Anatolian Studies Presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay by W. H. Buckler; W. M. Calder Review by: M. N. T. The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 12 (1922), pp. 291-293 Published by: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/296195 . Accessed: 09/05/2014 09:52

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 [email protected].

.

Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Roman Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.89 on Fri, 9 May 2014 09:52:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NOTICES OF RECENT PUBLICATIONS. 291

matterthe authordeals in successionwith Invective,Satire, the philosophersof the first centuryA.D., and finallywith Christiancontroversialists, showing without difficulty in all a high degree of moral obliquityif truthfulnessis counted a virtue. But in this melancholycataloguie, besides the matter that is strictlyrelevant, there are manyscattered scrapsof variedinterest. The authorwas byway of dabblingin whatis calledpsychology, and therebyhe was led to severalunfamiliar conclusions-for instance, that the trouble with the youngerSeneca was ' gastricneurasthenia ' (p. 99). Religionis the subject of the next fivechapters, and in these the author'sanxiety to demonstratethe defectsof the Romansin thisrespect and the abuses to whichthey allowed theirreligious institu- tionsto be put endsin the productionof a picturewhich to somewill seemnot altogether fair. A legalmind is not the bestequipped for penetrating the inconsistencies of religious practiceto thereality behind, and in thesechapters on religionthe author'slegal training leads to a resultwith failings not unlikethose which marked the workof a greaterscholar whenhe handledthis side of Romanculture. The final,and probablythe most valuable, section of thebook consists of seven chapters concernedwith variousaspects of Julio-Claudianhistory. Aftera generaldiscussion of the positionof the Senate and its relationto the princepsthere comes an elaborateand verysane investigationof the Tiberius-legendin Tacitus. Pelham'sview that the story owed its mainfeatures to a traditionof long standingis rejected,atid in its place is put the suggestionthat Tacitus observedthe establishedrules of rhetoricas faithfullyin the freedomhe allowedhimself in the portrayalof characteras in othermatters. The com- parisonhere given of the practiceof Tacitus with the preceptsof Quintilianis good. At the end of thissection comes forty pages devotedto the storiestold of Gaius. That here again the scandalsare not consistentwith one anotherit is an easy taskto show; but his successin thisdoes not temptMr. Jeromeinto any extravagantlaudation. His positivecontribution is modest,and it is this-that it was not maniabut drink. It is difficultto say of a book like thisthat it is important: but it will certainlybe useful. Though it has no singlethesis to maintainand is scarcelymore than a loose-knit collectionof essays,it is the workof a scholarlymind and of a mind well storedwith knowledgeof the sources. There are indeed blemisheswhich, since the book lacks the author'sfinal revision, it would be unfairto criticize; but the blemishesare nowhere serious. The book is one whichyounger students will findof considerableservice, and it is one of which no man who cares forRoman historywill regretthe reading. The authorwas a man ofthe world as well as a scholar,and abouthis views there is a freshness whichwill makehis readerswish that he had lived to give the worldhis largerwork. H. M. L.

ANATOLIAN STUDIES PRESENTED TO SIR W'ILLIAM MITCHELL RAMSAY. Edited by W. H. BUCKLER and W. M. CALDER. Manchester UniversityPress. I 9Z3. Pp. xl +480 with I4 plates. It would be hard to imagineany more eloquent tributeto the laboursof a great scholarand teacherthan that containedin this volume. The workaccomplished bv Sir WilliamRamsay himself during the past forty-fiveyears is indicatedby the impressive Bibliographyof his publishedwritings, compiled by his daughter,which is prefixedto thevolume (pp. xiii-xxxviii). The remainderof the bookis takenup by thirty-twoessays by an equal numberof contributors:all of theseare here publishedfor the firsttime except the valuable discussionby B. Pace of the temple and cult of ArtemisPergaea, whichappeared previously in A4uisonia,x, i69ff. Twelveof the writersare British,and the restAmerican, French, German, Austrian, Belgian, Italian and Russian: among them figuremost of the livingscholars whose names are especiallyassociated with the archaeo- logical explorationof 1\'Iinoras well as one, Howard CrosbyButler, whose death in I922 createda gap whichit willnot be easyto fill. The bookfinds its unitynot onlyin the personof the'ApXt,xu-rmns(p. v) to whomall itschapters are dedicated, but alsoin thefact that they all relateto Asia Minorin antiquity.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.89 on Fri, 9 May 2014 09:52:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 292 NOTICES OF RECENT PUBLICATIONS.

Yet unityis by no meanssynonymous with monotony,for the ' antiquity' in question coversa periodof sometwo millennia,from about I469 B.C. (p. I67) to 5I8 A.D. (p. I62) and the subjectsdiscussed include not onlyhistory in the narrowacceptation of the word but also geography,language and literature,religion, epigraphy and numismatics,art and architecture. It would be impossiblewithin the limitsof a briefreview to indicate,however sum- marily,the contentsof each of theseessays, and so, althoughthe taskof selectionis an invidiousone where the standardis so uniformlyhigh, some must be singledout for mention,if onlyto serveas samplesof the wholework. Philologistswill welcomeA. H. Sayce's noteson the languagesof Asia lMLinorin the Hittite period,W. Arkwright'ssummary of our knowledgeof Lycian and J. Fraser's discussionof Lydian,leading to the conclusionthat it is moreor less closelyrelated with Etruscanand belongsto the samefamily as theCaucasian languages but came intocontact at an earlyperiod with such an Indogermaniclanguage as influenced" Hittite." The Hittite question,slowly emerging from the darknesswhich recently enshrouded it into a twilightwhich heralds, we mayhope, a brighterday, is treatedby D. G. Hogarthwith special referenceto the Hittite monumentsof and southernCappadocia and by H. R. Hall fromthe Egyptianstandpoint. A. T. Olmstead,again, traces, in the light of the Assyrianrecords, the relationsof the AssyrianEmpire to the statesof Asia Minor fromthe reign of ShalmaneserIII (86o-825 B.C.) to that of Assurbanipal(668-626). G. F. Hill and E. S. G. Robinsonmake interesting additions to our knowledgeof the coins of southernAsia lMLinor,the formerdescribing a numberof recentacquisitions of the BritishMuseum, the lattermaintaining that the archeron fifth-centurycoins of Soli in is an Amazon. In the sphereof religion-in whichAsia Minor, the meeting-placeof so manyraces and influences,offers the studentabundance of valuable material-two essayscall for special notice. In one J. Keil gives a masterlysurvey of the Lydian cults,including a completelist of the worshipsattested by Greekinscriptions, and attemptsthe difficult task of distinguishingthe various' strata,'-Islamic,Christian, Roman, Greek,Jewish, Syrian, Persian, Phrygianand Anatolian,-emphasizingthe importanceof the last- named elementeven in the Roman Imperial period. The other is W. M. Calder's scholarlyexamination of the epigraphicalevidence for the Anatolianheresies, in which, afterinvestigating the causes of the rarityof ' heretical' inscriptions,the authordeals with the strugglebetween MViontanism and Orthodoxyin CentralPhrygia and discusses in detail eleven memorialinscriptions of Laodicea Combusta and its neighbourhood whichrefer to hereticalsects. Nor shouldA. Deissmann'slucid summaryof the evidence in favourof St. Paul havingsuffered imprisonment at Ephesusbe overlooked. In manv of the essaysalready mentioned epigraphical evidence plays an important part: in othersit formsthe centreof discussion. A. Wilhelmgives freshproof of his extraordinarypower of restoringand interpretingepigraphical documents, dealing with a numberof inscriptionsfrom Asia Minor, notablytwo Cyzicenedecrees in honourof the princessAntonia Tryphaena (I. G. Romn.iv, I44, I46) and a mutilatedpassage of Diogenes Oenoandensis. D. M. Robinsoncontributes an editioprinceps of two grave- epigramsfrom , of whichone representsa dialoguebetween the deceasedand the passer-by. W. H. Bucklerexamines the four extant inscriptionsrelating to labour disputesin Asia lVlinorand givesus greatlyimproved texts of twoof them; his treatment of thesedocuments affords a modelof sobercriticism and logicalinterpretation, and the resultis a reallyvaluable contribution to the economichistory of the secondand later centuriesof our era. I am not,however, convinced that he is rightin maintainingthat the proconsularedict evokedby the bakers'strike at places no ban upon the ordinarybusiness of the Bakers'Union and conveysno threatof its dissolution(p. 33.) Of the essaysdealing with historicalquestions of the Hellenisticand Roman periods the longestis M. Rostovtzeff'sbrillianit sketch of the economicfactors in Pergamene historyand of the relationsof the Attalidprinces to the Greekcities, the nativetemples and the ruraldistricts in theirdomains. J. G. C. Anderson,discussing the composition

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.89 on Fri, 9 May 2014 09:52:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions NOTICES OF RECENT PUBLICATIONS. 293

of Strabo'sGeography, shows ' thatStrabo's knowledge about Eastern affairs was becoming meagreby B.C. 6/5, but that it extendsto B.C. 3/2,' afterwhich comes a greatlacuna followedmany years later by a superficialrevision; he givesgood groundsfor thinking thatthe workwas writtenneither at Amasianor at Rome,but in someprovincial city in theEastern Mediterranean, the identity of whichwe cannotdetermine. Two interesting questionsof Imperialprovincial and frontierpolicy are examinedby F. Cumont and V. Chapot: the formertraces the causesof Nero's annexationof PontusPolemoniacu3 in A.D. 64 and of Vespasian'sincorporation of ArmeniaMinor in the Empireeight years later,while the latterseeks to determinethe northernfrontier of the provinceof and to provethat it did not extendto the BlackSea littoraluntil Paphlagonicus wasadded to it at sometime between A.D. 209 and250. Authors,editors and publishersare to be congratulatedupon a workwhich not only does honourto the scholarwhose name it bears but also throwsimportant new light upon so manyaspects of Anatolianhistory and culture. M. N. T.

LES DIVISIONS ADMINISTRATIVES DF, L'ESPAGNE ROMAINE. BY EUGENE ALBERTINr. Paris: E. de Boccard, 1923. pp. viii + I36. For clearnessand completenessof statementthis little volumeshould supersede its predecessorsin the samefield, at leastfor English readers. It takesvery full and adequate account of previouswork, except that the recentarticles in this J7ournal(Vespasian's Reconstructionof Spain,Vol. viii,pp. 53-I02, and Addenda,Vol. ix, pp. 86-94) reached theauthor too late,and couldbe mentionedonly briefly in footnotes.Doubtful questions are fairlydealt with,and the evidenceis clearlyset forth; studentsare thusenabled to checkthe author'sconclusions. The constitutionof Lusitaniaas a provinceseparated from Baetica is dated 27 B.C. on the authorityof Dio Cassius(53, iz). Here the authoragrees with his predecessors Ursin and Braun, againstthe weightof recentopinion as representedby Mlommsen, Kornemann,Dessau, \'lispouletand others. These preferto followthe indirect evidence affordedespecially by the MIonumentumAncyranum and C.I.L. vi. 3I267, but they cannotagree upon any singlealternative. Local variationsof the provincialboundaries are fullydiscussed. Here the chiefquestion is theattribution of Vettonia,and theauthor is contentto followthe opinionof Braun,which has already been criticisedin thisJolurnal (ix, p. 92). In a footnotereplying to that criticismit is arguedthat since Salmantica was certainlyin Ulteriorin Republicantimes as well as in the later Empire it must alwayshave been so, and if Salmantica,then all Vettonia. But thereis an easy escape fromthis difficulty: Vettonia may have been transferredto Citeriorby Augustustowards the end of his reignalong with Callaecia and Asturia,about whichthere is no dispute; and thusPliny's credit may be saved. The evidenceof the' termini'(J.R.S. ix, pp. 93-4) is also rejected,despite C.I.L. ii, 6S6, whichshows that the interpretationsuggested is at least possible. With regardto the ' dioceses' of Citeriorthe authorindependently agreesin themain with the conclusionsreached in 7.R.S. ix, pp. 86-9. But he thinksthat theabolition of the diocesan system dates from the withdrawal of the Legio IV Macedonica byClaudius. That is certainlypossible. But thatthe first iuridicus for the whole province was appointednot by Claudius,but by Vespasian,is made highlyprobable by the absence ofany previous record, though our knowledge of Galba's governmentis comparativelyfull; by Pliny'semphatic reference to LargiusLicinus ; and by the contemporaryparallels of Britainand Galatia-. The authoris probablycorrect in supposingthat the completeindependence of Asturia-Callaeciain the thirdcentury was only ephemeral the new epigraphicevidence cited is fairlyconclusive. ' La divisionen dioceses,telle qu'on la tire de Strabon,et la divisionen conventus telle qu'elle est indiqu6epar Pline, sontinconciliables.' It is hard to accept thisview, with the furtherinference that the conventuswere fullyorganised only by Claudius.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.89 on Fri, 9 May 2014 09:52:05 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions