Reis Apollinaris: Talbert 833 and Miller 133 contend there is a missing line from Aquae Sextiae (the crossroads at Aix-en-Provence) to Alebaece Reiorum Apollinarium (Riez). This does not seem to me to be in any way an essential restoration, since there is no reason why the road to Reis Apollinaris (Riez) should not be a cul-de-sac.
Chrisopolis (Talbert 2084): connecting lines do not seem required for sense here: the site is a landmark, not a way-station. The Black Sea periplus in fact begins at Ad Promontorium.
Mizago-Amurio (Talbert 2138): the evidence offered by Talbert for this connection is ambiguous, and the tiny line proposed as a restoration would plainly not be essential for a clear diagrammatic structure. For the time being, this issue must remain open. Miller 659.
Talbert's conjecture of a connection from Mopsouestia to Katabolos (TPPlace2329) is based solely on what seems to be a superfluous mark of XXIIII at the riverside near Aregea. It demands no discussion here, since the line is not graphically required to complete the network.
Nicomedia-Artane as proposed in TPPlace2110 seems to me to go against the ductus of the chart. In any case the Black Sea periplus and the inland highway are too far out of sync for it to be plausible to suppose that the chart-maker took any interest in the correspondences between their stations.
Caesarea-Sebastia: This connection, which has been observed over long stretches (French 30) and runs relatively straight and level, is surprisingly shown in Talbert's Map A making wild zigzags because of some puzzling localizations of the toponyms on its course. First the line out of Caesarea jumps to Sibora in the north, then to a site east of Caesarea which is supposed to be Eudagina. These jags are based placements in the Barrington Atlas supervised by Timothy Mitford and Talbert.
For the first place, the localization of foroba to Sibora (DARE) apparently derives from work on the Tabula Imperii Byzantini (TIB), since the Barrington directory (990) lists "Sibora/Foroba? [also] Sobara?" by reference to TIB Kappadokien 270-271 (Vienna, 1981). I have not consulted this source yet. The second place is listed in the Barrington directory (987) as "Euagina/Sebagena? [also] Eudagina", localized to the vicinity of Gemerek (DARE), which is where one expects to find it, but it is shown on the map east of Caesarea. Reference is given to the Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua (MAMA) 7 by Calder, which I have not yet consulted, and also to Ruge's RE article "Evagina", which is orthodox in placing Eudagina near Gemerek. Richard Kiepert's map of 1914 also places Eudagina (with a question mark) on the direct road to Sebastia. Note that the TP text reads Eudagina with a vowel U and a consonantal D. Miller assumes a straight route, though he shrinks from any confident localizations. Since the directory and map are in conflict, I tend to think that there may have been some mistake in drawing the map, with the error carrying over into DARE. Pending more research I will not take up Talbert's emendations for the time being.
Another Euagina (but not Eudagina) has been a matter of controversy. G.J.C. Anderson, apparently following Ramsay, states: "At a point east of Tavium where there is a parting of roads to Zela, Comana and Caesareia there was situated a town variously named Euagina, Eugoni, or Aegonne." Anderson's picturesque description of the village of Köhne (Küçükköhne on Google Maps?) does not convince Ruge who opines they are not all the one place. Brill's New Pauly has no Euagina entry. Talbert (312, note 171) considers Aegonne and Evgoni a possible duplication. I have not ascertained if any recent field research addresses the muddle. Stephen Mitchell, in the directory to Map 63 of the Barrington Atlas, prefers to consider Euagina/Phoubagina an unlocated toponym (982: with reference to TIB Galatien 39, note 4). He also implies many of the identifications by Ramsay and associates (Anderson was a student of Ramsay) have only hung on so long for want of newer scrutiny.
Seleukeia Pieria-Antiochia: Talbert writes (TPPlace532): "We may fairly assume that a route into Antiochia from Selevcia has been overwhelmed by the former's elaborate symbol." The argument for the line is not however compelling, even if the road can be shown to have physically existed. An exit from Antioch towards Bacataiali already provides a line towards the Lebanese coast, and Seleukeia is in its turn connected into the network by this. A glance at the geography shows that travellers following the coast were obliged to pass through Antiochia: the coast from Rosos to Selevcia is too rugged for land travel. Seleukeia was mainly important as a port for east-west trade.
Chrisopolis (Talbert 2084): connecting lines do not seem required for sense here: the site is a landmark, not a way-station. The Black Sea periplus in fact begins at Ad Promontorium.
Mizago-Amurio (Talbert 2138): the evidence offered by Talbert for this connection is ambiguous, and the tiny line proposed as a restoration would plainly not be essential for a clear diagrammatic structure. For the time being, this issue must remain open. Miller 659.
Talbert's conjecture of a connection from Mopsouestia to Katabolos (TPPlace2329) is based solely on what seems to be a superfluous mark of XXIIII at the riverside near Aregea. It demands no discussion here, since the line is not graphically required to complete the network.
Nicomedia-Artane as proposed in TPPlace2110 seems to me to go against the ductus of the chart. In any case the Black Sea periplus and the inland highway are too far out of sync for it to be plausible to suppose that the chart-maker took any interest in the correspondences between their stations.
Caesarea-Sebastia: This connection, which has been observed over long stretches (French 30) and runs relatively straight and level, is surprisingly shown in Talbert's Map A making wild zigzags because of some puzzling localizations of the toponyms on its course. First the line out of Caesarea jumps to Sibora in the north, then to a site east of Caesarea which is supposed to be Eudagina. These jags are based placements in the Barrington Atlas supervised by Timothy Mitford and Talbert.
For the first place, the localization of foroba to Sibora (DARE) apparently derives from work on the Tabula Imperii Byzantini (TIB), since the Barrington directory (990) lists "Sibora/Foroba? [also] Sobara?" by reference to TIB Kappadokien 270-271 (Vienna, 1981). I have not consulted this source yet. The second place is listed in the Barrington directory (987) as "Euagina/Sebagena? [also] Eudagina", localized to the vicinity of Gemerek (DARE), which is where one expects to find it, but it is shown on the map east of Caesarea. Reference is given to the Monumenta Asiae Minoris Antiqua (MAMA) 7 by Calder, which I have not yet consulted, and also to Ruge's RE article "Evagina", which is orthodox in placing Eudagina near Gemerek. Richard Kiepert's map of 1914 also places Eudagina (with a question mark) on the direct road to Sebastia. Note that the TP text reads Eudagina with a vowel U and a consonantal D. Miller assumes a straight route, though he shrinks from any confident localizations. Since the directory and map are in conflict, I tend to think that there may have been some mistake in drawing the map, with the error carrying over into DARE. Pending more research I will not take up Talbert's emendations for the time being.
Another Euagina (but not Eudagina) has been a matter of controversy. G.J.C. Anderson, apparently following Ramsay, states: "At a point east of Tavium where there is a parting of roads to Zela, Comana and Caesareia there was situated a town variously named Euagina, Eugoni, or Aegonne." Anderson's picturesque description of the village of Köhne (Küçükköhne on Google Maps?) does not convince Ruge who opines they are not all the one place. Brill's New Pauly has no Euagina entry. Talbert (312, note 171) considers Aegonne and Evgoni a possible duplication. I have not ascertained if any recent field research addresses the muddle. Stephen Mitchell, in the directory to Map 63 of the Barrington Atlas, prefers to consider Euagina/Phoubagina an unlocated toponym (982: with reference to TIB Galatien 39, note 4). He also implies many of the identifications by Ramsay and associates (Anderson was a student of Ramsay) have only hung on so long for want of newer scrutiny.
Seleukeia Pieria-Antiochia: Talbert writes (TPPlace532): "We may fairly assume that a route into Antiochia from Selevcia has been overwhelmed by the former's elaborate symbol." The argument for the line is not however compelling, even if the road can be shown to have physically existed. An exit from Antioch towards Bacataiali already provides a line towards the Lebanese coast, and Seleukeia is in its turn connected into the network by this. A glance at the geography shows that travellers following the coast were obliged to pass through Antiochia: the coast from Rosos to Selevcia is too rugged for land travel. Seleukeia was mainly important as a port for east-west trade.
No comments:
Post a Comment