• Teos to Magnesia-on-the-Maeander, 200-150 BC (presbeutes, gr. πρεσβευτής, en. envoy)

Melanippos son of Apollonios, together with Apollonios son of Melanippos (possibly his father), came to Magnesia-on-the Maeander on behalf of Teos. Their purpose was to notify that Teos granted some honours, essentially a crown, decreed by the magistrates and the council, to an influential Magnesian man, Glaukos (also named Artemidoros) son of Admetos, for being a benefactor of Teian people.

In the first section of this long decree (I.Magnesia 97), we know that Melanippos was also the man who proposed (firstly in front of the magistrates and then in front of the popular assembly) to send a delegation to Magnesia concerning the honours of Glaukos. So, it is not strange at all that the Teians chose him and his father (?) to this task, because probably they had some personal connection to the honoured man.

Apollonios and Melanippos were obviously related, but we can not determine exactly how. Since Melanippos is the main actor in the assembly and in front of the magistrates, but then, when the Teians chese the envoys, the name of Apollonios is consistently put before his, if this is a choice dictated by a different degree of importance, we can assume that Apollonios is the father of Melanippos.

Even if the content of the honours for Admetos is somewhat trivial, and nothing specific is said of his merits towards Teos, this inscription is particularly interesting for the institutional and diplomatical procedures between Teos and Magnesia. For example, Melanippos’ personal intervention in the decision-making process is remarkable. Probably, as Gauthier beautifully reconstructs (Gauthier 2005, 83-4; Rhodes 1997, 394 is less persuasive), it was not originally planned to notify his motherland Magnesia of Admetos’ honours. Melanippos had the matter brought before the popular assembly, approved and implemented with himself as envoy.

The Teian assembly established also an ephodion for the diplomatic expenses. For its part, Magnesia agreed to the request of the Teian ambassadors (the inscription is in essence the product of this diplomatic exchange) and honoured the two men, even offering them a military escort to return home.

The chronology depends essentially on the form of the letters. Gauthier 2005, 85 assumes that the military escort was offered because Ionia was experiencing instability, but this assumption does not help to narrow the chronological framework.

• Gauthier, P. (2005), ‘Trois exemple méconnus d’intervenants dans des décrets de la basse époque hellénistiques’, in Fröhlich, P., Müller, C. (edd.), Citoyenneté et participation à la basse époque hellénistique, Geneva, 79-94.
• Rhodes, P.J. (1997), The decrees of the Greek states, Oxford.