DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4679#0344
318 IX. PHRYGIAN CITIES ON PISIDIAN FRONTIER.
§ 2. The Frontier between Galatia and Asia would be best deter-
mined by inscriptions proving -that the places where they have been
found were in one province or in the other. If a sufficient number were
found, no other authority would be required. But few have been found;
and while their evidence is conclusive as to the place and the time to
which they belong", a question remains whether the frontier varied at
different times. The frontiers of the provinces varied a good deal, and
the frontier of Galatia varied more than that of any other province.
The important facts vouched for by inscriptions or coins are as follows :
(i) The Ormeleis were in Asia about 200 a. d.1
(2) Olbasa was in Galatia from c. 6 B. c. onwards.
(3) Takina was in Asia in 130 B.C. and about 200 a.d. (and in
130 B. c. it reckoned distance from Ephesos through Apameia).
(4) The country at the S.W. end of lake Askania was in Galatia
in 54 A. D. (§ 4 and no. 165).
Further to elucidate these facts we must have recourse to topo-
graphical and historical evidence of a more general kind. The most
important passage is Pliny V 147 ; where is given a list of the important
cities of the province (besides Ancyra, Tavium, Pessinus). It is unfor-
tunately very corrupt; and I add it in two versions, the text of Sillig,
and the text which I believe right.
Sillig's text.
Corrected text.
Aotalenses, Arasenses, Comenses,
Didienses, Hierorenses, Lystreni,
Neapolitani, Oeandenses, Seleucenses,
Sebasteni, Tiruoniacenses, Thebaseni2
Adadenses, Alastenses, Comamenses,
Hydenses, Iconienses, Lystveni,
Neapolitani, Orondenses, Seleucenses,
Sebasteni, Timoniaoenses, Tobaseni.
(1. Isinda, Ariassos), Tarbassos, Termes-
sos. Tarbassos seems an error due to
assimilation to Termessos. Perhaps
Korbassos is the correct reading,
Ptolemy's Korbasa, Kolbassos of coins,
and Kolbasa of Hierocles (though
Petersen II 14 prefers the correction ■
Tii/3ni). Strabo's comments added to
this list are very incorrect: and it is
clear from several passages that he had
quite a mistaken idea of Pisidian topo-
graphy. His account of the extent of
Milyas p. 631 is, however, derived from
a good authority.
1 They were accustomed to date then
either by the Sullan or the Cibyratic
era; on their milestones under Severus
the distance was reckoned ' from Cibyra'
(inscr. 141); and natives of Cibyra re-
sided on the estate, apparently as
coloni.
2 The following variants are impor-
tant, Alasenses and Alassenses, Com-
menses, Didyenses, Hiconenses, and
Hieronenses, Tebaseni and Tobiseni and
Thebiseni and Tarbaseni (there seems
here to be a tendencj' to alter the
obscure Tobasa or Tobata to suit The-
basa of Pliny V 95).
§ 2. The Frontier between Galatia and Asia would be best deter-
mined by inscriptions proving -that the places where they have been
found were in one province or in the other. If a sufficient number were
found, no other authority would be required. But few have been found;
and while their evidence is conclusive as to the place and the time to
which they belong", a question remains whether the frontier varied at
different times. The frontiers of the provinces varied a good deal, and
the frontier of Galatia varied more than that of any other province.
The important facts vouched for by inscriptions or coins are as follows :
(i) The Ormeleis were in Asia about 200 a. d.1
(2) Olbasa was in Galatia from c. 6 B. c. onwards.
(3) Takina was in Asia in 130 B.C. and about 200 a.d. (and in
130 B. c. it reckoned distance from Ephesos through Apameia).
(4) The country at the S.W. end of lake Askania was in Galatia
in 54 A. D. (§ 4 and no. 165).
Further to elucidate these facts we must have recourse to topo-
graphical and historical evidence of a more general kind. The most
important passage is Pliny V 147 ; where is given a list of the important
cities of the province (besides Ancyra, Tavium, Pessinus). It is unfor-
tunately very corrupt; and I add it in two versions, the text of Sillig,
and the text which I believe right.
Sillig's text.
Corrected text.
Aotalenses, Arasenses, Comenses,
Didienses, Hierorenses, Lystreni,
Neapolitani, Oeandenses, Seleucenses,
Sebasteni, Tiruoniacenses, Thebaseni2
Adadenses, Alastenses, Comamenses,
Hydenses, Iconienses, Lystveni,
Neapolitani, Orondenses, Seleucenses,
Sebasteni, Timoniaoenses, Tobaseni.
(1. Isinda, Ariassos), Tarbassos, Termes-
sos. Tarbassos seems an error due to
assimilation to Termessos. Perhaps
Korbassos is the correct reading,
Ptolemy's Korbasa, Kolbassos of coins,
and Kolbasa of Hierocles (though
Petersen II 14 prefers the correction ■
Tii/3ni). Strabo's comments added to
this list are very incorrect: and it is
clear from several passages that he had
quite a mistaken idea of Pisidian topo-
graphy. His account of the extent of
Milyas p. 631 is, however, derived from
a good authority.
1 They were accustomed to date then
either by the Sullan or the Cibyratic
era; on their milestones under Severus
the distance was reckoned ' from Cibyra'
(inscr. 141); and natives of Cibyra re-
sided on the estate, apparently as
coloni.
2 The following variants are impor-
tant, Alasenses and Alassenses, Com-
menses, Didyenses, Hiconenses, and
Hieronenses, Tebaseni and Tobiseni and
Thebiseni and Tarbaseni (there seems
here to be a tendencj' to alter the
obscure Tobasa or Tobata to suit The-
basa of Pliny V 95).