DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4679#0379
Note: This is an additional scan to display the colour reference chart and scalebar.
0.5
1 cm
352
ADDENDA.
was treated in the same way in 139, and yet one can hardly doubt that
western Lycaonia, like Phrygia Magna, was under Pontic rule after 129.
Either Lycaonia was not actually given to Eumenes, or, if it was, it was
soon captured by the Galatae and afterwards was reduced along with
Galatia by the Pontic kings (see Mr. Rendall in Expositor April 1894
p. 256).
As to Milyas, we know even less. Ariassos of Milyas dated from
190-S9 as an era, and that is an indication (as M. Peinach urges) that
the city was made free in that year (see my paper Rev. $t. Gr. 1892).
Probably no real power was ever exerted by Pergamenian kings south
of the Lysis valley, except in Attaleia; ana one connexion with Attaleia
was maintained by sea rather than by land 1.
It is noteworthy that Livy changes the order of Polybius, giving undue
prominence to Lycaonia. He does this, apparently, in order to preserve
the order of XXXVII 54, 11; and this change may serve as an argument
that Lycaonia was introduced by him. The case must remain undecided
till further p.virlpnr>p. as tn fhp. fa.fp nf Tigpaonia, in mo is discovered.
56, 2 ; M. Muller
lentius).
olis; published by
.] eiSetid avbpl 9ijpo-
:S (i. e. xa'Pe Ae'yet
ling to the animals
, see p. 76 f. M.
: is inserted to p-et
Madvig rea -
calls it loco mtM
37. P. 1191
M. Perrot Rei E
rpucpui \xveias B
irapobirais). ' E
destined for B
Perrot reads |E
a rude hexamcE
38. P. 202§
of Eumeneia, E
39. P. 178 -
M. Mus. 189-E
40. P. 316 -
editions of PtE
is omitted in -
put after 2eAE
text, which giE
-.tote
-S CC
1 Three land
mos and Attale
Termessoa ana
dent, the next!
= ■*
o
c
o
O
>
cd
6
06
I °
o
O .
m
hristian inscription
led by Dr. Buresch
14), given in most
the Latin text, but
:en for a noun and
Ited also the Latin
the third, the longest,
ihos, of which nothing
fessos was in close alli-
!nos, but as a free city.
ADDENDA.
was treated in the same way in 139, and yet one can hardly doubt that
western Lycaonia, like Phrygia Magna, was under Pontic rule after 129.
Either Lycaonia was not actually given to Eumenes, or, if it was, it was
soon captured by the Galatae and afterwards was reduced along with
Galatia by the Pontic kings (see Mr. Rendall in Expositor April 1894
p. 256).
As to Milyas, we know even less. Ariassos of Milyas dated from
190-S9 as an era, and that is an indication (as M. Peinach urges) that
the city was made free in that year (see my paper Rev. $t. Gr. 1892).
Probably no real power was ever exerted by Pergamenian kings south
of the Lysis valley, except in Attaleia; ana one connexion with Attaleia
was maintained by sea rather than by land 1.
It is noteworthy that Livy changes the order of Polybius, giving undue
prominence to Lycaonia. He does this, apparently, in order to preserve
the order of XXXVII 54, 11; and this change may serve as an argument
that Lycaonia was introduced by him. The case must remain undecided
till further p.virlpnr>p. as tn fhp. fa.fp nf Tigpaonia, in mo is discovered.
56, 2 ; M. Muller
lentius).
olis; published by
.] eiSetid avbpl 9ijpo-
:S (i. e. xa'Pe Ae'yet
ling to the animals
, see p. 76 f. M.
: is inserted to p-et
Madvig rea -
calls it loco mtM
37. P. 1191
M. Perrot Rei E
rpucpui \xveias B
irapobirais). ' E
destined for B
Perrot reads |E
a rude hexamcE
38. P. 202§
of Eumeneia, E
39. P. 178 -
M. Mus. 189-E
40. P. 316 -
editions of PtE
is omitted in -
put after 2eAE
text, which giE
-.tote
-S CC
1 Three land
mos and Attale
Termessoa ana
dent, the next!
= ■*
o
c
o
O
>
cd
6
06
I °
o
O .
m
hristian inscription
led by Dr. Buresch
14), given in most
the Latin text, but
:en for a noun and
Ited also the Latin
the third, the longest,
ihos, of which nothing
fessos was in close alli-
!nos, but as a free city.