held only by Pomponius Alkastos, life-priest of the Augusti.

28 IG v. 1. 37 (cursus of Onesiphros) ll. 7–9: χρεσβευτὴς εἰς ὼμην πρὸς τὸν μὲγιστον αὐτοκρἀ τορα ᾿Αντωεῖνον περὶ τῶν πὸς ᾿Ελευθρολὰκωνας καὶ κατωρθὼθη Philokrates' presbeia should be dated several years after 137/138, the year to which is dated the joint presbeia to Lucius Caesar of Philokrates and his friend C. Pomponius Alkastos, who was no longer able to take part in this second mission. With this external crisis is probably to be associated the internal crisis in the year of Cl. Sejanus which may be posited on the basis of the renewal of the gerousia, presumably without elections (cf. SEG xi. 584 and 585).

29 IG v. 1. 407–45, SEG xi. 766–8. The number is continually increasing and has already exceeded 50. The standard formula of the inscription: Ζανὶ ῾Ελευθερὶφ ᾿Αντωνεὶνφ Σωτη̄ρι is evidence that the inscriptions were erected at the time, and also for the reason for their erection. For inscriptions honouring Hadrian, see Anna Benjamin, S., ‘The Altars of Hadrian in Athens and Hadrian's Panhellenic Program’, Hesp. 32 (1963), 74, 76CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

30 The patronomos Pius is dated between Caesar (Hadrian)—Lysippos and C.Julius Eurykles (IG v. i. 32B, 34 = SEG xi. 479). The patronomate of Hadrian, however, follows that of Damonikidas (SEG xi. 479), who is in turn preceded by Pratonikos (IG v. 1. 40).

31 IG v. 1. 42. Perikles–Pratonikos; IG v. 1. 40. Pratonikos–Damonikidas–Polyeuktos–Jul. Sosikrates–Pasikrates the younger (note, however, the reversal of the positions of Polyeuktos, and Damonikidas, in SEG xi. 489Google Scholar: Perikles–Polyeuktos–Damonikidas–Caesar), IG v. 1. 41: Perikles, –Neikippidas, , and SEG xi. 483Google Scholar. Perikles–Neikippidas–Pasikrates the younger.

32 See IG v. 1. 44 (= SEG xi. 486), IG v. 1. 526, 551, SEG xi. 483, 491, 492. Reference is also made about the middle of the 2nd century AD to a ἐπιμελητὴς τω̄ν σειτωνικω̄ν χρηυἀτων (IG v. 1.295).

33 For parallels, see e.g. IG v. 1. 38. 3–4, 40. 20, 54. 11 and 13, 71. 36–9.

34 The lack of any reference in the preserved lists and cursus honorum to the simultaneous holding of two offices (e.g. nomophylax and sitones) may be purely fortuitous, and due to the relative rarity of epigraphic references to the office.

35 In this last case, one would expect to find the entire list of nomophylakes, and those of the ephors and/or gerontes. For the composition of the Spartan Synarchia, see Bradford n. 1, Kennell n. 2. A further argument against the hypothesis that members of the major Spartan synarchiai were ex officio members of the synarchia of the sitonai is the fact that the same man could be elected to the office repeatedly (see e.g. the case of Eudokimos son of Damokrates and grandson of Spendon (SEG xi. 491), though it is not impossible that a distinction should be made between the synarchia of the sitonai and the title of αειτὼνου ὰπ ᾿ Αι̇γὺπτου.

36 SEG xi. 490 (in the year of Deximachos son of Nikokrates, early 2nd cent.), 491, 492 (between the two visits of Hadrian 125–128), 495 (in the reign of Antoninus), 486 (Marcus Aurelius and Verus). IG v. 1. 526, 551 (reign of Caracalla). On this issue, see Cartledge and Spawforth (n.1), 152–3 and n. 17.

37 According to Woodward's correction of IG v. 1. 41, ll. 9/11 (SEG xi. 481). The causes of it may be sought in the need to supply Trajan's Parthian campaign.

38 The shortages of these years have already been associated (see Cartledge and Spawforth (n. 1), 152) with the need to supply the imperial court during the emperor's visit to Sparta. This may also conceivably account for the granting of permission to import cereals from Egypt that is presupposed by these two inscriptions.

39 P. Memmius Pratolas son of Deximachos (IG v. 1. 53. 10–12), ephor in the year of Kallikrates son of Rouphos, is not the same person (as erroneously assumed by Spawforth, , BSA 80 (1985), 202Google Scholar) but the grandson of the patronomos P. Memmius Pratolas IV This is demonstrated by the date of the patronomos Kallikrates son of Rouphos, in whose year Pratolas was still at the beginning of his career (despite his social rank he is in the second row in the list of ephors). Since Kallikrates was presbys geronton in the year of Neikephoros son of Markos, 136/7, his year of office as patronomos must fall shortly after that of Neikephoros and be roughly contemporary with that of P. Memmius Deximachos son of Pratolas, the presumed son of the ephor. It is much more likely that the patronomate of Deximachos coincided with the election as ephor of his son, than with that of his father, who had already been patronomos 20 years previously.

40 For the date of the patronomate of G. Julius Meniskos, see IG v. 1. 59 and Woodward's correction, SEG xi. 521, 548.