Imperial Provisions for Pergamum: "OGIS" 484 Macro, Anthony D Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1976; 17, 2; ProQuest pg. 169 Imperial Provisions for Pergamum: OGIS 484 A. D. Macro I N HIS BOOK Banques et banquiers dans les cites grecques (Leiden 1968), R. Bogaert made valuable observations concerning the interpreta­ tion of the intractable document OGIS 484, directing his attention in the main towards its financial aspects (pp.231-34). The contribution offered here in the form of translation and commentary incorpo­ rates Bogaert's work and has two principal ends: to explain the financial. commercial and juridical features of the text and to emend misinterpretations which have gained currency over the years largely by default. The inscription, fragmentary at its beginning and end, preserves an imperial epistula, \vhich addresses itself to problems of currency exchange experiened in the Pergamene market and to matters of legal procedure having to do with default, distraint and trial. Written in response to a petition made to the Roman emperor about various abuses perpetrated by money changers, it upholds the institution of an exchange monopoly locally at Pergamum and at the same time establishes corrective measures on the basis of what purports to be a thorough examination of the complaints. Though its tenor is pre­ dictably paternalistic, nonetheless it was framed with an eye towards consumer welfare and with the clear intent of eliminating duress. In fine, it provides an intriguing insight into entrepreneurial pressures and schemes in the marketplace. Nowhere in the surviving portion of the document do those at the centre of the controversy, those who stand accused of illegal-or, at the very least, arbitrary-conduct, receive a name. Their prime activ­ ity is described as money-changing, but they were also involved in lending. It will do no harm to refer to them as 'bankers' and their business concretely as a Prott. Since the exchange dealers do not appear in the first six extant lines of the inscription but are the unspecified subject of the next clause (lines 9ff), they require identification here; hence I suggest Ot ow T1]C a I [/-,EtTTTtK1]C KEKOtVWVYjKOTEC TTO]'\ < A >a, which my translation reflects 10 [TO 8'7]vae[LOV] Prott, Dittenberger et alii, TO;; 8'7]vct.e[tov] W. K. Prentice apud ARS p.206, which is preferable. 46 Dittenberger's inclusion of the article [TO TTpO T1]C] I KPLCEWC is warranted by the space available. 49 Kct.O]c.:,C is perhaps preferable to OTT ]wc: see Dittenberger ad loco (n.42) and A. Debrunner, MusHelv 1 (1944) 37ff, who quotes: SIG3 685, line 21: Kct.06Tt Ta ... yp&.JLJLct.Tct. TTEPL€XEt. SEG III 421, line 33: Kct.OWC ~ wvTJ TTEPL€XEL. Also, MAMA VIII 554, line 3: Kct.OWC Kct.1. 8ta TijC YEVO/-,€II7]C EK86cEWC 8t(~ To[D XPE]OcpV>"ct.Ktov 8'7>"OVTct.t. 49-50 [80VAOV JL~ cU]f.L/-,EITPOV Prott, Dittenberger et alii, [80v>..ov JL~ &]JLEITPOII J. H. Oliver, per litteras. Commentary The author of the epistle is the Roman emperor, as the use of the first person plural in the text would seem to show;2 probably Hadrian, whose interest in the institutions and ambience of the Greek people is well known. Also Hadrian was a travelling emperor; and since it may reasonably be inferred (5-6) that the examination was conducted in Asia Minor-for there is nothing in the text to suggest that the respondent had asked the disputant parties to assemble for interview t Dittenberger, OGIS 484 n.1. 174 IMPERIAL PROVISIONS in Rome, it is likely that the document was prepared during one of his two tours of inspection in Asia, in A.D. 123-124 or A.D. 129-131.3 Other evidence may be adduced which accords with a Hadrianic date, though it lacks precision. If the name Calvisius Glyco, the envoy sent by the Pergamenes (5), reflects a bestowal of citizenship by P. Calvisius Ruso (cos. suffect. A.D. 79), proconsul of Asia in the time of Domitian, then we have a terminus post quem; there is no record of any other Calvisius as governor of Asia.4 Furthermore, because of the similarity of lettering, it is claimed that the same mason is respon­ sible for the lex de Astynomis Pergamenorum (= OGIS 483), which was cut in the early second century, and the series of monuments of C. Antius Aulus Iulius Quadratus, cos. 94 and 105, governor of Asia ?l09/110.5 LINES 1-8. The (consortium of) exchange dealers operated a monop­ olistic exchange bank as lessees of the city. This privilege was granted to them by a contract or licence (cvvccAAccY/7) which guaranteed, among other things, that no money-changing should occur except throught their agency. The principles of the contract were contra­ vened by them in a variety of ways with a view towards increasing their profits. One assumes that the Pergamene magistrates were slow to move to put a stop to the abuse, since the public treasury was also a beneficiary of this extra income. The tradesmen, in resentment, made representations to the emperor. He heard the arguments and sought to dispose of the matter once for all by this epistle. LINES 8-24. The assarion (= as) was the unit of the local, bronze coinage, a token currency for use in the Pergamene market. At 17:1, its ratio to the Roman silver denarius was arbitrary since the going rate for the period (to which this epistle would seem to belong) was 16 asses: 1 denarius.6 There is nothing sinister in this. Because the valid­ ity of the Pergamene assarion was undoubtedly limited to the city and its environs, there was no possibility of a profiteering traffic in the I Magie, Roman Rule, 612ff and 1470 n.6. • PIRs C 350: P. Calvisius Ruso Iulius Frontinus. ~ Similarity of lettering: Prott, AthMitt 27 (1902) 82; Dittenberger, OGIS 483 n.l. Monu­ ments of luI ius Quadratus: (= PIR I I 507): Fraenkel, Alt. v. Perg. 298ff. Date of his governorship: R. Syme, Tacitus (Oxford 1958) 665. Date and purpose of the astynomic law (= OGIS 483): G. Klaffenbach, AbhBerl, Kl. Sprachen 1953, no.6; J. H. Oliver, "The Date of the Pergamene Astynomic Law," Hesperia 24 (1955) 88-92. IOn the relationship of bronze to silver in the eastern Empire, see Bolin, State & Currency, ch. X. A. D. MACRO 175 coin developing from city to city, such as John of Giscala, for instance, managed in oil a few decades earlier in Syria.? The majority of items for sale in the market were marked in the local asses and the essential foodstuffs were priced by the agoranomi. Customers brought with them to the market both silver and bronze, though chiefly the latter, which they could obtain from the bank at 17:1. On a typical day, the tradesmen, stall-keepers and others re­ ceived a steady influx of the local bronze asses, which they could exchange at the bank at 18: 1 for the denarius. They needed the universal denarius to pay their wholesale suppliers, who would have no interest in local token currency. Clearly it was to the buyers' and sellers' advantage to do business direct in silver denarii, whether the article for sale was priced in bronze or silver, bypassing the bank and thereby avoiding agio. In this way it was possible for the tradesman (as at Mylasa, ocrs 515, early III cent.) to act as 'unofficial banker' and to operate a black market in exchange. Such finesse provoked the inter­ vention of the bank: the official, licenced changers tried to put a stop to the direct changing, having as their accomplices the agoranomi, who had the feel of the market. This is nowhere stated but may reasonably be assumed. The changers, then, intervened in direct denarii purchases, claiming an as per denarius: i.e., they claimed for the bank the same premium as if the transaction had been conducted in asses. The emperor's measures to prevent these abuses of the tariff regulations by changers, tradesmen and consumers are contained in the subsequent paragraphs of the document (13-24). I. henceforth the money changers shall not interfere in transactions that lie outside the compass of the regulations that they had negotiated with the city (cvvaAAaYrl); i.e., they cannot exact an as per denarius on sales of goods priced in denarii (13-15); II. henceforth, in the matter of small fish sold by weight, i.e., food marked for sale in bronze coin and priced by the agoranomi, (1) whoever buys at gross any quantity the value of which exceeds a denarius shall still pay the seller in bronze coin; (2) whoever form themselves into a group to buy in bulk and propose to pay in (silver) denarii cannot do so: they may buy in bulk but must pay in bronze; however, the customers in these 7 Joseph. Bell. 2. 591-92, Vita 74-76. 176 IMPERIAL PROVISIONS two cases (1 and 2) shall pay at the attractive rate of 17:1, provided that their purchase exceeds the value of one denarius (16-24). By his measures, therefore, the emperor reinforces the bank's monop­ oly of exchange. He is at some pains to point out that the revenue from exchange will accrue to the city. It will have done so in accord­ ance with whatever terms the changers had negotiated with the city: one assumes that a percentage of profits was paid by the changers, but the document is silent on this aspect of the cvva'\'\aY17. Further­ more, the consumers' interests were protected: the agio charged on bulk-rate items, whether purchased collectively or not, must not be passed on to the buyer; the seller is obliged to offer a bulk rate and in such cases support the agio himself. For the buyer, who acquired his bronze coin at the bank at 17:1, buys in bulk at 17:1. But the tradesman turns his cash received from sales into denarii at the rate oflS:1. In summary: neither consumer nor seller may profit directly from exchange; the exchange monopoly for the bank is assured. LINES 24-41. The next section addresses further areas of disagreement that had arisen between the two parties (tradesmen and money changers), as a result of which, one may easily imagine, the consumer has been the main victim. But since these particular disputes have already been settled prior to the emperor's involvement and he is assured that the city's financial policy (Sux'Tagtc) has not been im­ paired, he merely records his approval of the settlement and offers no amendment.8 LINES 41-57. The final section is fragmentary and incomplete. Its substance is juridical, the manner terse, the meaning obscure. It seems that the emperor has two objectives in mind: to reinforce due process in litigation concerning unpaid debt; and to place the judgement of lawsuits before a panel of more responsible judges. The exchange dealers have been flouting the procedures for redress against debtors whom they allege to be delinquent and have taken matters into their own hands (41-43). The procedures were defined by the cvva'\'\aY17' which, as we have seen, was the licence granted by the city to the consortium of bankers on certain terms and conditions, enabling them to conduct their business. Two of these conditions are 8 8LCha~,c (lines 36-37)= budget or law concerning financial policy: cf. L. Robert, He!· Imica IX (1950) 14-18. A. D. MACRO 177 indicated by the text: that EVExvpacta should be Inanaged through the treasurers' office (ralLtat) and be carried out in the presence of the public slave; and that whatever was taken by EVExvpacta should remain available to the debtor (44-47). There is ambiguity in the meaning oUvExvpacla.9 It has to do both with receiving an object (or objects) offered as security and taking (i.e., seizing) an object (or objects) on the basis of some authority, whether constitutional or judicial. Context does not always specify. Such is the case here. The following argument. however, sheds some light. The security taken by EVExvpacta "remains with the debtor" (46- 47)-so much is explicit. It seems anomalous. How can what is taken in distraint be kept by the one distrained upon? Yet the apparent anomaly is dispelled by the recognition of an ellipsis: one infers that there can be no resort to securities, no conveyance of property, until a judicial decision has been reached. Trial is the inevitable consequence of EVExvpacta. In this context, therefore, EVExvpacta, when Hproperly and legally applied" (46), is the expression of the creditor's litigious resolve. By means of it, he not only serves formal notice of intent, but selects an object or objects on which he will distrain, if given a favourable judicial verdict. The presence of the public slave in the proceedings is required more to make the act a matter of public record than to police the confrontation between debtor and creditor.Io EVExvpada, then, as envisaged by the cVVaAAaY17, is conditional and ceremonial distraint. The force of the cvvaAAaJ177 has been diminished because the bankers have disregarded its terms. And so the emperor turns to restatement and amendment (48-52). He draws attention to the ;K8onc. This is the editio rationum, the presenting of the register kept by the bankers which contained a record of the charges drawn on each individual's account.H Bankers were obliged to keep such accounts under Roman • €vI£xvpacla: H. F. Hitzig, Das griechische Pfandrecht (Muenchen 1895) 56ff; L. Beauchet, L'Histoire du droit prive de la rq,ublique athbtienne III (Paris 1897) 223ff; RE 5 (1905) 2561 (Thalheim), 10 (1919) 2511 S.v. KaTI£vI£xvpacla (Weiss); A. B. Schwartz, "Sicherungsuebereig­ nung und Zwangsvollstreckung in den Papyri," Aegyptus 17 (1937) 241-82; A. R. W. Harrison, The Law of Athens: Procedure (Oxford 1971) 244-47. 10 For the employment of an 'attendant' (tnrTJP€TT}c) with a similar function at fourth­ century Athens, cf Oem. 48.35 and 52, and Beauchet, op.cit. (supra n.9) 225 n.4. 11 KaO]wc 1TI£lpu;:L'XI£V .q iKoonc (lines 48-49), "matching the contents of the bankers' state­ ment of account." ;Kooc£c=editio (rationnm)=presentation of accounts: B. Keil, Hermes 43 (1908) 558-59, who quotes Dig. II 13.4 (Ulpian); cf L. Robert, Hellenica XIII (1965) 197. '1r<,-pdXE(v 'to contain': A. Oebrunner, "Verschobener Partizipialgebrauch im Griechischen," 178 IMPERIAL PROVISIONS law; and one assumes that its maintenance at Pergamum was en­ joined by an article of the CVVCXAACXYJ7. The emperor urges that the parties to the dispute avail themselves of the evidence of the EKOOCLC. Since creditors and debtors are ever likely to see things differently, it should serve as an invaluable control in estimating the equivalency between the value of the security taken and the amount of the un­ paid debt. It is a fair assumption that the bankers have failed to make the data of the EKOOCLC available. Such a failure contravenes the law. Next the emperor amends the juridical procedure. He offers an alternative to decision by trial: namely,