DOI Artikel:
Kenyon, Frederic George: Progress of Egyptology, [2]: graeco-roman Egypt
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.12422#0064
50
PKOGRESS OF JiGYPTOLOGY.
versions will be of interest also to those who hâve to do with the Greek
texts.
Of the publications of the year dealing with what may be called the
administrative side of the papy ri, one relates to the Ptolemaic period,
two to the Eoman period, and one, which is perhaps the most
important of ail, to the Byzantine. Dr. Schubart27 examines the
traces of local autonomy in Egypt under the Ptolemies. The main
novelty of his article is his interprétation of the phrase ttoXitikoI
vôfj-oL as meaning the local législation of the Greek towns, Alexandria,
Naucratis, and Ptolemais. That Ptolemais had a considérable measure
of autonomy is certain, and ISTaucratis, though now becoming relatively
insignificant, seems to have been constitutionally in the same condition ;
but the constitution of Alexandria is very obscure. It is uncertain
whether it ever possessed a Council, and the balance of évidence
appears to be against it. Outside the three Greek cities, Schubart finds
traces of privileged corporations {rroXnevfiaTa) in other towns, which may
have possessed some kind of autonomy ; but it does not seem to have
amounted to much, and it tended to disappear, not to become intensified.
ïhe Greeks retained a privileged position as compared with the Egyptians ;
but it was practical and financial rather than constitutional.
M. Jouguet28 contributes a discussion of the organisation of the è^^oi,
or young adults, in Graeco-Boman Egypt. ïhe gênerai facts that youths
were enrolled in this organisation at the âge of 14, and that it constituted
a privileged grade of society, do not admit of doubt ; but the other détails
relating to it are still obscure, and M. Jouguet's article will be useful as a
summary of the data bearing on the subject. Prof. E. de Euggiero 29
reviews two books (by Lewald and Eger) dealing with the land registers of
Graeco-Eoman Egypt, a subject of great interest, since the whole financial
system of the country was to a great extent based on them, but one which
it is impossible to discuss in détail here.
Dr. M. Gelzer's studies of the administration of Byzantine Egypt30 are of
fundamental importance for the period with which they deal. Byzantine
Egypt has suffered much neglect at the hands of scholars, who have
generally found the Ptolemaic and Eoman periods more interesting.
Meanwhile a quantity of new material has been accutnulating, which needs
collating with the literary évidence already in existence. Gelzer's little
volume of about a hundred pages is a most useful and meritorious
contribution to the subject. The main topics dealt with are (1) the
successive administrative divisions of Egypt, frorn the time of Diocletian to
the Arab conquest ; (2) the financial machinery and municipal organisation
PKOGRESS OF JiGYPTOLOGY.
versions will be of interest also to those who hâve to do with the Greek
texts.
Of the publications of the year dealing with what may be called the
administrative side of the papy ri, one relates to the Ptolemaic period,
two to the Eoman period, and one, which is perhaps the most
important of ail, to the Byzantine. Dr. Schubart27 examines the
traces of local autonomy in Egypt under the Ptolemies. The main
novelty of his article is his interprétation of the phrase ttoXitikoI
vôfj-oL as meaning the local législation of the Greek towns, Alexandria,
Naucratis, and Ptolemais. That Ptolemais had a considérable measure
of autonomy is certain, and ISTaucratis, though now becoming relatively
insignificant, seems to have been constitutionally in the same condition ;
but the constitution of Alexandria is very obscure. It is uncertain
whether it ever possessed a Council, and the balance of évidence
appears to be against it. Outside the three Greek cities, Schubart finds
traces of privileged corporations {rroXnevfiaTa) in other towns, which may
have possessed some kind of autonomy ; but it does not seem to have
amounted to much, and it tended to disappear, not to become intensified.
ïhe Greeks retained a privileged position as compared with the Egyptians ;
but it was practical and financial rather than constitutional.
M. Jouguet28 contributes a discussion of the organisation of the è^^oi,
or young adults, in Graeco-Boman Egypt. ïhe gênerai facts that youths
were enrolled in this organisation at the âge of 14, and that it constituted
a privileged grade of society, do not admit of doubt ; but the other détails
relating to it are still obscure, and M. Jouguet's article will be useful as a
summary of the data bearing on the subject. Prof. E. de Euggiero 29
reviews two books (by Lewald and Eger) dealing with the land registers of
Graeco-Eoman Egypt, a subject of great interest, since the whole financial
system of the country was to a great extent based on them, but one which
it is impossible to discuss in détail here.
Dr. M. Gelzer's studies of the administration of Byzantine Egypt30 are of
fundamental importance for the period with which they deal. Byzantine
Egypt has suffered much neglect at the hands of scholars, who have
generally found the Ptolemaic and Eoman periods more interesting.
Meanwhile a quantity of new material has been accutnulating, which needs
collating with the literary évidence already in existence. Gelzer's little
volume of about a hundred pages is a most useful and meritorious
contribution to the subject. The main topics dealt with are (1) the
successive administrative divisions of Egypt, frorn the time of Diocletian to
the Arab conquest ; (2) the financial machinery and municipal organisation