Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία

αναλυτική αναζήτηση

 ΙΔΡΥΜΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ
z
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Αναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΑΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΒΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΓΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΔΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΕΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΖΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΗΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΘΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΙΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΚΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΛΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΜΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΝΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΞΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΟΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΠΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΡΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΣΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΤΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΥΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΦΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΧΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα ΨΑναζήτηση με το γράμμα Ω

Province of Asia (Antiquity)

Συγγραφή : Dimitriadou Daphne (11/3/2002)
Μετάφραση : Chrysanthopoulos Dimitrios

Για παραπομπή: Dimitriadou Daphne, "Province of Asia (Antiquity)",
Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Μείζονος Ελληνισμού, Μ. Ασία
URL: <http://www.ehw.gr/l.aspx?id=8091>
Επαρχία Ασίας (Αρχαιότητα) (6/2/2006 v.1) Province of Asia (Antiquity) (24/2/2011 v.1) 
 

1. Historical context

The peace of Apamea in 188 BC, a consequence of the victory of Rome over Antiochus III, was particularly beneficial to Eumenes II of Pergamon. His friendly policy towards Rome gave him Greater and Lesser Phrygia, Mysia, Lydia and Ionia, including Magnesia ad Sipilum, Ephesus, Tralleis and Caria Hydrela.1 In 133 BC, Eumenes’ son, Attalus III, bequeathed the kingdom of Pergamon to the Roman people. In the summer of the same year, however, his half-brother Aristonicus, the illegitimate son of Eumenes and the daughter of an Ephesian guitar player, led a revolt against Rome. Without the support of the majority of the Greek cities, with the exception of Phocaea and some minor cities, Aristonicus attempted to regain the kingdom of the Attalids. His initial success against the Romans, which was characterized by consul Publius Licinius Crassus Mucianus’ death, was followed by his defeat in a naval battle against the Ephesians. In 130 BC, he was defeated by Crassus’ substitute, Marcus Perperna. He was arrested after a siege and taken under custody to Rome, where he was executed under orders of the senate.2

Manius Aquilius, consul in 129 BC, remained in Asia Minor for approximately three years in order to organize, along with a body of ten senators, the kingdom of the Attalids, a heterogeneous state as regards its population and institutions. His attempts were not limited to the typical organization of the new province, but aimed at its actual development by means of a series of technical works, such as the construction of roads, especially in the southern regions, which had been neglected by the Attalids. His work was appreciated both by the Greek population and Rome, where he was awarded with the highest of honours.3

Having taken the consent of the senate, Manius Aquilius decided to grant the distant regions of the kingdom to neighbouring rulers. The whole of Phrygia was given to Mithridates V of Pontus and Lycaonia to Ariarathes V of Cappadocia. Moreover, the Thracian peninsula and the island of Aegina were integrated into the provinces of Macedonia and Achaea respectively. Out of all the dominions of the Attalids, Rome finally included the western part of the kingdom, comprising the regions of Troad, Aeolis, Mysia, Ionia, Lydia and Caria, into the new province. Around 116 BC, Phrygia and the city of Cibyra were taken from Mithridates V’s successor, Mithridates VI Eupator, and integrated into the province.4

Mithridates VI’s wars against Rome (88-63 BC) constitute a special chapter in the history of the Greek cities of the province. The Greek cities hailed him as a liberator from the oppression of Rome and sided up with him. His defeat, however, by Sulla marked the end of freedom for his allied cities. Under the provisions of the treaty of Dardanus in 85 BC, the cities of Asia were forced not only to pay a fine of 20,000 talents and the retrospective taxes of the last five years, but also to undertake the feeding, clothing and daily wages of Sylla’s legions for the winter of 85-84 BC.

On the contrary, the few cities that opposed Mithridates, such as Stratonicea, Aphrodisias, Ilium and Magnesia, were rewarded with new dominions and the privileges of the friends of Rome.5 The dire financial situation the cities of the province faced due to Sulla was alleviated by the measures Lucullus – consul in 74 BC and commander of the armed forces in Asia and Cilicia – took in 72 BC, following his victory over Mithridates. Lucullus cancelled Sulla’s measures, announced the partial erasure of the cities' debts owed to their creditors, allowed the interest-free payment of the rest of the debts within a four-year period, specified the maximum interest rate of loans to 12%, and imposed a 25% tax on crops and special taxes on real estate and slaves in order to bring money to the coffers of the cities. Finally, he decreed that each debtor should pay no more than ¼ of their income.6 In 27 BC, the structure of the province was reorganized by Octavian Augustus Caesar and came under the jurisdiction of the senate. The borders of the province remained unchanged until Gaius Aurelius Valerius Diocletian’ reign at the end of the 3rd cent. AD, when, in the context of the emperor’s reforms, it was divided into seven smaller administrative units, one of which retained the older name of the province.7

During Augustus’ reign, the primary commercial and cultural centres of the province were Ephesus, on the estuary of the Maeander River, and Smyrna, on the estuary of the Hermos River. These two cities were major ports and surpassed Miletus in importance, which played a protagonist role during the Hellenistic period. To the north of the province, Cyzicus, on the southern coast of Propontis, developed into a financially robust city. Pergamon retained its former glory as the capital of the Attalids, displaying the renowned Eumenes’ Library and numerous works of art. In Lydia, Sardis remained an important centre, in contrast to Mylasa, which did not manage to recover from the damage cause by the Parthians in 40/39 BC. In Phrygia, the strategic position of Apameia – known as Apamea Kibotus in later times – was the main reason, according to geographer Strabo, the city developed into a major commercial centre, second only to Ephesus.8

2. Administration of the province

Rome, following the policy of the Attalids, used the existing mechanisms of regional government in the cities of the province. Ephesus remained the administrative centre of the province and seat of the governor throughout the entire period of the Roman rule.

During the Imperial period, the province was governed by a higher official, the proconsul. The fact that it had come under the jurisdiction of the senate did not prevent various emperors from intervening in its internal affairs by influencing senate members they controlled. Vespasian, Trajan and Hadrian in particular meticulously attempted to cut down the extravagant expenses of various cities. Trajan, for example, systematically attempted to monitor the financial affairs of the cities and instituted the position of the corrector in order to give legal validity to his intentions. The same emperor probably instituted or increased the responsibilities of the curator as well, including the investigation over the financial affairs of the cities and the reorganization of their financial structures. The curatores rei publicae were appointed either by the emperor or by the proconsul of the province.9 The administration of justice was the responsibility of the proconsul and the local courts. Trials related to homicides and the imposition of exile were the exclusive responsibility of the governor. The proconsul appointed the judges in cases related to Roman citizens or citizens of different cities. In order to facilitate his magisterial work – as well as his administrative work in general –10 the province was divided into administrative centres, known as dioeceseis during the Roman Republic and conventus or conventus iuridicus or iurisdictio during the Imperial period.11 The courts were obligatory convened by the governor in the biggest city of each administrative centre.12 During the Roman Republic, the province of Asia was divided into 13 administrative centres: Adramyttium, Pergamon, Smyrna, Sardis, Tralleis, Miletus, Mylasa, Alabanda, Cibyra, Synada, Apamea and Philomelium. Pliny the Elder mentions that during Augustus’ reign, the administrative centres were reduced to 10: Philomelium, Cibyra, Synada, Apamea, Alabanda, Sardis, Smyrna, Ephesus, Adramyttium and Pergamon. According to an inscription found in Didyma, Halicarnassus and Cyzicus were added to the aforementioned administrative centres in 40 AD, probably replacing Tralleis and Mylasa, as well as Miletus. An inscription from Ephesus dating back to the Flavian dynasty mentions five administrative centres: Miletus, Halicarnassus, Pergamon, Sardis and Apamea.13 There is no accurate information about the number of administrative centres during the 2nd and 3rd centuries AD, but it can be surmised with relative certainty that Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamon, Apamea and Sardis were trial-holding centres. During the 2nd cent. AD, trials were also held in Philadelphia, a city in the administrative centre of Sardis. Under Caracalla’s order in 215 AD, the same privilege was also given to the city of Thyateira.14

3. State offices

During the Imperial period, the boule (council) and the ekklesia (the assembly of citizens in a city-state) still constituted the centre of the political activity of the Greek cities.15 The older bodies of prytaneis (presidents) and strategoi (generals) , the so-called archontes (rulers), still existed, assuming the responsibilities of self-government and financial administration of the city. They collaborated with the grammateis (secretaries) of the boule or the ekklesia, who were responsible for compiling and presenting resolutions to the boule, as well as erecting statues to honour the emperor or some other important person, following a relevant decision of the boule.

The title of the eponymous archon was not the same throughout all the cities of Asia Minor. In Pergamon, Ephesus and Colophon, they referred to it as the prytanes; in Cyzicus, they referred to it as the ipparch, whereas in Miletus, Smyrna, Aphrodisias and Stratonicea, they used the older title of stephanephoros (the right of wearing a crown, which belonged to certain magistrates).16

Of particular importance were also the offices of sitonesand elaiones, responsible for the procurement of grain and olive oil respectively. Other offices were those of the agoranomos (clerk of the market ), tamias (treasurer), astynomos (a magistrate who had the care of the police, streets, and public buildings) and eirenarchos (responsible for the observance of laws and the preservation of the morals and discipline of the citizens). In order to persecute and arrest the lawless, the latter had soldiers, horsemen and diogmites (mounted policemen) under his command. The duties of the paraphylax were similar to the duties of the eirenarchos. However, they were restricted to rural regions only.17

4. Archai and liturgies

The activities of the citizens in the Greek cities of Asia Minor belonged either to the archai (offices)or to the liturgies(public service performing by private citizens at their own expenses).

The archai referred to the state offices citizens were asked to serve in, following their election and subsequent payment of an amount of money (summa honoraria). They were considered an honour (honor) and offered to the citizen the respect of the entire city, whereas their evasion brought the citizen's disgrace.

The liturgies were the mandatory duties of the wealthy citizens for the benefit of the entire community. They were a kind of service (munus) and the official release from them was considered a privilege. The liturgies consisted of the munera personalia, which did not require the payment of any amounts of money, the munera patrimoniorum, which were a kind of indirect taxation on the real estate of the citizen, and the munera mixta, which gave the citizen the responsibility for the payment of the imperial taxes.18 The gymnasiarchia (the office of gymnasiarch), agonothesia (the office of the judge of the contests) and panygeriarchia(the office of panegyriarches) were also considered liturgies , closer to the spirit of the relevant institutions of classical Athens. The gymnasiarch was responsible for the maintenance and coverage of the running expenses of the gymnasium. The agonothetes was responsible for the games and covered the expenses of the athletes, the events and the trophies. The panegyriarches was responsible for the coordination of the festivals and the expenses of at least one free meal for his fellow citizens.19

5. Clubs

An institution of the majority of the cities in Asia Minor with particular prestige was the two clubs of “Neoi” (youths) and "Gerousia" (elders). The “Neoi” was an athletic club which gradually developed into a social club as well, with young men who had come of age as its members. The Gerousia dates back to the 3rd cent. BC and was an exclusively social club. It had a gymnasium and its members were prominent citizens. During the Imperial period, it had the right, along with the boule and the ecclesia of the demos, to present honourary resolutions. Both clubs accepted donations and had a president, a secretary and a treasurer.20

6. Taxation

During the Roman Republic, the governors of the province considered their tenure of office as the golden opportunity to improve their financial situation. Without any kind of audit from Rome and in full collaboration with the tax collectors (publicani), they aimed at unscrupulously draining the resources of the province. The citizens paid taxes in order to rent public land and tariffs (portoria), often resorting to bribery and offering gifts to the officials of Rome. The inhuman behavior of the tax collectors occasionally led to social unrest, targeting the wealthy citizens and Roman officials. Most characteristic are the events of 88 BC, when Mithridates VI of Pontus prompted the citizens of several cities of Asia Minor to murder the Romans inhabiting in them. The sources mention that 80,000 people were slaughtered in a single day, but this number is probably exaggerated. In another case, in 20 BC, Roman citizens were murdered in Cyzicus when riots broke out due to the shortage of grain. As a result, Augustus repealed the privilege of freedom the city was enjoying.21

During Augustus’ reign, some tax reforms were made. The former tax-collecting methods were cancelled and the boule of each city was assigned the responsibility for the assessment of tax payers and the collection of taxes. The collection of taxes was based on the population and asset census. The tax collectors were named decemprimiand they were not necessarily members of the boule. The office of decemprimiwas one of the liturgies and belonged to the munera mixta.22

In contrast to the governors during the Roman Republic, the proconsuls tried to protect the emperor’s interests. Rome was interested in the financial growth and prosperity of the province, which would guarantee the collection of taxes and the increase of revenues in its treasury.23

7. New cities – Colonies

Roman emperors, following Pompey’s policy in Pontus, promoted the establishment of new cities in Asia Minor and the development of small communities into cities. Augustus, Vespasian and Hadrian were particularly interested in these procedures. Urbanization was an indication of progress and prosperity, a result of peace and security brought by Augustus’ predominance (Pax Romana/Pax Augusta). Several new cities, as well as some older ones that were renamed, were named in honour of the emperor, such as Caesarea, Neocaesarea, Sebaste, Sebastopolis, etc.24 During Augustus’ reign, some cities were granted the privilege of freedom, whereas others retained the privileges of self-government, tax exemption, local taxation, etc. they had been enjoying until then. Pliny the Elder names them civitates foederatae or liberae sine foedere and cites them in his work Historia Naturalis. As regards the province of Asia, he mentions that Ilium, Caunus, Cnidus, Mylasa Alabanda, Stratonicea and Aphrodisias were all free cities.25

After the end of various campaigns, emperors faced the problem of the social rehabilitation of the veterans of the Roman legions. The solution was the establishment of colonies, where veterans acquired land on the one hand and the symptoms of overpopulation in the Italian peninsula were relieved on the other. Most known colonies were established in Bithynia, Pontus and Pisidia, whereas fewer ones were established in Lycaonia, Cappadocia, Cilicia and Galatia. In the province of Asia, Parion was established during the Roman Republic and Alexandria Troas during Augustus’ reign.26

8. The Koinon of Asia

At the beginning of the 1st cent. AD, several cities of the province collectively honoured Q. Mucius Scaevola, governor in 98 BC, and celebrated the Mucieia.27 By Marcus Antonius’ reign, these cities were organized into a Koinon, often undertaking the task of conveying requests and complaints to the senate. During Augustus’ reign, the Koinon developed into an exclusively religious institution and undertook the responsibility for the imperial cult, exercised in Pergamon. This fact gave great prestige and importance to the Koinon of Asia in contrast to the other Koina of Asia Minor. In 26 AD, a temple in honour of the emperor was also built in Smyrna, soon followed by another temple in Ephesus. The meetings for the organization of devotional ceremonies and the cases that concerned the Koinon took place in any one of the three cities, which were honoured with the title of neokoros. After the 1st cent. AD, the delegations of the members of the Koinon met in Sardis, Cyzicus, Philadelphia, Laodicea ad Lycum, Miletus and Tralleis. The main official of the Koinon was the asiarch, whose term was annual. He was a Roman citizen, probably descending from the prominent families of the city, and he was responsible for the proper organization of the annual celebration of the emperor’s birthday.28

1. Jones, A.H.M., The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces 2(Oxford 1971), pp. 51-52.

2. Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the 3rd century AD (Princeton 1950), pp. 148-153.

3. Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the 3rd century AD (Princeton 1950), pp. 157-158.

4. Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), p. 663; Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the 3rd century AD (Princeton 1950), pp. 154-155.

5. Heichelheim, F.M. – Yeo, C.A. – Ward, A.M., A History of the Roman People 2(New Jersey 1984), p. 185.

6. Heichelheim, F.M. – Yeo, C.A. – Ward, A.M., A History of the Roman People 2 (New Jersey 1984), p. 195.

7. Deininger, J., Die Provinziallandtage der römischen Kaiserzeit: von Augustus bis zum Ende des dritten Jahrhunderts n. Chr. (Vestigia 6, Munich – Berlin 1965), p. 60.

8. Strab., Geographica 13.4.5; Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), p. 664.

9. Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), pp. 669-670; Burton, G.P., “Proconsuls, Assizes and the Administration of Justice under the Empire”, JRS 65 (1975), p. 105.

10. Burton, G.P., “Proconsuls, Assizes and the Administration of Justice under the Empire”, JRS 65 (1975), pp. 102-106.

11. Habicht, C., “New Evidence on the Province of Asia”, JRS 65 (1975), p. 67.

12. OGIS 458, 1.65; Modestinus, Dig. 27.1.6.2.

13. Plin., HN 5.95-126; IvDidyma, 148, IvEphesus 3653; Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), p. 671 and note 26; Habicht, C., “New Evidence on the Province of Asia”, JRS 65 (1975), p. 70; Jones, A.H.M., The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces 2(Oxford 1971), pp. 64-90.

14. Burton, G.P., “Proconsuls, Assizes and the Administration of Justice under the Empire”, JRS 65 (1975), pp. 93-94.

15. Pleket, H.W., “Political Culture and Political Practice in the cities of Asia Minor in the Roman Empire”, in Schuller, W. (ed.), Politische Theorie und Praxis in Altertum (Darmstadt 1998), pp. 210-212; Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the 3rd century AD (Princeton 1950), pp. 62-63.

16. Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the 3rd century AD (Princeton 1950), pp. 58-61.

17. Rife, J.L., “Officials of the Roman Provinces in Xenophon’s Ephesiaca”, ZPE 138 (2002), pp. 96-104; Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), pp. 678-680.

18. Pleket, H.W., “Political Culture and Political Practice in the cities of Asia Minor in the Roman Empire”, in Schuller, W. (ed.), Politische Theorie und Praxis in Altertum (Darmstadt 1998), p. 206; Jones, A.H.M., The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces 2(Oxford 1971), p. 340.

19. Rife, J.L., “Officials of the Roman Provinces in Xenophon’s Ephesiaca”, ZPE 138 (2002), pp. 96-104; Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), pp. 678-680.

20. Pleket, H.W., “Political Culture and Political Practice in the cities of Asia Minor in the Roman Empire”, in Schuller, W. (ed.), Politische Theorie und Praxis in Altertum (Darmstadt 1998), p. 206; Jones, A.H.M., The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces 2(Oxford 1971), p. 340.

21. Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), p. 680.

22. Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), p. 681; Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the 3rd century AD (Princeton 1950), pp. 854-860, notes 37, 38.

23. Plut., Sylla 24.4; Memn., Fragmenta B.434.22.9.

24. Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), pp. 667-668; Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the 3rd century AD (Princeton 1950), pp. 406 and 1260, note 8.

25. Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), p. 667.

26. Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), pp. 672-673; Jones, A.H.M., The Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces 2(Oxford 1971), pp. 59-84.

27. Plin. HN 4.71, 5.91-92, 5.104-109, 5.124, 5.132-139, 5.149, 6.7; Magie, D., Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the 3rd century AD (Princeton 1950), p. 473.

28. Macro, A.D., The Cities of Asia Minor under the Roman Imperium (ANRW II, Prinzipat 7, Berlin 1980), pp. 674-675; Levick, B., Roman Colonies in Southern Asia Minor (Oxford 1967), pp. 68-91.
     
 
 
 
 
 

Δελτίο λήμματος
 
press image to open photo library
 

>>>
 
 
 
 
 
 

copyright © 2008, ΙΔΡΥΜΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ

Το έργο Μεγάλη Δικτυακή «Εγκυκλοπαίδεια Ελληνικού Πολιτισμού» - Μέρος Α΄ συγχρηματοδοτήθηκε σε ποσοστό 80% από το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης (ΕΤΠΑ) και κατά 20% από εθνικούς πόρους στο πλαίσιο του Επιχειρησιακού Προγράμματος "Κοινωνία της Πληροφορίας" του Γ΄ ΚΠΣ.

Το έργο ΕΓΚΥΚΛΟΠΑΙΔΕΙΑ ΜΕΙΖΟΝΟΣ ΕΛΛΗΝΙΣΜΟΥ συγχρηματοδοτήθηκε σε ποσοστό 80% από το Ευρωπαϊκό Ταμείο Περιφερειακής Ανάπτυξης (ΕΤΠΑ) και κατά 20% από εθνικούς πόρους στο πλαίσιο του Επιχειρησιακού Προγράμματος "Κοινωνία της Πληροφορίας" του Γ΄ ΚΠΣ.