Papyri.info — APIS (Advanced Papyrological Information System) — papyri · papyrus

Petition Concerning Liturgies

Source of record: Papyri.info — APIS (Advanced Papyrological Information System) — papyri — catalogued by the holding institution. View the original record →

Description

A certain Aurelius X, a native of Naucratis, informs a person whose name is lost (unless we assume that he was called Aurelius Heras) about matters relating to liturgies. Justices have also been involved in the matter and, unless we take it that the provenance of this text should be traced back to one of the three Greek towns which had already had a boule for a long time, this fact would support the assumption that this papyrus is to be dated in the period following the introduction of a boule by Septimius Severus in 202 A.D. From line 22 (probably up to and including line 44) a conversation is reproduced, ending with the speaker's request to send someone to the dissenting parties and the phylarchos to tell them something and to punish someone, if he keeps troubling Aurelius X (?) about liturgies. It would seem to me that in this instance we might be confirmed with a similar case to that found in P.Oxy. VIII, 1119. In the latter papyrus two inhabitants of Antinoplois request the strategus of the Oxyrhynchite nome, where they own property, to inform the phylarchos that they are exempted from nomination for the performing of municipal duties. Once before they had been appointed to collect the monetary taxes in the metropolis, in spite of the fact that, as citizens of Antinoopolis, they were exempted from this duty. When we recall that Hadrianus granted the nomoi of Naucratis to his settlement Antinoopolis, it wouldn���t be surprising if the privileges enjoyed by the inhabitants of Antinoopolis, or at least some of them, such as exemption from the duty of performing liturgies outside their own town, were also enjoyed by the inhabitants of Naucratis. It is hoped that the missing right- hand fragment of this interesting papyrus will some day be found in another collection and that the publication of the left-hand fragment will lead to the other half being edited. Only when that part is discovered either completely or partially, will it be possible to confirm or reject my explanation of this papyrus, which is of necessity based on surmises.

Cross-references (5)

About this record's data
  • From the source institution — accession, description, dimensions, and dating are as catalogued by Papyri.info — APIS (Advanced Papyrological Information System) — papyri.
  • AI-inferred — the image-analysis panel (deities, names, signs) is machine-generated and may be wrong.
  • Approximate location — most map points are plotted at the site centroid, not the exact findspot.
  • Inferred links — cross-references marked with a match method other than explicit-source-field were matched by us, not stated by the source.