58 American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) ISSN (Print) 2313-4410, ISSN (Online) 2313-4402 http://asrjetsjournal.org/ Practical and Symbolic Aspects of Olive Oil Donations in Asia Minor during the Hellenistic period and the Principate Alina Andrieș * PhD Faculty of History, University Al. I. Cuza, Iasi, 700115 Email: alina26cantacuz@gmail.com Abstract This paper concludes some major aspects regarding olive oil donations in Asia Minor during the Hellenistic period and the Principate. These benefactions were part of the larger phenomenon called Euergetism, that took place in all Greek cities, starting with the fifth Century BC, in which rich and poor, magistrates and ordinary people were exchanging gifts and honors for the well-being of the city and for themselves. Through the study of oil donations there can be highlighted the relations between donor and donated, the importance of the value of gifts in receiving honors, the social and economic characteristics of the city during the studied period, the practical and symbolic aspects that derive from donating olive oil in antic Asia Minor. Keywords: olive oil donations; Euergetism; honors; gymnasiarch; magistrates; prices; amphora; social relations. 1. Introduction The archaeologists discovered over 1.200 inscriptions for Asia Minor, which include terms like euergetes- city benefactor, euergetein - doing good to the city, euergeteô - do good, euergesia- charity. They are joined by an equally large number of epigraphic testimonies attesting to occasional contributions of eisphora - wealth tax imposed in case of war on the rich and rarely on the rest of the city's inhabitants-, leitourgia – under various types: imposed sacrifices, supply of oxen, epidoseis-voluntary contributions promised at Council’s meetings. To these financial contributions were added tax and taxes, reserve funds and loans, income from real estate and movable property and natural resources. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ * Corresponding author. http://asrjetsjournal.org/ American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 59 These were the main revenue categories of Greek cities. Only a small part of the community residents had the opportunity to contribute occasionally, by posting them as evergets. They were the ones who had the financial power to allocate remarkable sums to solve substantial needs. About Euergetism historians stated series of interpretations. For Paul Veyne, the Greek Euergetism was about contests of spending and receiving honors, of perpetuating personal merit through votive gifts, statues, buildings, about the pleasure of giving and the moral duty of giving. For Philippe Gauthier, Euergetism became an institutional government at the end of the Hellenistic period, when the number of benefactors decreased. Léopold Migeotte saw in Euergetism the contributions that came from rich citizens who preferred to pay the many public expenditures in exchange for gratitude and prestige. Those who donated controlled the city. Friedemann Quass, Christian Habicht, Pierre Fröhlich pleaded that the number of honored citizens maintained from Classical Age to the end of the Roman Empire [1]. According to the characteristics mentioned above, with the study I realized on on benefactions in Greek cities, during the ancient times, the definition of Euergetism can be: „A system of public gifts addressed to Greek cities by wealthy individuals, who were rewarded with honors according to their status and the value of the benefactions rendered”. Two categories of people were engaged in this system: benefactors and beneficiaries, and two types of gifts were traded: benefits and honors. The efficiency of the exchange was given by the way in which the beneficiaries related to the status of the evergets, and the type of aid offered and received. 2. Methods and results To find the characteristics of olive oil donations and the relations built during the process of offering, I used as working methods: epigraphic analysis, analogical method - scientific arguments are built on comparisons - similarities between the evergetism specific to Asia Minor and the characteristics that emerge from the analysis of oil donations. I have analyzed useful commentaries in „Études Anatoliennes”, „Recherches sur les inscriptions grecques de l’Asie Mineure”, „Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum”, „Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum”, the translated inscription offered on Attalus site [2], in volumes of inscriptions published for the researched periods, with those translated by Professor Dr. Mihaela Paraschiv or transmitted by Professor Dr. Iulian Moga [3]. Starting from the information provided by the inscriptions, I established tables with dominant criteria. In parallel, based on general, specific works, writings of ancient authors, I studied the social and political background in which the system of public gift was formed and developed, respectively the system of oil donations: concepts, administration, economy, olive oil, gymnasium, gymnasiarch, religious practices. I carried out the documentation activity in over five years of study. Of great importance was the research internship from Paris between October 1-31, 2015, in Bibliothèque Gernet-Glotz, within the center Anthropologie et Histoire des Mondes Antiques –ANHIMA-, possible with the help of Professor Dr. Madalina Dana [4] and with the financial support received within the project POSDRU/187/1.5/S/155397 - Through doctoral scholarships to a new generation of elite researchers, co-financed by the European Social Fund through the Sectoral Operational Program Human Resources Development 2007-2013. administration, economy, olive oil, gymnasium, gymnasiarch, religious practices. This study has his own limitations regarding the number of inscriptions used, the impossibility of using all the German volumes discussing Euergetism. The general conclusions are built on more than 80% of the epigraphic testimonies recording oil donations. Even so, the analyzed structure has standard characteristics, on which the related conclusions are relevant and sufficient American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 60 in drawing the important lines on the significance of donating oil in Asia Minor during the Hellenistic period and the Principate. 3. Practical aspects regarding oil donations Olives and their products were universally used in food, ointments, medicines, perfumery, lighting. The ability of olive oil to perform many tasks distinguishes it as the main commodity of the ancient economy [5]. It is also among the most important benefits, traded between the Evergets and the Greek cities. Substantial oil donations have been made especially since the end of the second century BC and developed during the Principate. What practical aspects emerge from these transactions? 4. The origin of the donated oil From what sources did the Evergets of Asia Minor obtain the donated oil? This first practical aspect, regarding the sources of oil offered for donation to the gymnasium during the Hellenistic period and to the inhabitants of the cities during the Principate, can be determined from the production and sale of the oil. The olive oil trade was a frequent transaction in the agora of Greek cities. There, traders negotiated oil prices with olive growers to later sell at a high cost to other buyers in other markets, other regions. They stored the oil in amphorae with specific shapes. All vessels used for transporting and storing food and liquids had their own characteristics. The shape, weight, physical and chemical properties were considered. For example, the wine was stored and transported in narrow-necked vessels or in vessels with a small hole inserted in the neck to release the gas obtained from fermentation. From the end of the Hellenistic period most wine amphorae had an elongated shape, finished with a long neck, of low capacity. In contrast to wine, olive oil was stored in amphorae with an ovoid body, followed by a long neck and a wide lip. In domestic use, these vessels were rarely raised, as the oil was used in small quantities for a long time. The width of the container allowed the use of a small lade to take the oil [6]. Several oil amphora production centers are known for Asia Minor. We will focus on just two areas of interest to give a few examples. In the region of Cilicia, there were four types of amphorae useful for oil transport, discovered in three amphora production centers. The archeological site of Antioch ad Cragum has amphorae with a coarse basin and attached handles, known as Zemer. Specific to the embodiment are the red and white inclusions, fine grain and soft to the touch. The archeological site of Syedra reveals the production of two types of amphorae: Pamphylia amphora - almost oval body, convex body, small, rounded handles, rolled edge, slightly thickened - and amphora with pinched handle - handles at right angles with striations. They have a fine, reddish material with white inclusions and small irregular gaps. The last archeological site, Biçkici Kiln, records amphorae with pinched handles and Koan type amphora with beveled lip, double handles, rolled. All models are fine red. This type of amphorae, dating from the middle of the first century BC., it was found in many regions of the Roman Empire, including Italy, Lebanon, and Egypt. As a crushing basin and a grooved circular stone, elements specific to an olive press, were discovered in Biçkici Kiln, archaeologists concluded that olive oil was the main cargo transported in amphorae [7]. "Dressel 24 Similis C amphorae" was produced in Erythrai for the storage of oil. The ovoid body ended with a neck whose lip was thickened only on the inside. It differed from other types of amphorae by the careless attachment of the handles to the neck and shoulders of the vessel. Amphorae of this type have been discovered in Athens, Chersonesos and Histria [8]. There were areas where oil production resulting from the processing of olives from oil plantations was not sufficient to cover the American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 61 needs of community activities and areas where oil was obtained in abundance [9]. What was the situation in the cities of Asia Minor where oil donations were registered? Were they known for olive groves and oil presses? During the Hellenistic period, in 4 regions out of 17, the cities honored Evergets for oil benefits: Caria, Ionia, Lydia, Phrygia, Mysia. In three of them, according to Stephen Mitchell, olive trees were grown. The number of regions increased during the Principate: Galatia, Pamphilia, Psidia, Pontus, Lycia, Paphlagonia were added. Of all the regions listed, only Lydia was an area not known for olive groves, but for precious metals, fertile land, ideal for cereal crops [10]. The most abundant archaeological data on oil production come from Caria, Halikarnassos. The region was appreciated for wheat, wine, and olive oil. Olives were grown on terraces about 700 meters high, inside the area and on the coast. The considerable number of presses (9) and terraces discovered in the area show that the oil obtained from the processing of olives was used not only for domestic use. The surplus was traded. The oil produced here was exported to Greek cities such as Athens [11]. Adnan Diler also proposed an estimated calculation for oil production in Halikarnassos. A press produced 400-1,000 liters of oil a week. After a single press, which lasted between an hour and an hour and a half, an average of 10- 12.5 liters was extracted. Assuming that one day the press was used for 6 hours, and the entire crop was pressed for two and a half months (75 days), the oil production in one season of a press reached 4,000-5,000 liters. The 9 presses in Halikarnassos together produced about 45,000 liters. This numbers do not represent the total amount of oil produced in the area, considering that not all the presses from that period have been preserved [12]. In most cases the Greek cities where the Evergets supplied oil were in areas where olive trees were planted. We also know that: a) The Evergets were wealthy people who earned their income from other sources: inheritances, landowners, trade. b) During the Hellenistic period, the oil donors held the position of gymnasiarch or was gymnasiarch and oversaw other magistrates; during the Principate, they held the position of gymnasiarch, or was gymnasiarch and priest at the same time, or had other magistracy. c) They were inhabitants of cities in areas where olive trees were planted or in areas recognized for other natural resources. d) The oil supplies were made occasionally or annually during the Hellenistic period, daily, periodically, occasionally, or annually during the Principate. Starting from these references, we can state that there were two ways in which the Evergets could have the amount of oil needed for supply. They either bought the oil directly from traders or had their own plantations. The only case in which the Evergets did not have olive groves is the one in which they lived in cities in Lydia: Sardis, Magnesia near Sipilos, Tralles. In Sardis, around 50 BC, Iollas, son of Metrodorus, provided the oil for the athletes from the position of gymnasiarch. The inscription does not specify for how long [12]. In Magnesia near Sipilos, in the 1st century BC. Hr., Lisanias supplied expensive oil, in large quantities, for a whole year [13]. In Tralles, 1st / 2nd century AD, Tiberius Claudius, a gymnasiarch at three gymnasiums, offered oil throughout the day for four months [14]. I consider that these Evergets bought the oil from traders, as there were no olive groves and presses in the area. It should be noted that there was only one case in which the supply was American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 62 made for a year, for which considerable quantities of oil were used. The gymnasium was one of the institutions where exorbitant sums were spent due to the money allocated for the oil supply. Defense, war, taxes imposed by the Hellenistic kings, by the Romans were another important category of expenses that Greek cities constantly incurred [15]. During the Hellenistic period, the expenses necessary for the consumption of oil went in two directions out of the five provided by the city: the supply of the gymnasium for daily activities; conducting holidays, sacrifices, and competitions. During the Principate, the supply of oil in gymnasiums continued to be provided, oil was donated for festivals, temple-specific activities and free distributions of oil were undertaken to citizens, foreigners, other categories of residents. 5. The cost of oil donations The second practical aspect stems from the role of this type of donation in covering the annual expenses of Greek cities. As we well know, there were expenses specific to cults, which ensure the development of holidays, sacrifices, and competitions. The ceremonies common to some cities, the remuneration of priests and priestesses were added. The constructions, restorations, and equipment necessary for carrying out daily activities also required considerable sums. Usually, the coverage of the expenses for the activities of the gymnasium was made from the incomes of the institution or from those of the gymnasiarch. They consist in the supply of oil for exercises, the payment of teachers, the purchase of other necessary materials, the repair of constructions and the erection of others, the organization of sacrifices to the protective gods. During the festivals, the expenses involved the provision of animals for slaughter, oil and wine, gifts, food for the banquet, prizes as appropriate. From the end of the second century BC, the gymnasiarchs donated oil during a year or occasionally, for the daily activities or the organization of some contests [16]. These donations were made during periods when the city's economy was stable or during times when the city recovered financially. They were important especially for the institution of the gymnasium because they ensured the optimal development of the trainings, then for the city, when the sacrifices and contests in which all the citizens participated took place [17]. During the Principate, the categories of oil donors diversified: gymnasiarch, priests, supervisors, strategists, agoranomi. They donated oil monthly, occasionally, periodically, even daily, for activities carried out in gymnasiums, temples, for the development of festivals, for the inhabitants of the cities. As the inscriptions do not mention conflict situations or financial deficiencies of the city, we deduce that these donations were made during periods of prosperity or economic stability. What amounts was used when a gymnasiarch allocates from its own funds the supply of oil in a year? Foxhall's estimates show that to rub the body of a 6-year-old child, 25 ml of olive oil were needed, for an adult 25-50 ml. If one went 4 times a week in a year, oil consumption ranged from 5 to 10 liters per person per year. There are no sources to give us an indicative figure of participants in gymnasium activities, but we can get an idea of the annual costs of oil [18]. At the beginning of the second century BC, an inscription from Delos, recorded the price of one metrete [19] at 20 drachmas. Taking the case of the gymnasiarch of Magnesia near Sipilos, who supplied oil for the whole year, expensive and in large quantities [20], to provide an adult with the oil needed for rubbing (10 liters) he would have contributed 5 drachmas, for 10 people (100 liters) - 50 drachmas, for 1,000 people (10,000 liters) - 5,000 drachmas. The city of Magnesia near Sipilos, located west of Sardis, was strategically and commercially important, connecting with the center of Asia Minor, with the road to Cizic. Valuable military location for the Seleucid dynasty, in the middle of the 3rd century BC was occupied by soldiers brought by kings, who during the time of Seleucus II received citizenship American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 63 in nearby cities such as Smyrna. The population of this city did not rise to the level of the city of Seleukeia, of half a million, nor to the level of Athens, of 100,000-125,000 inhabitants in the Hellenistic period [21], but we can estimate a figure of 10,000 inhabitants, which included citizens, women, children, foreigners, and slaves. Of these, if half attended the gymnasiums (we start from the premise that the city maintained its importance until the end of the second century BC and that there were two gymnasiums in it), the gymnasium would have provided oil for the at least 2,500 participants, financing with about 12,500 drachmas in a year, the equivalent of 50,000 sesterces [22]. This calculation considered only the amount of oil used for body hygiene, not for religious events: sacrifices, prayers, or contests. The amount of 12,500 drachmas certainly varied from gymnasium to gymnasium in Asia Minor. Comparing the cost of oil needed for a gymnasium in a medium-sized city with the total income obtained from the sale of a wheat crop from the 2nd century BC, 42,000 drachmas, we find that the oil donation represents about a third of the income [23]. We can relate the 12,500 drachmas / 50,000 sesterces to the values of salaries and distributions generally known for the period of the Principate: a) salaries of Romanian magistrates: senator - 1,000,000 sesterces; knight - 400,000 sesterces; municipal councilor-100,000 sesterces; governor: 400,000 sesterces; attorney: 60,000-300,000 sesterces; legionary during the Principate: 900 sesterces. b) the costs of a distribution of cereals in Rome - 5 people - 300-360 sesterces / year [24]. We find that the donation of oil made by an Everget at the end of the Hellenistic period represented about 55 salaries of a legionary / the minimum wage of a procurator / half of the salary of a municipal councilor, respectively the provision of grain distributions for over 125 people in a year of days. In cases where gymnasiarchs provided oil for a shorter period, during a competition or festival, the costs were related to the increase in the number of participants in the activity (competitors, population) and the high price of oil, as they donate expensive oil. In the Hellenistic period, the benefits of oil, whether it involved high or low costs, were appreciated as important for the gymnasium, and attracted with them the prestige of gymnasiarchs among the population of cities. For the period of the Principate, the inscriptions record a series of numbers for the costs of oil donations and benefits in general. It should be mentioned that the number of gymnasiums that had hot baths and the number of festivals also increased in the cities. The exorbitant amounts recorded in the epigraphic testimonies are obviously attributed to the constructions or repairs: 72.000 denarii for the repairs of the gymnasium, 600.000, 580.000 denarii offered to 23 cities after an earthquake, 314.000 used for the erection of statues in the temple. These are followed by oil donations: 38.000, 300.000, 15.000. The amounts are related to the activities carried out in the gymnasium and during the festivals: the most expensive oil donation - Menodora donated 300,000 denarii in Sillyon, the smallest donation- Ti. Claudius, who donated 15.000 denarii to Apamea. It is not specified for how long the oil from these donations was supplemented. The first charity, 300.000 denarii / 1.200.000 sesterces, was the equivalent of the salary of a senator / grain distribution in a year for over 3.300 people. The second, 15.000 denarii / 60.000 sesterces, was equivalent to half the salary of a city councilor / the minimum wage of a prosecutor / a distribution of grain for American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 64 over 181 people. Oil donations were not made regularly, but rarely, as evidenced by the small number of inscriptions recorded in the Hellenistic period, with a considerable increase in the first three centuries AD. The Evergets donated high quality oil, obtained from the first pressing for sacrifices and ordinary oil for training. In the first three centuries AD, they donated mostly ordinary oil. Table 1: Costs of benefits during the Principate inscribed in inscriptions. Inscription Area Everget/ function Charity sum with oil Amount of donation temple activities Donation amount constructions / reconstructions Grain supply IG XII, 3, 1119. Tenos Satiros, sacred ambassador - 27.850 denarii - J. H. Oliver, op. cit., Ephesus 50, p. 160-161 Tralles Tiberius Claudius Pannychus, military general 1.527 denarii CIG 2782 Aphrodisias Marcus Ulpius Carminius Claudianus supervisor in city repairs 38.000 denarii 72.000 denarii M. Sartre, op. cit., 64, 1, p. 251 Rhodiapolis Opramoas preist, secretary 600.000 denarii M. Sartre, op. cit., 64, 1, p. 251 Rhodiapolis everget anonymous 580.000 denarii M. Sartre, op. cit., 65, 1, p. 253 Sillyon Menodora, gimnasiarch, Augustal 300.000 denarii 314.000 statues I. Tralles 5 Tralles Tiberius Claudius Hephaistion, 15.000 denarii gimnasiarch - 27.850 denarii - 6. Symbolic aspects of oil donations Olive oil was a product of great material and spiritual value to ancient civilizations. It was the main vegetable fat used by the Greeks for personal hygiene. It was used as a food product, a light source, for fixing the smells of aromatic, medicinal plants, a means of communication with the gods, and a source for donations. Pliny the Elder put it next to wine as a necessity for the human body: "wine for the interior and oil for the exterior" [25]. Democritus of Abder recommended anointing with oil and consuming honey to maintain health [26]. Horatius ranked it among the foods: vinegar, salt, pepper, Iuvenal put it next to wheat, millet, fish, meat, and vegetables [27]. Among the benefits undertaken by the Evergets of Asia Minor, during the Principate, oil donations represented 17% of the total value, along with cereals, wine, food, and money. The remaining 83% went to construction (58%), games and festivals (13%), other charities (12%) [28]. Oil donations followed the importance of building and restoring public buildings. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 65 A first symbolic aspect derives from the iconographic representation of the oil donation. Information of this type is found in: a) Chalcedon, a city in Bithynia a. the funerary stela dedicated to Apollas dated to the end of the Hellenistic period- It presents at the bottom the portrait of the main character, surrounded by symbolic objects. In the upper register, on the right, a crown, below it a jug, in the center a sword in its scabbard, on the left a palm supported by a basin. Based on these symbolic objects, it was established that Apollas was a priest (crown), military commander (sword), gymnasiarch (basin) [29]. b. the stela of Ariston and his wife Gykeia - A series of symbolic objects are represented, which indicate the magistracies held by these two characters: on the left, a mirror, perfume bottle - objects attributed to his wife; below study objects, then a stylus, a strigil, followed by a panel of weapons, a helmet, an armor, a jug, a basin with a palm, three crowns, below an inkwell and a stylus, a cup, a bell and a ladder. According to Louis Robert, Ariston was a priest and agonothetes, agoranom, strategist and gymnasiarch. The basin and cup were used for the distribution of the oil [30]. b) Prusa ad Olympum - dated during the Principate: a. a fragmented stela without an inscription - on the left a large bell, below it an ax, in the center a young man with a cup placed in a deep basin, on the right a whole crown, a second fragmented one. It was an inscription specific to the imperial period for Asia Minor and Greece. It may represent an oil distribution offered in a contest [31]. b. a lost inscription, known by drawing - represents a priestly crown, a medallion, three small portraits, an ax, a bell, three oysters, a standing basin surrounded by two palms, with an epigraphic text next to it: “Diodorus, son of Theophilos, gymnasiarch at 53 years old”. The oil basin, the oyster and the palm mark the distribution of the oil, the bell announces the moment of the day when the oil was offered, the ax symbolizes the regular sacrifices made in a gymnasium [32]. The iconographic representations of the oil associate it with the activities specific to the function of gymnasiarch. The last inscription proves that the gymnasiarch of the Principate period continued to manage the revenues of the gymnasium and to organize the specific sacrifices along with the oil supply. The second symbolic aspect relates to the significance of oil donations in the evergetic system. Was one oil charity enough to make a magistrate an everget of the community? The data provided by the inscriptions from the Hellenistic period give us an overview. Detached from the rest of the charities, oil donations played an important role in obtaining honors and prestige in the Hellenistic period. In two cases, the donors were honored due to oil supplies, in four cases the value of donations equaled at least the value of other types of funding: the organization of sacrifices and ceremonies. Indeed, a single donation of oil brought with it the enrollment of gymnasiarchs among the Evergets of the cities. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 66 Table 2: The value of oil donations in relation to other benefits in Hellenistic period Everget Oil donations Funding Other benefactions Kydimos from Abydos Yes no not Straton unlimited oil supply teachers' payment not Diodoros Mentoros providing pure oil for sacrifices meat distributions maintaining order Dionysios Yes no youth supervision Lisanias the necessary oil for a competition buying three bulls not Cares oil for a whole year their sacrifice not During the Principate, oil donations in most cases were made in addition with other benefactions: a) oil donations with other supplies (wheat, meat, water, money) - Caius Iulius Antiochus, Tiberius Claudius Erymneus, Tiberius Claudius Marcianus Smaragdos, Aristippos and the priestess Apphion, Tiberius Flavios Sabinianos, Markus Flavianus Phileas [33]; b) oil donations with festivals, public performances - priests of Tiberius of Galatia - 9 cases [34]; c) oil donations with financing of administrative expenses related to the magistracy held and festivals: Titus Peducaeus Canax, Q. Pomponius Flaccus [35]; d) oil donations accompanied by financing of constructions, statues: Marcus Ulpius Carminius Claudianus, Menodora, Dionysios [36]; e) oil donations with financing of constructions and festivals: Marcus Ulpius Alexander Heraclitus and his wife, Epainetos Pamphilos [37]. In eight cases, the Evergets were honored only for the oil donations made [38]. They held positions of gymnasiarchs, priests or were members of the political elite: Gaius Julius Sakerdos, 24 magistrates, Diotimos, Tiberius Claudius Hephaistion, Tiberius Claudius Garnianus, Claudia Amia, Tiberius Flavios Menandros and his wife Flavia Leontis, benefactors whose names are unknown. Thus, we notice that even during the Principate, the oil benefits could determine the honor of the everget by the community. When they accompanied other charities, supplies, construction financing, festival organizations, their importance did not diminish, a fact demonstrated in the case of inscriptions that recorded the amounts related to donations. Like any occasional contribution, oil donations brought with them the honoring of the benefactor. Compared to the inscriptions from the entire Hellenistic period in which benefactors and benefactions are attested, those about Evergets that donate oil have certain peculiarities. The description of gymnasiarchs who donated oil and manifested themselves by financing the organization of sacrifices, festivals and competitions was in most cases (7 out of 13) accompanied by multiple appreciations regarding their virtuous behavior [39]: example - Cares, son of Timarcos "was a good man, with vigor and generosity he performed the tasks of a gymnasiarch, he behaved well, he had a generous attitude, he completely complied with his own kindness" [40]. We find these mentions to a small extent in the inscription dedicated by Samos to the gymnasiarch Boulagoras: “manifestation of zeal, devotion”, in 243/2 BC, who did not donate oil, and in that of Antikles of Lampaskos, from the end of the third century BC, in which the American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 67 civic behavior he showed towards the Ilion League is underlined: "he spent without sparing, with zeal and generosity" [41]. Also, to a small extent we find them in 8 out of 40 inscriptions dedicated to Evergets during the IV-II centuries BC: the generals honored by Erythrae - “noble conduct” [42], the judges honored by Chios, - “righteous judgment” [43]; Apollonius of Miletus honored by Samos: "showed zeal" [44]; generals honored by the Ilion League, Amyzon, Araxa: "fair treatment of cities" [45]; "showed kindness to the people" [46]; "he has shown zeal for the people countless times" [47]; oikonomoi honored by Limyra: "honest, fair, honorable and just" [48]; Menippos, strategist, ambassador, agonist, honored by Colophon at the end of the second century BC: "he showed zeal" [49]. We deduce that the gymnasiarchs of the end of the second century and those of the first century BC were appreciated and honored by the citizens of the cities not only with the usual honors offered: crown, statue, crown, and statue, but also by mentioning in inscriptions the civic behavior they showed. Most appreciations of this type can be found in the inscriptions that mention oil donations. Thus, posting as a benefactor who financially supports from his own income the provision of oil for sports activities in the gymnasium and for the conduct of sacrifices and competitions brought with it a greater gratitude and prestige, found at the level of vocabulary in inscriptions. Although occasional, oil donations ensured the gymnasiarchs fame in the eyes of generations and contemporaries. For the period of the Principate, the assessments regarding the behaviors of oil donors, gymnasiarchs, priests, agonists, are more restricted, only 7 cases out of the 36 analyzed: example- Gaius Julius Sakerdos- he guided the ephebes, revived the ancestral traditions of doing good [50]; Marcus Ulpius Alexander Heraclitus and his wife- they behaved with dignity as their parents and ancestors did [51]; Aristippos and Apphion the priestess- increasing according to the commitment the greatness of the priesthood, with piety and generosity [52]; Claudia Amia- she behaved with zeal, with dignity [53]; priest Tiberius Flavios Menandros and his wife- generous [54]. They extend in the case of Evergets who did not donate oil. The praise received by the benefactors was either directly proportional to the nature of the benefactions undertaken - recorded only in the case of large sums donated to construction, festival organization, oil donations - or it lack denotes a change in the language of honorary decrees: small text, without many descriptions of activities. In Greek cities, from the Hellenistic period, the benefits done for gymnasiarchs were appreciated as "beautiful deeds", worthy of "honors in accordance with their value". The oil donations were therefore the public gift that was addressed especially to the participants in the activities of the gymnasium. He became the "gift," which Marcel Mauss defined as the one who received it and the one who gave it, and brought extraordinary honors: crown, statue, crown, and statue, most often secured from the treasury of the city that honored. To these were added the appreciations mentioned above. I find them to be the personal imprint of the first category of beneficiaries, the direct participants in the activities within the gymnasium. The giver, the gymnasiarch, rejoiced through the notoriety seen in the eyes of the people and the educated. A bond of mutual respect was established between the giver and the educated. During the Principate, the recipients of oil donations expanded. They also addressed festival participants, and residents in general, in some situations to foreigners or categories with fewer rights. From the third century, oil donations are added to public grain distributions [55]. It is no longer a question of establishing close links between benefactors and beneficiaries, given the diversification of situations in which donors did not come into direct contact with participants in events and considering that registrations no longer record the supervision of activities as the task of the gymnasiarchs. Gymnasiarch oversaw managing the gymnasium's income and supplying oil from its own resources when needed. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 68 7. Conclusions What relations were built in the Hellenistic period between the gymnasiarchs and the citizens of the Greek cities, between the gymnasiarchs and the participants in the gymnasiums? But in the Roman period between the oil donors and the community? Rich or poor, the citizens of Greek cities did not consider themselves mere taxpayers in the communities they belonged to. In their view they were active members who led directly through the assemblies, councils, tribunals, and other administrative offices of which they were members or for which they voted representatives [56]. Aristotle wrote: "A Greek city is not just the division of a common community to prevent mutual harm and exchange of goods… It is a partnership between families and clans to live well, to live a full and independent life" [57]. Of course, the cities were once independent, but with the Persian wars, their autonomy became a slogan against the "others" (hegemonic powers and barbarians). The cities founded in Asia after the conquest of Alexander the Great never had the status of the ancient city. They came to enjoy a form of autonomy, not total, which retained the status of a city. The independent life held by the citizens of Greek cities was symbolized by decisions made in assemblies, by cults and civic temples (universal elements, found in all communities), by common authorities and by forms of social life specific only to Greeks: gymnasium and theater [58]. The gymnasium, the place where initially, in the classical period, the citizens trained for war, became in the Hellenistic period the place where young people practiced throwing spears and archery, a place of intellectual and political education, where philosophers, rhetoricians presented concepts, ideas. It was also a place of entertainment, where physical training was a means to relax the body and mind. Intense social life took place in the gymnasium buildings. It was built not on the edge of the city, as it was in the classical period, but in its center, near the agora. Due to these elements, the Gymnasiarhia became one of the most prestigious and most expensive magistracies, occasionally involving the provision of expenses for the payment of teachers' salaries, the decoration of the building and the supply of oil. Slaves, free people, prostitutes, and some traders were excluded from the gymnasium, there were restrictions also for foreigners. The Greeks saw in the gymnasium the symbol of their cultural superiority [59]. At the theater there were usually music festivals, often called Dionysia. They were famous as gymnasiums activities. Each city hosted an annual music festival. There were actors, flutists, guitarists, dancers, gathered in guilds, known as Dionysios' technicians. The inscriptions mentioning the Dionysian celebrations usually attest to benefactors and friends of the city, to whom the cities showed their gratitude by offering them honors and privileges, including the proedria [60]. The characteristics of these forms of social life, gymnasium, and theater, specific to Greek cities everywhere in the Hellenistic period, highlight the importance of gymnasiarchs and the role of their activities in the communities, also noted by the language of epigraphic testimonies. The relations established between them and the people were official, in a relationship of equality at community level, a fact ascertained from the information transmitted by the inscriptions. Their benefits were symbolically matched by the honors and privileges established by the Council and the Assembly, a place where citizens actively participated, either because they took part or because their representatives voted. Compared to the rest of the benefactors, officials of other magistrates, in the Hellenistic period, the gymnasiarchs received more gratitude and prestige. This gratitude also came from the image they created in relation to the ephebes and young people of the gymnasium with whom American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 69 they came into constant contact. The appreciations that we do not meet pronounced towards other Evergets were the imprint of the direct beneficiaries of the donations undertaken by the gymnasiarchs, the active participants in the activities. When the gymnasiarchs organized sacrifices, festivals, competitions in the gymnasium, the people also directly benefit from the benefactions. The relations between ephebes, young people and gymnasiarchs were public, in a relationship of subordination - “All who attend the gymnasium must submit to any person appointed by the gymnasiarch as leader; whoever does not obey will be punished by the gymnasiarch by whipping, by fine”, economic: the gymnasiarch will have control of all funds available to young people and will spend them for them [61]. Within these relations, it was possible to create a general appreciation towards the gymnasiarchs who manifested themselves as benefactors, which the young people of the gymnasium manifested by inscribing it in the text of the inscription. During the Principate, the relations between the oil donor gymnasiarchs and the participants in the gymnasium activities remained subordinate. Between the priests, other magistrates and the beneficiaries, citizens, foreigners, the public relations were of cooperation. The purpose of the exchange in this context of oil donations, and not only, was to mediate the relations between the wealthy citizens, the rest of the population, the Roman representatives, emperors, to facilitate the "smooth running of the provinces". Through this study I pointed out the importance of oil donations in Asia Minor during the Hellenistic period and the Principate, from two points of view. Firstly, the practical importance of the donations of this kind, based on the sources of the donated oil and the price paid for it. The olive oil was either bought from the agora or obtained from the euergetes own plantations. The second case was more likely, because outside Lydia, all the areas, where oil donations are attested, had olive groves. The price of the donated oil was considerable during both periods. Even though, oil donations were not made regularly, but rarely, they supposed the payment of a large amount or the giving up of a sale which would have brought serious finance. In the Hellenistic period one gymnasium in one medium city would have been provided oil for at least 2,500 participants, financing with about 12,500 drachmas in a year, the equivalent of 50,000 sesterces, representing 55 salaries of a legionary / the minimum wage of a procurator / half of the salary of a municipal councilor, respectively the provision of grain distributions for over 125 people in a year of days. In the Principate one expensive oil donation, 300,000 denarii / 1.200.000 sesterces, was the equivalent of the salary of a senator / grain distribution in a year for over 3.300 people, and one small donation, 15.000 denarii / 60.000 sesterces, was equivalent to half the salary of a city councilor / the minimum wage of a prosecutor / a distribution of grain for over 181 people. Secondly, oil donation had symbolical aspects during that time. The iconographic representations of gymnasiarchs were always related with a cup, a deep basin, sometimes with a crown. Through their gestures, the administrators of the gymnasium were appreciated for their good will towards the visitors of the institute, the young learners. Oil donations made by gymnasiarchs played an important role in obtaining honors and prestige in the Hellenistic period, despite other gestures: buying bulls, paying teachers, organizing contests. A single donation of oil brought with it the enrollment of gymnasiarchs among the Evergets of the cities. The Principate was also a period in which the oil benefits could determine the honor of the everget by the community. When they accompanied other charities, supplies, construction financing, festival organizations, their importance did not diminish. The difference between these periods stood in the nature of the honors received. The gymnasiarchs of the end of the second century and those of the first century BC were honored with crown, statue, crown, and statue, but also by mentioning in inscriptions the civic behavior they showed. After 1 st century AD, the appreciations and the civic behavior were registered directly proportional to the nature of the benefactions undertaken and recorded only in the case of large sums donated to construction, festival American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 70 organization, oil donations. Towards the end of 3 rd century, it lacks denotes a change in the language of honorary decrees: small text, without many descriptions of activities. As I said before, olive oil was a product of great material and spiritual value to ancient civilizations. Donating olive oil to the people meant to be an action of great importance and cost. Between the donors and the donated at social level was created the image of a relation of cooperation and trust, of mediating for facilitating the development of the cities, for balancing the differences between rich and poor. References [1]. The evolution of the term and phenomenon Euergetism from Asia Minor was synthesized in a previous paper published in 2018, A. Cantacuz. “Some New Considerations about Evergetism in Asia Minor. The Hellenistic Period and the First Century BC”. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS), vol. 43, 2018, pp. 241-262. [2]. http://www.attalus.org/, List of sources and translations. [3]. Mihaela Paraschiv- University professor of classical languages, „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iasi, Faculty of Letters- M. Paraschiv. Lexic grec şi latin universal. Iasi: Demiurg, 2007; Iulian Moga- University lecturer, „Alexandru Ioan Cuza” University of Iasi, Faculty of History- I. Moga. Culte solare şi lunare în Asia Mică în timpul Principatului (secolul I-III d. Hr.). Iasi: Editura Universităţii "Alexandru Ioan Cuza", 2011. [4]. Mădălina Dana- Professor of Greek history, Université Jean Moulin Lyon 3- M. Dana. Culture et mobilité dans le Pont-Euxin. Approche régionale de la vie culturelle des cités grecques, Bordeaux: Ausonius, 2011. [5]. R. Bruce Hitchner. „Olive Production and The Roman Economy: The Case of Intensive Growth”. La production du vin et de l'huile en Méditerranée. Actes du symposium international Aix-en-Provence et Toulon, 1991 ̧pp. 499- 510. [6]. A. Opait. „Aspects of the Provisioning of The Pontic Settlements with Olive Oil in the Hellenistic and Early Roman Periods”. Actes de la Table Ronde internationale de Batoumi et Trazbon, 27-29 Avril 2006, 2010, pp. 153-158. [7]. C. Autret, N. Rauh. „Roman Amphorae Production in Western Rough Cilicia”. Olive oïl and wine production in Anatolia during Antiquity. Symposium Proceedings, 06-08 November 2008, 2010, pp. 109-122. [8]. See [6] pp. 158. [9]. MM. Ch. Daremberg, E. Saglio, E. Pottier. Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines, d'après les textes et les monuments, contenant l'explication des termes qui se rapportent aux mœurs, aux institutions, à la religion, et en général à la vie publique et privée des anciens. Paris: Libraire Hachette, 1877-1919. pp. 169. [10]. A. Diler. „Olive Oil and Wine Production of the Halikarnassos Peninsula in Karia”. Olive oil and wine production in Anatolia during Antiquity. Symposium Proceedings, 06-08 November 2008, 2010, pp. 135-174, pp. 135-174. [11]. See [6] pp. 159-160. [12]. R. L. Barr. Honors for Late Hellenistic Civic Benefactors in Western Asia Minor, Cincinnati. Midwest American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 71 Christian College, 1995. pp. 44-52. [13]. TAM V 2. [14]. I. Tralles 5. [15]. (a) B. Dignas. Economy of the Sacred in the Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, pp. 14. (b) S. Dimitriev. City government in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor/ Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005 pp. 360-370. (c) L. Migeotte. „Les Finances des Cités Grecques aux Périodes Classique et Hellénistique”. Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 2014, pp. 371-385. [16]. MDAI (A) 1907, 278; TAM V, 2, 1343; I Milet I 9, 368; BCH 13, 1889, p. 335-340; I Priene 112. [17]. I. Priene 112. [18]. L. Foxhall. Olive Cultivation in Ancient Greece: Seeking the Ancient Economy. New York: Oxford University Press, 2007, pp. 92. [19]. Unit of measure in ancient Greece, approximately 40 liters, in A. Bailly. Dictionnaire GREC- FRANÇAIS. Paris: Hachette, 1996 [1950], pp. 2198. [20]. TAM V 2, 1343. [21]. (a) D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia Minor. To the end of the third century after Christ. Vol. I-II. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1950, pp. 122. (b) R. Billows, Antigonos the One-Eyed and the Creation of the Hellenistic State. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997, pp. 196. [22]. Attic drachma and denarius were equivalent coins, denarius was worth 4 sesterce, in B. Levick, „Greece (Including Crete and Cyprus) and Asia Minor from 43 B.C. to A.D. 69” in The Cambridge Ancient History. The Augustan Empire, 43 B.C.- A.D. 69. Vol X. K. Bowman, E. Champlin, A. Lintott, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008, pp. XVIII-XIX. [23]. (a) SEG 9, 42; (b) M. Abdelhamed, „Legume production at Cyrene in the Hellenistic period: Epigraphic evidence”. Libyan Studies, 49, 2018, pp. 159-169. [24]. See [22] p. XVIII-XIX. [25]. Plin. H. N., XIV, 150. [26]. Ath. Deipnosophistae II, 55. [27]. Hor. Sat. II, 2, 10-59. Iuvenal Satire V. pp. 63. [28]. A. Zuiderhoek. The Politics of Munificence in the Roman Empire. Citizens, Elites and Benefactors in Asia Minor, Cambridge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009, pp. 77. [29]. I. Kalchedon 45. [30]. I. Kalchedon 65. [31]. H. Möbius. Die Ostgriechischen Grabreliefs. II. Mainz, 1979, nr. 82, pl. 2273. [32]. (a) I. Kalchedon 70. P. Fröhlich. Les activités évergétiques des gymnasiarques à l’époque hellénistique tardive : la fourniture de l’huile, în Curty, O. (ed.), L’huile et l’argent. Actes du colloque tenu à Fribourg du 13 au 15 octobre 2005, publiés en l’honneur du Prof. Marcel Piérart à l’occasion de son 60ème anniversaire, 2009, pp. 57-94, pp. 72-78. [33]. I Dydima 248, IGRP 3 804, RICIS*312/0501, I. Str. 242, I. Str. 664, I. Dydima 279. [34]. S. Mitchell. Anatolia. Land, Men, and Gods in Asia Minor. The Celts in Anatolia and the Impact of Roman Rule. Vol. 1, Oxford: Clarendon Paperbacks, 1993, Table 8.1, pp. 107-109. [35]. J. H. Oliver. Sacred Gerousia, Athens, 1941. Ephesus 5, pp. 87, IGR IV 860. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS) (2021) Volume 80, No 1, pp 58-72 72 [36]. CIG 2782, M. Sartre, op. cit., 65, pp. 253, I Eph. 661. [37]. (a) J. H. Oliver. Sacred Gerousia, Athens, 1941. Ephesus 35, pp. 148, (b) SEG 4, 421. [38]. (a) S. J. Friesen. Twice Neokoros. Ephesus, Asia, and the Cult of the Flavian Imperial Family. Leiden, New York, Köln, 1993, pp. 116. (b) Ramsay, 31, pp. 143. BCH, 1892, 429, n. 59. I Tralles 5. IGR IV 788. I. Str. 664. See [37] Ephesus 45, pp. 157. [39]. MDAI (A) 1907, 278. I Milet I 9, 368. TAM V 2, 1343. I Iasos 84. BCH 13, 1889, pp. 335-340. I. Priene 112. [40]. BCH 13, 1889, pp. 335-340. [41]. SEG 53, 1373. [42]. I. Erythrai 21. [43]. Chios 12. [44]. MDAI (A) 64, 1957, pp. 233-41. [45]. Syll. 3, 368. [46]. Amyzon 7. [47]. SEG 18, 570. [48]. SEG 27, 929. [49]. L. and J. Robert, Claros I. pp. 63-104. [50]. See [38] (a) p. 116. [51]. See [37] Ephesus 35, pp. 148. [52]. I. Str. 242. [53]. SEG 6185. [54]. A. P. Gregory. Village Society in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor. Columbia, 1997, 44, pp. 648. [55]. P. Garnsey, Cities, Peasants and Food in Classical Antiquity. Essay in Social and Economic History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp. 241. [56]. J. Leclant. Dictionnaire de l’Antiquité. Paris, 2005, pp. 912-913. [57]. Pol. 1280b30f. [58]. A. Giovannini. Greek Cities and Greek Commonwealth, in Images and Ideologies. Self-definition in the Hellenistic World. A Bulloch, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1993, pp. 265-266. [59]. (a) M. Rostovtzeff. The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World. Vol 2, Oxford, 1998, pp. 1058-1060; (b) J. Delorme. Le monde hellénistique (323-133 avant J.-C.). Événements et institutions. Paris, 1975, pp. 441; (c) M. Austin. The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest. A Selection of Ancient Sources in Translation. Cambridge, New York, 2006, pp. 137, 30. [60]. See [58] pp. 271-273. [61]. See [59] (c) pp. 137, 10, 90.