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