DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.4680#0364
8. LYKAONES. 695
in one of the great centres to which they were attracted *. No bishop
of the Lykaones appears at any Council, which is strange; but
a work attributed to Jerome alludes to Lykaonia as a city of Phrygia
Salutaris 2.
M. Radet assigns to the Lykaones a position S. of Stektorion, where
I could find not a trace of ancient life, and which is on a great and
easy route, not in a strong situation likely to be a refuge : moreover
it lies S. of the Pentapolis ; see § 2 and Ch. XIV App. Ill (1).
§ 9. The Turkish Conquest. In the time of Alexius Comnenus
1081-1117, the Pentapolis was probably still a part of the Byzantine
dominion. Akroenos (Afion-Kara-Hissar) was a frontier fortress :
Kkorna-Siblia was under a Byzantine governor after 1092 : the Themes
of Cappadocia and Khoma, which together constituted the frontier
defences against the Seljuks, were under the same general Burtzes 3;
and therefore they were necessarily conterminous. Now, if the same
general administered the defences of Khoma, Akroenos, and the
Amorian plain *, we can hardly doubt that the Pentapolis was included
in the line of frontier defence, for communication between Khoma and
the northern parts of the frontier could hardly be maintained, except
through the Pentapolis 5. Moreover, it is clear that at this period
communication between Constantinople and Khoma was maintained
by a direct route (passing most probably through the Pentapolis)
whereas in the time of Manuel it evidently had to be maintained
by a circuitous path °. We conclude therefore that, according to the
peace arranged between the empire and the Seljuks about 1072,
the Pentapolis was left to the empire, while Apameia and the Lycos-
valley were abandoned to the Turks.
The most serious danger in the situation of Asia Minor in the
twelfth century lay, not in the armies of the Turks, but in the
nomadization of the country7. The nomad tribes with their tents,
families, and flocks, were constantly pressing on the settled Chr.
1 A monastery of the Galatai at Ico- was in the Theme Cappadocia {Hist.
nium is explicable only through the Geogr. p. 231).
fact that Iconium was for a long time ■ The country further East was cer-
a city of the Galatai: see St. Gregory tainly Turkish since 1072.
the Great Dialog. IV 38 {Studio, Biblica c Alexius did not attempt to maintain
IV p. 32). his hold on Laodiceia, even when Ducas
2 Lycaonia provincia Asiae est; et marched through it in 1092, Ch. 1 § 8.
eiusdem nominis civitas est in Phrygia He therefore relied on maintaining his
Minore {i. e. Salutari p. 82), Hieronymus communications with Khoma-Siblia by
Lib. Nom.locc.ex Actis III 1302 (Migne). a direct road. On Manuel's marches
3 Anna I p. 119 (171). see below.
4 At this period the Amorian plain 7 See pp. i6ff.
in one of the great centres to which they were attracted *. No bishop
of the Lykaones appears at any Council, which is strange; but
a work attributed to Jerome alludes to Lykaonia as a city of Phrygia
Salutaris 2.
M. Radet assigns to the Lykaones a position S. of Stektorion, where
I could find not a trace of ancient life, and which is on a great and
easy route, not in a strong situation likely to be a refuge : moreover
it lies S. of the Pentapolis ; see § 2 and Ch. XIV App. Ill (1).
§ 9. The Turkish Conquest. In the time of Alexius Comnenus
1081-1117, the Pentapolis was probably still a part of the Byzantine
dominion. Akroenos (Afion-Kara-Hissar) was a frontier fortress :
Kkorna-Siblia was under a Byzantine governor after 1092 : the Themes
of Cappadocia and Khoma, which together constituted the frontier
defences against the Seljuks, were under the same general Burtzes 3;
and therefore they were necessarily conterminous. Now, if the same
general administered the defences of Khoma, Akroenos, and the
Amorian plain *, we can hardly doubt that the Pentapolis was included
in the line of frontier defence, for communication between Khoma and
the northern parts of the frontier could hardly be maintained, except
through the Pentapolis 5. Moreover, it is clear that at this period
communication between Constantinople and Khoma was maintained
by a direct route (passing most probably through the Pentapolis)
whereas in the time of Manuel it evidently had to be maintained
by a circuitous path °. We conclude therefore that, according to the
peace arranged between the empire and the Seljuks about 1072,
the Pentapolis was left to the empire, while Apameia and the Lycos-
valley were abandoned to the Turks.
The most serious danger in the situation of Asia Minor in the
twelfth century lay, not in the armies of the Turks, but in the
nomadization of the country7. The nomad tribes with their tents,
families, and flocks, were constantly pressing on the settled Chr.
1 A monastery of the Galatai at Ico- was in the Theme Cappadocia {Hist.
nium is explicable only through the Geogr. p. 231).
fact that Iconium was for a long time ■ The country further East was cer-
a city of the Galatai: see St. Gregory tainly Turkish since 1072.
the Great Dialog. IV 38 {Studio, Biblica c Alexius did not attempt to maintain
IV p. 32). his hold on Laodiceia, even when Ducas
2 Lycaonia provincia Asiae est; et marched through it in 1092, Ch. 1 § 8.
eiusdem nominis civitas est in Phrygia He therefore relied on maintaining his
Minore {i. e. Salutari p. 82), Hieronymus communications with Khoma-Siblia by
Lib. Nom.locc.ex Actis III 1302 (Migne). a direct road. On Manuel's marches
3 Anna I p. 119 (171). see below.
4 At this period the Amorian plain 7 See pp. i6ff.