The Hellenistic Settlements in the East from Armenia and Mesopotamia to Bactria and India. Getzel M. Cohen

Чтение книги онлайн.

СКАЧАТЬ enables one to distinguish a bulla fragment from a flat appended sealing. The size of a bulla was dependent upon two factors, the diameter of the rolled or folded document and the number of seals whose impressions were required.” With the passage of time the papyrus or parchment documents that were enclosed by the bullae disintegrated or were destroyed; all that remains today are the (fragments of the) bullae. At SELEUKEIA, URUK, and Nippur the extant bullae—as well as the clay impressions—date from the early part of the third century B.C. to the middle of the second.

      Rostovtzeff pointed out that the bulla was a compromise between the Babylonian and Greek systems of sealing documents. He noted that “the Babylonian system is represented by the cuneiform tablets of the Hellenistic period found . . . [in] Babylonia. . . . The seals of the contracting parties and of the witnesses were impressed into the wet clay of the tablet itself.”²⁴ On the other hand, the Greeks normally wrote on papyrus or parchment. Under the Greek system, a document written on papyrus or parchment was sealed with single clay lumps on which the seals of the contracting parties and the witnesses were impressed.

      The bullae normally have one or more impressions on them. In many instances at Seleucid URUK the impressions on the bullae and single clay seals were made by the same type of seals that were impressed on cuneiform tablets.²⁵ Bullae with one or two sealings, for example, were probably documents drawn up by an individual that required a notary. Bullae with four or more sealings—the majority of those found at SELEUKEIA—normally enclosed documents that required witnesses. We can distinguish two broad categories of seal impressions: those made with the seals of private persons and those made with official seals. Some of the latter bear inscriptions mentioning a particular office or registration, while others refer to various taxes. Furthermore, the impressions on the bullae are often similar to the types—monarchs, deities, mythological figures, and symbols—found on Seleucid coins.²⁶

      The discoveries of the bullae and single clay seals have provided useful and dated information about both the social and economic history of Hellenistic Babylonia and the history of its art. For example, they have shed important light on the method of registering business documents under the Seleucids.²⁷ By extension, of course, we can learn something of the nature of business transactions in these regions. In addition, many of the bullae provide information about taxation in Babylonia under the Seleucids. Finally, as Rostovtzeff has noted, the bullae “give us a glimpse into the Seleucid archives of Babylonia [and] . . . furnish us with a set of official seals well dated, which corresponds to another set of objects—the coins.”²⁸

      Archaeological excavation has uncovered, among other objects, both bullae and terra-cotta figurines at Seleukeia.²⁹ Interestingly, the figurines date from both the Seleucid and the Parthian periods; the bullae, on the other hand, date only from the Seleucid. No Parthian sealings have yet been found. The evidence is admittedly negative, but nevertheless potentially significant: it undoubtedly reflects the difference between the Seleucid and the Parthian approaches to administration and bureaucracy.

      Finally, for the historian of art the study of the motifs found on the seals and bullae as well as the style of carving can also be rewarding; it is, however, a very complex exercise.³⁰ Generally speaking, scholars have been able to distinguish Greek and Oriental iconography; within the latter category—which is much smaller than the former—it is possible to distinguish Babylonian and Achaemenid types.³¹ It is interesting and instructive to try to trace the nature and extent of these influences in the extant impressions. On the other hand, it is doubtful whether one can draw any definitive conclusions about the ethnic background and composition of the population of a particular city based solely on the typology of the extant seals and bullae of that city.³²

      The study of the bullae and sealings may throw some light on the Hellenization of Babylonia. It is interesting to note that at the beginning of the Seleucid hegemony in Babylonia cuneiform tablets were still the accepted method for maintaining records. By the beginning of the second century B.C. these tablets were being supplanted by papyri and parchment. Furthermore, a large number of names and motifs on the bullae and single clay seals were Greek. The Hellenizing tendency is quite clear. What is less clear is the extent to which this tendency spread among the native population.³³

      Greek Inscriptions. A clay tablet from the Parthian period and inscribed in Greek has been discovered at BABYLON.³⁴ The inscription is a list of ephebes and neoi. Undoubtedly the tablet was inscribed by persons of Graeco-Macedonian descent. Clay tablets were, of course, the common writing material in southern Mesopotamia. Irrespective of whether the inscriber was driven by choice or necessity, the tablet offers a rather nice example of the adoption of a native practice by the descendants of the colonists.³⁵ In addition, other Greek inscriptions provide information regarding such places as SELEUKEIA on the Tigris, IKAROS, ANTIOCH in Persis, and URUK as well as BABYLON.

      BACTRIA AND INDIA

      Our knowledge of the Graeco-Macedonian settlements in Hellenistic Bactria is, of course, a function of the available evidence.³⁶ And here it is useful to distinguish between the evidence available for the foundations attributed to Alexander and that for those attributed to the various Graeco-Bactrian dynasts. For the former, we have the lists in the various recensions of the Alexander Romance and its derivatives, as well as in Stephanos.³⁷ In addition, we have the information available in the major narrative accounts of Alexander’s life, namely Diodorus Siculus, Plutarch, Appian, Curtius Rufus, and Justin. For the latter, the surviving literary evidence is quite spotty.³⁸ Essentially, it is confined to observations and passages in a few authors—for example, Strabo, Pliny, and Justin—rather than occurring in a continuous narrative. Furthermore, when these authors do provide information about Bactria and adjacent regions, their focus is usually on the dynasts rather than on the settlements.

      There is extensive numismatic evidence emanating from Hellenistic Bactria.³⁹ And this evidence is of the utmost importance and utility in reconstructing the history of Hellenistic Bactria and the adjoining regions. On the other hand, it is of only modest utility for the historian trying to give an account of the settlements there. In this connection we may note that it has been suggested that there were mints at, for example, AÏ KHANOUM and (possibly) ALEXANDREIA in Aria.

      Archaeological excavation has demonstrated the existence of previously unknown Greek settlements at KAMPYR TEPE (Pandocheion?) in Uzbekistan and AÏ KHANOUM in Afghanistan.⁴⁰ Furthermore, ceramic evidence from Aï Khanoum provides evidence for contact between Bactria and the Mediterranean world throughout the Hellenistic period.⁴¹ We may note, for example, the presence of Dionysiac motifs on objects found in Bactria and Sogdiana.⁴² The archaeological evidence for contacts between Bactria and regions farther west is supported by other sources. Thus, we may recall the well-known request sent by the Mauryan king Bindusara (c. 298–272 B.C.) to the Seleucid king Antiochos I (281–261 B.C.) asking the latter to send him Greek wine, figs, and a Greek philosopher! (Athen. 14.652f–653a). And elsewhere I have mentioned the dispatch of elephants by a Bactrian satrap to Antiochos I in 274/3 B.C.⁴³

      Greek inscriptions have been found at various places in Bactria, especially at AÏ KHANOUM.⁴⁴ The inscriptions are on stone, on vases, and, occasionally, on parchment. P. Bernard called attention to the relative paucity of inscriptions on stone in a city like AÏ KHANOUM, which had, nevertheless, yielded so much other evidence of its Greek heritage and culture. This paucity is particularly noticeable in comparison with other cities of the Seleucid Near East, such as Susa.⁴⁵ Bernard noted the practically total absence of public documents on stone recording, for example, letters between the king and the local authorities, or local administrative decisions. In particular, he called attention to the absence of dedications of honorific statues and decrees in honor of benefactors. Of course, as he noted, there is at least one major example of a public benefaction: the erection of the gymnasium at Aï Khanoum. But the general absence is noticeable. Setting aside the possibility that this was СКАЧАТЬ