Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-wpx84 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T19:36:35.398Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Partnership in the Lease of Cults in Greek Antiquity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 August 2011

F. Sokolowski
F. Sokolowski
Affiliation:
Gouvieux, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We are in possession of a Number of documents (inscriptions and papyri) relating to the lease of priesthoods in Greece and Egypt, dating from the fifth century B.C. to late Roman times. That curious practice, similar in some respect to the holding of Church benefices in the Middle Ages, has been studied by different scholars, but without agreement on many substantial points. Before the second World War K. Wilhelmson and M. Segre dedicated very important studies to the problem, advancing considerably the interpretation of the sources. In my Lois Sacrées of Asia Minor I collected many specimens of these documents and tried my best to promote their understanding. But nobody has sought to link the sale of cults in Greece with the same practice, as it is well attested through the papyri, in Ptolemaic and Roman Egypt. Meanwhile the inscriptions and the papyri, put together, not only fill the lacunas existing in both fields of documentation, but contribute to elucidate the legal side of the practice itself. With the recent publication of the study of M. Talamanca on auction in the classical world, the task has now become easier. Unfortunately the author does not utilize the abundant epigraphical material on our subject. I should like to endeavor to supply in part this need.

Type
Research Article
Information
Harvard Theological Review , Volume 50 , Issue 2 , April 1957 , pp. 133 - 143
Copyright
Copyright © President and Fellows of Harvard College 1957

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 Herbrecht, H., De sacerdotii apud Graecos emptione, venditione, Diss. Argent., 1885, p. 36Google Scholar. Bruchman, Philol. Anz., 1885, p. 442 foll. Lehmann, B., Quaestiones sacerdotales, Königsberg, 1888, p. 8Google Scholar foll. Heller, , De Cariae Lydiaeque sacerdotibus, Leipzig, 1891, p. 228Google Scholar foll. Gaebler, Erythrae, Berlin, 1892, p. 71 foll. Bischoff, Rh. Mus. LIV, 1889, p. 9 foll. Otto, W., Priester und Tempel, Leipzig-Berlin, 1908, I p. 230 follGoogle Scholar.

2 Wilhelmson, K., Zum römischen Fiscalkauf in Ägypten, Acta et commentationes Universitatis Tartuensis XVIII, 1930, pp. 1–12Google Scholar. Segre, M., Osservazioni epigraphiche sulla vendita di sacerdozio, Rendic. 1st. Lombardo LXIX, 1936, p. 821Google Scholar foll., LXX, 1937, PP. 83–105.

3 Lois Sacrées de l'Asie Mineure, Paris, 1955, n0 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 25, 37, 38, 47, 48, 49, 52, 56, 63, 66, 71, 73.

4 W. Otto does not think that the Greek practice was transferred to Egypt, o. c. I, p. 244, n. 1–3. But it could derive from a common source, viz. the Persian administration, as some Aramaic papyri seem to suggest.

5 Contributi allo studio delle vendite all' asta nel mondo classico, Atti della Accademia dei Lincei CCCLI, 1954.

6 “IL sacerdozio in ἐπἰπρασις non fosse venduto per un periodo fisso di tempo, ma in qualunque momento chi volesse acquistarlo potesse provocare un' asta; se allora l'attuale possessore ci teneva a conservarlo, faceva salire il prezzo ad un valore di poco inferiore a quella che aveva pagato la volta precedente, e tale chenessun concorrente si sentisse di pagare.” O. c, p. 103.

7 O. c., p. 9–11.

8 O. c., pp. 203, 205.

9 The question is put by the editors of The Ox. Pap. XX, 1952, p. 145.

10 Cf. F. Pringsheim, The Greek Law of Sale, Weimar, 1950, p. 136.

11 Pap. Tebt. I, 5, 88.

12 Uxkull-Gyllenband, Idios Logos, Ägypt. Urk. V, 2, 1934, p. 83: αἱ ἐπὶ διαδοχῆ προϕητεῖαι τῷ γένει ϕυλάσσονται, αἱ δὲ πραθεῖσαι ψειλῶς καὶ μὴ ἐϕ᾽ αἱρέσει πραταί εἰσιν.

13 Syll3. 1014. Lois Sacrées no 25. Cf. below the list of cults.

14 Ll. 157–163; 160–165.

15 Heniochos: 8, 119. Polypeithes: 28, 69. Pythocles: 32, 36. Iatrocles: 39, 139. Damasistratos: 19–21. Metrodoros: 49, 166. Aristeas: 67, 71, 83. Phyliscos: 81, 127, 129. Hecatonymos: 85, 163. Molion: 97, 106, 115. Dionysodoros: 158, 180.

16 Cf. Arch, Papf. IV, 390 n0 244, 11; V, 390, n0 11.

17 L. 120.

18 Lois Sacrées no 3: priest of Gods of Samothrace 250 dr., of Heracles 106 5/12 dr., three other priests 371/2 dr. each.

19 I G XII, 5, 721. Th. Saucius, Andros, Sonderschr. Oester. Arch. Inst. VII, 1914, p. 125 foll. M. Segre, 0. c. pp. 89–96.

20 L. 7–8.

21 Leg. Gr. Sacr. II, 132. Cf. M. Segre, o. c. p. 829.

22 Lois Sacrées n0 48, 20.

23 Leg. Gr. Sacr. 44, 6.

24 Lois Sacrées n0 73, 6.

25 Lois Sacrées n0 49, 4–12.

26 O. c. n0 34, 9–10.

27 Cf. o. c. n0 56, 22 and p. 144.

28 Leg. Gr. Sacr. II, 84, 9–12.

29 Lois Sacrées n0 1, 2. Cf. Wenger, L., Die Stellvertretung im Rechte der Papyri, Leipzig, 1906, p. 219Google Scholar.

30 von Gaertringen, Hiller, Nachr. Gött. Gesell. Wiss. I, 1934–1936, p. 122Google Scholar.

31 C. B. Welles, Royal Corr. nos 65, 66.

32 O. c. n0 25, 15–22.

33 O. c. n0 25, 179–192.

34 O. c. n0 25, 158.

35 O. c. p. 202.

36 Cf. BGU III, 719, 10; 734, II, 7; 916; Pap. Tebt. I, 14.

37 Lois Sacrées n0 52, A 12.

38 O. c. n0 13, 10–11.

39 O. c. n0 3, 11–13.

40 O. c. n0 4, 19–20. The suppletion μετὰ τὰ]ν κ[ύρωσιν is recommendable.

41 0. c. pp. 84–85.

42 Cf. C. B. Welles, Royal Corr. p. 310.

43 Die societas negotiationis im Rechte der Papyri, Zt. Sav. Stift. LII, 1932, p. 64 foll. Afterpacht und Aftermiete im Rechte der Papyri, ibidem LIII, 1935, p. 234 foll. Cf. The Law of Greco-Roman Egypt in the plight of the Papyri2, 1955, PP. 385–393.

44 SB 5252; BGU 916; Arch. Papf. II, 139. Cf. W. Otto. o. c. I, p. 394–395, II, p. 115.