The Pompeian Receipts
A find in 1875 in Pompeii in the house of the banker and auctioneer Lucius Caecilius Iucundus brought 153 documents, mostly triptychs, to light.37 With the exception of two documents from AD 15 and 27 respectively, the documents all date from the years AD 53 to 62.
The ruinous state of the documents - largely caused by extensive charring - restricts their legibility considerably.38 All of the documents are receipts: the vast majority39 relate to payment of the proceeds of auctions; these were made through the banker to the seller and principal in the auction.40 There are also 16 receipts41 from the town of Pompeii for payments the banker made to it.In two respects, these documents have their own peculiarities. Even in external appearance they differ from the Transylvanian and the new Pompeian documents. In the case of the triptychs only sides 2, 3, and 5 were prepared for writing, while the cover sides 1 and 6 and side 4 were smooth wood surfaces, side 4 having a groove through which the string closure ran where the seals were placed. The internal text was on sides 2 and 3 as usual, and the external text on side 5. On side 4 next to the seals the names of the witnesses were written in the genitive in ink (these are better preserved than the text itself). For the few diptychs, sides 1, 2, and 3 correspond precisely to these sides of the triptychs, while side 4 was intended for the names of those signing and the external text. The narrow edges of the triptychs on the opposite side from the spine seem generally to have given an indication in ink of the content of the document, so that it could easily be found.
The second peculiarity is, for most of the documents, a dilang=EN-US style='font-size:8.0pt;line-height:115%; font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>fference between the internal and external texts.
The true purpose of the external text was to repeat verbatim the words of the internal text, to show the content of the sealed internal text. Most of the receipts of Caecilius Iucundus are different: the internal text of most triptychs (on sides 2 and 3) is a testatio, while the external text on side 5 is a chirograph.42 The testationes are written by the same hand, presumably that of Caecilius Iucundus, and they record a declaration by the creditor that he has received a sum of money from Caecilius Iucundus. In the chirographs, on the other hand, the creditors acknowledge receipt of a sum of money from Caecilius Iucundus either at their own hand or (in the case of those unable to write) at the hand of a person who could write. In a few cases the internal and external texts do match, both being either testationes43 or chirographs.44The testationes attest a declaration by the creditor (the seller and principal) that he has received a specific sum of money, less a fee for conduct of the auction, from Lucius Caecilius Iucundus. This sum was promised in a verbal contract (stipulatio) which Lucius Caecilius Iucundus had made in relation to the principal's auction. An example is a document from 23 December 57.45 Here Tullia Lampyris agreed with Caecilius Iucundus that he should auction for her an item which is not identified in the document: the contract was one of letting work to be done (locatio conductio operis). In terms of the contract Tullia Lampyris owed a fee (payment for the work done), while Caecilius Iucundus was obliged to carry out the auction and pay her the price realized. But the parties did not limit themselves to the obligation under a contract of letting: as usual, Caecilius Iucundus also promised by means of a stipulatio that he would pay the sale price realized: Tullia Lampyris's claim under the contract of let may have been novated by this means. The testatio speaks only of the stipulatio.
The deduction of the fee for work done was based on Tullia Lampyris's contractual obligation. The auction was regarded as hers, since the goods for sale were hers, and she was the principal and seller. All the testationes are sealed by at least seven and sometimes more seals placed on the string in the groove on side 4. Where there are more than seven, among their number are the author of the document and the creditor.46The external text was in the form of a chirograph, which Tullia Lampyris did not write herself. Instead Sextus Pompeius Axiochus wrote it at her request; women generally let others write on their behalf. The chirograph ends with a final clause referring to her having been asked questions about the sealed tablets (ex interrogation facta tabellarum signatarum). This can refer only to the sealed testatio and to the declaration by Tullia that she had obtained the money that was due. The declaration was the answer to a corresponding question,47 but that does not alter the fact that it is a receipt. The probative value of the chirograph receipt rested on the declaration by the creditor at her own hand that she had received the specified sum of money - and it was against the creditor that the document needed to supply proof.Chirographs were also sealed:48 generally the creditor granting the receipt placed his or her seal on the string, often twice,49 while Marcus Alleius Carpus sealed his chirograph of 24 June 56 four times.50 Third parties were also involved as witnesses: sometimes just one,face=Arial>51 frequently two or three.52 Seven witnesses, such as used for testationes, are not found.
The receipts granted by the town of Pompeii for payments made by Caecilius lucundus are all chirographs, with regard to both the internal and the external text. In most cases the external text repeats the internal text with minor, insignificant differences, although sometimes it is just an extract from the internal text.53 The authors of these documents were slaves of the town, the chirograph of 14 March 53 being by a Secundus,54 while so far as can be seen the others are by a Privatus: both are described as slaves of the town of Pompeii (or, to be precise, the coloni of the colonia Veneriae Corneliae Pompeianorum).
The documents whose dates are preserved come from the years 53, 55, 58, 59, 60, and 62. In each case the slave placed his seal twice on the string closure,55 and, in order to show their authority to do so,56 so did both of the duumviri57 - or else only one of them did so,58 in which case he sealed twice.59 In addition there are regularly seals of one or two independent third parties.60 An example is a document from 19 February 58, according to which Lucius Caecilius lucundus paid 1,652 sesterces to the town of Pompeii in respect of a fuller’s workshop (ob fullonicam). In the same year he went on to pay a further 1,652 sesterces;62 the following year, on 10 July 59, he paid 1,651.5 sesterces;63 and on 8 May 60 once again 1,652 sesterces.64 All the payments were made in respect of the fuller’s workshop. Caecilius Iucundus did not rent the shop himself; instead he farmed the tax that the fullers had to pay the town of Pompeii for their use of the workshop.65 Caecilius Iucundus took the rent paid by the fullers and paid the town the tax due to it; the difference was his profit or loss. Tax-farming contracts were entered into for five years, and the payments were made annually. On the first side of each of these four documents there is reference to the year in respect of which the payment was made; the reason for the slight difference in the payment for the third year is unclear. There is no doubt that these payments relate to tax farming; the first three payments were paid when they fell due, on 1 July, while the fourth was paid before it fell due.66Three receipts - from 5 January and 13 June 58, and 18 June 5967 - relate to a tax-farming contract for taxes due by the tenant of a pasture owned by the town; and a document of 14 March 53 as well as a damaged chirograph68 attest payments by Caecilius Iucundus probably in relation to a tax-farming contract for taxes due under a long lease.69
In spite of their uniformity, these receipts provide a direct view of two of the lines of business of an evidently successful banker and auctioneer; a glimpse of everyday life and the administrative arrangements of Pompeii; and, not least, an insight into just how precise and how rich in information these documents are.
6.