DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4679#0086
6o II. LAODICEIA : THE GRAECO-ROMAN CITY.
coins. This explanation suits admirably with Eckhel's theory just
stated. The date TTH, which occurs so often on coins, both imperial
and autonomous, struck under Caracalla, is a.d. an1. The legend
AaoSiKecop to irrj' is then equivalent to euruyet? Kaipol AaoSiKecov,
' the beginning of the prosperous time for the city of the Laodiceans.'
A dedication, probably made to Caracalla a. d. 214-7, by the neokoros
city of Laodiceia, has been found at Kome (Kaibel 1063): it is erected
under care of Aelius Antipater Rhodon and Aelius Antipater Kollegas2.
'§ 11. Tribes and Demos. The population of Laodiceia was divided
into an unknown number of tribes, of which three are known, Apol-
lonis, Athenais, and Laodikis 3. The last is obviously named after
the queen of Antiochus II4, and (like the Ephesioi in Ephesos) was
probably the first and most honourable tribe on the list. Doubtless
a cultus and priesthood of Laodike was instituted when the city was
founded (§ 1). The relations of the various sections of the population,
colonist and native, to each other are obscure.
The deliberative bodies in Laodiceia were, as usual, Senate and
Demos. As to the latter nothing is known ; but, according to analogy,
it would be an unimportant body, which met to accept proposals drawn
up by the grammateibs and strategoi and approved by the Senate.
§ 12. Senate. The most important question regarding the Senate is
whether it had a constitution like the Greek boule or like the Roman
senatus. It is certain that before the Roman period the senate in
the cities of Asia was chosen by the people for a certain term
(doubtless a year) according to the tribes (so many senators from each
tribe) ; and also that in later time the senators in these cities were
appointed in the Roman way for life, and constituted an order. The
points on which evidence is needed are (1) when was the change made
from the Greek to the Roman system? (3) was it made in all cities
simultaneously (in which case it must have been made under orders
from the Roman government), or did it take place at different times
in different cities 1 (3) was it made by a single complete change, or
(as Mr. Hicks is inclined to think5) by a gradual romanization of the
Senate. ______________________________
1 It is calculated from the era 123 A.D., ably be completed [#]e'|V]tv M. Aip. k.t.X. :
§ 6 (b). epitaphs with this formula are probably
2 Kaibel rather oddly understands Christian). Tribes Athenais also at
this to mean ' Aelius Antipater his col- Nyssa, Eumenia, and Apollonis at a
league.' In a Greek inscription Kollegas Bithynian city (Wadd. 1183).
must be treated as a proper name. 4 On this queen see Ch. VIII § 2 and 5.
3 Apollonis, Ath. Mitth. 1891 p. 146; 5 See his valuable essay on the consti-
Laodikis, inscr. 9 : Athenais BCH 1887 tution of Ephesos, Inscr. Brit. Mus. Ill
p. 353 (the published text should prob- p. 73.
coins. This explanation suits admirably with Eckhel's theory just
stated. The date TTH, which occurs so often on coins, both imperial
and autonomous, struck under Caracalla, is a.d. an1. The legend
AaoSiKecop to irrj' is then equivalent to euruyet? Kaipol AaoSiKecov,
' the beginning of the prosperous time for the city of the Laodiceans.'
A dedication, probably made to Caracalla a. d. 214-7, by the neokoros
city of Laodiceia, has been found at Kome (Kaibel 1063): it is erected
under care of Aelius Antipater Rhodon and Aelius Antipater Kollegas2.
'§ 11. Tribes and Demos. The population of Laodiceia was divided
into an unknown number of tribes, of which three are known, Apol-
lonis, Athenais, and Laodikis 3. The last is obviously named after
the queen of Antiochus II4, and (like the Ephesioi in Ephesos) was
probably the first and most honourable tribe on the list. Doubtless
a cultus and priesthood of Laodike was instituted when the city was
founded (§ 1). The relations of the various sections of the population,
colonist and native, to each other are obscure.
The deliberative bodies in Laodiceia were, as usual, Senate and
Demos. As to the latter nothing is known ; but, according to analogy,
it would be an unimportant body, which met to accept proposals drawn
up by the grammateibs and strategoi and approved by the Senate.
§ 12. Senate. The most important question regarding the Senate is
whether it had a constitution like the Greek boule or like the Roman
senatus. It is certain that before the Roman period the senate in
the cities of Asia was chosen by the people for a certain term
(doubtless a year) according to the tribes (so many senators from each
tribe) ; and also that in later time the senators in these cities were
appointed in the Roman way for life, and constituted an order. The
points on which evidence is needed are (1) when was the change made
from the Greek to the Roman system? (3) was it made in all cities
simultaneously (in which case it must have been made under orders
from the Roman government), or did it take place at different times
in different cities 1 (3) was it made by a single complete change, or
(as Mr. Hicks is inclined to think5) by a gradual romanization of the
Senate. ______________________________
1 It is calculated from the era 123 A.D., ably be completed [#]e'|V]tv M. Aip. k.t.X. :
§ 6 (b). epitaphs with this formula are probably
2 Kaibel rather oddly understands Christian). Tribes Athenais also at
this to mean ' Aelius Antipater his col- Nyssa, Eumenia, and Apollonis at a
league.' In a Greek inscription Kollegas Bithynian city (Wadd. 1183).
must be treated as a proper name. 4 On this queen see Ch. VIII § 2 and 5.
3 Apollonis, Ath. Mitth. 1891 p. 146; 5 See his valuable essay on the consti-
Laodikis, inscr. 9 : Athenais BCH 1887 tution of Ephesos, Inscr. Brit. Mus. Ill
p. 353 (the published text should prob- p. 73.