DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45246#0013
PART III.
CHAPTER I.
INSCRIPTIONS FROM PRIENfe.
INTRODUCTORY NOTE. THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN PRIENE AND SAMOS.
The most important of the inscriptions from Priene
have reference to a long standing dispute between
Priene and Samos touching the ownership of certain
lands on the continent. The circumstances of this
dispute have been sketched by Bockh (C. I. 2905,
compare 2254) and MM. Waddington-Lebas (Voy-
age Archeologique, Part v, 186 foil.). But the exca-
vations carried on at Priene in 1869 by Mr. Pullan,
by direction of the Society of Dilettanti, have
resulted in the discovery of many documents upon
the subject unknown to previous scholars. These
marbles, together with most of the Priene inscriptions
published by Waddington-Lebas, were presented to
the British Museum in 1870. The inscriptions
were engraved on the antae and on the external face
of the walls of the pronaos of the temple of Athene
Polias, the walls being built with large blocks of
marble, the joining of which afforded a beautiful
specimen of ancient masonry. The inscriptions fol-
lowed on without regard to the joints of the wall-
stones, as will be seen later on to be the case with
the πολίτβίαό inscriptions from the Artemision at
Ephesos. It has been therefore no light task to
prepare these documents for the reader. For some
of the wall-stones never reached the Museum, and
many of those which came were broken into frag-
ments. These have had to be pieced together,
lacunes allowed for, and the position of one slab in
relation to others determined. In many cases the
practised eye of the masons at the Museum was
able to determine the probable joinings of the
stones, where it was impossible to judge from the
internal evidence of the inscriptions. The plan on
p. 7 will show the reader in what manner the marbles
have been re-arranged. The Prienians appear to
have regarded this cella as a kind of muniment room,
containing the documentary evidence of their title
to the disputed lands.
A short survey of the controversy between the
two cities will explain the order in which the fol-
lowing documents are grouped, and will supersede
the necessity of a detailed commentary on the
subject-matter of each inscription.
The Samians appear to have laid claim from time
immemorial to a district upon the mainland adjoining
the Prienian frontier. In whatever way this district
may have come into the possession of the Samians,
PART III.
whether as the prize of war (as we shall find to be
probably the case), or in some other way, certain it
is that Priene viewed the Samian occupation as an
encroachment, and the disputes which arose in con-
sequence between the two states formed no insignifi-
cant feature in the history of either people.
Plutarch tells us (Qusest. Grsec. 20) of an early
war (circa b.c. 550) between Priene and Samos, pro-
bably concerning these lands, in which, after varying
fortunes, the Samians were defeated with the loss
of a thousand men. They accordingly withdrew
from the mainland, and Priene resumed possession of
the district, her claim to it being strongly supported
by Lygdamis, then tyrant of Naxos, b.c. 540-525
(C. I. 2254, lines 15-19). This settlement lasted only
for six years, when the Milesians, espousing the cause
of Samos, inflicted upon the Prienians so terrible a
defeat at a place called Δρυς, that '0 παρά Δρνϊ σκότος
became a proverb at Priene. The Samians im-
mediately seized upon the disputed territory (C. I.
ibid., lines 20, 21), but through the mediation of
Bias, the Prienian sage, who went as ambassador to
Samos, the two states were again reconciled, and
the Samians appear to have withdrawn from the
mainland (C. I. ibid., line 22 foil.).
In the year 440 b.c. war broke out between Miletos
and Samos ‘concerning Priene,’ says Thucydides
(i, 115), an expression from which we may infer
that the cause of contention was the same as before,
but that the Milesians now sided with the Prienians.
The result was that Samos was defeated and reduced
to the condition of a tributary by the Athenians
under Perikles (Thucyd. i, ij6, 117; Plut. Pericl. 28),
and the Prienians apparently were established in
their possession of the district under dispute. In
Greek literature nothing more is heard concerning
the question, but inscriptions enable us to trace the
controversy through several subsequent stages.
When Alexander crossed over into Asia (b.c. 334),
Priene was one of the towns that opened their gates
to him. Whether Alexander made any award con-
cerning the disputed lands is uncertain. No. cccc
is an edict of his concerning Prienian territory, but
no mention of Samos occurs, nor the names of any of
the disputed lands. But a reference to Alexander’s
expedition in No. ccccm, line 146, seems to imply
that he did make some award in favour of Priene.
B
CHAPTER I.
INSCRIPTIONS FROM PRIENfe.
INTRODUCTORY NOTE. THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN PRIENE AND SAMOS.
The most important of the inscriptions from Priene
have reference to a long standing dispute between
Priene and Samos touching the ownership of certain
lands on the continent. The circumstances of this
dispute have been sketched by Bockh (C. I. 2905,
compare 2254) and MM. Waddington-Lebas (Voy-
age Archeologique, Part v, 186 foil.). But the exca-
vations carried on at Priene in 1869 by Mr. Pullan,
by direction of the Society of Dilettanti, have
resulted in the discovery of many documents upon
the subject unknown to previous scholars. These
marbles, together with most of the Priene inscriptions
published by Waddington-Lebas, were presented to
the British Museum in 1870. The inscriptions
were engraved on the antae and on the external face
of the walls of the pronaos of the temple of Athene
Polias, the walls being built with large blocks of
marble, the joining of which afforded a beautiful
specimen of ancient masonry. The inscriptions fol-
lowed on without regard to the joints of the wall-
stones, as will be seen later on to be the case with
the πολίτβίαό inscriptions from the Artemision at
Ephesos. It has been therefore no light task to
prepare these documents for the reader. For some
of the wall-stones never reached the Museum, and
many of those which came were broken into frag-
ments. These have had to be pieced together,
lacunes allowed for, and the position of one slab in
relation to others determined. In many cases the
practised eye of the masons at the Museum was
able to determine the probable joinings of the
stones, where it was impossible to judge from the
internal evidence of the inscriptions. The plan on
p. 7 will show the reader in what manner the marbles
have been re-arranged. The Prienians appear to
have regarded this cella as a kind of muniment room,
containing the documentary evidence of their title
to the disputed lands.
A short survey of the controversy between the
two cities will explain the order in which the fol-
lowing documents are grouped, and will supersede
the necessity of a detailed commentary on the
subject-matter of each inscription.
The Samians appear to have laid claim from time
immemorial to a district upon the mainland adjoining
the Prienian frontier. In whatever way this district
may have come into the possession of the Samians,
PART III.
whether as the prize of war (as we shall find to be
probably the case), or in some other way, certain it
is that Priene viewed the Samian occupation as an
encroachment, and the disputes which arose in con-
sequence between the two states formed no insignifi-
cant feature in the history of either people.
Plutarch tells us (Qusest. Grsec. 20) of an early
war (circa b.c. 550) between Priene and Samos, pro-
bably concerning these lands, in which, after varying
fortunes, the Samians were defeated with the loss
of a thousand men. They accordingly withdrew
from the mainland, and Priene resumed possession of
the district, her claim to it being strongly supported
by Lygdamis, then tyrant of Naxos, b.c. 540-525
(C. I. 2254, lines 15-19). This settlement lasted only
for six years, when the Milesians, espousing the cause
of Samos, inflicted upon the Prienians so terrible a
defeat at a place called Δρυς, that '0 παρά Δρνϊ σκότος
became a proverb at Priene. The Samians im-
mediately seized upon the disputed territory (C. I.
ibid., lines 20, 21), but through the mediation of
Bias, the Prienian sage, who went as ambassador to
Samos, the two states were again reconciled, and
the Samians appear to have withdrawn from the
mainland (C. I. ibid., line 22 foil.).
In the year 440 b.c. war broke out between Miletos
and Samos ‘concerning Priene,’ says Thucydides
(i, 115), an expression from which we may infer
that the cause of contention was the same as before,
but that the Milesians now sided with the Prienians.
The result was that Samos was defeated and reduced
to the condition of a tributary by the Athenians
under Perikles (Thucyd. i, ij6, 117; Plut. Pericl. 28),
and the Prienians apparently were established in
their possession of the district under dispute. In
Greek literature nothing more is heard concerning
the question, but inscriptions enable us to trace the
controversy through several subsequent stages.
When Alexander crossed over into Asia (b.c. 334),
Priene was one of the towns that opened their gates
to him. Whether Alexander made any award con-
cerning the disputed lands is uncertain. No. cccc
is an edict of his concerning Prienian territory, but
no mention of Samos occurs, nor the names of any of
the disputed lands. But a reference to Alexander’s
expedition in No. ccccm, line 146, seems to imply
that he did make some award in favour of Priene.
B