Puech 1 Endowment of Akousilaos

Endowment of Akousilaos

Puech, Orateurs 1 Date: ca. 112-114 AD

Ἀγαθῇ Τύχ[ῃ] [. . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . .] Ἀκουσιλάου Ἀζηνιέος κατα[λιπόντος κατὰ διαθήκην] [τῇ πόλει 𐆖 μυ]ριάδας δέκα εἰς χωρίων ἀγόρα[σιν ἐπὶ ὑπάτων Σεττιδίου] [Φίρμου καὶ] Κλαυδίου Σεουήρου · Κλαυδ[ίου δὲ - - - καὶ - - -] (5)[. . . . τὸ ἀργύρι]ον ἀριθμησάντων ἀργυρο[ταμίαις καὶ? Ἀουιδίου] [Νιγρείνου τ]οῦ πρεσβευτοῦ καὶ ἀντιστ[ρατήγου . . . . . . ¹² . . . . . .] [. . . . . . ¹² . . . . . . Γ]λαυκίᾳ θελήσαντος τοῦ [διαθεμένου ἐκδανεῖσαι τὰ] [χρήματα τοὺς ἀργ]υροταμίας ἕως ἀγορασ[θῇ ἂν τὰ χωρία καὶ τὴν πρό]- [σοδον καταθεῖ]ναι ἥτις κατ᾽ ἐνιαυτὸν ἐδ[ίδοτο . . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] (10)[. . . . . . ¹² . . . . . .] Ἀουιδίου Νιγρείνου τοῦ π[ρεσβευτοῦ καὶ ἀντιστρατή]- [γου περὶ τῶν ἀγορα]σθέντων χωρίων ἐν ὅρο[ις . . . . . . . . . . ¹⁹ . . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . ¹⁸ . . . . . . . . .]ς εἴς τε τὴν τειμὴ[ν - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -] [- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]τε Γλαυκίου [- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -] [- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]μα v τὰ ῥήμ[ατα - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -] (15)[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]η οἱ κλη[ρονόμοι - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]

Next - Puech, Orateurs 91
Translated text

References:

Puech, Orateurs 1 (Translated text) (AIO)

SEG 52.139

SEG 21.498

Roman Attica Project, Normative Texts no. 10 (RAP)

Translation by: Chris de Lisle

Images: Agora Excavations - (1, 2)

Monument type: Stele

Inscription type: Decree (?), Record of endowment

Findspot: Agora (Ag. I 6507)

Transliterations on Places on

[1] This inscription deals with an endowment bequethed to the city of Athens by Akousilaos. The entire surviving text is a series of genitive absolutes describing how the money was handed over to the financial treasurers (see n. 3) after Akousilas’ death to lend out at interest in order to grow the principal while the purchase of the estates was being arranged (a common procedure, cf. IAph2007 12.538). The fragmentary ll. 10-15 appear to deal with the actual purchase and/or a dispute regarding it. Presumably, the lost section described the final settlement, perhaps with a list of the purchased estates appended. It is one of several inscribed endowments of the Imperial period. The others are: (1) SEG 55.248bis, probably of the 40s AD, regarding land on Salamis; (2) IG II² 1102 of 132/3 AD, from Hadrian for the gymnasia; (3) I Eleusis 489, after 168/9 AD, regarding an annual distribution at the Eleusinian Mysteries; (4) SEG 21.510, ca. 175-200 AD, regarding an annual distribution for Areopagites; (5) IG II² 2773, ca. 240-260 AD, regarding an annual distribution for Areopagites.

The absence of a patronymic and the use of consular dating indicate that the testator, Akousilaos, was a Roman citizen and his will was governed by Roman, not Athenian law. Under Roman inheritance law, the will had to designate one or more natural persons as heirs (probably Claudius and others in l. 4, see n. 3). To leave assets to other parties and to communities, the will could instruct the heir to pay out legacies. Alternatively, testators could establish a “trust” (Latin: fideicommissum; Greek: hē kata pistin klēronomia) with a trustee who was responsible for passing the asset to the community (D. Johnston in Cambridge Companion to Roman Law, 2015, 205-9). Because of its greater flexibility, the latter method was preferred and it is likely to been employed here, with either Avidius Nigrinus or Glaukias as the trustee (see n. 4).

According to the Suda, Akousilaos was an Athenian, who studied oratory in Athens, then travelled to Rome in 69 AD and had a successful career there as an orator. Finally, “having engaged in business, at his death, he left the Athenians a hundred and twenty thousand from interest on loans” (Suda Α 943). This inscription must refer to the same bequest; the extra twenty thousand mentioned by the Suda might be the interest from lending the endowment out (see below). This is the second largest donation from a private individual attested at Athens (after SEG 30.82, l. 1), but in a broader Roman context it is not exceptionally large. In IAph2007 12.538 from the 180s AD the same sum pays for a quadrennial musical festival. Several donations of a million or more are attested in Asia Minor (see M. Sartre, L’orient romain, 1991, pp. 154-55 for a list) and Herodes Atticus is said to have spent seven million on an aqueduct for Ilion in the 130s (Philostr. Vit. Soph. 2.1.2). For another agreement to purchase land for Athens in the Imperial period, see SEG 55.248bis.

It is unclear what type of inscription this is. If it is a decree, then the long string of genitive absolutes matches the style of the Areopagos (cf. IG IV² 1, 82-84). There is no space at the beginning of l. 2 for even an abbreviated prescript (the gap will have been totally filled by Akousilaos' nomen), however, which militates against identification as a decree. On public decrees of the first two centuries AD, see SEG 21.499, with notes. Alternatively, it may be simply be a record of the endowment (cf. IG II² 2773, SEG 21.510, and perhaps SEG 55.248bis). The stele was found reused as a cover slab for a drain under a late Roman road in the Agora, along with SEG 19.172 (a late ii AD list of monetary contributions). [2] For the date, see A. Cooley, Cambridge Manual of Latin Epigraphy, 2012, 468. [3] Claudius (l. 4) and one or more others pay out the money from the estate, so they are probably the heirs (Puech). The financial treasurers (argyrotamiai, literally "silver-treasurers"), entrusted with loaning out the donation in order to grow the principal, appear at Athens and many cities in Asia Minor from the first century AD. They appear to have had wide-ranging financial poweres, possibly modelled on those of the praefectii aerarii, the treasury officials of Rome (A. D. Macro, Greek Treasurers under Roman Rule, 1969). At Athens, they also appear in IG II² 1100, ll. 66-67 where they have some role in the compulsary purchase of olive oil for public use and in AIUK 4.3A (BM, Decrees) no. 10, ll. 47-49 where they are to sell off the securities of defaulting public debtors. They are distinct from the treasurer(s) of the sacred allocation (see IG II² 1035, l. 15) and the treasurer of the Council (e.g., Agora XV 287), who were also responsible for Athenian finances in the Imperial period, and from the prytany treasurer, who was a liturgist (e.g., Agora XV 322). The relation of these officials to the Opisthodomos (SEG 19.172) is unclear. [4] The title “legate of Augustus and propraetor” (Latin: leg. Aug. pro prae.) here refers to a specially appointed imperial agent (in some provinces it was the title of the governor, but in Achaia the governor's title was "proconsul"). Trajan appointed this agent to deal with the free cities in Achaia (Athens, Sparta, Delphi, Thespiai, Plataia, and others), which technically did not come under the purview of the provincial governor. This ad hoc appointment developed into a permanent post of “corrector of the free cities,” which eventually merged into the governorship (J. H. Oliver, GRBS 14, 1973, 389-405). For attestations of other holders of the post at Athens see IG II² 3194, 4210, 4215.

The legate's involvement in this case may be as the designated trustee of the "trust" (cf. Plin. Ep. 10.75 where a Roman leaves his estate to Pliny, as governor, on condition that he transfer most of it to two Greek cities). In this case Glaukias might be his personal representative. Alternatively, he may have been required to issue a judgment allowing the bequest, either because of a dispute or because a special dispensation was required for Athens to receive the bequest. Under Roman inheritance law, Roman citizens could not leave legacies to “peregrine” (non-Roman) communities, like Athens (see D. Johnston, JRS 75, 1985, 106-8). Nerva introduced an exception to this rule in 96-98, but it was not finalised until the reign of Hadrian (Ulp. Reg. 24.28; Digest 36.1.27). Follet suggests that the "borders" referred to in ll. 10-12 are those of Athens and that he was required to mediate with Athens’ neighbours regarding the purchase, which is plausible but does not explain his involvement in the initial monetary payout in ll. 5-7.

Gaius Avidius Nigrinus (PIR² A 1408) is attested as legate at Delphi ca. 114 (F.Delphes III 4, 290-296; cf. P. Stadter, Plutarch and his Roman Readers, 2015, 77-80). He was probably appointed because he had existing ties with Greece; his uncle had been governor ca. 91/2 (L. Girdvainyte in K Czakowski and B. Eckhardt, Law in the Roman Provinces, 2020, 225). He was a suffect consul in 110, governor of Dacia in the late 110s (CIL III 7904), and executed by Hadrian for conspiracy in 118 (Cassius Dio 69.2.5).

Textual Note: The text was originally published by B. D. Meritt, Hesperia 22, 1963, 24-25 n. 25 (= SEG 21.498). AIO follows the text of Puech, which is similar to but more conservative than S. Follet in A. Billault ed., Opōra, 2001, 85-96 (= SEG 52.139). The main differences are that Follet restores [Τι Κλαυδίου?] Ἀκουσιλάου “[Tiberius Claudius?] Akousilaos in l. 2 and Κλαυδ[ίου δὲ Ἀκουσιλάου “Claudius [Akousilaos…] in l.4, while Peuch treats them as distinct individuals; Follet does not restore Avidius Nigrinus' name in ll. 5-6; and Follet tentatively restores ll. 10-15: Ἀουιδίου Νιγρείνου τ[οῦ πρεσβευτοῦ καὶ ἀντι]|[στρατήγου περὶ τῶν ἀγορα]σθέντων χωρίων ἐν ὅρο[ις τῆς Ἀττικῆς]| [ὄντων? γνώμην ἀποφήναντο]ς εἴς τε τὴν τιμὴ[ν τῶν χωρίων καὶ τὴν]| [κατ᾽ ἐνιαυτὸν τοῦ ἐλαίου ἀπόδοσιν? τοῦ] τε Γλαυκίου [καὶ τῶν ἀργυρο]|[ταμιῶν? ἀντιγράψαντων τοῦτο τὸ ἐπίκρι]μα τὰ ῥήμ[ατα τῆς διαθήκης?]| [ἀπετέλουν? ὅ τε Γλαυκίας κ]αὶ οἱ κλη[ρονόμοι · · ? · ·]. “with Avidius Nigrinus [the legate and propraetor [having delivered his opinion] regarding the purchased estates on the boundaries [of Attika] both on the price [of the estates and the annual olive delivery (apodosin)?] and with Glaukias [and the financial treasurers? both having counter-sued this edict, both Glaukias] and the heirs [fulfilled?] the words [of the will…]”

Added: 20 May 2023
Updated: 18 Mar 2024
Feedback

ID: AIO_2639