Nawotka ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 ISSN 2159-3159 Article copyright held by the author(s) and made available under the Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ On the Nature and Functions of the Macedonian Council of Peliganes Krzysztof Nawotka HE PELIGANES, although sparsely attested in literary sources, have lately received attention in the scholarship because of the growing number of documentary sources that mention them. The most recent contribution is by Miltiades Hatzopoulos, who while discussing the civic organization of Macedonia writes: “The council (boule), the member of which bore the name of peliganes in the Old Kingdom, constituted, as everywhere in the Greek world, the permanent commission of the assembly.”1 Another leading expert on ancient Macedonia, Nicholas G. L. Hammond, devoted his attention to the etymol- ogy of peliganes and was more ambiguous, stating simply: “One term for Councillors in a Macedonian town goes back to the time of Philip and probably much earlier: πελιγᾶνες.”2 Given Hatzopoulos’ stature in Macedonian studies, his statement will likely be accepted by most. But, contrary to his assertion, the nature of the peliganes deserves reconsideration in light of sources 1 M. B. Hatzopoulos, Ancient Macedonia (Berlin 2020) 101. Hatzopoulos as- similates the peliganes to the ‘boule’ also in his earlier publications: Macedonian Institutions under the Kings I (Athens 1996) 323, 326; “Épigraphie et philologie: récentes découvertes épigraphiques et gloses macédoniennes d’Hésychius,” CRAI 142 (1998) 1196; “The Cities,” in R. J. Lane Fox (ed.), Brill’s Companion to Ancient Macedon (Leiden 2011) 240–241. His position agrees with E. Biker- man, Institutions des Séleucides (Paris 1938) 157, who asserted that Seleukid colonies were organized on the pattern of Greek poleis. 2 N. G. L. Hammond and G. T. Griffith, A History of Macedonia II (Oxford 1979) 648–649. T KRZYSZTOF NAWOTKA 387 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 broader than the evidence quoted by him. Such reconsideration is overdue because the peliganes, although attested largely within the Seleukid empire, have escaped the attention of most of the standard books on Seleukid institutions.3 The peliganes are directly mentioned in four documentary and three literary sources, one of which has been plausibly emended. The documentary evidence consists of: 1. A letter of Philip V to the city of Dion in Macedonia of ca. 180 BCE addressed: Εὐρυλόχωι τῶι ἐπιστά/τει καὶ τοῖς πελειγᾶσι καὶ τοῖς / λοιποῖς πολίταις (“To Eurylochos the epistates, the peleiganes, and the rest of the citizens”).4 2. A decree of Laodikeia in Syria of 174 BCE adopted by the peliganes: δεδόχθαι τοῖς / πελιγᾶσιν.5 3. A broken inscription from Seleukeia on the Eulaios (Susa) of the second century BCE, possibly containing a decree issued by the peliganes: [– – π]ε̣λειγᾶσι ΕΠ[– –].6 4. A Babylonian chronicle of 130 BCE names, in a much- damaged place, lúpe-li-ga-na-a-n[u] (plural in Akkadian), or peliganes, as a body bringing gifts to an official.7 The direct literary evidence: 5. Polybius, in his account of Molon’s rebellion, writes that 3 Bikerman, Institutions; L. Capdetrey, Le pouvoir séleucide (Rennes 2007). They are mentioned, however, by Domenico Musti, “Lo stato dei Seleucidi. Dinastia popoli città da Seleuco I ad Antioco III,” SCO 15 (1966) 123–124. 4 SEG XLVIII 785.2–4. 5 IGLSyr IV 1261.21–22. Discussion of the decision taken by the peliganes: Vojislav Sarakinski, “Peliganes: The State of the Question and Some Other Thoughts,” Macedonian Historical Review 1 (2010) 40–42. 6 SEG LIX 1654, dated tentatively by the editors, Georges Rougemont, “Les inscriptions grecques d’Iran et d’Asie,” JSav (2012) 24–27, and Pierre- Louis Gatier, “Des péliganes à Suse,” ZPE 184 (2013) 205–210, based on letter shapes. 7 BCHP 18 (BM 35189+46018+46216) B.3: R. J. van der Spek, “The Size and Significance of the Babylonian Temples under the Successors,” in P. Briant et al. (eds.), La transition entre l’empire achéménide et les royaumes hellénistiques (Paris 2006) 285 (text), 286 (translation), 288 (commentary). 388 THE MACEDONIAN COUNCIL OF PELIGANES ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 once the rebellion had been quelled, Hermeias, a minister of Antiochos III, expelled “the so-called adeiganes” from Seleu- keia: Ἑρµείας … ἐφυγάδευε δὲ τοὺς καλουµένους Ἀδειγάνας (Polyb. 5.54.10). The last word, which is otherwise un- attested, was convincingly emended to πελιγάνας by Pierre Roussel. This reading is now generally accepted.8 6. In the fragmentary portion of Book 7 of his Geography Strabo says: Ὅτι κατὰ Θεσπρωτοὺς καὶ Μολοττοὺς τὰς γραίας πελίας καὶ τοὺς γέροντας πελίους, καθάπερ καὶ παρὰ Μακεδόσι· πελι- γόνας γοῦν καλοῦσιν ἐκεῖνοι τοὺς ἐν τιµαῖς καθὰ παρὰ Λάκωσι καὶ Μασσαλιώταις τοὺς γέροντας. “Among the Thesprotians and the Molossians old women are called ‘peliai’ and old men ‘pelioi,’ as is also the case among the Macedonians; at any rate, those people call their dignitaries ‘peligones’ (com- pare the ‘gerontes’ among the Laconians and the Mas- saliotes).”9 8 Pierre Roussel, “Décret des Péliganes de Laodicée-sur-Mer,” Syria 23 (1942/3) 31–32. Accepted: J. N. Kalléris, Les anciens Macédoniens. Études linguistique et historique I (Athens 1954) 243–244; Walbank, HCP I (Oxford 1957) 583; Musti, SCO 15 (1966) 123; G. M. Cohen, The Seleucid Colonies (Wiesbaden 1978) 80; R. A. Billows, Kings and Colonists: Aspects of Macedonian Imperialism (Leiden 1995) 181; van der Spek, in La transition 288; Sarakinski, Macedonian Historical Review 1 (2010) 43; Gatier, ZPE 184 (2013) 206; G. M. Cohen, The Hellenistic Settlements in the East from Armenia and Mesopotamia to Bactria and India (Berkeley 2013) 159–160; Omar Coloru, “Seleukid Settlements: Between Ethnic Identity and Mobility,” Electrum 20 (2013) 41–42; M. Mari, “Macedonian Cities under the Kings: Standardization or Variety? A View from Amphipolis,” in M. Kalaitzi et al. (eds.), Βoρειοελλαδικά: Tales from the Lands of the Ethne: Essays in Honour of Miltiades B. Hatzopoulos (Athens 2018) 179– 197, at188; Hatzopoulos, Ancient Macedonia 102–103. Also in the Loeb edition of Polybius (2011), revised by F. W. Walbank and C. Habicht. The single dissenting voice is Nicholas G. L. Hammond’s (“The Koina of Epirus and Macedonia,” ICS 16 [1991] 186), who does not, however, present any argu- ment against the emendation. 9 Strab. 7a 1.2, transl. H. L. Jones. The fragments have been excerpted from the Vatican epitome. See Kalléris, Les Anciens Macédoniens 243 n.1, on the etymology of the words πέλιος and πελιγᾶνες. KRZYSZTOF NAWOTKA 389 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 7. Hesychius Π 1329: πελιγᾶνες· οἱ ἔνδοξοι· παρὰ δὲ Σύροις οἱ βουλευταί (“Peliganes: those who are held in esteem, bouleutai among Syrians”). The slight difference in spelling of the name πελιγᾶνες/ πελειγᾶνες/πελιγόνες is of no concern—all evidence pertains to the same body.10 Roussel already noticed that the institution of the peliganes is Macedonian, brought to the East in the process of founding colonies in the early Hellenistic age, when (contrary to the silent majority of scholarship) they received not Greek but Macedonian institutions.11 Since, despite the steadily growing body of evidence, the peliganes are never attested in Greek cities, we are justified in considering them a Macedonian institution.12 This is not to say that there was a universal, specific model of a Macedonian city. On the contrary, it is probable that Philip II and later kings respected local traditions.13 The inscription from Dion (no. 1), the earliest documentary evidence for the peliganes, attests to their Macedonian origin,14 while the Babylonian chro- nicle (no. 4) and the inscriptions from Laodikeia (no. 2) and Susa (no. 3) document the widespread presence of the peliganes in the Seleukid colonies in Syria and Mesopotamia, known also from literary sources (nos. 5 and 7). In other words, with every new piece of evidence the position advanced by Roussel is more and more certain. One needs to be very careful, however, when generalizing on the basis of the sparsely attested internal organization of Seleukid colonies in the East, since some of them surely enjoyed institutions patterned on Greek poleis, the best 10 Roussel, Syria 23 (1942/3) 29; Kalléris, Les Anciens Macédoniens 244–245. 11 Roussel, Syria 23 (1942/3) 28–30. 12 Kalléris, Les Anciens Macédoniens 244–245; Walbank, HCP I 583. We need not join the modern debate on the degree to which the Macedonians were linguistically or culturally Greek. On the peliganes as an essentially Mace- donian institution see Sarakinski, Macedonian Historical Review 1 (2010) 31–46. 13 Mari, in Βoρειοελλαδικά 179–197. 14 Hatzopoulos, CRAI 142 (1998) 1196, and Ancient Macedonia 103. 390 THE MACEDONIAN COUNCIL OF PELIGANES ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 example being Antiochia in Persis.15 This leaves us with two issues: the permanence of the board of peliganes and its name, and the nature of this institution. All datable evidence is mid- to late-Hellenistic, with the exception of Hesychius, but he only transmits data excerpted from earlier sources ordinarily unknown to us.16 Although there is no evi- dence predating 220 BCE (no. 5), those who conjecture that the origin of the peliganes was in Argead Macedonia are almost cer- tainly right.17 Without the assumption that the peliganes were installed in the Seleukid colonies after the Macedonian pre- Hellenistic pattern, it would have been nearly impossible to explain their proliferation in the East. Another Macedonian civic institution, the epistates or chief magistrate in cities of Old Macedonia, implemented in Macedonian colonies in the East, furnishes a ready parallel of the process of exporting pre- Hellenistic Macedonian institutions into Hellenistic kingdoms.18 A crucial question is the nature of the council of peliganes: was it, as Hatzopoulos claims, a regular Greek boule (“the permanent commission of the assembly”) under another name? Accepting Hatzopoulos’ stance would mean that the peliganes were selected by the appropriate assembly, preferably by lot, and that their primary function was probouleutic, i.e. pre-handling motions before they were submitted to the demos. These characteristics of 15 OGIS 233 = I.Estremo Oriente 252 attesting Greek-type legislative pro- cedure with the boule and ekklesia expressly named. The same can be said of some cities in Hellenistic Macedonia, e.g. Thessalonike, where the boule and demos legislated (IG XI.4 1053), or Amphipolis. See Hatzopoulos, Macedonian Institutions I 140–145. 16 See Paul Bernard, “La glose sur les péliganes,” CRAI 142 (1998) 1208– 1210, on possible sources of Hesychius’ entry peliganes, with no firm con- clusion. 17 Roussel, Syria 23 (1942/3) 29–30; Hatzopoulos, in Brill’s Companion 241; Sarakinski, Macedonian Historical Review 1 (2010) 38–39; R. J. Lane Fox, “Philip’s and Alexander’s Macedon,” in Brill’s Companion 378–379; Hatzo- poulos, Ancient Macedonia 101, 103. 18 Mari, in Βoρειοελλαδικά 183. KRZYSZTOF NAWOTKA 391 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 the boule, although best attested in Athens, are believed by modern scholarship to be the democratic norm in most cities of the early- to mid-Hellenistic age.19 Admittedly, selection by lot is directly attested in some poleis only, and a parallel pro- bouleutic procedure with participation of kosmoi and other probouleutic boards, rather than of the council, is well known too; but it was the demos, not any other body, who legislated in Hellenistic Greek cities.20 In the late-Hellenistic age the way bouleutai were appointed started to change, turning Imperial-age councils into bodies that replenished themselves through coopta- tion or were built through appointment of former magistrates by timetai (‘censors’). Bouleutai were increasingly becoming a quasi- order of the socially prominent in the city, a phenomenon unheard of in the early Hellenistic age (the “aristocratization” of formerly democratic Greek cities of the Roman age, in the words 19 The literature is vast, to cite only: P. J. Rhodes, The Athenian Boule (Oxford 1972) 1–16, 52–81; R. A. De Laix, Probouleusis at Athens (Berkeley 1973); M. H. Hansen, The Athenian Democracy in the Age of Demosthenes (Oxford 1991) 247– 250; J. Creed, “Aristotle and Democracy,” in A. Loizou et al. (eds.), Polis and Politics: Essays in Greek Moral and Political Philosophy (Aldershot 1990) 23–34; P. J. Rhodes, The Decrees of the Greek States (Oxford 1997) 11–15, 475–491; V. Gabrielsen, The Naval Aristocracy of Hellenistic Rhodes (Aarhus 1997) 26–28; P. Hamon, “À propos de l’institution du Conseil dans les cités grecques de l’époque hellénistique,” REG 114 (2001) XVIII–XIX; V. Grieb, Hellenistische Demokratie. Politische Organisation und Struktur in freien griechischen Poleis nach Alexander dem Grossen (Stuttgart 2008) 45–47, 157–160, 213–217, 289–292; C. Mann, in C. Mann et al. (eds.), “Gleichheiten und Ungleichheiten in der hellenistischen Polis: Überlegungen zum Stand der Forschung,” in “Demo- kratie” im Hellenismus. Von der Herrschaft des Volkes zur Herrschaft der Honoratioren? (Mainz 2012) 14–19; R. Fabiani, “Dedochthai tei boulei kai toi demoi: protagonisti e prassi della procedura deliberative a Iasos,” in “Demokratie” im Hellenismus 119–122, 160–165; H.-U. Wiemer, “Hellenistic Cities: The End of Greek Democracy?” in H. Beck (ed.), A Companion to Ancient Greek Government (Chich- ester 2013) 56–59; E. Kosmetatou, “Tyche’s Force: Lottery and Chance in Greek Government,” in A Companion to Ancient Greek Government 235–251; K. Nawotka, Boule and Demos in Miletus and its Pontic Colonies (Wiesbaden 2014) 93– 125, 139–141. 20 Hamon, REG 114 (2001) XVII–XVIII; Nawotka, Boule and Demos 98–109. 392 THE MACEDONIAN COUNCIL OF PELIGANES ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 of Patrice Hamon and Hans-Ulrich Wiemer).21 This transfor- mation, important as it was and worthy of mention, is of limited relevance here since all the documentary evidence of the peliganes is mid-Hellenistic and thus much earlier than the transformation of bouleutai into a quasi-order. Peliganes need to be juxtaposed with mid-Hellenistic boulai—in most Greek cities, bodies ema- nating from the demos. There is nothing in our evidence on how the peliganes were appointed. We may only guess that these councils were intro- duced by royal fiat into Seleukid colonies either when they were founded or when they were reorganized. This would involve direct or indirect royal agency in appointing the first group of notables to serve as the peliganes in a city.22 But this leaves open how their ranks were later replenished. Selection by the assem- bly (either by lot or by vote) is only one option, cooptation or appointment by a royal official being also possible. There is nothing in our sources to prove that the peliganes were selected by the assembly, let alone that they were a permanent com- mission of the assembly as Hatzopoulos holds. As a matter of fact, Babylon is the only city in which both the peliganes and the assembly are simultaneously attested (third quarter of the second century BCE). In Babylon the only function which can be as- signed to the assembly of citizens (pulitê/pulitānu in Akkadian, the 21 F. Quaß, Die Honoratiorenschicht in den Städten des griechischen Ostens (Stuttgart 1993) 382–394; Hamon, REG 114 (2001) XIX–XXI, “Le Conseil et la partici- pation des citoyens: les mutations de la basse époque hellénistique,” in P. Frölich et al. (eds.), Citoyenneté et participation à la basse époque hellénistique (Geneva 2005) 121–144, and “Élites dirigeantes et processus d’aristocratisa- tion à l’époque hellénistique,” in H.-L. Fernoux et al. (eds.), Aristocratie antique: Modèles et exemplarité sociale (Dijon 2007) 79–100; Wiemer, in A Companion to Ancient Greek Government 64–67; A. Zuiderhoek, The Ancient City (Cambridge 2017) 80–82. The institutional evolution of councils does not contradict the general rule that in Greek cities leadership was always the stage on which the elite played the leading role: C. Habicht, “Ist ein ‘Honoratiorenregime’ das Kennzeichen der Stadt im späteren Hellenismus?” in M. Wörrle et al., Stadtbild und Bürgerbild im Hellenismus (Munich 1995) 87–92. 22 I owe this suggestion to an anonymous reader for GRBS. KRZYSZTOF NAWOTKA 393 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 language of the source) was to gather in the theatre to listen to royal pronouncements, never to discuss anything, elect anybody, or vote on anything.23 No link between the assembly and the peliganes can be established in the light of our evidence. The probouleutic activity is never attested for the peliganes. Moreover, there are two pieces of evidence, one certain (no. 2) and one probable (no. 4), for the peliganes legislating, i.e. per- forming duties in Greek states reserved for the demos.24 In the address of the letter of Philip V (no. 1) the peliganes are named in the position of prominence, as almost always was the demos, or the boule and the demos, in addresses of letters of Hellenistic kings to Greek cities. A typical instance is the letter of Seleukos I to Miletos: βασιλεὺς Σέλευκος Μιλησίων τῆι βουλῆι καὶ τῶι δηµῶι χαίρειν (Didyma 493).25 By appearing in the address of a royal letter, the peliganes are treated as the supreme body of a polis (Dion). Polybius’ evidence (no. 5) is telling too: Hermeias pun- ished the peliganes of Seleukeia on the Tigris because their city sided with Molon. This is understandable only if the leadership in Seleukeia was vested in the peliganes.26 The early- to mid- Hellenistic boule, usually selected by lot and thus representing a cross-section of the active part of society, was not the board of 23 AD III 30, no. -161, obv. 25′ ; III 134, no. -140A, rev. 6′ ; III 230, no. -132 D2 rev. 15′ ; III 264, no. -124 A, obv. 7′ ; III 278, no. -124 B, rev. 17′ ; III 326, no. -118 A, rev. 19′ ; III 454, no. -87 C, rev. 30′ . R. J. Van der Spek, “The Theatre of Babylon in Cuneiform,” in W. H. van Soldt et al. (eds.), Veenhof Anniversary Volume: Studies Presented to Klaas R. Veenhof (Leiden 2002) 448–455. 24 Luca Mazzini, “Seleucia on the Tigris, Doom of Babylon?” IncidAntico 19 (2021)172–173, admits that the peliganes legislated, but he unnecessarily equates them with boule in this respect. See Rhodes, Athenian Boule 82–87, on decrees of the Athenian boule on non-procedural matters—a rare phe- nomenon of oligarchic nature. It is well attested, however, in Hellenistic Macedonia: Hatzopoulos, Macedonian Institutions I 139–148. The peliganes, as we know them, legislated in matters of substance, not of procedure. 25 Other examples: Welles, Royal Corres. 2, 4, 6, 7, 14, 15, 17, 22, 23, 25, 31–35, 38, 41, 43, 48, 62, 64, 66, 72. 26 Sarakinski, Macedonian Historical Review 1 (2010) 42–43. 394 THE MACEDONIAN COUNCIL OF PELIGANES ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 municipal leaders: the leadership of a polis rested with elected magistrates, strategoi or the like.27 For the peliganes as bouleutai we are left with the entry in He- sychius’ lexicon (no. 7). Although Hesychius is not be neglected as purveyor of an earlier tradition, because his lexicon is not a documentary source no technical terminology can be expected. The most obvious way of reading Hesychius is that he (or his source) was referring to the peliganes in (presumably) Seleukid Syria as the members of a council (a boule), not necessarily of the boule selected by lot or elected by the people to perform pro- bouleutic duties in a city. In the light of our evidence, the peliganes were the principal body of the Hellenistic Macedonian city, responsible for legislating and other leadership activities, over- shadowing the demos, if it ever convened. The last direct attestation to the nature of the peliganes is Strabo’s statement (no. 6) juxtaposing the Macedonian peliganes with gerontes, i.e. members of the gerousia in Sparta. The issue of the old age implied by Strabo’s etymology should not be read literally, since he does not say that there was an age limit for the peliganes, only that their name was derived from the word pelioi (“old men”). One should bear in mind that the Greek word γέροντες designated both “old men” and “Elders, Chiefs.” In the political sense the second designation was prevalent, at least in the pre-Roman age.28 That said, one has to admit that there is in fact no reason to exclude the possibility that there was an age limit for peliganes; the current state of the evidence does not allow for a firm conclusion in this matter. The designation “Elders, Chiefs” is nevertheless applicable to the peliganes, whose prom- inent position in a polis, if not specifically their attested re- sponsibilities, were comparable with those of the gerousia in Sparta—the Council of Elders and high court superior to 27 Rhodes, Athenian Boule 4–6; Hansen, Athenian Democracy 268–247. 28 LSJ s.v. γέρων; Denis van Berchem, “La gérousie d’Éphèse,” MusHelv 37 (1980) 25–40, at 34; Rhodes, Decrees 460. KRZYSZTOF NAWOTKA 395 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 Sparta’s assembly.29 Gerousiai profusely attested in the Imperial age, in both Athens and Asia Minor, should be left out of con- sideration on account of their being venerable associations, not organs of the state sensu stricto: they could initiate legislation and influence it, but the decision rested with the regular legislative bodies, the boule and the demos.30 Perhaps two more items can be brought into consideration, although neither mentions the peliganes by name. In his descrip- tion of Surena’s triumph after the victory over Crassus Plutarch says that the Parthian general gathered the gerousia of the Seleu- keians to deride the Romans who carried in their baggage the licentious Milesiaka (Crass. 32.4). Plutarch uses the word gerousia in a restricted way, always referring either to the bodies which indeed carried this name, like the gerousia in Sparta31 or Syracuse (Marc. 23.2), or to the ruling council of Rome, the Senate.32 If this is read in the context of other evidence (nos. 5 and 6), it is reasonable to infer that what Plutarch called the gerousia of the Seleukeians was in fact the Council of Elders known from Polybius as the peliganes.33 This was either Plutarch’s metonymy, used for clarity’s sake (gerousia was more common by far than 29 On the elevated position of the Spartan gerousia in the classical and early- Hellenistic age see P. Cartledge, Agesilaos and the Crisis of Sparta (London 1987) 121–125; E. G. Millender, “Kingship: The History, Power, and Prerogatives of the Spartans ‘Divine’ Dyarchy,” in A. Powell (ed.), A Companion to Sparta II (Chichester 2018) 460–461. The somewhat diminished position of the Spar- tan gerousia of the Imperial age (P. Cartledge and A. Spawforth, Hellenistic and Roman Sparta: A Tale of Two Cities [London 1989] 143–149) need not concern us here as it falls beyond the chronological limit of this paper. 30 J. H. Oliver, The Sacred Gerusia (Baltimore 1941) 21–38; van Berchem, MusHelv 37 (1980) 25–40; Rhodes, Decrees 538–539; E. Bauer, Gerusien in den Poleis Kleinasiens in hellenistischer Zeit und der römischen Kaiserzeit (Munich 2014) 345–348; K. Martin, Demos, Boule, Gerousia: Personifikationen städtischer Institu- tionen auf kaiserzeitlichen Münzen aus Kleinasien I (Bonn 2013) 141–142. 31 Plut. Lyc. 6.1, Pyrrh. 27.4, Ages. 4.4. 32 Plut. Caes. 28.7, 29.7, 33.6, 67.1; Fab. 18.5; Rom. 13.3, 27.3; An seni 789E. 33 Roussel, Syria 23 (1942/3) 29. 396 THE MACEDONIAN COUNCIL OF PELIGANES ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 peliganes) or to reflect the fact that the ruling council of Seleukeia no longer bore the name peliganes. The same may apply to Tacitus’ account of the internal strife in the Arsakid state, in which he likens the council of Seleukeia to the Senate, not only in numbers (300 members each) but also in respect to obvious Roman senatorial qualities which decided the membership: means and wisdom.34 Putting all this evidence together, one may surmise that in Seleukeia (and probably some other Macedonian cities in- cluding the Seleukid colonies) legislative power and leadership was originally vested in the peliganes, a council descriptively re- ferred to as gerousia or senatus. This was not the council (boule) acting as a committee of a largely unattested demos but a council of notables, in a way similar to the Roman Senate of the early Imperial age.35 Finally, let us consider the permanence of the peliganes. With the concentration of evidence in the mid- to late-Hellenistic age and no source being later than Strabo, the question arises whether this is an artifact of transmission or else the name peliganes went out of use at some point. In Seleukeia on the Tigris, for example, sometime between the late-first century BCE and the early-first century CE the council almost certainly acquired the name boule, as attested by bronze coins bearing the inscrip- tion ΒΟΥΛΗ at Seleukid-era dates corresponding to 13/4, 14/5, 15/6, 40/1, 42/3, 43/4, 44/5 CE.36 One has to agree with 34 Tac. Ann. 6.42.1, trecenti opibus aut sapientia delecti ut senatus, sua populo vis. A. J. Woodman, The Annals of Tacitus. Books 5 and 6 (Cambridge 2017) 260; Leonardo Gregoratti, “The Importance of the Mint of Seleucia on the Tigris for Arsacid History: Artabanus and Greek Parthian Cities,” Mesopotamia 47 (2012) 132. 35 In a way this usage of the words boule and gerontes/gerousia reflects what Iliad 2.54 says of Agamemnon when he was about to convene the leaders of the Achaians: βουλὴν δὲ πρῶτον µεγαθύµων ἷζε γερόντων. 36 R. H. McDowell, Coins from Seleucia on the Tigris (Ann Arbor 1935) no. 134 (22 pieces), and G. Le Rider, Séleucie du Tigre: les monnaies séleucides et parthes KRZYSZTOF NAWOTKA 397 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 Georges Le Rider who identifies the seated figure on the obverse of these coins holding a staff, a symbol of power, as a personi- fication of the council of Seleukeia.37 To Katharina Martin the iconography of the boule on these coins resembles the portraiture of Hellenistic queens and it alludes to the position of power exercised by the council.38 It seems, therefore, that only the name changed, not the supreme position of the council within the government of Seleukeia. A reflection of this is perhaps found in the Acts of Mār Mārī, a hagiographic text composed in the sixth century and recording events best dated to the second. It reads: “Now there were three assemblies in Seleukeia, one for the elders, one for the young people, and one for the children, for this is how they organized their assemblies.”39 The editor of the text, Amir Harrak, claims that the assembly of the elders was the assembly of all free citizens of Seleukeia, after the pattern of the Akkadian assem- blies puḫru ša šībūti.40 This has been met with disbelief, since under no plausible scenario could the knowledge of an Akkadian judicial organ have made it into the Acts of Mār Mārī.41 Even if Harrak is right on linguistic grounds in his claim that the ter- minology in the Acts is derived from the Akkadian puḫru ša šībūti, his explanation of the “council of elders” as the assembly of Seleukeia unconvincingly leaves two other assemblies unex- plained. In Babylonia the puḫru ša šībūti was a council of elders (Florence 1998) nos. 351, 536–538 (4 pieces). The inscription: McDowell 71. Cohen, The Hellenistic Settlements 160, and Le Rider, Séleucie 24, read the inscription as ΒΟΥΛΗ(Σ). The first reading is standard in coin inscriptions: Martin, Demos II passim. 37 Le Rider, Séleucie 23–25, 58; Gregoratti, Mesopotamia 47 (2012) 133; Martin, Demos I 110. 38 Martin, Demos I 113. 39 Amir Harrak, The Acts of Mār Mārī the Apostle (Atlanta 2005) 19. 40 Harrak, The Acts 43–45 nn.105–106. 41 Joseph P. Amar, review of Harrak’s Acts in JNES 70 (2011) 166–167. 398 THE MACEDONIAN COUNCIL OF PELIGANES ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 representing the body of citizens (mār banî).42 Thus it paralleled the gerousia/peliganes known from classical sources rather than the popular assembly (demos), otherwise unattested in Seleukeia. More likely the organizational model described in the Acts of Mār Mārī is reminiscent of the tripartite structure of the post- Hellenistic city, with neoi (ephebes), adult citizens, and elders (gerousia/peliganes).43 Characteristically, in the Acts the apostle in his Christianizing mission turns to the elders, apparently the active part of the society of Seleukeia. Thus the Acts of Mār Mārī may inadvertently reflect an arrangement according to which the power was vested in the council. The only other example of the probable disappearance of the peliganes from the municipal government is Laodikeia. An imperial-age inscription shows the boule and demos as decision- making bodies of the city, replacing the peliganes in this capacity.44 In contrast to Seleukeia on the Tigris, no source attests the circumstances of this shift in constitution—a shift in substance, not in the name alone. We can neither be sure when exactly the peliganes disappeared from Seleukid colonies, nor whether this happened due to decisions of central governments or through the internal evolution of the cities once governed by the peliganes. The disappearance of the board of peliganes might be placed in the context of transformations associated with the transition from the late-Seleukid to Arsakid and Roman rule.45 42 Muhammad A. Dandamaev, “Babylonian Popular Assemblies in the First Millennium B.C.,” BCSMS 30 (1995) 23–29; J. Oelsner, B. Wells, and C. Wunsch, “NeoBabylonian Period,” in R. Westbrook (ed.), A History of Ancient Near Eastern Law (Leiden 2003) 919. 43 Franz Cumont, “Notes sur un passage des Actes de S. Mari,” Revue de l’instruction publique en Belgique 36 (1893) 373–378; Mazzini, IncidAntico 19 (2021) 172–173. 44 IGLSyr IV 1257; cf. 1302 from Balanaea. 45 Cf. the transition of leadership in Babylon from šatammu and the council of Esagila to epistates which happened at the turn from the Seleukids to the Arsakids: P. Clancier, “The Polis of Babylon: An Historiographical Ap- KRZYSZTOF NAWOTKA 399 ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 In Seleukeia on the Tigris, and perhaps in some other Mace- donian cities of the Parthian empire, the clearly anachronistic name of peliganes was dropped, but the principle of local govern- ment by a council of notables, now called boule, was retained. In Roman Syria the government of the peliganes gave way to the most common constitutional arrangements, with the boule and demos in charge of legislation. The growing number of documentary testimonies, Greek and Akkadian, speaks to the Macedonian pre-Hellenistic origin of the peliganes and to the wide implementation of this body in Seleukid colonies organized on the Macedonian pattern. In his book on Seleukid colonization, Getzel Cohen remarked in a brief paragraph concerned with the peliganes: “At Laodiceia, at least, it is clear that they formed a council of some sort. But whether they were actually constituted as a boule or a gerousia is unclear.”46 The dichotomy presumed by this sentence is un- necessary. The peliganes were not the boule—in Greek cities, a council selected from the demos to perform mostly probouleutic functions. The peliganes were the council (in Greek, a boule) of notables or Elders (in Greek, a gerousia) governing Macedonian cities and legislating, much as the boule and demos did in Hel- lenistic Greek cities. Proliferation of the peliganes in Macedonia and Seleukid colonies in the East and the role they played seem to bespeak the coexistence of the constitutional norm of (many/ most) Hellenistic Greek cities, ruled by boule and demos, with the practice in Macedonian cities of rule by councils of notables. The dearth of documentary evidence from Macedonia prevents us from saying whether the rule of the city by the peliganes was the norm (unlikely) or just one Macedonian tradition which hap- pened to be transmitted to Seleukid colonies. The evolution of the council of peliganes in the late-Hellenistic age and later is proach,” in B. Chrubasik et al. (eds.), Hellenism and the Local Communities of the Eastern Mediterranean: 400 BCE–250 CE (Oxford 2017) 75–80. 46 Cohen, Seleucid Colonies 80. On the peliganes as gerousia also Mari, in Βoρειοελλαδικά 188, but without stating any rational. 400 THE MACEDONIAN COUNCIL OF PELIGANES ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 63 (2023) 386–400 bifurcated: in some Seleukid colonies in the Parthian empire the name peliganes was no longer used but the municipal government of the council of notables survived until the second century CE, whereas the Seleukid colonies in Roman Syria dropped the name peliganes and adopted a system resembling the consti- tutional norm of Greek cities in the East, in which the boule and demos legislated.47 July, 2023 University of Wroclaw krzysztof.nawotka@uwr.edu.pl ORCID 0000-0002-2658-5831 47 My research for this paper was funded in whole by a grant of the National Science Centre (Poland) UMO-2021/42/A/HS3/00421 “Epi- graphic culture in the Eastern Mediterranean and the Middle East in antiquity: status, display, democracy, identity.” The earlier version of this paper was presented at a seminar in the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, NYU. I would like to thank those who commented upon it, giving me an opportunity to streamline some of my ideas, Dr. Sören Stark and Mr. Alireza Khounani in the first place. I would like to thank as well anonymous readers for GRBS whose comments helped me to smooth some rough edges of this paper.