The Annual of the British School at Athens http://journals.cambridge.org/ATH

Additional services for The Annual of the British School at Athens:

Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here

A Latin Inscription from Perrhaebia

A. J. B. Wace and M. S. Thompson

The Annual of the British School at Athens / Volume 17 / November 1911, pp 193 - 204 DOI: 10.1017/S0068245400008571, Published online: 18 October 2013

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0068245400008571

How to cite this article: A. J. B. Wace and M. S. Thompson (1911). A Latin Inscription from Perrhaebia. The Annual of the British School at Athens, 17, pp 193-204 doi:10.1017/ S0068245400008571

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/ATH, IP address: 128.122.253.228 on 28 Apr 2015 A LATIN INSCRIPTION FROM PERRHAEBIA.

IN April, 1911, during an exploring journey undertaken on behalf of the Macedonian Exploration Fund, while travelling from Serfije to we were fortunate enough to discover the important Latin inscription here published.1 It lies in the ruined church of the Holy Trinity (Ayta Tpids) on the right bank of the Sarantaporos, about five minutes to the north of the gendarmerie post by the Khan of Hajji Zhogu, on the high road some three hours to the north of Elassona. The inscription is on a tall, narrow stele of coarse blue marble '48 m. wide by '96 m. high and topped by a gable, -i6 m. high, below which is a moulded architrave '04 m. high. The total height of the inscribed part is 74 m., and the stone is -io m. thick. Unfortunately the stele, which is Greek in shape, has been broken in two obliquely not far below the top, and owing to the bad quality of the marble employed the break is not clean, and the surface is badly splintered. Thus lines 2-8 are badly damaged, but fortunately, with one exception, they can easily be restored. Below the last line that is visible on the marble the stele is broken away, but the inscription does not seem to have been much longer, for below the last line at the breakage in one place is a blank space on which the next line below should appear if the inscription had been longer. Consequently we may assume on this slight evidence that the inscription is complete for all practical purposes. The text is as follows:—

1 In preparing this inscription for publication we are deeply indebted to the kind help of Dr. von Premerstein. 194 WACE AND THOMPSON 'WCAIISARI1-NII IIAVGIiRJIlI A.RJICVLIIIC VFllVlKF S ISCR1PTVM11TR.11 1X-C0MMI/WL4R1O n ' V C DAli I IK OR1

IDIIA-QVAIIPOSI AIISTlNfOR 6 DO LI CH A N0 RVISA-1W SCW PTOS IISSIIPIINI1SCOVVI1W1IINTI SO/I F//VI I/OIVMlllGIAll-rACTAII A6AMYIvrAfHJL]PPl-P/!iTRAil-lN TIIR.-DOLJCHA/VOS-IITHLIIMI OrASPIACIlTTI NIINA-I1SSII-AT1IR. AAl NO-aVII 1ST-I W VIASV PHA GIIR/XN/ASINTIIR-AZZOR1SI OfVOAR IIAS IITPI ITK.AWAS DOLlCHIS-Pl I fcSVMMMVG TC AIV PV I\A CLV J-P R.0 IVO M OC/\TVHITAVTCANPVJ1N IVriJilBlLMWMOTAR.VI\A-i| SVMIV\A/\/6A *T AN INSCRIPTION FROM PERRHAEBIA. 195

Imp(eratore) Caesare Ne(rva) [Trae(iano)] Au(gusto) Ger(manico) III I [et Q(uinto)] Articuleio [co(n)s(ulibu)s a(nte) d(iem)] VI K(alendas) Apriles. 5 [Dejscriptum et re- [cognitum e]x conmentario • [Ve]rg[i]n[i P]u[bliani] iudicis dati a[b im](p)er[at]or[e] Traeiano, quod protu[li]t 10 Caelius Niger, in quo sc- riptum erat id q(uod) i(nfra) s(criptum) (e(st)). Cum [pjrobatum sit mihi in stela lap- idea, quae posita est in for- o Dolichanorum, inscriptos 15 esse f(i)nes conveniente- s defini(t)ioni regiae factae ab Amynta Philippi patre in- ter Dolichanos et Elemi- otas, p(l)acet finem esse a ter- 20 mino, qui est in via supra Geranas inter Azzoris [et] Ono(a)reas et Petraeas [in] Dolichis, per summa iug[a] [a]t canpum, qui Pronom[ae] 25 [v]ocatur, ita ut canpus in [pa-] rte sit Elemiotarum, e[t per] summa iuga at ------O 2 196 WACE AND THOMPSON

The letters are carefully cut, and those in the first four lines, which give the date, are bigger than the rest being '03 m. against -O2 m. high. Faint lines are ruled on the marble for the guidance of the engraver, and the only remarkable point in the shape of the letters is that II is used throughout for E. From various peculiarities it seems that the engraver did not know Latin. In line 9 there is Traeiano, and also, if our restoration is correct in line 2 TRAIL In line 11 F might stand for fuit, but the sense and the formula require est;1 still it is hard to see how the engraver came to write F in an inscription where E is throughout written as II. In line 15 we have fenes for fines, in line 16 definiiioni for defini- lioni, in line 17 patrae for patre, in line 19 piacet for placet, and finally in line 22 the fourth letter was originally carved as a A and then an attempt was made to correct it into an A. In addition to these errors interpuncts are omitted between several words. The gaps in the text can easily be restored with one or two exceptions. In line 2 the II before AV is clear, and seems to show that we should restore here TRAII as an abbreviation of TRAIIIANO which occurs in line 9. The restoration of lines 5 and 6 is made in accordance with the usual formula indicating a copy of a commentarius?- We have not restored any word to fill the gap before description, because it seems probable that there was a blank left at the beginning of this line to indicate the beginning of the text after the date. This is still more probable if the blank space at the beginning of line 8, which is certain, is not due to an error of the engraver. In line 7 the restoration of the name of the index is very uncertain, as it comes just where the stele is broken through. Verginius seems to be the only name that fits the fragments of letters still visible. For the cognomen the only names that suit the letters that can be distinguished are Publianus, or Rubrianus.3 In front of Verginius there is room for one letter more, the abbreviation of the praenomen. The other restorations are simple and obvious, except those in lines 21 and 22 which are discussed below.4 To turn to the text of the inscription itself, we have in the first four lines the date given by the names of the consuls for the year, 1 See inscription quoted below, p. 197. 2 Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, iv. pp. 733, 737. 3 Cf. C.I.L. viii. 9157. 4 For at instead of ad in line 24, cf. the Latin boundary inscription from Lamia, C.I.L. iii. 586, 12,306, 11. 10, 13. AN INSCRIPTION FROM PERRHAEBIA. 197

the emperor Trajan consul for the fourth time, and Quintus Articuleius, about whom little is known.1 This year was 101 A.D. The abbreviations of the emperor's names are unusual. Then follows the day of the month, A.D. VI. K. Apriles, the twenty-seventh of March. The four lines giving the date are, as remarked above, in bigger letters than the rest of the text. Then follow the formal words, at least we may so restore them, showing that this is an official copy,' copied and verified' is the phrase,2 from the report of a special arbitrator appointed (datus) by the emperor Trajan. It is not stated in the text who Caelius (or C. Aelius) Niger was, but the sentence quod protulit, which depends on commentario shows that Caelius Niger had the duty of keeping and perhaps of writing up the official note-book (commentarius) of the iudex. This contained all the evidence and documents relating to the case, and the text of the actual judgment. From this an extract was made on the petition of one of the interested parties, in this case the inhabitants of DoUche, and recorded on the marble stele which has been found. Profero is the technical word indicating the production of an official record for the purpose of making a properly certified copy. In an inscription from Sardinia, dating from the reign of Otho, and also referring to a boundary dispute we have a formula very similar to that of our inscription.3 It runs: descriptum et recognitum ex codice ansato L. Helvii Agrippae proconsulis quern protulit Cn. Egnatius Fuscus scriba quaestorius in quo scriptum fuit it quod infra scriptuni est ...... Perhaps Caelius Niger was the scriba quaestorius of Macedonia, which from 44 A,D. was like Achaia a senatorial province. At the end of line 11 we come to the sentence giving the decision of the imperial arbitrator. From what follows we see that an appeal had been made to the emperor to decide a boundary dispute between the inhabitants of Elemiotis,4 one of the districts of upper Macedonia, and the citizens of , one of the three members of the Tripolis in northern Perrhaebia. The arbitrator based his decision on a previous

1 Clinton, Fasti Romani, i. p. 88 ; Prosographia Imp. Rom., s.n. 2 Cf. Pauly-Wisspwa, iv. pp. 733, 737. 3 C.I.L. x. 7,852 ; Bruns, Fontes Juris Romani, p. 231. 4 This seems to be the correct Latin spelling in spite of (xlv. 30). The Greek form of the name is 'EKfiptairls, as shown by a Delphian inscription (B.C.H. 1897, p. 112), and the reading of the majority of the MSS. of Thucydides (ii. 99). The province, originally an independent principality, was subdued by Philip II., and after the Roman conquest of Macedonia formed part of the fourth region. 198 WACE AND THOMPSON

award of Amyntas the father of Philip which he found inscribed on a stele set up in the market place of Doliche. This shows how careful the Romans were in dealing with subject peoples, especially in provinces formerly parts of Hellenistic kingdoms, to respect local privileges and customs. A typical instance of this is their treatment of the Jews. A recently discovered inscription of Thyatira,1 recording a decision of Caracalla, shows that in this case again, the imperial decision was based on a previous award of the kings of Pergamon. The last nine lines contain topographical details defining the boundary line. The importance of this inscription lies in three main points. First the light it throws on the Roman imperial administration. Secondly it has considerable importance regarding the geography of northern Perrhaebia and Elemiotis. Thirdly the mention of king Amyntas the father of Philip, is interesting as referring to a dark period in the history of the Macedonian kingdom. During the imperial period was administratively united with Macedonia, so that the boundary dispute, although dealing with the ancient boundaries of Macedonia and Perrhaebia, was as regards the Roman provincial government, merely an internal dispute and not one which concerned two provinces. Trajan appointed an arbitrator whose decision, as that of the emperor's representative, was final. To judge by a much mutilated inscription found by Heuzey * on the hills to the east of Elassona, another boundary dispute between Dium and Oloosson was decided by Trajan in this same year. Unfortunately, as the stone found seems to have been only one of those set up to mark the boundary line awarded, we learn nothing from the inscription about the procedure followed in that case. In another boundary dispute3 between Lamia and Hypata, in which appeal was made to the emperor, Hadrian wrote to the proconsul ordering him to decide it with the assistance of surveyors. Thereupon the proconsul, Q. Gellius Augurinus, heard the arguments and witnesses on both sides and with the aid of a surveyor fixed the boundary line. Thus in each of these three recorded boundary disputes in the province of Macedonia, appeal was made to the emperor as the ultimate authority. The main importance of the inscription however lies in the additions it 1 Premerstein-Keil, Wiener Dvikschriften, liv. p. 13. 2 C.I.L. iii. 591. 3 C.I.L. iii. 586, 12306. AN INSCRIPTION FROM PERRHAEBIA. 199

enables us to make to our knowledge of the geography of Perrhaebia1 and Elemiotis (see Map, Fig. 1). Doliche2 was one of the towns which, with Pythion3 and ,4 formed the Perrhaebian Tripolis.5 These towns are mentioned several times in ancient authors and in inscriptions, but so far, no certain evidence has been found to fix their actual positions. The most important evidence for the topography of the Tripolis is to be found in Livy, in his account of the .6 In 171 B.C. Perseus marched into Thessaly from lake Begorrites (Ostrovo). On his route southwards he came first to the Haliacmon and Elemea, then crossing the Cambunian mountains by a narrow pass, presumably that of Volustana7 which he occupied two years later when Q. Marcius Philippus encamped between Azoros and Doliche,8 descended into the Perrhaebian Tripolis. Therefore it seems certain that , Doliche, and Azoros were situated in the rolling country about the upper waters of the Sarantaporos (the ancient Europos). This district is geographically separated from the Elassona and Potamia districts by a range of hills through which the Sarantaporos forces its way below the villages of Klisoura and Kephalovryso. In it there are three ancient sites,9 the Kastro of Vouvala on the left bank of the river, a site known as Kastri about half an hour east of the Khan of Hajji Zhogu by the vineyards belonging to Vlacho-Livadi, and the hill on which stands the church of the Hagioi Apostoloi to the south of Selos. These must be the three cities of the Tripolis. All authorities are agreed in placing Pythion at Selos, but as to which of the other two is Doliche and which Azoros we must attempt to decide. An inscription10 found at Corfu dating from the second century B.C. gives an arbitrators' decision in a boundary

1 See Kip, Thess. Studien, pp. 111 ff. 2 Livy, xlii. 53, xliv. 2; , iii. 13; I.G. ix. 2, No. 1296, 1. 20; Leake, Northern , iii. p. 344; Lolling, Hell. Landeskunde, p. 151 ; Bursian, Geogr. Griechenlands, i. p. 57 ; Kromayer, Griech. Schlachtfelde, ii. pp. 237, 268. * , Aem. Paul. 15 ; Steph. Byz. s.v. ; Livy, xlii. 53, xliv. 2, 35 ; Ptolemy, iii. 13, 42 ; B.C.H. 1897, p. 112 ; Leake, op. cit. iii. p. 341 ; Bursian, op. cit. i. p. 57 ; Kromayer, op. cit. ii. pp.237, 270, 304 ff. 4 , xxviii. 13, 1 ; Ptolemy, 12, 39; Steph, Byz. s.n. ; Diod. xix. 52, 6; Livy, xlii. JJj XliV, 2; SUltbO, VH. JZ/J Leake, Northern Greece, iii. ^42 ; Bursian, op. cit. i. 57 ; Kromayer, op. cit. ii. pp. 237, 268; Ussing, GriecL Keism u. Studien, p. 44. 6 Kip, op. cit. p. 122. 6 xlii- S3- 7 This pass is identified with that followed by the modern road from Serfije to Elassona. But there is a track leading over the hills from Vlacho-Livadi towards Velventos. 8 xliv. 2. 9 Heuzey, Le Mont Olympe> pp. 28 ff. 10 Dittenberger, Syll? 453. 2OO WACE AND THOMPSON

^= Main Roads. •*• Ancient Sites SKETCH MAP OF NORTHERN PERRHAEBIA .

FIG. I. AN INSCRIPTION FROM PERRHAEBIA. 201 dispute between the Thessalian city of Mondaia and Azoros. The site of Mondaia is unknown, but if Azoros, a Perrhaebian town, had a boundary dispute with a Thessalian city, it must have been the westernmost town of the Tripolis, and not in the centre. On this evidence we might with Leake, place Azoros at Vouvala, and Doliche at Kastri. This probability is strengthened by the fact that our inscription, which was probably set up in the territory of Doliche, was found about half an hour west of Kastri. We may then assume that on the evidence at present before us, Doliche was at Kastri. The Perrhaebian Tripolis does not seem to have always been united with the rest of Perrhaebia. A Delphian proxeny decree of the third century B.C. speaks of a man from Pythion as an Elemiote.1 An inscription from Samothrace of the second century B.C. mentions a o-TpaTryyos Tpnrokirtbv.2 Further Livy in one passages speaks of Tripoli aliaque Perrhaebia. From this it seems that the Tripolis was at all events in a different position from the rest of Perrhaebia, and may at one time have formed part of Elemiotis. To this point we shall return below. Thus, since the territory of Doliche lay to the south of the Cambunian hills that separate the upper basin of the Sarantaporos from the Haliacmon valley by Serfije, the district round the latter town and Velventos was probably part of Elemiotis in antiquity. Midway between Velventos and Serfije there is one ancient site, the Kastro of Palaeo- gratsiano.* Here inscriptions have been discovered, and below the small acropolis now crowned with Byzantine ruins, a cemetery of pithos burials (perhaps of the Early Iron Age) has been found. This site Heuzey identified with Phylakai which was in ,5 and his identification has been followed by Kiepert, Demitzas, and others 6 in spite of the geographical improbability that a small part of the Haliacmon basin separated from Pieria proper by the massif of Olympus, should have been in antiquity part of Pieria. Our inscription, however, together with Livy's account of Perseus' march in 171 B.C. referred to above, seems to shew that this district was in Elemiotis, and it is thus possible that the Kastro of

1 B.C.H. 1897, p. 112. 2 I.G. xii. 8, 178. s xlii. 67. 4 ftsnq, o(>. cit. \>xj. a\6 S. 6 Ptol. iii. 13, 40: cf. Pliny, Hist. Nat. iv. 17. 6 Kiepert, Format Orb. Ant. PI. XVI. ; Arifi(r(as, MaiceSovla, p. 173. 202 WACE AND THOMPSON

Palaeogratsiano is the site of Elemea. Other topographers, relying on the similarity of the names, have placed it at Velemisti on the Graeco-Turkish frontier between Grevena and Kalampaka. No ancient site has yet been found there, and it seems more probable that the Grevena district was part of Tymphaea rather than of Elemiotis.1 The boundary line between Doliche and Elemiotis began on the west (if we are right in placing Azoros at Vouvala) at a boundary stone placed on a road above or beyond a place called Geranae. This lay inter Azzoris [et] Onoareas et Petraeas \in~\ Dolichis according to the restoration of the text given above. Geranae may have been some small village dependent on Azoros, and Onoareae and Petraeae similar villages belonging to Doliche. It would be tempting to take Onoareae as a village of Azoros and Petraeae only as a village of Doliche, but in this case it would not be easy to restore or construe the text. At all events it is difficult to see what case 'Azzoris' is. In Greek, for the name of this city we have "Afto/sos, ~'h%wpiav, "A%a>pa and 'A%a>peia. None of these names in Latin would form an accusative in is, which it seems could only represent some plural name ending in et? like %dpBei<;, although Greek et seems in this inscription to be transliterated by e? Dolichis, although the Greek name is AoX4%»j, might be the ablative of a feminine or neuter plural. Further, if the name Onoareas is incomplete and the letters missing at the end of line 21 belonged to this name, and it was dependent on Azoros, we should have in inter Azzoris ...Onoareas et Petraeas in Dolichis, a chiasmus which would be very awkward.3 It is possible that the Roman arbitrator had before him the Greek text of Amyntas' award with the place names in the genitive, and was unable to decline them correctly in Latin. In any case these names seem to be those of small places lying between Azoros and Doliche, which are only mentioned for the purpose of fixing the starting-point of the boundary line. From this point, which we may assume to have been among the hills to the north-west of Vouvala, the boundary ran along the tops of the hills till it reached a plain called Pronomae. This plain, which to judge by its name was pasture land, seems to have been the

1 Cf. Arrian's (i. 7, 5) account of Alexander's march to Pelinnaeum. 2 See above, p. 197, note 4, 3 It could be suggested that Onoareas might be a corruption of Mondaia, or a half Latinised version of a name like 'OvovireSiov, but neither of these seems likely. Of course, Azzoris and Dolichis might be the accusative plurals of 'AGwpeis and AoAixeiSs, but as we have seen in this inscription Greek ei is rendered by e. AN INSCRIPTION FROM PERRHAEBIA. 203 disputed territory, for the arbitrator decides that it shall be divided between Elemiotis and Doliche. Amongst the hills to the north-west of Vouvala there is a small upland plain round the village of Metaxa. It is tempting to think that this is the plain Pronomae. This assumption would suit our identification of Kastri as Doliche. From the plain the boundary ran along the hilltops again to some other place, the name of which is lost, and with this the inscription seems to have ended. Examination of the hills along the line suggested might result in the discovery of boundary stones, such as that found marking the boundary between Dium and Oloosson mentioned above, and those found on Taygetos, along the frontier between Messenia and Sparta.1 Interesting though this inscription is, it does not tell us enough to enable us to pronounce with certainty on any of the points suggested. Amyntas, the father of Philip, must have been Amyntas III. (390-371 B.C.), the son of Arrhidaeos and the father of Philip II., and the grandfather of Alexander the Great. It might be inferred from our inscription that Amyntas, if he could make a royal award defining the boundary between Elemiotis and Doliche, must have been ruler of Elemiotis2 and Tripolis as well as of Macedonia proper, but according to the existing literary sources3 for the early history of Macedonia this does not seem to have been the case. Amyntas, though married to Eurydike the sister of Derdas, the prince of Elemiotis, does not seem to have had real authority over the province, for both he and Derdas appear separately as allies of Sparta in the Olynthian war in 382 B.C.4 Amyntas II., his cousin and predecessor, seems to have been murdered by Derdas. This seems to show that at this time Elemiotis was independent of the Macedonian kingdom. It was left for Philip II. to bring these principalities into subjection, and it is recorded that he married Phila, the sister of Derdas, who was presumably the son of the contemporary of Amyntas III. The princely houses of Lynkestis and Elemiotis were not native dynasties, but branches of the Macedonian royal house (Derdas was Amyntas' third cousin once removed) and their relations with one another do not seem to have been very friendly.5 We thus see that such literary sources as we

1 Kolbe, Ath. Mitt. 1904, pp. 364 ff. 2 Thucydides (ii. 99) says it was a vassal state. 3 See Abel, Makedonien, Pauly-Wissowa, s.vv., and Hoffmann, Die Makedonier, pp. 157 ff. 4 Xenophon, Hell. v. 2, 38, 40, 43 ; 3, 1 ff., 9. 5 In this connection we may recall that Archelaos the father of Amyntas II. was attacked by 204 AN INSCRIPTION FROM PERRHAEBIA. have, do not agree with the inference to be drawn from this inscription, that Amyntas had authority over Elemiotis and Tripolis. We can only explain this discrepancy by a series of conjectures. Probably at this time the Perrhaebian Tripolis was part of Elemiotis, for we have seen that this is a possibility, and consequently the ruler of Elemiotis would have had authority over Tripolis. Perhaps Derdas died before Amyntas III., and the latter as brother-in-law of the deceased prince became guardian of his son and successor, and as such, exercised royal authority over Elemiotis. It could only have been under such circumstances that Amyntas could have had sufficient power over both Elemiotis and Tripolis to be able to fix a boundary by royal decree. Then after the death of Amyntas, Elemiotis would have become independent again till subdued by Philip II. But these conjectures must be tested by further research.

A. J. B. WACE. M. S. THOMPSON.

Arrhabaeos of Lynkestis, and Sirrhas of Elemiotis, who was probably the father of Derdas. It should be noted too that when Amyntas III. recovered his kingdom in 383 B.C., two years after he had been driven out by Illyrians apparently under the leadership of a Lynkestian prince, he did so with Thessalian help.