DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4680#0107
433 XI. APAMEIA.
no. 304; and, even where no reference is made to the action of the
Senate, it must always be understood that the act was initiated
in the Senate according to the regular practice. A meeting of the
entire population, i. e. both citizens and resident Romans, is mentioned
in no. 299 ; and probably all decrees of ' the Demos and the Romans '
were passed in that way.
(3) The Gerousia at Apameia was founded between 70 and 79 a.d.1
Taken in association with the foundation of the Gerousia at Sebaste
in 98-9 a.d., this shows that a new step in the diffusion of the
Graeco-Roman civilization in the great cities of western Phrygia was
taking place about that period. The meaning of that step depends
on the character of the institution which was thus naturalized in city
after city of Asia2. This subject has already been touched on, pp.
110 ff.
A person who approaches this question from the point of view
of Roman provincial administration can answer it only in one way.
It is inconceivable that the Roman government should have permitted
the formation. of a new assembly exercising political powers in the
cities of the East in the period 70-190 A.D. ; such a step is contrary
to the spirit of its policy, which distrusted the popular assemblies,
curtailed their powers, and turned them gradually into agents of the
central administration. The Gerousiai which were founded during
that period were not bodies exercising political powers of any kind :
Wadding-ton and Mommsen rightly stand firm on that ground, which
their opponents do not venture to touch upon, but carefully avoid.
M. LeVy in his review of the evidence, p. 235, concludes that during
the second century the Gerousia exercised no administrative functions
whatever3. At the same time it is clear that admission to the
1 M. Levy points out in Rev. it. Gr. 3 He has propounded a very enticing
1895 p. 241 n. that no. 305 refers to this theory (on which I pronounce no opinion)
foundation and belongs to the latter that the Gerousia originated at Ephesos,
part of the first century. I had written where Lysimachus instituted a body with
my argument to the same effect, but large powers religious and political, in
fixing a more precise date, before his which the power of the temple hierarchy
article appeared. might operate in support of his policy.
2 M. Levy has treated the subject in This theory does not affect our study of
a comprehensive and masterly paper, Phrygia; M.Levy's arguments are drawn
Rev. Et. Gr. 1895 Pp. 231 ff. He quotes entirely from the great cities of the
a paper by M. Fr. Cumont, Note mr un coast-lands ; he admits that ' the sacer-
2)assage des Actes de S. Atari (Rev. de dotal senate' (as he calls the Gerousia)
Vlnstr. publ. en Belgique XXXVI pp. was a failure, and that step by step its
373 ff), expressing the same view as that powers came back to the popular bodies,
stated in these pages : I have not been EkklesiaandBoule; and there is nothing
able to see this paper. in his reasoning to prove that the
no. 304; and, even where no reference is made to the action of the
Senate, it must always be understood that the act was initiated
in the Senate according to the regular practice. A meeting of the
entire population, i. e. both citizens and resident Romans, is mentioned
in no. 299 ; and probably all decrees of ' the Demos and the Romans '
were passed in that way.
(3) The Gerousia at Apameia was founded between 70 and 79 a.d.1
Taken in association with the foundation of the Gerousia at Sebaste
in 98-9 a.d., this shows that a new step in the diffusion of the
Graeco-Roman civilization in the great cities of western Phrygia was
taking place about that period. The meaning of that step depends
on the character of the institution which was thus naturalized in city
after city of Asia2. This subject has already been touched on, pp.
110 ff.
A person who approaches this question from the point of view
of Roman provincial administration can answer it only in one way.
It is inconceivable that the Roman government should have permitted
the formation. of a new assembly exercising political powers in the
cities of the East in the period 70-190 A.D. ; such a step is contrary
to the spirit of its policy, which distrusted the popular assemblies,
curtailed their powers, and turned them gradually into agents of the
central administration. The Gerousiai which were founded during
that period were not bodies exercising political powers of any kind :
Wadding-ton and Mommsen rightly stand firm on that ground, which
their opponents do not venture to touch upon, but carefully avoid.
M. LeVy in his review of the evidence, p. 235, concludes that during
the second century the Gerousia exercised no administrative functions
whatever3. At the same time it is clear that admission to the
1 M. Levy points out in Rev. it. Gr. 3 He has propounded a very enticing
1895 p. 241 n. that no. 305 refers to this theory (on which I pronounce no opinion)
foundation and belongs to the latter that the Gerousia originated at Ephesos,
part of the first century. I had written where Lysimachus instituted a body with
my argument to the same effect, but large powers religious and political, in
fixing a more precise date, before his which the power of the temple hierarchy
article appeared. might operate in support of his policy.
2 M. Levy has treated the subject in This theory does not affect our study of
a comprehensive and masterly paper, Phrygia; M.Levy's arguments are drawn
Rev. Et. Gr. 1895 Pp. 231 ff. He quotes entirely from the great cities of the
a paper by M. Fr. Cumont, Note mr un coast-lands ; he admits that ' the sacer-
2)assage des Actes de S. Atari (Rev. de dotal senate' (as he calls the Gerousia)
Vlnstr. publ. en Belgique XXXVI pp. was a failure, and that step by step its
373 ff), expressing the same view as that powers came back to the popular bodies,
stated in these pages : I have not been EkklesiaandBoule; and there is nothing
able to see this paper. in his reasoning to prove that the