DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4679#0314
288 IX. PHRYGIAN CITIES ON PISIDIAN FRONTIER.
No record exists in literature that Armia Cornificia Faustina had
a daughter; but the name and the period put the relationship of
Faustina Ummidia Cornificia beyond a doubt1.
The only fact recorded of the emperor's sister Annia Cornificia, is
that she left property, part of which was given by the emperor her
brother to her son M. Ummidius2. It is implied apparently that the
emperor might have kept the property to himself, which perhaps
indicates that it was imperial property which returned to the sovereign
at her death. From this inscription we may infer that another part
of her property was given to her daughter, including the Pisidian
estate. That her property was very large might be assumed, both
from her rank, and from the fact that history has preserved the fact
that it was divided at her death. Before we proceed to examine the
difficult inscriptions which date soon after this one, we shall find it
best to look at the latest of the whole series.
No. 125. (R. 1884: published by Sterrett no. 59). 'Ay[a8rj Tvyr) ■
eTovs] A— t5>v KparicrTcov t€kpcov tov Xavrrpo(Td)Tov vttcltikov <PXaBiov
''AvTioyj>avov Ka[l r]eTs deifivr/crTOV pirjrpbs clvtSiv no[/j.]7ra>ptas Ov/ilSicls
iiwep crooTrjpias avTmv KCtl o~(OTr)pias Srjfiov 'Opp.r]Xecov......Aiip.
Mrjvis B" Kacriov BopiaKov Ik t$>v ISimv dvaXcofidTCOv dvecrTrjcre tov
Boopbv rols crvviepeio-.v tov Aid's • eyevera3 8a,7rdvr]s 8r\v. . . Tdios
Ni'ypov BayavSevs • Avp.'ATTo\\5>vi$ ZrpuTcovos 'OXBaaeijs BovXeurr/s-
Avp. KcoBzXXls Sh 'l<JTp&Ta>vo[s] ■ Avp. NeifcdSas Sh M-qvlSos • Avp.
'AXe£ai>8pos Sh 'Ai/8p£[a\. See p. 310.
The date is perhaps A^T, a.d. 279-80 (according to the Sullan
era)4. The college of six priests of Zeus (i. e. Zeus Sabazios, no. 290)
is an interesting feature : one was a senator of Olbasa, and another
belonged to Baganda, a place which is otherwise unknown.
Flavius Antiochianus is a historical character. He was consul II in
270 a.d., and praefectus urbis in 271-2 and 274. From this inscription
wre learn that he was married to Pomponia Ummidia. By a comparison
1 Prof. Mommsen confirms this opinion Aios [Mjc^fiVrJou, which still seems to
unhesitatingly. While regarding some me to suit the traces on the stone. Zeus
of the later steps in my reasoning as Megistos is often found in Pisidian in-
uncertain, he has nothing better to scriptions.
substitute. 4 There is room for a third letter in
2 Scriptt. Hist. Aug. just quoted. the date, but the traces are broken
3 An error for iyevero, as Sterrett away. A-Z-Z, i. e. A. D. 289-90 (Ciby-
rightly takes it. M. Berard in BCH ratio era), is less probable ; and A Z is
1892 p. 418 invents a Zeus Egenetas, but impossible, as it eould only be infer-
tile great god of this. district was Zeus preted on the Pamphylian era A. D. 74,
Sabazios $5. He restores A/.'>s'Eya[iver]ov giving a.d. 278, but this district was
in an inscription, where I have proposed not in Pamphylia (no. 120).
No record exists in literature that Armia Cornificia Faustina had
a daughter; but the name and the period put the relationship of
Faustina Ummidia Cornificia beyond a doubt1.
The only fact recorded of the emperor's sister Annia Cornificia, is
that she left property, part of which was given by the emperor her
brother to her son M. Ummidius2. It is implied apparently that the
emperor might have kept the property to himself, which perhaps
indicates that it was imperial property which returned to the sovereign
at her death. From this inscription we may infer that another part
of her property was given to her daughter, including the Pisidian
estate. That her property was very large might be assumed, both
from her rank, and from the fact that history has preserved the fact
that it was divided at her death. Before we proceed to examine the
difficult inscriptions which date soon after this one, we shall find it
best to look at the latest of the whole series.
No. 125. (R. 1884: published by Sterrett no. 59). 'Ay[a8rj Tvyr) ■
eTovs] A— t5>v KparicrTcov t€kpcov tov Xavrrpo(Td)Tov vttcltikov <PXaBiov
''AvTioyj>avov Ka[l r]eTs deifivr/crTOV pirjrpbs clvtSiv no[/j.]7ra>ptas Ov/ilSicls
iiwep crooTrjpias avTmv KCtl o~(OTr)pias Srjfiov 'Opp.r]Xecov......Aiip.
Mrjvis B" Kacriov BopiaKov Ik t$>v ISimv dvaXcofidTCOv dvecrTrjcre tov
Boopbv rols crvviepeio-.v tov Aid's • eyevera3 8a,7rdvr]s 8r\v. . . Tdios
Ni'ypov BayavSevs • Avp.'ATTo\\5>vi$ ZrpuTcovos 'OXBaaeijs BovXeurr/s-
Avp. KcoBzXXls Sh 'l<JTp&Ta>vo[s] ■ Avp. NeifcdSas Sh M-qvlSos • Avp.
'AXe£ai>8pos Sh 'Ai/8p£[a\. See p. 310.
The date is perhaps A^T, a.d. 279-80 (according to the Sullan
era)4. The college of six priests of Zeus (i. e. Zeus Sabazios, no. 290)
is an interesting feature : one was a senator of Olbasa, and another
belonged to Baganda, a place which is otherwise unknown.
Flavius Antiochianus is a historical character. He was consul II in
270 a.d., and praefectus urbis in 271-2 and 274. From this inscription
wre learn that he was married to Pomponia Ummidia. By a comparison
1 Prof. Mommsen confirms this opinion Aios [Mjc^fiVrJou, which still seems to
unhesitatingly. While regarding some me to suit the traces on the stone. Zeus
of the later steps in my reasoning as Megistos is often found in Pisidian in-
uncertain, he has nothing better to scriptions.
substitute. 4 There is room for a third letter in
2 Scriptt. Hist. Aug. just quoted. the date, but the traces are broken
3 An error for iyevero, as Sterrett away. A-Z-Z, i. e. A. D. 289-90 (Ciby-
rightly takes it. M. Berard in BCH ratio era), is less probable ; and A Z is
1892 p. 418 invents a Zeus Egenetas, but impossible, as it eould only be infer-
tile great god of this. district was Zeus preted on the Pamphylian era A. D. 74,
Sabazios $5. He restores A/.'>s'Eya[iver]ov giving a.d. 278, but this district was
in an inscription, where I have proposed not in Pamphylia (no. 120).