CORN DOLE ARCHIVE

There were two types of scrutiny that might be in question here, that for admission to the metropolitai citizens of the metropolis, and that for admission to the more restricted class of those from the gymnasium (hoi ek tou gymnasiou or apo g.), see Mertens, Les services de l'état civil, pp. 98–128, esp. pp. 127–8. The Hermopolite applicant was of the apo gymnasiou class, but one Oxyrhynchite describes himself in his application as a metropolites (2895 ii 5), which implies that the eligible class was the wider one. Nor are there any here who claim to be of the gymnasium class.

The number of recipients was limited. Places fell vacant by death and were filled by lot. If 2929 is rightly included here, the ideal number was 3,000 and the actual number in Payni of 2 Claudius II (May/June, A.D. 270) was slightly over 2,900.

The lottery was held annually at Rome in the time of Caesar (Suet. Jul. 41, 'quotannis' every year). At Oxyrhynchus applications from persons who had been successful in the lot were submitted in the months Thoth, Phaophi, Tybi, and Mecheir, which might suggest that the lottery was held more often. On the other hand, since eligibility did not depend at all on means, it is likely that a proportion of recipients had no urgent need of an extra food supply. It is probably better to suppose, therefore, that those who entered their petitions in Tybi and Mecheir were simply slow to apply, see also 2894 ii 13 n., 2929 introd.

Citizens of Rome and Alexandria were also admitted to the dole and listed with the epikrithentes those who have passed scrutiny (2927 3 n.). Applications from Alexandrians refer to resolutions of the Oxyrhynchite city council which declared them eligible to share. No application from a Roman citizen domo Roma from the city of Rome survives, but their case may have been the same. However, the grain was the gift of the emperor (2898 10 n.) and it is reasonable to wonder, therefore, whether the city decree was not merely the endorsement of measures which owed their real authority to him.

Part of the qualification of Alexandrians was residence (hestia, ephestion hearth/residence) in Oxyrhynchus. It is uncertain whether this means permanent residence or not, see the divergent views in Braunert, Binnenwanderung, p. 25 n. 39, and Hombert-Préaux, Recensement, p. 67.

There is also a fragmentary application from a citizen of Antinoopolis (2917), but he claims to have done public service in Oxyrhynchus and this appears to be the ground of his appeal, see next paragraph. According to the Antinoite privileges he should have been exempt from public service in other cities, but voluntary liturgy public service by exempt persons is known (BASP vi (1969), pp. 20–1). An Alexandrian also applies on grounds of public service (2915).

The other large category of persons entitled to the dole consisted of those who had performed a public service, the leleitourgekotes those who have performed public service. It appears that these were not merely persons with the appropriate citizen rights (epikrithentes), whose service entitled them to receive the dole without taking part in the lottery for a place, but were admitted solely on grounds of public service without regard to hereditary rights. The normal applications for admission on grounds of public service do not mention citizen rights, though two, perhaps three, petitioners refer both to their epicrisis scrutiny and to their public service.