DOCSLIB.ORG

THE REACH of the ROMAN EMPIRE in ROUGH CILICIA by HUGHW.ELTON

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
THE REACH of the ROMAN EMPIRE in ROUGH CILICIA by HUGHW.ELTON THE ECONOMIC FRINGE: THE REACH OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE IN ROUGH CILICIA By HUGHW.ELTON Many discussions of the Roman economy are rather vague about what they mean by 'Roman'. Phrases such as 'Roman Europe' or 'the Roman Empire' often blur two different concepts, that of the cultures of Iron Age Europe and the political institution of the Roman Empire. Cultures in Iron Age Europe varied widely. The Welsh uplands or the Atlas mountains, for example, had an aceramic culture with few public buildings, though were mIed directly by Rome for several centuries. Other regions, not under Roman control, like the regions across the middle Danube, showed higher concentrations of Mediterranean consumer goods and coins than some of these aceramic areas. 1 In Mesopotamia, many societies were urban and literate, not differing in this respect from those in Italy or Greece. Thus, determining what was imperial Roman territory by archaeological criteria alone is very difficult? But these archaeological criteria are important for two reasons. First, they allow us to analyse the cultural and economic changes that occurred in Iron Age Europe between 100 B.C. and A.D. 250. Second, they allow for the possibility of change within Europe that was not caused by the Roman state? Unlike cultures within Iron Age Europe, the Roman Empire was a political structure, imposed by force and dedicated to extracting benefits for the mling elite of the city of Rome.4 As the empire developed and matured, its form changed, but it was never about the mIed, only the rulers. If we accept that the Empire was a political, not an archaeological, structure, it follows that an examination of 'Impact of Empire: Transformation of Economic Life', has to mean an examination of the impact of the Roman imperial state. This paper has a regional focus, so does not deal with larger I L. Pitts, 'Roman Style Buildings in Barbaricum (Moravia and SW Siovakia)" Oxlord Journal 01 Archaeology 6 (1987), 219-236; cf. H.W. Elton, 'Defining Romans, Barbarians and the Roman Frontier', in R.W. Mathisen & H.S. Sivan, eds., Shifting Frontiers in Late Antiquity (Aldershot 1996), 126-135. See the article ofDJ. Mattingly in this volume. 2 DJ. Mattingly, ed., Dialogues in Roman lmperia/ism (Portsmouth, RI 1997); F. Miliar, 'Introduction', in S. Macready & F.H. Thompson, eds., Roman Architecture in the Greek Wor/d (London 1987), ix-xv at xi. 3 R. Hingley, 'Resistance and Domination: social change in Roman Britain', in DJ. Mattingly, ed., Dialogues in Roman lmperia/ism (Portsmouth, RI 1997), 81-100 at 85 n.18. 4 G. Woolf, 'Imperialism, Empire and the Integration ofthe Roman Economy', Wor/d Archaeology 23 (1992),283 -293. 172 HUGH W. ELTON - 9789004401624 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 02:06:03AM via free access elements of the Roman impact. Being in the Roman Empire did have an impact on regional economies. Roman control of the Mediterranean created a common market that allowed large-scale import and export of goods, especially low-cost commodities such as pottery, within a predictable framework of language, lawand currency. But this common market was an unintended byproduct, and had more to do with being in an empire than being in the Roman Empire.5 The cultural and political impact of Rome can be measured by comparing apre-Roman region to the region under Roman rule. Most scholarly literature, which discusses the changes between pre-Roman and Roman periods (a process of usually known as Romanization), has focused on the west, especially Gaul and Britain.6 Since this approach relies heavily on archaeological (including epigraphic) evidence, it tends to be more informative about Roman cultural than political impact. Many of these conclusions are valid only where Rome was the first empire in a region. This is often true in the west, but far less so in the east, where many other areas already had widespread exchange systems.7 Work on Romanization in the east is mostly recent. Much of this work is based on literary texts, especially those of the Second Sophistic, so tends to be cultural rather than political. 8 In both east and west, some recent work has minimised the Roman impact on a region, but does so without discussing the political changes brought about by Rome.9 This paper applies a politically focussed analysis of the economic changes brought about by Roman imperial rule to one region of Asia Minor, Rough Cilicia. 10 This region, approximately bounded by the river Melas in the west and the Lamus in the east, runs from the Mediterranean in the south to Lake Trogitis in the north. It was a region dominated by the Taurus mountains, with few aristocrats taking part in the imperial system and no major garrison. S P.W.M. Freeman, 'Romanisation and Roman material culture', Journal oi Roman Archaeology 6 (1993),438-444. 6 E.g. M. Millett, The Romanization oi Britain (Cambridge 1990); G. Woolf, Becoming Roman: the origins oiprovincial civilisation in Gaul (Cambridge 1998). 7 Z.H. Archibald, ed., Hellenistic Economies (London, 2000). 8 G. Woolf, 'Becoming Roman, staying Greek: culture, identity and the civilising process in the Roman East', Proceedings oi the Cambridge Philological Society 40 (1994), 116-143; S. Swain, Hellenism and Empire (Oxford 1996); S. Alcock, ed., The Early Roman Empire in the East (Oxford 1997); N. Pollard, Soldiers, Citizens and Civilians in Roman Syria (Ann Arbor 2000). 9 W. Ball, Rome in the East (London 2000); J. Webster, 'Creolising the Roman provinces', American JournaloiArchaeology 105 (2001), 209-225. 10 T.B. Mitford, 'Roman Rough Cilicia', ANRWII 7.2 (Berlin 1980), 1230-1261. 173 HUGH W. ELTON - 9789004401624 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 02:06:03AM via free access Rough Cilicia in the Early Roman Empire LAKE TIiOGITIS 9 .1... ," Vetu Anemur1um Imperial power in the eastem Taurus mountains was nothing new when Rome arrived. During the first millennium B.C., the region had been controlled by Assyrians and Achaemenid Persians, then the Greeks arrived, in several varieties - Alexander, the Seleucids and the Ptolemies, as weH as a brief Armenian interlude. The imposition of Roman imperial authority by Pompey in 63 B.C. was simply the replacement of one imperial layer with another. lI This Roman imperial layer, however, was not simple. 12 Although Pompey created a single province of Cilicia in 63 B.C., this was split into two parts in the mid-40s B.C. Lowland Cilicia was incorporated into the province of Syria, a situation which lasted until A.D. 72, while Rough Cilicia was left in the hands of allied kings. Strabo explained it as 'the Romans thought it was better for the region to be under kings rather than subject to 11 P.W.M. Freeman, 'The Province ofCilicia and its Origins', in P.W.M. Freeman & D.L. Kennedy, The Defence ofthe Roman and Byzantine &st (Oxford 1986),253-275. 12 For primary references for the politica1 changes in the region, D. Magie, Roman Rufe in Asia Minor (Princeton 1950) and Mitford 1980, op. eit. (n.10). 174 HUGH W. ELTON - 9789004401624 Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 02:06:03AM via free access Roman governors who were sent out to administer justice, who were not going to be everywhere at once, nor with an armed force.' 13 There was no single ruler in the early days. In 39 B.C., Antony gave an inland Cilician kingdom (which included Iconium) to Polemo, and the coastal regions (including Coracesium and Hamaxia) to Cleopatra. In 37/6 Polemo was removed from his principality which was then added to the Galatian kingdom of Amyntas. The temple-state at Olba (whose territory included Elaeussa and Corycus) remained under native rulers. Seleucia on Calycadnus was probably a free city.14 After the battle of Actium (31 B.C.), Cleopatra's possessions along the coast were handed over to king Amyntas of Galatia who then mIed all of the region except Olba and Seleucia. On Amyntas' death in 25 B.C., his Rough Cilician territories were divided into two parts. The western parts, from the Melas to Syedra, were included in the new province of Galatia, as was the Augustan colony of Ninica on the Calycadnus. 15 The eastern parts were given to Archelaus I, king of Cappadocia (25 B.C. - A.D. 17).16 In 20 B.C. Augustus also gave Archelaus the cities of Elaeussa and Corycus (which had been either independent or part ofthe Olban principality). When Archelaus died in A.D. 17, his Cappadocian kingdom was annexed by Rome, but his son Archelaus 11 succeeded him in Rough Cilicia (17-38). On Archelaus lI's death in 38, his kingdom was given to Antiochus IV of Commagene (38-72). In 41 Olba was given to Polemo 11. 17 Antiochus' kingdom of Commagene was taken over by the Romans in 72. A new province of Cilicia with its own governor was created. It combined lowland Cilicia, now detached from Syria, and the parts of Rough Cilicia that had been controlled by Antiochus. At this point, Polemo's Olba was perhaps transferred by Vespasian to Alexander, Antiochus' son-in-Iaw. 18 Although the detailed history is confusing, it shows that phrases such as 'the arrival of the Romans', 'the annexation of a province' or 'the imposition I3 Strabo 14.5.6. 14 Mitford 1980, op. eit. (n.\O), 1241 + n.45. 15 Seleueia, in Galatia?, S. Mitchell, Anatolia I (Oxford 1993), 152. 16 H.W. Elton, 'Geography, Romans, Labels and Cilieia', in H.W. Elton & G. Reger, eds., Regionalism in Hellenistic anti Roman Asia Minor (Ann Arbor, forthcoming).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alexander the Great and Hephaestion
    2019-3337-AJHIS-HIS 1 Alexander the Great and Hephaestion: 2 Censorship and Bisexual Erasure in Post-Macedonian 3 Society 4 5 6 Same-sex relations were common in ancient Greece and having both male and female 7 physical relationships was a cultural norm. However, Alexander the Great is almost 8 always portrayed in modern depictions as heterosexual, and the disappearance of his 9 life-partner Hephaestion is all but complete in ancient literature. Five full primary 10 source biographies of Alexander have survived from antiquity, making it possible to 11 observe the way scholars, popular writers and filmmakers from the Victorian era 12 forward have interpreted this evidence. This research borrows an approach from 13 gender studies, using the phenomenon of bisexual erasure to contribute a new 14 understanding for missing information regarding the relationship between Alexander 15 and his life-partner Hephaestion. In Greek and Macedonian society, pederasty was the 16 norm, and boys and men did not have relations with others of the same age because 17 there was almost always a financial and power difference. Hephaestion was taller and 18 more handsome than Alexander, so it might have appeared that he held the power in 19 their relationship. The hypothesis put forward here suggests that writers have erased 20 the sexual partnership between Alexander and Hephaestion because their relationship 21 did not fit the norm of acceptable pederasty as practiced in Greek and Macedonian 22 culture or was no longer socially acceptable in the Roman contexts of the ancient 23 historians. Ancient biographers may have conducted censorship to conceal any 24 implication of femininity or submissiveness in this relationship.
    [Show full text]
  • When Kings Become Philosophers: the Late Republican Origins of Cicero’S Political Philosophy
    When Kings Become Philosophers: The Late Republican Origins of Cicero’s Political Philosophy By Gregory Douglas Smay A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Ancient History and Mediterranean Archaeology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Erich S. Gruen, Chair Professor Carlos F. Noreña Professor Anthony A. Long Summer 2016 © Copyright by Gregory Douglas Smay 2016 All Rights Reserved Abstract When Kings Become Philosophers: The Late Republican Origins of Cicero’s Political Philosophy by Gregory Douglas Smay Doctor of Philosophy in Ancient History and Mediterranean Archaeology University of California, Berkeley Professor Erich S. Gruen, Chair This dissertation argues that Cicero’s de Republica is both a reflection of, and a commentary on, the era in which it was written to a degree not previously recognized in Ciceronian scholarship. Contra readings which treat the work primarily as a theoretical tract in the tradition of late Hellenistic philosophy, this study situates the work within its historical context in Late Republican Rome, and in particular within the personal experience of its author during this tumultuous period. This approach yields new insights into both the meaning and significance of the work and the outlook of the individual who is our single most important witness to the history of the last decades of the Roman Republic. Specifically, the dissertation argues that Cicero provides clues preserved in the extant portions of the de Republica, overlooked by modern students in the past bur clearly recognizable to readers in his own day, indicating that it was meant to be read as a work with important contemporary political resonances.
    [Show full text]
  • CILICIA: the FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCHES in ANATOLIA1 Mark Wilson
    CILICIA: THE FIRST CHRISTIAN CHURCHES IN ANATOLIA1 Mark Wilson Summary This article explores the origin of the Christian church in Anatolia. While individual believers undoubtedly entered Anatolia during the 30s after the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:9–10), the book of Acts suggests that it was not until the following decade that the first church was organized. For it was at Antioch, the capital of the Roman province of Syria, that the first Christians appeared (Acts 11:20–26). Yet two obscure references in Acts point to the organization of churches in Cilicia at an earlier date. Among the addressees of the letter drafted by the Jerusalem council were the churches in Cilicia (Acts 15:23). Later Paul visited these same churches at the beginning of his second ministry journey (Acts 15:41). Paul’s relationship to these churches points to this apostle as their founder. Since his home was the Cilician city of Tarsus, to which he returned after his conversion (Gal. 1:21; Acts 9:30), Paul was apparently active in church planting during his so-called ‘silent years’. The core of these churches undoubtedly consisted of Diaspora Jews who, like Paul’s family, lived in the region. Jews from Cilicia were members of a Synagogue of the Freedmen in Jerusalem, to which Paul was associated during his time in Jerusalem (Acts 6:9). Antiochus IV (175–164 BC) hellenized and urbanized Cilicia during his reign; the Romans around 39 BC added Cilicia Pedias to the province of Syria. Four cities along with Tarsus, located along or near the Pilgrim Road that transects Anatolia, constitute the most likely sites for the Cilician churches.
    [Show full text]
  • Poison King: the Life and Legend of Mithradates the Great, Rome's
    Copyrighted Material Kill em All, and Let the Gods Sort em Out IN SPRING of 88 BC, in dozens of cities across Anatolia (Asia Minor, modern Turkey), sworn enemies of Rome joined a secret plot. On an appointed day in one month’s time, they vowed to kill every Roman man, woman, and child in their territories. e conspiracy was masterminded by King Mithradates the Great, who communicated secretly with numerous local leaders in Rome’s new Province of Asia. (“Asia” at this time referred to lands from the eastern Aegean to India; Rome’s Province of Asia encompassed western Turkey.) How Mithradates kept the plot secret remains one of the great intelli- gence mysteries of antiquity. e conspirators promised to round up and slay all the Romans and Italians living in their towns, including women and children and slaves of Italian descent. ey agreed to confiscate the Romans’ property and throw the bodies out to the dogs and crows. Any- one who tried to warn or protect Romans or bury their bodies was to be harshly punished. Slaves who spoke languages other than Latin would be spared, and those who joined in the killing of their masters would be rewarded. People who murdered Roman moneylenders would have their debts canceled. Bounties were offered to informers and killers of Romans in hiding.1 e deadly plot worked perfectly. According to several ancient histo- rians, at least 80,000—perhaps as many as 150,000—Roman and Italian residents of Anatolia and Aegean islands were massacred on that day. e figures are shocking—perhaps exaggerated—but not unrealistic.
    [Show full text]
  • 295 Emanuela Borgia (Rome) CILICIA and the ROMAN EMPIRE
    EMANUELA BORGIA, CILICIA AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE STUDIA EUROPAEA GNESNENSIA 16/2017 ISSN 2082-5951 DOI 10.14746/seg.2017.16.15 Emanuela Borgia (Rome) CILICIA AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE: REFLECTIONS ON PROVINCIA CILICIA AND ITS ROMANISATION Abstract This paper aims at the study of the Roman province of Cilicia, whose formation process was quite long (from the 1st century BC to 72 AD) and complicated by various events. Firstly, it will focus on a more precise determination of the geographic limits of the region, which are not clear and quite ambiguous in the ancient sources. Secondly, the author will thoroughly analyze the formation of the province itself and its progressive Romanization. Finally, political organization of Cilicia within the Roman empire in its different forms throughout time will be taken into account. Key words Cilicia, provincia Cilicia, Roman empire, Romanization, client kings 295 STUDIA EUROPAEA GNESNENSIA 16/2017 · ROME AND THE PROVINCES Quos timuit superat, quos superavit amat (Rut. Nam., De Reditu suo, I, 72) This paper attempts a systematic approach to the study of the Roman province of Cilicia, whose formation process was quite long and characterized by a complicated sequence of historical and political events. The main question is formulated drawing on – though in a different geographic context – the words of G. Alföldy1: can we consider Cilicia a „typical” province of the Roman empire and how can we determine the peculiarities of this province? Moreover, always recalling a point emphasized by G. Alföldy, we have to take into account that, in order to understand the characteristics of a province, it is fundamental to appreciate its level of Romanization and its importance within the empire from the economic, political, military and cultural points of view2.
    [Show full text]
  • İkinci Sofistik Dönem: Sofist, Retor Ve Filozofların Dini Görevleri 219
    cedrus.akdeniz.edu.tr CEDRUS Cedrus V (2017) 217-239 The Journal of MCRI DOI: 10.13113/CEDRUS/201711 İKİNCİ SOFİSTİK DÖNEM: SOFİST, RETOR VE FİLOZOFLARIN DİNİ GÖREVLERİ THE SECOND SOPHISTIC: RELIGIOUS OFFICIALS OF SOPHISTS, RHETORS, AND PHILOSOPHERS ∗ ELİF AKGÜN KAYA Öz: Edebi kaynaklar, epigrafik belgeler ve nümismatik Abstract: Literary sources, epigraphical documents, veriler İkinci Sofistik Dönem’de (MS I-III. yüzyıl) sofist, and numismatic evidence show that the sophists, rhe- retor ve filozofların mensubu oldukları aile ve aldıkları tors, and philosophers that belonged to the most pro- eğitim sonucunda, kamusal yükümlülükleri ait olduk- minent and the wealthiest families had an excellent ları toplumsal sınıf içinde dikkat çekici şekilde başarıyla education and so they officiated successfully many yerine getirdiklerini ve sahip oldukları parayı cömertçe public services and generously spent their money for kentleri için harcadıklarını göstermektedir. Bu kişiler the cities in the Second Sophistic Period (Ist to IIIrd cen- βούλαρχος, βουλευτής, γραμματεύς, στρατηγός, ἀρχιε- turies AD). They undertook important municipal ma- ρεύς, δᾳδοῦχος, ἱερεύς, ἱεροφάντης, νεωκόρος, νεοποι- gistracies such as βούλαρχος, βουλευτής, γραμματεύς, ός, περιθύτης, προφήτης, ἀγορανόμος, λογιστής ve τα- στρατηγός, ἀρχιερεύς, δᾳδοῦχος, ἱερεύς, ἱεροφάντης, μίας, γυμνασίαρχος, ἐφήβαρχος, ἀγωνοθέτης, εἰρήναρ- νεωκόρος, νεοποιός, περιθύτης, προφήτης, ἀγορανό- χος/εἰρηνάρχης, στεφανήφορος, πρύτανις/πρυτανάρχης μος, λογιστής ve ταμίας, γυμνασίαρχος, ἐφήβαρχος, gibi önemli kent görevlerini üstlenmişlerdir. Ayrıca ἀγωνοθέτης, εἰρήναρχος/εἰρηνάρχης, στεφανήφορος, eyalet düzeyinde ἀγωνοθέτης, ἀρχιερεύς/ἀσιάρχης ve πρύτανις/πρυτανάρχης. Also, it is documented that γαλατάρχης’lik gibi oldukça prestijli kamusal görevleri they took on quite prestigious provincial magistracies üstlendikleri de belgelenmektedir. Bu makalede ise İkin- such as ἀγωνοθέτης, ἀρχιερεύς/ἀσιάρχης, and γαλα- ci Sofistik Dönem’de sofist, retor ve filozofların kent- τάρχης.
    [Show full text]
  • Cappadocia and Cappadocians in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early
    Dokuz Eylül University – DEU The Research Center for the Archaeology of Western Anatolia – EKVAM Colloquia Anatolica et Aegaea Congressus internationales Smyrnenses X Cappadocia and Cappadocians in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine periods An international video conference on the southeastern part of central Anatolia in classical antiquity May 14-15, 2020 / Izmir, Turkey Edited by Ergün Laflı Izmir 2020 Last update: 04/05/2020. 1 Cappadocia and Cappadocians in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine periods. Papers presented at the international video conference on the southeastern part of central Anatolia in classical antiquity, May 14-15, 2020 / Izmir, Turkey, Colloquia Anatolica et Aegaea – Acta congressus communis omnium gentium Smyrnae. Copyright © 2020 Ergün Laflı (editor) All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission from the editor. ISBN: 978-605-031-211-9. Page setting: Ergün Laflı (Izmir). Text corrections and revisions: Hugo Thoen (Deinze / Ghent). Papers, presented at the international video conference, entitled “Cappadocia and Cappadocians in the Hellenistic, Roman and Early Byzantine periods. An international video conference on the southeastern part of central Anatolia in classical antiquity” in May 14–15, 2020 in Izmir, Turkey. 36 papers with 61 pages and numerous colourful figures. All papers and key words are in English. 21 x 29,7 cm; paperback; 40 gr. quality paper. Frontispiece. A Roman stele with two portraits in the Museum of Kırşehir; accession nos. A.5.1.95a-b (photograph by E.
    [Show full text]
  • Greek-Anatolian Language Contact and the Settlement of Pamphylia
    CHRISTINA SKELTON Greek-Anatolian Language Contact and the Settlement of Pamphylia The Ancient Greek dialect of Pamphylia shows extensive influence from the nearby Anatolian languages. Evidence from the linguistics of Greek and Anatolian, sociolinguistics, and the histor- ical and archaeological record suggest that this influence is due to Anatolian speakers learning Greek as a second language as adults in such large numbers that aspects of their L2 Greek became fixed as a part of the main Pamphylian dialect. For this linguistic development to occur and persist, Pamphylia must initially have been settled by a small number of Greeks, and remained isolated from the broader Greek-speaking community while prevailing cultural atti- tudes favored a combined Greek-Anatolian culture. 1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 BACKGROUND The Greek-speaking world of the Archaic and Classical periods (ca. ninth through third centuries BC) was covered by a patchwork of different dialects of Ancient Greek, some of them quite different from the Attic and Ionic familiar to Classicists. Even among these varied dialects, the dialect of Pamphylia, located on the southern coast of Asia Minor, stands out as something unusual. For example, consider the following section from the famous Pamphylian inscription from Sillyon: συ Διϝι̣ α̣ ̣ και hιιαροισι Μανεˉ[ς .]υαν̣ hελε ΣελυW[ι]ιυ̣ ς̣ ̣ [..? hι†ια[ρ]α ϝιλ̣ σιι̣ ọς ̣ υπαρ και ανιιας̣ οσα περ(̣ ι)ι[στα]τυ ̣ Wοικ[. .] The author would like to thank Sally Thomason, Craig Melchert, Leonard Neidorf and the anonymous reviewer for their valuable input, as well as Greg Nagy and everyone at the Center for Hellenic Studies for allowing me to use their library and for their wonderful hospitality during the early stages of pre- paring this manuscript.
    [Show full text]
  • Alexander's Seventh Phalanx Battalion Milns, R D Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1966; 7, 2; Proquest Pg
    Alexander's Seventh Phalanx Battalion Milns, R D Greek, Roman and Byzantine Studies; Summer 1966; 7, 2; ProQuest pg. 159 Alexander's Seventh Phalanx Battalion R. D. Milns SOME TIME between the battle of Gaugamela and the battle of A the Hydaspes the number of battalions in the Macedonian phalanx was raised from six to seven.1 This much is clear; what is not certain is when the new formation came into being. Berve2 believes that the introduction took place at Susa in 331 B.C. He bases his belief on two facts: (a) the arrival of 6,000 Macedonian infantry and 500 Macedonian cavalry under Amyntas, son of Andromenes, when the King was either near or at Susa;3 (b) the appearance of Philotas (not the son of Parmenion) as a battalion leader shortly afterwards at the Persian Gates.4 Tarn, in his discussion of the phalanx,5 believes that the seventh battalion was not created until 328/7, when Alexander was at Bactra, the new battalion being that of Cleitus "the White".6 Berve is re­ jected on the grounds: (a) that Arrian (3.16.11) says that Amyntas' reinforcements were "inserted into the existing (six) battalions KC1:TCt. e8vr(; (b) that Philotas has in fact taken over the command of Perdiccas' battalion, Perdiccas having been "promoted to the Staff ... doubtless after the battle" (i.e. Gaugamela).7 The seventh battalion was formed, he believes, from reinforcements from Macedonia who reached Alexander at Nautaca.8 Now all of Tarn's arguments are open to objection; and I shall treat them in the order they are presented above.
    [Show full text]
  • The Court of Alexander the Great As Social System
    Originalveröffentlichung in Waldemar Heckel/Lawrence Tritle (Hg.), Alexander the Great. A New History, Malden, Mass. u.a. 2009, S. 83-98 5 The Court of Alexander the Great as Social System Gregor Weber In his discussion of events that followed Alexander ’s march through Hyrcania (summer 330), Plutarch gives a succinct summary of the king ’s conduct and reports the clash of his closest friends, Hephaestion and Craterus (Alex. 47.5.9-11).1 The passage belongs in the context of Alexander ’s adoption of the traditions and trap ­ pings of the dead Persian Great King (Fredricksmeyer 2000; Brosius 2003a), although the conflict between the two generals dates to the time of the Indian campaign (probably 326). It reveals not only that Alexander was subtly in tune with the atti­ tudes of his closest friends, but also that his changes elicited varied responses from the members of his circle. Their relationships with each other were based on rivalry, something Alexander - as Plutarch ’s wording suggests - actively encouraged. But it is also reported that Alexander made an effort to bring about a lasting reconcili ­ ation of the two friends, who had attacked each other with swords, and drawn their respective troops into the fray. To do so, he had to marshal “all his resources ” (Hamilton 1969; 128-31) from gestures of affection to death threats. These circumstances invite the question: what was the structural relevance of such an episode beyond the mutual antagonism of Hephaestion and Craterus? For these were not minor protagonists, but rather men of the upper echelon of the new Macedonian-Persian empire, with whose help Alexander had advanced his con ­ quest ever further and exercised his power (Berve nos.
    [Show full text]
  • ROMANIZATION and SOME CILICIAN CULTS by HUGH ELTON (BIAA)
    ROMANIZATION AND SOME CILICIAN CULTS By HUGH ELTON (BIAA) This paper focuses on two sites from central Cilicia in Anatolia, the Cory­ cian Cave and Kanhdivane, to make some comments about religion and Romanization. From the Corycian Cave, a pair of early third-century AD altars are dedicated to Zeus Korykios, described as Victorious (Epinikios), Triumphant (Tropaiuchos), and the Harvester (Epikarpios), and to Hermes Korykios, also Victorious, Triumphant, and the Harvester. The altars were erected for 'the fruitfulness and brotherly love of the Augusti', suggesting they come from the period before Geta's murder, i.e. between AD 209 and 212. 1 These altars are unremarkable and similar examples are common else­ where, so these altars can be interpreted as showing the homogenising effect of the Roman Empire. But behind these dedications, however, may lie a re­ ligious tradition stretching back to the second millennium BC. At the second site, Kanhdivane, a tomb in the west necropolis was accompanied by a fu­ nerary inscription erected by Marcus Ulpius Knos for himself and his family, probably in the second century AD. Marcus then added, 'but if anyone damages or opens [the tomb] let him pay to the treasury of Zeus 1000 [de­ narii] and to the Moon (Selene) and to the Sun (Helios) above 1000 [denarii] and let him be subject to the curses also of the Underground Gods (Kata­ chthoniai Theoi). ' 2 When he wanted to threaten retribution, Knos turned to a local group of gods. As at the Corycian Cave, Knos' actions may preserve traces of pre-Roman practices, though within a Roman framework.
    [Show full text]
  • Tourism Potential of Gazipaşa
    Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 19 (2011) 231–239 The 2nd International Geography Symposium GEOMED 2010 Tourism potential of Gazipaúa (Antalya - Turkey) ùenay Güngöra∗& Recep Bozyi÷itb aMeram Anatolian Vocational Trade High School, Meram/Konya, Turkey bSelçuk University, Ahmet Keleúo÷lu Faculty of Education, Geography Education Department, Meram/Konya,Turkey Abstract The aim of this study was to determine natural, historical and cultural attractions of Gazipasa district and to suggest the possibilities to add the attractions like caves, water sources, flora and faunas to the tourism. Its historical and cultural attractions include antique cities, ruins, tombs and graves, plateaus, hand arts and traditional clothes. Inspite of all these attractions role of Gazipasa in the tourism sector is not on the right level. Therefore tourism potential of Gazipasa district was investigated in order to bring it to a better level in Turkish tourism sector and suggestions are made for necessary investments in this connection. © 2011 Published byby ElsevierElsevier Ltd. Ltd. Selection Selection and/or and/or peer-review peer-review under under responsibility responsibility of ofThe Recep 2nd InternationalEfe and Munir Geography Ozturk Symposium-Mediterranean Environment Keywords: Gazipasa, Tourism, Natural Attracts, Historical and Cultural Attracts. 1. Introduction The town of Gazipaúa is full of natural, historical and cultural attractions. However, it is not benefiting from this richness at a desired level. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine tourism potential of Gazipasa and steps to be taked for activating this potential. Such a study on the potential of a touristic place helps both in the touristic development as well as sustainable use of natural environment.
    [Show full text]