¹ Seton Lloyd and D. Storm Rice, Alânya (Ala'iyya).

² The temple we take to be a building just below the tower on the west; but very little of it is now standing.

³ A room in the Belediye Building in Alânya is used as a store for antiquities collected in the neighbourhood. From Sinekkalesi come a small sarcophagus, a group of seven busts from a single tomb, and the handsome monument, our no. 7 below. We saw also ther sarcophagi, an inscribed base and a number of small altars (libanotrides)—of which two have inscriptions. These, however, were examined in 1960 by L. Robert; and they are therefore, except for no. 7, omitted from the present article.

⁴ Our revisions have in general been communicated to the Austrian Academy for inclusion in the schedae of TAM.; and, save in exceptional cases, we say nothing of them here.

⁵ Stadiasmus 208: . 209: . This is generally emended to Ἁμαξιαν and ἀπὸ Αὐνήσεως, since it is widely accepted that the reference is to Strabo's Hamaxia. This part of the Stadiasmus is probably derived from sources not far in date from Strabo: Müller, , GGM. I, cxxv–cxxviGoogle Scholar. On this coast χωρίον in the Stadiasmus is applied to places then of a minor importance—Charadrus, Cragus, Nephelium, Laertes, Augae, Tenedos, Lyrnas.

⁶ Strabo XIV, 5, 2 (668): κ.τ.λ. We may note that here Strabo in his description of the timber industry speaks in general terms: and again . He no longer has Hamaxia in mind.

⁷ The rivers are incorrectly shown on Kiepert's map: in particular there is no river between Sinekkalesi and Alânya. The “bon port” below Sinekkalesi mentioned by Besnier (Lex. Geogr. s.v. Hamaxia) does not exist.

⁸ cf. our no. 6 below; CIG. 4402, 4404, 4406–9; HW. nos. 226, 227.

⁹ But we can speak only for those we saw, seven in all. These, however, are enough to establish the principle. This argument, however, cannot be pressed: how Hamaxia was laid out as a κατοικία, and what changes, if any, were made when it became a πόλις, we are as yet in no position to say. Our nos. 4 and 5 are evidence of three architectural phases—and it would seem that our inscription belonged to the earliest.

¹⁰ The second century, as we should judge.

¹¹ Lines 2 and 3 of (b), as given by Beaufort, are as follows:

¹² The present damage to the stone may be in part ancient and have been avoided by the stone-cutter.

¹³ Similar names are frequent, formed indifferently from Greek or from Anatolian names.

¹⁴ cf. HW. p. 141 sq.

¹⁵ We note certain corrections to Heberdey and Wilhelm's texts. No. 234, line 9, —but this delta is in fact a leaf. Nos. 238, 239 and 240 all end with . No. 242, line 7: the name is Αὐρηλίου . No. 249, line 3: not ἐτείμησον–despite the editors' (sic)–but, quite clearly, ἐτείμησεν.

¹⁶ A worship of Julius Caesar was established in his lifetime at Cos and Ephesus for benefactions conferred. But the Xanthian inscription IGR. III, 482Google Scholar, is ascribed by Dittenberger, , OGI. 555Google Scholar, rather to Octavian. Why Syedra should possess a priest and presumably a temple of Caesar—or his son—is, however, obscure. According to Lucan (Pharsalia VIII, 260Google Scholar: parvisque Syedris—or Synedris) Pompey held there a council of war after Pharsalus, before setting sail for Cyprus and Egypt–and Syedra may have thought it prudent to mollify the conqueror. The story, confirmed as it is by Florus (110, 13, 51)—(Pompeius) pulsus deserto dliciae scopulo–at least attests the existence of Syedra at the close of the Hellenistic period.

¹⁷ As is shown for example by an inscription of Selge shortly to be published.

¹⁸ Except in a favourable light this inscription is barely visible, and was either over-looked or withheld by Heberdey and Wilhelm.

¹⁹ Its height is given as 1,690 m. by the Turkish maps, 1,460 m. by Kiepert and 4,790 ft. by the old GSGS map. Our own impression agrees rather with the lower estimate, but we had with us no altimeter.

²⁰ The plan, Text-fig. 2, makes no pretence whatsoever to accuracy, being drawn largely from memory. We offer it to give some idea of the nature of the site and the location of the inscriptions.

²¹ On the death of Arsinoe Philadelphia in 270 B.C. and her deification, an important city in each subject population was renamed after this goddess. These names could not be expected to survive Ptolemaic domination.

²² Jones, A. H. M., Cities of the Eastern Roman Provinces (1937) p. 200Google Scholar, suggests that Arsinoe is the Ptolemaic name for Coracesium. The arguments of Mueller, K., GGM I, 487 f.Google Scholar (Arsinoe to be equated with Aunesis), and W. Ruge, RE. s.v. Syedra (Strabo's Arsinoe to be emended to the Syedra which he strangely omits) must be reconsidered in the light of the Hadra vase, Breccia, Iscriz. gr. e lat. no. 191, with the ethnic This is admirably discussed by Robert, in Ét. épig. et philol. (1938) 255Google Scholar and n. 2, who for himself suggests an unidentified city somewhat to the east of Coracesium. Cf. now the Cypriot inscription, AJA. 65, 1961, 135Google Scholar, no. 35, which honours one Theodorus s. Demetrius Strabo's only service has been to locate this Arsinoe at or near the modern Alânya. That Hellenistic Pamphylia included this district is certain; while the administrative boundary under the Empire lay between Iotape and Syedra. We reserve for a later occasion our formal discussion of this vexed frontier.

²³ e.g. Dessau 135, 142, 171, 6123.

²⁴ Broad letters with thick strokes, phi not extending above or below the line.

²⁵ Our inscription is further proof, if such indeed were needed, that like Syedra, Laertes under Claudius formed no part of the regnum Antiochenum but belonged to the West. It is of interest to find the laudatory language familiar in the titulary of Hadrian here anticipated—almost uniquely—for the benefit of Claudius; and we may note that this emperor is now generally credited with the formation in A.D. 43 of the joint province Lycia–Pamphylia, a union later dissolved but revived (as we note under our no. 14) in A.D. 78 by Vespasian. Under Claudius in A.D. 50 the roads of Pamphylia were repaired: IGR. III, 768Google Scholar; Dessau 215. These events may account for Claudius being acclaimed at Laertes as the “Saviour and the Founder of the world”.

²⁶ Moretti, Luigi, Mem. Lincei VIII, viii, 1957, 57–198Google Scholar, Olympionikai. There can be no question of the Olympia of our inscription being local.

²⁷ e.g. Μουτη and Μουτεους from Μουτη (nos. 37 and 45 below); Βλα and Βλατος from Βλας (HW. no. 228); Μωτα and Μωτατος from Μωτας (nos. 33 and 38 below); κουνδι and κουνδιος from κουνδις (no. 40 below). For the genitive Νινει we refer to CIG. 4413 (a) and (c): these Cilician genitives in -ι or -ει are well established (cf. below, no. 40).

²⁸ Non-Greek names ending in psi seem not to occur in Cilicia, or indeed in any neighbouring region. Thus we find no examples in Sundwall, Einh. Namen and Kleinas. Nachtr. Names ending in xi are likewise rare and in Cilicia equally unknown.

²⁹ For ἀπολύω, and more commonly διαλύω, to “pay”, cf. LSJ. s.v.

³⁰ Pliny, , NH V, 93Google Scholar, and Stadiasmus 213 call this river the ancient boundary of Cilicia and Pamphylia. But cf. above, note 22. Our inscription would appear to be of the first century of our era; but we can find no cause to connect Toues' benefaction with the repair of the Pamphylian road known for the years A.D. 50 and 78.

³¹ But the statue in question has not come to light in the recent Turkish excavations at Side.

³² CIG. 4412, .

³³ CIG. 4415; IGR. III, 831, 833, 834Google Scholar.

³⁴ Certain Anatolian names do not lend themselves readily to declension in Greek, e.g. nominatives such as Δουκκου (Sterrett, WE. no. 85), Βακου (ib. no. 100), Λιλου (HW. p. 119), κουτι (Sterrett, EJ. no. 227), Σηο (TAM. I, 32Google Scholar). (Some other examples are chimerical; e.g. Μαθουν Δισπα in Sterrett, WE. no. 69, where we should read Παθουνδις Πα (cf. Hereward, D., JHS. LXXVIII (1958), 73Google Scholar), and nominative Ὀσαει in Ramsay, , CB. I, 309Google Scholar, which is certainly a genitive.) It would be no great surprise to find these undeclined, though usually evidence is lacking for the oblique cases. On the other hand, nom. Πιττον at Termessus has genitive Πιττουτος, dative Πιττουτι (TAM. III, 1, 724, 846, 785Google Scholar), as if from Πιττους, a form which actually occurs in BCH. XXIII, 178Google Scholar. Similarly Λιλουν in our no. 20 may be from Λιλους or Λιλου, both of which occur. Νοῦς, Νοῦ is a similar case (no. 13 above). These names in -ι and -ου reflect the frequent names in -i and -u in the early Anatolian languages. For use in Greek they were usually rendered more amenable by the addition of a sigma or by other means: e.g. Μηνϵις beside Μηνϵι, κουτιας beside κουτι. SO are variant Graecisms for the female name Tati. In their own languages these names were not apparently indeclinable: at least, we seem to have Δωταρι, genitive Δωταρις and Μηνει, genitive Μηνεις in Pisidian (Ramsay, Rév. Univ. Midi loc. cit.).

³⁵ IG. I ², 304, 305Google Scholar; II², 212, 380, 784. Their functions are defined by Aristotle, in Ath. Pol. 60, 1Google Scholar: ; and they are praised for their performance of these same duties in IG. II ², 784.Google Scholar

³⁶ Both heavily restored, but ἀθλοθ[έτης] at least seems certain.

³⁷ This is Boeckh's explanation, adopted in IG. loc. cit. In IG. II ², 1368Google Scholar, line 131, where the ἀθλοθεσία is mentioned in a decree of the Iobacchi, no indication is given of its nature.

³⁸ e.g. Buckler-Robinson in Sardis loc. cit., Buckler-Calder, in MAMA. VI, 61Google Scholar. LSJ. s.v. evade the question: “one who awards the prize, judge or steward in the games.”

³⁹ We note the following cases: Καλολου Οὐβρανγερου in no. 21 above; Νέωνος Νοũ in no. 33 below; in no. 38 below; in no. 45 below, q.v.; in HW. no. 224; in HW. no. 234; in HW. no. 232. On the other hand, we have in no. 31 below, in no. 40 below, and in no. 37 below.

⁴⁰ Paribeni and Romanelli believe this stone to be in a secondary position, built into their “castello medievale”—even as their numbers 117–120 in the adjacent tower are manifestly pedestals reused. The inscription we revise to read as follows: . Thus Πουβλίω for Πουβλίω (sic) and for . But this, from its position over the only gateway in the wall, is certainly original: this massive wall was built in the reign of Gallienus (260–8), when Voconius Zenon was legate of Cilicia, by the city out of its own funds but on the instigation and assistance of a native who was also its curator. The editors' nos. 117–120 are in this connexion informative; for three of them were cut on the pedestals of the statues of Antonine and Severan emperors.Clearly Adanda was devastated in the course of the Isaurian insurrection of Trebellianus in the reign of Gallienus. Trebellianus was defeated and slain; and doubtless then Adanda was restored with the addition of a strong acropolis. Of earlier fortifications, however, we saw no trace—and the Severan city would appear to have been as unfortified as Laertes. The former, thanks to these walls, survived into Christian times, since Paribeni and Romanelli describe a church.

⁴¹ P. and R. no. 117, which carried the statue of Antoninus Pius, has been removed and was not found by us. No. 118 honours Caracalla, no. 119 Geta. This last, heavily defaced, we read and restore thus: . In no. 120 for Μεμνοδώρου we substitute Μηνοδώρου.

⁴² We have considered other possible interpretations of lines 8–10, but are satisfied by none of these. (1) We might omit the stop after ἐνθεῖναι and continue the sentence, to punctuate after Νέωνος Νοũ. The sense then would be: “if the above-mentioned consent, the associates of Neon shall be permitted to use the tomb for burial. It was unanimously agreed that they should participate. “But there seems no adequate reason for recording these deliberations, in preference to giving a simple permission; and this view disregards the conspicuous change in the script. (2) We might join ἔδοξε with κοινωνοῖς: “the associates of Neon decided unanimously to participate.” But such an acceptance by Neon and his partners could only be in response to an invitation, which must have been recorded (strangely, we think) on some other part of the tomb. Lines 6–7 do not give such an invitation, but merely provide for the possibility at some future time. Although in such epitaphs permission is frequently given by a subsequent dispensation, we cannot recall a similar instance of an acceptance recorded in this manner. (3) We might understand: “the above-mentioned decided to share the tomb with Neon and his associates.” But we very much doubt whether this can be right, for we can find no parallel to μετέχειν having virtually the sense of μεταδιδόναι.

⁴³ The upper part of beta and part of the upright of rho are visible.

⁴⁴ We prefer at this point to say no more of this inscription, which is unusual and of exceptional interest. We hope on our next visit to Adanda to examine once more the mound of debris which to-day marks the site of this once splendid tomb and attempt to recover further fragments of this text. For lines 7 and 10 our text is indebted to Wilhelm, A., S.B. Ak. Wien 179 (1917), 6, p. 64Google Scholar, n. 4.

⁴⁵ This was noted by Wilhelm, A., Jahreshefte Beibl. 18 (1915), 59Google Scholar (S.B. Ak. Wien 179 (1917), 6, 62Google Scholar). Cf. further Roussel, P. and Nicole, G., REG 29 (1916), 453Google Scholar. The lambda of the editors must clearly be emended to nu, on the evidence of the legend Κεστρηνῶν of the coins: it may be that nu and omega were written in ligature, and thus suggest lambda omega. For ξυστρωτούς, fluted, admirably read and discussed by Wilhelm, , cf. S.B. Ak. Wien, loc. cit. 62Google Scholar. For the name of the priestess, we prefer Ṃᾳṿτι to the of the editors: she receives 24 den.—perhaps as a dowry (v. LSJ s.v. προστίθημι).

⁴⁶ Strabo 669: (with variants ). Stadiasmus 199: , . For mention of Charadrus in a recently published inscription, cf. note 22 above.

⁴⁷ Called Kara Gedik Dağı on Kiepert's map and identified with Androcus-Andriclus; but this part is not accurately shown by him.

⁴⁸ The cult can hardly have been administered by Cestrus. An inscription (IGR. III, 838Google Scholar) found at Charadrus refers to , from which it would appear that the city of Lamos (which is still to be identified) must have lain in the mountainous country above Kaledıran, and therefore close to Mt. Androclus. We would expect this cult of Zeus to have its centre there.

⁴⁹ This part of the Stadiasmus mentions only occasionally inland features. Along the whole south coast of Asia Minor we note some eight other cases: 159 (Mt. Panion); 173 (Corycian Cave); 208 (Hamaxia); 214 (city of Perge); 226, 228 (mountains above Phaselis and Phoenicus); 236 (city of Limyra); 247 (city of Xanthus).

⁵⁰ This meaning does not appear to be recognised by the dictionaries.