Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 9

The Claudian Monument at Patara

Author(s): Christopher P. Jones


Source: Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd. 137 (2001), pp. 161-168
Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany)
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20190946 .
Accessed: 30/10/2014 15:57
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
.
Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access
to Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
161
The Claudian Monument at Patara
A fire on the site of ancient Patara in
October, 1992,
had the
unexpected
result of
bringing
to
light
a
monument of Claudian date.
Originally
a
square
column over five meters
tall,
it bore on three sides an
inscription,
more
precisely
two
inscriptions,
of unusual interest and
importance.
The first
inscription
(Face A) comprises
a dedication to Claudius
by
the
Lycians,
the second
(Face
B and
C)
a
long
list of
roads built
by
the
emperor
and their
lengths;
this list is
prefaced by
an
explanatory
sentence of
eight
lines. The
nearly sixty
blocks on which these texts were inscribed were found rebuilt into a
Byzantine
wall. Fahri
I?ik
and his team of
archaeologists
have done an
extraordinary job
of
saving
and
recording
these blocks under
extremely
difficult
conditions,
and of
putting
them into a coherent order.
They
have
now
published
their
results,
at the same time
calling
on others to
help, especially
with the
primary
inscription
on Face A.
*
As materials for restoration of the text
they
have
provided
a
majuscule version, prepared by
Helmut
E(ngelmann) (p. 107-09).
E. has
put spaces
between words in order to facilitate
comprehension,
and
very
few of his
implied readings
can be called into
question.
The authors have also
supplied
detailed
drawings
of each inscribed
stone, together
with excellent
photographs,
thus
immensely facilitating
the
necessary
work of collaboration. All in
all,
this is a model of
scholarly generosity.
In the
following paper,
I discuss the
inscription
that
occupies
Face
A,
the
opening
lines of that on
Face
B,
and its
very
last lines on Face C.
Finally,
I discuss the historical context of the two
inscriptions
and draw out some
implications,
at the same time
adducing parallels
to some of the
supplements
that I
have
proposed.
The text of Face A takes the usual form of a honorific
inscription,
and
begins
with the name of the
honorand,
Claudius.
(The
use of the dative
strikingly
confirms an
argument
of Paul
Veyne,
that this
case,
an imitation of Latin
usage,
is
especially
at home in dedications to
emperors,
whereas in Greek the
accusative would be
expected.)2
Claudius'
titles,
with his fifth tribunician
power,
eleventh salutation as
imperator,
and fourth consulate in
prospect,
indicate the
year
46.3 Next come the
dedicants,
the
Lycian
people,
with a
participial phrase
in
apposition
to
explain
their motive for the dedication. The last lines
consist of one or more clauses which
give
a further reason for the
Lycians' gratitude,
and mention the
emperor's legate,
the well-known
Q.
Veranius. That fits with the dates of his
tenure,
approximately
43
to 47.4
The first 13 lines
concerning
Claudius are all in order
except
for the last
phrase,
which E.
gives
thus:
12
TME[NQI..]..
Q
...
OY
EAYT??N E0NOYX
Like several of the lines on both
faces,
line 12 is cut across the
join
of two
courses,
and
except
for the
final OY all the
surviving
traces are on the lower
blocks,
that
is, only
the bottom of the letters is
preserved.
On the left-hand block the traces are
compatible
with the
required
TME of
aTco????i|yp?vc?i,
but in addition the
photograph (Plate 15,
block 12 A
IV)
shows the lower left-hand hasta of the
1
Fahri
I?ik,
Havva
??kan,
Nevzat
?evik,
Miliarium
Lyciae:
Das
Wegweisermonument
von Patara.
Vorbericht, Lykia
IV,
Akdeniz
?niversitesi,
1998/1999
[2001].
2
P.
Veyne,
Latomus
21, 1962,49-98,
cf. J. and L.
Robert,
Bull.
?p.
1966.220.
3
The same date in ILS 205
(Rome)
=
E. M.
Smallwood,
Documents
illustrating
the
principates
of
Gaius,
Claudius and
Nero, Cambridge, Eng., 1967,
308 b.
4
A. E.
Gordon, Quintus Veranius,
consul A.D. 49: A
Study
based
upon
his
recently
identified
sepulchral inscription,
University
of California Publications in classical
Archaeology 2.5, Berkeley
and Los
Angeles 1952, 238-44;
R.
Syme,
Roman
Papers 1,
Oxford
1979, 333-35;
A.
Balland, Inscriptions d'?poque imp?riale
du
L?t?on,
Fouilles de Xanthos
7,
Paris
1981,
ch.
3;
B. E.
Thomasson,
Laterculi
Praesidum, G?teborg 1984,
275 no.
1,
who cites IGR 3.703
(Smallwood,
Documents
23
la, Cyaneae)
and
Balland, pp. 79-100,
nos. 37?40
(Xanthos),
in addition to the other
inscriptions
to be discussed below.
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
162 C. P. Jones
following
nu. On the
right-hand
block
(Plate 15,
block 40 A
IV),
the trace
immediately
after the break
looks at first
sight
like a
rightward sloping vertical,
which would
only
be
compatible
with
alpha
or
lambda.
However,
the
photograph
indicates that this is not a
letter,
but an accidental
edge
due to
breakage.
To the
right
the two letters are almost
certainly sigma
and
omega (omega throughout
has
curious
wedge-shaped
marks in
place
of
serifs),
and after that there are traces of two or three
letters,
then room for one or two more before the OY. I restore
[x i]
oc?xfjp[i
x]o\)
?aw
v
?0vo\)?,
'the savior
of their nation'. An
inscription
from
Myra
had
previously
called
Agrippa
x?v
???py?xr|v
Kai a
xfjpa
xo\)
?0vo-o?.5
In the nominative
phrase
that
begins
in line
13,
all is clear down to lines
20-24,
where E. reads:
20 A
nEIAH[0]OTEI
AE OMO
.
[.. .]N
KAI THN IIHN A
[.]0[. ].
IAN KAI TOYI
24
[.]I
NOMOYI
In line
21,
the
photographs (Plate 17,
blocks 18 A VI and 45 A
VI) clearly
show the
phi,
the bottom of
the vertical
being
visible on the left-hand
block,
and the rest of the vertical and
part
of the
loop
on the
right-hand
one,
so that the two blocks are almost
touching.
In line
22,
E.'s calculation of four
missing
letters before the
preserved
nu looks
correct,
but not so
his
reading
of a trace in the first
space;
the small
gamma-shaped
letter shown in the
drawing
is
merely
damage
to the stone. The letters
OMO[_]N
must
represent
the word
?p?|[voia]v.
In line
23, again
E.'s calculation of five
missing
letters looks
correct,
but after the omicron on the
left-hand block the next
letter,
preserved
on the
right-hand
one,
has two horizontal
parallels,
and can
only
be
epsilon
or
sigma;
it also is
immediately adjacent
to the
iota,
and not
separated by
another letter.
Since no Greek word can end in
-o?iav,
this one must end in -oaiav. Now the isolated delta at the end
of the
previous
line is
suspect,
since a mason would not isolate an initial
consonant,
and the sketch and
photograph
both
suggest
that the surface of the stone to the
right
ofthat letter is abraded. There is room
for one or even two more
letters,
and the
required
word must be
?[i|Kai]o[?]oaiav,
'fair administration
of
justice'.
In line
24,
an
adjective
is
required
to
qualify v?pouc.
If E. is
right
in
allowing
seven
letters,
then a
tempting
restoration is
xovq [7taxpioi)]? v?pou?.
An
inscription
from
Pergamon honoring
P. Servilius
Isauricus,
Julius Caesar's
powerful proconsul
of
Asia, may
be
compared:
?
oflpoc ?x?pr)a?v
??7i^iov
l?po?^iov
noTT?ioi) m?v
TaaupiKOv,
x?v
?vQvnaxov,
y?yov?xa ac?xfjpa
Kai
?\)?py?xr|v xfj? 7t??,?C??
Kai a7ro???c?KOxa
xfji
noXtx
xo?? TtaxpioD? v?pouc
Kai
xr]v
?rjpoKpaxiav
aooutauxov.6
The
genitive
absolute
begins
in line
25,
and the first
phrase,
if there is more than
one,
has
xr\q
7io?ax??a?
as its
subject,
with the verb
clearly
contained in the traces of lines 29 and 30. E.
gives
these
lines as follows:
THE nOAEITEIAI TOII
EH APIITiiN
E[n]IAEAE
TMENOII BOYAEY
28 TAIX AnO TOY AKPITOY
riAHOOYI
n[. ]ITEY[ ]
[.. .]HZ
.
[
Line 29 is divided between two courses
(Plate 18,
blocks 21 A
VII,
48 A
VII, plate 19,
block 24 A
VIII;
the lower
right-hand
block is
missing).
The
drawing
of the
upper
course shows the
tops
of the first
letters read
by E.,
but the
photograph
fails to show the final
upsilon,
which was
perhaps
on a
chip
now
broken
away.
After that
upsilon
there
may
have been one or two further
letters,
but not
necessarily,
5
IGR
3.719,
cf. D.
Magie,
Roman Rule in Asia
Minor,
Princeton
1950,
529.
6
OGIS
449;
IGR 4.433. On Isauricus in
Asia,
J. and L.
Robert,
Hellenica
6, 1948,
37-42.
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Claudian Monument at Patara 163
since the lines do not
always go
to the
margin (cf.
line 27
just above).
At the
beginning
of line
30,
the
photograph
shows one or two letters
missing (what
looks like a lower horizontal seems
again
to be
damage
to the
stone).
Next there is a
very
clear
sigma
before the eta. In
short,
the traces are
fully
compatible
with the
required participle, 7t[i]cx?\)|[0eio]r|<;.
For lines 30
through
36
(Plate 19,
block 24 A
VIII,
with the
right-hand
block
missing;
PI.
19,
blocks
27
AIX,
54
AIX),
E. reads:
[.. JHZ. [
[.. .]YI1[
32
TH0HIA[
OYHPAN[I
.
OY
.
[
8
1ITPATH
TOY TIBEPIOY KAAY
36 AIOY KAIIAPOI
IE[BA]ITOY
A new
phrase
should
begin
after
-[0??]or|?
in
30, leaving
about 10 letters to the
right.
A clue
may
reside
in the letters TH0HIA in
32,
which can
hardly
be other than the third
person plural indicative,
aorist
passive,
of a verb
ending
in -x? or -x?oo. The
present
context
suggests
one such
verb, e?epyex?c?.
Adducing
an
expression
such as the
following
in an
imperial inscription
from
Hyettos
of
Boeotia, [?vxi
noXX&v]
Kai
pey?ta?v
[cbv]
e\)?pyexr|0r|Gav nap?
xov
Qeov,1
I
propose
the
following,
which would
produce 16,
15 and 17 letters
respectively
in lines 30-32:
[?vxi noXX&v] | [cbv]
vn
[avxox>
?\)?pye]|xr|
0r|oa[v
?i? Kowtod] | Ouripavtioi),
kxX.],
'in return for the
many
benefits
they
have received from him
through Quintus
Veranius'. After Veranius' name in line
33,
we would
expect
mention of his
function,
as in Face B lines 7 and 8. This time the clue comes from line
34,
where I see
nothing
before the first
omicron,
but a vertical
just following
the
upsilon;
thereafter I count five or six letters
missing
before the
ITPAT on the
right-hand block,
not
eight
as calculated
by
E. I therefore restore 33
through
35 as:
0\)T|pav[io'o 7ip?o??'o]|xo'?
ic[ai
avxi]oxpaxr||yo'o. 7tp?a??WTic
Kai
?vxiaxpaxrvyo?,
with or without the
Kai,
is the usual
rendering
of
legatus pro
praetore?
On Face
B, however,
the Kai is
apparently
omitted.
I
propose
the
following
text and translation of Face A:
Ti?fipicui
[K?,]ai)?ic?i I Apouaoi)
[vi]m
Kai|aapi le?aoxoi rep|4paviK
i,
?p%iepe? [p]e|yioxc?i,
?[r|]papxiKfi? |
e^oi)[ai]ac
x?
7t?|i|7tx?v, a[?]xo|8Kp?xopi
x?
?v??ralxov, rcaxpi 7taxpi|?o?,
vnax(?[i x]?
x?|xapxov ?7co[?e]?ei|12yp?v[c?i,
x
i]
oa>xfjp[i
x]ov \
?avx&v
eQvovq,
A|/?]|kioi
(pi?op
paioi
Kai
|
cpi?,OK[a]iaap??,
7tio|16xoi <70p|ia%oi, ?7ra?,|?,a[y?]v[x?]? gxoco?|c??
Kai
?vopia?
Kai
?,ti|g[x]?u?v
[?i]?
xt)v
0dav
|20 amo[6]
7ip?voiav, ?|7i?iA,r|cpox??
??
?p?|[voia]v
Kai
xr\v ?or|v
?[i|Kai]o[?]9aiav
Kai
xovq
|24 [7taxpun)]?
(?)
v?poD?, | xfj? noXixeiaq xo?? |
?^ ?piax
v
?[7r]i?,??l?|y|i?voi? ?oa)X,?0)|28xaic
a7c? xov
ocKpixoi)
|
7iX,ri0o'u? TitilaxED^ItOE?laric,
[?vxi
noXX&v
\ cbv]
vu
[amo?
e\)?pye]|32xr|0r|oa[v
(?)
?i?
Koivxo\)] |
OurjpavtioD 7cp8a?e'?]|xo'?
ic[ai
?vxi]axpaxr||yo\) Ti?epio-o
K?m^?io-o Kaiaapo? le?aa
xov.
To Tiberius
Claudius,
son of
Drusus,
Caesar
Augustus Germanicus, pontifex
maximus,
trib.
pot. V,
imp.
XI, p. p.,
cos. IV
design(atus),
the savior of their
nation,
the
Lycians,
Rome- and
Caesar-loving,
faithful, allied,
freed from
faction,
lawlessness and
brigandage though
his divine
foresight, having
recovered
concord,
the fair administration of
justice
and the ancestral
(?) laws,
the conduct of affairs
having
been entrusted to councilors drawn from
among superior people by
the
incompetent majority,
in
return for the
many
benefits
they
have received from him
(?) though Quintus Veranius, legatus
propraetore
of Tiberius Claudius Caesar
Augustus.
The
opening
lines of Face B have a less official and more
panegyrical
tone than the
inscription
on
Face A.
They
consist of a
single
sentence with Claudius as its
subject,
the finite verb
?7to?r|G?v,
and
7
Syll.3
1112,
5-6.
8
H. J.
Mason,
Greek Terms for Roman
Institutions,
American Studies in
Papyrology 13,
Toronto
1974, 153;
see also
OGIS,
Index VIII s.v.
rcpeG?eDxric.
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
164 C. P. Jones
odovq
as the
object;
thereafter there is a
prepositional phrase again involving Q. Veranius,
and then a
relative clause
dependent
on
?Sovq.
All the
rest,
in the form 'from X to
Y,
x
stades' lists the roads
'made'
by
the
emperor.
These
opening
lines are
longer
than on Face
8,
about 22-24 letters
per
line
rather than
14-16,
and
usually occupy
three blocks rather than two.
All is clear down to line
4,
which is written across two courses
(Plates
20 and
21,
blocks
1, 2,
3 B
I,
4 and 6 B
II,
with 5 B II
missing).
In line
4,
E. reads:
TQ[P]
OAOYI
KA0O[... ]N
.
[. ]
EIIOI
Though
some of these letters should be
dotted,
the
only problem
resides in the central
ones,
which on
the
photograph
look like
KA0O[
5
]KI[. .].
The omicron could
theoretically
be another rounded letter
such as
theta;
the
kappa
and iota seem clear in the
drawing
and the
photograph,
so that E.'s nu seems to
be a
misreading.
The correct
supplement
is
surely
Ka0'
o[?lr|v Ai)]Ki[av], 'throughout
all
Lycia'.
For lines 5
through 8,
E.
gives
the
following:
HIEN AIA
TI[BEPIOY] OYHPAN[IOY]
TOY IAIOY
n[
6
]OY ANTIIT[PA]
THTOY Y?H
.
[ ]
N
[E]ZTIN
METPO
8 N TO
Yn{P}OrErPAMMENON
vacat
Ti[??pio\)]
in line 5 cannot be
right,
for the reason that Veranius'
praenomen
is
Quintus.
The
photo
graph (plate 21,
block 4 B
II)
shows what could be a horizontal attached to the hasta of the
supposed
iota,
in other words a
damaged
eta. The
genitive
of Veranius' name and titles must therefore
depend
on
a feminine
noun,
presumably beginning
with the letters YFIH in line 7. Instead of
Ti[??pio\)],
that
is,
we
should read
xr)[v Koivxo-o], making
a
slightly longer space
than E. allows for. That is corroborated
by
line
6,
where the lacuna
surely represents 7i[p?a??ux]o'6,
seven letters rather than six. Hence in line 7 the
lacuna after the
eta,
which is of about the same
width,
should also be of about seven letters. On the left
hand
block,
the trace after YI1H
appears
as a vertical
standing
close to the
eta;
on the
right-hand
one
(plate 21,
6 B
II),
the
drawing
shows the nu and the
sigma
as well
preserved,
while
they
seem to have
flaked
away
in the
photograph.
The word to be
supplied
should be
imr|p[?oiav],
with one letter
(or
perhaps two)
to follow before the
nu;
this letter should then be
omega, [cb]v, providing
the
required
relative
pronoun
to
qualify p?xpov. tmripEG?a
is not uncommon in
inscriptions
for the 'services'
rendered
by
citizens to their
city:
its
application
to an
imperial legate
seems
unusual, though
not
surpris
ing
when Claudius has
just
been called
'emperor
of the world'. An
inscription
from
Thyatira praises
a
citizen who
among
his other services had been
priest
of Roma and also
?7ti??a?(o)i
Kai
KupiaKa??
imr|p?G?ai? ('services
to the
emperors') %pr)oi|H?\)oavxa xfj rcaxpioi.9
I
propose
the
following
text and translation of Face
B,
lines 1
through
8:
[Ti?ep]ioc K?aiS?to? [Apoujooi)
| vxbq Ka?aap l??aaxoc T?ppavi|K?c,
?
xfj? oiKo\)[|i?vr|?
a]uxoKp?|4xc?[p], ??o??
Ka0'
?[?,r|v
Au]K?[av]
?7ioi|r|a?v
?i?
xf)[v
Koivxo\)]
O?r)pav[un)] |
xov \b\ov
7c[p?a??-?x]oC avxiaxtpallxiiyoi)
\>7cr|p[?a?av,
cb]v
?axiv
p?xpo|8v
x?
\)7r{p}oy?ypapp?vov
vac.
Tiberius
Claudius,
son of
Drusus,
Caesar
Augustus Germanicus,
the
emperor
of the
world,
made
roads
throughout
all
Lycia by
the
agency
of
Q. Veranius,
his own
legatus propraetore,
of which
(roads)
the distance is written below.
The last lines on Face C
(28-29)
are
exceptional
in that
they
mention roads built in the
province
of
Asia,
and not in
Lycia;
moreover,
whereas in the rest of this section the basic formulation is 'from X to
Y,
x
stadia',
here there stands 'and in Asia between
C[ ]
and Laodicea in the
.
..' The lines
are
longer here,
some 35 or so
letters,
and E. reads:
KAI EN THI
A2IA[I]
METAEY
K[
K[AI A]AOAIKHA[I E]N
TQI
EIIIKAAOt
9
TAM 5.2.940
(CIG 3490;
IGR
4.1228).
For this and other
epigraphical examples,
L.
Robert, Opera
Minora Selecta
7.733 n. 14
(Arch. Eph. 1969).
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Claudian Monument at Patara 165
The editors
tentatively suggest
that the two cities meant are
Cibyra
in southern
Phrygia
and Laodicea on
the
Lycos,
in the
Caro-Phrygian
borderland.10 This is
unduly
tentative. An
inscription
from
Cibyra,
known since the nineteenth
century,
shows Veranius
being
honored for
'supervising
the
Augustan
constructions
(x
v
lefiacx&v ?pyoov)
in accordance with the mandates of Tiberius Claudius Caesar
Augustus,
the founder of the
city,
and of
[name erased] Augusta';
the mention of an
empress (in
this
case,
Messallina)
as
issuing
mandata is
highly striking, though
not out of
place
for the
reign
of
Claudius.11
Cagnat
had
glossed
the
expression lefiacxa
?pya
in the
Cibyra inscription
as
referring
to
roads and the
like,
whereas Louis Robert held that
they
were
buildings
within the
city.
While Veranius
might
have
performed
work of both
kinds,
it now looks as if
Cagnat
was
essentially right.12
In
addition,
another
inscription
of
Cibyra,
dated in or about the
reign
of
Claudius,
mentions a
Q.
Veranius
Philagrus
who 'ended a
great conspiracy
that was
greatly harming
the
city'.13
Nor can there be
any
doubt that the
stretch of road referred to here is the one
leading
north-north-west to Laodicea on the
Lycus,
where it
joins
the
King's Highway
down the Meander
valley
to the coast.14 The
puzzle
of these two lines is in
the last
preserved
words of 29. The one
following
?v x?i must be the
participle eniKaXo[v\i?,vm],
'in
the so-called
. .
.' It is
unclear, however,
whether this
phrase
refers to the whole district
through
which
the road
ran,
or
only
to
Laodicea,
but either
way
I cannot see a
satisfactory supplement. Nonetheless,
I
would constitute these two lines thus: Kai ?v
xfji
Aa?ai
p?xa^t) Kti?upac
ca. 10
] | K[ai
A]ao?iKT|a[?
?]v
x i
?7UKa?,o['U|jivc?i
ca. 10
].
If Tacitus' account of the
year
42 had not
perished
with the rest of Book IX or X of the
Annales,
we
would
certainly
know much more about the
background
to Claudius' decision to
impose
direct rule on
Lycia.15
The historian is interested in Veranius'
father,
who had had a similar
post
to his son as the first
legate
of
Cappadocia (Ann. 2.56.4).
At the time he was a comes of Germanicus in the
East,
and
again
Tacitus
gives
him a
prominent
role in the
prosecution
of Cn. Piso
(2.74.2, 3.10.1, etc.).
The historian
might
have treated the son's
appointment
to
Lycia
as an
example
both of inherited
ability
and of the
power
of
adsentatio;
when
commenting
on
Veranius' death in
Britain,
he notes his
'great reputation
for
severity',
and at the same time his
flattery
of Nero
(14.29.1).
Otherwise,
our
literary
evidence for the
absorption
of
Lycia
is
practically
confined to a sentence in
Suetonius and a more
informative
paragraph
in Cassius Dio. The former
says merely
that Claudius 'took
away
the
liberty
of the
Lycians
because of their destructive internal conflicts'
(ob
exitiabiles inter se
discordias,
Cl.
25.3).
Cassius Dio is more
informative. He
reports
under the
year
42
(60.17.3-4):
'[Claudius]
enslaved the
Lycians
because
they
had been in turmoil
(axaoiaaavxac),
and
incorporated
them in the
province
of
Pamphylia.
In this
investigation,
which he conducted in the
senate,
he used the
Latin
language
when
questioning
one of the
ambassadors,
a man
originally Lycian
who had become a
Roman. Because the man did not understand the
question,
he
deprived
him of his
citizenship, saying
someone should not be a Roman if
they
did not understand the
language.'
Some modern scholars have
10
F.
I?ik
et al.
(n. 1) 101,
'Es k?nnte
Kibyra
und Laodikeia am
Lykos gemeint
sein. Die Stelle w?rde sich dann
m?glicherweise
darauf
beziehen,
da? ein Teil der
gro?en
?berlandstra?e nach Laodikeia
lykischer
Aufsicht
untersteht,
wobei auch diese
Angaben
mit dem
Zollgesetz
der Provinz Asia
zusammenh?ngen
k?nnten.'
11
IGR 4.902
(Smallwood,
Documents 231
b),
with the
impossible supplement Ze?acftfic guvkXtitoi)];
for the correct
text,
L. Robert in M.
Holleaux,
Etudes
d'?pigraphie
et d'histoire
grecques 6,
Paris
1968, 14-15; Balland, Inscriptions
26 n.
102. Cf. Suet. Cl. 29.1.
12
Cagnat
on IGR
4.902; Robert,
Etudes
anatoliennes,
Paris
1937,
89 n. 2.
13
IGR
4.914,
cf.
Robert,
Et. anat. 375-78.
14
On this
road,
R. J. A.
Talbert, ed.,
The
Barrington
Atlas of the Greek and Roman
World,
Princeton and Oxford
2000,
Map
65 B2 and
3,
and see also W.
Ruge
s.v.
Themisonion,
RE 10
A, 1934,
1638-41. On communications between
Cibyra
and
Laodicea, Robert,
Et. anat. 385.
15
R.
Syme, Tacitus,
Oxford
1958, 386,
Tacitus would not fail to
register
the first
campaigns
of Veranius.' On the
position
of the
year
42 in the
Annales, Syme, op. cit.,
259-60.
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
166 C. P. Jones
wondered whether the
allegations
of
Lycian
turbulence are a mere
pretext;
'this
high-handed action,
in
accord with Claudius's desire for the
glory
of
extending
the
Empire,
. . .
was
justified
on the
specious
ground
that no other means could be found of
preventing
the
Lycians
from
quarrelling
with one
another.'16 The
present
text does not
quite dispel
such
skepticism,
but at least it shows that
very
serious
internal troubles had
preceded
the
imposition
of direct rule.
Information also comes from several
inscriptions.
The most
revealing, though very mutilated,
is
Veranius'
sepulchral inscription,
found near Rome. After mention of his
five-year
tenure of the
combined
province
of
Lycia-Pamphylia,
it alludes to a
region
or
people brought
'into the
power'
of
Claudius,
to the reconstruction of certain
walls,
and to
'pacification' (pacavit).11
The new monument reveals
something neglected by
Suetonius and
Dio,
that
'brigandage' (Face
A
line
18)
had broken out either before or
possibly
after the
imposition
of direct rule. Sir Ronald
Syme
long ago proposed supplying
line 6 of Veranius'
sepulchral inscription
to read:
[totam provinciam
a
latronijb[usJ pacavit.
For
support
he adduced
Augustus' proud
claim in the Res Gestae
(25.1),
mare
pacavi
a
praedonibus.
His
conjecture
was
published only
in
1995,
but it now
receives corroboration
both from the mention of
'brigandage'
on Face A and 'of all
Lycia',
Ka0'
o[X\\v A\)]Ki[av],
if that is
correctly supplied
on Face B.18
By contrast,
the new text corroborates Suetonius and Dio in their statement that Claudius' inter
vention was
officially
motivated
by Lycian discord;
that follows from the
phrase
on Face
A, 'having
recovered
concord,
the fair administration of
justice
and the ancestral
(?)
laws'. Similar
expressions
are
found in Hellenistic
inscriptions,
for
instance,
'he asked the
king
to restore the laws and the ancestral
constitution',
used of an ambassador to an Attalid
king.
Such
phrases,
which also occur in
literature,
'were
commonly
used in the third and second centuries in contrast to
tyranny, [and]
did not
necessarily
imply
a return to the
previous
constitution
enjoyed
before the
"tyranny"'.19
So also here it is not neces
sary
to
suppose
that the restoration of 'ancestral laws'
(if
that is the
right supplement)
means the restora
tion of the status
quo ante,
but rather the cessation of
anarchy.
The contrast is
striking
with a
somewhat
similar
inscription put up by
the
Lycians
in
Rome, probably
after their 'liberation' from Rhodes in 167
BCE. There the
league
claimed to have 'recovered its ancestral
democracy' (Kopia?pevov xtjv
7i?xpiov
??ipoKpaxiav), 'democracy' being
used as a
near-synonym
of
'freedom',
as often in this
period.20
The
new
inscription
makes no such
claim,
since what was restored in
Lycia
could not be called
democracy.
In
general,
the term
'democracy'
does not enter the normal
public
discourse of cities of the Roman
empire,
to
judge by
their
inscriptions;
in his
political treatises,
Plutarch makes
very
little use of the
word.21
The discord of the time also finds an echo in an
inscription
discovered near Corinth in the 1950's.
This contains a
long
dossier of decrees in honor of a
Lycian
woman named Junia Theodora. One of the
two decrees of the
Lycian
koinon attests that Theodora had
'generously
sheltered
very many
of our
people
when
they
were exiled'
(7r?,??GX0\)?
x v
Tjpexepcov ?K7teoovxa? urce??^axo peya^pep ?,
SEG
16
Magie,
Roman Rule
529; Syme,
Anatolica: Studies in
Strabo,
Oxford
1995, 270-72,
also inclines to seek 'extraneous
reasons' for the annexation.
17
The restorations
given by Gordon, Quintus
Veranius
270-71,
and
reproduced
in AE
1953, 251,
are
overly generous,
as are those of
Smallwood,
Documents 231
c;
a much soberer text in A. R.
Birley,
The Fasti of Roman
Britain,
Oxford
1981,
50.
^
Syme,
Anatolica 273.1 heard Professor
Syme
make this
proposal
in an Oxford seminar
forty years ago.
19
Ambassador to Attalid
king: Holleaux,
Etudes 2.92.
Propaganda:
F. W.
Walbank,
A
Commentary
on
Polybius 1,
Oxford
1957, 288;
cf. J.-L.
Ferrary,
Philhell?nisme et
imp?rialisme,
BEFAR
271,
Paris
1988,
196.
20
OGIS
551;
L.
Moretti, Inscriptiones
Graecae Urbis Romae
1,
Rome
1968,
5. On
'democracy',
J. A. O.
Larsen,
CPh
40,1945,88-91.
21
In the An
seni,
De
exilio,
and the
Praecepta reipublicae gerendae, apart
from references to Periclean
Athens,
there are
only
two
occurrences,
both
stressing
the need for submission to
higher authority:
An seni 783
D,
Praec.
reip. ger.
816 E-F
(TLG search).
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
The Claudian Monument at Patara 167
18.143 line
58).
These should be
people unjustly
exiled before the Roman
intervention,
since the
league
would
hardly praise
her for
sheltering
victims of Roman rule.22
As well as
discord,
the new text also
alleges
that there had been
judicial irregularities.
An ordinance
of Veranius from
Myra
shows him
putting
an end to the falsification of official
records,
no doubt
another
aspect
of these circumstances.23 The
expression 'having
recovered the fair administration of
justice', xf]v ?o?)v 8[iKaio8]oc?av,
is
presumably
connected with the
Lycian peculiarity
of
calling
these
governors ?iKaio?oxai, 'dispensers
of
justice';
this term is
applied
to Veranius himself in an
inscription
of Xanthos.24 The verb ?iKaio?oxe?v is also used of Lucius
Antonius,
brother of the better-known
Marcus,
as
proquaestor
of Asia in 49 BCE:
5iKaio8oxr|oavxa xr\v
knap%r\av Kaoap??
Kal
?iKaico?
Kai
?a?coc.25
The constitution of the
Lycian
Federation is known both from a detailed account in
Strabo,
and from
a number of
inscriptions
both earlier and later than the
year
43.26 It has often been wondered how much
change
resulted from direct Roman
rule,
but on this
point
the
inscription
is not
explicit (nor
was such a
text
likely
to
be).
It refers
only
to the
Lycians' recovery
of their 'ancestral
laws',
and
yet
there must
have been Roman
legislation
for the
newly incorporated region,
similar to the lex
Pompeia
known for
Pontus and
Bithynia.
Neither Dio nor Suetonius mentions such a
law,
but Michael W?rrle inferred its
existence from the famous dossier of C. Julius Demosthenes of
Oenoanda,
dated to the
reign
of Hadrian.
This refers to
previous governors
as
confirming
certain
privileges
attached to
magistracies
that had
come into existence 'after the
legislative
acts'
(xa?? eTriyevop?vai? pex? x?? vopoOeaia? Kaiva??
?p%a??);
the
implication
is that these
governors
had
agreed
to extend such
privileges
on the basis of
those
already
contained in the
original
law or
laws,
of which a second one
may go
back to
Vespasian.27
That the
lexprovinciae
for
Lycia
should have favored the
wealthy
classes is not
surprising; Pliny's
references to the lex
Pompeia
for
Bithynia
show a similar
tendency.28
A
recently published inscription
from
Pergamon
has revealed
something
of the constitution of Asia
shortly
after the end of Attalid rule in
133
BCE,
and
suggests
that the measures taken for the stabilization of
Lycia may
have been similar.29
'When affairs
changed
to
democracy
and the
people
voted
representatives
from
among
the best
men,
Metrodoros was
appointed,
and
participating
in the council
(set up)
in accord with the Roman
legislation
...':
pexarceoovxcov
xe x?v
Tcpayp?xcov ei? ?ripoKpaxiav
Kai xov
?ripou cruv??po'o?
xeipo
xovnaavxo?
x?v
?piaxcov ?v?p?v, Kaxecx?Gr)
Kai
Mrixpo?copo?
Kai ?v x?i Kax?
xt]v Tcopa?Kriv
vopo?eoiav ?oDAeDxripicui yevopevo?,
kx?,. Whatever
precisely
the function of this
council,
and
whatever its relation to the later federal council
(koinori),
as in
Lycia
it consisted of members chosen
from the better
sort,
though
elected
by
the
people.
This
parallel may explain
a detail of the
present inscription
which is otherwise
puzzling,
the
statement that 'the conduct of affairs
[had]
been entrusted to councilors selected from
among superior
22
On this
inscription,
see in
particular
L.
Robert, Opera
Minora Selecta 2.840-48
(REA 1960).
I am not convinced
by
the
arguments
of R.
Behrwald,
Der
Lykische
Bund:
Untersuchungen
zu Geschichte und
Verfassung, Antiquitas.
Reihe
1,
Abhandlungen
zur Alten Geschichte
48,
Bonn
2000, 120-128,
cf. 129 n.
430,
for
placing
this
inscription
in 42/41 BCE.
23
M. W?rrle in J.
Borchhardt, ed., Myra:
Eine
lykische Metropole
in antiker und
byzantinischer Zeit,
Istanbuler
Forschungen 30,
Berlin
1975, 254-286, esp.
255-56
(L'Ann?e ?pigraphique 1976, 673,
cf. J. and L.
Robert,
Bull.
?p. 1963,
252).
24
Balland, Inscriptions
93 no.
38,
cf. 84 n. 47 with further
bibliography.
25
IGR
4.400, 401;
on his
position,
T. R. S.
Broughton,
The
Magistrates
of the Roman
Republic 2,
New York
1952,
260.
26
Strabo 14.664-665. Cf.
Magie,
Roman Rule
524-26, 530-34,
and now Behrwald
(n. 22), especially
165-69.
27
M.
W?rrle,
Stadt und Fest im kaiserzeitlichen
Kleinasien, Vestigia 39,
Munich
1988, especially
96-100.
28
Magie,
Roman Rule
369, 603-04, 640-41;
A. N.
Sherwin-White,
The Letters of
Pliny,
Oxford
1966,
669-70: 'Such
changes
were
apt
to favour an
oligarchy
of wealth.'
29
M.
W?rrle,
Chiron
30, 2000, 543-76;
the
passage
cited is
p.
544 lines 13-15.
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
168 C. P. Jones
people by (?rco)
the
incompetent majority'.30 (It
is unclear whether the
prepositional phrase goes
with
the first
participle,
'entrusted',
or the
second, 'selected', though
the latter seems more
likely,
and the
difference need not be
very great.)
There cannot be much doubt about the
meaning
of the
phrase ?ncpi
xov
7rAfj0o?; Josephus
uses
exactly
this
expression
about the
people
of Caesarea when it demanded his
punishment,
and was rebuffed
by Vespasian: Ovecmao?av??
??
xf]v rcepi
xowou
??r|aiv ?
vn9
aKp?xo-? yivop?vriv nXr\Qovq e^eXvcev r\ov%?q
(BJ 3.411).
It
may
therefore be
that,
in
Lycia
as in
Asia,
Rome set
up
a mechanism
whereby
the commons voted on their
representatives,
but were
given only
a
very
narrow
choice, perhaps by
means of a
high
census
qualification,
or
by
the
requirement
that the
governor approve
the list of candidates. The official
justification
was
presumably
that the
majority
had
proved 'incompetent'
to
govern
itself because of the faction that had
prevailed
hitherto.
In
general, therefore,
the
inscription
is an
eloquent
witness to the state of
Lycia
before its
absorption
in
42,
and to the
changes
that Claudius introduced with Veranius as his
loyal agent.
The whole monu
ment should be
regarded primarily
as a
glorification
of the
emperor,
and can be called a
'Wegweiser',
'signpost', only
in a
very
extended
sense,
since it
clearly
does not function within a
system
of roads.
Rather it
commemorates, first,
Claudius'
general
work of
pacification
and
reconstruction,
and second
the
building
of a road-network of which Patara was
only
a
part.
In this second
respect,
it recalls
Augustus'
miliarium aureum at
Rome,
since that too is now
usually thought
to be rather a
register
of the
roads built
by Augustus
within
Italy
than a
signpost marking
the distance between Rome and other
cities.31
According
to
Suetonius,
Claudius' favorite oath was
by Augustus,
and historians have often
noticed his interest in
recalling
and
emulating
the achievements of his
predecessor.32
Harvard
University Christopher
P. Jones
30
It seems
impossible
to take ano in
any
other
way:
for this
sense,
note Liddell-Scott-Jones s.v. Ill
4,
'in later Greek
frequently
of the direct
agent',
with several citations from the
early imperial period.
31
Z. Mari in E. M.
Steinby, ed.,
Lexicon
Topographicum
Urbis Romae
3, 1996,
250-51.
32
Suet. Cl.
11.2;
see
e.g.
A. D.
Momigliano,
Claudius: The
Emperor
and his
Achievement, Cambridge, Eng., 1961,
24
25.
I am
greatly
indebted to Professor Glen Bowersock for his advice.
This content downloaded from 194.27.186.191 on Thu, 30 Oct 2014 15:57:19 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Вам также может понравиться