SOURCE: Alexander, Paul J. “Letters and Speeches of the Emperor Hadrian.” Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 49 (1938): 141-77.

[In the following excerpt, Alexander presents Hadrian's major concerns as an emperor based on an examination of his extant official documents and speeches.]

The Emperor Hadrian is generally credited with having been the best of the “Five Good Emperors.” The literary sources at our disposal for his reign, however, are particularly scanty; of the sixty-ninth book of Cassius Dio only an epitome is preserved, and the Emperor's biography by the writers of the Historia Augusta, though much more reliable than those of the later Emperors from Severus on, cannot make up for the lack of a contemporary account of his reign. Thus an examination of his extant letters and speeches may enable us to learn more about the man, the administrator, and the ruler.

The letters and speeches were not collected during antiquity. Not even a group of letters has been as fortunate as those of his predecessor Trajan, which have come down to us with the correspondence of one of his friends and officials, the younger Pliny. A few documents only are given in our literary sources. But since either they can be shown to be spurious,¹ or they cannot be proved to be genuine,² or, at least, since their present form is due to a transposition of the original into the author's own style, according to the rules of ancient historiography,³ these and other documents contained in our literary sources will not be discussed in the present paper.

The genuine letters and fragments which we possess are scattered all through the collections of inscriptions and papyri and through the legal writings and compilations. Several attempts have been made to catalogue them. Lafoscade⁴ listed part of them, but his collection was incomplete even for the time of its publication and is still more so today. A list by Vaglieri⁵ is confined to inscriptions and gives practically all the inscriptions of the period, not only those emanating from the Imperial Chancery. Finally, a list by von Rohden⁶ needs to be completed by more recent evidence. None of these lists has taken into account one of the most important sources, the legal compilations.⁷ This paper will attempt to assemble by no means all, but the more important documents issued by the Imperial Chancery and the speeches made by the Emperor.⁸ A detailed study of the documents mentioned will be impossible; an attempt will be made, however, to bring into relief the leading ideas which inspired the imperial acts of Hadrian.

I

Soon after Hadrian had been proclaimed Emperor, embassies from a number of important cities arrived to congratulate him. The answers of the Emperor to three cities are preserved. In 117/118 a.d. he writes to the archons, senate and people of Astypalaea:

From your ambassador Petronius Herakon and from your enactment I have learned that you were glad at my taking over the paternal rule. I praise you for that. …⁹

In November 117 a.d., a similar letter … :

When I learned from your letter and from your ambassador Claudius Cyrus that you have expressed yourselves as sharing feelings of joy on our behalf, I thought it a proof of your being good men. Farewell.¹⁰

Finally, Delphi had sent a congratulatory embassy, and the Emperor answered in 118 a.d. … by praising it as ancient and noble. … After a gap the inscription continues as follows:

… and not least because you openly showed your zeal by rejoicing at my accession to the rule and by invoking the Pythian God Apollo to bless me. … I confirm your liberty and your autonomy and all the gifts granted to you of old, particularly those granted by the divine Trajan, etc.¹¹

Astypalaea, Pergamon, and Delphi were not the only cities to honor the new ruler; a particularly revealing text is preserved in P. Giss. 3. Shortly after October 117, the consecration of the deceased Emperor Trajan and the accession of his successor were celebrated at Heptakomia, the metropolis of the Egyptian nome Apollonopolites. The papyrus seems to be an official draft for the celebration. Phoebus himself appears on the stage and proclaims in highly poetic language:

Having just mounted aloft with Trajan in my chariot of white horses, I come to you, oh people, I, Phoebus, by no means an unknown god, to proclaim the new ruler Hadrian, whom all things serve on account of his virtue and the genius of his divine father.

The Demos answers:

Let us make merry, let us kindle our hearths in sacrifice, let us surrender our souls to laughter, to the wine of the fountains and the unguents of the gymnasia; for all of which we are indebted to the reverence of our strategos for our lord (viz. Hadrian) and his zeal on our behalf.¹²

This pageant was doubtless officially inspired; the scene which it represents is therefore doubly interesting. It may be added that the particular emphasis on Hadrian's father Trajan possibly pleased the Emperor more than it would seem at a first glance;¹³ rumors that the adoption of Hadrian by his predecessor had never occurred had spread all over the Empire.¹⁴

II

Yet more than kind words and liberal distribution of drinks was demanded of Hadrian at his accession. Four generals of Trajan, dissatisfied with the peaceful methods of their new master, were charged by the Senate with plotting against the Emperor and were put to the sword. The execution of these four consulares,¹⁵ even if carried out without Hadrian's assent or against his will, made him highly unpopular with many people and particularly with the army. Thus we find Hadrian bestowing favors on his troops in a series of documents to be discussed in this section.

In the tense atmosphere created by the alleged plot of the consulares and its consequences, one of Trajan's most trusted generals, C. Julius Quadratus Bassus, had died in Dacia during the spring 118 a.d.¹⁶ Hadrian, wishing to show that he was willing to honor those generals of his predecessor who were loyal towards himself, granted a public funeral of extraordinary solemnity: Bassus' body was carried from Dacia to his native city of Pergamon by the centurio primipilarius Capito and his soldiers; by special order of Hadrian, the cities all along the road sent out their magistrates to accompany the funeral procession, and finally a tomb was erected at the expense of the fiscus.

But the Emperor was not only interested in his generals: he was even more concerned to win the favor of the rank and file. In this connection a letter of Hadrian to Q. Rammius Martialis, prefect of Egypt from 117-119 a.d., is interesting. Soldiers were not allowed to marry until the time of Septimius Severus, and the offspring of their unions was considered illegitimate. Here, Hadrian took an important step which was to pave the way for the reforms of Septimius Severus. In 119 a.d. he writes:

I know, my Rammius, that children who have been recognized by their father during the course of his military service are prevented from access to their father's property; that did not appear harsh since he acted contrary to his military discipline. With great pleasure, however, I myself offer an opportunity of interpreting the somewhat too severe measures of the emperors before me in a more humane way. Though the persons recognized during the military service are not the legitimate heirs of their father, nevertheless I decide that they, too, can demand the bonorum possessio on the basis of that part of the edict where it is granted to the cognati. You will have to make this grant known both to my soldiers and to my veterans, not as if I wished to appear yielding to them, but that they may make use of it in case they do not know it already.¹⁷

We do not know whether this measure was taken with respect only to Egyptian soldiers or whether similar letters were sent out to the rest of the Empire. What interests us more than the mere facts are some obiter dicta. Although he insists on military discipline, the Emperor thinks that the measures taken by his predecessors were too harsh. He prides himself on being more humane; and though he emphasizes that he does not wish to appear yielding in the face of pressure from his troops, we have good reasons to doubt such a statement shortly after the execution of the four consulares.

But things quieted down, and Hadrian's popularity with the troops was soon firmly established. The rest of his letters, as far as they are concerned with the army, assume more or less of a routine character. Among them the military diplomata should be mentioned.¹⁸ These are excerpts from larger documents granting the privileges of honesta missio to soldiers who had completed their service. The formula of Hadrian is the same as that of his predecessor: the recipients are granted Roman citizenship for themselves and their descendants; their previous unions are made matrimonia with all the consequences attached to such by Roman Law; and if they are bachelors, they are free to marry—“but only one at a time” (dumtaxat singuli singulas), as the formula judiciously adds.

If the expectation of well-deserved rewards after the completion of service was a powerful stimulus to the soldiers, the Emperor's constant inspections of the troops, his criticisms, praises, and rewards must have been at least as effective.¹⁹ Extremely illuminating in this connection are several African inscriptions recording speeches made by the Emperor in 128 a.d. while reviewing troops stationed at Lambaesis in Africa.²⁰

To the primipili of a legion he says:

The legate has himself made all possible apologies in your behalf: that one cohort is absent because one is sent in rotation every year for the service of the proconsul; that three years ago you gave up one cohort and four men from each century to help out your comrades of the third legion; that many and distant posts keep you separated; and that recently you have not only twice moved out of your camp, but also constructed new ones. For these reasons I should consider it excusable if the legion had long ceased from practice. But you have neither ceased. …²¹

Then, on July 15, we find him addressing the ala I Pannoniorum:

You have carried out everything in orderly fashion. You covered the entire (?) field with your maneuvers, you threw the spear with no little grace, you used the hastae short and stiff as they were, the majority of you threw the lanceae with equal skill. You mounted your horses nimbly here and swiftly yesterday. If anything had been lacking, I should have missed it; if anything had been conspicuous, I should have pointed it out. In all parts of the performance you have pleased me equally well. Catullinus, the legate, the most honorable man, shows uniform solicitude in all things with which he is charged. … Your prefect seems to look out for you carefully. Take the largess and the road-allowance, you will mount your horses on the Campus Commagenorum.²²

The next speech is made to the equitum VI cohors Commagenorum:

Military practice, to some extent, has its own limits. If anything is added or taken away, the practice becomes either of less value or more difficult. What, indeed, is added to the difficulty, is subtracted from the agreeableness. You have done the most difficult of all difficult things; you have thrown the javelin clad in armour. … I applaud your spirit also. …²³

He then proceeds to praise the quick construction of a winter camp (we are in July) and continues by addressing his speech to one ala:

I approve of his (the legate's) having introduced among you this form of drill which gave the impression of real fighting and so trains you that … I can praise you. Cornelianus, your prefect, satisfied me in the performance of his duties. Your lateral attacks (?) seem unsatisfactory to me. … The horse should break forth from a sheltered position and pursue the enemy cautiously; for if they can neither see where they are going nor keep back their horses whenever they want, they necessarily will be in danger from covered pits.²⁴

And another group is addressed thus:

It is hard for the horsemen of the cohorts to make a good impression even by themselves; still harder not to displease after the maneuver of the alae: the dimensions of the field and the number of the dart-throwers are dissimilar, the attack of the dextrator is repeated, that of the Cantabrian is close packed, the type of horse and the equipment vary with the pay. However, you have made criticism impossible through your ardor and zealous discharge of duty; you have gone further in that you have hurled stones with slings and have assailed the other side with missiles. Throughout you have mounted your horses briskly. The signal care of my legate Catullinus, the most honorable man, becomes evident since such men as you under his command. …²⁵

Such speeches show the competence of the Emperor both in military and psychological matters. Encouraging in their very criticism, they certainly strengthened the bonds between the ruler and his army. They allow us to envisage the speaker. A man who can speak this language is not a mere talker, a literary amateur, whom scholars often depict. It is true that in some of his literary works he used a more rhetorical style; but the Emperor drew a sharp line between literature and administration. The conciseness of his speech even borders on roughness; all he says, for instance, of one of his highest African officers, Cornelianus, is satisfecit.

III

We hear very little about the strictly constitutional problems of the Empire.

A letter of Hadrian of September 125 a.d., dictated at his villa Tiburtina …, runs as follows:

The letter which you sent me recently concerning yourselves was laid before the most illustrious Senate, and the Senate which you requested to give judgment in accordance with the senatusconsulta … and declared. …²⁶

From other (unpublished) fragments, the editor infers that the problem dealt with by the Senate concerned an ambassador and his legationis praemia. However that may be, it is interesting to see that the Emperor turned over to the Senate the decision concerning a municipality in the senatorial province of Achaia. The provincials knew beforehand that such would be the procedure since, in their letter to the Emperor, they had asked the Senate to decide on the basis of its previous consulta.

The respect felt by the Emperor for the Senate²⁷ went still further. An oratio principis mentioned by Ulpian in his first book De Appellationibus and preserved in the Digest²⁸ provided that no appeal from the Senate to the princeps was possible (appellari a senatu ad principem non posse).

Another constitutional problem about which we hear is the question of citizenship. If a Latinus married a girl who possessed Roman citizenship, their son was a Roman citizen according to a novum senatus consultum, quod auctore divo Hadriano factum est.²⁹ If however a Latinus married a peregrina, or a peregrinus a Latina, the child would follow the status of its mother, according to the same senatus consultum.³⁰ Here we find the Senate, inspired by Hadrian, granting Roman citizenship to a group of persons who had not previously had it, namely, to children born of a father with Latin rights and a mother who possessed Roman citizenship. Prior to this senatus consultum, only the child of a Roman father had been a Roman citizen.

Finally, some letters of the Emperor inform us of the methods of cooptation as practised in one of the Roman collegia, the Fratres Arvales. At a meeting of February 7, 120 a.d., a letter of Hadrian, himself a member of this college, was read:

Imp(erator) Caesar Traianus Hadrianus Aug(ustus) fratribus Arvalibus collegis suis salutem. In locum Q. Bitti Proculi collegam nobis mea sententia coopto P. Manlium Carbonem.³¹

The Emperor's sententia was very naturally accepted. As a matter of fact, since the days of Caligula, the elections to certain places in the college, which normally would have been carried out by free cooptation, were conducted ex tabella imperatoris; that is, the sententia of the Emperor, delivered in writing, was simply agreed to.³²

IV

We may assume that problems of legal technique formed one of Hadrian's main concerns. It was during his reign that the praetor's edict received its definite and unalterable form and that a permanent consilium principis was organized to prepare the imperial responsa to questions addressed to the Emperor by the various judicial authorities of his Empire.³³ Despite his interest in legal matters, which we know from literary and legal sources, only a few of Hadrian's own letters concerning the administration of justice have survived. Furthermore, these fragments, collected by lawyers who were more interested in the decisions than in the motives which prompted them, do not afford many general remarks which would be interesting for this study.

Several provincial governors had asked the Emperor for instructions concerning certain points of legal evidence brought before their courts. To Vibius Varus, legate of the province of Cilicia, Hadrian writes:

You can tell better than I how much you can rely on the witnesses, what kind of people and of what rank they are, what their reputation is and which of them seemed to tell a straight story; whether they all retailed the same account devised beforehand or gave likely and extemporaneous answers to your questions.³⁴

He advises another governor to take all the available evidence into account and to evaluate it ex sententia animi tui, since it is impossible to lay down general rules on this problem.³⁵ In another case, he refuses to decide merely on the basis of written testimonia. He suggests that the witnesses themselves be questioned as he is wont to do (nam ipsos interrogare soleo) and refers both parties to the praeses provinciae.³⁶

If the Emperor had, to a certain extent, given stable form to the administration of law by crystallizing the edictum perpetuum, on the other hand he increased the auctoritas of the lawyers by taking some of them into his consilium and by sanctioning their ius respondendi ex auctoritate principis. Their sententiae et opiniones were to be binding on the judge; it was only if the iurisconsulti disagreed that the judge was allowed to follow whichever opinion he preferred.³⁷

These decisions and others of minor importance³⁸ show that though the Emperor kept firm control over the administrative machinery, he did not mean to interfere with the details of administration: whereas the principles of law become fixed by the edictum perpetuum, the iurisconsulti and the officials are left to administer it. They are urged to decide according to their own understanding.

V

A large number of the extant letters of the Emperor deal with the municipalities of the Empire.

The cities of Greece, above all Athens, were especially dear to the imperial Graeculus. In 124/125 a.d. the Emperor, when visiting Athens, granted it a new constitution inspired by the laws of Draco and Solon;³⁹ even the Boulē was reduced from 600 to 500 in order to restore its Cleisthenian form.⁴⁰

Hadrian's sympathy for Athens is well reflected in an extant letter dating from 131/132 a.d.:

You know that I use all excuses to bestow favors both publicly on the city and privately on certain Athenians. I give to your [paides] and [néoi] the gymnasium so that the city may be embellished, and I give you besides … talents. … Farewell.⁴¹

The venerable religious traditions of Delphi made it likewise the object of the Emperor's care. Hadrian's answer to their congratulatory embassy has been mentioned above.⁴²—Sometime between 118 and 125 a.d., probably not long before 125, Hadrian wrote a long letter to Delphi, of which, unfortunately, only fragments are preserved.⁴³ He announces that on his arrival at Delphi he is going to decide whether certain sums should be paid out of the funds of the Pythian Apollo—a question on which the Delphians could not agree with the Thessalians. Furthermore, he intends to settle a dispute centering around the harbour of Cyrrha, which the Aetolians claim from the Delphians, the latter protesting that they had paid the divine Vespasian thirty talents for this territory. Since certain enactments of the Amphictyonic Council seemed to bear on the question, the Emperor ordered Claudius Timocrates, a writer who had collected those of the enactments of the Council which did not agree either with one another or with the general laws,⁴⁴ to send him his material.⁴⁵ Delphi seems to have claimed that the Aetolians had lost their votes, which Augustus took away from them and gave to the Nikopolitans. The Emperor announces that he will decide all these problems justly and by due process of law.

Fortunately, Hadrian's decision on this matter has survived albeit in a very mutilated condition. It is not possible to decipher the passage dealing with the Aetolians, but we can grasp the sense of what was decided in Delphi's struggle with the Thessalians:

What however should be done in accordance with the laws, I have laid before the most illustrious Senate, proposing that the votes by which the Thessalians surpass the others be distributed among the Athenians, Lacedemonians and the other cities, so that the Council may become the common weal of all Hellenes.⁴⁶

One observes in these documents a profound respect for earlier⁴⁷ institutions and strict legal sense; no member of the Amphictyony is supposed to be preponderant over any other so that perfect equality may exist among them. This policy of equality or average was to be the preparation for the “Synedrion of all the Hellenes” established by the Emperor in 132 a.d.⁴⁸

Athens and Delphi were not the only cities who submitted their troubles to the Emperor. In 120 a.d. the Emperor writes … :

Mettius Modestus, the most powerful, did well in sustaining your claims in his decision. But as you have informed me that many have appropriated your property, some retaining the goods of the debtors while denying they are their heirs and others being the actual debtors, I have sent the copy of your resolution to Cornelius Priscus, the most powerful proconsul, that he may, if such be the case, choose a man to decide the dispute and collect all that is due to the Senate

(sc. of Ephesos).⁴⁹

In 125/126 a.d. the governor of Asia, Avidius Quietus, had asked for instructions from the Emperor concerning lands dedicated to the Zeus of Aezanoi. The citizens of Aezanoi, among whom these lands had been distributed by the (Seleucid or Attalid?) Kings, quarrelled among themselves about the size of their respective [kleroi] and the rent which they had to pay for them. The Emperor, as the governor writes to the citizens, has decided this quarrel “combining justice with human kindness”, and the governor, who writes in Greek, appends Hadrian's Latin letter:

If it is not clear how large were the lots called [kleroi] into which the Kings had divided up the territory dedicated to Zeus of Aezanoi, it will be best to keep to the size of the κλη̑ροι in the neighbouring civitates, neither more nor less, as you yourself suggest. And if it was clear which lands were agri cleruchici when Mettius Modestus decided that a vectigal should be paid on them, it is fair that from that time the vectigal should be paid. If it was not clear, the vectigal should be paid from this (the present?) time on. But if they should ask for a delay in paying the total, let it be granted.⁵⁰

“Justice paired with human kindness”—the governor has well defined the imperial policy. He might have added a third point, the golden mean, which we met already in the letter deciding Delphi's conflict with the Thessalians.⁵¹

A similar case was brought before the Emperor at an unknown date.⁵² The cities of Lamia and Hypata in the province of Macedonia had quarrelled about the frontiers of their territory. The optimus maximusque princeps Traianus Hadrianus wrote to the proconsul of Macedonia Q. Gellius Sentius Angarinus to decide these problems. This the latter did after having consulted a surveyor; he proceeded personally to inspect the place and listened to the advocates of both cities.

While all these problems were comparatively easy to solve, an infinitely more serious task faced the Emperor at Alexandria. Here a struggle between the Greek and the Jewish population had been raging ever since the days of Caligula.⁵³ A new outburst of this strife had occurred in 115 a.d. under Trajan and was still going on under his successor. About this conflict we are informed by one of the “Alexandrian Martyr Acts,” the Acts of Paulus and Antoninus.⁵⁴

When Trajan was engaged in his Parthian War, the Jews both within Egypt and outside it, particularly those of Cyrene, had rebelled. This rebellion was suppressed, in 116 a.d., by Q. Marcius Turbo, and both Greeks and Jews were forbidden by the prefect of Egypt, M. Rutilius Lupus, to carry arms. Not long before Trajan's death, however, in August 117 a.d., the Jews of Cyrene under their “King” Lukuas invaded Egypt and were conquered only after a long and desperate resistance. The Alexandrian Greeks began to feel more at their ease and staged a show satirizing the Jewish “King” Lukuas. This satire, very naturally, hurt the feelings of the Jews. It seems that at the same time the Alexandrian Greeks felt dissatisfied with the new Emperor. Sixty intoxicated men began to sing songs in public against him. They were punished together with some slaves; part of them were freed later by a new act of violence. Feeling ran higher still when Hadrian established⁵⁵ the Alexandrian Jews in a quarter of the city, the location of which caused the Greeks to claim that they could be more readily attacked by their old enemies.

This was sufficient to make a hearing before the Emperor necessary; the minutes of the hearing are preserved, though only with considerable literary adaptations, in the papyrus fragments mentioned above. The hearing took place before Hadrian himself prior to February 17, 121 a.d., and it is rather interesting to be informed of the Emperor's view on these events in Alexandria.

He approves the prohibition of the prefect to carry arms: “you had a sufficient number of guardians in the legions,” he says to the Greeks of Alexandria.⁵⁶ He disapproves of the Greeks' provoking the Jews by their satire on Lukuas and of their singing offensive songs against himself.⁵⁷ He tries to reconcile the opponents by advising the Jews to restrict their hatred to the actual evil-doers and not to loathe all the Alexandrian Greeks en bloc. There follows a violent diatribe against slaves in general whose participation in all rioting is notorious.⁵⁸ A bold remark on the part of one of the Greek ambassadors causes him to be arrested and tortured, and he dies soon after from the consequences.—The whole trial shows Hadrian as a rather cautious judge listening to both parties, convinced that neither of them is beyond reproach and mainly interested in restoring peace at Alexandria, the second city of his Empire.

Hadrian's relations with the municipalities can be studied particularly well in a letter which he wrote … in 129 a.d.:

L. Erastos claims that he is a citizen of your city and has made frequent voyages which as far as possible he has turned to the advantage of his native city and has regularly transported the governors of the province. I have already sailed twice with him, first when I was brought from Ephesos to Rhodes, and now when I arrived from Eleusis at your city. He wishes to become a senator. I leave in your hands the examination of his eligibility, and if there is no obstacle and he is judged worthy of the honor, I shall give for his election the customary amount given by the senators. Farewell.⁵⁹

Whether we are dealing here with the ordinary method of election to the Boulē of Ephesos or, as seems more likely, with an extraordinary procedure which would have a parallel in similar occurrences in Bithynia and Pontus,⁶⁰ the wording of the letter is most instructive. The Emperor does not say that he is appointing L. Erastos senator of Ephesos. But, on the other hand, he could be sure that the Ephesians would understand his meaning; for a δοκιμαsία formed a regular part of the procedure after the candidate had been elected or appointed. The very fact that the Emperor avoids mentioning the appointment proves that municipal autonomy was still an important factor in municipal life and that, in the cities, there still existed a sensitiveness which a wise ruler did well to take into account. One other point is worth noticing: at least at Ephesos, it is still a much coveted honor to belong to the Senate.

The Emperor not only took care of the already existing cities of the Empire; he was also the founder of many a new colony. His ideas about his foundations are well expressed in two documents.

In 127 a.d. Hadrian writes …

It seems to me that your requests are lawful and necessary for a recently founded city. Now, I grant you the taxes of the countryside and the house of Tiberius Claudius Socrates. (Follow details concerning the house.)⁶¹

Hadrian's most famous foundation was the city of Antinoopolis in Egypt. The entire city was one big monument in honor of its founder and of Antinoos; even the names of the phylae and demoi remind us of the names dear to his heart.⁶² A papyrus dating from the rule of Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus has preserved an excerpt from a letter of its founder to the archons of the city, dating between 130 and 135 a.d.:

Also I relieve you from all liturgies elsewhere as you have already a city for which you will carry out liturgies … introduce them to serve your own needs.⁶³

The purpose of Hadrian's measure is to free the colonists, brought to Antinoopolis from Ptolemais in the Thebaid and from the Fayûm, from munera in their native communities. A recently founded city—this seems to be Hadrian's idea—needs all the personal services and financial support of its settlers, and the growth of the new city should not be hampered by burdening its inhabitants both in their native community and in their new home. It is interesting to note that here in Egypt the liturgies had already become a burden rather than an honor.⁶⁴

These examples give ample illustrations of Hadrian's concern for the municipalities of his Empire. Even his will provided for the completion of public works in certain cities, as we learn from an inscription at Signia.⁶⁵

One general measure concerning all cities has still to be mentioned. A senatus consultum Apronianum of the year 123 a.d. provided that omnes civitates, quae sub imperio populi Romani sunt, can receive bequests and fideicommissa;⁶⁶ evidently they cannot be instituted as heirs, since a municipality would be considered an incerta persona.

VI

Only a few texts deal with the cultural problems of the Empire, but these specimens are instructive, both for the culture of the period and for the writer.

Trajan's widow Plotina seems to have been interested in the school of Epicurus. In 121 a.d. she wrote to Hadrian as follows:

How much I am interested in the sect of Epicurus, you know very well, domine. Your help is needed in the matter of its succession; for in view of the ineligibility of all but Roman citizens as successors, the range of choice is narrow. I ask therefore in the name of Popillius Theotimus, the present successor at Athens, to allow him to write in Greek that part of his disposition which deals with regulating the succession and grant him the power of filling his place by a successor of peregrine status, should personal considerations make it advisable; and let the future successors of the sect of Epicurus henceforth enjoy the same right as you grant to Theotimus; all the more since the practice is that each time the testator has made a mistake in the choice of his successor, the disciples of the above sect after a general deliberation put in his place the best man, a result that will be more easily attained if he is selected from a larger group.⁶⁷

The Emperor answers:

I permit him to write the will in Greek concerning those matters which regard the succession of the sect of Epicurus. But since his choice of a successor will be facilitated if he has the possibility also of choosing from among the peregrini, this too I grant to him and to those thereafter who shall hold the office of successor: it shall be allowed to transfer this right either to a peregrinus or to a Roman citizen.⁶⁸

Thus Roman citizenship is no longer required for the head of the school of Epicurus. The importance of this text in appreciating Hadrian's political ideas will be discussed in the last section of this paper.

This was not the only favor which the Emperor bestowed on the philosophers. They had been exempted from taxes and liturgies by Trajan; the orators, grammarians, and doctors as early as Vespasian.⁶⁹ Hadrian confirmed these exemptions by an edict immediately after his accession which is quoted in a letter of Antoninus Pius.⁷⁰

Hadrian granted similar privileges to the association of Dionysiac artists (actors, musicians, poets and other persons connected with the stage).⁷¹

VII

Some few texts throw light on Hadrian's social policy.

Callistratus, in his third book De Cognitionibus, has preserved a rescript of Hadrian to Terentius Gentianus dating from 119 a.d. and dealing with persons who displaced boundary stones. After asserting their culpability, Hadrian turns to the principles according to which the limits of the punishment should be determined.

The form of the punishment can better be determined from the condition of the person and from his intent. For if the persons convicted are of high rank (splendidiores), no doubt they have committed this deed in order to occupy property not belonging to them, and they can be banished for such periods as their ages permit; that is, younger persons for a longer, older persons for a shorter term.⁷²

We note in this document not so much the privileged position of the splendidiores (= honestiores) who are not liable to any dishonoring punishment,⁷³ as the striking disadvantage to which these persons are subject by their very position: in the mind of the Emperor it is precisely their privileged condition which creates the legal assumption that their displacing the boundary stones was not due to a mistake, but to the unlawful intent of occupying their neighbor's land.

Another letter is preserved in Ulpian's eighth book De Officiis Proconsulis and concerns cattle-lifters (abigei). This rescript is addressed to the concilium Baeticae and runs as follows:

Cattle-lifters, if punished most severely, are usually sentenced to death by the sword: however, they are not punished in this very harsh way everywhere, but only where this type of crime is rather frequent; otherwise they are sentenced to forced labour and sometimes to a term of it. And therefore I believe that among you too that type of punishment will be adequate which is the severest generally imposed on this crime, namely that cattle-lifters be put to the sword.⁷⁴

It seems that the concilium Baeticae had suggested one of the more cruel types of death penalty.⁷⁵ The Emperor does not agree. The ordinary death penalty should, according to him, be the severest one for a cattle-lifter. Justice but no unnecessary cruelty: this seems to be Hadrian's principle.

A senatusconsultum Tertullianum promulgated under Hadrian⁷⁶ gave certain hereditary privileges to a mother having three or four children. Thus, under Hadrian the principle of cognatio advanced considerably in its fight against the older principle of agnatio, and the legal position of the mater-familias was improved.

Finally, we have two documents showing the Emperor's concern for problems of population.

Paulus, in his book De Portionibus Quae Liberis Damnatorum Conceduntur preserves the following fragment of an imperial letter:

The large number of sons makes the case of the children of Albinus a favorable one in my eyes since I prefer an expansion of the Empire by additional men rather than by an abundance of money: and therefore I want them to receive the property of their father which they will declare (separately?) as so many possessors even though they received it as a whole.⁷⁷

Another rescript is directed against castration and threatens a number of persons convicted of having participated in this crime with harsh punishment.⁷⁸

VIII

We turn to the nervus rerum, the economic problems.⁷⁹

Hadrian's rule began with a number of measures in favor of Egyptian agriculture.⁸⁰ Egypt had been ruined by the devastations of the Jewish War: a decree which is not preserved but often referred to in the papyri⁸¹ provided important reductions of rent for the tenants of imperial domains.⁸²

These latter were favored not only in Egypt but also in Africa. The famous Ain-Wassel inscription, engraved on the ara legis Hadrianae, contains a sermo procuratorum adapting the lex itself⁸³ to the necessities and customs of a given estate.⁸⁴ We find a reference to a lex Hadriana de rudibus agris et iis qui per decem annos continuos inculti sunt: the tenants are entitled to occupy lands not cultivated by the conductores and even to transmit them to their heirs.⁸⁵

Another inscription concerning the Saltus Burunitanus mentions a kaput legis Hadrianae⁸⁶ preventing the conductor from increasing the shares of the crop (partes agrariae) or the services and draught-animals to be claimed from the coloni.

Everywhere, Hadrian seems to have favored agriculture. At the sources of the Phalaros River in Greece a letter of the Emperor, discovered some time ago but not yet published, seems to show that he tried to win fertile land by building ditches. In his last years, we find the Emperor helping Egyptian agriculture once more. His edict of 136 a.d. runs as follows:

Having been informed that now, as last year, the Nile has been inadequate in its rise … < =,—although during a succession of preceding years its rise was not only plentiful but almost higher than any year before, and, flooding all over the country, it caused the produce of abundant and flourishing crops—still I have deemed it necessary to bestow a favor on the cultivators, although I hope—this be said with God!—that in years to come any possible deficiencies will be supplied by the Nile itself and the earth,

For good luck! Know that the money tax due for this year shall be payable, by the inhabitants of the Thebaid who probably are most seriously hurt by the scarcity, in five annual instalments, by those from the Heptanomia in four, by those from the Delta in three, the mode of paying semiannually being allowed those wishing to do so, under the condition that the limits of the time granted remain for those from the Thebaid five years, for those from the Heptanomia four years, for those from the Delta three years.⁸⁷

What particular tax or taxes were included in the “money tax” of our edict, it is hard to ascertain.⁸⁸ But it is interesting to see the Emperor's “human kindness” being manifested at the end of his reign just as it had been in the beginning: the “money tax” can be paid by instalments. Furthermore, here for the first time in all his letters, only a few years before his death, he indulges, in an official document, in some general remarks of a philosophical character: nature itself changes from scarcity to plenty, and the god Nilus will take care of the needs of his Egyptians.

All these measures seem to have been in favor of the small landowner or tenant, to protect him against the encroachments of the conductores and the consequences of the acts of God and of nature.

The same tendency appears in Hadrian's attitude towards the mining industry. An inscription discovered in 1906 at Vipasca and supplementing the fragments of the so-called lex Metalli Vipascensis⁸⁹ contains in its second paragraph⁹⁰ the mention of a liberalitas sacratissimi imperatoris Hadriani Augusti. In order to make mining attractive and possible for the small capitalist, the Emperor decided that the price for silver mines had to be paid to the fiscus only after the mine-owner had struck ore. Thus, it was only after a chance of profit had appeared that he had to pay the price. Thenceforth, it was possible even for people with small capital to acquire silver mines.⁹¹

The food supply of the cities of the Empire was a problem with which all the Emperors had to struggle. Hadrian, in a letter of 124/125 a.d.⁹² forbade the selling of fish in Attica by retail merchants whom he threatens with penalties to be imposed on them by the Areopagus. Only the fishermen themselves and the original purchasers are allowed to sell the fish. “For if there is a third person selling the same goods, prices rise.”⁹³ One could not say it more precisely: too many intermediaries elevate prices. It would appear that, by keeping down the price level for fish, the Emperor acted both in the interest of the Attic fishermen and of the consumers in Attica.

A very elaborate decree was issued by Hadrian around the year 124 a.d. It stated that farmers had to sell part of their oil-crop to the state, that is, to the city of Athens. Perhaps the motive for this rule was to supply the city with the oil necessary to light its public buildings.⁹⁴

Tax problems seem to have been a constant worry to the Emperor.

He exempted the inhabitants of Astypalaea from the payment of the aurum coronarium in 118 a.d. because “you claim to be poor and unable to pay.”⁹⁵

The decuriones of the municipalities were responsible for the proper collection of the taxes, and it is quite characteristic that the Emperor forbade any decuriones to be sentenced to death except for parricide;⁹⁶ he would have lost his guarantors.

We find the Emperor caring with equal solicitude for the tax-farmers and farmers of public land. Callistratus, in his third book De Iure Fisci, quotes one of Hadrian's rescripts:

That is a most inhuman practice according to which the farmers of public taxes and of fields are held responsible if they cannot be farmed out again for the same price; for farmers will be found more easily if they know that after five years they can withdraw if they want to.⁹⁷

Here, we see the Emperor combine humanitas with economic considerations: if this practice were to continue, it would soon be exceedingly hard to find conductores for the taxes or for imperial domains.

Finally, a rescript of Hadrian, preserved by Callistratus, shows that in certain parts of the Empire at least the munera had already become a burden for which it was hard to find candidates. He writes:

I agree that if other suitable persons cannot be found to take over this munus, they should be appointed from those who have already held it.⁹⁸

IX

Extremely few texts deal with Hadrian's personal affairs.

An inscription⁹⁹ has preserved the funeral speech of a son-in-law for his mother-in-law; the speaker has been identified with Hadrian and the dead mother-in-law with the older Matidia Augusta who died before 119 a.d. The inscription is badly mutilated, but the general trend of the speech can be reconstructed. Hadrian claims that he honored Matidia as if she were his own mother. “She came,” he says, “to her uncle (Trajan) after he had taken over the principate, and from then on she followed him until his last day, accompanying him and living with him, honoring him as a daughter would, and she was never seen without him.” He says that he is overcome with grief at her death, calls her “the best mother-in-law” and speaks of her virtues. She was, he continues, “most dear to her husband, and after his death, through a long widowhood, passed in the very flower and fullest beauty of her person, most chaste, most dutiful to her mother, herself a most indulgent mother, a most loyal relative, helping all, not troublesome to any, always in good humour.” She never asked a favor of him, though he would have liked to grant it.¹⁰⁰ She delighted only in her son-in-law's fortuna.

One further document might be mentioned in this chapter. A papyrus, written during the second century a.d.,¹⁰¹ claims to give the text of a letter of the dying Emperor Hadrian to his successor Antoninus.

The Emperor Caesar Hadrian Augustus to his most esteemed Antoninus, greeting. Above all I want you to know that I am being released from my life neither before my time, nor unreasonably, nor piteously, nor unexpectedly, nor with faculties impaired, even though I shall almost seem, as I have found, to do injury to you who are by my side whenever I am in need of attendance, consoling and encouraging me to rest. From such considerations I am impelled to write to you as follows, not, by Zeus, as one who subtly devises a tedious account contrary to the truth, but rather making a simple and most accurate record of the facts themselves, … and he who was my father by birth fell ill and passed away as a private citizen at the age of forty, so that I have lived half as long again as my father, and have reached nearly the same age as that of my mother. …

The text is not easy to interpret, but I think that, with the help of our literary evidence, it can be understood. At the beginning, the Emperor insists that death will be a relief to him. He is afraid to hurt Antoninus' feelings by such a statement and mentions casually that, on an earlier occasion, Antoninus had already disapproved of Hadrian's taedium vitae. Now we know that, during the last year, the Emperor was tired of life and he is even said to have attempted suicide.¹⁰² One of his attempts was prevented by Antoninus who “begged him to endure with fortitude the hard necessity of illness, declaring furthermore that he himself would be no better than a parricide, were he, an adopted son, to permit Hadrian to be killed.”¹⁰³ The clause [os euron], therefore, might be explained by this earlier occurrence.

Thus, nothing in the text contradicts our external evidence. But this does not prove the genuineness of the document, which, very naturally, has been suspected of being the production of some student of rhetoric. On the papyrus the text was first written by the hand of a teacher and, afterwards, the beginning was copied by his pupil. Indeed, the queer comparisons of the length of Hadrian's life with that of his parents might look somewhat like an exercise in composition. But it should be remembered that the text was written first by the hand of the teacher and, only later, was copied by the pupil. Consequently, if it was an exercise in composition, we should have to assume that it was drafted by the teacher or the author of the text-book which he used. Furthermore, the clause [os euron] might indicate somewhat more than mere consistency with our external evidence; it seems to betray a rather intimate knowledge of events in the imperial family. Finally, there is one argument which, though not entirely conclusive, makes the balance turn rather to the side of genuineness. Cassius Dio¹⁰⁴ knew a letter of Hadrian in which the Emperor expressed his longing for death and regretted that he was unable to die. If Hadrian wrote such a letter—and Cassius Dio gives no indication of doubting its authenticity—why should we not believe that he is the author of a letter in which he expressed his satisfaction that the moment which he had so long desired had finally arrived? Once more, the argument is not conclusive, but it shows at least that the document deserves more attention than has previously been given to it.

X

On the preceding pages we made Hadrian speak for himself. The study of a man's letters and speeches does not allow any objective appreciation of his historical achievements: audiatur et altera pars! But what might be expected from such a study is an insight into the man's personality, a comprehension of his political ideas whether right or wrong, and of the philosophy, if philosophy there is, which might have helped to form them.

Of Hadrian's personality we cannot gather much from his own words. Hardly ever does he allow us to catch a glimpse of his deepest feelings. In this respect, he is very different from Trajan who, in his letters to Pliny, makes general and personal remarks on almost every page. Religious matters are only once touched upon, in his Egyptian Edict of 135/136 a.d. A few words in the speeches at Lambaesis and in his funeral oration for the older Matidia which convey the impression of genuine concern—that is about all the material which we possess for an appreciation of Hadrian's character. We gain the impression of an extremely reticent man who is always at work. A certain amount of vanity is there; he is extremely proud of his knowledge of military things and imagines that he would notice any irregularity in a review. He displays much wisdom in his sentence on difficultas and gratia and is, in spite of all his reticence, not devoid of feelings, as his speech at the death of the older Matidia shows. In his later years, he seems to succumb occasionally to the temptation of expatiating on generalities.

Since his words do not provide us with much direct information, we shall have to turn to his political ideas as expressed in his acts. It will be remembered that, in 125/126 a.d., Avidius Quietus, governor of Asia, had written that the Emperor decided a quarrel “combining justice with human kindness.” In fact these two ideas, justice and human kindness, and their combination are the main thoughts expressed again and again, directly or indirectly, in our documents.

Justice requires reverence for institutions and laws of the grand old days. The Senate is treated, at least outwardly, with the greatest respect. In a good many cases, the Emperor confirms the liberty and autonomy of the cities of the Empire. In the case of Athens he even revives the laws of Draco and Solon. Privileges granted to certain social groups by previous Emperors are maintained; the traditions of the Roman army are cherished. Ancient laws as such are respected: the prohibition of matrimony for soldiers, the distinction between honestiores and humiliores in questions of punishment. This traditionalism evinces a considerable antiquarian interest; in order to maintain old laws and institutions it is necessary to know them. …

Iustitia and humanitas … produce a third phenomenon which appears in our documents: uniformity. It is both just and humane that all men be treated alike. Thus Hadrian extends the privilege of Roman citizenship to a group of persons who previously had enjoyed only Latin rights. Even where these distinctions of civic status continue to exist, their consequences are mitigated by admitting persons of inferior status to positions formerly reserved to Roman citizens; for instance, a peregrinus can become now the head of the Epicurean School. Hadrian revises the distribution of votes in the Delphic Amphictyony so that all members may be evenly represented in the federation. Uniformity is particularly evident in two documents in which we find the Emperor applying a sort of comparative jurisprudence: the size of the agri cleruchici at Aezanoi depends on their size in the neighbouring civitates, and in the case of the punishments for cattle-lifters in Baetica Hadrian takes as a basis for his ruling their punishment in the other provinces of his Empire. From a more or less loose federation of city states under Augustus the Empire has become an administrative unit. Everywhere the interests of the socially weaker classes are protected by the imperial judge and legislator; for only thus can equal rights be guaranteed to them. Above all, the urbanization of the Empire in which we saw the Emperor take such an active part tends to make urban equality accessible to a greater number of persons.

Uniformity does not mean centralization. The travels of the Emperor and his retinue are a most important factor in decentralization. His instructions to the local authorities emphasize that many cases cannot be decided from the capital. He strengthens the authority of his administrators by confirming their measures wherever possible.

It will be noticed that certain of Hadrian's ideas correspond to the views expressed in contemporary philosophy, particularly those of the Stoics. It would be rash to infer that Stoicism was ruling the Empire as early as Hadrian; at his time certain Stoic ideas had become part of general education, and the Emperor as an educated man was acquainted with them. Still, it may not be wholly accidental that the best ancient judgment on Hadrian was written by a man who was at the same time a friend, military officer, and civil official of Hadrian and an ardent admirer of the Stoic Epictetus, Arrian. At the end of his [Tékhne Taktike] he speaks of the excellent training and equipment of the Roman troops “remarkable partly for beauty, partly for speed, partly for frightening effect and partly for practical utility. …

Notes

1. For instance in the case of the letter to Servianus, Hist. Aug., Firmus, Saturninus, Proculus and Bonosus, 8.

2. For instance in the case of his letter to Minutius Fundanus concerning the Christians, Justin Martyr, First Apology I 68.

3. As in the case of Hadrian's speech to the “most prominent and respected of the senators,” in 138 a.d., after the death of L. Ceionius Commodus Verus, Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 20.

4. L. Lafoscade, De Epistulis (aliisque titulis) Imperatorum Magistratuumque Romanorum etc., Lille, 1902, 9-18.

5. D. Vaglieri, “Hadrianus,” E. de Ruggiero, Dizionario Epigrafico di Antichità Romane, III (Spoleto, 1910) 607-640.

6. P. von Rohden, “Aelius 64,” RE I 494-496.

7. The fragments of imperial documents preserved in the legal writings with the exception of Justinian's Codex are most conveniently collected by G. Haenel, Corpus Legum ab Imperatoribus Romanis ante Iustinianum Latarum etc., Leipzig, 1857. For Hadrian see 85-101.

8. Occasionally, a document will be quoted which, though not emanating from the Imperial Chancery, is connected with such a document or illustrates the problems discussed in an imperial document.

9. Lafoscade De Epistulis 16. …

10. Lafoscade De Epistulis 17. …

11. Ae. Bourguet, De Rebus Delphicis Imperatoriae Aetatis etc., Montpellier, 1905, 72-73. …

12. L. Mitteis and U. Wilcken, Grundzilge und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde. I. Historischer Teil. 2. Chrestomathie (Leipzig, 1912) 491. Cf. E. Kornemann, “Αναξ καινòς ‘Αδριανός,” Klio VII (1907) 278-288; R. Reitzenstein, “Zu Horaz,” Neue Jahrbücher für das klassische Altertum XXI (1908) 365-367; U. Wilcken Archiv für Papyrusforschung etc. V (1909) 249-250. …

13. Kornemann Αναξ 284.

14. Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 1.4; Hist. Aug. Hadrian 4.10. Cf. B. W. Henderson, The Life and Principate of the Emperor Hadrian, London, 1923, 34-38; W. Weber, Untersuchungen zur Geschichte des Kaisers Hadrian, Leipzig, 1907, 37-47; P. L. Strack, Untersuchungen zur römischen Reichsprägung des zweiten Jahrhunderts, II (Stuttgart, 1933) 41; W. Weber, “Hadrian,” Cambridge Ancient History XI (Cambridge, 1936) 300.

15. Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 2.5; Hist. Aug. Hadrian 7. Cf. Henderson Hadrian 47-50; Weber Untersuchungen 76-81; Weber, “Hadrian,” Cambr. Anc. Hist. XI 303.

16. See the inscription published by Th. Wiegand, “Zweiter Bericht über die Ausgrabungen in Pergamon,” Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 1932, 39-42 and discussed by W. Weber, ibidem, 57-95.

17. Mitteis and Wilcken, Grundzüge und Chrestomathie, II. Juristischer Teil. 2. Chrestomathie, Leipzig, 1912, 373. …

18. CIL XVI 66-86.—Cf. F. Lammert, “Militärdiplome,” RE XXX 1666-1668 and “Missio,” RE XXX 2052-2053.

19. See Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 9. 1-4.

20. H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, Berlin, 1902-1916, I 2487 and III 9133-9135 a.—A German translation of these speeches will be found in H. Delbrück, Geschichte der Kriegskunst, Berlin, 1900-1936, II 174-179; these translations are, however, rather free and seem to be influenced, stylistically, by contemporary speeches delivered at maneuvers by the German Emperor William II.—Useful commentary in S. Dehner, Hadriani Reliquiae Particula I, Diss. Bonn, Bonn, 1883.

21. Dessau ILS I 2487: … [quae excu-] / sanda vobis aput me fuissent, omnia mihi pro vobis ipse di[xit: quod] / cohors abest, quod omnibus annis per vices in offiicium pr[ocon]- / sulis mittitur, quod ante annum tertium cohortem et qua[ternos] / ex centuris in supplementum comparum tertianorum dedis- / tis, quod multae, quod diversae stationes vos distinent, quod / nostra memoria bis non tantum mutastis castra, sed et nova fecis- / tis; ob haec excusatos vos hab[erem, si legio] diu exercitatione cessas- / set. Sed nihil aut cessavi[stis]. …

22. Dessau ILS III 9134: Omnia per ordinem egistis. Campum d[ec]ursionibus complestis, / iaculati estis non ineleganter, hast[is usi q]uamquam brevi- / bus et duris, lanceas plures vestrum [par]iter miserun[t]. Saluis- / tis et hic agiliter et heri velociter. Si q[u]it defuisset, desid[e]rarem, / si quit eminuisset, designarem; tota exercitatione perae[q]ue pla- / cuistis. Catullinus legatus meus v[ir] clarissimus in o[mni]- / bus quibus praeest parem curam suam exhib[et] … [prae] fectus vester sollicite videtur vobis attendere. Congiar[i]- / um accipite, viatoriam, in Commagenorum campo salieti[s].—For the translation of salire see Dehner Hadr. Part. 19 and Arriani Nicomediensis Scripta Minora, ed. A. G. Roos, Leipzig, 1928. …

23. Dessau ILS I 2487: [Ex]ercitationes militares quodammodo suas leges / [ha]bent, quibus si quit adiciatur aut detrahatur, aut minor / [exer]citatio fit, aut difficilior. Quantum autem difficultatis / [additur, t]antum gratiae demitur. Vos ex difficilibus difficil- / [limum fecistis], ut loricati iaculationem perageretis / … o, quin immo et animum probo. …

24. Dessau ILS I 2487: laudo, quod convertuit vos ad hanc exercitat[ionem, quae verae di-] / micationis imaginem accepti et sic exercet, [ut … lau-] / dare vos possim. Cornelianus praefectus ves[ter officio suo sa-] / tisfecit. Contrari discursus non placent mih[i], … / est auctor. E tecto transcurrat eques et pe[rsequatur caute; nam si non] / videt qua vadat aut si voluerit ecum r[etinere nequit, non potest] / quin sit obnoxius caliculis tectis.

25. Dessau ILS I 2487: Difficile est cohortales equites etiam per se placere, difficilius post ala- / rem exercitationem non displicere: alia spatia campi, alius iacu- / lantium numerus, frequens dextrator, Cantabricus densus, / equorum forma armorum cultus pro stipendi modo. Verum / vos fastidium calore vitastis, strenue faciendo, quae fieri debe- / bant; addidistis ut et lapides fundis mitteretis et missilibus con- / fligeretis; saluistis ubique expedite. Catullini leg. mei c. v. / [insignis cura] apparet, quod tales vos sub i[ll]o. …

26. Bourguet De Rebus Delphicis 82. …

27. Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 7.1. See also the inscription Bourguet De Rebus Delphicis 78-79 which will be discussed below p. 154. Cf. Weber, “Hadrian,” Cambr. Anc. Hist. XI 308; O'Brien Moore, “Senatus,” RE Suppl.-B. VI 778-779.

28. Dig(est, edd. Th. Mommsen and P. Krüger, ed. stereotypa quarta decima, Berlin, 1922) XLIX 2.1.2.—Cf. Th. Mommsen, Römisches Staatsrecht, II 1 (3rd edition, Leipzig, 1887) 107-108; III 2 (Leipzig, 1888) 1263; O'Brien Moore Senatus 783.

29. Gaius Institutiones (ed. B. Kübler, 6th ed., Leipzig, 1928) I 30, 80.

30. Gaius Inst. I 81.

31. CIL VI 2080 lines 25-26. A similar letter is preserved in CIL VI 32374, lines 32-33 (February 26, 118 a.d.).

32. G. Wissowa, “Arvales Fratres,” RE II 1469.

33. The connection between these two measures has been elucidated by F. Pringsheim, “The Legal Policy and Reforms of Hadrian,” Journal of Roman Studies XXIV (1934) 141-153.

34. Dig. XXII 5.3.1: Tu magis scire potes, quanta fides habenda sit testibus, qui et cuius dignitatis et cuius existimationis sint, et qui simpliciter visi sint dicere, utrum unum eundemque meditatum sermonem attulerint an ad ea quae interrogaveras ex tempore verisimilia responderint.

35. Dig. XXII 5.3.2.

36. Dig. XXII 5.3.3.—See also the fragment Dig. XXII 5.3.4 dealing with the same problem; we learn from it that the witnesses were paid their expenses.

37. Gaius Inst. I 7. On this passage see Pringsheim Legal Policy 146-148.

38. Dig. I 2. 2. 49 (concerning the ius respondendi); Dig. V 1. 37, but cf. Dig. XLVIII 6. 5. 1; Dig. V 1. 48 (conflict of duties between a private and a public office); Dig. XLVIII 20. 6. pr. (definition of the term panniculariae causa); Cod(ex Iust.) VI 23. 1 (letter to A. Catonius Verus concerning witnesses to a will).

39. P. Graindor, Athènes sous Hadrien, Le Caire, 1934, 30-35; P. Graindor, “Études épigraphiques sur Athènes à l'époque impériale,” Revue des Études Grecques XXXI (1918) 227-240.

40. Graindor Athènes 83.

41. IG II² 1102. … See, however, a different restoration by P. Graindor, Bulletin de Correspondance Hellénique XXXVIII (1914) 392-396.—For the terms [paides] and [néoi] see F. Pohland, “Geschichte des Griechischen Vereinswesens,” Preisschriften … der Fürstl. Jablonowskischen Gesellschaft zu Leipzig XXXVIII (1909) 93-95, 97.

42. P. 143.

43. Bourguet De Rebus Delphicis 74.

44. … On these general or fundamental laws of the Amphictyonic Council see Dionysios of Halicarnassus Ant. Rom. IV 25. …

45. The thoroughness with which Hadrian prepared his decisions is further attested by two fragments in Aulus Gellius Noct. Att. III 16. 12 where he consulted veterum philosophorum et medicorum sententiae, and XVI 13. 4-5 where the Emperor must have drawn either on some secondary source or, more probably, on the archives.

46. Bourguet De Rebus Delphicis 79, Col. II. … The Emperor proposes only, it is the Senate which decides. See above p. 150.

47. Th. Mommsen, Römische Geschichte, V: Die Provinzen von Caesar bis Diocletian, Berlin, 1933, 232.

48. Weber Untersuchungen 195, 272.

49. Dittenberger, Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum, (Leipzig, 3rd ed., 1915-1920) II 833. …

50. G. Lafaye, Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes etc., Paris, 1906-1927, IV 571: ²³Si in quantas particulas, [q]uos [cle]ros appellant, ager Aezanen- / ²⁴si Ioui dicatus a regibus diuisu[s sit], non apparet, optimum est, / ²⁵sicut tu quoque existimas, [modu]m, qui in uicinis ciuitatibus / ²⁶clerorum nec maximus [nec mi]nimus est, obseruari. Et si, cum / ²⁷Mettius Modestus cons[titueret], ut uectigal pro is pendere- / ²⁸tur, constitit qui es[se]nt cleruchici agri, aequum est ex h[oc] / ²⁹tempore uectigal pendi. Si [non co]nstitit, iam ex hoc tem[po] / ³⁰re uectigal pendendum e[s]t. [At] si quae morae qu[aerantur], / ³¹us[que dum penda]nt inte[grum, dentur].

51. P. 154.

52. Dessau ILS II 5947a.

53. Wilcken Grundzüge und Chrestomathie I 1, 63-64.

54. Editio princeps in U. Wilcken, “Zum alexandrinischen Antisemitismus,” Abhandlungen der Phil.-Hist. Klasse der Sächsischen Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften XXVII (1909) 783-839. A successful attempt to fill out the gaps of the document has been made by A. von Premerstein, “Alexandrinische und jüdische Gesandte vor Kaiser Hadrian,” Hermes LVII (1922) 266-316; on this edition the present account is based.

55. Perhaps this settlement formed the content of the letter referred to in Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 8. 1a.

56. Col. IV lines 7-10. …

57. Col. I lines 12-22.

58. Col. III lines 25-31.

59. Dittenberger SIG³ II 838 (a slightly different restoration in Lafoscade De Epistulis 26). …

60. Pliny the Younger, Epistulae ad Traianum etc., 112 and 113.—Cf. J. Menadier, Qua Condicione Ephesii Usi Sint inde ab Asia in Formam Provinciae Redacta, Diss. Berlin, 1880, 31.

61. Dittenberger SIG³ II 837. …

62. E. Kühn, Antinoopolis etc., Diss. Leipzig, Goettingen, 1913, 123-131; H. I. Bell, “Diplomata Antinoitica,” Aegyptus XIII (1933) 514-528; H. I. Bell, “Egypt, Crete and Cyrenaica,” Cambr. Anc. Hist. XI 650-651.

63. P. Würzb. 9 in U. Wilcken, “Mitteilungen aus der Würzburger Papyrus-sammlung,” Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 1933, no. 6, 60-71, lines 31-33. …

64. See F. Oertel, Die Liturgie etc., Leipzig, 1917, 394.

65. CIL X 5963: Divo Hadr[iano] / maximae mem[oriae] / principi / senatus populusq(ue) S[igninus] / quod opera reipubl[icae utilia] / profusa liberalita[te antea] data pecunia t[est(amento) perfici] / iusserit.

66. Dig. XXXVI 1. 27.

67. Dessau ILS II 7784: ⁴[Quod studium meum] erga sectam Epicuri sit, optime scis, d[om]ine. Huius successioni a te succurrendum /⁵[est; nam quia n]on licet nisi ex civibus Romanis adsumi diad[o]chum, in angustum redigitur eligendi /⁶[facultas. ⁷Rogo e]rgo nomine Popilli Theotimi, qui est modo diado[c]hus Athenis, ut illi permittatur a te Graece /⁸[t]estari circa ha[n]c partem iudiciorum suorum, quae ad diadoches ordinationem pertinet, et peregrei- /⁹nae condicionis posse substituere sibi successorem, s[ii]ta suaserit profectus personae; et quod Theotimo /¹⁰concesseris, ut eodem iure et deinceps utantur fut[uri] diadochi sectae Epic[u]ri, eo magis, quod opservatur /¹¹quotiens erratum est a testatore circa electionem [di]adochi, ut communi consilio substituatur a studio- /¹²sis eiusdem sectae qui optimus erit: quod facilius fiet, si e[x] compluribus eligatur.

68. Dessau ILS II 7784: ¹³[I]mp. Caesar Traianus Hadrianus Aug. Popillio Theotimo. permitto Graece testari de eis quae pertinent ad diado- / ¹⁴chen sectae Epicureae. Set cum et facilius successorem [el]ecturus sit si ex peregrinis quoque substituendi facul- /¹⁵tatem abuerit, hoc etiam praesto en (r. ei et) deinceps ceteris, q[ui] diadochen habuerint: licebit vel in peregreinum vel /¹⁶in civem Romanum ius hoc transferri.—Cf. R. Herzog, “Urkunden zur Hochschulpolitik der Römischen Kaiser,” Sitzungsberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 1935 II 984 n. 1.—While the letter of Hadrian bears the name of Popillius Theotimus in the address, Popillius Theotimus is always spoken of in the third person throughout the text. This makes us suppose that, in the inscription, the address of the letter to Popillius Theotimus has been erroneously conflated with the text of Hadrian's answer to Plotina.

69. Herzog Hochschulpolitik 993-997.

70. Dig. XXVII 1. 6. 8. …

71. BGU 1074 = Klio VIII 415, lines 3-4. …

72. Dig. XLVII 21. 2: … de poena tamen modus ex condicione personae et mente facientis magis statui potest: nam si splendidiores personae sunt quae convincuntur, non dubie occupandorum alienorum finium causa id admiserunt, et possunt in tempus, ut cuiusque patiatur aetas, relegari, id est, si iuvenior, in longius, si senior, recisius etc. Cf. Lex Dei Sive Mosaicarum et Romanarum Legum Collectio (edd. E. Seckel and B. Kübler, Iurisprudentiae Anteiustinianae Quae Supersunt II (Leipzig, 1927) 325-394 XIII 3. 2 (Ulpian).

73. Th. Mommsen, Römisches Strafrecht, Leipzig, 1899, 1032-1037.

74. Dig. XLVII 14. 1. pr.: abigei cum durissime puniuntur, ad gladium damnari solent. puniuntur autem durissime non ubique, sed ubi frequentius est id genus maleficii; alioquin et in opus et nonnunquam temporarium dantur. Continuation of the text in Lex Dei XI 7. 2: ideoque puto apud vos quoque sufficere genus poenae, quod maximum huic maleficio inrogari solet, ut ad gladium abigei dentur etc.

75. Mommsen Römisches Strafrecht, 916-938.

76. Inst(itutiones ed. P. Krüger, ed. stereotypa quarta decima, Berlin, 1922), III 3. 2-3.

77. Dig. XLVIII 20. 7. 3: Favorabilem apud me causam liberorum Albini filiorum numerus facit, cum ampliari imperium hominum adiectione potius quam pecuniarum copia malim: ideoque illis paterna sua concedi volo, quae manifestabunt tot possessores, etiamsi acceperint universa. …

78. Dig. XLVIII 8. 4. 1.

79. The rescript concerning money-changing (F. F. Abbott and A. C. Johnson, Municipal Administration in the Roman Empire, Princeton, 1926, 401-403 = W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, Leipzig, 1905, II 484) and the edict concerning certain problems of taxation (ibid., 414-415 = IG² II 1104) are not discussed here since their attribution to Hadrian seems uncertain.

80. M. Rostovtzeff Archiv für Papyrusforschung V (1909-1913) 299.

81. W. L. Westermann, “Hadrian's Decree on Renting State Domain in Egypt,” The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology XI (1925) 165-178; U. Wilcken, “Die Bremer Papyri,” Abhandlungen der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Klasse, 1936 no. 2, 84.

82. E. Kornemann, “Ein Erlass Hadrians zugunsten ägyptischer Kolonen,” Klio VIII (1908) 398-412.

83. C. G. Bruns, Fontes Iuris Romani etc., 7th ed., Tübingen, 1909, 301 lines 10-13.

84. M. Rostovtzeff, “Studien zur Geschichte des Kolonats,” Archiv für Papyrusforschung etc. Beiheft 1, Leipzig and Berlin, 1910, 330-332, 337.

85. M. Rostovtzeff, Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft im Römischen Kaiserreich, translated into German by L. Wickert, Leipzig, 1929, II 82.

86. Bruns Fontes 259 lines 5-6.

87. Editio princeps by P. Jouguet, “Un Édit d'Hadrien,” Revue des Études Grecques XXXIII (1920) 375-402. S. Eitrem and L. Amundsen, Papyri Osloenses III (Oslo, 1936) 78 have re-edited and translated the text on the basis of the readings of a new papyrus fragment (see the facsimile). …

88. Jouguet Édit 392-398; Rostovtzeff Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft etc. II 81, 321 n. 13.

89. Bruns Fontes 289-293.

90. Bruns Fontes 293-294.

91. This at least is the result of the best study of ancient mining, E. Schönbauer, “Beiträge zur Geschichte des Bergbaurechts,” Münchener Beiträge zur Papyrusforschung etc., Heft 12, München, 1929, 64-71.

92. IG² II 1103.

93. IG² II 1103. …

94. IG² II 1100 with the note of the editor.

95. G. Lafaye IGRR IV 1032. …

96. Dig. XLVIII 19. 15.

97. Dig. XLIX 14. 3. 6: Valde inhumanus mos est iste, quo retinentur conductores vectigalium publicorum et agrorum, si tantidem locari non possint. Nam et facilius invenientur conductores, si scierint fore ut, si peracto lustro discedere voluerint, non teneantur.

98. Dig. L 4. 14. 6: Illud consentio, ut, si alii non erunt idonei qui hoc munere fungantur, ex his, qui iam functi sunt, creentur.—The oppressive character of the munera had appeared already in Hadrian's letter to Antinoopolis above p. 159.—We learn from an interesting letter of the Emperor (F. F. Abbott and A. C. Johnson Municipal Administration 399) that only those citizens who owned property were responsible for the maintenance of the imperial road at Heraclea in Macedonia.

99. CIL XIV 3579.—See Th. Mommsen, “Grabrede des Kaisers Hadrian auf die ältere Matidia,” Gesammelte Schriften I (Berlin, 1905) 422-428; F. Vollmer, “Laudationum Funebrium Romanorum Historia etc.,” Jahrbücher für classische Philologie, Suppl.-B. XVIII (1891-1892) 516-524; G. Herzog-Hauser, “Matidia,” RE XXVIII 2199-2202; Strack Untersuchungen II 68.

100. ²⁷ … tanta modestia, uti nihil umquam a me pe- /²⁸[tierit suo usui cre] braque non petierit, quae peti maluissem. …—The restorations are those of Vollmer Laudationum 520.—It is rather piquant to compare with this passage a sentence from his funeral speech for Trajan's widow Plotina, preserved by Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 10. 3a. …

101. P. Fay. 19 (edd. B. P. Grenfell and A. S. Hunt, Fayûm Towns and Their Papyri, London, 1900, 112-116).—Cf. the restoration of F. Buecheler, “Coniectanea,” Rheinisches Museum für Philologie LVI (1901) 326-327, which has been accepted by F. Preisigke, Berichtigungsliste der Griechischen Papyrusurkunden aus Ägypten I (Berlin and Leipzig, 1922) 128 in his reedition, and by J. G. Winter, Life and Letters in the Papyri, Ann Arbor, 1933, 19 in his translation of the text. See, however, a different restoration in W. Crönert, “Literarische Texte mit Ausschluss der christlichen,” Archiv für Papyrusforschung etc. II (1903) 364, which seems to be paleographically possible as far as that can be ascertained without a personal inspection of the papyrus and certainly makes better sense. I have followed the text of Crönert as far as it goes, and for the rest the suggestions of Buecheler with the translation of Winter.

102. Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 17. 2-3; Hist. Aug. Hadrian 24. 8-13.

103. Hist. Aug. Hadrian 24. 9: rogantibusque ut aequo animo necessitatem morbi ferret, dicente Antonino parricidam se futurum si Hadrianum adoptatus ipse pateretur occidi.—The translation in the text is that of D. Magie, Loeb series, I (London and New York, 1921) 75.

104. Cassius Dio Hist. Rom. LXIX (Epitome) 17. 3. …