Pisidian Antioch) in the Augustan Age Author(S): W
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Colonia Caesarea (Pisidian Antioch) in the Augustan Age Author(s): W. M. Ramsay Source: The Journal of Roman Studies, Vol. 6 (1916), pp. 83-134 Published by: Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/296268 . Accessed: 15/06/2014 07:03 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 195.78.108.185 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 07:03:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions COLONIA CAESAREA(PISIDIAN ANTIOCH) IN THE AUGUSTAN AGE.1 By SIR W. M. RAMSAY. I. FOUNDATION AND IMPORTANCE OF THE COLONY. Colonia Caesarea was the oldest and the chief among the Pisidian coloniae which were founded by Augustus. The emperor brieflyrefers in the MonumentumAncyranum to one or more colonies in Pisidia; but the reference is so slight as to give no evidence of their number or of the time or circumstancesof foundation: it only shows that he planted in Pisidia at least one colony of soldiers. Strictly these garrison cities were ' Pisidian,' not 'in Pisidia': they were founded on the Pisidian frontier of the empire, but the Romans expressed themselves with geographical looseness, and the looseness had a political meaning and purpose: Rome did not trouble herself about barbarian geography, but intended to substitute a Roman geographyand classification.2 The Pisidian coloniae of Augustus were not all situated in the country which bore the name Pisidia among geographersor Greek writers who had regard to racial facts. Augustus and the Romans generally employed the term Pisidia in a loose way to designate a large part of the western Taurus mountains between Lycia and Cilicia, together with the foothills and the valleys on the north side of Taurus, so far as these were commandedby the mountains. That the geographicalnames in Asia Minor were used in a very loose fashion is a complaint made by Strabo more than once; and he assignspait of the blame for this loosenessto the Romans, who arranged their divisions without regard to racial facts.3 Part of the fault lay in the intermixtureof races, and the difficultyof fixing definite limits between them. Three of those colonies were in Pisidia proper: one, namely Antioch, was in Phrygia;one, namelyLystra, was in Lycaoniaor in the Isauricanregion : one, namelyParlais, is usuallyassigned to Lycaonia, although the Augustan term Pisidian is probably more correct. 1 The following paper, sections i-vi, was written Ramsay, with Professor Calder and myself, were and ready for the printer in July, 1914, but publi- excavating the temple adjacent to the colony cation has been delayed for various (some of on the mountain above: later we all united in the them obvious) reasons. The time that has elapsed concluding stages of the excavation on the site since August 4, 1914, has not been propitious for of the colony. The excavation in 1914 was con- such work, and nothing further has been done ducted only by Lady Ramsay and myself, and it to it except in ?3 (q.v.). In the circumstances the was her eye which detected the proper place to article remains a first and merely preliminary resume the work of I913; on the very first day report prepared in the first few days after returning we began to find stones of the Augustan staircase from an excavation while the scene was fresh in my (see ? 6). The on the site of the memory. excavations colony 2 Strab xiii6*. 4 p. were conducted in I9I3 by Professor Callander of S Queen's College, Kingston, Ontario, while Lady 3 Strabo, ib. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.185 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 07:03:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 84 COLONIA CAESAREA (PISIDIAN ANTIOCH) IN THE AUGUSTAN AGE. The fact that the intention of them all was to restrainthe mountain tribes of Taurus, loosely called Pisidians by the Romans at that time, led to their being classed as Pisidian colonies. These Pisidian coloniae fall into two divisions, as their names show. The first divisioncontains only Colonia Caesarea(Antiochea). The second contains five: Cremna, Olbasa, Comama, Parlais, Lystra (or Lustra as the inhabitantscall it on coins and inscriptions). These five are all termed Colonia Iulia or Iulia Augusta, with additional epithets: Colonia Julia Augusta Felix Cremnensium (Cremna), Colonia Iulia Augusta Olbasena, Colonia Iulia Augusta Prima Fida Comama, Colonia Iulia Augusta Parlais, Colonia Julia Felix Gemina Iustra. The omission of Augusta in the last is probably accidental. The authorities often shorten the long titles of these coloniae by omitting one or more of the names: probably Parlaisalso had other epithets. Colonia Caesareastands by itself, and the name points to an earlier date for its foundation. Messrs. Cumont and Anderson point out1 that the name Kaisareionfor a temple of Augustusimplies an earlier date than the name Sebasteion or Augusteum. Now it is impossible to place the foundation of this colonia so early as 27 B.C. when the title Augustus was bestowed on Octavianus; for the province Galatia was not created until 25 B.C. and it is a funda- mental that a colonia was on Roman soil, even principle 2 although a recent investigatorssometimes ignore the principle, and Kornemann says that Colonia Caesareawas founded before 27 B.C. inasmuch as after that year it would have been called lulia Augusta: in other words he maintains that the Roman colony was founded in the kingdomof Amyntas. This principle does not imply that no colonia was planted in a country unless it had already been fully organised as a province; for there are exceptional cases, in which it was so important for the Roman to hold a piece of foreign territory, either for trade and imperial intercommunication,or for military reasons, that the foundation of a garrison city and centre of Roman power was necessaly. Such was the case at Narbo, which was needed to hold the land-road to the two provincesof Spain. It was impossible to permit the connexion between Rome and Spain to depend solely on navigation: that was too uncertain. The land-route must be held firmlv. The necessary basis for retaining the Spanish pro- vinces was a safe roadthrough the south of France. Again, evidently, 1Studia Pontica, iii, p. 80 f. 1894, p. 164 ff), yet I still adhere to the view stated 2 Colonia Niniva was long supposed to be an there that Claudiopolis was founded as a city by exceptional colonia situated on alien soil; but Antiochus in honour of Claudius, and Col. Iul. Aug. the name is now proved to be an error for Claud. Ninica as a colonia by Domitian, named Ninica in Cilicia Tracheia. Kubitschek, however, after Iulia Augusta: Kubitschek, Rundschau iiber would attribute the foundation of Colonia Ninica ein Quinquennium d. a. Num., Wien, I896 (see foot- Claudiopolis to Claudius, long before the province note on p. 86). arose; but, though he explicitly dissents in this from my article on Colonia Ninica (Rev. Numism. 3 In Pauly-Wissowa s.v. Colonia, p. 532. This content downloaded from 195.78.108.185 on Sun, 15 Jun 2014 07:03:00 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions COLONIA CAESAREA (PISIDIAN ANTIOCH) IN THE AUGUSTAN AGE. 85 in the case of the Mauretanian colonies founded by Augustus, the principle that the territory of the colony was a piece of Rome itself, separated in space from the rest of Rome, was observed. Pliny remarks with regard to the first of these colonies that its territory was disjoined from the alien rule of Mauretanian kings and attached to the administration of the province Baetica; and the same may confidently be said about the others. All stood on or at no great distance from the coast, and were needed to maintain the Roman dominion on the Mediterranean and the Atlantic. None of the conditions that apply to Narbo and other cases were fulfilled at Antioch, which had been a self--governing state from I89 to 40 B.C. It was then given to Amyntas, an energetic client king. No Roman interest was involved in this district, except that of general peace and order; and it was a principle of Augustan administration that, in such outlying distant regions, where the population was not yet fit for incorporation in the empire as a province, the general advantage would be best served by placing the territory under the government of a king, part of whose duty was to educate the people up to the standard needed for a provincia. 1 Such kings were Amyntas, Polemon, Herodes, Antiochus IV, etc. No line of communication of great importance for the empire passed through Pisidian Antioch. There is no sign that it had been a centre of Roman trade, or that Roman traders had preceded the eagles in settling there. The rarity of cives Romani consistentes in the province Galatia is remarkable, and contrasts with their great numbers and wide distribution in the province Asia (as is gathered from a wide survey of the epigraphic material).