Ancient Sinope 9781607246381, 1607246384

Citation preview

Ancient Sinope

A n a l e c t a Gorgiana

389 Series Editor George Anton Kiraz

Analecta Gorgiana is a collection of long essays and

short

monographs which are consistently cited by modern scholars but previously difficult to find because of their original appearance in obscure publications. Carefully selected by a team of scholars based on their relevance to modern scholarship, these essays can now be fully utili2ed by scholars and proudly owned by libraries.

Ancient Sinope

David Robinson

l gorgias press 2009

Gorgias Press LLC, 180 Centennial Ave., Piscataway, NJ, 08854, USA www.gorgiaspress.com Copyright © 2009 by Gorgias Press LLC Originally published in All rights reserved under International and Pan-American Copyright Conventions. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise without the prior written permission of Gorgias Press LLC. 2009

1

ISBN 978-1-60724-638-1

ISSN 1935-6854

Extract from The ^American Journal of Philology 27 (1906)

Printed in the LTnited States of America

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY

V O L . X X V I I , 2.

WHOLE

I.—ANCIENT FIRST

NO. 106.

SINOPE.

PART.

INTRODUCTORY

NOTE.

N o monograph on Sinope has been written since 1855. In that year, when interest in the Black Sea towns had been for some time stimulated by the Crimean war, and Sinope had been forced into temporary prominence by a naval battle near the town between the Turks and Russians, appeared W. T . Streuber's historical sketch (Sinope, ein Historisch-Antiquarischer Umriss, Basel, 1855). It was marred by many mistakes, and the author could not avail himself of the numerous inscriptions and coins which have since thrown so much light upon the city's annals. Many of the best histories of Greece and of the Greek colonies, moreover, have been written during the half-century that has elapsed since that time. In 1902, while I was studying as fellow at the American School in Athens, Professor Edward Capps suggested that I use the opportunity to make a thorough investigation of all material connected with ancient Sinope and, if practicable, embody the results in a connected account. Kindly letters from Professor Edward Meyer of Berlin and Professor George Busoltof Göttingen encouraged me to make the attempt. After much preliminary study I went in June, 1903, to live in the town itself, made journeys in different directions through the immediate locality and sought to quicken and unify my investigations into a living, historic portrayal. How far I have succeeded the reader must judge for himself. The indebtednesses of the author are of course many and varied, as the notes and references indicate. In addition to the geographical works cited on page 126, mention should be made of the brief Sinopicarum Quaestionum Specimen by M. Sengebusch (Berlin, 1846), of the article by Six on coins of Sinope in the Numismatic Chronicle for 1885, of the general histories, and especially of Eduard Meyer, Geschichte des Königreichs Pontos, and ReinachGötz, Mithradates Eupator. T h e ancient sources and other modern works will be found cited throughout the paper.

9

126

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

CHAPTER THE

I.

SITE.

T h e configuration of the country round Sinope, its g e o g r a p h i c position, its products, the security of its double harbor, and the impregnability of its r o c k y promontory, have conspired to write its name in the annals of war, of commerce, of popular and governmental independence and development, and of b i o g r a p h y , literature, and art. T h e northern coast of Asia Minor is like a central mounting billow with a trough on each side. T h e billow and the two troughs taken together, form the entire southern shore of the Pontus, and the outline is symmetrical, so that the crest of the w a v e is the middle point of the shore. T h e crest, however, is somewhat flattened, and just at its eastern edge, before it begins to fall away, it throws out a bold promontory. 1 From the eastern corner of this main p r o m o n t o r y 2 juts out in a northeasterly direction the smaller peninsula on whose low landward neck Sinope is built. 3 T h e peninsula itself is a promontory, 4 about 600 feet in height, with precipitous sides and a broad level table-land at the top. Its outline somewhat resembles that of a boar's head with the 1

in

C a l l e d S y r i a s in M a r c i a n , E p i t o m e P e r i p l i M a r i s I n t e r n i . g ; b u t Arrian,

Peripl.

P o n t i E u x i n i 20.

21 ; a n d

S y r i a s A c r u l e p t e in

the

anonymous

Lepte

Periplus

C f . M ü l l e r , G e o g r a p h i G r a e c i M i n o r e s I , pp. 571", 3 8 7 , 4 0 6 .

T h e m o d e r n T u r k i s h n a m e is I n d j é - b u r u n . 2

Geographi Minores, pl.

8

Cf. Strabo X I I

ohalraL

fî' £TTÎ rivoç

âtaKÂeini Kvpiaç. !)' kKlnZÔOV

KCÙ

TO

yàp ¿Tri avxévi

~Keppovr/(jav -porEivovcrjç

Kpdç ri/v 'Aciav,

ûvvâTTTOvra

XVIII.

545 ïôpvrcu

âè

?MITVOV

7TaV€VSpa, in Strabo (XII 546, 561 and elsewhere) ij 'ZtvuiïÏTtç or Scvutvîç. Steph. Byz. gives also Swwkîç and Zivuttikôv. T h e male inhabitant is ZivuTrevç, Herodian, ed. L e n t z I I 891, 27, or Sivu-îti/ç (cf. Dion. Orb. Descr. 255 and Herodian, ed. Lentz I 77 ; I I 869, 37), in L a t i n Sinopensis or Sinopeus; the female inhabitant "Zivu-xiç (cf. Herodian I I 891, 1). T h e adjective is 'Zivumnôç (Steph. Byz.). SÎWJTTaloç occurs in C. I. G. 7074. 6 Xen.

Anab. VI 1, 15. 'Livutîùç ôè outovm p.èv èv ry Tla&ùayovtKy.

So also

Strabo X I I 544 f., Diodorus X I V 31, Pliny N . H . V I 2 and Arrian, Peripl. 20, 21. ' Herodotus I 72 and Strabo X I I 1, 1 ; 3 , 9 , 25 seem to make the H a l y s the eastern boundary, but Scylax and Marcian, the river Evarchus. I n X e n o -

130

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

of A m i s u s a n d the district of S i n o p e at the r i v e r H a l y s , 1 still f u r t h e r to the west. O n the o t h e r h a n d it is e q u a l l y clear that S i n o p e did not e x t e n d its p o w e r w e s t w a r d to the B i t h y n i a n border. 2 N a t u r e e r e c t e d a southern limit in the O l g a s s y s m o u n tains. 3 P e r h a p s w e s h o u l d not be f a r f r o m the truth if we b o u n d e d the ancient S i n o p e a n district b y the P o n t u s on the north, the H a l y s on the east, the O l g a s s y s m o u n t a i n s on the south, and a n indefinite line on the west d r a w n at about the 3 2 n d parallel. 4 R e t u r n i n g to the t o w n on the n e c k of the p r o m o n t o r y w e find u p o n the site of the ancient city an inner w a l l e d e n c l o s u r e with a T u r k i s h castle a n d p r i s o n , p r o b a b l y the site of the S i n o p e a n a c r o p o l i s , a n d outside the wall n o r t h e a s t w a r d , t o w a r d the p r o m o n t o r y , the G r e e k a n d C h r i s t i a n quarter. 5 U n h a p p i l y there a r e f e w certain d a t a for r e c o n s t r u c t i n g the ancient c i t y . Looking d o w n f r o m the h e i g h t a b o v e I tried in vain to m a k e a mental plan w h i c h w o u l d include the stoas, g y m n a s i u m , and m a r k e t - p l a c e , 6 the P a l a c e of M i t h r a d a t e s , ' a n d the T e m p l e of S e r a p i s . There a r e no ruins or e v e n a n y m o u n d e d outlines for points of d e p a r t u r e . H o w e v e r , we h a v e the t w o walls a c r o s s the isthmus w h i c h h a v e b e e n built and razed a n d rebuilt in the s a m e positions a n d out of the most h e t e r o g e n e o u s materials a r r a n g e d in the m o s t d i s o r d e r l y m a n n e r . T h e r e are f o u n d a t i o n stones f r o m b u i l d i n g s ; c o l u m n s of R o m a n d a t e w h o s e unfluted sides indicate their p r e v i o u s position in stoas ;8 pieces of s c u l p t u r e scattered at r a n d o m , i n c l u d i n g a lion built into the top of the wall, in one case, while a s i m i l a r o n e lies upon the g r o u n d f and pieces of a r c h i t r a v e s and of corphon's time the T h e r m o d o n was the boundary. Plin. V I 2 makes Amisus a city in Paphlagonia. Ptolemy makes a mistake when he (V 4 and V I I I 1 7 , 26) includes Sinope in Galatia. It belonged later to the R o m a n province of B i t h y n i a and Pontus, but never to Galatia (cf. on this Cumont, R e v u e des E t u d e s Grecques X V I (1903), pp. 2 5 - 2 7 . 1

Cf. Strabo, X I I 546, 5 6 0 ; Arrian Peripl. 22 ; A n o n y m . Peripl. 25. 3 Strabo, X I I 546. Strabo, X I I 561, 562. J A r m e n e , fifty stadia to the west, was part of S i n o p e : cf. 'Apfif/vtiv n}c ZivimriQ, X e n . A n a b . V I 1 , 1 5 ; Strabo, X I I 545. But the district of Sinope certainly extended still further west. 2

5

C f . the geographers and travellers quoted above. C f . Strabo X I I 546 avrij ' 7) -kqali r,< ruxinnu K(U (,jr. nai yvfivaaiG) (ie nai ayopa nai aroalg K.->;6ouij7ai '/.nit~. 7 What the inhabitants call " the Palace of Mithradates " , a large structure in Boz-tepe with three vaulted chambers and a Byzantine chapel in its midst, is of later date than Mithradates. Hamilton, op. cit. p. 3 1 2 refers to it. 8 Perhaps they come from the stoas mentioned by Strabo. 6

9

C f . Hommaire de H e l l , op. cit. p. 346 ; H a m i l t o n , op. cit., p. 309.

ANCIENT

SI

NOPE.

nices. Many other pieces of carving have been carried away by individuals or have found their way into museums, especially that at Constantinople. In the wall nearest the mainland, but on the inside, are arches indicating the remains of a Roman aqueduct. 1 This part of this wall is better built than the rest and probably goes back to Roman date, whereas the greater portion of it, like the other walls, was built by the Genoese and later by T u r k s . T h e main factor in the making of Sinope, as in the making of Cyzicus, has been its double harbor 2 commanding the eastward and westward sea and in both ancient and modern times the best on the southern shore of the Pontus. In ancient times the southerly harbor was improved and ruins exist of a mole 3 which seems to be as old as Mithradates the Great. No river flows into either harbor to silt it up, but the northerly harbor has been shallowed by sand deposits and is no longer usable by vessels of modern draft. T h e deeper water and the lighter draft vessels of the ancient day, however, made it accessible for commercial purposes. 4 It may be that even in the time of Pericles and later in the days of Mithradates the northerly harbor was deep enough for their full-sized craft. C H A P T E R II. IMPORTANCE OF THE SITE.

It may well be believed that, however unimportant, through distance and misrule, Sinope may have come to be in the eyes of our western world, the ancient Greeks would hold in high esteem a city-state so fertile, so fortified, and so far-reaching in its natural command of the land and of the sea. An examination 1 Cf. Hommaire de Hell, op. cit. p. 346; Hamilton, op. cit. p. 309 ; Ritter, op. cit. p. 789-790; cf. also Pliny Ep., X 91. 2 Cf. Strabo X I I 545, enarcpuOev Xepaóvqcrov nríaavrec, hv ry vvv -H¿>~r¡ ttü'/ ir * K/Áar olniarai. The vvv does not necessarily mean that no Greek city existed when the Cimmerians came, as Grote and Busolt loc. cit. think. T h e r e may have been a weak settlement there at the time. 6 T h e second founding was by Cretines and Cous (cf. Phlegon in Müller, Frag. Hist. Graec. I l l 605, 6 ; Eust. ad Dionys. Com. 772 ; and Ps. Scymnus v. 949.) Acc. to Ps. Scymnus loc. cit., it took place yv/na ó Kififiepíuv nareópa/ie rt¡v 'Aaíav arpará;, that is, in the epoch year of the capture of Sardis (657), cf. Rohde, Rhein. Mus. X X X I I I 200. If this date is right, then it was not the inroad of the Cimmerians in 635 but an earlier one which settled at Sinope.

150

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

T h e few definite points w h i c h w e h a v e thus far been able to d e d u c e with a n y t h i n g l i k e certainty, a n d the d e a r t h of a n y r e c o r d s at all to c o v e r nearly t w o s u c c e e d i n g centuries, m a y naturally occasion scepticism as to there h a v i n g been any s u c h early foundi n g at all b y the G r e e k s . B u t the e x t r e m e antiquity of the stories of the A r g o n a u t s and of H e r a c l e s ' e x p e d i t i o n against the A m a z o n s , both of w h i c h h a v e for their scenes the shore of the B l a c k S e a , a n d in both o f w h i c h A u t o l y c u s , the r e c o g n i z e d founder of S i n o p e , and his c o m p a n i o n s had part, 1 j o i n s with the s t r o n g tradition w e h a v e been u s i n g to assure us that we are d e a l i n g with an historic, e v e n if not with a p r e c i s e l y ascertained, f o u n d i n g of the g r e a t E u x i n e t r a d i n g port.

CHAPTER DARK

AGES

AND

V.

RENAISSANCE.

E v e n after S i n o p e ' s r e f o u n d i n g in 630 its r e c o r d s for n e a r l y t w o centuries are for the most part b l a n k annals. T h e L y d i a n m o n a r c h y rose, r e a c h e d the H a l y s , a n d fell. But whether its b r o a d lines of d i s p l a y a n d vanity penetrated the mountain passes and subjected the s h o r e cities is left in doubt. 2 Pteria taken b y C r o e s u s lay 150 miles to the south and there are no r e c o r d s of a n y further n o r t h w a r d march. C y r u s b r o k e the L y d i a n p o w e r a b o u t 550 B. c . ; but h o w soon or h o w decisively the Persian p o w e r s u b d u e d t h e G r e e k cities of the southern coast of the E u x i n e is unwritten. X e r x e s ' e x p e d i t i o n in 480 B. C. included J C f . P a u l y - W i s s o w a , E n c y l . I I 763 ff. O n l y Strabo, X I I 545, (source perhaps Eumelus) makes Autolycus a comrade of Jason. C f . also A p o l l o d . i , g, 16, 8. Plut. L u c . 23 says that " A u t o l y c u s , son of Deimachus, was on the expedition of Heracles from T h e s s a l y against the Amazons. W h e n he was returning with Demoleon and Phlogius he was shipwrecked at Sinope and took the city away from the S y r i a n s " . A p p i a n Mithr. X I I 83 says the same. Cf. also Ps. Scymnus v. 944 f ; A n o n Peripl. Pont. E u x . 22. Apollonius of R h o d e s combines the two traditions and (II 948-067) says that the sons of Deimachus, Deileon, Autolycus and Phlogius, comrades of Heracles, were p i c k e d up by the Argonauts when they came there. V . Flaccus, V 106-120 and H y g . F a b . 14 have the same. Phlogius is mentioned in an inscription found at Sinope, cf. A m . J. A r c h . I X (1905) p. 306, no. 31. On these heroes cf. Roscher's L e x i c o n and Burchner, op. cit. p. 58 and on the Argonauts in general the dissertation by Gruger, D i e Argonauten-Sage (Breslau, 1889). F o r Heracles at Sinope cf. A m . J. A r c h . I X (1905) p. 305. 2Cf.

Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums I § 487, who thinks not.

150

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

T h e few definite points w h i c h w e h a v e thus far been able to d e d u c e with a n y t h i n g l i k e certainty, a n d the d e a r t h of a n y r e c o r d s at all to c o v e r nearly t w o s u c c e e d i n g centuries, m a y naturally occasion scepticism as to there h a v i n g been any s u c h early foundi n g at all b y the G r e e k s . B u t the e x t r e m e antiquity of the stories of the A r g o n a u t s and of H e r a c l e s ' e x p e d i t i o n against the A m a z o n s , both of w h i c h h a v e for their scenes the shore of the B l a c k S e a , a n d in both o f w h i c h A u t o l y c u s , the r e c o g n i z e d founder of S i n o p e , and his c o m p a n i o n s had part, 1 j o i n s with the s t r o n g tradition w e h a v e been u s i n g to assure us that we are d e a l i n g with an historic, e v e n if not with a p r e c i s e l y ascertained, f o u n d i n g of the g r e a t E u x i n e t r a d i n g port.

CHAPTER DARK

AGES

AND

V.

RENAISSANCE.

E v e n after S i n o p e ' s r e f o u n d i n g in 630 its r e c o r d s for n e a r l y t w o centuries are for the most part b l a n k annals. T h e L y d i a n m o n a r c h y rose, r e a c h e d the H a l y s , a n d fell. But whether its b r o a d lines of d i s p l a y a n d vanity penetrated the mountain passes and subjected the s h o r e cities is left in doubt. 2 Pteria taken b y C r o e s u s lay 150 miles to the south and there are no r e c o r d s of a n y further n o r t h w a r d march. C y r u s b r o k e the L y d i a n p o w e r a b o u t 550 B. c . ; but h o w soon or h o w decisively the Persian p o w e r s u b d u e d t h e G r e e k cities of the southern coast of the E u x i n e is unwritten. X e r x e s ' e x p e d i t i o n in 480 B. C. included J C f . P a u l y - W i s s o w a , E n c y l . I I 763 ff. O n l y Strabo, X I I 545, (source perhaps Eumelus) makes Autolycus a comrade of Jason. C f . also A p o l l o d . i , g, 16, 8. Plut. L u c . 23 says that " A u t o l y c u s , son of Deimachus, was on the expedition of Heracles from T h e s s a l y against the Amazons. W h e n he was returning with Demoleon and Phlogius he was shipwrecked at Sinope and took the city away from the S y r i a n s " . A p p i a n Mithr. X I I 83 says the same. Cf. also Ps. Scymnus v. 944 f ; A n o n Peripl. Pont. E u x . 22. Apollonius of R h o d e s combines the two traditions and (II 948-067) says that the sons of Deimachus, Deileon, Autolycus and Phlogius, comrades of Heracles, were p i c k e d up by the Argonauts when they came there. V . Flaccus, V 106-120 and H y g . F a b . 14 have the same. Phlogius is mentioned in an inscription found at Sinope, cf. A m . J. A r c h . I X (1905) p. 306, no. 31. On these heroes cf. Roscher's L e x i c o n and Burchner, op. cit. p. 58 and on the Argonauts in general the dissertation by Gruger, D i e Argonauten-Sage (Breslau, 1889). F o r Heracles at Sinope cf. A m . J. A r c h . I X (1905) p. 305. 2Cf.

Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums I § 487, who thinks not.

ANCIENT

SINOPE.

a m o n g its total of 1200 ships 80 contributed b y the G r e e k s on t h e H e l l e s p o n t and the Pontus. 1 It is natural to s u p p o s e that S i n o p e was r e p r e s e n t e d a m o n g the e i g h t y , but there is n o written e v i d e n c e of s u c h a fact. S o m e few r u d e 2 coins b e a r i n g a n e a g l e and a d o l p h i n a n d a m e r e incuse square on the r e v e r s e a r e archaic e n o u g h to represent this o b s c u r e p e r i o d of S i n o p e ' s s t o r y w h e n t h e g r e a t tides of c o n q u e s t w e r e s w e e p i n g to and fro far south of its mountain fences. In the fifth century relief e x p e d i t i o n s b e g a n to be sent to the G r e e k cities of the B l a c k S e a w h i c h w e r e u n d e r tribute to Persia. A r i s t i d e s , about 470, did not g e t so far as S i n o p e . B u t later, p r o b a b l y soon after 444/ in the flowering time of A t h e n s , Pericles, with the d e s i g n of m a k i n g a d i s p l a y of A t h e n i a n power, and in order to relieve the G r e e k cities o n t h e E u x i n e from o p p r e s s i o n a n d to stimulate their trade with A t t i c a , led forth an e x p e d i t i o n w h i c h r e a c h e d S i n o p e . H e r e he left the efficient L a m a c h u s with thirteen ships and assigned him the task of e x p e l l i n g the tyrant Timesilaus. 4 T h e m a n 5 w h o at S y r a c u s e a d v i s e d the A t h e n i a n s to fight at once s e e m s to h a v e p e r f o r m e d his task with characteristic p r o m p t n e s s , a n d not l o n g afterwards it was v o t e d at A t h e n s that s i x h u n d r e d v o l u n t e e r colonists s h o u l d sail for S i n o p e to o c c u p y the h o u s e s and lands of the d e f e a t e d t y r a n t a n d his following. L a m a c h u s can h a r d l y h a v e remained l o n g at S i n o p e : w e find him in 424 b. c . l e a d i n g another B l a c k S e a e x p e d i t i o n w h i c h w a s 1

D i o d . X I 3.

2

N u m . Z e i t s c h r i f t I I , p. 259 ; Six, N u m . Chron. 1885, pp. 8, g, 19, 20.

A b b o t t , A History of G r e e c e , I I , p. 375, s a y s " after 449 B. c " . K ö h l e r , U r k . zur Gesch. d. D e l i s c h - A t t i s c h . Bundes., p. 1 1 4 f. puts the expedition in the y e a r 453. D u n c k e r , D e s P e r i k l e s ' Fahrt in den Pontus (Sitzungsberichte der Berl. A c a d . , X X V I I 1885), p. 536, g i v e s the year 444/3 B. c . Busolt, Griech. Geschichte I I 538 (ed. of 1888), gave the same date but later, in I I I 585, n. 2, argues against this date and gives 436/5 B. c. B e l o c h , Gr. G e s c h . I 504, gives the same date. M e y e r , Gesch. des A l t . I V 430, says after 440. K i r c h n e r , Prosopogr. A t t . 1 1 8 1 1 gives 437 B. c. But I see no conclusive reason for putt i n g the expedition so late. Plut. Per. 20, places it immediately after that to the Chersonesus in 447. I f w e accept the date 436 there are 34 years b e t w e e n the first and second expeditions and only 12 between the second and third. I n 415 L a m a c h u s was 50 or 55 years old (cf. Plut. A l c i b . 18). T h a t would m a k e him about 25 or 30 years old at the time of the expedition to the Pontus, if it was circ. 440. 3

Plut. Per. 20. Busolt, 1. c., for the identification of L a m a c h u s , w h o died in 414 before Syracuse, with the man l e f t in Sinope by Pericles. 4

6Cf.

152

AMERICAN

JOUKA'AL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

w r e c k e d at H e r a c l e a . 1 B u t from this time S i n o p e ' s condition was g r e a t l y i m p r o v e d , e v e n its coins s h o w i n g m u c h finer w o r k manship. 2 B e t w e e n L a m a c h u s ' deposition of the tyrant Timesilaus a b o u t 444 B. c. and the P e a c e o f A n t a l c i d a s , w h i c h deliberately left the E u x i n e G r e e k s at the m e r c y of Persia, lies S i n o p e ' s g o l d e n d a y of a u t o n o m o u s p r o s p e r i t y and power. 3 N o t that w e possess the direct recital of it, but the indirect e v i d e n c e is conclusive. W h e n X e n o p h o n ' s veterans climbed the coast r a n g e and saw the sea, it was T r a p e z u s , a c o l o n y of S i n o p e , that lay directly beneath their e y e on the coast. 4 A l t h o u g h s o m e 250 miles east of S i n o p e , it o w n e d a l l e g i a n c e to it and paid tribute in c o m m o n with C e r a s u s a n d C o t y o r a . 5 T h a t S i n o p e ' s colonial arm reached so far m a y not indeed warrant Perrot and C h i p i e z 0 in c a l l i n g S e s a m u s , C y torus, and Ionopolis actual colonies of S i n o p e , and " m u l t i p l i e d " harbors m a y be t o o s t r o n g an e x p r e s s i o n ; but it is e v i d e n t that S i n o p e had a firm colonial s y s t e m c o v e r i n g nearly the w h o l e s o u t h e r n shore of the E u x i n e . Its c o m p a c t n e s s is illustrated in the s p e e c h m a d e to X e n o p h o n b y H e c a t o n y m u s , w h o b a d c o m e all the w a y from S i n o p e to deal with the T e n T h o u s a n d when he s a y s 7 " T h e s e ( C o t y o r i t e s ) and the p e o p l e of C e r a s u s and T r a p e z u s b r i n g us an a p p o i n t e d tribute; so that w h a t e v e r harm y o u d o them, the city of the S i n o p e a n s considers that it suffers it itself". T h e r e m a y h a v e been a lack of G r e e k unity in the failure of the C o t y o r i t e s to receive the T e n T h o u s a n d m o r e c o r d i a l l y , but X e n o p h o n ' s soldiers a p p e a r to h a v e b e h a v e d s o m e w h a t r o u g h l y and the colonists m a y well h a v e been s u s p i c i o u s 8 of so l a r g e and p o w e r f u l 1

T h u c . I V 75.

3

S t r a b o , X I I 546, s e e m s to e x t e n d S i n o p e ' s a u t o n o m o u s p e r i o d f a r o n w a r d to

the capture

2

of t h e c i t y b y P h a r n a c e s

S i x , N u m . C h r o n . 1 8 8 5 , p. 2 1 .

in 183 B. c .

But either he wrote

in

p a r t i a l i g n o r a n c e of t h e r e s u l t s o f the P e a c e o f A n t a l c i d a s or t h e a u t o n o m y h e h a d in m i n d w a s a p a r t i a l a n d d e f e c t i v e o n e ; f o r , n o t to s p e a k o f o t h e r e v i d e n c e , t h e e m b a s s y to D a r i u s w i t h w h i c h w e d e a l in t h e n e x t c h a p t e r s h o w s a c l e a r l y a c k n o w l e d g e d g e n e r a l s u b m i s s i o n to P e r s i a . 4

X e n . A n a b . I V 8, 22.

5

X e n . A n a b . V 5, 10.

deported

by

Scymnus 910;

Pharnaces

The to

inhabitants

form

of

Pharnacia,

these cf.

two

places

were

a l s o D i o d . X I V 30, 3 ;

later Ps.

S t r a b o X I I 545 f . ; a n d B i i r c h n e r , D i e B e s i e d e l u n g d e s I ' o n t o s

E u x e i n o s durch die Milesier, pp. 56-66. 6

H i s t o i r e d e l ' A r t , V , p. 1 9 7 .

8

A s i m i l a r f e e l i n g m a y a c c o u n t for X e n o p h o n ' s s h i p s g o i n g a f e w m i l e s p a s t

7

X e n . 1. c .

S i n o p e to A r m e n e , as t h o u g h t h e r e w e r e an o b j e c t i o n to h i s a n c h o r i n g , as h e n a t u r a l l y w o u l d , at t h a t e x c e l l e n t h a r b o r i t s e l f .

C f . X e n . A n a b . V I 1, 15.

ANCIENT

SI NOPE.

153

a force with so a d v e n t u r o u s a history b a c k of them. In a n y case the incident d o e s not affect our v i e w of the unity of S i n o p e ' s colonies a m o n g t h e m s e l v e s . A further e v i d e n c e of S i n o p e ' s i n d e p e n d e n c e , m a y be seen in X e n o p h o n ' s w a r n i n g 1 to H e c a t o n y m u s against an alliance of the S i n o p e a n s with the P a p h l a g o n i a n s . H i s w o r d s p r e s u p p o s e the desire of the P a p h l a g o n i a n s to g e t possession of S i n o p e a n d their inability hitherto to d o so. T h e n u m i s m a t i c testimony is interesting. W e now for the first time find S i n o p e a n coins b e a r i n g the names of magistrates, 2 or rather the first letters o f the names. T h e inscription on o n e is E K , w h i c h s u g g e s t s H e c a t o n y m u s 3 , on a n o t h e r X O P H w h i c h s u g g e s t s XOPI/yiW and on a n o t h e r AEQM w h i c h p r o b a b l y stands for AeaixeSav.4, T h e i r v a r i e t y , too, points to a democratic form of g o v e r n m e n t . T h i s series c o m e s a b r u p t l y to an end a few d e c a d e s later, and is s u p p l a n t e d b y the inferior minting of D a t a mes, w h i c h itself is f o l l o w e d b y a still p o o r e r c o i n a g e with A r a m a i c inscriptions, s o m e s p e c i m e n s of w h i c h bear the names o f A r i a r a t h e s a n d A b d s a s a n (not A b d e m o n ) . 5 But short-lived as the G r e e k m a g i s t r a t e s ' c o i n a g e was, it bears m u t e t e s t i m o n y t o S i n o p e ' s brief a u t o n o m y . T h e r e is, m o r e o v e r , a p a s s a g e of S t r a b o w h i c h , I think, must be referred to this p e r i o d a n d discloses in a brief but effective w a y the sea p o w e r o f S i n o p e . X e n o p h o n 6 s h o w s us that S i n o p e with the h e l p of H e r a c l e a , could upon occasion s u p p l y ships e n o u g h to transport his l a r g e force to w e s t w a r d points. But Strabo7 says KaTatTKtvatra/j.evr] Se vavTLKov eirTjpx* ttjs evros Kvavtcov 6a\aTTt]s, Kai e£v ayajvav ¡i€T€txe rots "EWtjoiv. JOHNS

HOPKINS

UNIVERSITY.

D A V I D

M .

R O B I N S O N .

Anab. V 5, 23. C f . Judeich, Kleinasiatische Studien, pp. 40, 260. Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p . 50 gives a list of them. 8 Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 24. 4 C f . A m . J. Arch. I X (1905), pp. 2g8, 306, 313. 5 Cf. Six, op. cit. p. 25. 6 A n a b . V 6 if. 7 X I I 545.

1 !

AMERICAN

JOURNAL VOL. X X V I I ,

OF

PHILOLOGY

3.

WHOLE

I.—ANCIENT SECOND

UNDER

107.

SINOPE. PART.

CHAPTER SINOPE

NO.

VI.

PERSIAN

RULE.

Sparta never had a Black S e a fleet or any great ambitions there. It was easy for her, when the A t h e n i a n sea power was broken, to leave Sinope to its fate, and the latter's independence wanes with the waning of Athens. T h e attack b y D a t a m e s 1 in 370 B. c. shows us Sinope as no l o n g e r a G r e e k city fighting against non-Greeks, but rather as an object of strife between some Persians in possession of it and other Persians seeking to gain possession. If a Persian satrap ruled a long distance from the Great K i n g his loyalty to him was likely to be somewhat loose in those days. D a t a m e s was anxious to carve out a little empire for himself in A s i a Minor and went b e y o n d his own satrapy of C a p p a d o c i a into Paphlagonia. A f t e r subduing large portions of it, his ingenuity conceived against Sinope itself a wily scheme which Polyaenus has entered for us in his compilation of strategic operations. 2 B e i n g in need of siege-engines and ships, he tricked the old enmity of the Sinopeans against Sestus into furnishing him with engineers and mechanics to construct them as if for operations against that distant town, but treacherously used them, when completed, for a combined land and sea attack upon S i n o p e itself. A r t a x e r x e s Mnemon, getting information of the siege, 1Cf.

P o l y a e n u s V I I , 21, 2, 5.

17

2

Ibid.

246

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

o r d e r e d D a t a m e s off, a n d he a b a n d o n e d t h e siege and w i t h d r e w his ships b y night. 1 B u t we g e t a g l i m p s e of the perilous position of the city in the statement that t h e S i n o p e a n s d r e s s e d their w o m e n as m e n and led t h e m a b o u t the walls in o r d e r to create a false idea of n u m e r i c a l strength. 2 F r o m all this w e g a t h e r the impression of a strong G r e e k element in the population, but of a Persian political p r e p o n d e r a n c e ; for A r t a x e r x e s I I would s c a r c e l y h a v e o r d e r e d D a t a m e s to raise the s i e g e o f an u n s u b d u e d auton o m o u s G r e e k city. It is probable, h o w e v e r , that D a t a m e s r e n e w e d the a t t a c k a n d s u b s e q u e n t l y entered the city. C e r t a i n l y he s u c c e e d e d in subd u i n g l a r g e r e g i o n s oi P a p h l a g o n i a , i n c l u d i n g Amisus, 3 and at s o m e f a v o r a b l e season m a y afterwards h a v e secured S i n o p e itself, w h i c h he desired for his capital. T h e e v i d e n c e is numismatic. T h e coins with the n y m p h S i n o p e on one side a n d D A T A with the e a g l e and the dolphin o n the other must be a s s i g n e d to D a t a m e s , 4 and S i x ' s 5 a r g u m e n t that these pieces of m o n e y d o not necessarily s h o w that D a t a m e s was at a n y time in p o w e r at S i n o p e , but that they were m a d e for him at the time w h e n his relations with S i n o p e were friendly e n o u g h to s e c u r e m e c h a n i c s a n d engineers can h a r d l y h a v e m u c h f o r c e ; for s u c h a personal c o i n a g e implies p o s s e s s i o n of personal a u t h o r i t y and ambition, and a n y a p p e a r a n c e of these qualities w o u l d h a v e b e e n v e r y carefully a v o i d e d b y the wily Persian just at that time. The simpler and, as I think, the truer v i e w of these coins and t h o s e of O r o n t o b a t e s , V a r a r a n e s , A r i a r a t h e s , A b d s a s a n a n d others 6 is 1 Beloch, Griechische Geschichte II, p. 185 is in error when, referring to this attack, he says "Sinope fiel nach tapferem Widerstande in Datames' H a n d " ; cf. also p. 186, n. I " Über die Einnahme durch Datames cf. Polyaen. V I I , 21, 2, 5 ; Aeneas 40,4". Others as Meyer op. cit. V, 964 appear to make the same mistake, but it is definitely stated in Polyaenus that Datames gave up the siege, and the language of Aeneas implies that Sinope was not captured. Cf. Judeich, Kleinasiatische Studien, p. 193 f.

Aeneas 40, 4. Cf. Polyaen. V I I 21, 1 ; Ps. Arist. Oecon. I I 1350 b ; cf. also Meyer op. cit., V , 964 and Nepos, Dat. 2-3. 4 C f . Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Münzen, p. 6, pi. I, 5; Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 26, pi. II, 7 ; 1895, p . 1 6 9 ; Head, Historia Numorum, p. 434; Brit. Mus. Cat. of Greek Coins, Pontus. 5 Num. Chron. 1885, p. 25. 6 Cf. Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 26 f.; 1895, p. 169; Babelon, Perses Achemenides, p. L X X X f.; Head, Num. Chron. 1892, 253; Macdonald, Greek Coins in the Hunterian Collection, I I 236; cf. also Head, Hist. Num. and Brit. Mus. Cat. of Greek Coins. 2

3

ANCIENT

SINOPE.

247

that t h e y indicate Persian officials actually in p o w e r at Sinope. 1 D a t a m e s died in 362. W e must then a s s i g n his acquisition of p o w e r in S i n o p e , if he did acquire it, to s o m e time b e t w e e n this date and his interrupted s i e g e in 370. S i n o p e ' s isolated position k e e p s its internal condition from b e i n g w h o l l y clear to u s e x c e p t at such times as s o m e g r e a t p o w e r , b e i n g at its zenith, b e c o m e s so important as to d r a w the w h o l e ancient w o r l d into its light. O n e of these e p o c h s was in t h e time of P e r i c l e s ; that of A l e x a n d e r w a s another. Appian® tells us that A l e x a n d e r on his great eastward m a r c h incidentally r e s t o r e d to A m i s u s b y edict its f r e e d o m and a u t o n o m y , and D r o y s e n 3 surmises that the other G r e e k cities on the Pontus a s k e d him for a similar s e r v i c e , b u t that their remoteness m a d e him unwilling to deviate so far from the line of his l a r g e r m o v e m e n t , or to suffer the d e l a y n e c e s s a r y to d e t a c h i n g t r o o p s for t h e p u r p o s e . T h i s w o u l d indicate that the G r e e k s of S i n o p e were r e a d y at any time for an uprising against Persian authority. But this is not quite in a c c o r d a n c e with the clear inference, to be d r a w n from the definite details of A l e x a n d e r ' s m e e t i n g with the e m b a s s y from S i n o p e . A m o n g the M a r d i , at the i m m e n s e distance of 1500 miles from their o w n c i t y , these S i n o p e a n G r e e k s h a d c o m e to the Persian court. T h e y c a m e to m e e t D a r i u s and m e t A l e x a n d e r . T h e great M a c e d o n i a n did not put them under g u a r d as he did t h e L a c e d a e m o n i a n e n v o y s to D a r i u s . H e told them that, b e i n g subjects of Persia, t h e y h a d d o n e r i g h t in s e n d i n g a m b a s s a d o r s to its court. H e released them on the further a n d e x p r e s s g r o u n d that they h a d not j o i n e d in the G r e e k l e a g u e against himself. 4 T h i s incident reveals at least five facts. First, it s h o w s the importance of the G r e e k element in S i n o p e , for these a m b a s s a d o r s w e r e not Persians, but G r e e k s . S e c o n d l y , it s h o w s that the S i n o p e a n G r e e k s w e r e l o y a l e n o u g h to D a r i u s to send a n e m b a s s y to h i m . T h i r d , it s h o w s that their a c c e p t a n c e o f Persian a u t h o r i t y was not sullen but rather willing, l o y a l , a n d c o o p e r a t i v e . F o u r t h , the contrast of A l e x a n d e r ' s treatment o f 1 Cf. Reinach, Trois Royaumes de l'Asie Mineure, p. 10, whose language seems to imply a similar view. Cf. also Reinach-Gotz, op. cit., p. 21. Abdsasan is right. Head, Six, Num. Chron. 1885, and others give Abdemon. But in Num. Chron. 1893, p. 7, Six gives also Abdsasan. 2 Appian, Mithr. 8, 83. 3 Hellenismus I 1, 247. He cites the case of Heraclea; cf. Memnon (Phot. 223, 40, c. 4). 4 Cf. Arrian, Anabasis, I I I 24, 4; Curtius, Hist. Alex. V I 5, 6.

248

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

t h e m with his treatment of the L a c e d a e m o n i a n s s h o w s that t h e y h a d h a d no active part in the alliance of the other G r e e k s against him. A n d fifth, it s h o w s that t h e y w e r e so isolated from the affairs of the A e g e a n G r e e k s as to be practically neutral, so that A l e x a n d e r c o u l d afford to consider them, a l t h o u g h e n v o y s to Persia, as friends of his o w n cause. T h e vicissitudes of S i n o p e u n d e r the d i v i d e d rule of t h e D i a d o c h i cannot be k n o w n . 1 N o t u n l i k e l y a n a r c h y alternated with o r d e r ; for at the c l o s e of this p e r i o d w e find the tyrant S c y d r o t h e m i s in p o w e r . T h e n a m e has a barbarian, p e r h a p s a P a p h l a g o n i a n , s o u n d and T a c i t u s g i v e s him the title of k i n g , w h i c h is in fact m o r e a c c u r a t e l y descriptive than tyrant. Y e t on the occasion of the mission of P t o l e m y to obtain the statue of S e r a p i s he calls an a s s e m b l y of the p e o p l e , w h o feel free to o p p o s e his plans, a n d t h e r e is no s u g g e s t i o n of any use o f troops or o t h e r force to put them d o w n . W e m a y infer from all this a v a g u e g e n e r a l theoretic subjection to the D i a d o c h i , but a practical a u t o n o m y with c o n s i d e r a b l e d e m o c r a t i c liberty and a p p e a l to public assemblies. 2

CHAPTER

VII.

S I N O P E AND T H E P O N T I C K I N G S .

T h e practical a u t o n o m y o f S i n o p e was o n e of the results of that division a m o n g the successors of A l e x a n d e r w h i c h m a d e their E m p i r e fall b a c k from its p r e v i o u s limits. G r o u n d was thus cleared for the rise of the Pontic k i n g d o m . A n d w e must now s e e in the third c e n t u r y a d e s c e n t of these barbarians upon the S i n o p e a n civilization. T h e m o v e m e n t , t h o u g h it is on a smaller scale, s u g g e s t s the barbarian inroads of the M i d d l e A g e s . There is the s a m e final o u t w a r d defeat and the same victorious inward a n d p e r m a n e n t invasion of the m i n d s and t h o u g h t s of the c o n q u e r o r s b y the civilizing and o r g a n i z i n g g e n i u s of the c o n q u e r e d . T h e tradition that w h e n M i t h r a d a t e s , the s u b s e q u e n t founder of the Pontic k i n g d o m , was s e r v i n g with A n t i g o n u s , the ruler of the S y r i a n k i n g d o m , the latter d r e a m e d that he s o w e d g o l d in a field a n d that M i t h r a d a t e s ran a w a y with the harvest, sufficiently 1 D i o d . X V I I I 3 tells us that Paphlagonia was given to Eumenes, but nothing is said with regard to Sinope itself. 2 Cf. Tac. Hist. I V 83, 84.

248

AMERICAN

JOURNAL

OF

PHILOLOGY.

t h e m with his treatment of the L a c e d a e m o n i a n s s h o w s that t h e y h a d h a d no active part in the alliance of the other G r e e k s against him. A n d fifth, it s h o w s that t h e y w e r e so isolated from the affairs of the A e g e a n G r e e k s as to be practically neutral, so that A l e x a n d e r c o u l d afford to consider them, a l t h o u g h e n v o y s to Persia, as friends of his o w n cause. T h e vicissitudes of S i n o p e u n d e r the d i v i d e d rule of t h e D i a d o c h i cannot be k n o w n . 1 N o t u n l i k e l y a n a r c h y alternated with o r d e r ; for at the c l o s e of this p e r i o d w e find the tyrant S c y d r o t h e m i s in p o w e r . T h e n a m e has a barbarian, p e r h a p s a P a p h l a g o n i a n , s o u n d and T a c i t u s g i v e s him the title of k i n g , w h i c h is in fact m o r e a c c u r a t e l y descriptive than tyrant. Y e t on the occasion of the mission of P t o l e m y to obtain the statue of S e r a p i s he calls an a s s e m b l y of the p e o p l e , w h o feel free to o p p o s e his plans, a n d t h e r e is no s u g g e s t i o n of any use o f troops or o t h e r force to put them d o w n . W e m a y infer from all this a v a g u e g e n e r a l theoretic subjection to the D i a d o c h i , but a practical a u t o n o m y with c o n s i d e r a b l e d e m o c r a t i c liberty and a p p e a l to public assemblies. 2

CHAPTER

VII.

S I N O P E AND T H E P O N T I C K I N G S .

T h e practical a u t o n o m y o f S i n o p e was o n e of the results of that division a m o n g the successors of A l e x a n d e r w h i c h m a d e their E m p i r e fall b a c k from its p r e v i o u s limits. G r o u n d was thus cleared for the rise of the Pontic k i n g d o m . A n d w e must now s e e in the third c e n t u r y a d e s c e n t of these barbarians upon the S i n o p e a n civilization. T h e m o v e m e n t , t h o u g h it is on a smaller scale, s u g g e s t s the barbarian inroads of the M i d d l e A g e s . There is the s a m e final o u t w a r d defeat and the same victorious inward a n d p e r m a n e n t invasion of the m i n d s and t h o u g h t s of the c o n q u e r o r s b y the civilizing and o r g a n i z i n g g e n i u s of the c o n q u e r e d . T h e tradition that w h e n M i t h r a d a t e s , the s u b s e q u e n t founder of the Pontic k i n g d o m , was s e r v i n g with A n t i g o n u s , the ruler of the S y r i a n k i n g d o m , the latter d r e a m e d that he s o w e d g o l d in a field a n d that M i t h r a d a t e s ran a w a y with the harvest, sufficiently 1 D i o d . X V I I I 3 tells us that Paphlagonia was given to Eumenes, but nothing is said with regard to Sinope itself. 2 Cf. Tac. Hist. I V 83, 84.

ANCIENT

SI NOPE.

249

s u g g e s t s the y o u n g man's rapid a n d ambitious a p p r o p r i a t i o n of k n o w l e d g e and p o w e r w h i c h b r o u g h t him u n d e r suspicion a n d l e d t o his flight into C a p p a d o c i a , w h e r e he m a d e a realm for h i m s e l f a n d ruled o v e r it a n d e v e n as far as the eastward coast o f the E u x i n e . 1 W e s t w a r d , h o w e v e r , the mountain r a m p a r t b e h i n d S i n o p e a g a i n s e c u r e d its i m m u n i t y from direct a t t a c k until the unsuccessful a t t e m p t of M i t h r a d a t e s I I in 220 B. C.2 T h e intervening e p o c h s h o w s the Hellenic civilization of S i n o p e in c l o s e relations with the rest of G r e e c e . Significant in this c o n n e c t i o n are the coins w h i c h the S i n o p e a n s struck o f the A t t i c s t a n d a r d of w e i g h t a n d fineness and b e a r i n g a h e a d of A t h e n a c l o s e l y c o n f o r m e d to the A t t i c type. 3 S u c h u n i f o r m i t y in m o n e y c l e a r l y indicates intimate c o m m e r c i a l intercourse. T h e silver coins o f the S e l e u c i d k i n g s of S y r i a i also circulated at S i n o p e b e t w e e n about the m i d d l e of the third c e n t u r y and 190. These t w o silver c o i n a g e s in successive circulation at S i n o p e testify to her continuous f r e e d o m from the d o m i n a t i o n o f the Pontic k i n g s , w h o s e fiat b r o n z e m o n e y of the same t y p e as that in other Pontic villages 6 w a s i m m e d i a t e l y forced u p o n S i n o p e as t h e sole m e d i u m of e x c h a n g e w h e n P h a r n a c e s finally t o o k the t o w n in 183 B. C. T o the numismatic e v i d e n c e I a m g l a d to b e able to a d d that a m o n g the inscriptions w h i c h D r . W i l h e l m has c o p i e d and studied there is o n e of this p e r i o d from H i s t i a e a in E u b o e a . T h e inscription is l o n g a n d m u c h mutilated, b u t clearly states that the H i s t i a e a n s e x t e n d e d t o a m b a s s a d o r s from S i n o p e the p r i v i l e g e s of p r o x e n y and g r a n t e d aa no. 13*

'HpnxXfi'Sijf 2(kw7tîÛî, writer of epigrams; cf. Anth. Pal. V I I , 281, 392» 465'Hpîvos, TrpeaßevTrjs K a i t r a p o s , KTjàfpcbv rîjç Tto\cajst ibid. pp. 309, 310. K Î T T O S Aiovvalov 2ikoK\ijs Aij/*ijTpiov Sivamevr, grave-stone, I. G. II, 3, 3353. 2o0ooSplas UvOayyeXov hvamevs, 3354SwTrjpis 2nopov

Smaneas,

(C. I. A.) II, 3, 3355.

g r a v e - S t o n e , I . G . ( C . I . A . ) I I , 3,

övyarrjp NtKO/irjSov

Tevöpas evfioXapovs, Kepapevs, Am. J. Tiß. "ApaKTOs, ibid. p. 324, no. 67.

'An-io^fW ywrj, I- G.

Arch. 1. C. p. 296, no. 4.

Tt^o-i'XeoJs, tyrant; cf. A . J . P. X X V I I , pp. 151-2. Tifiodeos 2iva>iT(is, Epicurean philosopher, Strabo X I I , 546. iLfiav 'S.ivaneis, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) 11,3, 3356. Tt~\pojptosy vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p, 298, no. 8. QalbpiOV 'Epp-aiov SivajriW dvyarrjp, grave-Stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) I l l , 2, 2913. üapvaKTjs •iapväKuv Zivamtvs, died abroad, epigram, Kaibel, op. cit. 252. «fetXijTiW 'S.ivairevs, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) I l l , 2, 2914. &r'ifiios 'Avricpov, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 319, no. 54. •¡>i\fi[[pou], StycDirevr, d e d i c a t o r t o S e r a p i s , i b i d . p . 3 3 1 , no. 84. r iiXiinrot), Sivamevi, vpi^evos o f C l e i t o r , A t h e n . M i t t .

VI

( 1 8 8 1 ) , p. 3 0 3 a n d B e i l a g e 2. JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY.

DAVID M.

ROBINSON.

1 S i n c e this article was paged, I have received copies of three more unpublished inscriptions on grave-stones found last A u g u s t on the isthmus of Sinope. T h e s e I hope to publish in the near future. T h e y marked the graves of 'Ioi/Uof KaX7r£i/c(5f(?), vavK^pof ; of Mavr/s, the name also of D i o g e n e s ' s l a v e (cf. p. 2 6 1 , n. 6 ) ; and of Nap/cifftrof.