The Provinces of the Roman Empire, from Caesar to Diocletian. v. 2Mommsen, Theodor
History
The Provinces of the Roman Empire, from Caesar to Diocletian. v. 2
Mommsen, Theodor
Roman provinces -- Administration; Rome -- History -- Empire, 30 B.C.-476 A.D.
give to an Egyptian township, Antinoopolis, laid out by him in memory
of his favourite drowned in the Nile, urban rights according to the
Greek fashion; and subsequently Severus, perhaps as much out of spite
to the Antiochenes as for the benefit of the Egyptians, granted to the
capital of Egypt and to the town of Ptolemais, and to several other
Egyptian communities, not urban magistrates indeed, but at any rate an
urban council. Hitherto, doubtless, in official language the Egyptian
town calls itself Nomos, the Greek Polis, but a Polis without Archontes
and Bouleutae is a meaningless name. So was it also in the coinage. The
Egyptian nomes did not possess the right of coining; but still less did
Alexandria ever strike coins. Egypt is, among all the provinces of the
Greek half of the empire, the only one which knows no other than royal
money. Nor was this otherwise even in the Roman period. The emperors
abolished the abuses that crept in under the last Lagids; Augustus
set aside their unreal copper coinage, and when Tiberius resumed the
coinage of silver he gave to the Egyptian silver money just as real
value as to the other provincial currency of the empire.[205] But the
character of the coinage remained substantially the same.[206] There
is a distinction between Nomos and Polis as between the god Chemmis
and the god Alexander; in an administrative respect there is not any
difference. Egypt consisted of a majority of Egyptian and of a minority
of Greek townships, all of which were destitute of autonomy, and all
were placed under the immediate and absolute administration of the king
and of the officials nominated by him.
[Sidenote: Absence of a land-diet.]
It was a consequence of this, that Egypt alone of all the Roman
provinces had no general representation. The diet is the collective
representation of the self-administering communities of the province.
But in Egypt there was none such; the nomes were simply imperial or
rather royal administrative districts, and Alexandria not merely
stood virtually alone, but was likewise without proper municipal
organisation. The priest standing at the head of the capital of the
country might doubtless call himself “chief priest of Alexandria and
all Egypt” (p. 248, note), and has a certain resemblance to the Asiarch
and the Bithyniarch of Asia Minor, but the deep diversity of the
organisations is thereby simply concealed.
[Sidenote: The government of the Lagids.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account