SEG 30.82 Honours for Marcus Ulpius Eubiotos and sons

Honours for Marcus Ulpius Eubiotos and sons

SEG 30.82 Date: ca. 230 AD

[of which he gave] two hundred [and fifty] thousand (denarii), and in . . . ^[1] . . . and having voluntarily undertaken the competition directorship (agōnothesian) of the [Panathenaia] munificently . . . . . . indicating his absolutely unsurpassed good will (eunoian) towards the city, which he inherited from [his ancestors] [and] a bronze [statue of them] shall be erected at their own expense (proika) in the meeting-chamber (sunedriō) of the Sacred Gerousia and in the city hall (prutaneiō),^[2] and (5)[two inscribed stone stelai] shall be erected next to them, which will pass these things down in eternal memory to posterity, and he and [his] [sons], the mighty (kratistois) Ulpius Teisamenos and Pupienus Maximus shall have dining rights (seitēsin) in the Tholos and the city hall with double portions (dimoiria)^[3] [and] [a crown at] all games and festivals (panēguresin), and priority seating (proedrian) shall be assigned to him at these games, and a throne for the priority seating given to him and his sons shall be placed in the [theatre] and inscribed with his name [in] Oineis' row (bathmō), the third, by the interpreters (exēgētōn) and prophets (manteōn);^[4] he and his mighty sons Ulpius Teisamenos and Pupienus Maximus shall receive the status for their property (10)[of tax-freedom (aneisphorias)] that comes with the throne, and their money [shall be released] from dues (telōn) in the city and in the whole of Attica and the subject islands,^[5] and he and his sons the mighty Teisamenos and Maximus shall also share in the invitation (eisklēseōs) to the Dionysiac contests, which was even in the time of our ancestors considered [in exchange for benefactions (euergesiōn) to be] in proportion (pros logon), although it was held by men who provided from their private means with good will but not equivalently to the benefactions of this man to the city, and he shall also be invited into the theatre by the prytaneis always for priority seating and a share (koinōnia) in sacrifices and [libations] (15)in all processions (pompais) and assemblies that take place – he and his sons the mighty Ulpius Teisamenos and Pupienus Maximus, and he and his sons shall be among those who have permanent dining rights (aiseitōn), on the terms with which they are assigned to the hierophant (?) . . . ^[6] . . . both when (games) are held by the city and (when they are held) through love of honour (philoteimias) . . . . . . daily, whenever he should wish, and if he should wish, - having let him . . . . . . brilliance (lamprotatēta) and requital through grants of citizenship (poleitias) at Athens (?) . . . ^[7] (20) . . . [to preserve] the decree (dogma) for all time and the [honours] for the most brilliant consular, if anyone . . . to the interpreters and prophets and those in charge of the sacred allocation (tois eph' hieras diataxeōs)^[8] . . . [the chairman of the presiding committee (proedros) (said), “whoever thinks ] [that what has been read out should come into force], raise your hand.” Everyone raised (their hands). “And whoever (thinks it) should not, [raise your hand.” No one raised (his hand).^[9] Decided] [by the People]. And in the same month, 25th (day), Aurelius [Hermonax, herald of the Areopagos Council] having announced the proposal (gnōmēn), [in the meeting-chamber of the] council, the chairman put the question. [The Areopagos Council decided]^[10] (25)[to praise the] most brilliant consular, the eponymous archon, Marcus Ulpius Eubiotos [Leuros of Gargettos, having been a benefactor to the] [citizens privately and] the city collectively and having saved it in a great crisis [with grain funds (chrēmasi seitōnikois), to which he gave in total] two hundred and fifty thousand (denarii), beyond the profusion of wheat, [which he also gave] during the [famine, neither providing it in exchange for] [grain funds, nor] having charged money, and having [voluntarily undertaken] to be competition director of [the Great] Panathenaia and omitted [no] excess of goodwill for his fatherland in any respect, [statues shall be erected in the meeting-chamber and] (30)the city hall and stelai shall be set up next to the statues of him [in the meeting-chamber and city hall, in accordance with] the proposal which the Council formulated (probouleusato) about these things,^[11] and he and his mighty sons [Marcus Ulpius Flavius Teisamenos and Pupienus] Maximus shall be honoured with [dining rights] in the Tholos and in the city hall with a double portion, and [with a crown] at games [and festivals], and he [shall have priority seating] in those games – also his sons the mighty (Marcus Ulpius Flavius Teisamenos and Pupienus Maximus) – and in the theatre of Dionysos 1-3 lines lost

Fragment a+d

(35) . . . and he and his mighty sons [shall also be entitled to] [be invited into the Theatre of Dionysos always for priority seating and a share of the distributions (dianomōn)] of the libations [and sacrifices, which happen] in all the processions [and sacrifices and they shall share in the perpetual dining right] as much and in the same way as the [hierophant] [and the dadouch], and [it has been granted to] him [and his mighty sons before games] when they are held [by] the city [and when (they are held) through the] love of honour [of private individuals, always, to be invited in by the prytaneis] and if he should wish, with – having let him (40) . . . shall write first . . . the [requital] through grants of citizenship at Athens . . . after . . . [a throne for him and] his sons the mighty (Marcus Ulpius Flavius Teisamenos and Pupienus Maximus) [shall be placed] [in the third row by the interpreters and] prophets [and it shall be inscribed with the proposal (?) of the interpreters] and prophets, (and) [they shall receive the tax-freedom that] comes with the throne [in accordance] with this . . . . . . [Council of the] 500’s behalf [the honours for] the most brilliant (45)[consular, given by the] board (sunedriou) [and the whole city] shall be inscribed . . . first . . . . . . the current (treasurers) of the sacred allocation . . . shall choose six, and shall pass a memorandum (hupomnēmatisai) . . . [priest firebearer] from the Acropolis Titus Flavius . . . . . . of Apollo . . . (50) . . . the priest firebearer

Previous - Oliver, Gerusia 31 Next - Oliver, Gerusia p. 132 n. 23

References:

SEG 30.82 (Translated text) (PHI)

IG II² 1064 (PHI)

SEG 21.506 (PHI)

SEG 33.137 (PHI)

SEG 21.505

Oliver, Gerusia 31

Oliver, Gerusia 32

Translation by: Chris de Lisle

Images: Agora Excavations - (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
Krateros - (1)

Monument type: Stele

Inscription type: Decree (Council and People), Decree (Areopagos)

Original location: Athens (Prytaneion) , Athens (Sacred Gerousia)

Copy A, fr. a - Findspot: Agora (Ag. I 1567a)
Copy A, fr. b - Findspot: Agora (Ag. I 1567b)
Copy A, fr. c - Findspot: Agora (Ag. I 1719)
Copy A, fr. d - Findspot: Unknown (EM 2648)
Copy A, fr. e - Findspot: Agora (Ag. I 1650)
Copy B, fr. a - Findspot: Agora (Ag. I 1571a)
Copy B, fr. b - Findspot: Agora (Ag. I 6673)

Transliterations on Places on

[1] Textual note: The text is known from two fragmentary copies (A and B). AIO's text and line numbering is that of Copy A. Square brackets contain only text that is restored in both copies. One of the copies was originally located in the Prytaneion and the other in the meeting chamber of the Gerousia (ll. 4-5, 29-31). The lettering in the two copies is probably by the same hand, but slightly larger in Copy B (Oliver); there are minor divergences between the text of the two copies at ll. 13-14, 21-22, and probably 8-9. Most of Copy A was first published by Oliver along with a fragment of B (The Sacred Gerusia, 1941, 125-42, no. 31-32). The majority of Copy B was published by Merrit (Hesp. 32, 1963, 26-30, no. 27 = SEG 21.505). The editors of SEG produced an updated text of Copy A in light of this (SEG 21.506), which was superseded by Oliver in ZPE 38, 1980, 107-14 = SEG 30.82. AIO follows Oliver's text with a few exceptions. In ll. 8-9, AIO has τεθῆναι καὶ ἐπιγραφῆναι ἐκ τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτο̣[ῦ ἐν τῷ] | [Οἰνηίδι βαθμῷ τ]ρίτῳ ὑπὸ ἐξηγητῶν καὶ μάντεων…; Oliver 1980 read Copy A as τεθῆναι καὶ ἐπιγραφῆναι ἐκ τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτο̣[ῦ ἐν τῷ] | [Οἰνηίδι βαθμῷ προκ]ρίτῳ ὑπὸ ἐξηγητῶν καὶ μάντεων… "(the throne) shall be placed and inscribed with his name [in the row of Oineis, selected] by the interpreters and prophets," and Merrit read Copy B as [… τεθῆναι καὶ ἐπιγραφῆναι ἐκ τοῦ ὀνόματος αὐτοῦ ἐν πρυ]|[τανείᾳ τῇ] Οἰνηίδι βαθμῷ τρίτῳ ὑπὸ [ἐξηγητῶ]ν καὶ μάν̣[τεων "[… (the throne) shall be placed and inscribed with his name in the prytany of] Oineis in a row, the third, by [the interpreters] and prophets." AIO retains τρίτῳ "third" here and in l. 43 (see n. 6). Something further appeared after αὐτο̣ῦ in Copy B, which was never present in Copy A, perhaps τε καὶ τῶν κρ παίδων "and his mighty sons." At ll. 13-14, AIO follows the text of Copy A: ἐδόκε[ι εὐεργε]|[σιῶν ἕνεκα εἶναι πρὸ]ς λόγον, ὑπῆρξεν δὲ… "it was considered [in exchange for benefactions to be] in proportion, although it was held..." but Copy B had a different text ἐδόκει εὐερ]|[γεσιῶν ἕνεκ]α εἰς δωρεὰς καὶ τειμ[ὰς λογίζεσθαι, ὑπῆρξεν δὲ... "it was considered (right) [in exchange for] benefactions [to calculate] in gifts and honours, [although it was held…" At ll. 20-21, Oliver reads Copy A as καὶ τὰς εἰς τὸν λαμπρότα[τον ὑπατικὸν τειμὰς …]|[… ἐξηγ]ηταῖς…"and the [honours] for the most brilliant consular… | … to the interpreters…" while Meritt reads … τειμὰς] ἐάν τις τοῖς [ἐξηγηταῖς... "honours, if anyone … to the interpreters…" in Copy B. AIO follows Meritt. At ll. 21-22, AIO follows Copy A, but Copy B uses a different voting formula which avoids direct speech: [ὁ πρόεδρος ἠρώτα ὁ]πό[σοι] ἕλοιεν τ[αῦτα κύρια εἶναι – πάντες ἐπῆραν τὴν χεῖρα - ἠρώτα δὲ ὁπόσοι μὴ ἕλοιεν -καὶ οὐδεὶς ἐπῆρεν - ] "[the chairman of the presiding committee asked] who would choose for [these things to come into force – everyone raised his hand – and he asked who would not choose (this) – and no one raised (his hand)]". At l. 43 AIO again retains τρίτῳ "third" (see n. 6).

Each copy contains two honorific decrees, one of the Council and People (ll. 1-23) and one of the Areopagos (ll. 23-50, see n. 9) for Marcus Ulpius Eubiotos Leuros and his sons dates to around 230 AD, making them the latest inscribed decrees known from Athens. Seven statue bases and a throne for Eubiotos and his sons survive, some explicitly erected under these decrees (IG II² 3697-3701), others erected privately in commemoration of the honours (IG II² 3702-3703, probably I Eleusis 644), as well as bases for his parents (IG II² 3695) and for his mother (IG II² 3696). The date is based on prosopography (cf. Byrne, Roman Citizens 2003, 510, 532 and IG II² 3697, one of the statues). On Athenian decrees in the Severan period see AIUK 4.3A (BM, Decrees), no. 10 with notes. Eubiotos was a Roman senator and former consul (ll. 20, 25, 44-45) from Thessaly, who had served as eponymous archon at Athens (l. 25) and performed various benefactions, perhaps in exchange for Athenian citizenship (see n. 7). On Eubiotos' family, see IG II² 3697 with notes. During his archonship, a famine occurred and he provided wheat and donated 250,000 denarii of grain funds (ll. 26 and 28, restored on the basis of IG II² 3697 and 3698); on the "grain funds" (sitonika chremata), cf. IG II² 3504 of the 1st century BC and the sitonia of the Late Classical and Hellenistic periods (IG II³ 1, 367; G. J. Oliver, War, Food, and Politics, 2007, 255-59). From the time of Hadrian, Athens had received annual grain shipments from Egypt at Imperial expense (Cass. Dio 69.16.2; M. T. Boatwright, Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire, 2000, 92-93); it is unclear whether the famine described here means that this supply had been cancelled, had failed to operate in this specific year, or had proven insufficient for the city's needs. Eubiotos had also voluntarily served as competition director (agonothetes) for the Great Panathenaia (ll. 1-3, 26-29, cf. IG II³ 4, 518 with notes on the agonothesia), probably before his archonship (S. Follet, Athènes, 1979, 334). His sons, Marcus Ulpius Flavius Teisamenos and Marcus Ulpius Pupienus Maximus had served alongside him as court presidents (thesmothetai). All three receive an augmented form of the "highest honours" (megistai timai, cf. AIUK 4.2 (BM, Decrees), no. 7 and AIUK 2 (BSA), no. 1 with notes), consisting of bronze statues and inscribed stelai in the Prytaneion and the Gerousia (ll. 4-5, 29-31, see n. 2); permanent dining rights (sitesis, see n. 3) with a double portion in the Prytaneion and the Tholos (ll. 5-6, 32); a crown and front seat rights (proedria, see n. 4) at games and festivals (ll. 6-9, 32-34, 41-42), which seems to come with tax immunity (aneisphoria, ll. 9-11, 42, see n. 5); an invitation to the Dionysia and other events by the prytaneis (ll. 14-16); and a share in all sacrifices, libations, processions, and Assemblies with rights equivalent to those with perpetual dining rights (aeisitoi, ll. 11-19, 35-40, see n. 6). The dynamic of a powerful foreigner performing expensive Athenian magistracies in exchange for extensive honours in return had been common in the first century AD (e.g. Julius Nikanor in IG II² 1069, Trebellius Rufus in Agora XVIII 398), but fades from view in the second century as the emperors took on a more active role in Athenian affairs; its return in this inscription may reflect a decline in imperial interest in Athens. [2] On the Sacred Gerousia, see I Eleusis 624; no evidence regarding the location of its meeting chamber (synedrion) exists. At ll. 29-30, the specification "Gerousia" is omitted and at l. 24, the same term refers to the meeting place of the Areopagos (also unknown, perhaps the same place?). The Prytaneion ("city hall") was the site of Athens' public hearth and seat of the eponymous archon (Agora III, p. 166-74 for literary and epigraphic testimonia). Its location is the subject of long-running controversy, but now appears to have been south-east of the Acropolis (Odos Tripodon), see G. Kavvadias and A. P. Matthaiou in Studies… Mattingly, 2014, 51-72. [3] On dining rights (sitesis), see IG I³ 131 with notes. The inclusion of the Tholos (the round building next to the Council chamber where the current prytany ate) alongside the Prytaneion is novel. This inscription is the only reference to sitesis with a double portion at Athens, but it is attested elsewhere as a mark of special honour (e.g. Ath. Deip. 4.149d on priests dining in the Prytaneion at Naukratis in the second century AD and Xen. Lak. Pol. 15.4; Hdt. 6.57 on the Spartan kings in the Classical period). On the relationship of sitesis to the grant of perpetual dining rights (aeisitia) see n. 6. The decree consistently refers to Eubiotos' sons with the status designation "the mighty" (kratistoi), translating the Latin viri egregii to which equestrians were entitled. This indicates that they had not followed their father into the Roman senate. Eubiotos himself is referred to as "most brilliant consular" (vir clarissimus consularis), the designation for a former consul. [4] The throne in the theatre of Dionysos is IG II² 3700. The word order of the text is strange. Oliver presumes a mistake and corrects it (see textual note), but archaeology seems to show that the throne was in fact erected in the third row of seating (M. Maaß, Die Prohedrie des Dionysostheaters, 1972, 101-2), so the reading of copy B should stand. The role of the interpreters and prophets may have been limited to the installation of the throne or perhaps their decision about its location within the theatre was inserted into the text when it was inscribed (on the interpreters, cf. IG II² 1035 with notes). [5] Ll. 9-11, 42 are the only explicit statements that freedom from tax (aneisphoria) came with the grant of a throne in the theatre (the term is restored in all cases but seems to fit the context). If this rule applied to all throne holders, then much of the Athenian elite would have been exempt from taxation through the thrones that they were entitled to as priests of various cults - but perhaps the tax-free status only applied to thrones granted as honours or to foreigners. Moreover, the slightly defensive phrasing might indicate that this tradition had been revived or invented specially for Eubiotos and his sons. The decree confirms that Athens retained control of various Aegean islands. These are probably the islands it had possessed at the end of the Hellenistic period: Salamis (see SEG 55.248bis), Delos (see I Délos 2535-2540), Lemnos, Imbros, and Skyros (see SEG 47.143a-b). It had also received Kephallenia from Hadrian (Cass. Dio 69.16.2) and may or may not have retained Keos, Ikos, Skiathos, and Peparethos, which it received from Mark Antony in 42/1 BC (App. Bell. Civ. 5.7; see P. Graindor, Athènes sous Auguste, 1927, 1-8). [6] "Those who have permanent dining rights" (aeisitoi) were a group of Eleusinian priests and officials linked to the operation of the Council and Assembly who were entitled ex officio to dine with the prytaneis every night (cf. AIUK 4.2 (BM, Decrees), no. 15). These dining rights have already been granted to Eubiotos and his sons in ll. 5-6 and 32 (see n. 3), so the clauses in ll. 15-16, 35-38 probably indicate that the aeisitoi had other privileges, in which Eubiotos and his sons are also to share, most likely connected with the sacrifices, libations, processions, and Assemblies mentioned in the preceding sentences. It seems that the hierophant and the dadouch (usually listed first among the aeisitoi, e.g. Agora XV 460, ll. 84-85) enjoyed greater privileges on these occasions – the grant of the same privileges to Eubiotos and his sons is in line with the earlier grant of sitesis with a double portion. [7] L. 19 should be part of a concluding hortatory clause encouraging others to follow the honorand's example in the knowledge that they will be honoured in turn (cf. IG II³ 1, 367, ll. 64-66 with notes). "Brilliance" should be a reference to Eubiotos' official status designation as a vir clarissimus. The second part of the line appears to refer to requital for grants of citizenship. Perhaps Eubiotos and his sons had been granted citizenship in order to enable them to undertake their official roles in this year. It was common for Athenians to hold citizenship of multiple communities in this period (cf. IG II³ 4, 629). [8] On the treasurers of the sacred allocation, see IG II² 1035 (late first century BC). In that decree, there is a single treasurer; at some point in the intervening centuries the post had become a committee. [9] On the voting formula, cf. SEG 47.143a with notes. The two copies use different formulae (see textual note). Some divergence between different copies of a text is normal in Greek inscriptions (cf. OR 155); it may be that even less fidelity to the "original text" was expected here because this formula was not part of the decree proper (Oliver 1980, 111-12). [10] The second decree was issued by the Areopagos (cf. IG IV² 1, 83-84 and AIUK 4.3A (BM, Decrees), no. 10 with notes; D. Geagan, Athenian Constitution after Sulla, 1967, 34-35). Aurelius Hermonax, who reads out the proposal at l. 23, also erected one of the statues for Eubiotos in his role as herald of the Areopagos (IG II² 3699), and the term "pass a memorandum" (hypomnematizein) in l. 47 is characteristic of the Areopagos. Two of the statue bases erected for Eubiotos, IG II² 3967 and 3698, state that they were erected by decree of the Areopagos. The subject matter of the two decrees is very similar, but the Areopagos reorders the points slightly and rephrases a few clauses, apparently for better style (l. 6 vs l. 32, ll. 7-9 vs ll. 42-43, l. 16 vs ll. 37-38, l. 17 vs l. 39, with Oliver 1980, 113-14). In the very fragmentary ll. 46-49, the Areopagos seems to introduce a new provision, presumably something that only it could authorise (cf. IG IV² 1, 83-84 with notes). This appears to involve the selection of six individuals, including one Titus Flavius who holds the office of firebearer (pyrphoros) from the Acropolis, and a priest of Apollo. These may be the individuals responsible for the erection of the statues, whom we know included a priest of Apollo Patroos (IG II² 3697, with Geagan 1967, 35). [11] The Areopagos indicates at l. 31 that the decree of the Council and People was probouleumatic (cf. IG II³ 1, 294) and appears to treat the decree as essentially a product of the Council (perhaps also at l. 44), probably indicating the high degree of control held by the Council in the Imperial period. Compare IG II² 1072, where the Council seems to pass a decree in the name of the People, and Agora XV 460, a joint-decree of Areopagos, Council, and People, passed in the Council.

Added: 28 Jul 2023
Updated: 28 Jul 2023
Feedback

ID: AIO_2760