DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4679#0087
10. THE NEOKORATE. 61
The evidence as to the constitution of the Senate at Labdiceia 4s
scanty and indirect. The romanization of the Senate involved certain
other changes; when the Senate ceased to be popularly elected, the
Kornan method of periodically revising the lists was substituted.
The officials who did so were perhaps (if we may judge from ana-
logy) the ordinary chief board of magistrates, who for the special
occasion were invested with the proper authority. Like the Ilviri
quinquennales of Italian cities, penteteric strategoi may be looked for
in the function of censors or revisers of the list (XoyLarat, k^eraaTai)1.
If any indication of such an institution can be found, we .may infer
that the Roman system had come into use. Further, in the Roman
system the list of senators was arranged in order of seniority. The
revisers periodically filled up the list, introducing those who had been
magistrates since the last revision (and who had already ex officio
taken their seats), and completing it in case of need by adding persons
who fulfilled the required conditions 2. The persons who had filled
the highest offices of the state came first on the list. The ten who
were placed at the beginning had special distinctions and powers, and
were named Decemprimi (§ 13). Wherever, therefore, we can detect
any sign of the existence of a senatorial order or of revision and
revisers of the list, or of arrangement of the list according to rank
or seniority, the senate must have been remodelled more or less
completely on the Roman system3. On the other hand, since the
Greek senate was chosen according to tribes, it seems to follow that,
where we can detect any sign that the list was kept, or the senators
classed, according to tribes, or that the presidency passed round the
tribes in succession, the senate was of the Greek type.
It therefore seems probable that at the time when inscr. 7 was
engraved the Senate was organized on the original Greek system.
Here Menander bequeaths a sum to the tribe Apollonis of the Senate,
i. e. the part of the Senate which was selected from that tribe.
It is unfortunate that the date of the inscriptions quoted here and in
§ 13 is uncertain. Inscr. 7 can hardly be later than the first century;
the names suit that period. A woman called Dometia was probably
born not later than A.D. 68 ; and the other names would be perfectly
consistent even with an earlier date. On the whole 70-100 seems
a fair guess ; and we may infer as probable that the Laodicean Senate
1 Or, as the board of strategoi was scrutiny (SoKifiaa-'ia) conducted by the
probably large, one or two of the revising officials: the conditions related
highest strategoi may have acted as to age, property, honourable occupation,
e^eTaiTTal. and free birth.
2 Each senator had to submit to a :; So in no. 6, see p. 63.
The evidence as to the constitution of the Senate at Labdiceia 4s
scanty and indirect. The romanization of the Senate involved certain
other changes; when the Senate ceased to be popularly elected, the
Kornan method of periodically revising the lists was substituted.
The officials who did so were perhaps (if we may judge from ana-
logy) the ordinary chief board of magistrates, who for the special
occasion were invested with the proper authority. Like the Ilviri
quinquennales of Italian cities, penteteric strategoi may be looked for
in the function of censors or revisers of the list (XoyLarat, k^eraaTai)1.
If any indication of such an institution can be found, we .may infer
that the Roman system had come into use. Further, in the Roman
system the list of senators was arranged in order of seniority. The
revisers periodically filled up the list, introducing those who had been
magistrates since the last revision (and who had already ex officio
taken their seats), and completing it in case of need by adding persons
who fulfilled the required conditions 2. The persons who had filled
the highest offices of the state came first on the list. The ten who
were placed at the beginning had special distinctions and powers, and
were named Decemprimi (§ 13). Wherever, therefore, we can detect
any sign of the existence of a senatorial order or of revision and
revisers of the list, or of arrangement of the list according to rank
or seniority, the senate must have been remodelled more or less
completely on the Roman system3. On the other hand, since the
Greek senate was chosen according to tribes, it seems to follow that,
where we can detect any sign that the list was kept, or the senators
classed, according to tribes, or that the presidency passed round the
tribes in succession, the senate was of the Greek type.
It therefore seems probable that at the time when inscr. 7 was
engraved the Senate was organized on the original Greek system.
Here Menander bequeaths a sum to the tribe Apollonis of the Senate,
i. e. the part of the Senate which was selected from that tribe.
It is unfortunate that the date of the inscriptions quoted here and in
§ 13 is uncertain. Inscr. 7 can hardly be later than the first century;
the names suit that period. A woman called Dometia was probably
born not later than A.D. 68 ; and the other names would be perfectly
consistent even with an earlier date. On the whole 70-100 seems
a fair guess ; and we may infer as probable that the Laodicean Senate
1 Or, as the board of strategoi was scrutiny (SoKifiaa-'ia) conducted by the
probably large, one or two of the revising officials: the conditions related
highest strategoi may have acted as to age, property, honourable occupation,
e^eTaiTTal. and free birth.
2 Each senator had to submit to a :; So in no. 6, see p. 63.