Выбрать главу

There is no reason to believe, however, that private estates ceased to exist in the country under Ptolemaic rule; on general considerations the Ptolemies inclined to make grants of large areas (δωρεαί) to individuals, in order to encourage agricultural experimentation and improvement such as small owners could not afford to carry out.[696] The name of Arimmas has already been cited as evidence for the estates of a prominent Cyrenean family between the 4th and 1st centuries B.C. The citizen body established by Ptolemy was apparently based for the most part on the large and medium landowners, and in 16 B.C. Barkaios son of Theochrestos left lands to Apollo and other deities.[697] The fine funerary monuments of Messa and a-Zawani point to the existence of well-to-do landowners in the hellenistic period, and the cleruchs who set up similar monuments near their village at Ngharnes can have differed little from them.

In Chapter II we have traced the fortunes of the native Libyans, and concluded that a strict administrative and legal barrier grew up between them and the citizens living in the cities and their territories. The Libyans, indeed, were ruled by a distinct governor, and according to Strabo in the 1st century B.C. were classed among the inhabitants of Cyrene not possessed of citizen rights. The conclusion appears justified that those not resident on the Greek lands as tenants and labourers were mainly concentrated in the southern region, and it is to be supposed that they engaged in shifting and seasonal agriculture on lands regarded juridically as state land, i.e. βασιλικὴ γη. It is nevertheless hard to believe that these wandering elements, who moved northward in summer and southward in winter, performed the functions of “royal peasants” (βασιλικοὶ γεωργοί) on the contemporary Egyptian model, yet there is no doubt (to judge by Strabo) that they included permanent agricultural workers near the territorial boundaries of Cyrene and the other cities, and these doubtless belonged to the class of “royal cultivators” and worked under the conditions characteristic of their class.

The representation of a plough appears on two coin types of Cyrene in the Ptolemaic period, the first[698] of the years 322-308 (Ptolemy Lagos), and the second in the reign of Magas.[699] The identification on the first is not completely certain, but no doubt attaches to that of the second. It is not beyond possibility that this is more than an arbitrary adjunct, and rather reflects Magas’ drive to revive and improve the agriculture of his kingdom. The actual type of plough represented is interesting; it possesses a stout horizontal share beam, into whose upper face the stilt and plough-beam are inserted as two distinct parts. The stilt is almost vertical, and a horizontal grip projects from its rear side near the head. The plough-beam rises obliquely from the share-beam and turns parallel to it through a rightangle. The position of the horizontal share-beam shows that this is not an implement for deep ploughing, nor can it be determined if the share was of iron, but the plough today used by the Beduin in the Tripolitanian steppe[700] resembles it in every detaiclass="underline" it has the same horizontal share-beam, the same vertical stilt with horizontal grip; its share is made of iron. It is therefore evident that the coins represent a steppe-plough, and it would seem likely that the figure reflects an interest in the cultivation of the southern fringes of the plateau. This interpretation may well find confirmation in the appearance of a corn-ear as an adjunct on contemporary coins bearing the form of the silphium plant.[701]

The Demiurgi steles of this period reveal interesting innovations from which relevant information can be derived.[702] The first striking change is, that the prices of agricultural produce are now fixed twice yearly instead of once, this being clearly proved by the division of the face of each stele into two parallel columns, headed respectively by the words πράτη ἐξαμήνις and δευτέρα ἐξαμήνις viz. the first and second half of the year, each half repeating exactly (in so far as restoration is possible) the items of the other. It would be possible to suppose that this change was required by the more extreme fluctuations in prices which became frequent in the 3rd century B.C. The great influence of these fluctuations in Cyrene is made clear by the steles themselves, and Cyrenaica was affected by the same general rise in prices which prevailed over the rest of the Greek world. Cyrene, which till then had generally enjoyed relative economic stability and prices lower than those of mainland Greece, now became part of the wider Greek economy whose unity had been promoted and in a measure achieved by Alexander’s empire. Cyrene’s prices now begin to fluctuate, and do not differ in some cases from other prices in the eastern Mediterranean. Nevertheless, owing to the mutilated state of the steles, we know only two instances (cummin, no. 40; legumes no. 41) of price-changes — in these cases rises — from one price-fixing to the next. Was there therefore some other reason for a second fixing of prices in the latter half of the year?

The first solution that suggests itself is that an annual two-crop course had been adopted. This innovation would explain why wheat, barley, fruit and legumes are recorded on both halves of the steles. But the appearance of legumes and vegetables ready for sale at the end of summer could also be the result of an increase in irrigated areas. Before we accept this solution, it would be well to enquire, when the Cyrenean year began, and when it ended.

It would be natural to assume that the calendar accepted at Cyrene would be the Dorian, as at Sparta, Elis, Argos, Delphi and in other Dorian states.[703] Loios (Λῶιος), the tenth month of the Dorian year, is in fact mentioned in the testament of Euergetes II,[704] but other hellenistic documents at Cyrene use the Egyptian calendar (e.g. the Ptolemaic constitution and numerous epitaphs). The royal edicts in the middle of the 2nd century cite both the Dorian (Γορπαῖος) and the Egyptian month (§ ii, lines 27-28), while § ii, 1.13 dates by the month of Theudaisios (Θευδαισιός). This month derives from a calendar known also at Lato in Crete, at Cos, Mitylene and Rhodes; its year began in September. The Ptolemaic year likewise began in the autumn, in 300 B.C. in November, in 200 B.C. in October.[705] The Dorian year too opened at the autumn equinox.[706]

вернуться

696

SEHHIV, p. 289.

вернуться

697

SEG 9, 4.

вернуться

698

BMC, no. 208, p. 47.

вернуться

699

BMC, no. 223, p. 49.

вернуться

700

Maugini, Flora ed. econ., p. 43.

вернуться

701

BMC, p. lxvi.

вернуться

702

DAI I, Cir. ii, nos. 30-43.

вернуться

703

PW XX, 1919, col. 1578, sv. Kalendar.

вернуться

704

SEG 9, 7; DAI I, Cir. i, p. 11.

вернуться

705

W. Kubitscheck, Grundriss der Antiken Zeitrechnungen, 1928, pp. 222-3.

вернуться

706

PW, loc. cit. 1578 sq.