Luigi Moretti s reputation as a world famous specialist of Greek epigraphy is based

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS OR NEAPOLITAN PHRATRIES AS COLLEGIA* Alain Bresson Luigi Moretti s reputation as a world famous specialist of Greek epigraphy is based on his Iscrizioni agonistiche greche, on his Olympionikai and on his Iscrizioni storiche ellenistiche. 1 Most of the texts of these volumes originate from the Eastern Mediterranean. This major attention to the East is confirmed by the fact that a wide majority of Luigi Moretti s articles was also devoted to inscriptions from the same geographic zone, a proportion that is nicely reflected in his selection of essays Tra epigrafia e storia. Scritti scelti e annotati. 2 But Luigi Moretti will remain as well as the editor of the Inscriptiones Graecae urbis Romae, which suffices to show all the interest he also devoted to the Greek speaking communities of the Western Mediterranean, especially to those of Italy. 3 It is to pay tribute to the western side of Luigi Moretti s monumental work that this paper will offer to reanalyze a bilingual text from Naples. This is one of the inscriptions concerning the imperial period Neapolitan phratries, a text that the famous scholar knew well and in which he had himself taken an interest, although never directly publishing on it. 4 This paper is also a way to celebrate a kind of anniversary. Indeed, the inscription to which this paper is devoted was discovered exactly one century ago, in March 1912, and received its first edition the following year, being published by D. Mallardo in the Memorie di Archeologia of Naples in 1913. 5 It was discovered in a suburb of Naples, in a place called Carbonella, two kilometers from Casoria and near * My deep gratitude goes to K. Rigsby and F. Zevi for their manifold help in the preparation of this study, to the American Academy in Rome and to J.-Y. Empereur for their assistance with the illustration, as well as to A. Chaniotis and the editors of this volume for thought-provoking remarks. 1 L. Moretti, Iscrizioni agonistiche greche (Studi pubblicati dall Istituto Italiano per la Storia Antica 12), Roma 1953; Id., Olympionikai, i vincitori negli antichi agoni olimpici, MAL s. VIII, 8.2, Roma 1957, 53-198; Id., Iscrizioni storiche ellenistiche, I. Attica, Peloponneso, Beozia (Biblioteca di studi superiori 53), Firenze 1967; II. Grecia centrale e settentrionale (Biblioteca di studi superiori 62), Firenze 1976. 2 Id., Tra epigrafia e storia. Scritti scelti e annotati, Roma 1990. 3 Id., Inscriptiones Graecae urbis Romae, I-IV (Studi pubblicati dall Istituto Italiano per la Storia Antica 17, 22.1-2, 28, 47), Roma 1968-1990, with bibliography of his works in vol. IV, 11-15. 4 See the indication of C. Ferone, Sull iscrizione napoletana della fratria degli Artemisi (A.E. 1913, 134), MGR 13, 1988, 167-180, esp. 167. 5 D. Mallardo, Nuova epigrafe greco-latina della fratria napoletana degli Artemisi, «Memorie della Reale Accademia di Archeologia, Lettere e Belle Arti. Napoli» 2.2, 1913, 149-175. «mediterraneo antico», xvi, 1, 2013, 203-222

204 ALAIN BRESSON a large ancient necropolis. It has been assumed that the place of discovery was not the original location of the inscription, which would have been somewhere in the town of Naples, where the phratry would have its seat and buildings. 6 But any debate on the original location of the inscription should take into account the content of the text, reexamined in this paper. 7 The inscription was soon republished with a better text by A. Maiuri in the Studi Romani, also the same year 1913. 8 After Mallardo and Maiuri, the inscription has caught the attention of many other scholars. The inscription has been more recently republished by E. Miranda, as number 44 of the first volume of her Iscrizioni di Napoli, published in 1990. 9 This is one of the jewels of Neapolitan epigraphy. The inscription was carefully and beautifully engraved on a broad marble plaque (H. 0.75 m; B. 2.22 m; T. 0.03 m), in three columns. The first two columns are in Greek, the third one in Latin. The text preserves a late second century CE decree of the Neapolitan phratry of the Artemisioi in honor of its benefactor Lucius Munatius Hilarianus, followed by a letter of the latter, first in Greek, then in Latin. The argument of this paper is that in order to make sense of this document and to solve the difficulties that still have resisted investigation, one must fully admit that at least in the second century CE the Neapolitan phratries were managed like the contemporary collegia. 10 In itself, this is certainly not a new discovery. As early as 1913, both Mallardo and Maiuri had stressed the link between phratries and collegia. 11 Ever since, most commentators have made the same observation. But the full consequences of this parallel have yet to be drawn. In his description of the institutions of Naples in book V 4, 7, Strabo stressed that, despite inevitable Campanian and Roman influence, a clear Greek identity of Naples was maintained: πλεῖστα δ ἴχνη τῆ ἑλληνικῆ ἀγωγῆ ἐνταῦθα σώζεται, γυµνάσια τε καὶ ἐφηβεῖα καὶ φρατρίαι καὶ ὀνόµατα ἑλληνικά, καίπερ ὄντων Ῥωµαίων. A large number of traces of the Greek culture are preserved in this city, viz. gymnasiums, epheby, phratries as well as Greek names, 6 F. Pezzella, Atella e gli Atellani nella documentazione epigrafica antica e medievale, Napoli 2002, 124-127, for an original location on the site of the current church Santa Maria Maggiore alla Pietrasanta, i.e. within the former town of Neapolis, assuming that the inscription was transported from that place to be reused as a lid of sarcophagus. But see M. Niccolai, Élites e societa civili ed ecclesiastiche nella Napoli tardoantica da Diocleziano alla caduta della Pars Occidentis (Dottorato di ricerca in Storia, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II ), Napoli 2010, 9-10, for a criticism of this view on the original location. 7 For this caveat, see below, conclusion. 8 A. Maiuri, La nuova iscrizione della fratria Napoletana degli Artemisi, «Studi Romani: rivista di archeologia e storia» 1, 1913, 21-36. 9 E. Miranda, Iscrizioni greche d Italia. Napoli, I, Napoli 1990, nr. 44. A full text with English translation is to be found in Appendix, text no. 1. 10 For a general presentation of Roman collegia, see conveniently F. Diosono, Collegia. Le associazioni professionali nel mondo romano, Roma 2007, esp. 68-99 for their management and activity, and the other detailed references quoted below, passim. 11 See however already below n. 19 on some limitations of Maiuri s analysis in this regard.

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 205 although they are Romans. 12 There is no doubt that phratries of Naples helped at maintaining the Greek identity of the town. Besides, Augustus directly supported the continued existence of a Greek-speaking community and of Greek traditions at Naples. 13 Two centuries after Strabo, around 200 CE, his statement may seem to be still fully valid. Many inscriptions of Naples were still in Greek (and not a corrupt one), which is the clear indication that this language was still commonly spoken in the city. In parallel, Strabo stressed that Neapolitans were also Romans. Indeed, although it is written in Greek, and preserves many typical Greek cultural features, the decree of the Artemisioi also finds excellent parallels in the contemporary decrees of the Roman collegia. The decree of the Artemisioi is dated to the consulship of Septimius Severus and Clodius Albinus (ll. 1-3), that is to say to 194 CE, on January 26 th. It mentions the dēmarchos or chief magistrate of Naples. 14 Then (ll. 4-6) we observe a wording that corresponds exactly to that found in the decrees of collegia and typically Roman. Per se, this is again not surprising, for this is what can be found also in the decrees of the city of Neapolis in the imperial period. But that this was not originally the case, even after the Roman conquest of 326 BCE (Liv. VIII 22-26), is proved by a decree of Naples of 242 BCE that has the usual Greek formula: τυχῆι ἀγαθῆι ἔδοξε τοῖ ἄρχουσι καὶ τῆ[ι]» συνκλήτωι καὶ τῶι δήµωι κτλ. 15 Later, however, the decrees of Neapolis have the usual form of the Roman decrees. 16 This is the common influence of the form of the Roman Senatus consultum, which appears in the Greek versions of these documents as early as the Hellenistic period, as is proved for instance, among many examples, by the famous S.C. for Thisbe of 170 BCE (RDGE 2; Syll. 3 646), or by the bilingual S.C. (found in Rome) in honor of three Greek shipcaptains of 78 BCE (RDGE 22; Moretti, IGUR I, 1). Thus it is no surprise to observe 12 See also Varro (ling. lat. V 15, 85), who in the first century BCE defined the phratry as «a subdivision of the people, as still today at Neapolis» (fratria est Graecum vocabulum partis hominum, ut Neapoli etiam nunc). The literary and epigraphic sources (to date) relating to ancient Neapolis were conveniently gathered by G. Buchner - D. Morelli - G. Nenci, Fonti per la storia di Napoli antica, PP 7, 1952, 370-419. 13 On the efforts of Augustus to maintain the Greek-speaking element in Campania, see G.W. Bowersock, Infant gods and heroes in Late Antiquity: Dionysos first bath, in R. Schlesier (Ed.), A Different God? Dionysos and Ancient Polytheism, Berlin 2011, 3-12, esp. 6. 14 Strabo V 4, 7 already mentioned these magistrates. For the epigraphic mentions of dēmarchoi, see INapoli I 3, l. 2; 30, l. 2; 34, l. 2; 36, l. 1; 40. l. 1; 44, l. 2; 47, l. 2; 54, l. 2 (restored); 55, l. 2; 84, l. 2-3 and CIL X 1492. Among other local magistracies in Italy, Emperor Hadrian was demarchus at Neapolis (HA, Hadr. 19, 1; see M. Boatwright, Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire, Princeton 2003, 60). 15 L. Dubois, Inscriptions grecques dialectales de Grande Grèce, I. Colonies eubéennes. Colonies ioniennes. Emporia, Genève 1995, no. 28 = IG XII 4, 221, ll. 23-24. The text records the acknowledgment of the asylia of the sanctuary of Asklepios at Kos. The preamble of the Neapolitan decree was not engraved by the Koans, but the phrasing in the body of the document makes it clear that the Roman form of the Roman S.C. was not yet in use. The influence is however not one way: the word σύγκλητο, l. 8, used in the decree to designate the council of the city is found also in a series of cities of Sicily and in Malta and this is how the word came to designate the Roman senate in Greek: see Dubois, ibid., 80, with full references. 16 See the decrees INapoli I, 81-84, of the second half of the first century CE.

206 ALAIN BRESSON that the form of the preamble of the decree of the Artemisioi is that of those of the city of Naples, which also reflects the model of the Roman S.C. and that of the decrees in Latin of the Roman collegia. Let us consider for instance the decree of the collegium of the dendrophori CIL X, 1786. 17 The parallel is all the more noticeable as this decree originates from Puteoli, the closest neighbor of Naples, and as it is dated to 196 CE, only two years after the decree of the Artemisioi. It can be observed the strict parallel between γραφοµένων παρῆσαν (Artemisioi, ll. 4-5) and scribundo adfuerunt (Dendrophori, l. 5); that between περὶ τούτου τοῦ πράγµατο οὕτω ἔδοξεν (A. l. 6) and d(e) e(a) r(e) i(ta) c(ensuerunt) (D. l. 9); the insistence on the unanimity of the members, εἰσηγουµένων <τ>ὴν γνώµην ἁπάντων φρητόρων (A. ll. 5-6) and placere uniuersis honestissimo corpori dendrophororum (D. ll. 11-12). This is certainly not surprising, but reveals the perfect adaptation of the institutions of the phratries to the new Roman environment. But the parallel between phratries and collegia is not only a formal one. The decree of the Artemisioi records the lavish benefactions of L. Munatius Hilarianus, who perhaps (this was the view of Maiuri) belonged to a rich family of freedmen of Naples. 18 Observing the poor condition of the phratry building, Hilarianus decided to embellish it with the most beautiful and the rarest colored marbles, λίθοι ποικίλοι τοῖ ἀρίστοι καὶ σπανιωτάτοι (l. 10), at a high cost for him. All the same (l. 11), he decided to have the ceiling of the house (oikos) of the phratry of gold, which means of course gilded. He also built (ll. 13-14) a new dining hall (hestiate\rion) more stately than the others, presumably than that of the other phratries, and finally (l. 14) a temple to Artemis, the eponym goddess of the Artemisioi. The total of the expense must have been impressive and this why the phre\tores decided to repay him (ameibeisthai l. 16) for his benefactions (ll. 16-24). This consisted first in wishes and prayers, but also in bestowing him the title of closest friend, patron and father of all the members of the phratry, πάντων οἰκειότατον καὶ προστάτην καὶ πα<τέ>ρα (l. 18). Needless to say, the image of the rich benefactor who gives money to an association and is rewarded by special honors is a wellknown phenomenon in the Greek world since at least the Hellenistic period. As for the Roman collegia, they did their best to obtain the protection of a patronus who frequently was also their benefactor. 19 Then comes the decision to dedicate to him 17 Text and translation infra Appendix, text no. 2. 18 Basing his view on the funerary inscription Eph. Epigr. 8, 344 D(is) M(anibus) C(aio) Insteio Maximo uixit ann(os) XX mens(es) VIIII Munatius Hilari anus fratri mer(enti), Maiuri (Nuova iscrizione, cit., 26-27) argued that the Munatius Hilarianus of the decree of the Artemisioi was the dedicator of this funerary inscription, also found in Naples. On this interpretation and its difficulties (the brother has not the same gentilicium, which supposes adoptions in two different families) see Miranda, INapoli I, p. 68. 19 G. Clemente, Il patronato nei collegia dell impero romano, SCO 21, 1972, 142-229; J. Patterson, Patronage, collegia and burial in Imperial Rome, in S. Bassett (Ed.), Death in towns: urban responses to the dying

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 207 and to his late son four statues, two for each of them, and also apparently four images, which seem to be imagines clipeatae, bronze images. 20 Finally (col. I, l. 23, and col. II, l. 1), he receives the mysterious homage of fifty chōrai and (apparently) of something even more puzzling at the end of the same line. The conclusion and the motivation of these honors (col. II, ll. 2-4) are no less mysterious and have been also the object of many comments. The rest of the document consists of a letter of Hilarianus himself to the members of the phratry, both in Greek and in Latin, the latter being probably the language in which the letter had been originally been written. 21 Hilarianus expresses his grateful feelings and wants to moderate the expense of the phratry: two statues will suffice, one of himself and one of his son, and possibly one painted portrait, something less costly than the imago clipeata. He accepts only fifteen cho\rai instead of the fifty that were offered to him. 22 The tone of the address and the fact that Hilarianus wants to raise the expectations of the phrētores for further benefactions leave no doubt that he was now the big man of the phratry of the Artemisioi. But what was the real content of the last benefactions of the Artemisioi? How is it possible to make sense of this enigmatic sentence: (col. I, l. 23) προσφέρειν δὲ αὐτῶι καὶ πεντήκοντα (col. II, l. 1) χώρα ὁλοκλήρου καὶ κεχαλκολογηκότων ἐν τῇ φρατρίᾳ προῖκα? For a century, this question has aroused the perplexity of several generations of scholars. The first editor, D. Mallardo, thought that the word chōrai alluded to fields, to land, and, with some modifications, this was also the explanation of A. Maiuri, who proposed a detailed analysis of these lines. 23 For him, the text was corrupt and we lacked several words, which made the passage hardly meaningful. 24 Nevertheless, he interpreted is as follows: «Che il termine greco χώρα equivalga nel nostro caso ad una determinata area di terreno e quindi ad una and the dead, 100-1600, Leicester-New York 1992, 15-27. Curiously, despite the obvious parallel between the acknowledgment of Hilarianus as προστάτη καὶ πατήρ of the phratry and the patronus of a collegium, Maiuri (Nuova iscrizione, cit., 31-32) denied the existence of this link as precisely Hilarianus was only acknowledged the title of π. καὶ π. This allowed him to conclude that, on this point, the phratry had remained totally immune from the model of the collegia, which is certainly not the most obvious conclusion that can be drawn. 20 On the dedications, see in detail D. Fishwick, L. Munatius Hilarianus and the Inscription of the Artemisii, ZPE 79, 1989, 175-183. 21 Maiuri, Nuova iscrizione, cit., 25-26; M. Leiwo, Neapolitana. A Study of Population and Language in Graeco-Roman Naples (Commentationes Humanarum Litterarum 102), Helsinki 1994, 155. 22 On these cho\rai, see below. By mistake, the Greek version of the letter says that Hilarianus will not accept forty cho\rai (τεσσεράκοντα, col. II, l. 13), when the Latin version, certainly the original, has the correct number of fifty (quinquaginta, col. III, l. 9-10). 23 Maiuri, Nuova iscrizione, cit., 29-31. 24 Ibid., 30-31: «Rinuncio a spiegare il καὶ κεχαλκολογηκότων in connessione con quel che precede, perché a me pare evidente che il testo sia qui guasto da una grave lacuna: al κεχαλκολογηκότων dovevano precedere altri incisi congiunti da più καί, e il lapicida, tratto in errore dal ripetersi della congiunzione e dal ripetersi di altre desinenze a genitive in, ha saltato una o più linee del testo originale. Stando infatti a quel che segue ὡ µὴ µόνον ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ πλήθει τῶν νεµόντων εὐξῆσθαι κτλ. [ ]».

208 ALAIN BRESSON vera e propria misura locale applicata a parcelle di terra, risulta dal fatto che la parola è rimasta, nella risposta di Munazio ai fratori, tal quale: chora. Non si tratterebbe adunque di cinquanta agri o agelli diversi, ma di una zona di terreno, unita o suddivisa, dell area complessiva di cinquanta chorae». 25 This was refining on Mallardo and considering that a cho\ra was not strictly speaking a field, indeed a meaning that the word can hardly have, but a unit of measure of land. Others proposed alternative explanations. Thus, in 1913 also, A. De Marchi thought that the fifty cho\rai corresponded to free membership and that the phratry would have been augmented of 50 new members co-opted by Hilarianus. 26 This augmentation would have been alluded to in the next phrase and the allusion to the τῷ πλήθει τῶν νεµόντων (col. II, ll. 3-4). In 1914, in a very good paper that besides cleared several other issues, G. De Sanctis considered that the cho\rai would have been the seats of honor that were usually reserved to the former bronze collectors, the chalkologoi (with reference to the kechalkologe\kotes, col. II, l. 1). 27 De Sanctis was approved by M. Guarducci, but ever since this explanation has not been revived. 28 Indeed, most scholars have adopted Maiuri s explanation, often accepting also a lacuna in the text. In 1913, commenting on the cho\rai holokle\roi, Reinach translated «il recevra en toute propriété 50 chôrai (mesure locale de superficie) sur les terres dont le revenu revient à la phratrie». 29 This was exactly following Maiuri, with the addition of full property to translate holokle\roi. Following A. Maiuri and A. Reinach, E. Lepore has seen in this text the symptom of a crisis of the Italian agriculture at the end of the second century CE. 30 The cho\rai holokle\roi would in fact have been a fallow, uncultivated land and it is because he would have found the gift too burdensome that Hilarianus would have decided to accept only fifteen cho\rai instead of the fifty offered by the phratry. C. Ferone has tried to make sense of the text as it is but despite good remarks he has remained prisoner of the tradition of plots of land for the chōrai. 31 For him the chōrai holoklēroi would have been plots of full extension, if not plots of one jugerum. E. Miranda (in her edition of the Iscrizioni di Napoli), D. Fishwick and M. Leiwo have all discussed the passage in more or less detail and have concluded that it alluded to a gift of tracts of land. 32 25 Ibid., 29-30. 26 A. De Marchi, Sull iscrizione della fratria degli Artemisi di Napoli, «Studi Romani: rivista di archeologia e storia» 1, 1913, 326-328. 27 G. De Sanctis, Note sulla iscrizione degli Artemisi, «Revue épigraphique» 2, 1914, 306-309. 28 M. Guarducci, L istituzione della fratria nella Grecia antica e nelle colonie greche d Italia. II, MAL s. VI, 8.2, Roma 1938, 65-137, esp. 105-115 on the phratries of Naples and 113 for this question. 29 A. Reinach, La phratrie d Artémis à Naples, «Revue épigraphique» 1, 1913, 239-242. 30 E. Lepore, in Storia di Napoli, I. Età classica, alto medioevo, Napoli 1967, 324-325. Lepore also based his argument on the place of discovery of the inscription, in the rural outskirts of Naples. But see above on this point. 31 Ferone, Sull iscrizione napoletana, cit. 32 Miranda, INapoli, pp. 70-72; Fishwick, L. Munatius Hilarianus, cit., 178-179; Leiwo, Neapolitana, cit.,

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 209 The starting point of the new hypothesis that is proposed in this study is that the text is not corrupt and was perfectly intelligible. But to be able to make sense of it, one must give a radically new interpretation of the cho\rai referred to in the text, reconstruct differently the syntax of the whole sentence, and more generally situate the privileges awarded in the broader context of the life of the Roman collegia. The word cho\ra can of course allude to a land or to a territory, like the territory of a city, although for a field one would have normally used γῆ, ἀγρό, χῶρο or χωρίον. In fact, the word cho\ra first commonly refers to a place, a room or a location. This is the first entry of LSG, with four different sub-entries. As noted by D. Fishwick (although he finally prefers to follow Maiuri), the word can for instance refer to specific architectural details. In the contract for the construction of Philon s arsenal at the Piraeus of 347/346 BCE, the word refers to spaces between columns. 33 In an account of construction of the temple of Didyma of 218/217 BCE, it refers to spaces between pilasters. 34 At Tralleis, in a dedication of the imperial period, it refers to spaces between beams in the roof of a portico: Ἀλέξανδρο Νικίου, ὁ καὶ αὐτὸ» ἄρχων τῆ γερουσία, κατασκευ»ακέναι παρ ἑαυτοῦ τὴν µεσ<η>µ»βρινὴν στοᾷ ὀροφὴν χωρῶν» 5 ὀκτὼ σὺν τοῖ λιποῦσιν κυµατίοι κα[ὶ]» τῷ ἐν αὐταῖ κόσµῳ, ἀπογε»γραπφέναι δὲ καὶ τὰ ὀκτὼ δο»κού, πεποιῆσθαι δὲ παρ ἑαυ»τοῦ καὶ ἐνδώ[µη]σιν εἰ τὰ π[ ]» 10 [.c.8..]α µέρη [..c.6...]λη[ ] «Alexandros, the son of Nikias, himself archo\n of the gerousia, who has built at his own expense the southern part of the roof of the portico on a width of eight spaces, with their missing moldings and their internal decoration, who has registered (to his name) the eight beams, and who has also had built at his own expense the enclosing wall for [ ]». 35 It is thus perfectly justified to consider that the word cho\ra, «quite general, can apply to any portion or section of a wall or of a roof». 36 Another interesting context for the use of the word is provided by the Corpus Hermeticum, which was written in the second and third century CE and was thus broadly speaking contemporary with the inscription from Naples: it uses repeatedly the word chōra in its description of the space allocated to souls. When revealing to her son Horus the mysteries of the world, Isis explains to him that while the zone above the moon is reserved for the gods, that between the moon and the earth is 155 and n. 42 (agrees with the view that the chōrai are plots of land, but does not follow Lepore s rendering of holokle\roi by uncultivated ). 33 IG II 2, 1688 (= M.-C. Hellmannn, Choix d inscriptions architecturales grecques, Paris 1999, 46-52, no. 12), l. 71 and 77. 34 IDidyma 26B, l. 56. 35 ITralleis 147A (with references). Fishwick, L. Munatius Hilarianus, cit., 178, thinks that the inscription «refers to a covered portico divided into eight χώραι by interior walls», but clearly it is spaces in the roof that are alluded to (see already A. Wilhelm, Neue Beiträge zur griechischen Inschriftenkunde V [SAWW 214.4], Wien 1932, 3-51, esp. 34-35 = Id., Akademieschriften zur griechischen Inschriftenkunde, I, Lepizig 1974, 276-277, with ref., who however considers that ἀπογεγραπφέναι refers to a new painting of the beams). 36 R. Ginouvès, Dictionnaire méthodique de l architecture grecque et romaine, II, Paris 1992, 64, n. 46.

210 ALAIN BRESSON reserved for the souls (psychai). That zone is divided into four sections (moirai) from the earth to the moon, these sections being themselves divided into a different number of cho\rai: four for the first section, closer to the earth, eight for the second, sixteen for the third and thirty two for the fourth, that which is the closer to the gods. The principle was clear: the higher the section, the purer and unmixed the air. The noblest souls resided in the highest section, and the less noble in the lower ones, in proportion to their dignity, those with the lowest dignity of course residing in the bottom section. In each section, the chōrai are also sorted in a hierarchy defined by a vertical line (gramme\), each soul residing in the cho\ra fitting with its nature. 37 We have here a mathematical division of space. 38 It is clearly in this abstract sense that the word cho\ra is used, i.e. to define the regions where the souls reside. Another contemporary technical sense of the word cho\ra is no less interesting, that of square on a game board. The Greeks liked to play all kinds of games similar to our checkers (draughts) or chess, although the precise rules of these games are still not perfectly clear. 39 One of the most popular of these games in the Classical period was the game of the poleis, i.e. the game of the cities, alluded to twice by contemporary sources. A verse of Cratinus Runaway women (fr. 61 K.A, v. 1-3) refers to it: Πανδιονίδα πόλεω βασιλεῦ / τῆ ἐριβώλακο, οἶσθ ἣν λέγοµεν, / καὶ κύνα καὶ πόλιν, ἣν παίζουσιν «O offspring of Pandion, king of the city with fertile land, you know which one we mean, and the «dog and the city» that they are playing». 40 In the Republic (422e), Plato alludes to the same game in an analysis of the complexity of the city, always divided between rich and poor, and even in many other subcategories: ἑκάστη γὰρ αὐτῶν πόλει εἰσὶ πάµπολλαι, ἀλλ οὐ πόλι, τὸ τῶν παιζόντων, «for each one of them is many cities, but not a city, as we say when we play the game». When commenting on Cratinus verse, the late second century CE grammarian Pollux defines the game in a way which is of key signifi- 37 CH XXV 9, 11-13: τὸ δὲ διάστηµα τοῦτο, ὦ τέκνον Ὧρε, µοιρῶν µέν ἐστι γενικῶν τεσσάρων, ἰδικῶν δὲ χωρῶν ἑξήκοντα. ὧν ἡ µὲν ἀπὸ γῆ ἄνω χωρῶν ἐστι τεσσάρων, ὡ τὴν γῆν κατά τινα λόφου καὶ ἀκρωρεία ἀνατεῖναι καὶ φθάνειν ἄχρι τοσούτου [ ] ἡ δ ἀπὸ ταύτη δευτέρα ἐστὶ χωρῶν ηʹ, ἐν αἷ γίγνονται ἀνέµων κινήσει [ ] 12 ἡ δὲ τρίτη χωρῶν ἐστιν ἑκκαίδεκα, ἀέρο λεπτοῦ καὶ καθαροῦ πλήρη. ἡ δὲ τετάρτη ἐστὶ δύο καὶ τριάκοντα, ἐν αἷ ἐστι λεπτότατο καὶ εἰλικρινέστατο ἀὴρ καὶ διαυγή, διορίζων ἐφ ἑαυτοῦ τοὺ ἄνω οὐρανού, ἐκπύρου ὄντα τὴν φύσιν. 13 καὶ ἔστιν ἡ διάταξι αὕτη κατ εὐθυτενῆ γραµµὴν ἄνωθεν κάτω ἀκολλητὶ τὴν φύσιν, ὡ εἶναι µοίρα γενικὰ µὲν τέσσαρα, διαστηµατικὰ δὲ δώδεκα, χώρα δὲ ἑξήκοντα. ἐν δὲ ταῖ χώραι ταύται, ἑξήκοντα οὔσαι τὸν ἀριθµόν, οἰκοῦσιν αἱ ψυχαί, ἑκάστη πρὸ ἣν ἔχει φύσιν, µιᾶ µὲν καὶ τῆ αὐτῆ συστάσεω οὖσαι, οὐκέτι δὲ τιµῆ. ὅσῳ γὰρ ἑκάστη τῶν χωρῶν ἀπὸ γῆ ὑπερβέβηκε τῆ ἑτέρα, τοσούτῳ καὶ <αἱ> ἐν αὐταῖ ψυχαί ἑτέρα τὴν ἑτέραν καθ ὑπεροχὴν λείπει, ὦ τέκνον, χώρα καὶ ψυχή; see also CH XXVI, 1-2, for similar definitions and use of the word chōra. 38 This is in fact a geometric progression following the relation a n = ar n-1, where a = 1 and r = 2. 39 R.G. Austin, Greek Board Games, «Antiquity» 14, 1940, 257-271. 40 On the plays, see the detailed comment of E. Bakola, Cratinus and the art of comedy, Oxford 2010, 141-158; the translation of fr. 61 is due to Bakola, ibid., 143 (with the addition of and before the dog ). The offspring of Pandion is Theseus and the city referred to is of course Athens. The play was a parody of tragedies in the vein of Aeschylus Suppliants.

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 211 cance for the meaning of the word chōra at that time: ἡ δὲ διὰ πολλῶν ψήφων παιδιὰ πλινθίον ἐστί, χώρα ἐν γραµµαῖ ἔχον διακειµένα καὶ τὸ µὲν πλινθίον καλεῖται πόλι, τῶν δὲ ψήφων ἑκάστη κύων διῃρηµένων δὲ εἰ δύο τῶν ψήφων κατὰ τὰ χρόα, ἡ τέχνη τῆ παιδιᾶ ἐστὶ περιλήψει δύο ψήφων ὁµοχρόων τὴν ἑτερόχρων ἀνελεῖν ὅθεν καὶ Κρατίνῳ πέπαικται [ ] «The game played with many pawns uses a board that has squares (cho\ras) disposed in lines. The board is called city (polis) and each of the pawns is a dog (kyo\n). The pawns are divided in two by colors, the game consists in inclosing a pawn of the other color between two pawns of the same color to seize it». The definition is all the more interesting as Pollux is an exact contemporary of the Naples inscription, as we know that Commodus appointed him in 178 CE to a professorship of rhetoric at the Academy at Athens. 41 The definition of the early second century sophist Zenobius in his collection of proverbs fits perfectly with that of Pollux and justifies the change of name: Πόλει παίζειν: µέµνηται ταύτη Κρατῖνο ἐν Δραπέτισιν ἡ δὲ πόλι εἶδό ἐστι παιδιᾶ πεττευτικῆ. Καὶ δοκεῖ µετενηνέχθαι ἀπὸ τῶν ταῖ ψήφοι παιζόντων, ταῖ λεγοµέναι νῦν χώραι, τότε δὲ πόλεσιν. «To play cities (poleis): Cratinus refers to it in his Runaway Women. This city is a type of pawn game. And it appears that the name has been changed by those who play this pawn game in what we now call squares (cho\rai), but which at the time was called cities (poleis)». 42 The conclusion is clear: at least in the second century CE, it had become common to designate by the word chōra the square of a game board. Thus both for the authors or readers of the Corpus Hermeticum and for the players of the game boards the word chōrai corresponded to divisions of space, squares if we use the translation appropriate to the game board, or spaces, cells, regions if we prefer a more neutral translation, which were commonly regrouped by rows. 43 But what was the reality behind the chōrai the Naples inscription alluded 41 G. Zecchini, Polluce e la politica culturale di Commodo, in C. Bearzot - F. Landucci - G. Zecchini (a cura di), L Onomasticon di Giulio Polluce. Tra lessicografia e antiquaria (Contributi di storia antica 5), Milano 2007, 17-26. 42 Together, Pollux and Zenobius allow to make sense of Plato, as the term city (polis) could apply both to the board and to the individual squares, just as it was possible to say that one played city (polis), in Pollux version, or cities (poleis) in Hesychius (see below for Hesychius). Plato played on this ambiguity, stressing that just as on a game board there could be many cities (squares) in one (the board), though none of the squares could be confused with the board (ἑκάστη γὰρ αὐτῶν πόλει εἰσὶ πάµπολλαι). Hesychius definition was obviously copied from Zenobius: πόλει παίζειν παροιµιῶδε ( proverbial ). καὶ δοκεῖ µετενηνε χθαι ἀπὸ τῶν ταῖ ψήφοι παιζόντων ταῖ λεγοµέναι νῦν µὲν χώραι, τότε δὲ πόλεσι. See also Photius definition (p. 439), again from the same source: Πόλει παίζειν: τὰ νῦν χωρὰ καλουµένα ἐν ταῖ ζʹ ψήφοι. «To play cities : now called squares, in sixty pawns». 43 The English square (French case, Italian casella, German Feld ) is ambiguous in the sense that it seems to necessarily refer to a geometric square. Indeed on a board, a square can have this rectangular shape, and we know it could have it on ancient game boards. But on ancient game boards the shape of the position could also sometimes be circular: see R.C. Bell, Notes on Pavement Games of Greece and Rome, in I. Finkel (Ed.), Ancient Board Games in Perspective, London 2007, 98-99; C.M Roue-

212 ALAIN BRESSON Fig. 1. Rome, Via Appia. Second columbarium of Vigna Codini, west and north sides. Courtesy of American Academy in Rome. Photographic Archive, Parker 1178. to? The phratry offered to give Hilarianus fifty cho\rai, from which it may be legitimately supposed that the phratry had many more in reserve. As indeed they were many, the cho\rai might well also have been regrouped in rows. Now if the decree had been issued by a collegium and not by a phratry, what could this collegium have possessed and managed that might correspond to this description? From very many documents, we know the intimate link between the collegia and the columbaria, as obviously one of the main functions of the collegia was precisely to provide a tomb to their members. This has been well proved again recently by a fundamental essay of J. Bodel. 44 The logical answer to the enigma is thus to admit that the cho\rai of the Artemisioi were in fact the niches of a columbarium, like those of the famous Vigna Codini ensemble in Rome, which regrouped several hundred of cells ordered by rows. 45 Columbarium is here used in the modern sense of the word, that of wall or construction pierced by a series of niches. But this sense dates back only to the eighteenth century. The Roman inscriptions used the word columbarium in the sense of a niche in the wall, each niche having itself the capacity to be pierced of several secondary niches, which were properly designated as ollae, or slots to place the funerary urn. 46 This is why our texts associate columbaria with ollae. A good example is the inscription from Rome CIL VI, 7803, where a certain Q. Caecilius Q. l(ibertus) Primus buys ten columbaria and forty ollae (we may thus suppose that there were an average of four ollae per columbarium). Interestingly, several inscriptions from collegia make mention of transactions involving large numbers of columbaria and ollae, ché, Late Roman and Byzantine game boards at Aphrodisias, ibid., 100-105; R.C. Bell - C.M. Roueché, Graeco-Roman pavement signs and game boards: a British Museum working typology, ibid., 106-109. It is worth noting that in ancient Greek mathematics, the technical word for rectangle was χωρίον (χ. τετράγωνον for a square) thus a word close to χώρα, but different. 44 J. Bodel, From columbaria to catacombs: collective burial in pagan and christian Rome, in L. Brink - D Green (Eds.), with an introduction by R. Saller, Commemorating the dead: texts and artifacts in context, Berlin-New York 2008, 177-242. 45 On the aspect of these columbaria, see fig. 1 (Rome, Vigna Codini) and 2 (Alexandria, Gabbari necropolis); see also the illustrations in Diosono, Collegia, cit., 67, fig. 69 (Vigna Codini, partial view only) and Bodel, From columbaria, cit., 197, fig. 6.1 (household of Livia beside the Via Appia); 198, fig. 6.2 (columbarium of C. Scribonius Menophilus on the Janiculum). The Greek word ἐνσόριον applies to the space for a sarcophagus (I. Kubińska, Les monuments funéraires dans les inscriptions grecques de l Asie Mineure, Varsovie 1968, 103-107), not properly to a columbarium. 46 See the detailed discussion in Bodel, From columbaria, cit., 195-201.

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 213 often in multiples of ten, and up to one hundred, which directly reminds us of the negotiation of the Naples inscription. 47 The question is thus open to determine what actually were the chōrai of the Naples inscription: were they columbaria or ollae? The reduction in number from fifty to fifteen, which is quite in the range of the number of columbaria bought by Q. Caecilius Primus (who bought ten) and the visual comparison of delimited spaces or even of squares like for the game boards make it certain that it was in fact columbaria, not ollae, that were at stake there. The fifteen columbaria accepted by Hilarianus might have corresponded to sixty ollae if we use the parallel of the Rome inscription mentioned above (even of course there was no rule in the matter). They were for the use of the members of his familia maybe not at all for Hilarianus himself if he wanted a more luxurious individual tomb. One may wonder why initially the phratry had proposed him fifty columbaria, which would have corresponded up to the remarkably high number of ca. two hundred ollae. One must probably see here Fig. 2. Alexandria, Gabbari necropolis. Tomb 1, from one niche towards others. Courtesy of Centre d Études Alexandrines. Photo St. Compoint, archives CEAlex/CNRS. a sign of toadying on behalf of the phre\tores, seeming to believe that Munatius Hilarianus was immensely rich and that he needed space for two hundred urns. They must have expected that their benefactor would decline the offer and reduce the number of niches, which is exactly what occurred. This is the likeliest explanation. Another one could be that Munatius Hilarianus might indeed have accepted the offer, and then sold the use of the larger part of the niches, as obviously there was a market for columbaria. But this was not worthy of a rich benefactor and protector of the phratry. And indeed this is not what happened. One may also wonder whether this use of the word χώρα was exceptional or whether on the contrary it was perfectly common in the Greek spoken at Naples at this time. The answer to this question can be found in the Latin version of Hilarianus letter. Together, the fact that the original of Hilarianus letter was certainly the Latin version and that in this text the Greek word χώρα was directly transcribed into Latin (chora) proves that the word was perfectly intelligible in either of the two languages. We are typically in a situation of code-switching where speakers have no difficulty at using directly a word or phrase borrowed from another language. The use of the word phretria and phretor in the Latin letter deserves the same observation. If the word χώρα was thus directly intelligible in the two linguistic Neapolitan communities, this supposes also that, at least locally, it was a common term to 47 Bodel, From columbaria, cit., 180, n. 6, with full references.

214 ALAIN BRESSON designate a columbarium. 48 Another good case of code-switching for the use of the word chora in Latin is that of the inscription of Cimiez CIL V, 7870 = ILAlpesMaritimes 157, where the word has the sense of geographical and administrative district: Iovi O(ptimo) M(aximo) ceterisq(ue) diis deabusq(ue) immort(alibus) Tib(erius) Cl(audius) Demetrius dom(o) Nicomed(ia) u(ir) e(gregius) proc(urator) Augg(ustorum) nn(ostrorum) item CC(ducenarius) episcepseos chorae inferioris. In this case, two words are directly borrowed from the Greek. The chora obviously corresponded to a territorial district of the Greek city of Marseilles; 49 and all the same episcepsis must have been also the original designation of the function of local administration of the district in the administrative language of Marseilles. But then why were the cho\rai-niches of the Naples inscription supposed to be holokle\roi, complete? Despite explicit prohibitions and threat of heavy fines, the niches were under constant menace of being reused. 50 Besides, as is well known and for the same reasons, thousands of funerary inscriptions from the Latin West or from the Greek East stipulated that no one should be allowed to reuse an individual or family tomb and that the violators were to be liable to severe punishment, from men or from gods, or from both. Exclusivity in general was characteristic of the regulations relating to columbaria. 51 Again CIL VI, 7803 provides a good example: Q. Caecilius Primus first specifies that the members of his familia will have the right to bury their dead. But he also underscores (ll. 9-11) haec colu(m)baria et ollae alio nomine neminem sequentur. The ever-repeated threats are however a clear illustration that it was difficult, not to say impossible, to prevent tomb reuse. Insisting on the exclusivity of the cho\rai meant that the phratry committed itself not to allow anyone to share them with Hilarianus familia. Now what about the phrase καὶ κεχαλκολογηκότων ἐν τῇ φρατρίᾳ προῖκα, to quote it the way it has usually been put? It has aroused an immense perplexity, although it can easily be explained in the framework of the life of a collegium. But before coming to this point one must reexamine the syntax of the phrase. The difficulty comes from the fact that one has understood that the phratry had offered 48 As defined by J.N. Adams (Bilingualism and the Latin language, Cambridge 2003, 19), code-switching is a «switch from one language into another within one person s utterance or piece of writing». See F. Biville, Situations et documents bilingues dans le monde gréco-romain, in F. Biville - J.-C. Decourt - G. Rougemont (Eds.), Bilinguisme gréco-latin et épigraphie (Collection de la Maison de l Orient et de la Méditerranée 37; série épigraphique et historique 6), Lyon 2008, 35-53, and A. Pelttari, Approaches to the writing of Greek in Late Antique Latin texts, GRBS 51, 2011, 461-482. 49 S. Morabito, Inscriptions latines des Alpes Maritimes, Nice-Montpellier 2010, 40-44 and 264-265, no. 177, considers that the chora inferior would be the territory of Nikaia, the chora superior being that of Massalia (see also F. Bérard, La garnison de Lyon et les officiales du gouverneur de Lyonnaise, in G. Alföldy - B. Dobson - W. Eck [Hrsg.], Kaiser, Heer und Gesellschaft in der römischen Kaiserzeit: Gedenkschrift für Eric Birley, Stuttgart 2000, 277-304, esp. 296, n. 141). Interestingly, the man in charge of the episcepsis of the district originated from the Greek-speaking town of Nikomedia, which might have helped him in the accomplishment of his job. 50 Bodel, From columbaria, cit., 213-214. 51 Bodel, From columbaria, cit., 210-219.

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 215 Hilarianus two gifts, the first one being the cho\rai, the second one an unintelligible gibberish, as if the two καί were at the same syntactic level. 52 The key to make sense of the sentence is to note that the first καί at the beginning of the sentence (προσφέρειν δὲ αὐτῶι καὶ ) must be syntactically distinguished from the second one (καὶ κεχαλκολογηκότων). The first καί introduces a new element in the enumeration of the series of privileges bestowed to Hilarianus. After the initial mention of the honors πρῶτον µὲν τῇ τῆ διαθέσεω καὶ προαιρέ<σε>ω τειµῆι (col. I, l. 17), we have indeed an enumeration of other privileges: ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ τειµὰ αὐτῶι νέµειν (col. I, l. 19), ἀναθεῖναι δὲ καὶ εἰκόνα (col. I, l. 22), and finally προσφέρειν δὲ αὐτῶι καὶ πεντήκοντα χώρα (col. I, l. 23 and col. II, l. 1). The syntax of this last phrase is thus clear and simple: προσφέρειν δὲ αὐτῶι καὶ πεντήκοντα χώρα προῖκα. 53 The adverb προῖκα has its usual meaning for free, which comes as a reinforcement of the verb προσφέρειν, to offer, to make it explicit that not only Hilarianus would have the cho\rai at his disposal but that he would not have to pay for them. 54 Here προσφέρειν προῖκα is the equivalent of διδόναι δωρεάν. 55 The phrase ὁλοκλήρου καὶ κεχαλκολογηκότων ἐν τῇ φρατρίᾳ is only a qualification of χώρα. Despite the syllepsis, the meaning is perfectly clear. Indeed, it would have been a shame for such a benefactor to receive the use of the columbaria, but then to have to pay for them like an ordinary member. We know that ordinary members of a collegium had to pay entry fees and also to pay a monthly contribution, which provided the regularity of the funding necessary to the functioning of the collective tomb. This is explicitly stated in the so-called lex of the collegium of Diana and Antinous at Lanuvium (CIL XIV 2112; ILS 7212) from (at the latest) 136 CE. Its members had to pay 100 sesterces (and an amphora of good wine) as entry fee and 5 asses of monthly contribution (defined as stips menstrua l. 12). 56 Asses were of course bronze coins and it is to bronze (aes) collection 52 Ferone, Sull iscrizione napoletana, cit., 174-180, who, logically, goes so far as to consider προῖκα as a substantive, in the original sense of gift. 53 One should note that both Mallardo and Maiuri had originally seen the correct construction. 54 For προσφέρειν with the sense of present, offer, see LSJ I.3, and possibly also I.5 «convey property by deed of gift or by bequest». 55 As is well known, the reinforcement is necessary: for if διδόναι alone may have the sense of to give, very frequently it means only to transfer, or to pay, etc. Thus, pace Ferone (Sull iscrizione napoletana, cit., 175) there is no tautology in the reinforcement by προῖκα. Of course the adverb δωρεάν does not necessarily follow the verb it modifies but may come after the object, sometimes very far from the verb (ex gr. in the Delphic manumission FD III 3, 364, ll. 2-4: ἀπέ[δοτο Πατροφίλα - - - - - ]» Μακέτα τῶι Ἀπόλλωνι τῶι Πυθίωι ἐπ ἐλευ[θερίᾳ κοράσιον ᾇ ὄνοµα]» Δαµοστράταν δωρεάν). 56 See also now in parallel the inscription from Ostia CIL XIV, 454 with the publication of a new fragment (Inv. 8414) and detailed commentary by N. Laubry - F. Zevi, Une inscription d Ostie et la législation impériale sur les collèges, in M. Silvestrini (Ed.), Le tribù romane, Atti della XVI e Rencontre sur l épigraphie, Bari 8-10 ottobre 2009, Bari 2010, 457-467, completed thanks to a new text, the fragment Inv. 6020, published and commented by N. Laubry - F. Zevi, Inscriptions d Ostie et phénomène associatif dans l empire romain: nouveaux documents et nouvelles considerations, ArchClass 2012, in press, with new and detailed parallels; see especially the mention of the stips menstrua in Inv. 6020, a l. 7, which allows the

216 ALAIN BRESSON that the Roman collegia legislation referred to. 57 We know also from a decree of the phratry of the Aristaioi that the Neapolitan phratries had magistrates bearing the name of chalkologoi, bronze collectors, who were obviously the treasurers of the association of the Aristaioi. 58 The genitive κεχαλκολογηκότων could be masculine or neuter, but it is impossible to make sense of a neuter in the context. It is thus certain that the decree refers to kechalkologe\kotes, viz. former chalkologoi. Again, we know that the former magistrates of a collegium, the honorati or whatever their name was, had commonly a privilege of immunitas, especially of membership fee. 59 This was often only an honorary privilege. The exact meaning of the second definition alludes obviously to a certain class of type of columbaria, not the simple ones, those of the ordinary members of the phratry, but of the type of the honorati who, as was known to everyone in the phratry, had the privilege not to pay their monthly fees normally due to the collegium. This might (possibly) also imply that there was a certain sector of the columbarium that was devoted to the niches of the former bronze collectors, these columbaria being perhaps also signaled by a special decoration. As the context was clear to everyone in the phratry the decree did not bother to give these details. The precision ἐν τῇ φρατρίᾳ was routinely added but it was also a necessary reminder that the privilege did not apply to the former chalkologoi of any phratry, but only to those of the phratry of the Artemisioi. 60 restoration of the same formula in CIL XIV, 454 + Inv. 8414. On the legislation on the stips menstrua, see Marcian, Inst. 3 (Dig. 47, 22, 1 pr.) and the detailed comment provided by Laubry and Zevi in their second paper. 57 The new fragment of Ostia Inv. 6020, a l. 7, mentioned above (n. 56) reads [- - -]ris conf[- - -]+ qu[- - -]. With good right Laubry and Zevi (Inscriptions d Ostie, cit.) propose to restore ae]ris conf[erendi causa e]x qu[o, which allows them to restore in CIL XIV, 454 + Inv. 8414, ll. 11-13: p]lus quam semel sin [gulis mensibus conueniant aeris conferendi causa] ex quo de functi (!) [sepeliantur], the same restoration having to be made also in the Lanuvium S.C. This provides the perfect parallel with the Neapolitan chalkologoi (see below), viz. those of the Artemisioi, but also those of the Aristaioi of the early empire. A logical conclusion is to imply that the chalkologoi of the Aristaioi also already collected funerary contributions from their members. 58 INapoli I, 43, see infra Appendix text no. 3, ll. 3, 8, 12, 22 and 24-25 on the chalkologoi of the Aristaioi. The chalkologoi were the equivalent of the quaestores of a collegium, just like the phrontistēs was the equivalent of the curator of a collegium. On quaestores and curatores, see J.-J. Aubert, La gestion des collegia: aspects juridiques, économiques et sociaux, CCG 10, 1999, 49-69, esp. 64-65. The fees were collected in bronze money and this perfectly justified the definition of chalkologoi. 59 For a definition of the honorati, see H.L. Royden, The magistrates of the Roman professional collegia in Italy from the first to the third Century A.D., Pisa 1988, 224-228. For their role and their privileges, N. Tran, Les membres des associations romaines: le rang social des collegiati en Italie et en Gaule sous le Haut- Empire, Rome 2006, 141-182. 60 There existed a clear conscience that the phratries acted in some way as a collective body. The decree of the phratry of the Aristaioi (infra Appendix, text no. 3, ll. 1-12) specifies that the warrant of a loan must be an allophrētõr, i.e. the member of another phratry. This collaboration between phratries made it all the more necessary to stress that individual phratries had however to maintain their own specificity of organization and membership.

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 217 To sum up, the logic of the decree of the phratry of the Neapolitan Artemisioi finds its best explanation if the phratry is envisaged as a collegium. The preamble of the decree strictly parallels that of the contemporary collegia. The phratry had de facto a patronus, as was so frequent for the collegia, and its magistrates also find the closest parallels in those of the collegia. Among the privileges received by Hilarianus figured the offering of fifty cho\rai, complete, viz. in full ownership or use by Hilarianus and members of his familia as well as according to rules for usage he would himself define, and «of those who have exercised the charge of bronze collector in the phratry», viz. belonging to a special category of distinguished former financial magistrates in the phratry. These cho\rai were columbaria, niches, which proves that again like a collegium the phratry of the Artemisioi owned and managed a large collective tomb of the columbarium type. 61 It is hard to determine whether or not the seat of the phratry was distinct from the location of the columbarium. Anyway the columbarium was certainly located beyond the walls of the city, and this is where the inscription might have been erected. If there still was a large Greek-speaking population at Naples, the Romanization of the town at the end of the second century CE was much advanced. As observed at the beginning of this paper, Strabo considered that the presence of phratries was a feature of Greek culture in the city in the first years of the Principate. The reality of the life and institutions of a Neapolitan phratry two centuries later (a little before 200 CE) forces us to draw different conclusions, at least for that period: behind the façade of a traditional Greek phratry, the Artemisioi were organized along the same lines as those of a contemporary traditionally defined Roman collegium. This raises among others the question of the nature of phratry membership and organization in that period, if not even at a much earlier date, already in the time of Strabo. 62 Hellenistic koina had obviously among their main roles to take in charge the funerals of their members. 63 Organization of funerals appears ever more once again as being one of the principal functions of the Roman collegia. 64 It seems that the Neapolitan phratries were in a position to easily combine two traditions, that of the Greek koina and that of the Roman collegia, that had their own specificities but were in fact more similar to each another than has been often suspected. University of Chicago abresson@uchicago.edu 61 Interestingly, Maiuri (Nuova iscrizione, cit., 29, n. 4) had rejected without justification the hypothesis that the cho\rai might have a funerary connection: «È da escludere che χώρα abbia qui il significato con cui si ritrova di frequente nella tarda epigrafia sepolcrale di loculo di deposizione del morto». Besides, it is difficult to see what he was thinking of in his allusion to the frequent use of the term in that meaning in late funerary epigraphy: at least the present writer was not able to find inscriptions that could vindicate Maiuri s view. 62 See supra, n. 57 for the role of the chalkologoi of the Aristaioi. 63 See briefly A. Bresson, Recueil des inscriptions de la Pérée rhodienne, Besançon-Paris 1991, 86-87, no. 57. 64 See Laubry - Zevi, Inscriptions d Ostie, cit.

218 ALAIN BRESSON Appendix No. 1 Miranda, INapoli I, 44. Decree of the phratry of the Artemisioi (Neapolis, 194 CE). col. I ἐπὶ > [ὑ]π>ά>τ>ω> ν> Αὐτοκράτορο Καίσ(αρο ) Λ(ουκίου) Σεπτιµίου Σεουήρου Π[ερ]τένακο Σεβ(αστοῦ) τὸ βʹ [[καὶ Δ(εκίµου) Κλωδίου Σεπτιµίου]] [[Ἀλβίνου Καίσ(αρο )]], δηµαρχοῦντο Μ(άρκου) Αὐρηλίου Ἀπολαύστου ν(εωτέρου), πρ(ὸ) ζʹ καλ(ανδῶν) Ἰανου[α]ρίων, γραφοµένων παρῆσαν Καίλ(ιο ) Ἀσιατικό, 5 Ἰούλ(ιο ) Αὐρηλιανό Ἰούλ(ιο ) Καιλιανό, εἰσηγουµένων <τ>ὴν γνώµην ἁπάντων φρητόρων περὶ τούτου τοῦ πράγµατο οὕτω ἔδοξεν ἐπειδὴ{ι} Μουνάτι[ο] Ἱλαριανὸ πολείτου δικαίου καὶ φιλοπάτριδο γνώµηι καὶ διαθέσει χρώµενο τὴν φρατρίαν ὁρῶν τὴν ἡµετέραν ἀκόσµητον οὖσαν καὶ παλαιὰν φρονήµατι λαµπρῶι καὶ µεγαλοψύχωι χρη- 10 σάµενο λίθοι ποικίλοι τοῖ ἀρίστοι καὶ σπανιωτάτοι πολυτελείᾳ κατασκευῆ ἐκόσµησεν τὸν οἶκον καὶ τὴν ὀροφὴν ἐποίησε χρυσοῦ µηδέν τι δαπάνη χρηµάτων φεισάµενο, µηδὲ τῶν εἰ τοῦτο ἀναλωµάτων, καὶ τοῖ µὲν Ἀρτεµεισίων φράτορσιν ἑστιατήριον ἐποίησε τῶν ἄλλων σεµνότερον, τῇ δὲ Ἀρτέµιδι, ἧ ἐστιν ἐπώνυµο ἡ φρατρία, νεὼν 15 κατεσκεύασεν ἄξιον καὶ τῆ θεοῦ καὶ τῆ κοινῆ εὐσεβεία, δεδόχθαι τοῖ Ἀρτεµεισίων φράτορσιν ἀµείβεσθαι τὴν εὔνοιαν αὐτοῦ τὴν τοσαύτην καὶ τὴν φιλοτειµίαν, πρῶτον µὲν τῇ τῆ διαθέσεω καὶ προαιρέ<σε>ω τειµῆι πάντων οἰκειότατον καὶ προστάτην καὶ πα<τέ>ρα νοµίζοντα καὶ βίον εὐχοµένου αὐτῷ µακρὸν ἐν εὐδαιµονίᾳ, ἔπειτα δὲ καὶ τειµὰ αὐτῶι νέµειν, κατὰ 20 δύναµιν τὴν ἡµετέραν, τὰ προσηκούσα ἀνδριάντων ἀναστάσει τεσσάρων ἐν τῆι φρατρίᾳ, δύο µὲν αὐτοῦ Μουνατίου Ἱλ αριανοῦ τοῦ φιλοπάτριδο, δύο δὲ τοῦ ὑοῦ αὐτοῦ Μαρίου Οὐήρου τοῦ ἥρωο ἀναθεῖναι δὲ καὶ εἰκόνα ἐν τῆι φρατρίᾳ µετὰ ἀσπιδείων χρυσῶν ἀνφοτέρων, προσφέρειν δὲ αὐτῶι καὶ πεντήκοντα col. II χώρα ὁλοκλήρου καὶ κεχαλκολογηκότων ἐν τῇ φρατρίᾳ προῖκα, ὡ µὴ µόνον κεκοσµῆσθαι τὴν φρατρίαν ἡµεῖν πολυτελείᾳ καὶ {καὶ} κάλλει τῆ κατασκευῆ καὶ σεµνότητι ἱροπρεπεῖ, ἀλλὰ καὶ τῷ πλήθει τῶν νεµόντων εὐξῆσθαι τὴν φρατρίαν Μουνατίου Ἱλαριανοῦ τοῦ 5 φιλοπάτριδο τετε<ι>µηµένου ἐπικυροῦντο τὸ ψήφισµα Κανεινίου Ἡρακλείδου τοῦ φροντιστοῦ τῆ φρατρία. Μουνάτιο Ἱλαριανὸ Ἀρτεµεισίων φρήτορσι vacat χαίρειν. τὰ τειµὰ ἃ ἐψηφίσασθέ µοι καὶ τὰ δωρεὰ εἰ ἀµοιβὴν τῆ εὐνοία καὶ τῆ προθυµία τῆ ἐµῆ ἡδέω ἔλαβον, οὐ διὰ τὸ µέγεθο ὧν ἐπεδεί- 10 ξασθε φιλοτειµούµενοι πρὸ ἐµὲ καὶ τὸν υἱὸν τὸν ἐµὸν ἥρωα τὸν ὑµέτερον, ἀλλὰ καὶ δι αὐτὴν τὴν προαίρεσιν τῶν διδόντων ὅτι χρηστοὺ ὑµᾶ καὶ δικαίου ἐπέγνων ἐκ τῶν ἀµοιβῶν. τὰ µὲν οὖν τεσσεράκοντα χώρα ἃ προετείνατέ µοι παραιτοῦµαι, πεντεκαίδεκα χώραι ἐκ τούτων ἀρκούµενο καὶ τῶν εἰκόνων τῶν τεσσάρων καὶ 15 τῶν ἀνδριάντων τῶν τεσσάρων ἐµοὶ µὲν ἱκανὴ{ι} µία γραφὴ{ι} καὶ χαλκοῦ ἀνδριὰ εἷ, ἴσαι δὲ τειµαὶ καὶ τῶι µεθεστηκότι. τὰ γὰρ πολλὰ εἰκόνα καὶ τοὺ πολλοὺ ἀνδριάντα ἐν ταῖ ὑµετέραι ψυχαῖ ἔχοµεν καθιδρυµένου χρὴ δὲ ὑµᾶ, ἄνδρε ἀγαθοὶ καὶ φράτορε ἐµοί, µὴ ταῦτα µόνον ἐν ὀφθαλµοῖ ἔχειν τὴν φρατρίαν καὶ τὸν εἰ ταύτην κόσ-

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 219 20 µον καὶ τὴν πολυτέλειαν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἕτερα ὑµᾶ ἐλπίζειν παρ ἐµοῦ τὸ γὰρ τῆ εὐνοία τῆ ἐµῆ ἀεὶ καὶ µᾶλλον ἐγείρει τὴν προθυµίαν τὴν ἐµὴν εἰ τὴν πρὸ ὑµᾶ τειµὴν καὶ χάριν. col. III L(ucius) Munatius Hilarianus phretoribus Artemisis salutem. honores quos decreuistis mihi, item dona at remunerandum animum meum et pronam uolun- 5 tatem grate accepi, non pro magnitudine eorum quae ostendistis tribuentes mihi et filio meo heroi uestro, set maxime propositi uestri gratia qui decreuistis quod uos et bonos et iustos intellexi ex his quae remuneratis. et quidem quinqua- 10 ginta choras quas mihi obtulistis excuso, quindecim contentus, item de imaginibus quattuor et de statuis quattuor; mihi enim sufficit statua una et una imago, set et in honorem fili mei sufficiet statua una; plures enim imagines et statuas in 15 uestris animis habemus constitutas. oportet autem uos, optimi uiri et conphretores, non solum haec ante oculos habere, phretriam et cultum eius et lautitiam, <sed etiam alia> sperare de me; dispositio enim animi mei magis hortatur uolunta-leiwo 20 tem meam in uestrum honorem et gratiam. ualete. (Greek text) «Under the consuls Imperator Caesar L. Septimius Severus Pertinax Augustus, consul for the second time, and D. Clodius Septimius Albinus Caesar, being demarch M. Aurelius Apolaustos junior, on the 7 th day before the Calends of January; present for the writing (of the decree) Cael. Asiaticus, Iul. Aurelianus, Iul. Caelianus, the proposal being introduced by all the phre\trores, concerning these matters it was so resolved: Whereas Munatius Hilarianus, who behaves constantly with the will and disposition of a righteous and lover-of-his-patris citizen, as he saw our phratry building unadorned and old, conceived a munificent and generous design and adorned the house (of the phratry) with the most beautiful and the rarest colored marbles, at a high cost for the construction; made the ceiling of gold, sparing neither any disbursement of money, nor any expense in this goal; had built for the Artemisioi phre\tores a dining hall more stately than the others, and to Artemis, of whom our phratry bears the name, built a temple that is worthy of the goddess and of the piety of the community, let it be resolved by the Artemisioi: To repay such a goodwill and love of honor, first in honor of his good disposition and attitude by giving him the title of closest friend, patron and father of all and by wishing him a long life in happiness; then to bestow honors according to our means, viz. the fitting erection of four statues in the phratry-building, two of himself, Munatius Hilarianus, the loverof-his-patris, and two of his son Marius Verus, the hero; to also dedicate images in the phratry-building on gold shields [imagines clipeatae], two for each of them; to also offer him for free fifty chōrai, complete [viz. «for his exclusive use»] and from those of the former bronze-

220 ALAIN BRESSON collectors in the phratry, so that not only our phratry-building will be adorned by the magnificence and beauty of the construction and dignity befitting a sacred place, but that it will be extolled by the large number of those who took part when it came to celebrate Munatius Hilarianus, the lover of his patris; Caninius Herakleides, the curator of the phratry, ratifying the decree». «Munatius Hilarianus to the Artemisioi phre\tores, greetings. The honors that you have voted and the gifts in repayment of my goodwill and zeal I accepted with pleasure, not because of the size (of the honors) that you have displayed to honor me and my son, your hero, but because of the policy itself of the givers, so that from your repayments I recognized you were virtuous and righteous men. As for the forty cho\rai that you offered, I decline, satisfying myself with fifteen of them, and as for the four images and four statues, it suffices me (to receive) one painted portrait and one bronze statue, and the same honors to the one who shares them. For we have many images and many statues consecrated in your hearts. Good fellows and my co-phre\tores, you should have not only these things before your eyes, that is to say the phratry-building and its adornment and high cost, but also you should hope for other things from me; for the state of my goodwill stirs up ever more my zeal toward honor and benefaction in your favor». (Latin text) «L. Munatius Hilarianus to the Artemisii phretores, greetings. The honors that you have decreed for me, as well as the gifts to repay my goodwill and zeal, I accepted with pleasure, not because of the size (of the honors) that you have displayed to honor me and my son, your hero, but above all in thanks for the policy of you who voted this, in that from your repayments I understood you were good and righteous men. As for the forty chorai that you offered, I decline, satisfying myself with fifteen of them, and as for the four images and four statues, it suffices me (to receive) one statue and one image, and for the honor to my son let suffice one statue; for we have many images and many statues consecrated in your hearts. But good fellows and my co-phretores, you should have not only these things before your eyes, the phratry-building and its adornment and cost, but also you should hope for other things from me; the state of my goodwill stirs up ever more my zeal toward honor and benefaction in your favor. Farewell». No. 2 CIL X, 1786 (V. Arangio-Ruiz, Fontes iuris Romani antejustiniani, III, Firenze 1943, 113, no. 40). Decree of the collegium of dendrophori (Puteoli, 196 CE). C. Domitio Dextro II L. Valerio Messalla Thrasia Prisco cos. VI Idus Ianuar(ias) in curia Basilicae Aug(ustae) Annian(ae). scribundo adfuerunt A. Aquili<u>s Proculus, M. Caecilius Publiolus Fabianus, T. Hordeonius Secund(us) Valentinus, T. Caesius Bassianus. quod postulante Cn. Haio Pudente o(ptimo) u(iro) de forma inscriptioni dan da statuae quam dendrophor(i) Octauio Agathae p(atrono) c(ollegii) n(ostri) statue runt Cn. Papirius Sagitta et P. Aelius Eudaemon IIuir(i) rettu lerunt, q(uid) d(e) e(a) r(e) f(ieri) p(laceret), d(e) e(a) r(e) i(ta) c(ensuerunt): placere uniuersis honestissimo corpori dendrophororum in scriptionem quae ad honorem talis uiri p[ertinea]t dare quae decreto [praesenti (?) i]nserta est. «C. Domitius Dextrus II and L. Valerius Messalla Thrasia Priscus being consuls, the 6 th

THE CHO RAI OF MUNATIUS HILARIANUS 221 before the Ides of January [8 th January], in the curia of the basilica Augusta Anniana, present for the writing (of the decree) were A. Aquili<u>s Proculus, M. Caecilius Publiolus Fabianus, T. Hordeonius Secund(us) Valentinus, T. Caesius Bassianus. Given that on the proposal of Cn. Haius Pudens, excellent man, on the disposition to be given to the inscription of the statue that the dendrophori have decided to erect to the patron of our college Octavius Agathas, Cn. Papirius Sagitta and P. Aelius Eudaemon, the duumvirs, have reported that it should done according to what would please the collegium, concerning this matter it was so resolved: It will please to the whole most honorable body of the dendrophori to bestow an inscription that belongs to the honor of such a man, which by present decree has been inserted (on the statue base)». No. 3 IG XIV, 759; Miranda, INapoli I, 43 (see L. Dubois, Inscriptions grecques dialectales de Grande Grèce, 28, with full comment and French translation). Foundation of Valeria Mousa, phratry of the Aristaioi (Neapolis, late 1st c. BCE - early 1st c. CE). Ἀρίστωνο ΤΟΙ [ c.9 ] τὸ ὑ[πὲρ Οὐ]αλερία Μούση τῆ ἑαυτοῦ γυναικό. µὴ ἐξουσίαν δὲ ἐχέτωσαν ὁ φρήταρχο ἢ οἱ χαλκολόγοι ἢ ὁ φροντιστὴ ἢ οἱ διοικηταὶ ἢ ἄλλο τι τῆ φρητρία τῆ Ἀρισταίων τὴν θυσίαν 5 ἢ τὸ δεῖπνον ὑπερτίθεσθαι παρὰ τὰ τεταγµένα ἡµέρα κα[ὶ τ]ὰ χείλια καὶ διακόσια δεινάρια δανειζέσθω µὴ [πλ]ῆο[ν] ἐ [π ὀν]όµατι δεινάρια διακόσια πεντήκοντα καὶ τῇ π[όλ]ει. µὴ ἐξουσίαν ἐχέτω ὁ φρήταρχο ἢ οἱ χαλκολόγοι ἢ ὁ φροντιστὴ ἢ οἱ διοικηταὶ ἢ ἄλλο τι τῆ φρητρία τῆ Ἀρισταίων 10 φρήτορα ὑπὲρ τούτων τῶν ὀνοµάτων λαµβάνειν, οὐ[δὲ] πίστει δοθήσεται ὃν δὲ ἂν ὁ δανειζόµενο διδῷ ἀλλοφρήτορα, ἐν ἀγάρρει εἰσδιδόσθω, καὶ ἐὰν δόξῃ τῇ ἀγάρρει, καθὼ καὶ ὑπὲρ φρητάρχου καὶ χαλκολόγων <δε>δογµάτισται, τότε ἡ οἰκονοµία ὑπὸ τῶν προγεγραµµένων γεινέσθ[ω]. 15 τοὺ δὲ χαλκοῦ οἱ δεδανεισµένοι καταφερέτωσαν τῇ ἑβδόµῃ τοῦ Πανθεῶνο µηνὸ ἱσταµένου εἰ ἄγαρρει[ν] πληθύουσαν, καὶ ἐπιψηφιζέτω ἡ φρητρία <ο>ἷ θέλει δανίζε[ιν] καὶ οὕτω τότε ἄλλη οἰκονοµία γεινέσθω καθ ἕκαστον [ἔ]- το. ἔν τε ταῖ ἡµέραι ταύται ταῖ δυσίν, αἷ θύοντε δ[ει]- 20 πνοῦσιν, Οὐαλερίᾳ Μούσῃ διδόσθω τὰ κατάχ<ρε>α. τὸ δὲ γρ[α]- π[τὸν τ]ὸ τεθὲν ἢ τὸ προσηλω<θ>ὲν ὀφειλέτωσαν ὁ φρήταρχο ἢ οἱ χαλκολόγοι ἢ ὁ φροντιστὴ ἢ οἱ διοικηταὶ µετα[πα]ραδ[ι]- δόναι τοῖ ἀεὶ ὑπὸ τῆ φρητρία καθισταµένοι. ἐὰν δέ τι παρὰ ταῦτα τὰ ὑπεράνω γεγραµµένα ὁ φρήταρχο ἢ οἱ χαλκολ[ό]- 25 γοι ἢ ὁ φροντιστὴ ἢ οἱ διοικηταὶ ἢ οἱ δεδανισµένοι ἢ ἄλλο τι ποιήσῃ, ἀποτεισάτω ἱερὰ τῶν θεῶν τῶν φρητρίων ἀργυ- [ρίου δεινάρια δι]ακόσια [... c.15... κ]αὶ ἡ ἔκπραξί ἐστι [ ] Several lines are missing both at the beginning and end of the text. L. 1: L. Dubois (with parallel) suggests to read Ἀρίστωνο τοι[αῦτα διέθε]το ὑπὲρ κτλ. or τοῖαδε διέθε]το or Ἀρίστωνο ὃ τοῖ[αδε διέθε]το.

222 ALAIN BRESSON «son of Ariston, [ ] in favor of Valeria Mousa, his wife. Let the chief phre\to\r, bronze collectors, curator, administrators or any other in the phratry of the Aristaioi not have the authority to displace the sacrifice and banquet from the days that have been determined as well as let not be loaned the twelve hundred denarii in shares of more than two hundred fifty denarii per borrower, city included. Let the chief phre\to\r, bronze collectors, curator, administrators or any other in the phratry of the Aristaioi not have the authority to take a warrant among themselves; nor will it be loaned on good faith. Let the member of another phtatry whom the borrower offers as warrant be introduced in an assembly of the phratry and if it pleases the assembly of the phratry, just as has been decreed for the chief of the phratry and the bronze collectors let the loan procedure be carried out by the afore-mentioned magistrates. Let the borrowers return the bronze money on the seventh of Pantheon in a plenary assembly of the phratry. Let the phratry put to the vote the names of those to whom it wishes to loan and let the loan procedure take place in this way every year at that time. In these two days during which they sacrifice and banquet, let the due honors be paid to Valeria Mousa. Let the chief phre\to\r, bronze collectors, curator, or administrators have the duty to transfer the written document, be it deposited in the archives or posted, to those who are subsequently appointed by the phratry. If the chief phre\to\r, bronze collectors, curator, administrators, borrowers or any other person contravene any of the above-mentioned dispositions, let him pay a fine of two hundred denarii of silver sacred to the gods of the phratry [ ] and let the execution [ ]». Abstract Strabo (V 4, 7) referred to the phratries of Naples as one of the most typically preserved Greek institutions of this city, this although its citizens were actually Romans. A series of Neapolitan inscriptions, written in Greek (mostly) or both Greek and Latin and emanating from the local phratries, seems to confirm this report. Among these documents, the famous bilingual decree of the phratry of the Artemisioi in honor of Lucius Munatius Hilarianus, of 194 CE, which bestows several privileges to this rich benefactor of the community, enigmatically mentions a gift of cho\rai. It is here demonstrated that these cho\rai cannot be tracts of land (which is the most commonly accepted interpretation) but rather that in fact the word refers to the niches of a columbarium. This and various other features show that Neapolitan phratries, perhaps as early as Strabo s time, had all the characteristics of Roman collegia. Key-words: phratry, collegium, chora, columbarium, Naples