Gelasios the ex-logistes

Another figure of interest, contemporary with Pausanias, is Gelasios. A receipt belonging to him for the transport of statues to Alexandria, dated 331, was found in House 3 (pkgr.29).

Here he is titled ex-logistes, which makes him one of the (formerly) most important Roman officials in Dakhleh Oasis. Two documents from House 2 also involve a Gelasios. One is the letter from Harpokration to Ploutogenes son of Pataias (pkgr.7), where Gelasios is greeted by Harpokration as a ‘brother’. The other is an order from Aionianos to his ‘father’ Gelasios (although the reading is somewhat uncertain), where Aionianos asks him to provide four artaba of dates for Pataias (pkgr.16, dated third indiction, i.e. perhaps 329/30 or 344/5). Their discovery in House 2 and the recurrence of Pataias indicates that Gelasios of pkgr.16 and pkgr.7 are the same person, associated with Pataias and his son. But can this man in turn be

401 Pisistratos is rare for the Roman period, but occurs several times in the Kellis material. It seems likely that most of the occurrences from the mid-fourth century refer to this man (pkgr.46, okell.58, okell.85, okell.287, P.

Bingen 120). A Pisistratos, father of Theon, is also known, from the late third century. Okell.58 and okell.85 were both found at the West Church, and the latter clearly pertains to the colleague of Pausanias. It contains an order from a Pausanias to a Kome for delivery of chickens to the ‘son’ Pisistratos (probably d. 328/9 or 347/8; see further section 9.2.3). Worp takes this to indicate literal sonship between Pausanias and Pisistratos (see Worp, O. Kellis I, 84, okell.85, ll.1,5n.). Okell.287 features a Pisistratos who signs for a chicken brought by Tou son of Psais, and contains a staurogram (ibid., 175, okell.287, l.5n.). It was found in the above-mentioned structure D/8, containing texts of Pausanias (son of Valerios): based on this find-spot, an identification with Pausanias’ ‘son’

Pisistratos is very probable. Finally, a Pisistratos recurs in an account from House 4 (P. Bingen 120, d.367), where a Gena/Ploutogenes transacts on his behalf (see perhaps Pausanias’ associate, the son of Pataias, in pkgr.5–6?).

Although less certain, I think it likely that it, too, relates to the same man. See also section 9.2.4.

402 Worp remarks: ‘Given the letter form of the document it looks as if Palammon stood to Pisistratos in a kind of client/patron relationship and that Pisistratos had given the said amount of money to Palammon in order to pay for the price of a waggon.’ Worp, P. Kellis I, 137–38. Perhaps this Palammon could be identified with Lammon from the Coptic texts, without the Coptic definite article ⲡ(ⲁ), as Lammon was frequently engaged in freight (see sections 6.1.4 and 7.2). The editors, however, plausibly resolve Lammon as short for Philammon; this is now supported by pkc.122, where ‘Lammon’ and ‘Philammon’ seem to be used interchangeably for the same figure.

110

identified with the ex-logistes from pkgr.29? This identification has to be reconciled with the Roman preference for drawing local governors from outside the nome in which they served.⁴⁰³ Still, the fourth century witnessed a change in the practice, as logistai were drawn from local city councils already at an early date.⁴⁰⁴ There is perhaps an implied inferior status in Aionianos’ order in pkgr.16, which would make an identification of Gelasios as an important (ex-)magistrate unlikely. However, Aionianos was the literal son of Gelasios, as shown by a contract found in House 4 (P. Gascou 67, d.368), where Aionianos ‘son of Gelasios’ is himself called ex-magistrate of Mothis – making it highly probable that his father had had also held an office in the Oasis. An identification of Gelasios, father of Aionianos, with Gelasios, ex-logistes, is therefore quite likely.⁴⁰⁵ The document of Aionianos (P. Gascou 67) is furthermore a contract for irrigation of land in the vicinity of Kellis, which shows that Aionianos – and presumably his father – owned land here, providing evidence for landed interests (and perhaps a residence) in the village.

This argument can be supported by the occurrence of Gelasios in another document from Kellis. A letter from Sarapion, the council-president of Mothis, is addressed to his ‘lord’

Gelasios (P. Gascou 82, dated to the first half of the fourth century). It deals with the lack of payment by a group of Kellites under Gelasios’ jurisdiction. It may be that he can be traced outside of Kellis in an earlier period: a document from Hibis, dated 309, names Gelasios as strategos and exactor of the Great Oasis (SBXVIII 13852), which Worp tentatively posited could relate to the early career of this man.⁴⁰⁶ If so, Gelasios would be of advanced age by the time of Aionianos’ request in pkgr.16, and had perhaps retired to Kellis during or after his career.⁴⁰⁷

While the link to Pataias and his son Ploutogenes explains the appearance of pkgr.7 and pkgr.16 in House 2, the reason for the appearance of the freight receipt pkgr.29 in House

403 Noted by Worp, ‘Miscellaneous’, 438.

404 Rees, ‘The curator civitatis’, 91–94. Already the logistes of Oxyrhynchus in 307/8, Heron alias Sarapion, also served in other offices in Oxyrhynchus, and was probably nominated by the city council. Philip F. Venticinque,

‘Common causes: Guilds, craftsmen and merchants in the economy and society of Roman and Late Roman Egypt’, (University of Chicago, 2009), 61.

405 Still unpublished texts from D/8 may shed light on this issue. Worp, ‘Miscellaneous’, 438.

406 See Worp, P. Kellis I, 46–47, pkgr.16, ll.1–2n.

407 The retirement of officials from the cities to villages is certainly attested for the Roman period. See Andrea Zerbini, ‘Human mobility in the Roman Near East: patterns and motives’, in Migration and mobility in the early Roman Empire, ed. Luuk De Ligt and Laurens E. Tacoma (Leiden: Brill, 2016), 328–29.

3 is murky. It could perhaps relate to freight performed by the Pamour family, although they are not named in the receipt. They, too, were associated with Ploutogenes son of Pataias (pkgr.76), and so perhaps some mutual ties can be inferred. Aionianos retained land in the village, as seen in P. Gascou 67, as indicated by the contract referred to above, but he is not found as a later associated of the Pamour family. Aionianos had a ‘son’, Makarios, documented by a potsherd from the West Church (okell.288). An identification of this man with the actor from the Maria/Makarios circle might provide another explanation for the occurrence of pkgr.29 in House 3, while the status of Aionianos could account for Makarios’

high level of literacy. However, the absence of a ‘father’ Aionianos from his letters speaks against this, and so a literal father-son relationship is at any rate unlikely. Nothing is known of Aionianos’ later history (the name itself does not appear to be attested outside of Kellis).⁴⁰⁸

4.3 Village elite in 352 CE: P. Kell. Gr. 24

The two notable families considered above recede into the background from ca. 350 and onwards, whether because of lack of documentation, decline in fortunes, or because they no longer had close ties to the village. A document that is central to our understanding of the village elite in the mid-fourth century is an oath-declaration drawn up in 352 (pkgr.24). It concerns a conflict between two figures, a Ploutogenes and a Hatres, whose background is unfortunately lost.⁴⁰⁹ Its reason for being preserved in House 1–3 therefore remains unclear.

Although Pamour III appears as one of the subscribers (and writers), the matter is not one clearly related to his family or associates. It could perhaps be that Hatres is to be identified with the contemporary business associate from the Tehat circle, but the name was common.

Alternately, the document may have belonged to Ploutogenes son of Ouonsis.⁴¹⁰ Luckily, the list of subscribers is largely preserved. It provides a snapshot of a large group of prominent figures in Kellis ca. 350. There are subscriptions of ca. 33 men, of which 26 names can be read,

408 Worp, P. Kellis I, 46. No other occurrence is found in the Trismegistos database (3/5/2017). A possible Manichaean background for the name was broached by Gardner, referred to in ibid., 46–47, pkgr.16, ll.1–2n.

409 Ploutogenes here is probably the son of Ouonsis. He recurs – with most of the patronym preserved – on a papyrus reused by Tehat for the account pkc.47. Gardner, Alcock, and Funk, CDT I, 266, pkc.47, v. See section 3.3.1.

410 See section 3.3.1. Adding to the mystery is the fact that the different hands of the subscriptions indicate that the preserved papyrus is an original, so it is unclear whether it was in fact sent. Worp, P. Kellis I, 54.

112

as a rule with their patronyms. The list is divided into four groups, each subscribed for by a competent writer. The first three of these groups exhibit several intriguing connections to the Pamour family, as we shall see.