The aim of the present paper is to clarify the position and function of the official called the “Governor of Akkad (Babylonia)” (LB: ^lúmu-ma-'i-ir/^lúGAL. UKKIN ^kurURI^ki, with variants) in the Seleucid and Aršakid Empires in the period from 305/4 to 61/0 B. C., the end of the period covered in the Astronomical Diaries, the main source of my research.
Under Seleucid rule (305/4-141/0 B. C.), at least until the mid-third century B. C., the Governor was probably in charge of the financial administration of Babylonia. Although the commander of the military forces in Babylonia was the “General (of Akkad), ” the transportation of munitions was also under the control of the Governor. The “(Royal) Appointees (in Akkad)” (LB: ^lúpaq-du^me [^š] šá LUGAL/^lúpaq-du^meš šá ina ^kurURI^ki) probably had the role of assisting the Governor in his work.
Under Aršakid rule (141/0-61/0 B. C.), it is notable that the Governor frequently visited the “King's encampment” (madakti šarri) (probably his residence during progresses to Babylonia), while neither the General (of Akkad) nor the “General who is above the Four Generals” did so. (The latter official was the Governor General of Upper Satrapies under Seleucid rule, but under Aršakid rule the territory controlled by him was probably limited to Babylonia.) At least until the 120's, the loyalty of Greco-Macedonian cities and of generals/vassal kings was in question. Therefore, at least during this time, the King probably tried to build a close relation to the Governor and/or appointed his trusted subordinates to that office in order to keep these elements under control.

抄録全体を表示

Cuneiform texts recently published in ADRTB 1-3 (A. J. Sachs & H. Hunger [eds.], Astronomical Diaries and Related Texts from Babylonia, Vols. 1-3, Wien, 1988-1996) consist of contemporary and continuous records not only of astronomical data but also of historical events in Achaemenid, Seleucid and early Aršakid Babylonia (Akkad).
The aim of the present paper is to clarify the functions of three types of generals who often appear in descriptions of historical events in the “Diaries” under Seleucid (305/4-141/0 B. C.) and early Aršakid (141/0-61/0 B. C.) rule: “the General (of Akkad)”: LB ^lúGAL ú-qu/ú-qa or ^lúGAL ERÍN-ni/ERÍN^meš (^kurURI^ki); “the General who is above the Four Generals”: LB ^lúGAL ERÍN^meš šá ana UGU 4 ^lúGAL ERÍN^meš (with variants); and “the Chief of the Troops”: LB ^lúGAL. GAL ú-qa-a-nu/ú-qa-an. It is probable that each of these posts was occupied by only one person at any given time.
The conclusions drawn in the paper may be summarised as follows:
1) The army commander in Seleucid and Aršakid Babylonia was “the General (of Akkad), ” at least until the first appearance of the title “the Chief of the Troops.” The corresponding official title in Greek seems to be στρατηγóς. The post was below that of “the General above the Four Generals” which is probably to be equated with “the Satrap of the East” (probably corresponding, in turn, to Gk. ο επι των ανω σατραπειων) of the Seleucid kingdom. One variant of the title for the latter “the General of Akkad who is above the Four Governors, ” indicates that this official controlled a number of provinces, because the word “Governor (LB ^lúmu-ma-'i-ir/^lúGAL. UKKIN)” here no doubt corresponds to the Gk. σατραπης, the “governor” of a province (e. g. Babylonia), whereby the “Four Generals/Governors” will be the “Generals/Governors” of the provinces in the Seleucid East. The variant “the General of Akkad who is above the Four Governors/Generals” probably shows that “the General above the Four Generals” sometimes doubled as “General (of Akkad).”
2) Under Aršakid rule, some Seleucid official posts (“General [of Akkad], ” “General above the Four Generals, ” “Governor, ” etc.) were preserved, but the territory controlled by “the General above the Four Generals” was probably limited only to Babylonia. One variant of the title “(Who is) above the Four Generals of Akkad” appears in 141/0 and 133/2 B. C. (used on the latter occasion in the translation of royal correspondence!) We cannot, however, find any instances in the “Diaries” where there were more than two “generals” exercising their authority concurrently in Babylonia, so that “of Akkad” in the title seems to have been added only to indicate the location of the territory and the title most probably does not reflect the actual state of affairs.
3) Between 119/8 and 112/1 B. C., the post of “the Chief of the Troops” was established replacing that of “the Satrap of the East.” The bearer of this office probably exercised both military and judicial power either over Babylonia or a number of provinces including Babylonia, since in 91/0 B. C. an official whose title

抄録全体を表示

From the second half of the 2nd century to the first half of the 3rd century, many petitionary inscriptions, which complain of the arrogance by soldiers and officials to the emperor or provincial governors, appeared mainly in Asia Minor These inscriptions may enable us to give an answer to the question how the change on the administration in the 3rd century, the process called the militarization of administration, was recognized by provincial society In this paper, we investigate first the process in which soldiers penetrate into provincial administration This process was not necessarily made by soldiers' arrogance, but was based on the officia of soldiers which were formed under the governor after the second half of the 2nd century Since the most of petitionary inscriptions originates in Asia which was a public province, we should pay attention to the process in such a province While in the imperial provinces the governor's officia which were formed with legionary soldiers played an important role in provincial administration, in the public provinces it does not appear that such ordinary officia existed under proconsul In my view, the officiates in a public province were formed under the procurator, which means that the process of the penetration of the officiates into the administration of the province corresponded with that of the procurator According to G P Burton, even in a public province, the procurator even not only managed emperor's property but also encroached on the field considered as a domain of proconsul so far In its background, since the proconsul could not fill the various administrative demands from provincial society, the society also asked the procurator for many further When the procurator who was the senior official of officiates expanded his authority in response to the administrative demand of provincial society, it may mean that the demand from provincial society was an important factor in the process in which officiales exercised great influence over the provincial administration This aspect should appear in the petitionary inscriptions which we use second as historical records When officiates appear as an assailant in some of the petitionary inscriptions in Asia Minor (Table 1), we can recognize that they were not a mere rowdy, but carrying out some administrative duty Execution of this administrative duty might have caused friction with provincial society The research which is aimed to understand soldiers' administrative position from petitionary inscriptions has been hardly made until now However, the overlooked point in the relation between soldiers and society becomes clear by setting up the framework that the soldiers penetrated into provincial administration as the staff of the procurator These inscriptions show that the soldiers who were working as officiales of procurator might have been needed by the provincial society because of their compulsive power derived from their senior official Individuals and communities were forced a still severer struggle for their own existence in a violent social situation of those days In order to gain advantage for themselves, various members of provincial society tried to use the compulsive power which officiates had Therefore, we can recognize the soldiers who appear in petitionary inscriptions as existence with "duality" Because of their compulsive power, provincial society might have occasionally asked them for help, and might have occasionally avoided them on the contrary

抄録全体を表示

周知のように,元首政期のローマ帝国には元老院身分と騎士身分のふたつの官職体系が「併存」していた.このうち,元老院身分のそれは,事実上の「一人支配」という新しい現実の中で著しい変容をとげてはいるものの,その起源を共和政期の政務諸官職にまでたどることができるものであったが,これに対して,本来私人の代理人を意味したローマ私法上の術語を冠して「元首のプロクラートル」と総称されることになる財政業務担当の諸官職を中軸とする騎士身分の官職体系は帝政期に入って生れた全く新しい官職体系であった.固より,帝政の開始とともにこの官職体系が一挙に出現したわけではなく,先年物故したH. G. プーロームの研究に拠れば,騎士身分の官職体系が,諸官職間の俸給額による官職序列も定まり,昇官階梯が整序化されて,元老院身分の官職体系と相並ぶ官職体系として一応の完成をみせるのは2世紀前半期のハドリアーヌス帝代のことであったとされている.ところで,このようにして形成された騎士身分の官職体系のもつ性格に関して,3世紀に入ると,セウェールス朝代に活躍した法学者の間に,元首のプロクラートルもまた公務(res publica)に携わる公職者であると明示的に説く学説があらわれてくる.本稿では,この法学説を,元首政期における帝国国制とその変容という脈絡の中で位置づけ,その意味するところについて考えてみたいと思う.

抄録全体を表示

So far, it has been considered that the Emperor Vespasian's new government consisted of his relatives, partisans and old friends. In 79 A.D., however, the powerful senator, Eprius Marcellus, cos. II in 74, who has been regarded as one of Vespasian's confidants, was suspected of framing a plot against Vespasian and forced to suicide. It has been questioned why he went to his doom. In the first part of this paper, the careers of the provincial governors from 69 to 73 are examined. The governors of the few important consular provinces were Vespasian's relatives and supporters, but most of the consular governors were appointed not because they were supporters of Vespasian. They are classified as two types. One is the Othonian generals. Under the Emperor Otho, they fought against the Vitellian army in the civil war. Vespasian adopted them to get the support of the Othonian senators. The other type is the senators who held iterated consulships under Vespasian. This fact has led many scholars to conclude these senators were his confidants. But, it is doubtful whether the iterated consuls were his confidants. In the civil war, they gave no substantial support to Vespasian, with whom they do not seem to have had any plausible connection in the Julio-Claudian period. Their honorific and powerless posts from 70 to 73 suggest that Vespasian put little trust in them. Two inscriptions about Plautius Aelianus and Tampius Flavianus record that Vespsian honoured them, not because of their merits in his reign but because of merits in the Neronian period, which Nero had not rewarded enough. Vespasian was famous for his propaganda against Nero. It follows from these points that Vespasian made use of iterated consuls to show the difference between himself and Nero, and to get the supports of many other senators. A mere homo novus like him needed such propaganda to secure his throne. Thus, most of the governors in the early years of Vespasian's reign were neither his supporters nor his old friends. They were appointed governors because his partisans were not yet powerful among the senators at that time. Marcellus was honoured for his influence with other senators. He was not the real confidant of Vespasian. The second part of this paper deals with the appearance of the new powers after Vespasian's censorship in 73-74. Many scholars have considered that, by adlecting the senators to the patricians, Vespasian intended to create a new elite class. But, almost all of the new patricians whom Vespasian used as the provincial governors were originally his partisans from the civil war. After they became the consular governors, only a few other patricians were elevated as provincial governors. So Vespasian's intention toward patricians was to reward his partisans rather than to create an elite class. He intended to fill the important governorships, especially imperial consular ones, with his partisans. All governors of the imperial consular provinces from 74 onwards had been appointed consuls by Vespasian. The senators who had reached consulships before his reign were excluded from these posts. The significant evidence of this is that Othonian generals were not appointed to any governorships, and did not appear until the reign of Domitian. Iterated consuls who had reached the consulship first in Nero's reign existed in 74-75, but, as noted above, their appointment meant a political propaganda. Vespasian rapidly promoted his partisans and senators who began their careers under him, and excluded the consuls of the period from Nero to Vitellius. At the same time, Vespasian began his new policy. From Judaea, Agrippa II and his sister Berenice, who were among the main supporters of Vespasian in the civil war, came to Rome. The former received the ornamenta praetoria, and the latter co-habited with Titus. Although the Romans hated her, Vespasian did not get rid of her, and

(View PDF for the rest of the abstract.)

抄録全体を表示

The aim of the present paper is to investigate into the imperial cult performed on Roman Cyprus, placing a special emphasis on the so-called Cypriot oath to emperor Tiberius preserved in a Greek inscription from the Aphrodite sanctuary of Paphos Vetus (T. B. Mitford, A Cypriot Oath of Allegiance to Tiberius, JRS 50(1960), 75-79). In the oath, the Cypriots swore to the goddess Roma, Tiberius and his family at the accession of the emperor to the throne in 14. After providing an overview of studies on the imperial cult and of the Cypriot oath, the present paper tackles the oath and its text from the following three viewpoints: the theoi horkioi, i.e., the guarantor deities of the oath; the oath and the imperial cult; and the context of the oath. The Cypriot oath to Tiberius, though fragmentary in part, provides us with some fascinating insights into the religious status of the emperor on the island, the rituals of the imperial cult, and the religious and political communication between the centre and the province. The elaborately structured list of the theoi horkioi not only connects the local deities with the communal and Roman deities of greater importance, but also places Augustus and his descendants into the local context of Cyprus by means of representing the first emperor as an offspring of Aphrodite, patroness of the city of Paphos and of the island as a whole. The living emperor Tiberius also received the cultic veneration of the Cypriots, though his religious status was modified 'downwards' by means of depriving him of the epithet theos and including the goddess Roma in the objects of the final clause, which would pertain to the sacrifice to the emperor. The practice of the oath was perhaps focused on the city of Paphos, which retained the Aphrodite sanctuary and (probably) that of Hestia; however, this does not mean that the Paphians drafted and performed the oath exclusively for their own purposes and that the other cities were excluded from it. The Cypriot oath is probably a 'provincial-civic' oath in which all communities on the island participated. The oath would have involved communication between the Cypriots and the imperial power (imperial agents and the emperor himself), e.g., through the supervision of the oath by proconsules and the dispatch of a delegation to the emperor. The oath, therefore, offered the occasion for a communicative network between the Cypriots in the provincial capital and other communities, imperial agents, and the emperor himself at the religious and political levels.

抄録全体を表示

Greek writers rarely mentioned about the imperial cult Our author Aelius Aristides, however, frequently attended at the meetings of the provincial assembly So we may expect his orations to tell us something about the Greek attitudes toward the Roman imperial cult The Cyzicus speech (Or 27 K), one of such orations, is delivered at Cyzicus on the occasion of the dedication of Hadrian Temple, a temple for the provincial imperial cult This panegyric consists of three parts the praise of the city of Cyzicus, the description of the Temple, the encomium of two emperors But, as G Bowersock pointed out, nowhere in this panegyric does he call an emperor as a god He explicitly distinguishes the emperor from the traditional gods Instead, he calls the Hadrian Temple as "a thank offering to the gods," and says as follows, "We should be grateful to the gods, but we should congratulate the emperors and join in prayer for them" The Greeks erected many temples and cult images of the emperors, nevertheless, they did not call the emperor as a god, and in practice did pray for the emperors Here at least we may see one aspect of the Greek attitudes toward the imperial cult Another feature of the Cyzicus Speech is its patriotic tone He speaks of the temple of the imperial cult in terms of the Greek mythology and the glory of the Greek past. He refers to the temple as the pride of a Greek city. It it true that praise of the city where the festival is located is conventional in the panegyrics And yet, at the same time, we ought to pay attention to some passages in his other orations, where Anstides suggested how the leading Greek cities engaged in strife because of the temples and festivals of the koinon. And, judging from other sources, the title of neokoros, "temple warden," was such a distinction for the Greek cities that it became a cause of the struggles among them. It seems that the temple of the provincial imperial cult was recognized as the pride of a Greek city. We may be justified in pointing out another aspect of the Greek attitudes toward the imperial cult.

抄録全体を表示