Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T08:18:12.388Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Campaigns of Servilius Isauricus against the Pirates

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

H. A. Ormerod
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the effects of the defeat of king Antiochus, followed by a treaty of peace whose terms limited his fleet to ten vessels of war and prevented him from sending an armed vessel to the west of the Calycadnus, had been that the slight amount of control, which the kings of Syria had formerly exercised on the coast of Cilicia Tracheia, could no longer be maintained. As yet the Romans themselves had no interest in the districts outside the Taurus. Of the southern coast of Asia Minor, Lycia was handed over to the Rhodians, Pamphylia after some delay to Eumenes, and although western Cilicia remained a part of the Syrian kingdom, the terms of the treaty effectually prevented the nominal rulers from exercising any sort of control. It is scarcely surprising that the wild tribes which inhabited both sides of the Taurus once more betook themselves to occupations which had been natural to them from the earliest times. The piracy which, according to Strabo, now began in these waters, was moreover encouraged by the Rhodians and the kings of Egypt, in so far as it crippled the Syrian power, while Rome, if we may except a tour of inspection by Scipio Aemilianus without armed force, took no cognisance of its existence. Rather the operations of the pirates, as the purveyors of slaves, were regarded, together with the similar activities of the tax-farmers, as an integral part of the economic basis of life.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 12 , November 1922 , pp. 35 - 56
Copyright
Copyright ©H. A.Ormerod 1922. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 35 note 1 xiv, p 668.

page 35 note 2 See Foucart, Journal des Savants, 1906, p. 369. The text of the law has now been published in Klio, xvii, p. 172. Since the above was in type my attention has been drawn by Mr. M. N. Tod to an article by E. Cuq (C.R.A.I. 1923, pp. 129 seqq). Cuq shows, I think conclusively, that the accepted date for the inscription must be abandoned, but his proposed identification with the Lex Gabinia of 67 B.C. requires further evidence. (See also Suppl. Epigr. Graec. vol. i, p. 33, no. 161).

page 36 note 1 With the exception, perhaps, of Seleuceia ad Calycadnum (Strabo, xiv, p. 670, πολὺ ἀφϵστωσαν τοῦ Κιλικου καὶ Παμφυλίυ τρόπου.

page 36 note 2 Strabo xiv, p. 664. For the Pamphylians in general see xii, p. 570 : οὐ τϵλέως ἀφϵȋνται των λῃστρικῶν ἔργων, οὐδὲ τοὺς ὁμόρους ἐῶσι καθʼ ἡσυχίαν ζῆν.

page 36 note 3 xiii, p. 631.

page 36 note 4 Appian, Bell. Mithr., 93: Μουρήνας τϵ ἐγχϵιρήσας αὐτοῖς οὐδὲν ἐξϵἱργαστο μέγα. ἀλλ οὐδὲ Σϵρούιλος Ισαυρικὸς ἐπὶ τῷ Μουρήνᾳ.

page 37 note 1 Cic, . Verr. ii, I, 90Google Scholar. (Classis) quae contra piratas aedificata sit. See also §89.

page 37 note 2 This at any rate was the inference Cicero intended should be drawn from the statement in Verr. ii, 1, 56.

page 37 note 3 Ammian., xiv, 8, 4. Hae duae provinciae (Cilicia and Isauria) factae sunt vectigales. Eutrop. vi, 3. Is Ciliciam subegit. Orosius, v. 23.

page 37 note 4 See below, p. 43. Strabo after mentioning the capture of Isaura by Servilius (xii, p. 569) adds καὶ τὰ πολλὰ των πϵιρατων ἐρύματα ἐξϵȋλϵ τὰ ἐπὶ τῄ θαλάττῃ. He tells us, however, of none outside Lycia and Pamphylia.

page 37 note 5 References in Clinton, iii, p. 156.

page 37 note 6 Verr. ii, 3, 211. P. Servilius quinquennium exercitui cum praeesset.

page 37 note 7 Groebe-Drumann, iv, 408.

page 37 note 8 Eutrop. vi, 3: Intra triennium bello finem dedit. Orosius, v, 23 : Triennio emenso quo bellum gestum est. The reconciliation which Maurenbrecher (Prolegomena, p. 68) proposes between the two statements can hardly be accepted. According to his view the reduction of Eastern Lycia and Pamphylia was completed in 78 and was followed by a ‘terrestre bellum’ against the Cilicians and Isaurians, extending over the years 77, 76, 75.

page 38 note 1 Ep. 93: P. Servilius procos. in Cilicia Isauros domuit et aliquot urbes piratarum expugnavit. The campaign therefore preceded the death of Nicomedes (early in 74).

page 38 note 2 Ep. 90 : Praeterea res a P. Servilio pro cos. adversus Cilicas gestas continet. Ep. 91 opens with the appointment of Pompeius to the Spanish command in 77 B.C.

page 38 note 3 The fragments of Sallust are throughout quoted from Maurenbrecher's edition of 1893.

page 38 note 4 Suet., Julius, 3: Meruit et sub Servilio Isaurico in Cilicia, sed brevi tempore. Nam Sullae morte comperta … Romam propere rediit. His motive is still more definitely expressed by a fragment of Sallust (i, 57), if Maurenbrecher is right in referring the words to this incident. The Suetonius passage effectually disposes of the view put forward by Groebe-Drumann (ii, p. 159, note 12), founded on Sallust, i, fr. 127: Itaque Servilius aegrotum Tarenti collegam (i.e. Appius Claudius, the consul of 79, who was bound for Macedonia) prior transgressus, that Appius Claudius' illness at Tarentum followed his appointment as interrex. If this was the case it would mean that Servilius' departure for Cilicia did not take place until after the Lepidan revolt. It is more natural to suppose that both proconsuls were preparing to depart for their provinces in the spring of 78, but that Appius was delayed first by illness, and later by the Lepidan revolt.

page 38 note 5 That a powerful fleet was employed is expressly recorded by Florus, iii, 6: P. Servilius quamvis leves et fugaces myoparonas gravi et Martia classe turbaret et non incruenta victoria superat. The source from which Servilius obtained his ships was doubtless the states previously warned for the duty of providing them by Murena (v. above, p. 36). It was as an officer of the governor of Cilicia that Verres was able to requisition the myoparo from Miletus (Verr. ii, 1, 86).

page 40 note 1 See below.

page 40 note 2 Eutropius, vi, 3: Ad Ciliciam et Pamphyliam missus.

page 40 note 3 Cicero, , de leg. agr. i, 5Google Scholar: Iubent venire agros Attalensium atque Olympenorum. Hos populo Romano P. Servilii, fortissimi viri, victoria adiunxit.

page 40 note 4 De leg. agr. ii, 50, discussed below.

page 40 note 5 Verr. ii, 5, 79. Ille nobilissimus pirata.

page 40 note 6 Cic, . de leg. agr. ii, 50Google Scholar (Olympus and Phaselis) Verr, ii, 1, 21 (Olympus); Verr. ii, 4, 22 (Phaselis); Strabo, xiv, 671 (Olympus, Phaselis, Corycus); Florus, iii, 6 (Phaselis and Olympus); Orosius, v, 23 (Phaselis, Corycus, ‘Olympum montem pervagatus’); Eutropius, vi, 3 (Phaselis, Olympus, Corycus). Sallust, fragg. i, 127–132 (Olympus, Phaselis, Corycus); Pseudo-Asconius, in Verr. ii, p. 173 (Orelli) (Corycus, Olympus, Phaselis).

page 40 note 7 xiv, p. 664.

page 40 note 8 xiv, p. 671. Apart from the curious misplacement of this passage, which occurs in the description of Cilicia (where from no mountain could a view over Lycia, Pamphylia, Pisidia and the Milyas be obtained), there is a topographical error regarding Mount Olympus: Ὁ Ὄλυμπος ὄρος τϵ καὶ φρούριον ἀφʼ οὖ κατοπτϵύϵται πᾶσα Λυκία καὶ Παμφυλία καὶ Πισιδία καὶ Μιλύας. This in no way suits Mount Olympus, usually identified with the Musa Dagh (1,000 m.), the view from which is completely shut out to the north by the great mass of Mount Solyma (Tachtaly Dagh, 2,400 m.).

page 40 note 9 Cicero's statement regarding Phaselis is illuminated by a note of Leake's, who had fallen ill at Alaya (Coracesium) and was compelled to return by sea. Journal of a Tour in Asia Minor, p. 133 : ‘In passing by sea from Alaya to Castel Rosso [Casteloryzo], I was compelled to follow the coast of the Gulf of Adalia, the sailors being afraid in this season [March] of crossing directly to Cape Khelidoni.’

page 41 note 1 xiv, p. 665. Artemidorus' floruit is given as Ol. 169 (104–100).

page 41 note 2 The approaches by land to this part of the Lycian coast are difficult and few. Arrian's account of Alexander's march from Phaselis to the Pamphylian plain shows the difficulty of the road by the coast. At the present time the inhabitants of Eski Keui at Cape Avova to the north of Phaselis prefer the voyage by sea to Adalia to the difficulties of the Climax route, caiques running frequently between the two places. From the edge of the Pamphylian plain to Phaselis it is a march of not less than eleven hours; although the road round the Climax was found by Mr. Robinson and myself to be easy enough in calm weather, our horses were frequently up to their fetlocks in water, and the road would be impossible with any sea running. (It is perhaps worth recording that remains of an old road, known as Ghiaour Yolu, with an embankment of large blocks were to be seen above us on the cliffs.)

So far as I know, there is only one road to the west over the hills above this coast, the one taken by Hoskyn in 1842, by way of the pass between Mount Climax and the TachtalyDagh, and described also by Spratt and Forbes (Travels in Lycia, i, p. 199 seqq.) At the top of the pass it is joined by an alternative route from the Pamphylian plain by way of the Tchandyr valley, by which an aggressive mountain people could threaten Pamphylia. As a means of communication between Phaselis and the rest of Lycia the road taken by Hoskyn is practically negligible, as it debouches on to the upper valley of the Alaghyr Tchai near Seraidjik, from which the descent into the Limyra plain is an extremely difficult march of not less than ten hours. A route to the north from Seraidjik to the Cibyratis and Milyas reaching the Elmali plain at Imedjik is impassable during the winter months. (We had difficulty in crossing the snow-drifts at the Imedjik Yaila in the middle of May.)

The track between the Tachtaly Dagh and Mount Climax would, however, present few difficulties to marauding mountaineers descending on Phaselis and the coast from the Solyma uplands, while the ‘Robber's tomb’ (Benndorf-Niemann, , Reisen, ii, pp. 151–3Google Scholar, figs. 71-2), as Mommsen points out (Provinces, i, 337), throws an interesting sidelight on the character of the inhabitants of this district at a later date.

From the south the only practicable road to Phaselis is by way of Olympus, seven hours distant and reached from Phaselis by an inland route entailing a stiff climb. Access to Olympus from the west is less difficult, there being two different roads from the Limyra plain, both of which, however, must cross the ridge which connects the lower slopes of Mount Solyma with the Chelidonian promontory. The range of mountains which extends northwards from this point, viewed from the Pamphylian gulf, presents an almost unbroken mass, its appearance being well summed up by the statement of Strabo (p. 666), that many considered the Taurus to begin with the Chelidonian promontory and islands, διὰ τϵ τὴν ἄκραν ὑᾧηλὴν οὅσαν καὶ καθήκουσαν ἀπὸ τῶν Πισισδικῶν τῶν ὐπϵρκϵιμένων τῆς Παμφυλίας.

It will therefore be readily understood that the whole of the eastern coast is severed from the rest of Lycia; none of the characteristic Lycian rock-tombs and inscriptions are to be found in this district, and though Olympus, to which access from the west is less difficult, was drawn into the Lycian league, this was at no time the case with Phaselis (Strabo, p. 667). Quite apart from the Greek settlement at Phaselis, the ethnical distinction between the inhabitants of Lycia proper and those of the Solyma mountains goes back, as Strabo points out, to the earliest time? (p. 667, cf. p. 573).

page 41 note 3 p. 666: ῎Ολυμπς πόλις μϵγάλη καὶ ὃρος όμώνυμον ὁκαί Φοινικοῦς καλϵȋται.

page 42 note 1 Florus, iii, 6 (quoted above, p. 38).

page 42 note 2 Eutrop. vi, 3 : Lyciae urbes clarissimas oppugnavit, in his Phaselidem, Olympum; Orosius, v, 23: Lyciam et urbes eius obsessas oppressasque cepit. Praeterea Olympum montem pervagatus, Phaselim evertit, Corycum diruit. A similar exaggeration is to be found already in Cicero (de leg. agr. i, fr. 3): addicetur omnis ora Lyciorum atque Cilicum, on which passage Treuber (Geschichte der Lykier, p. 189) quotes the view of Junge that Phaselis and Olympus were joined by Servilius to the province of Cilicia, which, I think, is correct.

page 42 note 3 The passages quoted in favour of a reduction of Cilicia are : Velleius, ii, 39, Ciliciam perdomuit Isauricus; Eutropius, vi, 3, Is Ciliciam subegit; Festus, Brev. 12, 13, Ciliciam et Isauros … subegit.

page 42 note 4 e.g. Groebe-Drumann, IV, p. 409; Maurenbrecher, Prolegomena, p. 68.

page 42 note 5 Appian, Syr. 48, Mithr. 105; Plut. Lucullus, 26.

page 42 note 6 p. 671 (v. above).

page 42 note 7 Which for Strabo begins with Olbia, τῆς Пαμφυλίας ἄρχη (p. 667).

page 43 note 1 p. 667. The same information is given by Steph. Byz. s.v. Αττάλϵια, but transferred to the Cilician Corycus. In Photius s.v. Κωρυκαȋος Corycus is called a promontory of Pamphylia, παρ' ᾧ πόλις 'Ατταλία. A Corycus in Pamphylia is mentioned also by Periegetes, Dion. (Geogr. Gr. Min. ii, p. 156Google Scholar), where, if Attaleia is intended, it is badly misplaced.

page 43 note 2 Note to Sallust, i, frag. 131.

page 43 note 3 p. 666: Ὄλυμπος πόλις μϵγάλη … ϵἶτα Κώρυκος ὁ αἰγιαλός ϵἶτα Φάσηλις. Corycus obviously was of no importance in Strabo's time. Its existence, however, is confirmed by the Stadiasmus. 227, 228. Phaselis, Corycus, Phoenicus-Olympus. Ib. 215: ʼαπὸ Σίδης ϵἰς Ἀττάλϵιαν στάδοι τν´ ἀπὸ Ἀτταλϵίας ϵἰς τὸ [Κωρύκιον] ἐμπόριον στδιοι τ´, ἀπὸ δέ [τοῦ] Κωρυκίου (Κορακιον codex) [ἐμπορίου] ϵἰς Σίδην στάδιοι ν´

page 43 note 4 p.670. Full references in Hicks, J.H.S. xii, 213.

page 43 note 5 ii, 81, from Nonius, iii, p. 202 (ed. Lindsay): Ciocum generis neutri. Sallustius Historiarum Lib. ii : iter vertit ad Corycum urbem inclytam Pastusque nemore in quo crocum gignitur. Stowasser, portu atque; Havercamp, specu atque. cf Servius, , ad Georg. i, 56Google Scholar <nam et crocum in Ci> licia apud Corycum nasci Sallustius <meminit>.

page 43 note 6 I. fragment 131. ‘Ad Corycum’ from Priscian xv: Sallustius in I historiarum ‘ad Olympum atque Phaselida [=fr. 129]. In eodem ‘ad Corycum’ [=fr. 131] I could not find fragment 132 ‘Apud Corycum,’ which Maurenbrecher quotes from the same passage of Priscian.

page 43 note 7 Not the Pamphylian Attaleia, as Mauienbrecher asserts in his note ad loc.

page 43 note 8 p. 671: κατὰ τϵ τὰς ἀκρωρϵίας τοῦ Ταύρου τό Ζηνικέτου πϵιρατήριον ἐστιν ὁ Ὄλυμπος ὄρος τϵ καὶ φρούιον ὁμώνυμον, ὰφ᾽ οὗ κατοπτϵύϵται πᾶσα Αυκία καὶ Παμφυλία καὶ Πισιδία καὶ Μιλύας κ.τ.λ.

page 44 note 1 Assigned by Maurenbrecher to the first book (no. 130), but quoted by Servius, , ad Aen. i, 420Google Scholar, without mention of the book in which it occurred.

page 44 note 2 ἔστι Пύλος πρὸ Пύλοις. Hopeless confusion prevails among ancient writers whenever Corycus is mentioned. Steph. Byz. (quoted above) confuses the Pamphylian Corycus (Attaleia) with the Cihcian. Photius, s.v. Κωρύκαις, ascribes the ‘Corycian trick’ of Strabo's Ionian Corycus (p. 644) to Corycus-Attaleia. Quintus Curtius iii, 10, in a description of Cilicia, has Monstrabantur Lvrnessi et Thebae, Typhonis quoque specus et Corycium nemus, ubi crocum gignitur. For the position of Lyrnessus and Thebe (between Phaselis and Attaleia) see, however, Strabo, p. 667 and 676 (other references in Geogr. Gr. Min. ii, p. 156). Obviously Quintus Curtius has fallen into the Corycus pitfall, giving, as neighbours to the Cilician, places which belonged to its Lycian or Pamphylian namesake.

page 44 note 3 See above note 6.

page 44 note 4 Strabo, xii, p. 568 : κώμας δύο ὀμωνύμους τὴν μὲν παλαιὰν καλουμίνην, ϵὐϵρκῆ, [τὴν δὲ νέαν].

page 44 note 5 For a description of the fastness of Isaura Vetus see Davies, Life in Asiatic Turkey, pp. 408 seqq, and for the topography of the whole district, Sterrett, Wolfe Expedition, pp. 105 seqq., pp. 149-51; Ramsay, J.H.S. 1905, pp. 162 seqq.

page 45 note 1 Maurenbreche, ii, 87.

page 45 note 2 iii, 7, 1.

page 47 note 1 Oppidum incensum et cultores venumdati, eoque terrore mox Isaura Nova legati pacem orantes venere, obsidesque et iussa facturos promittebant.

page 47 note 2 Iuniores primum ex consilio, deinde ut quisque acciderat, per totam urbem maximo clamore tumultum faciunt.

page 47 note 3 De improviso montem ex quo in tiuga oppidi teli coniectus erat occupavit, sacrum Matri Magnae. Fugam A., corr. Mommsen; forum, coni. Hauler. The hill is identified by Ramsay, op. cit. p. 164.

page 47 note 4 De leg. agr. ii, 50. Iubet venire … agrumque Agerensem et Orindicum et Gedusanum. Haec P. Servilii victoria … vestra facta sunt.

page 47 note 5 Full references in Ramsay, H.G. p. 398, B.S.A. ix, pp. 243 seqq., J.H.S. 1905, p. 165, where the view taken in the text is expressed.

page 47 note 6 B.S.A. ix, pp. 247, 253. The suggestion in Groebe-Drumann, iv, p. 409, n. 7, that the reference is to Aperlae is scarcely tenable. We have no reason to regard Aperlae on the Lycian coast between Kasteloryzo and Myra as falling within Servilius' sphere of operations.

page 48 note 1 Zumpt's conjecture, Eleusanum, has a certain plausibility, if the view expressed above regarding Cilicia Tracheia is incorrect. It is difficult, however, to see what can have been intended by Ager Eleusanus. The island of Elaeussa on the Cilician coast in which the town of Sebaste was founded by Archelaos in or after 25 B.C. (Strabo xiv, p. 671), before this date had none of the territory on the mainland which it afterwards possessed. The small town of Kanytelideis beside the Olban cave a few miles to the east, which is proved by inscriptions of imperial date to have belonged to Elaeussa-Sebaste (e.g. J.H.S. xii, no. 4; Heberdey-Wilhelm, nos. 128, 129), at an earlier date can be shown to have been dependent on Olba (Heberdey-Wilhelm, no. 133 from the pre-Roman cemetery, and the still earlier inscriptions of c. 200 B.C. in J.H.S. xii, nos. 1 and 2). The territory of Olba clearly came down to the coast at this point. Corycus on the coast to the west was independent of Elaeussa at this time, whatever may have been the case after the foundation of Sebaste (Head, H.N. p. 720, autonomous coins of first century B.C.). The coinage of Elaeussa itself in the first century B.C. (v. Hill, B.M. Cat. Cilicia, pl. xl, 14, with legend Ἐλαιουσυίων τῆς ίϵρᾶ καὶ αὐτονόμου) is an additional argument against the reduction of Elaeussa by Servilius.

page 48 note 2 B.S.A. ix, p. 268; J.R.S. vii, 247 ff.

page 48 note 3 J.H.S. 1905, p. 165.

page 48 note 4 I find the identification of Derbe with thistown town difficult, if only for the reason that Strabo (p. 569), who has considerable information about the capture of Derbe and Isaura Vetus by Amyntas, has nothing to say about any capture of Derbe by Servilius in a paragraph which follows his mention of Servilius' reduction of Isaura Vetus and Nova.

page 48 note 5 Certainty, however, is impossible. The two Phrygian dioceses of Synnada and Apameia are known to have been included in Asia from 62 to 56, as the result of a reorganisation which Marquardt (ii, p. 239) would ascribe to Sulla or Murena.

page 48 note 6 So Ramsay, op. cit. p. 166, quoting Strabo xii, p. 577.

page 49 note 1 See above, p. 42.

page 49 note 2 Professor Calder tells me that there is a direct route, passable by wheeled traffic, from Derbe to Zengibar Kalessi, by which an invader coming from the east could reach Isaura Vetus without approaching Isaura Nova. But could an invader thus leave Isaura Nova unmasked ?

page 49 note 3 It is probable that the fragment of Sallust i, 128, Fessus in Pamphyliam se receperat (Servius ad Aen. viii. 232, quoted also in the Liber Glossarum with variant ‘recepit’), has reference to this march, and may indicate that the first attempts to penetrate Taurus (? in 76) were unsuccessful. It is assigned by Maurenbrecher to the first book on the ground that it concerned the Lycian operations, but in neither of the authorities is the number of the book mentioned. (I have to thank Miss F. M. Rees for verifying the quotation in the Lib. Gloss.)

Mr. Anderson suggests in J.R.S. vii, p. 235, that the presence of Calpurnius Piso in Pamphylia in 13 B.C. is to be explained on the supposition that the attack on the Homanadeis, actually carried out by Quirinius, was first planned to be delivered from Pamphylia. ‘A bad line,’ as Ramsay says, but suggested by the fact that it had been the line followed by Servilius when the northern, base used by Quirinius was not available.

page 49 note 4 See Appendix.

page 49 note 5 The route followed was from Konia to Adalia by way of Beishehir. Previously a chaussée had been projected by the Turkish government, parts of which had been constructed. The distances are given in English miles from Beishehir:

To Derekeui (28) by way of Bademli (2), Iskelez (10), Tchetme (20½) road passable by wheeled traffic.

From Derekeui to the south end of Kambos ova (41), thence by a track fit for pack animals only, between the mountains Loyka and Melik Dagh. From Subujaor-Ilzunly (52½), the track is easy to the Enif ova, a small plain c. 8 miles long by 3 broad, with a small khan at the SW. corner (64). A steep climb to the Kessik Bel pass, the sea being visihle at Demir Kapu (66½). From the foot of the Kessik Bel pass (73) to Karghyl Khan (92), of Seljuk construction, a section of the projected chaussée had been built. From Karghyl Khan to Köprü Khan (112) by way of Karamandalar (107) where the chaussée recommences. The Köprü Su (Eurymedon) is crossed by the Roman bridge Thence to Adalia 27 miles.

page 50 note 1 On the character of this country, which I have not seen beyond the southern shore of Lake Trogitis, see Ramsay, , J.R.S. vii, p. 247Google Scholar.

page 50 note 2 Plutarch, Lucullus, 6.

page 50 note 3 i, 72.

page 51 note 1 Strabo xii, p. 534, cf. Justin, xxxvii, 1. Full information in Ramsay, H.G. p. 335. It is noticeable that Strabo in his definition of Tracheia and Pedias limits them to that part of Cilicia which lies to the south of Taurus (τῆς Κιλικίας τῆς ἕξω του̂ Ταύρου).

page 51 note 2 xii, p. 569. See Ramsay, B.S.A. ix, p. 269 : ‘Cilices and Homanades are interchangeable on p. 569.’

page 51 note 3 See on this point, H.G. p. 361 seqq.

page 51 note 4 ii, p. 315 (French translation of 1892): τῷ δ' αὐτῷ χρόνῳ Φρυγίαν Εὔμαχος Μιθριδάτου στρατηγὸς ἐπιτρέχων ἔκτεινϵ Ρωμαίων πολλοὺς μϵτὰ παιδῶν καὶ γυναικῶν Πισίδας τϵ καὶ Ίσαύρους ὑπήγϵτο καὶ Κιλικίαν, μέχρι τῶν τις Γαλατικῶν τϵτραρχῶν Δηιόταρος ἐπιπολάζοντα αὐτὸν συνϵδἰωξϵ. In view of the wider use of Cilicia, it would be extremely hazardous to assert that Eumachus penetrated the Taurus into Tracheia. The same considerations apply equally to the Sallust fragment (v. 14) quoted by Marquardt: Lucullus audito Q.Marcium Regem pro consule perLycaoniam cum tribus legionibus in Ciliciam tendere. In both these passages, as in Dio. Cass. xv, 1, by Cilicia is meant the Roman province of that name, more particularly the parts north of the Taurus.

page 52 note 1 Ritter, , Erdkunde, xix, p. 610Google Scholar seqq.

page 53 note 1 Von Richter calls it Karas; Schönborn, Jaras (Yaras). See their reports in Ritter, l.c.

page 55 note 1 Strabo, xii, p. 570.

page 55 note 2 id. p. 569. Συναφϵȋς δ' ϵὶσὶ τούτοις (the Homanadeis) οί τϵ ἄλλοι Пισίδαι καὶ οἱ Σϵλγϵτς, οἵπϵρ ϵἰσὶν ἀξιολογώτατοι τῶν Πισιδῶν. τὸ μὲν οὖν πλέον αὐτῶν (i.e. the Pisidiands) μέρος τὰς ἀκρωρέιας τοῦ Ταύρου κατέχϵι, τίνϵς δὲ καὶ ὑπὲρ Σὶδης καὶ Ἀσπένδου Παμφυλίκων πόλϵων κατέχουσι γϵώλοφα χώρια ἐλαιόφυτα πάντα, τὰ δ᾽ ὑπὲρ τούτων ἤδη ὀρϵινά, Κατϵννϵῖς, ὅμοροι Σϵλγϵῦσι καὶ Ὁμοναδϵῦσι, Σαγαλασσϵῖς δ᾽ ἐπὶ τὰ ἔντος τὰ πρὸς τῇ Μιλυάδι i.e. the western frontier of the Homanadeis touched that of the Selgians in its northern part, in its southern part that of the Katenneis, who, if Polybius (v. 73) is right in saying that they could put 8,000 hoplites into the field, must also have occupied a considerable tract (? from the middle waters of the Melas to the Haidar Dagh).

page 56 note 1 B.S.A. ix, p. 266. I have not seen the report by Jünther, whose discoveries are cited.