Archive of Flavius Isidoros, officialis and beneficiarius

Page 1
Archive of Flavius Isidoros, officialis and beneficiarius
Place
Date
Language
Material
Number of texts
Type
Collections
Find/Acquisition
Bibliography
Hermupolite nome
AD 368-389
Greek
Papyrus
27 certain; 6 uncertain
Mixed archive with official, private and semi-private documents: surity contracts, petitions, official orders,
court protocol, contracts of rent and lease, receipt
Leipzig, Universität
A.H.M JONES, The Later Roman Empire: 284-602. A Social Economic and Administrative
Survey, II, Oxford, 1964 (=1973), p.596.
B. KRAMER, Zwei leipziger Papyri, Archiv 32 (1985), pp.33-39.
C. ZUCKERMAN, Two Reforms of the 370s. Recruiting Soldiers and Senators in the Divided
Empire, REByz 56 (1998), pp.86-91 ('Flavius Isidoros and the Gold for Recruits') .
Description
Between 1902 and 1906, the papyrus collection of Leipzig purchased an extensive archive of
Flavius Isidoros, an official of the officium of the praeses Thebaïdis in Hermopolis in the
second half of the 4th century AD (17, 20-23, 33-37, 46-55, 58-61, 64)1. The archive ranges
between AD 368 and 389. Between AD 368 and ca. 375, Isidoros was officialis. Afterwards
he was beneficiarius, until AD 388 at the latest (cf. 22 en 37).
Some other documents in the Leipzig collection are of the same type, place and date as the
documents in the archive of Isidoros (56, 62, 63, 65, 66), but they do not contain Isidoros’
name. They are included here among the uncertain documents of the archive. Montevecchi,
however, did consider 62 (AD 384-385), 63 (AD 388) and 56 (AD 398) to be part of it2. If
so, Isidoros' papers would form a subarchive of the archive of the officium of the praeses
Thebaïdis; his private documents, however, do not fit a public archive.
The archive mainly contains incoming documents of both private and official type (cf. fig. 2:
graph).
a) Private documents: 17, 20-23, 33, 37
A court protocol of AD 368 is our only source of information about Isidoros’ family (cf. fig.
1: stemma of the family). Flavius Isidoros and his siblings Sokrates, Kyra and the
beneficiarius Flavius Herakleon, were involved in litigation against their mother's relatives
over the family property. Isidoros and his brothers and sister were charged by their maternal
aunt Sarapiaine. Although they had received a dowry, their mother Nemesilla and her
married sister Dionysia had claimed part of the inheritance received by Sarapiaine and their
younger sisters after their father's death. Dionysia's heirs reached an agreement with their
aunt, but Sarapiaine still claimed a third of the inheritance of the heirs of Nemesilla.
A rent of a room in a house of Isidoros in the eastern quarter of Hermupolis [17 (AD 377)],
and four leases of small plots of land in nearby villages (Thynis, Monyris) in which Isidoros
appears as the lessor (20-23), show that he was well-off. According to 37 (AD 389), Isidoros
continued to manage his property after he retired3. In this petition, Isidoros asked the chief
officer of Hermupolis to arrest two shepherds, who had committed robbery with violence
against one of his employees, probably also a shepherd.
The private documents in Isidoros' archive show his family situation and his properties in
the Hermupolite nome.
kaʀoʟɪeɴ ɢeeɴs > k a t ʜ o ʟ ɪ e k e u ɴ ɪ v e ʀ s ɪ t e ɪ t ʟ e u v e ɴ > 2004-07-26
Page 2
the Hermupolite nome.
b) Official documents: 34-36, 45-55, 58-61, 64
Besides a few official documents which Isidoros kept in his archive after his term of office,
the archive also contains a lot of papers concerning a lawsuit in which Isidoros was involved
while officialis.
The group of documents relating to this lawsuit form a dossier within the larger group of
official papers. The praeses Thebaïdis Julius Eusebius Julianus had sent a letter on the 5th
Mesore of AD 372 to all cities of the province in which he summoned the kefalaiwtaiv
(capitularii) of the 11th till 14th indiction in his officium in Hermupolis4. In SB XVIII
13251 - not part of the archive - two officials from the city of Apollonos Mikra,
acknowledge to the praeses that they have received this letter. 48-515 are four surety deeds
of Mesore AD 372, addressed jointly to Flavius Isidoros and his colleague Flavius
Theodoros6, insuring that the kefalaiwtaiv will arrive at the officium. 52 and 53 are deeds of
surety in which the kefalaiwtaiv themselves promise to appear at the officium. Both texts
explicitely refer to the order of the praeses Julianus. Apparently, Isidoros and Theodoros
carried the order of the praeses from city to city, asking for sureties7. They started their
journey in Hermupolis, travelled south along the river to Hypselis (cf. 48-49 [27/28.7.372]),
Apollonos Mikra (cf. SB XVIII 13251 [29.7.372]) and Ptolemais (cf. 50 [7.8.372]). In
Ptolemais they crossed the Nile to go back to the North visiting Panopolis and Antaioupolis.
They stopped in Hypselis once again (cf. 51 [17.8.372]) and went back home.
According to Kramer, the kefalaiwtaiv might have been summoned in Hermupolis because
of a revision of the tax collection8. Zuckerman, however, correctly links this event with a
petition by Isidoros to the emperors Valens, Gratian and Valentinian (between AD 376 and
378)9, preserved in two copies (34 and 35)10. In AD 372, the tax collectors were convoked to
the officium of the praeses to deliver the gold that Flavius Isidoros was ordered to transport
to Valens' court in Syrian Hierapolis soon afterwards, in the spring of 37311. In Hierapolis,
Isidoros delivered this gold, 138 solidi according to 35,5, to Dioskourides, a member of the
imperial comitatus. The latter, however, took only the amount he needed, 61 solidi (cf. the
copy of Dioskourides' receipt on the verso of 34) and left the rest of the tax money with
Isidoros to be refunded to the tax-payers (35, 9), as the tax had been reduced to ten solidi per
head12. Unfortunately, Isidoros was robbed of the gold and of his own belongings. Upon his
return to Egypt, he was charged by the decuriones of Hermupolis before the governor of
having appropriated the money. He was ordered to pay 72 solidi to the treasury in his
accusers’ favour. He actually paid the 72 solidi on November 11th AD 375. The receipt is
preserved in 61. The rest of the amount (138 - (61+72) = 5 solidi) was absorbed by the
treasury. Since however the decuriones intended to appeal the governor’s ruling, Isidoros
petitioned the emperors asking to uphold the judgement.
But what were the decuriones expect to gain by their appeal, for they were credited with
almost the full amount of tax funds. And why would Isidoros risk being obliged to pay 5
more solidi by bothering the emperors? And The answer is given by the two slightly
different versions of Isidoros' petition to the emperors. 35 had been submitted first13 and
returned to Isidoros with a Latin subscription on the verso requesting more evidence.
Isidoros marked some corrections, which he integrated in the text of 34, and used 35 as a
draft. Since 34 bears no mark of official use, this must be a copy of the revised petition kept
by Isidoros among his other papers. In the corrected text, the amount entrusted to him
appears to be 238 (rather than 138) solidi. This means that the money stolen from him was
177 solidi. Thus, Isidoros was condemned to give back only 72 solidi of the 177 solidi
which he lost. This large sum explains why the decuriones appealed and why Isidoros
wanted to avoid a new trial by his petition to the emperors.
kaʀoʟɪeɴ ɢeeɴs > k a t ʜ o ʟ ɪ e k e u ɴ ɪ v e ʀ s ɪ t e ɪ t ʟ e u v e ɴ > 2004-07-26
Page 3
177 solidi. Thus, Isidoros was condemned to give back only 72 solidi of the 177 solidi
which he lost. This large sum explains why the decuriones appealed and why Isidoros
wanted to avoid a new trial by his petition to the emperors.
Whether or not Isidoros staged the robbery14, he was promoted beneficiarius soon after the
trial, as shown by 36 and 36B of AD 376 or 37815. In these texts, Kleoboulos writes to the
praeses that a decurion of the Great Oasis had placed a financial defaulter's heirs in the
custody of the beneficiarius Isidoros. There is a close ressemblance between both versions
of the document (36 and 36B) which leads Wilcken to the conclusion these are drafts16.
According to 36, 9 and 36B, 10, Kleoboulos passed on the letter to the praeses through
Isidoros, which may explain how these documents were found among his papers.
Another group of documents concerns the supervision of tax collection, in particular the
cura vestis militaris17. 45-47 (AD 371-372) are surety contracts in which different persons
stand bail before Flavius Isidoros for another person's liturgical duties for tax collection. The
ej p imelhtai; ej s qh' t o"
(curatores vestis militaris) were responsible for the collection of
clothing levy for the army. At the end of their term of office, they were summoned to
Alexandria to render account of their duties. Isidoros, in charge of supervision of this tax
collection, requested sureties in order to secure the appearance of the tax collectors in the
capital. In 58-60 (AD 371), various Panopolitan tax collectors acknowledge to Isidoros the
receipt of tax orders for supply of cloths.
54 and 55 are also surety contracts addressed to Isidoros, but they do not concern tax
collection. Finally, 64 is a series of copies of official orders from the praeses Thebaïdis (one
is from a centurio) to various officials of the Great Oasis concerning an investigation of
defalcation. Isidoros was appointed discussor in this case. Mitteis18 suggests that Isidoros
wrote all orders on one sheet. In Mitthof's opinion19, Isidoros was the bearer of the orders.
64 might be Isidoros' official diary in which he copied all documents delivered by himself.
The archive of Flavius Isidoros is a mixed archive: besides a few private documents, it
mainly consists of official documents which inform about his duties as officialis (between
AD 368 and 377/8) and afterwards as beneficiarius (between AD 377/78 and 388). Isidoros
became involved in taking sureties for the appearance of tax collectors before the governor
of the Thebaïd. He was responsible for gathering up tax funds and for transfers of imperial
funds from one place to another. He did not only keep the official documents relating to his
lawsuit, but he also took home some other official documents when he retired.
Appendices
Fig. 1: Stemma of Isidoros’ family
Paxa[mos?]
Nemesilla
Isidoros Herakleon
Dionysia
Kyra
Sokrates
NN
Sarapiaine
Heliodora
NN
kaʀoʟɪeɴ ɢeeɴs > k a t ʜ o ʟ ɪ e k e u ɴ ɪ v e ʀ s ɪ t e ɪ t ʟ e u v e ɴ > 2004-07-26
Theoneia
Page 4
Fig. 2: Graph showing types of certain documents in the archive
Types of certain documents in the archive
26%
41%
33%
Private
Court case
official
1
The numbers in bold refer to P.Lips. I.
O. MONTEVECCHI, La papirologia, Milaan, 1988, p.257, nr. 75.
3
Cf. A.H.M. JONES 1964, p.596.
4
Cf. B. KRAMER 1985, pp.33-39.
5
Cf. B. KRAMER 1985, pp.34-35.
6
Isidoros is mentioned first in each of these documents, which means he is the elder officialis. P.Vindob.Sijp. 6 is a
similar surety contract addressed to NN and Isidoros, officiales. According to the editor, P.Vindob.Sijp. 6 could relate to
a previous phase of Flavius Isidoros’ career, when he was the younger officialis, for he is mentioned second here, after
another officialis. J. BINGEN, CdE 38 (1963), p.167, however, dates this document to late 4th – early 5th century. If this
is correct, Isidoros in P.Vindob.Sijp. 6 cannot be identical with Flavius Isidoros from the Leipzig collection.
7
Cf. map in B. KRAMER 1985, p.35.
8
B. KRAMER 1985, p.35.
9
C. ZUCKERMAN 1998.
10
Cf. R. DELMAIRE, Largesses sacrées et res privata. L’aerarium impérial et son administration du IVe au VIe siècle.
(Collection de l’école française de Rome 121), Rome, 1989, pp. 327-328; R.S. BAGNALL , Egypt in Late Antiquity,
Princeton, 1993, p.65; C. ZUCKERMAN 1998, pp.86-87; N. LENSKI, Failure of Empire. Valens and the Roman State in
the Fourth Century A.D., London - Berkeley - Los Angeles, 2002, pp.314-316.
11
According to C. ZUCKERMAN 1998, p.88, he arrived for the celebration of Valens' decennalia on March 28, AD 373.
12
What precisely happened may be explained by P.Oxy. XLVIII 3424: Valens had issued a superindiction on a number
of items - including the aurum tironicum and the vestis militaris - for the 15th and 1st indiction years 371/2 and 372/3.
This surtax would have been instituted in the summer of AD 371, to keep up with his need for military manpower, for
the imminent war against Shapur II. According to 48-53, all tax collectors were pressured for arrears. When a truce was
struck in late 371, the need for men and clothing suddenly disappeared, and Valens was able to remit the 2nd year's
superindiction. Thus the imperial treasury was actually remitting three fourths of the gold Isidoros was carrying in AD
373; cf. N. LENSKI, op.cit., pp.315-316.
13
This was first recognized by C. ZUCKERMAN 1998, p.87, n.19.
14
The treasury did not suffer any loss, since the fisc had in theory no claim on the remainder of the money. Although it
was destined to be refunded to the tax payers, the money entered the fisc under a vague designation. The decuriones
however, unless succesful in the appeal, lost the hefty sum of 177 solidi; cf. C. ZUCKERMAN 1998, pp.89-91.
15
According to 17, Isidoros might still be officialis in 377, although the editor admits the reading of the title is doubtful.
16
U. WILCKEN, Archiv 4 (1908), p.467.
17
F. MITTHOF, Annona militaris: die Heeresversorgung im spätantiken Ägypten: ein Beitrag zur Verwaltungs- und
Heeresgeschichte des römischen Reiches im 3. bis 6. Jh. n. Chr. (Pap. Flor. 32), I, Firenze, 2001, passim.
18
L.MITTEIS, P.Lips. 64, introduction.
19
F. MITTHOF, Annona militaris, II, Firenze, 2001, nr. 145, p.482.
2
kaʀoʟɪeɴ ɢeeɴs > k a t ʜ o ʟ ɪ e k e u ɴ ɪ v e ʀ s ɪ t e ɪ t ʟ e u v e ɴ > 2004-07-26