DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45246#0080
68
EPHESOS.
until the war of Antiochos (No. cccclxxxv), soon
after which I place the remarkable law (No. ccccxlix),
which must be studied in close connexion with the
well-known decree of the Ephesians concerning
Mithradates, now at Oxford (Waddington-Le Bas,
Part v, 136 a).
When a Greek city, after its incorporation into the
Roman Empire, rose into new importance and became
a busy centre of Graeco-Roman civilization, it nearly
always happened that its past history became forgot-
ten. The records of its earlier and purely Hellenic
existence suffered neglect or destruction; and the
modern scholar in exploring its site finds hardly an
inscription referring to the older time : all is
Roman, or Graeco-Roman*. To a large extent this
observation holds good of Ephesos. The greater
portion of the Ephesian records in this volume
belong to the imperial period. They range from
the time of Augustus (Nos. dxxii foil.) down to the
fourth century (No. dclxxiii), and the most impor-
tant results which this collection yields, will be the
illustration it affords of the administration and inner
life of the province of Asia under the Roman
emperors.
As early as 1843 H. Guhl published his Ephesiaca,
in which he collected and arranged everything that
could be gleaned from ancient literature, and from
coins and marbles so far as known, to illustrate the
history of Ephesos. This remarkable monograph
still retains its value, even after the recent dis-
coveries. The following works must also be con-
sulted by every student of Ephesian antiquities :
Falkener, Ephesus and the Temple of Diana (1862).
Waddington, Fastes des Provinces Asiatiques (1872).
Marquardt, Romische Alterthiimer, vol. iv (1872).
E. Curtius, Beitrage zur Geschichte und Topographie
Kleinasiens: Abh. der Akademie der Wissen-
schaften zu Berlin (1872).
E. Curtius, Ephesos; ein Vortrag (1874).
Zimmermann, Ephesos im ersten Christlichen Jahr-
hundert (1874).
Head, Coinage of Ephesus (1880).
Menadier, Qua condicione Ephesii usi sint inde ab
Asia in formam provinciae redacta (1880).
To each of these treatises we shall have occasion
to refer in dealing with the inscriptions which follow.
But the essay of Menadier is of peculiar value; for
he has made it his task to illustrate the institutions
of Ephesos under the Empire by means of a minute
comparison of inscriptions and other records from
all the Greek cities of Asia Minor. And yet, after
the careful researches of these and other writers,
there remain not a few points in the antiquities
of Ephesos which await further elucidation. The
last word has not yet been said upon Ephesian
topography; for a comparison of the maps of
Ephesos appended to the monographs of Curtius,
Zimmermann and Wood will show how difficult it
is to assign aright the known names of Ephesian
hills and streams. On this subject however I leave
those to speak, who have had the advantage of a
personal study of the site of Ephesos; and will
confine my attention to the political and social
antiquities. In this department there are several
questions upon which I shall make a few remarks,
before proceeding to the inscriptions themselves.
On the Ephesian Tribes and Thousands
(0υλαζ χιλίαστΑ?).
We are familiar with the subdivision of the free
population of Attika, which remained in its chief
features unchanged from the time of the reforms
of Kleisthenes. We know the names and order of
precedence of the ten tribes (0υλαί), to each of
which were assigned a number of villages or dis-
tricts (δήμοι) not necessarily contiguous to each
other. Each of the four ancient tribes was divided
into three φρατρίαι, and each φρατρία comprised
(normally) thirty γίνη. Each yAoy again comprised
(normally) thirty families, so that the yAoy itself was
sometimes called also τριακάς (see Part i, No. xi, and
the authorities there quoted). Such were the tribal
subdivisions of Attika, about which both authors and
inscriptions afford varied information. But we know
that similar subdivisions, based upon distinctions of
family and race, existed in every Hellenic city, and
dated from the earliest times. The language of
Homer about the heroic battle-field would hold
literally true of historical times (II. ii, 362—363):
κρΐν ανδρας κατά φυλά, κατά φρήτρας, Άγάμεμνον,
ως φρήτρη φρήτρηφιν άρήγτ], φυλά δε φύλοις.
In fact these subdivisions were the lines upon
which the political life of the people, within their
own community, moved; and we gain a valuable
insight into the early history and into the inner life
of a Greek city, when we can enlarge our knowledge
of its tribal and sub-tribal divisions. We expect to
find in Attic colonies some traces of the old Ionic
tribes; in Doric colonies, the names of the old
Dorian tribes. In illustration of this we may refer
to No. ccccxxxix ante, and the note there concerning
the tribes of Priene; and Part ii, No. clxxviii, on
the tribes of Tomis; compare also Nos. clvi, cccxv,
CCCXLV, CCCLII.
At Ephesos in the time of Ephoros (fl. 340 b. c.)
there were five tribes, the names and origin of which
he described as follows, according to Steph. Byz.
S. V. Βεννα. μία φυλή των έν ’Εφεσω πεντε, ής οί φυλέται
Βενναΐοι, ώ? ’'Εφορος' οτι "Ανδροκλος ό κτίσας "Εφεσον,
ούτος Πριηνεΰσι βοηθήσας ετελεύτησε και οί πολλοί’Εφεσιοι
συν αύτω. οι οΰν καταλειφθεντες ’Εφεσιοι εστασίασαν κατά
των ’ Ανδρόκλου παίδων, και βουλόμενοι βοήθειαν ίχ^ιν προς
αυτούς εκ Τεω και Καρίνης άποίκους ελαβον, άφ’ ων εν
’Εφεσω δύο φυλα'ι των πεντε τάς επωνυμίας εχουσιν’ οι μεν
γάρ εν Βενντ] Βενναΐοι, οί δ’ εν Εύωνύμω τής ’Αττικής Εύώ-
νυμοι. ούς δ’ εξ αρχής tv ’ Εφεσω κατελαβον Έφεσίους
φασι, τούς δ’ ύστερον επήλυδας Τηΐους και Καριναίους άπο-
* See the note on No. ccccxxi ante, respecting Laodicea : and examine e.g. the extant inscriptions of Smyrna and Byzantium. The
most promising sites for excavation, if we are in search of purely Greek documents, would be towns like Priene, or even Lebedos, that
had no history under the Roman rule.
EPHESOS.
until the war of Antiochos (No. cccclxxxv), soon
after which I place the remarkable law (No. ccccxlix),
which must be studied in close connexion with the
well-known decree of the Ephesians concerning
Mithradates, now at Oxford (Waddington-Le Bas,
Part v, 136 a).
When a Greek city, after its incorporation into the
Roman Empire, rose into new importance and became
a busy centre of Graeco-Roman civilization, it nearly
always happened that its past history became forgot-
ten. The records of its earlier and purely Hellenic
existence suffered neglect or destruction; and the
modern scholar in exploring its site finds hardly an
inscription referring to the older time : all is
Roman, or Graeco-Roman*. To a large extent this
observation holds good of Ephesos. The greater
portion of the Ephesian records in this volume
belong to the imperial period. They range from
the time of Augustus (Nos. dxxii foil.) down to the
fourth century (No. dclxxiii), and the most impor-
tant results which this collection yields, will be the
illustration it affords of the administration and inner
life of the province of Asia under the Roman
emperors.
As early as 1843 H. Guhl published his Ephesiaca,
in which he collected and arranged everything that
could be gleaned from ancient literature, and from
coins and marbles so far as known, to illustrate the
history of Ephesos. This remarkable monograph
still retains its value, even after the recent dis-
coveries. The following works must also be con-
sulted by every student of Ephesian antiquities :
Falkener, Ephesus and the Temple of Diana (1862).
Waddington, Fastes des Provinces Asiatiques (1872).
Marquardt, Romische Alterthiimer, vol. iv (1872).
E. Curtius, Beitrage zur Geschichte und Topographie
Kleinasiens: Abh. der Akademie der Wissen-
schaften zu Berlin (1872).
E. Curtius, Ephesos; ein Vortrag (1874).
Zimmermann, Ephesos im ersten Christlichen Jahr-
hundert (1874).
Head, Coinage of Ephesus (1880).
Menadier, Qua condicione Ephesii usi sint inde ab
Asia in formam provinciae redacta (1880).
To each of these treatises we shall have occasion
to refer in dealing with the inscriptions which follow.
But the essay of Menadier is of peculiar value; for
he has made it his task to illustrate the institutions
of Ephesos under the Empire by means of a minute
comparison of inscriptions and other records from
all the Greek cities of Asia Minor. And yet, after
the careful researches of these and other writers,
there remain not a few points in the antiquities
of Ephesos which await further elucidation. The
last word has not yet been said upon Ephesian
topography; for a comparison of the maps of
Ephesos appended to the monographs of Curtius,
Zimmermann and Wood will show how difficult it
is to assign aright the known names of Ephesian
hills and streams. On this subject however I leave
those to speak, who have had the advantage of a
personal study of the site of Ephesos; and will
confine my attention to the political and social
antiquities. In this department there are several
questions upon which I shall make a few remarks,
before proceeding to the inscriptions themselves.
On the Ephesian Tribes and Thousands
(0υλαζ χιλίαστΑ?).
We are familiar with the subdivision of the free
population of Attika, which remained in its chief
features unchanged from the time of the reforms
of Kleisthenes. We know the names and order of
precedence of the ten tribes (0υλαί), to each of
which were assigned a number of villages or dis-
tricts (δήμοι) not necessarily contiguous to each
other. Each of the four ancient tribes was divided
into three φρατρίαι, and each φρατρία comprised
(normally) thirty γίνη. Each yAoy again comprised
(normally) thirty families, so that the yAoy itself was
sometimes called also τριακάς (see Part i, No. xi, and
the authorities there quoted). Such were the tribal
subdivisions of Attika, about which both authors and
inscriptions afford varied information. But we know
that similar subdivisions, based upon distinctions of
family and race, existed in every Hellenic city, and
dated from the earliest times. The language of
Homer about the heroic battle-field would hold
literally true of historical times (II. ii, 362—363):
κρΐν ανδρας κατά φυλά, κατά φρήτρας, Άγάμεμνον,
ως φρήτρη φρήτρηφιν άρήγτ], φυλά δε φύλοις.
In fact these subdivisions were the lines upon
which the political life of the people, within their
own community, moved; and we gain a valuable
insight into the early history and into the inner life
of a Greek city, when we can enlarge our knowledge
of its tribal and sub-tribal divisions. We expect to
find in Attic colonies some traces of the old Ionic
tribes; in Doric colonies, the names of the old
Dorian tribes. In illustration of this we may refer
to No. ccccxxxix ante, and the note there concerning
the tribes of Priene; and Part ii, No. clxxviii, on
the tribes of Tomis; compare also Nos. clvi, cccxv,
CCCXLV, CCCLII.
At Ephesos in the time of Ephoros (fl. 340 b. c.)
there were five tribes, the names and origin of which
he described as follows, according to Steph. Byz.
S. V. Βεννα. μία φυλή των έν ’Εφεσω πεντε, ής οί φυλέται
Βενναΐοι, ώ? ’'Εφορος' οτι "Ανδροκλος ό κτίσας "Εφεσον,
ούτος Πριηνεΰσι βοηθήσας ετελεύτησε και οί πολλοί’Εφεσιοι
συν αύτω. οι οΰν καταλειφθεντες ’Εφεσιοι εστασίασαν κατά
των ’ Ανδρόκλου παίδων, και βουλόμενοι βοήθειαν ίχ^ιν προς
αυτούς εκ Τεω και Καρίνης άποίκους ελαβον, άφ’ ων εν
’Εφεσω δύο φυλα'ι των πεντε τάς επωνυμίας εχουσιν’ οι μεν
γάρ εν Βενντ] Βενναΐοι, οί δ’ εν Εύωνύμω τής ’Αττικής Εύώ-
νυμοι. ούς δ’ εξ αρχής tv ’ Εφεσω κατελαβον Έφεσίους
φασι, τούς δ’ ύστερον επήλυδας Τηΐους και Καριναίους άπο-
* See the note on No. ccccxxi ante, respecting Laodicea : and examine e.g. the extant inscriptions of Smyrna and Byzantium. The
most promising sites for excavation, if we are in search of purely Greek documents, would be towns like Priene, or even Lebedos, that
had no history under the Roman rule.