Article contents
Extract
In JRS xxxiii, 58, Dr. F. Schulz writes: ‘The place is Alexandria or, as our documents always put it, Alexandria ad Aegyptum. This is a translation of the Greek’ Ἀλ. ἡ πρὸς Αἰϒύπτῳ which occurs in pre-Roman times. The legal meaning in the period of our documents is nothing else but “Al. in Aegypto”’; and in a footnote he states: ‘Wilcken's opinion … is not acceptable’.
This statement, which is utterly contrary to the prevailing view, gave me, I confess, something of a shock, for I had myself more than once made the assertion that Alexandria was, for the Romans, not officially a part of Egypt; but so dogmatically was Dr. Schulz's obiter dictum formulated that I was so far shaken as to make up my mind to investigate the point before again committing myself. I was at the time too much occupied with other work to do so, but recently I have had an opportunity to examine the evidence, and I think it desirable to place the result of this examination on record without delay.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © H. I. Bell 1946. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies
References
page 131 note 1 Ed. ἐ̣υ̣‘γ’(ενὴς?) μητρο ‘π’(ολῖτις). The other (and later published) instances make the reading given above practically certain.
- 1
- Cited by