DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4680#0134
App. II. INSCRIPTIONS. 465
(Teiy.r\iTav WpOKkov x Mawr/iov UottXlov 'Pwpikla 'Povacova, ayopevi]s navbr}-
P-ov (KKX.rj<jias, avbpa ayadbv Kal p.eya\6<p{po\va 81(a) re ras en irpoy6va>V
avrov Kai ras ibCas els rr\v naTpCba avvKplrovs evepyeatas, 6pe\j/avra re rrjV
irokiv kv bva^pr)arois ttoW&kis naipois, Kal irpeo-fievcravTa irpbs rovs 2e/3acr-
Tovs irepl t&v o-vvcpepovrcav it pay par wv, Kal eirirvyovTa ras irapa r&v ap-
Xtepeow (pikobocrias, [inrep] re rrjs iroKecos ev iravrl [Kaijpa br]po(pe\eo>s2
yevope[vo]v, Kal avvav^rjaavra ras [brjp]ocriovs Trpoaobovs ' avao\rrj\o-dvTU>v
tov avbpiavra rai> eirl rrjs ®epp.aias UXareias epyaar&v, viro einp.e\eiav
^vpJvov[s} Aiovvaiov Kal 'lov\. Aovfiaaalaivos s, Kara rrjs trokecus ^rrj(pio-pa.
The name Manneius is not uncommon in Italian inscriptions. The
family was probably settled at Apameia; M. Manneius, named on coins
of Livia Augusta, may perhaps be grandfather of P. Manneius Ruso;
cp. A • MAvvijws ZEYi/po? TPA- TO-B on coins of Elagabalus. The
inscr. seems not to be late in style j and the Augusti are perhaps
Vespasian and Titus4. The embassy to the Emperors is perhaps con-
nected with the next item, the liberality of the ArcJdereis. The latter is
a difficult, and perhaps unique expression : the Archiereis are implied to
be a body possessing control over money, and making, on the request of
Manneius, a grant to Apameia; M. Berard is clearly right that they are
'Ap^tepeis rrjs 'Aulas. We must, therefore, understand that there was
a Council of High-priests of Asia, controlling funds belonging to the
Koinon, and empowered to make grants to Asian cities 6. This Council
of ArcJdereis must be distinguished, probably, from the general meeting
of the Koinon, at which representatives of the cities (sitting in an order
of precedence p. 429) were present. The Council of Archiereis or Asiarchs
must be alluded to in Acts XIX 31, where it is implied to be assembled
in Ephesus; but there is no evidence whether it always met in the capital
of Asia or alternately in the great cities. A grant from this Council
could hardly be for any purpose outside of the Imperial cultus : probably,
therefore, Apameia was proposing to erect a temple to the Emperor (if
our dating is correct, the Flavian Emperors). Manneius obtained the
consent of the Emperors and a grant from the Archiereis. If this theory
is right, the priest of the new temple is mentioned in no. 305.
1 As the Roman nomenclature is i ttoWukis iv bv&xp. Kaipois perhaps
otherwise correct, this is probably an points to the third century, § 19; but
error for iloVXiov: perhaps the en- the tribe would hardly be mentioned
graver's copy had TT., which he expanded then.
wrongly. 5 The income of the Koinon was
2 Another engraver's error: 8r/po(f>e\rj managed by an Argyrotamias Asiae no.
and brnj.o<peXS>s were both in his mind. 345, probably in the way described no.
3 Perhaps an engraver's error for 549-
Iov\lov Batro-t'coroff.
YOL. I. PT. II. I
(Teiy.r\iTav WpOKkov x Mawr/iov UottXlov 'Pwpikla 'Povacova, ayopevi]s navbr}-
P-ov (KKX.rj<jias, avbpa ayadbv Kal p.eya\6<p{po\va 81(a) re ras en irpoy6va>V
avrov Kai ras ibCas els rr\v naTpCba avvKplrovs evepyeatas, 6pe\j/avra re rrjV
irokiv kv bva^pr)arois ttoW&kis naipois, Kal irpeo-fievcravTa irpbs rovs 2e/3acr-
Tovs irepl t&v o-vvcpepovrcav it pay par wv, Kal eirirvyovTa ras irapa r&v ap-
Xtepeow (pikobocrias, [inrep] re rrjs iroKecos ev iravrl [Kaijpa br]po(pe\eo>s2
yevope[vo]v, Kal avvav^rjaavra ras [brjp]ocriovs Trpoaobovs ' avao\rrj\o-dvTU>v
tov avbpiavra rai> eirl rrjs ®epp.aias UXareias epyaar&v, viro einp.e\eiav
^vpJvov[s} Aiovvaiov Kal 'lov\. Aovfiaaalaivos s, Kara rrjs trokecus ^rrj(pio-pa.
The name Manneius is not uncommon in Italian inscriptions. The
family was probably settled at Apameia; M. Manneius, named on coins
of Livia Augusta, may perhaps be grandfather of P. Manneius Ruso;
cp. A • MAvvijws ZEYi/po? TPA- TO-B on coins of Elagabalus. The
inscr. seems not to be late in style j and the Augusti are perhaps
Vespasian and Titus4. The embassy to the Emperors is perhaps con-
nected with the next item, the liberality of the ArcJdereis. The latter is
a difficult, and perhaps unique expression : the Archiereis are implied to
be a body possessing control over money, and making, on the request of
Manneius, a grant to Apameia; M. Berard is clearly right that they are
'Ap^tepeis rrjs 'Aulas. We must, therefore, understand that there was
a Council of High-priests of Asia, controlling funds belonging to the
Koinon, and empowered to make grants to Asian cities 6. This Council
of ArcJdereis must be distinguished, probably, from the general meeting
of the Koinon, at which representatives of the cities (sitting in an order
of precedence p. 429) were present. The Council of Archiereis or Asiarchs
must be alluded to in Acts XIX 31, where it is implied to be assembled
in Ephesus; but there is no evidence whether it always met in the capital
of Asia or alternately in the great cities. A grant from this Council
could hardly be for any purpose outside of the Imperial cultus : probably,
therefore, Apameia was proposing to erect a temple to the Emperor (if
our dating is correct, the Flavian Emperors). Manneius obtained the
consent of the Emperors and a grant from the Archiereis. If this theory
is right, the priest of the new temple is mentioned in no. 305.
1 As the Roman nomenclature is i ttoWukis iv bv&xp. Kaipois perhaps
otherwise correct, this is probably an points to the third century, § 19; but
error for iloVXiov: perhaps the en- the tribe would hardly be mentioned
graver's copy had TT., which he expanded then.
wrongly. 5 The income of the Koinon was
2 Another engraver's error: 8r/po(f>e\rj managed by an Argyrotamias Asiae no.
and brnj.o<peXS>s were both in his mind. 345, probably in the way described no.
3 Perhaps an engraver's error for 549-
Iov\lov Batro-t'coroff.
YOL. I. PT. II. I