No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Archaeology
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 27 October 2009
Abstract
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Other
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 1899
References
page 136 note 1 For example, the reviews of Lanckoronski's great folios, which he has published in the Revue Archiéologique under the titles les Villes de la Pamphylie and les Villes de la Pisidie, are rather elaborate fresh studies of the subject than mere reviews.
page 137 note 1 The name Pankaleia occurs only in late Byzantine time, and the ancient authorities differ as to its position. M. Radet assumes the truth of my argument as to the situation in Histor. Geog. p. 231, which he quotes. I am not aware that any other modern writer on ancient geography has mentioned the word.
page 137 note 2 It is in the British Museum, and therefore readily accessible.
page 137 note 3 ‘Qui témoigne de l'industrieuse habilité de son auteur, mais qui fait mioins d'honneur ` sa bonne foi.’ Again: ‘Schuchhardt spécule sur l'ignorance du lecteur,’ and ‘toute l'argumentation repose sur une équivoque,’ etc.
page 138 note 1 They have been carefully stated in the possible terms in my Cities and Bishoprics Phrygia, and need not be repeated here.
page 138 note 2 M. Radet had travelled several times previously in Phrygia.
page 138 note 3 My words are ‘14 miles E.S.E. from Kara-Hissar, between Tchobanlar and Yeni-Keui.’ Kara-Arslan 8 miles S. E. of Kara-Hissar.
page 138 note 4 Kara, ‘black,’ is regularly used of anything great or strong or terrible.
page 140 note 1 Sm. Mows. No. 
(the inscr. were found together, so that the restoration is highly probable); Sm. Mous, No. 
Buresch, p. 1: 
.
page 140 note 2 Stated on p. 2 f.
page 141 note 3 The correspondence is so indicated in the printed work.
page 142 note 1 ΛΛ is given in the copy as Μ, a common error, often made by the engraver himself in these rude inscriptions of confession.
page 142 note 2 δὲ improves the syntax, but probably the writer did not write it.
page 143 note 1 For Γαλλικῷ the true text is Παλλικώ. Ἰταλλικῷ for Ἰταλικῷ is not impossible on the stone, but gives no good sense.
page 143 note 2 I am unable to verify them all, not possessing the books. I may add that readings in papyri which were published when the decipherment of these documents was in its infancy, do not deserve the implicit trust that Hatzidakis and others repose in them.
page 143 note 3 The equivalence of διά and ἐπιμελουμένης or ἐπιμεληθείσης might be illustrated from coin legends and inscriptions.
page 143 note 4 Buresch wrongly speaks of the Sullan era by the name of provincial era. The province was formed in 133 B.C. Sulla added Phrygia Magna to it, and the new parts adopted the era, 1 = 85–4 B.C.
page 144 note 1 Berl. Phil. Woch. 7 Jan.
page 144 note 2 Athenaeum, 7 Jan.
page 144 note 3 Athenaeum, 4 Feb.
page 144 note 4 Berl. Phil. Woch. 14 Jan.