=============
Asianic Elements in Greek Civilisation.
________________
BROTHERHOOD AND PHRATRAI
AT Hierapolis, in the Lycus valley, the grave of Mar(cus) ? Julius Macedonicus and his wife Ar(ei?)a 1 Ioulia, which was evidently made by them, and strictly confined to themselves, bears an epitaph in which several features are very characteristic of Anatolian custom. The epitaph is probably of the second or even the first century (Ar(ei)a would permit a first-century date); the only imperial name is Julius, if Areia or any purely Anatolian restoration be accepted. The penalty for violation of the tomb is only 500 denarii: whereas after the first century the penalty imposed increased greatly, to thousands and to tens of thousands of denarii. Cichorius, however, read Aī(lī)a, which marks the second century. A sum of money was invested by the children of the deceased, the income of which was to be given to the Standard-bearers (Semeiaphoroi) of Apollo Archegetes the Leader, the great god of Hierapolis (also often called Sairbenos simply or Apollo Sairbenos), for the purpose of laying a garland on the grave, on each tenth month (day omitted), and on each first month, third day. The interest was to amount to 191 250 denarii in each case, i.e. 500 denarii per annum. These days were evidently the anniversaries of the death of father and mother, and the father was evidently one of the Flag-bearers of Apollo Archegetes in some great procession (probably the exodus of the god, viz. the occasion when his image was carried from his temple through the city and taken back again).
There are several differences in the text as published from the copy of Cichorius (who omits l. 6 entirely) and ours. Acting on probability I prefer τόπος Μαρ. to Hogarth’s βωμός in l. 1, and Hogarth’s Αρ. to Cichorius’ Αἰ[λί]α in 2, 3. In ll. 3-5 we agree; but Cich. has τῇ φίσκῳ where I have τῷ φίσκῳ. Both genders (and even the neuter) are used farther east, but the proper masculine is far more common, and the uncommon is perhaps preferable in this case. The penalty is doubtful, for Hogarth conjectures boldly 50 ἢ [ὅ]σ’ ἂν δέοι, “or as much as may be settled (according to legal decision).” Cichorius in this epitaph gives no epigraphic text, but only notes below the test. I have at this point ΗΛ, Cichorius only Α, from which he and I elicit [ἔδ]οσαν δὲ οἱ. The stone, as we agree, has Μακεδονικοί, which Cichorius leaves, whereas I conjecture υ for ι, viz. “the [sons] of Macedonicus.” The final sigma of Semeiaphorois was omitted by the stonecutter (so my copy, Cich. omits this first part of 5). The numbers at the end are untrustworthy, and the last line is given only by me, but admitted to have existed, through illegible, by Cichorius.2
It may be plausibly assumed that the flag-bearers were a sort of brotherhood, or Phratra, in the service of the god (as we shall see in the course of this chapter). Apollo Archegetes was radiated as the Anatolian sun-god, but bears the lyre when he is grecised. Coins of the city are our authority.
While it is not stated in the epitaph that the Flag-bearers were put in charge of the sanctity of the grave, they receive a considerable reward for placing a garland on the tomb twice in each year; and this reward would naturally be forfeited if the tomb were violated, so that it was to their interest to prevent violation.
192There is no other example known of Flag-bearers forming a sort of brotherhood united in the service of the god, and marching in his progress through the city; but the interpretation seems quite natural.
The true explanation of Semeiaphoroi probably lies between that which I have suggested and that which Hogarth printed, “a class of professional wonder-workers, like the dervishes in modern Moslem countries.” They were a guild or brotherhood, united in the worship of a god or a goddess, as all unions and festivals were. The dervishes are not an integral part of Mohammedanism. They are a survival of ancient custom, grafted on to Islam. The Mevlevi Sheikhs drink wine openly, which no true Moslem does. We have been offered by them champagne, of which I drank very sparingly, and which my wife politely declined, and the Chief, the Tchelebi Effendi, finished the bottle. They retain other pre-Mohammedan customs, and some of these are pre-Christian also.
They met under the religious form at Hierapolis of the worship of Apollo, north-west of Pisidian Antioch in the so-called Tekmoreian country in the worship of Artemis of the Limnai. They made voluntary contributions towards a common fund, in order to make vessels and works of architecture and sculpture for their common religion. They lingered to the end of paganism on the great estates of the Roman Emperors, for the reigning Emperor took the place of their god, and was worshipped as their Lord; this connexion cemented the alliance of the Empire and the old religion against the Christian faith. The peasants were literally the pagani. They constituted a sort of trade-guilds according to their kind of work.
Down to 1880-1890 it was literally true that the porters came from one remote district to make money in Smyrna or Constantinople, the confectioners from another, and so on. The older members of the guild passed on their knowledge and their trading connexion to their friends and relations. There were doubtless pass-words and secret formulae among them, though as 193 to this I have of course no certain information. The head of the guild in each case directed the operations of all, and laid down the law. No one could work against his will and authorisation. If one wanted horses to hire, the chief of the guild found them and named the price. Such was the case when I first knew modern Turkey; but great changes have occurred during fifty years.
Mr. Buckler’s important paper on Trade Unions in the Roman time3 has an intimate bearing on this subject. The Emperor and his representative governing any province could not permit society to suffer from any extra-imperial union or any disturbance caused to trade or the economy of the land or the cities. Such unions were older than the cities, and lasted longer, and were not regarded with any favour in the city system. The Greek or Hellenistic cities were organised according to the rights of the individual, and regarded trade unions and fraternities generally with suspicion and even hostility. So the Roman Catholic Church opposes freemasonry, as a union outside of itself. The Roman Emperors, as we know from Trajan’s letter to Pliny,4 would not even permit a guild of firemen to be formed, lest it should develop into a political danger to the State and the one lawful unity of the Empire. Where, however, the original Anatolian system prevailed, the Phratrai flourished; and they have been transmitted through the Seljuk Turks to the Ottoman Turks (Osmanli) in the form described.
Ibn Batuta, an Arab from Tangier, mentions this institution of brotherhoods in the Anatolian towns of which he speaks. He saw the “Brothers” (phratrai) at Antalia, Burdur,5 Ladhik, Kunia; and he implies that they existed generally in the Seljuk towns; the date is about A. D. 1333. He calls those towns Turkoman, 194 using that word less correctly than Anna Comnena two centuries earlier, or any experienced traveller at the present day. As he says, “no people are more courteous to strangers, more readily supply them with food and other necessaries, or are more opposed to oppressors than they are. At Adalia (Antalia) the brotherhood was a society of 200 silk merchants. At Burdur they invited him to a feast in a garden outside the town.”
It is an interesting feature of Ibn Batuta’s account that the young men are the active and energetic.6 The person who is termed “The Brother” is one about whom persons of the same occupation, or even foreign youths, who happen to be destitute, collect and whom they constitute their president. He builds a cell,7 and in this he puts a horse, a saddle, and whatever implements may be wanting. He then attends daily upon his companions and assists them with whatever they may happen to want. In the evening they come to him and bring all they have got, which is sold to purchase food, fruit, etc., for the use of the cell. If a stranger should happen to arrive in their territory [i.e. the land belonging to the village or town], they get him among them, and with this provision they entertain him. If, however, no traveller arrives, then they assemble to eat up their provisions. They are therefore called “the youths,” and their president “the Brother.”
This account corresponds with the somewhat broken-down form of hospitality that exists in Turkey in modern times, hearty, simple, but given by the whole village or by the wealthiest man in the village. There is a guest-house, where every stranger is welcomed. The elders of the village gather there every night, and sit and converse. It was formerly the privilege and honour of every man who aspired at distinction to have his own guest-house. 195 Our men, as we entered a village before 1890, used to inquire whose was the best house, and we rode here and made ourselves at home for the evening. Even a very surly and proud Moslem could not deny us anything. Hospitality was his duty and the duty of the village.
The chief duty of the Bektash dervishes, after their power was weakened by the massacre of the Janissaries in 1826, was to entertain lavishly, for the Janissaries were all Bektash. Hadji Bektash was the first chief and patron saint of the Janissaries, and (as I have been told, though I can quote no written authority), their leader at the capture of Mudania about 1328. The principal seats of the dervishes in Asia Minor are Hadji Bektash in the bend of the Halys, between Kir-Sheher (Mokissos?) and the crossing of the river that leads direct to Kaisari, Seidi-Ghazi (Nakoleia), bearing the name of a sort of mythical personage widely known in Antalia, and Sejah-ed-Din between Seidi-Ghazi and Eski-Sheher. Sejah-ed-Din was maintained in princely style as late as 1908, when sixty strangers sat down to supper, and four more of us were entertained apart; two ladies in the oda of the sheikh, and my son and I in the selamlik.
Some stress must be laid on this matter, as it bears upon many old references to hospitality; and especially upon various Christian inscriptions of the fourth and even the third century. “The friend of all” was a phrase taken up by the Christians, but was of pagan origin: it is like St. Paul’s expression, “Gaius mine host and of the whole church.” In a Lycaonian epitaph, which we dug in scraps out of a Turkish grave,8 a presbyter is praised as the helper of widows, orphans, strangers, and poor. Another presbyter at Nova Isaura is styled the helper of needy widows. The most remarkable example, however, is found in an epitaph, which I saw complete and clear in 1905, and Calder and Cox saw in a broken condition in 1924. They have published it with divergent reading.
[196]
[pic]
[197]
[pic]
198
Cox agrees with me. Calder’s facsimile and text as restored in facsimile differs in the critical word: Koulas to Solon the stranger, etc.
Solon was the stranger, hospitably received by the village in the immemorial style. He died there, and was buried by Koulas, and a simple inscription erected over his grave, “Koulas to Solan the guest: a memorial.”9 The host buried the guest.
The following monument (Fig. 3) throws some light on Figs. 1 and 2.
FIG. 3.
The same ? Brotherhood one generation earlier.
In copying it I had bad luck. I was taken by a stranger into the court of a house at Kabalar at sunset. I should have made friends with (i.e. bought leave of) the family, but I was too eager to make use of the short time of light, and omitted the preliminary bargaining. In fact, I a first thought that the stranger who had introduced me was the owner; and I rewarded him, which annoyed the rightful owner and his family.
It is unfortunate that the relief is so much defaced, and the stone broken. It would be instructive to know what divine attendant at the left-hand top balanced Hermes (with caduceus and purse) on the right. The goddess Cybele with her attendant lions sits on a throne in the round central pediment; she stretches her hands to fondle the lions, and rests her feet on a high foot-stool. The inscription probably should be restored as follows: it was irregularly engraved between defaced small reliefs under the rounded pediment:
The Phratra [of the Saloudeis and of the M]elokometai dedicated (the monument?). The chiefs of the Melokometai [honoured] Apollonides, son of Magas [and] Sarbalaeites, (resident) at Salouda, son of Nikomachus, the son of Aristides: the work being under the charge of Apollonides, the son of Apollonides, the [priest?] and . . . men of Salouda.
199Then follows a list of the Phratra: beginning with “men of Salouda” twice repeated:
Alexander son of Apollonides, native of Mêlokôme, son of Areides, native of Mêlokôme, Menophilos, son of Menophilos of Mêlokôme, Pes[e]nestes? fourth of the name, [of Mêl[okô]me, Apellides, son of Sarbalaeis of Salouda, Phurandros, son of Phu[rand]ros of Salou[da], [Apol]lonides [nbsp;. . ]vlichion, . . ., Apollonides Makry dion of Salouda, 200 [next name uncertain, Papade] : Troïlós son of Gaios of Salouda : [rest of list destroyed].10
This monument is like the two preceding; but it is so much ruder and more broken that I have given an attempt at a translation (which I cannot guarantee), in order to show how difficult it is. There is only one Roman name, the typical Gaius. It is perhaps the earliest of all: and is so rude and badly arranged that the task of decipherment would have been very hard, even if it had been better preserved. Probably it would have been more instructive, if it had been better preserved.
The obscure and much-disputed problems relating to various classifications of population in the states of Greece, especially Athens, at different stages of their development will be noted in part in Chapter XVII. It must, however, be kept in mind always.
In a general way it is known that birth and family formed the original foundation of the state; but in the Roman period of the Aegean world there was little difficulty in passing into a new state without abandoning one’s original citizenship. Roman citizens, like St. Paul, seem to have been accepted as citizens in any city of the East where they resided: “The people (demos) and the Romans who enjoy the citizenship along with them” is a phrase of law and administration.11 The same person is in that age described as citizen of two or half-a-dozen states; and probably, if such a man cared to do so he could exercise his right of citizenship in each of his states, if he happened to be present or to be permanently resident there. Finally all free men were made Romans.
Such citizenship ceases to have any real value. It is too vague and undefined to be worth having, except as a compliment. Like the term “Founder” (κτίστης), it was given indiscriminately to any person who had been a benefactor of the State or made any foundation 201 (however trifling) in the State. Successful athletes were often made citizens of many cities, through which their career led.
Even the term Demos, naturally meaning the whole body of citizens in a state, especially as assembled in council and voting on decrees and acting in common, is very far from definable in the same way in different cities. The expression “it seemed good to the demos to do so and so”12 is so common, and apparently so simple, that it can be translated by the tiro, and yet it cannot be clearly defined by the most learned, for its meaning varies according to the state and the age. In many cities this expression means the entire free state assembled n council,13 but in Attica, a very small country, there are said by different authorities to have been 100 or 174 demoi, and the names of 182 are known.
That the term Phratra was an old Anatolian institution is apparent from the accompanying illustrations. Their situation, even, is instructive. I had traversed the country several times without hearing about the village near which they lie. By accident, on my last journey across that region we heard of them. We had stopped to rest and eat some lunch, when a wayfarer came along and sat down with us. The usual questions were exchanged; and this man advised us to go to Kodja-Geuzlar, where there were some wonderful stones; but “don’t stay there for the night,” he added. As his directions for the way involved turning back a distance of three hours, and the day was well advanced and our camp had gone on, and was to be waiting for us, four hours further on, it seemed best for my wife to go on with two of our men and for me to turn back and copy the stones, if there proved to be any,14 and hurry back to camp late.
202My Turk and I found the village easily: it was situated a little way down the steep side of Meander gorge; but there was nothing worth looking at in it. My Turk whispered that the village was Kizil-bash (red-head), a name implied indiscriminately to all sorts of Moslem heretics, as well as to the Persian followers of Ali, the Shiya sect. These people had taken up their abode in a secluded position, where they might readily escape observation. The members of the Sunni sect despise and abhor them, and avoid all intercourse with them. In this case intercourse was necessary, and my man found after some inquiries that there were two large carved stones farther down the side of the gorge. These we could reach after a rather steep descent. They were big stelae, about 8 feet high, well cut of some volcanic material (I do not possess scientific knowledge enough to distinguish with certainty), lying sideways on the mountain side, and both covered with writing and figures. The task of copying them was evidently going to be long and difficult, and I regretted the absence of my wife to help in the drawing and in the measuring of them. There was barely room to stand beside them, in order to get a complete view. In their situation they could not be photographed: moreover, my wife was the photographer of the party, and carried the apparatus. It was, however, not difficult to make a drawing of the general character, for almost all the twenty-four human figures (members of the Phratra) were exactly of the same simple type, and the representations at the top in the pediment, and at the bottom, were of easy familiar character, which could readily be drawn, as appears from the two Figures 1 and 2. By the time I had finished the sun was setting, and it was impossible to reach camp in the dark over a rough and broken country. When we had scrambled up the mountain side to the village, darkness had already set in; and the problem was how to 203 spend the night. The hatred between these village sectaries and the Sunni population of Turkey was so intense as to make the situation awkward. The sectaries shunned all intercourse with their neighbours; they were situated on no road or path; and they had no village guest-house such as is almost universal in the country. My Turk was very unwilling to spend the night in the village; but there was no other resource. He inquired about hospitality and a guest-house, whereupon some people led us to what seemed like a dog-kennel beside a heap of garbage on the outside of the village. We came back, and on the way found a decent-looking house with an open veranda accessible by a wooden stairway or ladder, and looking on the street, not (as usual) on a courtyard behind a gateway (see Chapter IX.) I went up the ladder, sat down, and announced my determination to spend the night there, leaving it to the Turk to bargain for the hospitality, which he did successfully at a moderate sum. The residents in the house departed; and promised to send some food, which they did with perfect good faith. By the light of a candle I studied my copy of this unexpected and wonderful find, until it was so familiar that I could almost reproduce it from memory. Very early next morning we departed, glad to get away safely without any dissension.
FIG. 1.
A Brotherhood about 1 B.C.
FIG. 2.
The same Brotherhood one generation later.
The date of the two inscribed stelae is difficult to determine without any exactness. One, which I call Fig. 1, is evidently the older; the other, Fig. 2, is perhaps about a generation later. A considerable number of the same names and persons occur in both lists, but the chiefs are different, so that they can hardly be separated by less than twenty to thirty years. The Phratra was evidently limited to twenty-four members. The two monuments belong to the Roman period, for the names Gaius and Justus occur; but the former is the commonest and simplest Roman name, and the latter is evidently the translation of an Anatolian personal name; still it is a Latin rendering, which shows that the Roman age had begun. That, however, in Asia near Hierapolis and Laodicea and Colossae 204 does not necessarily imply a very late date, for Asia became a Roman province in 133 B.C., and Roman milestones of the first governor are found much farther east.
Phratria is the usual form in Greek, Phratra is the form employed by Homer and in all the Asian documents (some of which we shall quote in the sequel). That both words have practically the same meaning, and that both are derived from the old word corresponding to the Latin frater, a brother, is beyond doubt. The members of a Phratra (Phratores) are connected as being like brothers,15 not from having one father, as a family was built up according to the genealogical system.
The Phratores are associated in a common religion, or by some common bond of unity, and not by heredity. Our word “brotherhood” has a similar wide sense: the members of a brotherhood are often held together by some bond, political (like communists or socialists), religious (like the friars in a monastery), or otherwise, but without any blood relationship: persons of different race and country may call themselves “brothers” in virtue of some theory or belief, more or less vague; and such “brothers,” if left to mutual agreement purely voluntary, and not held together by a common opposition to any externally imposed bond which all agree in disliking, will often turn to mutual hatred within their own brotherhood.
A striking saying is that of Nestor in Iliad, ix. 63-4: he that provokes war within the demos, i.e. the general unity of different states in some common cause (such as the war against Troy), is excluded from any brotherhood, unprotected by the divine laws of any state, an outlaw from the family hearth.”16 Here 205 three different kinds of unity are specified, the Phratra, the State, and the Family: the last being the simplest and most natural, the second being the widest and wholly free from any semblance of blood-unity, the first being intermediate and maintaining some pretence of hereditary relationship.
Moreover, the reliefs at the top and bottom are distinctly Roman and Greek. Hermes is of the Roman type. The goddess of Good Fortune, with her rudder and cornucopiae, is characteristic of Roman and Greek Imperial coins. The date, therefore, is not likely to be earlier than Augustus, perhaps later. The artist who carved the two stelae was certainly brought from Laodicea or Hierapolis: he was no village workman. The ideas which he was called on to represent were done by him in the style of the cities on the great highway from the Roman capital of Asia to the East. He was familiar with, and used to, Graeco-Roman art.
An important criterion is that no name of an emperor occurs. There is no Julius, no Claudius, and no Flavius. Knowledge of Roman things and names was only beginning to penetrate to this remote village; but its remote situation perhaps made the penetration slow. For the same reason, at the present day, Turkish customs have been slow in reaching the village. The people belong to one of those obscure sects which are believed to retain many pre-Mohammedan and even pre-Christian customs. They are simply pagans with a veneer of Islam on the surface, shunting all intercourse and all community of feeling with the Turks, who are a kindly, jovial, hospitable race. Many tales are told true, or false, about these sectaries, villages of whom are or were found here and there over the country; though Abd-ul-Hamid’s aim and policy was to extirpate them, and to make the country uniformly Sunni. He certainly was not successful, but he did a good deal in the way of forcible conversion; but forcible conversion always leaves the character of the man or people unchanged, or even 206 makes him more confirmed in his old ways and thoughts (hidden though they may be under tyrannical law).
The two stelae belong to the same Brotherhood, and are of exactly similar style, though one, Fig. 1, is older and rather ruder than the other. Each has a low pediment, in the centre of which stands a tall figure of Zeus of the Laodicean type resting his left hand on a long sceptre, while on his outstretched right hand sits an eagle. At the left side of each pediment is a four-horse car, in which is the sun-god with radiated head. The wheels have four spokes, and the car is turned towards Zeus. At the right hand of the pediment is a cart drawn by two oxen, also turned towards the centre. The figures in the two cars are much defaced, as is the eagle, which Zeus holds forth in his right hand. Hermes, with caduceus and purse, stands between the ox-cart and Zeus. On the other side of Zeus stands the figure of Good Fortune of the usual Roman type holding the rudder and the cornucopiae.
It is beyond doubt that the Brotherhood which is pictured on these two stelae through two generations was an agricultural association. The ox-cart is a farm vehicle, and the four-horse car carrying the sun-god is starting on his course through heaven. The day is beginning: it is a day of joyous rustic gaiety. The Brotherhood is intended rather to cultivate vegetables than to grow wheat. In such a situation the villagers could not have wheat-fields; and the chief Brother in Fig. 2, the head of the Phratra, has the surname “melon-grower,” Kolokynthianos.17
The Brotherhood belongs to the village Thiounta, and this volcanic stone, of which the two stelae are made, was used at Hierapolis to construct some at least of the large graves which stand on the roads leading out of the city: inscriptions name the stone as Thiountene,18 though Boeckh has altered this in the 207 Corpus Inscrip. Graec. vol. ii. No. 3915, to Dokimene.19 He had not been there, and did not therefore know that the stone is not of Dokimene marble, carried 200 miles over mountain and glen, but of Thiountene volcanic stone, brought down the Maeander gore by a rough road, but always downhill.
The names of the Brotherhood are printed over their portraits, which are all of exactly the same type, except that some are bearded, and some are youths. The drawing is inaccurate in this respect; but time failed us to indicate the distinction. There are two chiefs or headmen in each case, and the number of the Brotherhood was limited to twenty-four, who are arranged in two rows.
Zeus was evidently the god in whose worship the Brethren assembled. On one side he is the sun-god, on the other he is perhaps Gordius, the driver of the first cart: in the centre he is Graeco-Roman. Beside him are the deities that represent, one the selling of merchandise, and the other, good luck. The Brotherhood prospered. There are signs of greater wealth in the second than in the first list.20 The Brotherhood stands between heaven and earth (see Chapter XV.).
The scene on earth in the lowest zone is very charming. In the middle of it stands a woman weaving at a loom supported on a basis. Circe, on a vase, uses much the same kind of loom. The drawing does not represent well the shuttle which she holds for her work: she is evidently beginning her work at dawn, and her shuttle looks like a ball of wool. In Fig. 1 she looks to the right, and this gives the appearance that she holds the shuttle in her left hand. This awkwardness (like some others) is avoided in Fig. 2, where she looks to the left. Behind her is a man in a long robe 208 playing the double flute, and in front of her are two herds of seven cows, in each case moving away from her: she represents the household, and the hour is early morning, when the cows are going out to pasture. In Fig. 2 they are represented with humps on the neck (zebu).
In Hesychius it is stated that “kerku” means the double flute, and one of the Brotherhood is surnamed Kerkus. Many of the Brothers bear a double name, and one of the names is very often Anatolian.
It would be easy to draw up a series of genealogies, one probably extending over three generations. The Brotherhood evidently had not wholly lost the family character, and the chieftainship is certainly hereditary. The genealogies are indicated in my Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, Part I. p. 144; but might be much increased in number.21
On the steep descent where Kodja-Geuzlar is situated, there is no opportunity for wheat-growing, nor even for the use of ox-wagons, nor for the pasturing of herds; but there is good level ground at the foot of the descent on both banks of the Maeander, and here oxen and ox-carts would be used, and herds of cattle could be pastured, and perhaps even a little wheat could be cultivated. There is no reason to think that Thiounta occupied exactly the same site of the wretched modern village, which is so placed as to avoid the notice of the hostile outer world, both Christian under the Byzantine and Moslem under the Turkish rule. Thiounta wsa situated in a better position, and was evidently a highly prosperous village.
Perhaps the strongest proof of relationship and blood in the two lists is the pair Apollonis,22 son of Mikketas in Fig. 1 (Mikka often as Anatolian female name) and Zeuxios, son of Apollonios, 209 grandson of Mikketas, in Fig. 2. Euxenion, son of Zôsimos, in Fig. 2 was probably father of Menander in the same list: Auxiniôn in Fig. 1 is a different name, probably Anatolian or selected as of good omen. Athenagoras, son of Diodoros Gorgion in Fig. 2, is son of Diodoros Gorgion23 in Fig. 1. The chiefs in Fig. 2 are father and son.
The presence of both father and son in the same lists several times not merely proves what a strong family tie existed in the Brotherhood, but also exhibits the reason why some figures are bearded, others are youthful (a detail which is not indicated in the drawings, as explained already).
Only one artisan is mentioned in the lists, Menander, son of Apheianos, a maker of lepta (perhaps delicate pottery, or more probably fine thin garments).24 There is a general predominance of names either (1) derived from the gods of the Brotherhood, Diogenianus, Diodoros, Diogenes, Theodoros, Theophilos, Dionysis, Dionysios, for the jolly tone of the scenes implies that Dionysos was recognised as a god of the Brotherhood, Apollonios from the sun-god as Apollo, and Hikesios a title of Apollo as the god of purification, viz. the sun-god, who keeps that country still clean and healthy: Hikesios is represented on coins of Ephesus; (2) names of good omen, Eutyches, Krusion (for Chrysion), Auxinion, Euxenion, Justus, Didymos, Glykon, Zosimos, Kyron; (3) names connected with husbandry, as Zeuxis and Zeuxios (driver of a pair of oxen), Kolokynthianos, Apenion (?), Korydon,25 Pityras (who superintends the husks on the threshing-floor); (4) names connected with history and poetry, Athenagoras, Alexander, Menander, Theocritus, Hellênios (?), Kyrôn (?); (5) names found in Greek mythology, or connected with mythological personages, 210 Iollas, Gorgion, Kasmos (from Kadmos),26 Aigeon (for Aigaion, perhaps ultimately connected with the rules of goat-culture, prescribed as religious ritual).
One official occurs in Fig. 2, Kasmos paraphylax; this office was as old as the Pergamenian kingdom and was kept up by the Romans; the paraphylax was a sort of chief constable.
The Gorgon and Gorgon’s village (Gorgorôme equivalent to Gorgorûme: see Chapter VIII.) are indubitably of Anatolian origin: the head with open mouth and protruding tongue is the author of prophecy in the Hittite inscriptions, according to Forrer and Sayce: i.e. Gorgo is the Earth-mother as the teacher of her children. The prophecies are often given in full in the inscriptions, but are always expressed in that undeciphered language, which is called by Forrer proto-Hittite. Names that need further careful study are Kyrtos (unless it is the Homeric adjective), Euaros, Lapisas, Lechitas, Psapharos, Kennêniôn, Masôn, Mongos. These seem to be Anatolian names. Euaros is probably a half-grecised Anatolian name: compare Zeus Eurudamenos and Ourudamenos on the Tekmoreian imperial estates and at Apollonia.
Perhaps the most extraordinary feature in the lists is that Hermes or a derivative is never used as a personal name, although the conjunction of Zeus and Hermes is so striking a feature in both pediments and in Fig. 4. Probably he was known at Thiounta under a native name, and they did not use the Greek name; and he is to be sought for among the unexplained names, or possibly he was identified with Dionysos, both gods being in mythology represented as sons of the supreme god Zeus.
The goddess of Good Fortune is evidently referred to in several personal names, e.g. Auxiniôn.27
211In Fig. 1, Zeuxis, son of Diodoros, has the title priest (appas):28 “appas” was used in Anatolia as a priestly title. The title “appas of Dionysos,” occurring in the union of mystae at Magnesia, seems almost conclusive. The personal name Hiereus (not used as a title) is found often in the lists of cultivators on the Killanian imperial estates. Now “appas” became a personal name in Anatolia, and probably Hiereus is a translation of the Asia word, just as Longus and Dolichos, Justus, Macer, etc., are translations of Anatolian names in the languages used later. The only objection that could be made to this use of “appas” here is that there is no “appas” in Fig. 2, but this is not a very strong objection. Zeuxis, therefore, in Fig. 1 was the priest of the Brotherhood. He is the only person on this occasion who contributes money, and it is merely the price of a place for the stele, which could not have been much in this situation. Chairylos in Fig. 2 is a better spelling than Cherylos in Fig. 1.
NOTE. — The strange name Lechitas may perhaps explain the even stranger name Amphilochos, one of the two prophets of Claros, who guided the Old-Ionian emigration along the south coast. Amphilochos is grecised, but is not a real Greek name. His oracle at his tomb in Cilicia was consulted. Mopsos and Amphilochos, the two dogs of Clarian Apollo, had Anatolian names.
===
Footnotes
1 I conjecture Ar(ei)a Julia, the former being a native name (mother of Milatos). The text was very difficult to read in 1887, when Hogarth and I saw it (ll. 1, 2 were copied by Hogarth, 3-6 by me). We were only a day there. Shortly afterwards Humann, as engineer, Cichorius, Judeich, and Winter spent ten days there and made a thorough examination and plan of the city, exposing to the light many stones whose inscription could not be seen by us. Cichorius has Ai[li]a: see their Hierapolis.
2 Hogarth published the inscriptions which we read at Hierapolis in the Journ. of Hellenic Studies, 1888.
3 Anatolian Studies, edited by Buckler and Calder.
4 See Pliny’s letter to Trajan, and the Emperor’s reply.
5 Antalia, a common pronunciation of Adalia till recent time: Burdur and Buldur are almost interchangeable.
6 So the young men rose up and carried out Ananias and Sapphira to their burial. — Acts v.
7 The word “cell” in Lee’s translation is the modern Musafir-Oda, i.e. guest-house.
8 In the cemetery at Alkaran, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 1905, p. 167.
9 I saw the complete inscription in 1909; Cox agrees with my copy in reading on the fragment ενῳ ; Calder mentions the discrepancy and restores τῷ ὑ]ειῷ. I published it in a paper on “The Church of Lycaonia during the Fourth Century,” in Luke the Physician, and other Studies in Religious History, p. 360, but missed the main point, translating “a stranger” instead of “the stranger.”
10 Antigonos, son of Pyrrandas, is the epitaph on an Acarnanian tomb (S.E.G. i. p. 60, No. 244).
11 ὁ δῆμος καὶ οἱ συμπολιτευόμενοι Ῥωμαῖοι.
12 ἔδοξε τῷ δήμῶ.
13 Especially the demos assembled in the Attic ekklesia to consider and pass decrees. Under the Roman Empire its business was mainly or wholly formal.
14 The life of the archaeological traveller consists of ten disappointments to one success. One never expects much from such reports; but all must be investigated. Occasionally a report proves the herald of a really important discovery. Yet I have made a journey of fifteen days continuously and found nothing, investigating a report of great ruins.
15 “Kasignétos” meant a cousin in classical Greek: terms of relationship were rather loosely used in the large semi-patriarchal households of Anatolia. A young bride was “nympha” to her brothers-in-law and parents-in-law.
16 The three adjectives remind one of the wonderful line in Hamlet, “unhousel’d, disappointed, unaneled.” In Homer the words are ἀφρήτωρ, ἀθέμιστος, ἀνέστιος .
17 This is, as I think, the true meaning.
18 I do not understand why in one the stone is called white Thiountene (see Humann, Judeich, etc., Hierapolis, No. 113, p. 108). I suspect the reading. The Turks would call it Kara-tash, black stone.
19 There is no justification for this conjecture: the letters are certain, and given in his epigraphic text.
20 There is a pannychis in fig. 2, as well as the distribution of oil for eight days. Oil was most necessary in the days when soap was unknown.
21 Σαβυς is perhaps connected with Sabazios. In loc. cit. read in 30, l. 2, Κυρων, Ἀπολλωνις Μικκητου, perhaps Ζευξις [δις Ἀ]πη[νιων].
22 Apollonis for Apollonios, a common vulgarism, avoided in the later list.
23 The δ in Fig. 1 shows that Diodoros Gorgion was son, grandson, and great-grandson of Diodoros, and took the surname Gorgion for distinction.
24 The lady in Figs. 1 and 2 evidently wore fine garments: the term is λεπτοπυοῦ. The Brotherhood was wealthy enough to have delicate garments.
25 I assume that korud is connected with skorod, garlic, not with korud, the lark (see my article “Specimens of Anatolian Words,” in the second number of Oriens).
26 It may be assumed that Kasmos is equivalent to Kadmos (as Pape-Benseler, Lexicon der Eigennamen, say, and every one assumes). So also Kasmilos, Kasmillos, Latin Camillus, otherwise Kadmilos, subordinate priest, Kadmêlos (i.e. Hermes).
27 The predilection for names ending in -iôn is a marked feature, and many of them are unknown in Hellenic personal nomenclature.
28 Ziebarth, Vereinswesen, p. 153, followed by Buresch, Aus Lydien, p. 130 f., first pointed this out; and their opinion seems to me right, but not quite conclusive, as shown below in this paragraph.
=============