Ancinet Sinope

0
"
Ξ
=
ο
c
ο
Ε
uw
=
>
ἘΞ
ω
01566950
c
Ww
2
2
=)
Robinson, David Moore

Ancient Sinope
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2008 with funding from
Microsoft Corporation
htto://www.archive.org/details/ancientsinopedisOOrobiuoft
The University of Chicago
FOUNDED BY JOHN Ὁ. ROCKEFELLER
.
ANCIENT SINOPE
A DISSERTATION
SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS

AND LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE
OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(DEPARTMENT OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE)
BY
DAVID M. ROBINSON
The University of Chicago
FOUNDED BY JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER
ANCIENT SINOPE
A DISSERTATION
SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS

AND LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE
OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(DEPARTMENT OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE)
BY
DAVID M. ROBINSON
}
1906
=r eae. . a.
-
: , tiie
i L
CORRIGENDA.
Page 130, 1. 3 of the notes. For ‘ belonged’ read ‘ belonged’.
‘< 139, note 2,1. 8. For‘ N.’ read - M.’
“ 146,n. 5 and ἢ. 148, π. 2. Before ‘ Eudocia’ read ‘ Ps.’
“ 276,1.13. For 343 read 313.
« 299, 1. 5; p. 300, ll. 21, 28. For ἀστύνομος read ἀστυνόμος.
“301, 1.3. For Ἡρακλείδης read Ἡρακλείδης.
‘303, 1. 3 of transcription ; 1. 2 from foot; p. 304, 1.2. For ναζυδαμήνῳ
read να[ζυδα]μηνῷ.
Page 303, 1.11. For ᾿Απολαυστὸς read ᾿Απόλαυστος.
« 304, 1. 3. For Εὐρυδάμηνος read εὑὐρυδαμηνός.
“ 304, 1. 2 from foot. For ‘Povdeivy read ἹῬουφεῖνα.
“ 305, 1.6 of facsimile. The second letter should be N.
‘© 373, 1.10. For Χορηγιώνος read Xopyyiwvoc.
“ 315, No. 45 and p. 327. For ®povyic read Φροῦγις.
** 316, last line. Omit serftence beginning ‘Strabo’, etc.
“317, No. 50. For Πακάτος read Ilaxaroc.
“319, No. 54. For Φιλησ[ίω read Φιλησ[ίῳ.
“319, No. 55. For Avovvovio read Διονύσοιο.
* 319, No. 56. For Xaipic read Xaipic.
“© 320,1. 15 from foot. For ᾿Αμφιλόχω read ᾿Αμφιλόχῳ.
“323. Omit the last half of the first sentence after the inscription.
“« 323. At end add “In ‘The Siege of Sinope’, a tragedy by Mrs.
Brooke, acted in London in 1781 and based on the Italian Opera of ‘ Phar-
naces’, Act. V, scene 4 f. is at the temple of Themis in Sinope”’.
Page 325, No. 70 and p. 326, No. 71. For mapagaiorov read παρὰ Φαύστου.
“327, No. 73. Transcribe L. Licin|nius Fr(u)|gi|h(ic) s(itus). Cf.
Ρ- 274. ;
Page 328, at end of first inscription. For ‘ Cae’ read [M]JA€. For the
restoration of this inscription (No. 75) and the correction of next to last line,
ΕἾ 75. 150. 2.12.
Page 328, No. 76. For line 5 ef. p. 139, n. 2. In place of the second M
read N.
Page 329, Nos. 77 and 78. For my corrected transcription cf. my article
in Am. J. Arch. X (1906), No. 4 “ Mr. Van Buren’s Notes on Inscriptions from
Sinope.” In 1. 4 of the facsimile of No. 77 read IX for N. In 1. 4 of No. 78
read Proc. A. Sinope M. P.andatend AB. In 1. 3 for R. read P. and in ll. 5,6
read cujrante Ael. Casino A | tiano, v(iro) p(erfectissimo) pr(aeside) p(ro-
vinciae) P(onti).
Page 329. No. 79 will be published in A. J. Ῥ, XXVII, 4. For ‘Emperor
Casinus’ read ‘ Praeses Casinus’.
Page 331, 1.3. For Σαραπίδ[ι read Σαράπιδ[ι.
“« «No, 86. For Kaio¢g read Κάιος, for Kaiov Kaiov.
“332, No. 96. The correct reference to Wilhelm will be found on
p. 249, note 6.
es ser πὶ aed tig a
a 5 pga ae 4
᾿ς pe ΤΩΝ a <a ou A ae Te Ke nid
Bao: 7 ν᾿. ἽΝ ΤΠ i᾿γεΟΕ "ὉὍΝ ee
or Ad i at ἊΣ
ον eu
“ ω ἔςoct os a He
ἡ
a 4 Ἴ Υ sae
7‘Te a of i ae
ἜΣ ΕΟ
ἜΡΙΝ hi,ayrite
PyὯΝ ᾿ ᾿ bid
7
: ant ᾿ ~~ 7
ae ss Ae ν μον eS ae lO ey
; 7
San STa τὺ
"
oe
> "
PaO Oo
᾿ ν ᾿
“1 ᾿
Ἂ ᾿ 4
ὮΝ ΠΥ νὼ
aha", ee ae Wie tat) ae en,

ΟΕ ἐδ i ρῶν, ee aΔῈΝ
=e, ᾿ ΠΡ τ eee we “πὸ δ εν ΝΕ a ἢ ὋΣ ᾿ aya. ᾿
πο
ΟΝ , νol.
SelἪ β 130 a
oe
okie Laat ΓΝ = A
ὸ 1 Oped
of ΠΗ Ty a) ae.τὰν a Neeol
r os
a
" ris,
aa This ir ἀρ σιντὴν,
Ve
4 ᾿ ve) 7 iy bas Oe ᾿
, 47
oll
<4 < ans 7oe. ae n a)
Ε a
we nit Me a ie, δι ΒΒ ὧν τῶν
ta At
ΠΥ ig ον Ἢ » ieνον ἢ μι. "Ν
᾿
Σ ΟΣἫΝ ey ᾿
he “re
tae ΒΕ.“
bot Bs slicein τ ΠΟ ἢMs Wi ᾿ ἄς πω "ᾧ
ΕἾΝ Ὡς μεν Fa
Ἢ: iw at:ve ἊΣ Se : a5 ᾿ peat δι τσ ὦ “ΠῚ io A
a 7” oF ; ἊΣ oe x See ΎΡᾺ
Wet
Somes } Tea
᾿ ahRoὙ oes δ ye oahe
era ον Sone
meal alοὐ
eet Wya. ΤᾺ. EN
Oe ὍΣ, τ oid
Ν
πιὰ oF νι.
Toγὼ Oeay a Ne τ,& ra hires ΠΑrat oe nee
=4 ᾿
eg
Cant
Ἢ ἴ ᾽ν al
oe ig? > Nat d oe Ν νὰ ἢ
mae
_
ἢ
4
oat Bf ha) Pes ἘΥ ΑΝ e.ἜΝ
“
1) oe pave civ, “ane:
a ᾿ Ε᾿ mae oe. ies
Sea
= tha Pes.) ateis
ay
é pe ΤῊ aieSee hice a ΧΑBA iBΕΝ, τὰ
a oeie Me ea WireΜΠ)revit ee pvt i Εν ᾿
othe ‘iyἊΣ ον 4
tn
raeLy ors Νὰ,
ria ORE te ὯΝ ie en Ν
υ
Bee pea ἢ γ eer.
ΠΝ
ΤῊΝ ΑΝ ' a ἐδ] ΝΟ " ah Ae,

of
mg:poet Sai et OS ee14
ΠΟΥ
ae
ἢτος: ἜΝ πεςΡΣ Ἢ
ge
ω τὴν at "ἢ mayen
ὩΣae el oeer eae eemackay
ΕΝ
ἀν ΛΝ Rieter
i.
OTἊΣΠΑΝῚ
ΤΣ= aa ἐξ Me J
ἐν n a: eng pt os 3 ψ
tm a
;soit oe peaks
mal or: Bes
᾿ FY 2
peteὧν na eee poe
᾿ ar, piv at:=

ἕν eye τὴ
‘|, “ "
ἸΣΘΟΝ Χο
va - at
? “Hid
i:
hey wi
a
ae
ooik
ὰἊΣ
Re
Ὗver ΜΕ
7,
Lf ἊΨ, “ ar ee Li τς ὶ Ὅν ἐς ᾿ς by i’
ἢ
᾿
iaioa:5 "
ae τλῆ οὖ " Th a
wees ὌΝ ,
Ea 4 Ue “ye
᾿ ὌΝἪ ah di ba ; ΝᾺ
si ὮΝies
we wpas. aἩ oe 2 xf AM)
i ᾿ yake Υ ν {7i.ἢ ων t. ὃ
ie cei:oh, mtaai -
% Ne ἈΜῊΝ “ee
Δ gina
᾿ ᾿χ
si) ἌΝ:ie ee
amath: am) ;
: Bs a “ ἫΝ
γὼ 4
aw ΤᾺ Υ
ae ike
ise eae
{Reprinted from AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY, Vol. XXVII, No. 2.]
I.—ANCIENT SINOPE.
FIRST PART.
INTRODUCTORY NOTE.
No 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
Busolt of Gottingen encouraged me to make the attempt. After much prelim-
inary 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 Kénigreichs Pontos, and Reinach-
Gotz, Mithradates Eupator. The ancient sources and other modern works
will be found cited throughout the paper.
126 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
CHAPTER TL
THE SITE.
The configuration of the country round Sinope, its geographic

position, its products, the security of its double harbor, and the
impregnability of its rocky promontory, have conspired to write
its name in the annals of war, of commerce, of popular and
governmental independence and development, and of biography,
literature, and art.
The northern coast of Asia Minor is like a central mounting
billow with a trough on each side. The 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
wave is the middle point of the shore. The crest, however,
is somewhat flattened, and just at its eastern edge, before it
begins to fall away, it throws out a bold promontory.’ From
the eastern corner of this main promontory” juts out in a north-
easterly direction the smaller peninsula on whose low landward
neck Sinope is built.’
The peninsula itself is a promontory,* about 600 feet in height,
with precipitous sides and a broad level table-land at the top.
Its outline somewhat resembles that ofa boar’s head with the
?Called Syrias in Marcian, Epitome Peripli Maris Interni. 9; but Lepte
in Arrian, Peripl. 21; and Syrias Acrulepte in the anonymous Periplus
Ponti Euxini 20. Cf. Miller, Geographi Graeci Minores I, pp. 571, 387, 406.
The modern Turkish name is Indjé-burun.
3 Geographi Minores, pl. XVIII.
3 Cf. Strabo XII 545 ἵδρυται yap ἐπὶ αὐχένι Χερρονήσου; cf. Polybius IV 56,
οἰκεῖται δ᾽ ἐπί τινος Χερρονήσου προτεινούσης εἰς τὸ πέλαγος, ἧς τὸν μὲν αὐχένα τὸν
συνάπτοντα πρὸς τὴν ᾿Ασίαν, ὃς ἐστιν οὐ πλεῖον δυοῖν σταδίων, ἡ πόλις ἐπικειμένη
διακλείει κυρίως. τὸ δὲ λοιπὸν τῆς Χερρονήσου πρόκειται μὲν εἰς τὸ πέλαγος, ἔστι
δ᾽ ἐπίπεδον καὶ πανευέφοδον ἐπὶ τὴν πόλιν, κύκλῳ δ᾽ ἐκ θαλάττης ἀπότομον καὶ
δυσπροσόρμιστον καὶ παντελῶς ὀλίγας ἔχον προσβάσεις; Herod. IV 12; Eust.
Commentarii 248, 773, 970; Plut. Luc. 23.
+ Several travellers and geographers mention this promontory, which to-day
is called Boz-tepé (gray hill), a name which is also applied to the Greek
quarter of Sinope, just outside the walls of the Turkish village, itself called
Sinub or Sinob or Sinab; and also to the eastern cape where the modern
lighthouse stands: cf. Meletios, Geographie p. 482; Ritter, Kleinasien J,
pp. 784,794; Hommaire de Hell, Voyage en Turquie et en Perse. II, p. 344 ff;
Rottiers, Itineraire de Tiflis a Constantinople, p. 275; Taitbout de Marigny,
ANCIENT SINOPE. 127
highest point at the snout in the extreme east. Itis about two miles
in length and one mile in width at the widest part. It appears to
have been of volcanic formation and, judging by the cretaceous
over the volcanic deposits, to have been at one time below the
level of the sea and afterwards heaved up slowly into its present
position. The rock is evidently of volcanic nature and is of the
same quality with those in eastern Anatolia. In the north central
part of the nearly level plateau there still exists a lake which is
at present very shallow, but which probably is an old crater.'
Such geologic formation, after decomposition by the weather,
has considerable fertility.” At the time of my visit cows, horses,
and goats were pasturing upon the short grass. There were also
abundant wild flowers and shrubbery, including juniper and laurel.
Under the conditions of an ancient siege the produce of the entire
area might support a considerable army even when all other
supplies were cut off. Water also would be abundant. A short
distance down the slope by which the promontory descends to
the town,’ there is a cave in which there is an underground stream
of ‘cool, drinkable water.‘ Both the inflow and the outflow are
secure from pollution. An underground passage-way leads from
the cave down to the town. Its date is later than the Greek or
Roman period, but the idea of reaching the hidden water in this
protected way might have suggested itself at any time. There
are springs also on the plateau itself, one of which in the
Pilote de la Mer Noire et de la Mer d’Azov, p. 159; Tozer, Turkish Armenia
and Eastern Asia Minor, p. 7. A view of Sinope and Boz-tepé from the
southeast is given in Tournefort, Relation d’un Voyage du Levant II.
lettre 17, p. 203; Reclus, Nouvelle Géographie Universelle IX, p. 566
(with map and photograph of Sinope); Jaubert, Voyage en Arménie et en
Perse, p. 394; cf. also page 128, note 4 of this paper and Mannert, Geographie
G35, 15
1 This is the opinion of Brauns, who wrote a good article on the geology
of the peninsula of Sinope, entitled Beobachtungen in Sinope, in the
Zeitschrift fiir allgemeine Erdkunde N. F. 11 (1857), p. 28 ff. He gives a good
geological map.
2 Cf. Strabo XII 545, ἄνωθεν μέντοι καὶ ὑπὲρ τῆς πόλεως εὑγεών ἐστι TO ἔδαφος
καὶ ἀγροκηπίοις κεκόσμηται πυκνοῖς, πολὺ δὲ μᾶλλον τὰ προάστεια.
ὅ.ΟΓ, Polybius ΙΝ 56.
* The cave to-day is called ‘ Byzana’ by the Greeks, because the water seems
to flow from breasts. A religious ceremony is performed there in the spring-
time. Perhaps Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, p. 312, refers to this cave.
5 The modern town gets its water from the peninsula; cf. Hamilton, op.
cit. p. 312.
southeasterly portion sends its stream out horizontally from a

hillock into a sarcophagus of Roman date bearing a Greek
inscription.’
While the general outline of the promontory may be compared
to a boar’s head, its steep bristling sides have caused it to be likened
to a petrified hedgehog.’ The action of the sea against rocks of
varying hardness, such as trachyte, black volcanic breccia, red
chalky scaglia, also varying greatly in density, shelly limestone,
and sandstone,’ has left a mass of sharp projections around the
coast. Down at the water-line, and below the surface, the sea has
hollowed out caves and water-filled holes, the ‘‘Choenicides”’ cf
Strabo.*- Upon such a shore® it was almost impossible to effect
a landing, and still more difficult to reach the easily defended
plateau above.
Descending in a southwesterly direction along the axis of the
promontory, we cross through the low neck, narrowed by the
double harbor to about a quarter of a mile® in width and ascend
to the mainland, a region of extraordinary beauty and fertility.
Southward the foreground shows scattered areas of wheat, barley,
corn, rice, and other grain interspersed with vineyards and
orchards of fruit-trees of the widest variety. There are apples,
pears, figs, peaches, plums, medlars, apricots and cherries. The
last are natives of this southern shore and are believed to have
been carried from this place of origin to Italy and thence to other
lands. Cerasus, a colony of Sinope on this same shore,’ got its
name from the abundance of its cherry-trees.° The olive tree
ΤΟΥ Am. J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 315, no. 44.

* Cf. Reinach-Gétz, Mithradates Eupator p. 352 and the epithet ἐχινώδης
applied to the rock in Strabo XII 545. Cf. also Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 14.
3 Cf. the article of Brauns, p. 28 ff. and Hamilton, op. cit. p. 312 for the
geology of the promontory of Sinope. ‘
4Cf. Strabo XII 545. καὶ κύκλῳ δ᾽ ἡ Χερρόνησος προβέβληται ῥαχιώδεις ἀκτὰς
ἐχούσας καὶ κοιλάδας τινὰς ὡσανεὶ βόθρους πετρίνους οὗς καλοῦσι χοινικίδας. πλη-
ροῦνται δὲ οὗτοι μετεωρισθείσης τῆς θαλάττης, ὡς καὶ διὰ τοῦτο οὐκ εὐπρόσιτον τὸ
χωρίον καὶ διὰ τὸ πᾶσαν τὴν τῆς πέτρας ἐπιφάνειαν ἐχινώδη καὶ ἀνεπίβατον εἶναι
γυμνῷ ποδί, For the Choenicides, cf. Hamilton, op. cit. p. 310 and Ritter,
Kleinasien I, p. 776.
> Orph. Argonautika 757, τρηχύν τ᾽ αγκῶνα Σινώπης ; Polyb. ΙΝ 56, 5 and note
4 on this page.
®Cf. Polyb. ibid., ov πλεῖον δυοῖν σταδίων. 7 Xen. Anab. V 3, 2.
8Athen. II 51a; Plin. N. H. XV 30; Ammianus XXII 8, 16; Steph. 5.
Κέρασος Eust. 11. II 853; Hehn, Kulturpflanzen und Hausthiere,> pp. 327,
345 f.
ANCIENT SINOPE, 129
was anciently more abundant than now,’ and Sinope is its west-
ward limit on the Pontus.’ I saw but few groves,’ whereas Strabo
seems to think of the whole region as covered withthem. Further
away in the background and to the eastward and westward are
noble forests of oak, pine, walnut, chestnut, maple, elm, beech,
box, cypress, and other trees, with an undergrowth of shrubs.
There are also many of the latter out inthe open. In the distance
is the purple, waving outline of the mountain rampart, which
separated the old Greek civilization of the coast from the barbarian
people of the interior,* and, in fact, performs a similar function to-
day. The mountainous district, however, must not be thought
of as rugged and unfertile; for, on the contrary, it is like the
maritime plain, richly productive, the mountain slopes and valleys
especially possessing a high degree of fertility.
The exact area of the territory of the state of Sinope’ cannot
now be determined. It was much less than that of the province
of Paphlagonia to which it belonged,° whether the eastern limit of
that province be drawn at the Thermodon, the Iris, or the town
of Amisus;’ for Strabo indicates a separation between the district
LCf. Strabo XII 546, ἅπασα δὲ καὶ ἐλαιόφυτός ἐστιν ἡ μικρὸν ὑπὲρ τῆς θαλάττης
γεωργουμένη and 73, τὰ δὲ τῆς Σινώπης προάστεια καὶ τῆς ᾿Αμισοῦ καὶ τῆς Φαναροίας
τὸ πλέον ἐλαιόφυτά ἐστι; Cf, Eust. Il. II 853.
*Xen. Anab. VI 4, 6, and Jaubert op. cit. p. 395 “ Plus prés de Constan-
tinople l’humidité du sol et l’inconstance des vents empéchent que cet arbre
délicat ne prospére”., Perhaps the southwestern wind that blew from Phrygia,
called βερεκυντίας was the cause of the growth of the olives at Sinope; cf.
Aristotle 973 a, 24; frag. 238, 1521 b, 17.
3 On Boz-tepé just outside the Greek quarter as you go toward the Quarantine
Station, Nesi Kieui, there is to-day a grove of olives, and there are some on the
mainland, but the tree is not in favor among the present inhabitants.
“Cf Ciendeskepa2) 4
>The name of the city itself is Σινώπη. L.and 5. give a short v, but cf. Hero-
dian, περὶ ᾿᾽Ορθογραφίας ed. Lentz II 580, 26. Xenophon says also ἡ Σινωπέων
πόλις. The name of the Sinopean district is in Xen. (Anab. V 6, 11) ἡ Σινωπέων
χώρα, in Strabo (XII 546, 561 and elsewhere) ἡ Σενωπῖτις or Σινωπίς, Steph.
Byz. gives also Σινωπίς and Σινωπικόν, The male inhabitant is Swwrete,
Herodian, ed. Lentz II 891, 27, or Σινωπίτης (cf. Dion. Orb. Descr. 255 and
Herodian, ed. Lentz I 77; 11 869, 37), in Latin Sinopensis or Sinopeus; the
female inhabitant Σενωπίς (cf. Herodian II 891, 1). The adjective is Σινωπικός
(Steph. Byz.). Σινωπαῖος occurs in C. I. G. 7074.
®Xen. Anab. VI 1, 15. Σινωπεῖς δὲ οἰκοῦσι μὲν Ev τῇ Παφλαγονικῇ. So also
Strabo XII 544 f., Diodorus XIV 31, Pliny N. H. VI 2 and Arrian, Peripl.
20; 21.
Ἰ Herodotus I 72 and Strabo XII 1, 1; 3,9, 25 seem to make the Halys
the eastern boundary, but Scylax and Marcian, the river Evarchus. In Xeno-
of Amisus and the district of Sinope at the river Halys,’ still

further to the west. On the other hand it is equally clear that
Sinope did not extend its power westward to the Bithynian
border.’ Nature erected a southern limit in the Olgassys moun-
tains.’ Perhaps we should not be far from the truth if we bounded
the ancient Sinopean district by the Pontus on the north, the Halys
on the east, the Olgassys mountains on the south, and an indefinite
line on the west drawn at about the 32nd parallel.*
Returning to the town on the neck of the promontory we find
upon the site of the ancient city an inner walled enclosure with
a Turkish castle and prison, probably the site of the Sinopean
acropolis, and outside the wall northeastward, toward the pro-
montory, the Greek and Christian quarter.” Unhappily there are
few certain data for reconstructing the ancient city. Looking
down from the height above I tried in vain to make a mental plan
which would include the stoas, gymnasium, and market-place,°
the Palace of Mithradates,’ and the Temple of Serapis. There
are no ruins or evenany mounded outlines for points of departure.
However, we have the two walls across the isthmus which have
been built and razed and rebuilt in the same positions and out of
the most heterogeneous materials arranged in the most disorderly
manner. There are foundation stones from buildings; columns
of Roman date whose unfluted sides indicate their previous
position in stoas ;* pieces of sculpture scattered at random, including
a lion built into the top of the wall, in one case, while a similar
one lies upon the ground;° and pieces of architraves and of cor-
phon’s time the Thermodon was the boundary. Plin. VI 2 makes Amisus a
city in Paphlagonia. Ptolemy makesa mistake when he(V 4 and VIII 17, 26)
includes Sinope in Galatia. It belonged later to the Roman province of
Bithynia and Pontus, but never to Galatia (cf. on this Cumont, Revue des
Etudes Grecques XVI (1903), pp. 25-27.
‘Cf. Strabo, XII 546, 560; Arrian Peripl. 22; Anonym. Peripl. 25.
?Strabo, XII 546. 3 Strabo, XII 561, 562.
*Armene, fifty stadia to the west, was part of Sinope: cf. ‘Apujvyv τῆς
Σινώπης, Xen. Anab. VI 1,15; Strabo, XII 545. But the district of Sinope
certainly extended still further west.
5 Cf. the geographers and travellers quoted above.
® Cf. Strabo XII 546 αὐτὴ δ᾽ ἡ πόλις τετείχισται καλῶς, Kai γυμνασίῳ δὲ καὶ
ἀγορᾷ καὶ στοαῖς κεκόσμηται λαμπρῶς.
7 What the inhabitants call “the Palace of Mithradates”,a large structure in
Boz-tepé with three vaulted chambers and a Byzantine chapel in its midst, is
of later date than Mithradates. Hamilton, op. cit. p. 312 refers to it.
8 Perhaps they come from the stoas mentioned by Strabo.
*Cf. Hommaire de Hell, op. cit. p. 346; Hamilton, op. cit., p. 309.
ANCIENT SITNOPE. 131
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.'
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 Turks.
The main factor in the making of Sinope, as in the making of
Cyzicus, has been its double harbor? 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* 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. The deeper water and the lighter draft vessels of
the ancient day, however, made it accessible for commercial pur-
poses.‘ 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.
GHAPTER, IF
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 οι.
2 Cf. Strabo XII 545, ἑκατέρωθεν dé τοῦ ἰσθμοῦ λιμένες.
3 Taitbout de Marigny, op. cit. p. 159; Hamilton, op. cit. p. 310.
*In his epitome of the journey of Menippus, Marcian of Heraclea 9 speaks
of an island lying off Sinope, κεῖται δὲ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄκρων νησίον, ὃ καλεῖται Σκόπελος.
Ἔχει δὲ διέκπλουν τοῖς ἐλάττοσι πλοίοις, τὰ δὲ μείζονα περιπλεῖν δεῖ καὶ οὕτω
καταίρειν εἰς τὴν πόλιν. Ἑἰσὶ δὲ τοῖς περιπλέουσι τὴν νῆσον πλείους ἄλλοι στάδιοι μ'
(Miller, Geog. Gr. Min. 1,0. 571). An anonymous Byzantine writer(Miiller, p.
407) of the fifth century uses the same words, doubtless derived from the same
source, which is of about the time of Augustus. But the only island existing
to-day at Sinope is a small low-lying rock off the promontory, mentioned by
Taitbout de Marigny, op. cit, p. 159, the détour of which could not possibly
of their literature shows that such was the actual fact. Strabo*
and Diodorus’ thought it the most notable and important of all
cities on the southern shore of the Pontus. Mela” joins it with
Amisus as one of the two most famous cities of the whole regicn.
Valerius Flaccus* calls it “great and wealthy”, Eutropius’°
“most noble” and Stephanus of Byzantium® and Eustathius’
“most eminent”. Among later writers, Ammianus® and
Phrantzes® class it among important cities of antiquity.
More significant testimonies, however, are watermarked rather
than expressed. Plautus’ Curculio (v. 443) sneers at the /eno
that he, all by himself, within the last twenty days has conquered
half of all the nations, including Persians, Paphlagonians,
Sinopeans, Arabs, Carians, Cretans, etc. But while his whole
long list contains the names of so many nationalities the only
city important enough to be included in the sneer is Sinope.
increase the necessary sailing distance by more than a small fraction of 40
stadia. Moreover, the water between this island and the mainland is very
deep, and even the largest modern steamer sails boldly through the passage.
The solution of the difficulty seems to lie in the word νησίον. A peninsula
was a land island, (χερσόνησος, Halb-insel). The village at the Quarantine
station on the promontory to-day is called Nesi Kieui (the island village).
The modern Greeks as a matter of fact at present speak of the whole pro-
montory as νησί. The confusion between the little island and the promontory
has extended to modern writers. Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 15 says, ‘‘ante hunc
portum insula quaedam sita erat, Σκόπελος vocata. Naviculis per fretum
navigare licebat, quod'inter illam est et terram continentem, XL vel Lstadiorum
iter; magnae naves onerariae Scopelum circumnavigabant per altum mare,
LXXX vel LXXXX stadium iter”. And even Ritter (Kleinasien, p. 794),
following the authority of a Black Sea pilot (Taitbout de Marigny), connects
the little island with the Scopelus of Marcian, while in an earlier passage (p.
776) he has made the same word of the same passage refer to the promontory.
The increased sailing distance of vessels going round the promontory cor-
responds quite exactly to the 40 stadia of the writer whom Marcian epitomizes,
(Sengebusch wrongly gives 80 or go stadia.) And διέκπλουν evidently refers
not to sailing between the little island and the mainland, but simply to the
passage from the town out through the northerly harbor into the open sea. The
true interpretation then, of the original writer whom Marcian epitomizes, is
that vessels of light draft could sail directly out from or directly into the
northerly harbor, while those drawing more water must circumnavigate the
promontory for an extra distance of 40 stadia in order to reach the other
harbor.
1 Cf. XII 545, ἀξιολογωτάτη τῶν ταύτῃ πόλεων.
2XIV 31 μέγιστον εἶχεν ἀξίωμα τῶν περὶ τοὺς τόπους.
Ὁ ΠΟΥ 4V 109. 5V1 8. 6 (ἢ. 5. ν. Σινώπη.
7 Eust. Commentarii 772: ΞΟΠ 8. 16: 9155: ΠΝ 19:
ANCIENT SINOPE. 133
Sinope was also the name of a prominent courtesan at Athens

who either took or received the name Sinope in the same fashion
as other harlots were called Megara and Cyrene.’ Nor was she
a mere individual, or subordinate character, but rather the mistress
of an establishment of some size, the inmates of which included
the celebrated Pythionike.* The woman also figured in Athenian
comedies,’ and even caused a verbal coinage, oworifew,* which
meant “to be debauched or dissolute”. She seems moreover to
have been a marked figure in Athenian life fora long enough
period to be called at last Abydos, διὰ τὸ γραῦς etvat.?
Sinope, however, has much more reputable associations than
these. The scholiast, on the Odyssey XII 257, mentions one
Sinopos as a companion of Odysseus who was engulfed by the
whirlpool at Scylla and Charybdis.° One of the seven editions
of Homer was the Sinopic.’ One of the cities whose constitution
Aristotle thought worthy of a treatise was Sinope.® One of the
deliberative orations ascribed, however inaccurately, to Isocrates
was the Swords.” The earliest Greek writers’® celebrated the
mythology of this town.
We may note in passing that Sinope was considered to be the
headquarters of the Cimmerians,” that its fortifications were
'Sinope was a harlot also in Aegina and Corinth, cf. Athenaeus XIII 595 a;
Suidas, 5. ‘Eraipa: Κορίνθιαι; Schol. Arist. Plut. 149; Dem. XXII 610; LIX
1385; Athenaeus XIII 594 a. For fact that harlots as slaves were often
named after their birth-place, cf. Bechtel, Die Attischen Frauennamen, p. 57 f.
(Bechtel omits the names of the harlots Sinope and Cyrene. For Cyrene cf.
Arist. Thesm. 98; Frogs 1328.
“Cf. Athenaeus XIII 595 a; Droysen, Hellenismus, 1 2, p. 239.
8 Cf. Athenaeus VIII 339 a; XIII 558 b, 567 f, 586 a.
4Cf. Apostol. XV 50 in Leutsch-Schneidewin, Paroemiographi Graeci, II, p,
641; and Suidas, Photius, Hesychius, s. v. σινωπίζειν.
5Cf. Athenaeus XIII 558 b, 586 a; cf. Photius, Suidas, Harpocration s. v.
Σινώπη.
§Cf. Eustathius 1721, 9; Wilamowitz, Phil. Unters VII 167; Maass,
(Hermes, XXIII 618) identifies him, rather improbably with Sinon who played
an important part in the taking of Troy in the Little Iliad. Cf. Virgil
Aeneid II, 29 and also Paus. X 27, 3.
’Schol. Il. I 298, 423, 435; 11 258; V 461. Wolf’s Prolegomena, p. 175}
Pauly, Realencyclop. 5. v. Homerus; Ludwich, Aristarchs Hom Text-kritik,
ey pare
δ Schol. Ap. Rhod. II 948; Arist. fr.540, 1567b23. 9% Cf. Anonym. Vit. Isoc.
10 Eumelus of Corinth and Hecataeus of Miletus. Cf. Schol. Ap. Rhod. II
946; Eudocia 5. v. Σινώπη and Arist. 1. c.
'"' Her. ΙΝ 12; Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums I, p. 453.
134 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOG\.
renowned,! and that its fleet dominated the Pontus and even sailed
away for contests in other seas.’
As a last testimony to the consequence of Sinope, and in order
to put it in immediate connection with our discussion of the
commerce of the port in the next chapter, we here note that
Sinope was a frequent point from which to reckon distances and
for elucidating geographical relations.’ Although Pteria is not
near Sinope, as was formerly supposed, but was considerably
south of it, as Ramsay shows,‘ it was nevertheless spoken of as
κατὰ Σινώπην, Or as we might say, on the same parallel with Sinope.
And again, although the narrowest part of Asia Minor was on
the line from the gulf of Issus to Amisus, the superior importance
of Sinope led Strabo to draw his line of shortest transit to that
city and not to Amisus.® It was from Sinope that Carusa was
distant 150 stadia,’ Amisus goo stadia,° Phasis 2 or 3 days’ journey®
and, in the westerly direction, Armene 40 stadia,’” Cape Carambis
700 stadia,” further away Cytorus 1312 stadia,” Amastris 1450
stadia,” Heraclea 2000 stadia‘ and the Hieron of Jupiter Urius at
the Thracian Bosporus, 3500 stadia.” Many places are said to be
situated “near Sinope ”’, though some of them as a matter of fact
are not very near it. Abonutichos” is ἄγχι Σινώπης. The Halys™
and Thermodon™ are ποταμοὶ περὶ Σινώπην. Heraclea” was a πόλις
περὶ Σινώπην. Corocondame”™ was πλησίον Σινώπης. Strabo calls the
1 Priscianus 751. 2Strabo XII 545.
* Sinope was the Greenwich of antiquity, cf. Bury, History of Greece, p. 236.
4 Ramsay, Hist. Geogr. of Asia Minor, p. 33, identifies Pteria with Boghaz-
kieui. Cf.also Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans 1’Antiquité, IV 598 ff,
Steph. Byz. Πτερία, πόλις Σινώπης.
5 Her. I 76, ἡ δὲ Πτερίη ἐστὶ τῆς χώρας ταύτης τὸ ἰσχυρότατον κατὰ Σινώπην
πόλιν τὴν ἐν ἙἘὐξείνῳ Πόντῳ μάλιστά κῃ κειμένη. There is no reason for conclud-
ing from this passage that Herodotus visited Sinope, as Matzat, Hermes VI
416, does. Herodotus certainly visited Phasis and probably got his informa-
tion from Sinopean merchants there.
6 Strabo XVI 677. 1Cf. Arrian Peripl. Pont, Eux. 21.
δ Cf. Strabo XII 547; according to Pliny N. H. VI 2, 1040 stadia (130 miles).
°Cf. Strabo XI 498.
Cf. Arrian Peripl. 21; Anonym. Peripl. 21; Marcian Epitome Peripli
Menippei 9.
1! Marcian op. cit. 9; Strabo XII 546; Schol. Ap. Rhod. IT 945.
12 Pliny N. H. VI 2 says 164 miles. 18 Marcian, op. cit. 9.
14 Strabo XII 546; Marcian op. cit. 9 gives 2040.
9 Strabo ibid.; Marcian ibid., gives 3570.
16 Lucian Alexander 11. 17 Schol. Apoll. Rh. 2, 366.
8 -Tzetz. Lyc.i647. 19 Ibid. 695. 20 Steph. 5. v.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 135
southern shore of the Pontus τὴν Σινώπης παραλίαν, and Eratosthenes

speaks of Παφλαγονίας καὶ τῶν περὶ Σινώπην." Livy® locates Gordium
as a point equally distant from the Hellespont, the Cilician shore,
and the sea at Sinope. Cicero’s oratory* finds the remotest
enemies of Rome with whom Verres had communicated at the
Spanish Dianium on the west and at Sinope on the east. Isocrates®
marks the limits of the Greek population in Asia Minor by
Cnidus and Cilicia in the west and Sinope in the east. Pliny°
puts it in the fifth segment of the world, while Avienus’ in the
fifth century A. D. places it near the confines of the earth.
CHAPTER III.
THE COMMERCE OF SINOPE.
The ship’s prow often found upon the obverse of coins of

Sinope is an indication of its commercial instinct.° In fact the
distances given at the close of the last chapter are in the main
commercial, and lead us on to discuss its trade relations which
were of the highest importance. To the list of places already
mentioned we must add the islands of the Aegean, including
Rhodes’ and Delos, to which votive offerings were shipped,” Attica,
Greece in general,’ and even Egypt.” Its coastwise trade covered
1Strabo I 46; II 74. 2 In Strabo II 134. SX XXVIII 18) 12:
4 Or. against Verres, 2,1, 34. For the idea cf. also Tusc. Disp. 1, 20.
5 Philip, 120; Panegyricus, 162. SUN ΗΝ Wall 216:
7 Descriptio Orbis Terrae, 951 ff (775) = Miiller, op. cit. II, 185 ‘‘ propter
confinia terrae”’.
8 Numismatic Chronicle, 1885, pp. 38, 48, pl. II, 15, 19; Zeitschrift f. Num.
XX p. 273; Head, Historia Numorum, p. 434.
9 Rhodes aided Sinope in its successful resistance of Mithradates II in 220
B. C., probably because of commercial friendship; cf. Polyb. IV 56. For
Sinopeans in Rhodes cf. I. G. XII 1. (6. I. G. Ins. I.) 465 ; 466, 467.
ΤΟΥΣ ῬΑ, 1112:
11 Sinope’s trade relations with the Greek world were so important that it
adopted the Aeginetan standard for the drachma, Six, Num. Chron. 1885,p. 41-
12 The story of the carrying of the image of Serapis to Egypt, told in Tac.
Hist. IV 83, 84 and elsewhere shows this. Clemens, Orat. Adhort. p. 20, says
Ptolemy relieved Sinope from famine by a supply of corn. Furthermore we
know of a Sinopean Demetrius who was a landowner in Egypt, cf. Amherst
Papyri II, no. XLII, LV.
the entire shore from the Thracian Bosporus’ to Phasis” and in-
cluded Heraclea, Cytorus,’ Carambis, Ionopolis, Amisus, Cotyora,
Cerasus, Trapezus,* and many other ports. But I am convinced
that the volume of direct trade between the northern shore ofthe
Pontus and Sinope has been underrated. The fact is that ancient
navigators could cross the Pontus just at this point without losing
sight of land for more than a few hours on ordinary days, and on
very clear days without losing sight of it at all. Writers like
Reinach® assume that the statement of Strabo,° that both the
promontory Carambis on the Asiatic side and the promontory
Criumetopon at the end of the Crimea could be seen from the
middle of the sea, is an instance of the underestimating of
maritime distances by the ancients. There is no warrant for
this criticism, for both promontories can be seen to-day from the
middle of the sea.’ This great advantage was available to the
ancient navigator neither in the wider westward nor in the east-
ward third of the sea, but only in the central one. To follow the
coast multiplied the distance greatly. Hence, when the route was
once established the north shore ships would strike boldly out for
the central headlands of Asia Minor and for Sinope, the commer-
cial metropolis of the region. Their goods would then be
transhipped in Sinopean bottoms to points further east or west,
or would proceed in the same vessels without shifting of cargoes.
The statement of Pausanias® that the first fruits of the Hyper-
boreans of the opposite territories were carried by the Sinopeans
to Delos indicates a general commercial route directly across the
Pontus. It is well known that coins of Sinope stamped with the
device of the eagle grasping the dolphin have been discovered
on the northern shore at Olbia,*® and I found at Sinope handles
of amphoras with the same inscriptions as those found in such
‘A son of Polydorus, a Sinopean, dwelt in Tomi; cf. Am. Jour. Arch. IX
(1905), p. 331.
> Polyb. IV 56 says Sinope was situated on the right of the Pontus παρὰ Φᾶσιν.
3 Strabo XII 544 τὸ δὲ Kitwpov ἐμπόριον ἣν ποτε Σινωπέων.
+ Cotyora, Cerasus and Trapezus were colonies of Sinope; cf. Xen. Anab.V.
> Reinach-G6tz, op. cit. p. 56.
§ Strabo VII 309, cf. also 11 124; Pliny N. H. IV 86.
1 The officers of Black Sea steamers volunteered this information to me.
Spouses tea.
9 Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 34; Streuber, Sinope (Basel, 1855) p. 60. The same
device, borrowed from Sinope probably, occurs also on coins of Olbia itself.
Ci. Hirst; ihe (Cults of Olbia Hess Χ ΧΤΤΡ. 265.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 137
large quantities at Olbia.1_ Becker’ assumes from the large number

excavated there that it was the centre of their manufacture, but
an equally large number might perhaps be found by excavations
at Sinope and elsewhere. In any case those that I found still
further emphasize the commercial relations of Sinope with Olbia
and the northern shore. An additional evidence of close connection
between the two shores is found in the similarity of personal
names.’ Even north shore inscriptions in some cases show the
names of Sinopean citizens.‘ The general impression made by
all this evidence is that vessels proceeded from both east and west
coastwise to the central section of the sea where it was so much
narrower than elsewhere and then turned directly across it, and
that a commercial lane was in this way established for the great
volume of Black Sea trade, which would thus pass in and out at
the fine harbor of Sinope.°
A point from which commercial articles were thus distributed
by sea was likewise a point toward whicn converged the various
roads by which the products to be exported were brought in and
along which at least a certain amount of goods went back to the
interior districts. The great caravan routes from India,° and the
1Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 294-300.

2Ν. Jahrbiicher fiir kl. Phil. Suppl. X, pp. 67, 108 f.
3Cf. the Prosopographia Sinopensis (to be published in the second part of
this paper) with index IV 3 in Latyschev, Inscriptiones Antiquae Orae Sept.
Pont. Eux.
4Cf. p. 136, note 1; Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca 252, from Panticapaeum.
Cf. Latyschev op. cit. 1 185, II 298, 299; cf. C. I. L. 1Π1 783 ;Diodorus XX 25
and Strabo XI 496 also showa close relation between Sinope and the Cimmerian
Bosporus; cf. Reinach-Gétz, op. cit. pp. 56, 225. The Sinopean historian
Theopompus also was acquainted with the region; cf. Phlegon, Mirab. c. 19.
Sengebusch op. cit. p. 34, says ‘alio titulo Olbiano mentio facta est Theogiti
Sinopensium astynomi’. The inscription is on a vase handle C. I. G, 2085 b
Θεογείτου ἀστυνόμου ; Σινωπίων. Both Sengebusch and the C. I. G.are in error, for
Σινωπίων is the name of the vase-maker; cf. an identical inscription in Becker,
Mélanges Gréco-romaines I 494, no. 16. For Σινωπίων as a proper name cf.
also N. Jahrbiicher f. kl. Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 472, 38, 39; Suppl. V, p. 483, 29;
Suppl. X, p. 31, 4; p. 35,17; Ρ- 224, 2. In Streuber op. cit. p. ΟἹ the name of
the Sinopean citizen Theocles is wrongly given as Theogeitos.
> This would explain why in Herod. II 34 Sinope is said to be situated oppo-
site the mouth of the Ister. A merchant boat going from the Ister to Phasis
or vice versa would avoid the open sea as much as possible and sail by way
of Sinope.
8 If goods were not brought all the way to Sinope by land, they were taken
to Phasis and shipped to Sinope; cf. Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit. p, 216.
far east followed such rivers as the Euphrates in the south and
theAraxes' in the north, but as they approached the heart of
Asia Minor, the problem was to get the goods through to the
Greek and Roman world. Up to the Roman times there was no
good road from the East through western Asia Minor to the
Aegean. The old Hittite road, afterwards the Persian postal
road, served more as a bond between the different parts of the
Persian Empire than asa means of transporting goods to Greece.
The well-known Ephesus highway was not yet built.” The great
eastern system of roads centering in Persia and the great western
systems centering in Greece and Rome had no good connecting
links at the coast of the Aegean. The solution of the difficulty
was in a water route. The best harbor on the southern shore of
the Black Sea would become the terminal land point of the great
caravans which seem, in sharp contrast to the present, to have
contained few, if any, camels. That harbor was Sinope. To this
port branch roads were built from the great Persian highways.
It is true that Sinope had no good direct connection with the
interior, but its shipping facilities were superior and a coastwise
road connected it further east with a more favorable point of
departure for the interior. Sinope’s commerce suffered an inevi-
table decline when the Roman roads were built and perfected to
the great cities of the eastern coast of the Aegean, but in the
earlier times the great Persian net-work of lateral and transverse ὅ
lines of transit in Asia Minor may be considered, so far as through
travel is concerned, as in the main converging upon the double
harbor of Sinope.*
A study of the roads in the more immediate general district
serves to complete our picture of it as an isolated and strategic
point for interior trade connections, having no good landward
approaches along the coast except from Amisus. Hecatonymus,
1 Reinach-Gotz, op. cit. p. 225.

2 Cf, Ramsay, Hist. Geogr. of Asia Minor, p. 28; Strabo XII 540; XIV 663.
3 Such a transverse road was that from the Gulf of Issus to Sinope on which
Pteria was probably situated; cf. Her. 1 72; II 34; but ‘an active man > could
hardly ‘ cover the distance in five days’. Cf. also Livy XXXVIII18; Strabo
XIV 664; Ps. Scylax 102; Ps. Scymnus 921 f; Plin. N. H. VI 7, and cf. Athen.
Mitt. XXII (1897), p. 3, note 3; Reinach-Gitz, op. cit. p. 226. Macan,
Herodotus (bks. IV-VI) App. XIII, p. 293.
4 Cf. a good article on the roads of the Pontus by Munro in the J. H. S.
XXI (190) pp. 52 ff, pl. IV; cf. also Curtius, Griechische Geschichte, ed. 5,
vol. I, pp. 405, 408.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 139
the Sinopean, whom Xenophon’s Ten Thousand met at Cotyora,

warned him that only by going back into the interior and over the
difficult mountain roads could he get around into Sinope.’ His
representations were so convincing that Xenophon had his army
proceed from Cotyora by water. Similar representations no
doubt, at least in part, account for his again taking ship from
Sinope westward.
It is hardly practicable at present to locate the ancient roads
close to Sinope. In exploring the back country I found Roman
mile-stones at a distance of perhaps 25 or 30 miles in a southeasterly
direction from the town, but they were not in situ, nor were others
which I found in other directions.” Nor is it possible to tell how
far the Romans built along the old lines or in new directions. But
it is probably safe to say ina general way that there were numerous
highways good and bad reaching into the interior. Certainly
there must have been bridges at certain points upon the Halys.°
It is already evident that the goods shipped in vast quantities
at Sinope were the products in part of the immediate locality, in
part of the remoter portions of Asia Minor, and in part came
from the far east. These last, including jewelry, ivory, bronzes
and oriental luxuries in general,* do not especially concern us
here, and in attempting to classify Sinope’s exports we shall con-
fine ourselves to articles from its immediate neighborhood and
from those interior regions of Asia Minor which found their most
immediate natural outlet at Sinope. Neglecting numerous minor
items such as nuts,’ hides,’ grain (small in quantity as compared
1Xen. Anab. V 6, 3 ff.; B.C. H.1gor, p. 41 ff.; Reinach-G6tz, op. cit. p.

232; Ainsworth, Travels in Asia Minor, vol. I, p. 92.
2Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 328f, nos. 75-79. The beginning of no. 75
can be restored by means of J. H. 5. XX (1900), p. 163, no. 7 and C. I. L.
III, 6895. Read Imp. Caes. C. Aur. Val.] Diocl[etiano P(io) F(elici) Invicto
Aug. et Imp. Caes. M. Aur. Val.] M[aximia]n[o. The latter part of no. 75
refers to the three sons of Constantine the Great. So in next to last line read
ΕἸ. Co(n)sta(nti) nob(ilissimis) C(aesaribus). In no. 76, in which we have a
case of praes(es) used in a technical sense before Diocletian, we should
expect in 1. 5 filio eius et N. Aur. Num(eriano). But the inscription is care-
lessly cut.
3 E.g. the bridge which was regarded as a wonder by the Greeks, Ramsay,
op. cit. p. 31; Herod. I 75.
4 Perrot et Chipiez, Histoire de l’Art dans l’Antiquité, V, p. 198.
5 Athen. II 54 d; Hehn, Kultur-pflanzen und Hausthiere, 6th ed., p. 380.
6 Cf, Dem. XXXIV 10; Strabo, XI 493.
140 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY
with the product of the northern shore), honey, wax,’ stones for
gems’ etc. we mention:
1. Fish. The tunny was most important. Its great spawning
ground was the vast swampy shores of the palus Maeotis. Strabo’
says that, while still exceedingly small, the shoals made their way
along the coast in an easterly and southerly direction. By the time
they reached Trapezus and Pharnacia they were of considerable
size and the first catch was at these points. But those that got
round to Sinope, were much larger and the hauls were immense,
though neither fish nor catch was so large as at Byzantium.
These fish were salted or pickled and sent to Greece, where they
were a staple article of diet for the common people.* There seems
to have been an extraordinary difference in price between Greece
and Rome, for, however common and cheap they were in Greece,
Diodorus quotes the price of Pontic fish at Rome as 400 drachmae
for a small jarful.2 There is a vast wealth of other edible fish
in the Pontus,® such as sturgeon, mackerel, turbot, mullet’ and
dolphin. But ancient literature seems to mention only the last
two as caught at Sinope and indeed the last only for its oil and
the medicinal value of its liver.
2. Timber. The country around Sinope was covered in ancient
times, as it is to-day, with a splendid growth of timber which was
utilized for two main purposes, ship-building and the manufacture
of furniture... The ship-timber of the Euxine was celebrated
among the ancients.’ If Horace’s ship of state were to have the
utmost staunchness, it must be Pontica pinus, Silvae filia nobtlis
1Polyb. IV 38; Aristotle, Περὶ θαυμασίων ἀκουσμάτων, 831, c. XVII.
2 Strabo XII 540: Plin. XXXVI112,45; XXXVII37. For other such articles
of export which came mostly from the interior, cf. Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 19 ff.
and in general on the exports of Sinope cf. Sengebusch, op. cit. p. 16 ff. and
Streuber, op. cit. p. 50; Reinach-Gitz, op. cit. p. 227 f.
3 Strabo VII 320. Cf. also Arist. Hist. An. 598 f. 1X 13; Plin. N.H. IX 15
47-52; Strabo XII 545 πηλαμυδεῖα θαυμαστά, words still used in Sinope; XII
549; AelianIV 9; IX 59; XV 3,5 and 10; Ritter, op. cit. p. 794 ff.; Meyer,
Geschichte des Altertums, II 345.
4Cf. Polyb. IV 38; cf. Hermann, Lehrbuch der Gr. Privataltertiimer, ed. 3,
p. 227, notes 1 and 2.
5 Diod. XXXVII 3, 5: Reinach-Gotz, op. cit. p. 223 wrongly says 300
drachmae.
6 For a list of the fish in the Pontus, cf. Pliny, N. H. XXXII11 ff.
7 Cf, Athenaeus III 118 c; VII 307 Ὁ for Sinopic mullets (κεστρεῖς).
8 Strabo XII 546; Theophr. Histor. Plant. IV 5, 5.
9 Catullus IV 9-13; Verg. Georg. II 437.
ANCIENT SINOPE. I4I
(Od. 1 14, 11). Great quantities of ship-timber doubtless found

their way from the northern shore of the Pontus to Greece by
way of Panticapaeum, but there must have been a long period
when, as Strabo indicates, the forests of the neighborhood of
Sinope sent out through its harbor a large quota of the same
material. These heavy exports, however, probably were not made
until after the time of Alexander, for according to Thucydides, *
the store-house of ship-timber seems previously to have been in
the much nearer forests of Thrace and Macedonia.
As the oak and pine were used for the construction of vessels,
so the maple and walnut were worked into furniture such as
couches, and tables.” The maple seems to have been held in
peculiarly high estimation, tables made from it being ranked
second to the citrus tables only.’
3. Olive-oil. Although, as we have stated (p. 129), Sinope was
the westward limit of the olive, it nevertheless grew abundantly
in the neighborhood of that town itself,* and the districts east of
it would bring their product thither for export. The exports of
Sinope thus competed with those of the more southern countries,
such as Greece,’ in supplying Cappadocia and the western section
of the southern shore of the Pontus together with the whole
northern coast.°
4. Red Earth or Bole. This substance was, in the main at
least, iron calcined or oxidized into a soft moist clay. The
ancients gave it many names, such as μίλτος and minium.’ The
common appellation, Σινωπίς, shows that Sinope was regarded as the
1 Thuc. LV 108; cf. also Hermann, op. cit. p. 436, note 3.
2 Cf. Strabo l.c.; Eust. Com. 773; Pliny, N. H. XII 31; Theophr. Histor.
Plant, 1113; 13/1) 7, '2;-V 3,3; 7,6 etc.; Hor. Sati 2,8, 10; Martial 14, 90;
Bliimner, Gewerb]. Thatigk. 33, 44, 46, 70, 80. Cf. Ransom, Couches and
Beds of the Greeks, Etruscans, and Romans, pp. 39,55. The same wood is
used to-day by the Turks for the same purpose.
SPliny, N.H. ΧΥΤ 26; Cic. Verr. IV τη.
4Cf. Strabo XII 545, 546; II 71, 73; Eust. Il. II 853.
> Polyb. IV 38.
6 Melitene alone in Cappadocia had the olive; cf. Strabo XII 535. Forthe
lack of the olive on the north shore of the Pontus cf. Strabo II 73, 74; for the
climate cf. Herod. IV 28; Theophr. De Causis Plant. V 12,11.
7Strictly speaking, minium is to be distinguished, for it contains oxide of
lead. But μίλτος and minium are often confounded, as by Strabo XII 540; cf.
also Pliny N. H. XXXIII 36 f.
10
main place of export.’ It is found near Sinope, and in Cappadocia

its general abundance stains the Halys so deeply that the Turkish
name for that stream is Kizil Irmak (red river).
This earthy substance existed, of course, in various other
localities of the ancient world. Its importance as an article of
trade and commerce is evident from the Athenian monopoly of
the Cean product,’ from the sealed packages used for the
Lemnian article,* and from the care with which different grades
of it are enumerated.* The most important were the Cean, the
Lemnian, and the Sinopean. Theophrastus’ considers the Cean
product better than the others. Pliny® ranks the Lemnian and
the Sinopean highest, whereas Strabo’ marks the quality of the
latter as finest, and an interesting papyrus® gives convincing details
of its superiority in weight, rich liver color, moisture, and freedom
from grit. The importance of this homely article of Sinopean
commerce is indicated by its numerous and heterogeneous uses.”
Its colors varied, but some were intense enough to furnish a kind
of redink. It was used as a mineral paint and as an ingredient
in other paints, being applied to houses, ships, and wood-work
generally. Its more artistic employments were in decorating
furniture, wood-carving, terra-cotta figurines and even statues.
It was no unimportant part of the ancient materia medica, being
applied externally asa kind of mud-bath and even taken inter-
nally for various diseases specifically listed by Pliny. An architect
who desired to use the best material would stipulate in his speci-
1Strabo, 1. c. ὠνομάσθη δὲ Σινωπικὴ διότι κατάγειν ἐκεῖσε εἰώθεσαν οἱ ἔμποροι;
Theophr. De Lapidibus 52, κατάγεται εἰς Σινώπην; Pliny Ν. Η. XXXV 13.
Sinopis inventa primum in Ponto est; inde nomen a Sinope urbe.
21, Goll (CLA 11), 546: 3 Pliny, N. H. XXXV 14.
4Pliny, N.H.XXXV13. °5DeLap.52. L.c. ‘Strabo, XII 540.
8 Leemans, Papyri Graeci Lugduni-Batavi X 15,11,12,15. Ibid. X 311 tells
how Sinofis can be mixed with gold, half and half, to double the amount of
the latter.
9 Pliny, N. H. XXXV 12, 13, 17, 24, 32; Vitruv. VII 7; Diosc. V 111; Cels.
De Medicina V 6,6; VI 6, 19; Hesychius 5. μίλτος ;Eust. Com. 1166; Boeckh,
Die Staatshaushaltung der Athener 115 p. 315 f.; Bliimner, Technologie und
Terminologie IV, p. 480 f. For ships cf. μιλτσπάρῃοι νῆες in Homer; Pliny,
N. H. XX XIII 38; Herod. III 58; Hermann, op. cit. p. 489, note 8. For the
use of μίλτος for terra-cottas cf. Lucian Lexiph. 22; B.C. H. XIV (1890), p.
503, n. 3; Monuments Piot IV (1898), p. 214; for statues Paus. 11 2,6; Plut.
Quaest. Roman., 98, p. 287 b; Xen. Oecon. 10,5; Hermann, op. cit. p. 201
n.3. Ladies used it for painting their faces; Guhl und Koner, Leben der
Griechen und Rémer, p. 316.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 143
fications that certain structural lines be drawn with a pigment

made of clean oil and Sinopic earth. I noted at Corinth crosses
made with Szzopzs to indicate the position for columns’ not now
in situ, and lines drawn with it to indicate how far blocks of stone
were to overlap the stones in the course below.® In excavations
at Miletus the separated drums of columns showed that this sub-
stance mixed with oil had been used as a cement.
5. Iron and Steel. Ata general distance of about two hundred
miles east of Sinope the coast range of mountains draws very
near the sea. The whole district is rich in copper, iron, and, in
ancient times, even silver*. Here the Sinopeans, doubtless
attracted by the rich deposits, founded a prosperous colony.
Part of the ore was evidently worked into iron and steel imple-
ments at Cotyora. But another part was doubtless shipped to
the mother-city Sinope to the manufacturers there ; for Sinopic
steel® was equally celebrated with the Chalybian, Lydian, and
Laconian; and it was made into carpenters’ tools, whereas the
Spartan was used for files, augers, dies and stone-cutters’ tools,
and the Lydian for similar things, including knives and swords.
Hamilton® thinks he has located the ancient mines of the
Chalybians at Unieh. But in any case the steel that passed through
the port of Sinope was of the finest quality.
6. Live Stock. There is abundant evidence that Cappadocia
and Paphlagonia itself nourished great numbers of sheep, goats,
mules, horses and other domestic animals.’ If we put with this
fact the statement of Polybius that live stock was extensively
exported from the Pontus, it becomes evident that shipments of
this kind were large at Sinope. The word Polybius* uses
ΤΙ, G. VII (I. G. Sept. 1), 3073 = Dittenberger Syl.? no. 540, ll. 155-160.
The price was three or three and a half cbols per στατήρ, cf. I, Ὁ. II, 834”,
col. I, 1. 12 (p. 522) and col. II, 1. 48 (p. 526).
? As in the long south stoa (Am. J. Arch. VI 1902), Suppl. p. 19.
3 As in the Greek temple near Pirene, Ibid. pl. XVII, the Greek building
with a round end (not yet published), the Old Spring, the round basis above
the spring (ibid. pl. VII), and elsewhere. So Sinopis was used in Greek buil-
dings as well as in Roman buildings of the Republic. It was also found used
for the same purposes in fourth century buildings at Epidaurus and Lesbos.
* Strabo XII 549; Virg. Georg. I 58; Apoll. Rhod. II 1005 f.
°Step. Byz. 5. v. Λακεδαίμων, Schol. 1]. XIII 218; Eustathius 294, 5 on Il.
II 582; Bliimner, Gewerbl. Thatigk. p. 41; Miiller, Frag. Hist. Graec. II 442,
9, frag. from Daimachus. For artisans etc. at Sinope cf. Polyaen. VII 21, 2;
Diog. Laer. VI 20.
Op. cits, pp 244, 257. 7Strabo XI 525; Eust. Com. 970. ΙΝ 58.
(θρέμματα) as employed in the classifications of the Greeks,

included slaves (CIG 1709). Lucian (Alex. 9, 15, 17, 45) speaks
of slaves as differing only in form from cattle. The Paphla-
gonian slave is a frequent figure in the comedies of Aristophanes.
The picture of Sinope’s commerce must include its traffic in the
human species ; droves of captive men and women passed down
to its fine harbor and were carried in ships to meet the sneers of
the cultivated comic poets of Athens.
So great a volume of exports implies a certain amount of
imports. Salt came from Olbia’ and from the interior of Asia
Minor’ and wine’ from Greece, objects of art also such as
statues *and vases, and in general such refinements of the west
as well as of the east as the somewhat defective Sinopean culture
would demand.
CHAPTER IV.
THE FOUNDING OF SINOPE.

A city of such impregnability, located in so productive a
region, and at the natural gate-way of so vast a commerce, would
of course be coveted and fought for. It would have its political
vicissitudes, its general culture, and its religious cults. It would
develop its great men. It would weave its name into Greek and
Latin literature and leave its record in figured coins and in
inscriptions on stone. In a word, it would have its history, of
which, in this and several succeeding chapters, we aim to give an
account.
The uncertain figures of Assyrians move in the mist of its
primitive records. There isa Milesian dawn of Greek colonial
light quickly clouded by Cimmerian darkness and then rekindled.
Then come the nearly blank annals of some one hundred and
eighty years on whose last pages the figure of a barbarian tyrant
becomes distinct. The Attic rescue follows and the reinforcement
by Pericles’ six hundred newcolonists. Democratic independence
displaces tyrannic subjection at Sinope. Anon its colonial depend-
encies are disturbed and excited by Xenophon’s Ten Thousand
who have forced their way from the heart of Asia to the sea and
1 Herod. IV 53; Dio Chrysost. XXXVI 437.
*Strabo XII 546, 560, 561 ; Eust. Com. 784. 3 Polyb. IV 38.
* Such as the statue of Autolycus by Sthennis, cf. Plut. Luc. 23.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 145
along its shore. The great cynic matures the fearless powers
which Athens admired, and the comic poets who woke its
laughter, bringing Sinopean culture to its flower in the mother-
land, arise. With Rhodian help its fortifications resist the
engines of Mithradates II, but fall before the sudden onset of
Pharnaces, his son. The power of the Pontic conquerors brings
Sinope to the climax of its political strength under Mithradates
the Great, whose linguistic acquirements were only second to his
great military genius, which baffled the utmost power of Rome
for nearly half a century. Then come the days of the inevitable
Roman yoke, in passing under which Sinope joins the universal
procession. Then the intricate entanglements of the Middle
Ages and finally the present Turkish dominion.
There is no evidence that the early Phoenicians were at Sinope.
The whole main course of the Phoenician commercial empire
took its way westward. Its northern and southern movements
were only short spurs thrown out of the mainrange. Although
there is at present in the north-western portion and outside the
walls by the Turkish Hospital and school, Idadie, and near the
water a quarter of the city called Φοινικίδα, a late local imagination,
thinking of the spot as one to which the Phoenicians would
naturally come, may in a fanciful spirit have given it its name.
Or the name may be due to the palm tree there.
The early foundations of Sinope are probably Assyrian. The
extreme antiquity of that great power is constantly receiving
fresh evidence. The code of Hammurabi is dated ca. 2250 B. C.
and it seems evident that more than a millennium later in about
1100 B. C. the Assyrian power swept westward through Asia
Minor to the Mediterranean. It is incredible that it should not
at more than one point have forced its way through the openings
in the coastwise mountains to the shore of the Pontus. Its kings
have left no monuments along the sea reciting their personal
conquests!, but other evidence of the presence of their subjects
is not wanting. In later times, in the seventh century according
to Noldeke’, the Assyrian power still extended beyond Sinope
1 Gelzer’s argument (Zeitschrift f. ag. Sprache 1874, p. 118 f) that Mat-qui
(shore-village) which occurs in Assyrian inscriptions, refers to Sinope, is
inconclusive, for the word might be intended for almost any coast town in
Asia Minor. On p. 119 he goes far astray when he says qui or kui comes
from the name of the founder, K@voc, transposing the lines in Scymnus to suit
his theory.
2Cf, his article on ’Aocitpioc, Σύριος, Σύρος in Hermes V 443 ff.
and Furtwangler thinks of Sinope, as being at about that time

the mediating agent by which Assyrian elements, such as griffins’
heads and winged human busts on bronze vessels (cf. Olympia
Bd. IV, Die Bronzen) came to Greece.’ Coming down to later
times, we recognize the persistence of its Assyrian origin in
Sinopic coins with Aramaic inscriptions ;? in Avienus’ mention
of a “‘second Syria reaching as far as Sinope” ;* in Tzetzes’ vague
statement that “everybody calls Sinope Assyria” ;* in the legends
that the nymph Sinope was the mother of Syros from whom the
Syrians got their name, and that she was carried off from Assyria;°
in the existence at Sinope even now of a sarcophagus with a
Greek inscription indicating that aman named Syrios was buried
in it;° and in the fact that the promontory mentioned above
(page 126) was called Syrias.
The name Sinope itself evidently antedates Greek settlement,
for mythology and tradition indicate, not the colonizing of an
uninhabited locality, so much as the taking of the place from
previous inhabitants. Strabo’ says that Autolycus took posses-
sion Of (κατέσχε) Sinope, a word whose usage generally indicates
seizure or capture. Plutarch*® says outright that Autolycus took
the town from the Syrians. Apollonius of Rhodes® says that the
Argonauts came tothe Assyrian land where Zeus had established
Sinope, daughter of Asopus, etc. In listing those who in early
times inhabited Sinope, Ps. Scymnus ” speaks of “‘ Sinope, a city
named after one of the Amazons, who dwell near by, which
formerly the native-born" Assyrians inhabited, and afterwards
the Greeks who went against the Amazons, Autolycus and
‘Meyer 5. Kappadokien in Ersch und Griiber, Encyclopadie and in his
Geschichte des Altertums II, p. 225 says there is no monumental evidence.
But Furtwdangler holds there is, cf. Die Antiken Gemmen ITI, p. 68.
* Cf. Six, Numismatic Chronicle, 1885 and 1893, p. 7; cf. also Head, Hist.
Num. and Brit. Mus. Cat.
3 Miiller, Geogr. Min. II, p. 187, vs. 1153.
4 Chiliad. 12, 917 τὴν δὲ Σινώπην σύμπαντες καλοῦσιν ᾿Ασσυρίαν.
5Eust. in Miiller, Geogr. Min. II, pp. 352-353, 8775 f; Eudocia’s ᾿Ιωνιά
DCCCLXII; Diodorus IV 72, 1, 2; Schol. Apoll. Rhod. II 948; Et. Mag.
ς, Σινώπη.
6 Cf. Am, J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 315.
TXITI 545. *Plut, uc. 23:
* Argonautica II 948 ff; cf. also Scholium and Herod. II roa.
Vs. 941-952 (Miiller, Geogr. Min. I, p. 236).
"'T adopt Meineke’s emendation, éyyeveic.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 147
Deileon and Phlogius, Thessalians”’. Scylax’ ina loose way calls

Sinope a place in Assyria. Winckler’s® conjecture that “ Leuco-
syri” did not originally mean white Assyrians, as Strabo® thinks,
but rather incorporates a corruption of “ Lukki”’, the name of
certain Assyrians mentioned in the Tell-El-Amarna tablets, is
unlikely. The Assyrians of the north were probably of a lighter
complexion than those of the south.
The derivation of the name Sinope perhaps goes back to the
Assyrian deity Sin, the moon-god, whose numerical symbol was
thirty, in allusion to the period of the moon, and who was the
patron of brick-making and building. The worship of the moon
along the southern shore of the Pontus was more important than
elsewhere in the Greek world.‘ Assyrians were perpetually
compounding the names of towns and persons with the name ofthe
God Sin, and in view of the powerful early influence of Assyria,
nothing is more likely than that Sinope would be one more example
of such compounds.
If now we recognize the founding of Sinope as Assyrian°® it will
not seem difficult to dispose of the prominent and persistent myth
concerning the nymph Sinope. Greek writers would prefer a
Greek to an Assyrian origin of their colony. Although such an
etymology has not been mentioned before, I venture to connect
the name with σίνομαι, to seize or carry off. This would be the
most natural connection of ‘‘Sinope”’ for those who found the
word already on the ground and were ignorant of or wished to
ignore its Assyrian etymology. On this derivation may have
been built up the manifold forms of the rape of the nymph Sinope.
Hardly anything is constant in the story except the item of seizure.
The God who carries her offissometimes Zeus, sometimes Apollo,
sometimes Poseidon, sometimes the river-God Halys. Her
parents are sometimes Asopus and Metope, sometimes Ares and
1Scylacis Caryandensis Periplus 89 (Miiller, ibid. p.66). Soalso Nicephorus

(Miller, Geogr. Gr. Min. II, p. 464) and Nicolaus Damascenus (Hist. Graeci
Minores ed. Dindorf) p. 32, 7.
2Winckler, Die Thontafeln von Tell-El-Amarna (Schrader, Keilinschrift-
liche Bibliothek Bd. V) 28, 10: Winckler, Die Vélker Vorderasiens (Der Alte
Orient, vol. I), p. 23.
3 XII 544, XVI 737.
4 Cf. Roscher s. v. Luna, especially the worship of Μὴν Φαρνάκου, In one of
the inscriptions I discovered at Sinope Selene is mentioned along with Helios
and Hermes and other deities, cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 323.
5 And this is the opinion of Blau, op.cit., Mévers, Die Phénizier, and others,
though not of most modern scholars.
Aegina or Parnasse. Sometimes she is carried off from Assyria

and sometimes from Boeotia.! Sometimes she deceives her cap-
tor by exacting a blank promise to give her whatever she should
ask and afterwards fills in the blank with her own virginity. Some-
times she has children. But she is always seized and carried off.
And this unfailing feature seems to show the source of all the
stories to be in the already present but misinterpreted name of
the town.’
To this Assyrian town the enterprising Greeks of Miletus,
attracted by the mineral wealth of the eastward shores and led to
the location by the advantages of its harbor, penetrated at a very
early period. The date is difficult to fix, but may perhaps be
approximated in the following fashion. Sinope must have existed
before 756,° for Trapezus, its colony,* was founded in that year.
Eumelus of Corinth, moreover, in writing up the Argonautic
expedition, enriched it with geographical details which included
Sinope by name. There is nothing extant of this work of Eume-
lus, but his mention of the town is cited by the Schol. Apoll. Rhod.
Il 946. NowEumelus wrote in the latter half of the eighth century
B.C. Sinope must therefore have been reached by Greeks
before that time. Thus again we are pointed to some period in
the first half of the eighth century such as Eusebius’ date (II 80 ε
Schone) for Trapezus indicates, at least thirty or thirty-five years
earlier than 756 B. C., 790 or 785 B. C., thus leaving a few years
1Probably because the Minyans, with whom the Argonautic expedition was
associated, dwelt in Boeotia.
2Cf. Plut. Luc, 23; Apoll. Rhod. II 946-967. The scholia to the latter
(Miller, Frag. Hist. Graec. II 161; 348, 2; III 29, 3), give excerpts about the
nymph Sinope from Andron of Halicarnassus, Andron of Teos, Artemidorus,
Eumelus, Aristotle, Hecataeus, and Philostephanus. Cf. also V. Flaccus,
Argon. V 106-120; Dionysius Per. vs. 772-779 (Miller, Geogr. Gr. Min. II
p- 153); scholia to Dion. Per. (Miller, ibid. II, p. 453); Eust. Com. 772-774
(Miiller, ibid. II, p. 351); Nicephorus, Tewypadgia συνοπτική, 782 f. (Miiller, ibid.
II, p. 464); Diodorus IV 72, 1, 2; Ps. Scymni Periegesis, vs. 941 f. (Miller,
ibid. I 236); Avienus, vs. 951 f. (Miiller, ibid. II 185); Et. Mag. 5. v. Σινώπη;
Eudocia’s ᾿Ιωνιά DCCCLXII, περὶ Σινώπης. Sometimes Sinope appears as an
Amazon and the story is told that she drank much and hence was called Σανάπη,
which in the Thracian dialect (which the Amazons spoke) means “drinking
much”. And Sinope is a corruption of Sanape; cf. the above references.
2 Eusebius, Vers. Arm. Ol. 6, 1; Hieronymus, ΟἹ. 6, I.
4Xen. Anab. IV 8, 22.
5Curtius, Gr. Geschichte I,* p. 407, puts the first foundation in 790 B. C.;
Abbott, A History of Greece, I, p. 340 about 770 B. C.; Duncker, Gesch. d.
Altert. 1,5 p. 462, 466; V° 507 and Biirchner, Die Besiedelung der Kiisten des
ANCIENT SINOPE., 149
of prosperity before the Cimmerian inroad in 782 mentioned by

Orosius,! in which probably Habrondas,” its leader, was killed.’
We must assume that Sinope revived after the destroying nomad
tide had swept through in order to account for its founding of
Trapezus in 756. What the fortunes of the Greek contingent
were for the subsequent century and more, we have no means of
knowing. They probably included many vicissitudes connected
with the various incursions of the Cimmerians from the northern
shore,‘ one of which penetrated even to Sardis, surprising and
plundering the town, and another to Magnesia. However, in 635
B. C., there seems to have been an extraordinarily strong and
powerful body of these barbarians driven down by the still stronger
nomad Scythians. This body all but destroyed Sinope,° so that
its reinforcement in 630 or 629, according as we follow Hieronymus
or Eusebius (II 89n Schéne) was looked upon as a second found-
ing, and Sinope, like Cyzicus, was said to have been founded
twice.®
Pontos Euxeinos durch die Milesier, p. 49 and Streuber op. cit. about 785.
Grote, History of Greece II? 191, note 64 considers improbable the foundation
of a Milesian colony at so early a period. Perhaps the first colony was only a
small settlement for trade; cf. Busolt, Gr. Gesch. I, p. 466 and Reinach-Gdtz,
op. cit. p. 18. Beloch, Gr. Gesch., says nothing about the first founding; cf. I,
p. 192-3 forsecond founding. Holm, The History of Greece I, p. 275 and Meyer,
Gesch. des Altert. I 406 and II 285 give both colonies. There is a great deal
of uncertainty about this early period of Greek history and we cannot be sure
of dates; but the evidence, including Scymnus whose source, Demetrius of
Callatia, was good, points to a double founding.
airs
2 The name of the leader is variously given. Habrondas seems more likely
to be correct than Ambron or Abron. Meineke, Step. Byz. (Berlin, 1849),
p- 571 made the suggestion.
3Ps. Scymnus V 947.
4For the Cimmerians cf. Herod. IV 11,12; I 6,15, 16; Strabo, I 1,6; I
2,20; I 3,61; ILI 2,149; XI 494; XIV 648.
5 Herod. IV 12 says φαίνονται δὲ οἱ ἹΚεμμέριοι φεύγοντες ἐς τὴν ’Ασίην τοὺδ
Σκίθας καὶ τὴν Χερσόνησον κτίσαντες, ἐν τῇ νῦν Σινώπη πόλις ᾿Βλλὰς οἴκισται. The
viv does not necessarily mean that no Greek city existed when the Cimmerians
came, as Grote and Busolt loc. cit. think. There may have been a weak
settlement there at the time.
6 The second founding was by Cretines and Cous (cf. Phlegon in Miiller,
Frag. Hist. Graec. III 605, 6; Eust. ad Dionys. Com. 772; and Ps. Scymnus
ν. 949.) Acc. to Ps. Scymnus loc. cit., it took place ἡνίκα ὁ Ἱζεμμερίων κατέδραμε
τὴν ᾿Ασίαν στρατός, that is, in the epoch year of the capture of Sardis (657),
cf. Rohde, Rhein. Mus. XX XIII 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.
The few definite points which we have thus far been able to
deduce with anything like certainty, and the dearth of any records
at all to cover nearly two succeeding centuries, may naturally
occasion scepticism as to there having been any such early found-
ing at all by the Greeks. But the extreme antiquity of the stories
of the Argonauts and of Heracles’ expedition against the Amazons,
both of which have for their scenes the shore of the Black Sea,
and in both of which Autolycus, the recognized founder of Sinope,
and his companions had part,’ joins with the strong tradition we
have been using to assure us that we are dealing with an historic,
even if not with a precisely ascertained, founding of the great
Euxine trading port.
CHAPTER, V;
DaRK AGES AND RENAISSANCE.

Even after Sinope’s refounding in 630 its records for nearly
two centuries are for the most part blank annals. The Lydian
monarchy rose, reached the Halys, and fell. But whether its
broad lines of display and vanity penetrated the mountain passes
and subjected the shore cities is left in doubt.” Pteria taken by
Croesus lay 150 miles to the south and there are no records
of any further northward march. Cyrus broke the Lydian power
about 550 B. C.; but how soon or how decisively the Persian
power subdued the Greek cities of the southern coast of the
Euxine is unwritten. Xerxes’ expedition in 480 B.C. included
1Cf. Pauly-Wissowa, Encyl. II 763 ff. Only Strabo, XII 545, (source per-
haps Eumelus) makes Autolycus a comrade of Jason, Cf. also Apollod. 1, 9,
16, 8. Plut. Luc. 23 says that ‘ Autolycus, son of Deimachus, was on the
expedition of Heracles from Thessaly against the Amazons. When he was
returning with Demoleon and Phlogius he was shipwrecked at Sinope and
took the city away from the Syrians”. Appian Mithr, XII 83 says the same.
Cf. also Ps. Scymnus v. 944 f; Anon Peripl. Pont. Eux. 22. Apollonius of
Rhodes combines the two traditions and (II 948-967) says that the sons of
Deimachus, Deileon, Autolycus and Phlogius, comrades of Heracles, were
picked up by the Argonauts when they came there. V. Flaccus, V 106-120 and
Hyg. Fab. 14 have the same. Phlogius is mentioned in an inscription found
at Sinope, cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 306, no. 3r. On these heroes cf. Roscher’s
Lexicon and Biirchner, op. cit. p. 58 and on the Argonauts in general the
dissertation by Griiger, Die Argonauten-Sage (Breslau, 1889). For Heracles
at Sinope cf. Am, J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 305.
2Cf, Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums I § 487, who thinks not.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 151
among its total of 1200 ships 80 contributed by the Greeks on

the Hellespont and the Pontus.’ It is natural to suppose that
Sinope was represented among the eighty, but there is no
written evidence of such a fact. Some few rude” coins bearing
an eagle and a dolphin and a mere incuse square on the reverse
are archaic enough to represent this obscure period of Sinope’s
story when the great tides of conquest were sweeping to and fro
far south of its mountain fences.
In the fifth century relief expeditions began to be sent to the
Greek cities of the Black Sea which were under tribute to Persia.
Aristides, about 470, did not get so far as Sinope. But later,
probably soon after 444," in the flowering time of Athens, Pericles,
with the design of making a display of Athenian power, and in
order to relieve the Greek cities on the Euxine from oppression and
to stimulate their trade with Attica, led forth an expedition which
reached Sinope. Here he left the efficient Lamachus with thir-
teen ships and assigned him the task of expelling the tyrant
Timesilaus.*. The man® who at Syracuse advised the Athenians to
fight at once seems to have performed his task with characteristic
promptness, and not long afterwards it was voted at Athens that
six hundred volunteer colonists should sail for Sinope to occupy
the houses and lands of the defeated tyrant and his following.
Lamachus can hardly have remained long at Sinope: we find
him in 424 B. C. leading another Black Sea expedition which was
1Diod. XI 3.
? Num. Zeitschrift II, p. 259; Six, Num. Chron. 1885, pp. 8, 9, 19, 20.
3 Abbott, A History of Greece, II,p. 375, says ‘after 449 B.C”. Kohler, Urk.
zur Gesch. d. Delisch-Attisch. Bundes., p. 114 f. puts the expedition in the year
453. Duncker, Des Perikles’ Fahrt in den Pontus (Sitzungsberichte der Berl.
Acad., XXVII 1885), p. 536, gives the year 444/3 B. Cc. Busolt, Griech.
Geschichte 11 538 (ed. of 1888), gave the same date but later, in III 585, n. 2,
argues against this date and gives 436/5 B.c. Beloch, Gr. Gesch. I 504, gives
the same date. Meyer, Gesch. des Alt. IV 430, says after 440. Kirchner,
Prosopogr. Att. 11811 gives 437 B.C. But I see no conclusive reason for put-
ting the expedition so late. Plut. Per. 20, places it immediately after that to
the Chersonesus in 447. If we accept the date 436 there are 34 years between
the first and second expeditions and only 12 between the second and third.
In 415 Lamachus was 50 or 55 years old (cf. Plut. Alcib. 18). That would
make him about 25 or 30 years old at the time of the expedition to the Pontus,
if it was circ. 440.
= Elut. ber.) 20:
5 Cf. Busolt, 1. c., for the identification of Lamachus, who died in 414 before
Syracuse, with the man left in Sinope by Pericles,
[52 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
wrecked at Heraclea.'' But from this time Sinope’s condition was

greatly improved, even its coins showing much finer work-
manship.”
Between Lamachus’ deposition of the tyrant Timesilaus about
444 B.c. and the Peace of Antalcidas, which deliberately left the
Euxine Greeks at the mercy of Persia, lies Sinope’s golden day
of autonomous prosperity and power.’ Not that we possess the
direct recital of it, but the indirect evidence is conclusive. When
Xenophon’s veterans climbed the coast range and saw the sea, it
was Trapezus, a colony of Sinope, that lay directly beneath their
eye on the coast.’ Although some 250 miles east of Sinope, it
owned allegiance to it and paid tribute in common with Cerasus
and Cotyora.> That Sinope’s colonial arm reached so far may
not indeed warrant Perrot and Chipiez® in calling Sesamus, Cy-
torus, and Ionopolis actual colonies of Sinope, and “multiplied ”
harbors may be too strong an expression; but it is evident that
Sinope had a firm colonial system covering nearly the whole
southern shore of the Euxine. Its compactness is illustrated in
the speech made to Xenophon by Hecatonymus, who had come all
the way from Sinope to deal with the Ten Thousand when he says’
‘‘These (Cotyorites) and the people of Cerasus and Trapezus bring
us an appointed tribute; so that whatever harm you do them, the
city of the Sinopeans considers that it suffers it itself”. There may
have been a lack of Greek unity in the failure of the Cotyorites to
receive the Ten Thousand more cordially, but Xenophon’s
soldiers appear to have behaved somewhat roughly and the
colonists may well have been suspicious * of so large and powerful
1Thuc. IV 75. 2 Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 21.
3 Strabo, XII 546, seems to extend Sinope’s autonomous period far onward to
the capture of the city by Pharnaces in 183 Β. 6. But either he wrote in
partial ignorance of the results of the Peace of Antalcidas or the autonomy he
had in mind was a partial and defective one; for, not to speak of other evi-
dence, the embassy to Darius with which we deal in the next chapter shows a
clearly acknowledged general submission to Persia.
4Xen. Anab. IV 8, 22.
5Xen. Anab. V5, 10. The inhabitants of these two places were later
deported by Pharnaces to form Pharnacia, cf. also Diod. XIV 30, 3; Ps.
Scymnus 910; Strabo XII 545 f.; and Biirchner, Die Besiedelung des Pontos
Euxeinos durch die Milesier, pp. 56-66.
6 Histoire de |’Art, V, p. 197. ™ Xen. 1. c.
8 A similar feeling may account for Xenophon’s ships going a few miles past
Sinope to Armene, as though there were an objection to his anchoring, as he
naturally would, at that excellent harbor itself. Cf. Xen. Anab. VI 1, 15.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 153
a force with so adventurous a history back of them. In any case

the incident does not affect our view of the unity of Sinope’s
colonies among themselves. A further evidence of Sinope’s
independence, may be seen in Xenophon’s warning’ to Heca-
tonymus against an alliance of the Sinopeans with the Paphla-
gonians. His words presuppose the desire of the Paphlagonians
to get possession of Sinope and their inability hitherto to do so.
The numismatic testimony is interesting. We now for the
first time find Sinopean coins bearing the names of magistrates,”
or rather the first letters of the names. The inscription on one
is EK, which suggests Hecatonymus’*, on another XOPH which
suggests Χορηγίων and on another AEQM which probably stands
for Λεωμέδων. Their variety, too, points to a democratic form
of government. This series comes abruptly to an end a few
decades later, and is supplanted by the inferior minting of Data-
mes, which itself is followed by a still poorer coinage with
Aramaic inscriptions, some specimens of which bear the names
of Ariarathes and Abdsasan (not Abdemon).° But short-lived
as the Greek magistrates’ coinage was, it bears mute testimony
to Sinope’s brief autonomy.
There is, moreover, a passage of Strabo which, I think, must
be referred to this period and discloses in a brief but effective
way the sea power of Sinope. Xenophon® shows us that Sinope
with the help of Heraclea, could upon occasion supply ships
enough to transport his large force to westward points. But
Strabo’ says: κατασκευασαμένη δὲ ναυτικὸν ἐπῆρχε τῆς ἐντὸς Κυανέων
θαλάττης, καὶ ἔξω δὲ πολλῶν ἀγώνων μετεῖχε τοῖς Ἕλλησιν.
Jouns Hopkins UNIVERSITY. Davip M. ROBINSON.
1 Anab. V 5, 23. Cf. Judeich, Kleinasiatische Studien, pp. 40, 260,

2 Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 50 gives a list of them.
3 Six, Num. Chron, 1885, p. 24.
4Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 298, 306, 313.
5Cf. Six, op. cit. p. 25. 6 Anab. V 6ff. TXII 545.
.
se ee
een ἘΠ :
ΠΟΣῚ en ne igau
| ce aape ΠΣ
ΟΣ ἌΝ Oye
aeEa aie ~ ΠΝ acd ᾿Lh oa he
ite ve oy aiἔν μεν tasAp stk eee
aoe ati ane Le woe ὙΌΣ ΝΝ,jerey aye iy :
ὯνΝΥ aa Cees ὃ ἊΣ Ta hte ἜΣ po “esha ‘igh
ot Sty seen) CEs ce 7.
ne‘ae Pete Mawes ; =
is
δ ae aha, ra a
: he)
ΠΣ ἀν νονdes ep © Pai ae eae
om
ats 7 ee ἣ
mers tks YeOr ὯΝ er eee ee itei eaf
᾿ oh ae vent. δ... ihe ; ee eee Fe -
re eA Lars
Pel νον tw?ope‘the a Wea αι care τa βὰν ἱΐ
aie τὺ ee ire =
δ᾿, ἣν Pie tii a iT ie “εις lee,i 40
re ea Nr tsa!᾿ ὙΠῈΡye ΠΝ ἵν ᾿ ta
ag omyἽΝ rg! Ceδὰ
κυ. ae bag Ta eax,᾿ Aly Sas 2

oes ᾿ sey
hae ενwe} ores;
ἀν ee
ΕΝ ΤΟΝ
st)eo
ea
oaks ἔν τος fons. δα
ee ae Ν Rita “ ἐν a ey aΝΣ δὰ 72
δ᾿.᾿ae a tg") τοιἜν ΠΥ ΕΣ γε ἘΝPASCreat =per
. ee
hone bt yr osa τ Ἂς“epa ἐν ΤΈΣΣ εἰς τωγοὶ ee
ἣν ΩΝ ;ae press caw eae hieoy per ἥ;ae
τ, tasΕΣ τ Mera/s(; ees i ay ἤν, δ ha ih ον ΜῊ
4 ᾿ 7 otek re oe jes
— al ae hx Bs tp ΑΒ εν
Εντη
τουee σταγος
ΡΥ
ro γῇ
πο
int 797
ιν
.
¢ ».-
“yng Bote
ΟΝ
[Reprinted from AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY, Vol. XXVII, No. 3.]
I.—ANCIENT SINOPE.
SECOND Part.
CHAPTER VI.
SINOPE UNDER PERSIAN RULE.
Sparta never had a Black Sea fleet or any great ambitions
there. It was easy for her, when the Athenian sea power was
broken, to leave Sinope to its fate, and the latter’s independence
wanes with the waning of Athens. The attack by Datames’ in
370 B. C. shows us Sinope as no longer a Greek 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 King his loyalty to him was likely to be somewhat
loose in those days. Datames was anxious to carve out a little
empire for himselfinAsia Minor and went beyond his own satrapy
of Cappadocia into Paphlagonia. After 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.” Being 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 Sinope
itself. Artaxerxes Mnemon, getting information of the siege,
1Cf, Polyaenus VII, 21, 2, 5. 2 Tbid.
ordered Datames off, and he abandoned the siege and withdrew

his ships by night." But we get a glimpse of the perilous position
of the city in the statement that the Sinopeans dressed their
women as men and led them about the walls in order to create a
false idea of numerical strength.* From all this we gather the im-
pression of a strong Greek element in the population, but of a
Persian political preponderance; for Artaxerxes II would scarcely
have ordered Datames to raise the siege of an unsubdued auto-
nomous Greek city.
It is probable, however, that Datames renewed the attack and
subsequently entered the city. Certainly he succeeded in sub-
duing large regions of Paphlagonia, including Amisus,’ and at
some favorable season may afterwards have secured Sinope itself,
which he desired for his capital. The evidence is numismatic.
The coins with the nymph Sinope on one side and DATA with
the eagle and the dolphin on the other must be assigned to
Datames,’ and Six’s® argument that these pieces of money do
not necessarily show that Datames was at any time in power
at Sinope, but that they were made for him at the time when his
relations with Sinope were friendly enough to secure mechanics
and engineers can hardly have much force; for such a personal
coinage implies possession of personal authority and ambition,
and any appearance of these qualities would have been very
carefully avoided by the wily Persian just at that time. The
simpler and, as I think, the truer view of these coins and those
of Orontobates, Vararanes, Ariarathes, Abdsasan and others°® 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’ Hand”’;
cf. also p. 186, n. 1 “ Uber die Einnahme durch Datames cf. Polyaen. VII, 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.
2 Aeneas 40, 4.
3Cf. Polyaen. VII 21, 1; Ps. Arist. Oecon. II 1350 b3 cf. also Meyer
op. cit., V, 964 and Nepos, Dat. 2-3.
* Cf, Imhoof-Blumer, Kleinasiatische Miinzen, p. 6, pl. I, 5; Six, Num.
Chron. 1885, p. 26, pl. II, 7; 1895, p. 169; Head, Historia Numorun, p. 434;
Brit. Mus. Cat. of Greek Coins, Pontus.
> Num. Chron. 1885, p. 25.
δ Cf. Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 26 f.; 1895, p. 169; Babelon, Perses Aché-
ménides, Ὁ. LXXX f.; Head, Num. Chron. 1892, 253; Macdonald, Greek
Coins in the Hunterian Collection, II 236; cf. also Head, Hist. Num. and Brit.
Mus. Cat. of Greek Coins.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 247
that they indicate Persian officials actually in power at Sinope.'

Datames died in 362. We must then assign his acquisition of
power in Sinope, if he did acquire it, to some time between this
date and his interrupted siege in 370.
Sinope’s isolated position keeps its internal condition from
being wholly clear to us except at such times as some great
power, being at its zenith, becomes so important as to draw the
whole ancient world into its light. One of these epochs was in
the time of Pericles; that of Alexander was another. Appian*
tells us that Alexander on his great eastward march incidentally
restored to Amisus by edict its freedom and autonomy, and
Droysen*® surmises that the other Greek cities on the Pontus
asked him for a similar service, but that their remoteness made him
unwilling to deviate so far from the line of his larger movement,
or to suffer the delay necessary to detaching troops for the
purpose. This would indicate that the Greeks of Sinope were
ready at any time for an uprising against Persian authority. But
this is not quite in accordance with the clear inference, to be
drawn from the definite details of Alexander’s meeting with
the embassy from Sinope. Among the Mardi, at the immense
distance of 1500 miles from their own city, these Sinopean Greeks
had come to the Persian court. They came to meet Darius and
met Alexander. The great Macedonian did not put them under
guard as he did the Lacedaemonian envoys to Darius. He told
them that, being subjects of Persia, they had done right in sending
ambassadors to its court. He released them on the further and
express ground that they had not joined in the Greek league
against himself. This incident reveals at least five facts. First,
it shows the importance of the Greek element in Sinope, for these
ambassadors were not Persians, but Greeks. Secondly, it shows
that the Sinopean Greeks were loyal enough to Darius to send
an embassy to him. Third, it shows that their acceptance of
Persian authority was not sullen but rather willing, loyal, and
cooperative. Fourth, the contrast of Alexander’s treatment of
1Cf, Reinach, Trois Royaumes de |’Asie Mineure, p. 10, whose language
seems to imply a similar view. Cf. also Reinach-Gé6tz, 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).
4Cf. Arrian, Anabasis, III 24, 4; Curtius, Hist. Alex. VI 5, 6.
them with his treatment of the Lacedaemonians shows that they

had had no active part in the alliance of the other Greeks against
him. And fifth, it shows that they were so isolated from the
affairs of the Aegean Greeks as to be practically neutral, so that
Alexander could afford to consider them, although envoys to
Persia, as friends of his own cause.
The vicissitudes of Sinope under the divided rule of the
Diadochi cannot be known.’ Not unlikely anarchy alternated
with order; for at the close of this period we find the tyrant
Scydrothemis in power. The name has a barbarian, perhaps a
Paphlagonian, sound and Tacitus gives him the title of king,
which is in fact more accurately descriptive than tyrant. Yet on
the occasion of the mission of Ptolemy to obtain the statue of
Serapis he calls an assembly of the people, who feel free to oppose
his plans, and there is no suggestion of any use of troops or other
force to put them down. We may infer from all this a vague
general theoretic subjection to the Diadochi, but a practical
autonomy with considerable democratic liberty and appeal to
public assemblies.”
CHAPTER. VIE
SINOPE AND THE PonrtTic KINGS.

The practical autonomy of Sinope was one of the results of
that division among the successors of Alexander which made
their Empire fall back from its previous limits. Ground was thus
cleared for the rise of the Pontic kingdom. And we must now
see in the third century a descent of these barbarians upon the
Sinopean civilization. The movement, though it is on a smaller
scale, suggests the barbarian inroads of the Middle Ages. There
is the same final outward defeat and the same victorious inward
and permanent invasion of the minds and thoughts of the con-
querors by the civilizing and organizing genius of the conquered.
The tradition that when Mithradates, the subsequent founder
of the Pontic kingdom, was serving with Antigonus, the ruler
of the Syrian kingdom, the latter dreamed that he sowed gold in
a field and that Mithradates ran away with the harvest, sufficiently
'Diod. XVIII 3 tells us that Paphlagonia was given to Eumenes, but

nothing is said with regard to Sinope itself.
*Cf. Tac. Hist. IV 83, 84.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 249
suggests the young man’s rapid and ambitious appropriation of

knowledge and power which brought him under suspicion and
led to his flight into Cappadocia, where he made a realm for
himself and ruled over it and even as far as the eastward coast
of the Euxine.’ Westward, however, the mountain rampart
behind Sinope again secured its immunity from direct attack
until the unsuccessful attempt of Mithradates II in 220 B. Cc.”
The intervening epoch shows the Hellenic civilization of Sinope
in close relations with the rest of Greece. Significant in this
connection are the coins which the Sinopeans struck of the Attic
standard of weight and fineness and bearing a head of Athena
closely conformed to the Attic type.’ Such uniformity in money
clearly indicates intimate commercial intercourse. The silver
coins of the Seleucid kings of Syria‘ also circulated at Sinope
between about the middle of the third century and 190. These
two silver coinages in successive circulation at Sinope testify to
her continuous freedom from the domination of the Pontic kings,
whose fiat bronze money of the same type as that in other Pontic
villages’ was immediately forced upon Sinope as the sole medium
of exchange when Pharnaces finally took the town in 183 B. C.
To the numismatic evidence I am glad to be able to add that
among the inscriptions which Dr. Wilhelm has copied and
studied there is one of this period from Histiaea in Euboea.
The inscription is long and much mutilated, but clearly states
that the Histiaeans extended to ambassadors from Sinope the
privileges of proxeny and granted ἀσφάλεια, ἀσυλία, ἰσοτέλεια and
other honors to Sinopeans who came to Histiaea.° There are
at Athens, moreover, numerous inscriptions which mention the
names of Sinopeans,’ some of them doubtless of this period.
These are an excellent though very general indication of transit
between Sinope and Attica. And, finally, the prompt, generous,
and effective assistance which Rhodes gave to Sinope when
attacked by Mithradates II throws a strong light backward and
l Appian, Mithr. 9; Plut. Demetrius 4; On Mithradates Ktistes cf. also

Diods XTX. 407, XX TTT.
2 Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 297. 3 Six, Num. Chron, 1885, p. 43.
* Tbid., pp. 48-49. 5Thid., p. 49.
δ Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 333. For the first two lines of the inscription
not given there cf. Wilhelm, Proxenenliste aus Histiaia, in the Arch. Epigr.
Mitt. aus Oester. 1892, p. 114.
TCf. I. G. (C. I. A.) II 3, 3339-3358.
250 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY
discloses the previous friendly and trading relations between the

two peoples.
That attack itself, though unsuccessful, was the beginning of
the end of Sinope’s independence,’ for it marks the practical
recognition by the Pontic kings of the strategic importance ofthe.
town and of its natural destiny as the capital of the Pontic empire
At the same time it revealed the resourceful energy of the
Sinopeans. They promptly built palisades at every point in
the entire circuit of the promontory at which, in case of a sea
attack, a possible landing could be made. Their colonies rendered
efficient help. They also dispatched, as has been indicated above,
an embassy to Rhodes appealing for help. The Rhodians re-
sponded at once by making three of their number a committee
to purchase the needed arms, bow-strings, and engines of war,
which the Sinopeans took home along with an amount of money.
They also gave them wine, to the extent of 10,0o0o0amphoras.? We
get evidence of the military strength of Sinope from the fact that,
with this help, the great power of the Pontic kingdom could not
capture it.
When indeed it did finally fall, it was by a sudden and unex-
pected attack, perhaps in time of peace and through treachery ὅ;
for details of the capture by Pharnaces in 183 B.C. are significantly
absent. And there is no evidence of other hostilities at the
time. Nor does Sinope ever appear to have been taken by a
protracted siege. It was naturally so nearly impregnable that
surprise and perfidy were the only available means of capturing
it. Sinope’s colonies fell with it. Pharnaces deported the in-
habitants of Cotyora and Cerasus to a spot not far from Cerasus
and there formed a new colony named after himself, Pharnacea.*
The Rhodians again showed their sympathy for Sinope’ by
sending ambassadors to Rome to complain of the fate of Sinope
1 Polybius IV 56, καί τις οἷον ἀρχὴ τότε Kai πρόφασις ἐγένετο τῆς ἐπὶ TO τέλος
ἀχθείσης ἀτυχίας Σινωπεῦσιν.
2 ΟΕ, Polyb. 1. c. For an amphora-handle with the name of a Rhodian
month on it, which I found at Sinope, cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 296, 297.
3 Strabo, XII, 545; Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit. p. 34; Bevan, The House of
Seleucus II, 122.
4 Arrian Peripl. 24 is speaking only in a general way when he says ai77
Φαρνάκεια πάλαι Kepacov¢ ἐκαλεῖτο Σινωπέων καὶ αὕτη ἄποικος. Cf. Hamilton,
op. cit.
>Polybs ΚΕΝ, τὸς Wivye ΧΕ 2, 20:
ANCIENT SINOPE. 251
but failed to push the matter.'| Pharnaces also sent ambassadors,

but in the meanwhile prosecuted his campaign against Paph-
lagonia, Galatia, and Cappadocia. The Romans sent envoys
to examine into the situation, but they accomplished nothing.
However, in 178 B. C. peace was made and Pharnaces retired in
the main from the districts named, but retained Sinope itself.’
About this time he removed his capital from Amasia to Sinope.
At Amasia below the citadel in the smoothed rock are still to be
seen the five tombs of the Pontic kings.’ The fifth one is in an
unfinished state and the conjecture of Perrot* is interesting, that
this was Pharnaces’® own sepulchre, the work upon which was
abandoned for the construction of a new one at Sinope when he
removed his seat of government to that place. But there are
no monumental remains at Sinope to testify to the embellishment
of the new capital by Pharnaces or even by Mithradates the
Great.®
Although Pharnaces’ successor, Mithradates III,’ did so much
for Sinope that he was called Euergetes, his large-hearted and
enterprising fgure appears but briefly on its stage. He sent
Dorylaus to Crete for mercenary troops and while there the latter
helped the Gnossians against the Gortynians.* Mithradates III
also had a share in the third Punic war’ by sending ships to assist
the Roman fleet, but he was suddenly murdered in his capital,”
leaving behind him a wife and two boys, the older of whom
became Mithradates the Great.'' The limits of the present study
prevent us from entering into the career of this strange and typical
1 This was undoubtedly due, as Meyer (Gesch. des K6nigreichs Pontus p. 72)
suggests, to the fear of injuring their commercial relations with the Pontus.
* Cf. Polyb. XXVI 6.
8 Appian, Mithr. 113; Hamilton, op. cit. I 339 ff.; Ritter, Kleinasien XVIII
154 ff.; Meyer, op. cit. p. 69; Strabo, XII 561; Anderson, Studia Pontica,
p. 48.
4Perrot, Guillaume, et Delbet, Exploration Arch. de la Galatie, Bithynie,
Mysie, Phrygie, Carie, et du Pont, I 371 (cf. pl. 80). Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit.
p. 288, thinks the fifth grave was for the successor of Pharnaces, This seems
to me unlikely. Cf. next note.
5 Meyer, op. cit. p. 56 makes Pharnaces the fifth Pontic King. He would
naturally have the fifth grave.
δ Cf. Lydia Paschkow, Tour du Monde (1889), p. 404.
7 Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit. p. 27.
8 Strabo, X 477. 9 Appian, Mithr. ro. 10'Cf. Strabo, lc.
1 The epithet “Great” does not occur at all in official documents and only
rarely elsewhere (cf. Suet. Caes. 35 and Eutrop. VI 22).
252 AMERICAN JOUKNAL OF PHILOLOGY.
combination of Oriental cruelty and despotism with Greek culture

and comprehensiveness. Indeed Reinach’s monograph, which
tells us of the Greek playmates of his boyhood and of the
twenty-two languages he could talk and familiarizes us with his
empire 2500 miles in length and reaching from Greece itself to
the land of the Colchians, has made such entrance wholly un-
necessary. We need only note for Sinope’s honor that it was
his birth-place;! that he made it his capital,” improved its double
harbor, fortified it and put it in condition to resist the Romans,
and embellished it with a market-place, stoas, and a gymnasium ;°
that his phil-hellenic appreciation’ led him to make Greek his
official language,’ and to use Greek models in designing his coins,
and to make the Sinopean Greek Diophantus his chief-general,
through whom he freed the Greeks of the Tauric Chersonesus
from the Scythian tyranny, as is shown by their grateful inscription
discovered at Olbia.® The lustre of his character is the lustre
of Sinopic Hellenism, while his barbarities may reasonably be
charged to the Pontic and Persian blood which he claimed to
have in his veins.
CHAPTER Will:
SINOPE UNDER THE ROMANS.
Sinope does not figure in the first war between Mithradates

and the Romans. Inthe course of the second Murena intended,
following the best advice available, to besiege Sinope as the key
to the whole country’; but, while still far distant from this strategic
point, he was defeated at the Halys by the energy of Mithradates.®
In the third war, however, Sinope is the scene of several im-
portant events. When Mithradates was forced by Lucullus to
raise the siege of Cyzicus, he hastened away from the Propontis
1 Head, Hist. Numorum, p. 423, says Amasia was his birth-place. But Strabo,
who was related to Mithradates and himself came from Amasia, and hence
would have known if Mith. had been born there, says (XII 545) ὁ δὲ Evrdrwp
καὶ ἐγεννήθη ἐκεῖ (Sinope) καὶ ἐτράφη, διαφερόντως δὲ ἐτίμησεν αὐτὴν μητρόπολίν TE
τῆς βασιλείας ὑπέλαβεν.
2Cf. Strabo, 1. c. and Οἷς. De Imp. Cn. Pomp. 21(8). For his palace at
Sinope cf. Diod. XIV 31.
= Strabo, lac: 4 Bevan, op. cit. I, p. 153.
5 Reinach-Gdtz, op. cit., p. 30. 6 Cf. Dittenberger Sylloge 2326.
7 Cf. Memnon 36 (Miiller F. H. 6. III, p. 544).
8Appian, Mithr. 65.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 253
into the Euxine; but a storm destroyed most of his fleet and he
was obliged to flee in a pirate’s boat to Sinope.’ Thence he
sailed to Amisus, leaving Sinope under the control of pirates, led
by Leonippus.*, Meanwhile Lucullus pushed on and finally came
to Amisus, forced Mithradates to flee into Armenia, and turned
his forces against the Pontic kingdom in general, taking such
places as Heraclea. At last in 70 B. Ὁ. he appeared before Sinope.”
He found the pirates in full possession and confident in their
sea power, for they had but lately defeated in a decisive battle
fifteen triremes sent by the Romans under command of Cen-
sorinus.t The leaders of the pirates were Leonippus, Cleochares
and Seleucus. Dissensions existed among them, and Leonippus
had previously, sometime before the naval attack by Censorinus,
undertaken to negotiate with the Romans for the betrayal of the
city to them. But the other two members of the triumvirate
of pirates had discovered the plot, called an assembly of the
Sinopeans, and disclosed the treachery of Leonippus. He, how-
ever, enjoyed the confidence not only of Mithradates but also
of the people of Sinope and Cleochares and Seleucus were obliged
to resort to assassination to get rid of him. Soon after this deed
came the defeat of the Roman fleet by that of the pirates.
After the victory over the Romans the pirates ruled Sinope
with a high hand. The insecurity of their position caused Se-
leucus to propose to Cleochares the delivery of the city to the
Romans. Cleochares, who favored continued resistance to the
Romans, objected to the plan, perhaps because it involved the
massacre of the people. Finally the two men shipped their
goods to Machares at Colchis at the eastern end of the Pontus,
intending to follow later themselves. But Machares entered into
friendly communication with Lucullus. Lucullus agreed to an
alliance provided Machares would send no provisions to the
Sinopeans. Machares not only agreed to the proposal but went
so far as to divert to Lucullus supplies intended for the army
of Mithradates. Under these circumstances Cleochares himself
despaired of success against the Romans. He and his followers
1 Appian, Mithr. 78. Memnon 42 also mentions the storm but is silent
about Mithradates’ escape in a pirate’s boat.
2 Memnon 53 (Miiller F. H. G. III, 554) Λεόνιππος δὲ ὁ σὺν Κλεοχάρει παρὰ
Μιθριδάτου τὴν Σινώπην ἐπιτραπείς, Strabo, XII 546 ὁ yap ἐγκατασταθεὶς ὑπὸ
τοῦ βασιλέως φρούραρχος Βακχίδης.
8 Appian, Mithr. 82, 83.
4On the name Censorinus at Sinope cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 310,
seized what valuables they could, gave their soldiers liberty to

plunder the town, and fled in their lighter ships by night to the
eastern end of the Pontus. Before starting, to avoid pursuit,
they set fire to the remaining ships which were heavier and also
(according to Plutarch) to the town. The sight of the flames
apprised Lucullus of the situation. He ordered his scaling
ladders against the walls, took the town, put 8000 of the pirates
and their adherents to the sword, and then by a sudden change
of plan stayed the slaughter, restored to the inhabitants their
property, gave the city its freedom, and promoted its welfare.
The cause of the change was a statue which Lucullus saw
lying upon the shore or being carried along by the citizens. It
was wrapped up in linen and bound with ropes. But when un-
covered at his command it proved to be the statue of Autolycus
which the final haste of the pirates had prevented them from
carrying away and which seemed to him to be the exact likeness
of a figure which had appeared to him in a dream the very night
before and had said to him “Go on a little further, Lucullus; for
Autolycus is coming to see thee”. The coincidence seemed to
him a divine call to care for the city whose deity had so favorably
appeared to him." Thus Sinope passed into the power of the
Romans and the story of its capture reveals one more phase in
its strange, eventful history, and to almost every other possible
form of government Sinope has now added a government by
pirates. The transition to Roman rule marked an epoch in its
history and a new era was dated from it, stamped on coins as the
era of Lucullus.’
Some years of Roman order and organization, of Roman favor
and Roman rebuilding, succeeded the anarchic violence of the
piratical regime.’ But the next striking scene on Sinope’s streets
was the pomp and splendor of the funeral procession of Mithra-
dates the Great. His own son, the worthless Pharnaces II, was
in power in the Cimmerian Bosporus on the northern shore of
1 On the capture cf. Plut. Luc. 23; Appian, Mithr. 83,and Memnon’s detailed
account c. 53, 54 (source Nymphis of Heraclea, 3rd cent. B. c.); cf. also Cic.
pro lege Manil. VIIT 21; Oros. VI 3 ; Strabo XII 546, Eutrop. VI 8; Reinach-
Gétz, Mithr., pp. 352, 353.
2 Cf. Eckel, Doctrina Numorum II 1, 394; Six, Num. Chron. 1885 ; Head,
Hist. Num.
%Plut. Luc. 23 τῆς πόλεως ἐπεμελήθη. Appian, op. cit.; Memnon, op. cit.
Cic., De lege agr. II 20, 353 shows that Sinope was under the Roman rule in
the time of Pompey, who succeeded Lucullus in 66 B. Cc.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 255
the Euxine. Thither the father, defeated by Pompey, had fled.

But he met with an unfriendly reception and in despair ended
his own life with poison and the sword.'' To win the favor of
Pompey, who was now at Sinope, Pharnaces sent the mutilated
and all but unrecognizable corpse across the sea to him. But
that large-hearted conqueror, whose own body, by a strange in-
justice of history, was to lie upon the Egyptian shore, decapitated,
mutilated, dishonored and unburied, gave at his own expense
a magnificent interment to his barbarian enemy. He viewed the
body with emotion and averted eye and had it laid with marching
and flute music in the royal tomb at Sinope.’
For going over to Rome Pharnaces received as his reward
a kingdom on the northern shore; but it was too narrow for his
ambitions, and while Pompey was absent in his western war with
Julius Caesar, Pharnaces crossed the sea and took Sinope from
Calvinus, who had been given charge of Pompey’s territory.
There are no details of the capture, but in 47 B. c. Caesar, after
conquering Pompey at Pharsalus and pursuing him to Egypt,
marched rapidly against Pharnaces and quickly overthrew him
in the “ veni, vidi, vici” battle of Zela. Pharnaces fled to Sinope
by way of the Amisus road, made his ignoble agreement there
with Calvinus that if allowed to depart in safety, he would remain
upon the northern shore, whither he went to end his career by
dying in battle, wounded by a personal enemy.’
Beginning with Pompey, Bithynia and Pontus were formed
into one province.* He endeavored to improve the condition of
the cities he captured by giving them better laws and regulations,’
and we cannot doubt that after his visit to the place Sinope ex-
perienced the beneficial effects of his attentions. But the im-
portant event in the city’s improvement was a considerable influx
of new blood in the colony sent by Julius Caesar about 45 B. c.°
1 Appian, Mithr. 114,112; Dio Cass. XX XVII 3, 11-13; Plut. Pomp. qr,
Oros. VI 5; Eutrop. VI 12.
*Plut. Pomp. 42; Appian, Mithr. 113; Dio Cass. XX XVII 14.
3 Appian, Mithr. 120; Dio Cass. XLII 46-8; Appian, Bell. Civ. II οἱ, 92;
Plut. Caes. 50; Suet., Jul. Caes. 35, 37; J. H. 5. 1901, p. 59.
4Strabo, XII 541; J. H.S.1go1, p.60; and Schoenemann, De Bithynia et
Ponto, Provincia Romana (Gottingen 1855); cf. also Marquardt, Rémische
Staatsverwaltung, vol. I, p. 351.
5 Appian, Mithr., 115.
® Cf. Strabo XII 546; Pliny, Epist. X ΟἹ ‘‘coloniam Sinopensem” ; Pliny,
N.H. VI 2 ‘‘colonia Sinope”; Appian, Mithr. 120, 121.
Another chronological era dates from this time.’ It marks a new

era of prosperity also. The evidence of an imperial coinage is
always perfunctory, and in the C. I. F.:or'C. R. I. F. S.‘or C. I.
F. 5. (Colonia Julia Felix Sinope)’ which now makes its ap-
pearance on the city’s coins*® and in inscriptions on stone* the
“Felix” is not necessarily descriptive, and indeed shows itself
with almost monotonous continuity down to the time of Gallienus.
Even the λαμπροτάτη" on a sarcophagus is tainted with a kind of
municipal cant. But, as a matter of fact, becoming a Roman
colony included very tangible municipal privileges as well as a
strong addition to the population. The new colonists were not
distributed throughout the city but occupied a separate quarter
by themselves,’ while the remaining territory was occupied by
the earlier inhabitants who had survived the fire and sword of the
Mithradatic wars.
The history of Sinope being thus merged in the world-em-
bracing history of Rome, its separate annals are largely lost to
view. Almost the only mention of it at this time is found in
Josephus who speaks of Marcus Agrippa’s warm greeting of
Herod there and the departure of the two in 16 B.C. upon an
expedition to the Cimmerian Bosporus.’ The same old natural
sources of commercial prosperity continued. The fish still appears
on the coins and the figure of Ceres and the plough.® Strabo”
writes of the beauty of the city and its surroundings in words
to which we have referred in an earlier chapter. Roman mile-
1Kckel, Doctr. Num. II, 391 f.; Marquardt, Rom. Staatsverwaltung I 357;
Schoenemann, op. cit. p. 96; Head, Hist. Num. p. 435.
°C. 1. A. S. or C. A. 5. (colonia Augusta Sinope) also occurs, It is not
surprising to find Augustus’ name on the coins. He was regarded as a king
in Paphlagonia, temples were built to him, and his cult established, cf. Revue
ἃ. Etudes Gr. IgOI, pp. 26-45.
* Mionnet, Descr. de Médailles Antiques II goof.; IV 575 f.; Eckel, Doctr.
Num. II 1, 389 f.; Rasche, Lex. Num. IV 2, r105f.; Cohen, Description
historique des monnaies V, pp. 123, 174, 324, 474; Imhoof-Blumer, Klein-
asiatische Miinzen, pp. 6-10, p. 231, pl. 1; Macdonald, Greek Coins in the
Hunterian Collection II, p. 238; Brit. Mus. Cat.; Six, Num. Chron, 1885;
Head, Hist. Num.; Schoenemann, op. cit. p. 96.
ACh. C. ie des LI 2303/6078:
5 Cf, λαμπροτάτῃ κολωνείᾳ in Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 314.
6 Strabo XII 546, νυνὶ dé καὶ Ρωμαίων ἀποικίαν δέδεκται καὶ μέρος τῆς πόλεως
καὶ τῆς χώρας ἐκείνων ἐστί.
1 Josephus, Arch. XVI 21; Dio Cass. LIV 21.
8 Cf. Mionnet, etc., as cited above ; Imhoof-Blumer, op. cit. p. 7,4; pl. 17.
9 XII 545, 546.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 257
stones were set up in the vicinity and a multitude of inscriptions,’

honoring Germanicus, Tiberius, Agrippina, Hadrian, Antoninus
Pius, Marcus Aurelius and other lesser Romans testify, if the
testimony were needed, how completely Sinope had become
merged in Rome.
And yet in a general way it seems permissible to indicate
certain ascending stages by which the city’s prosperity and honor
were increased. Whatever the general welfare of Sinope under
the Roman Republic, it nevertheless had to suffer from the self-
seeking ambitions of its governors, who regarded their provinces
as prizes to be exploited in their own interests. A better day
came under the more solid government of the Empire, for there
was at least some sense of responsibility felt by the proconsuls
to the authorities at Rome. In the time of Augustus, however,
Bithynia and Pontus were not an imperial province but were
under the Senate.” Her proconsuls were appointed for a year
at a time. Their characters doubtless varied very greatly and
continuous plans for the improvement of the city, stretching over
a considerable period, were unlikely to be made. But under
Trajan Bithynia and Pontus became an Imperial province and its
governor was obliged to consult the Emperor even upon matters
of detail and to be responsible to him for his administration, so
that an Imperial province, at least under such an Emperor as
Trajan, was better off than a senatorial one. In the younger
Pliny Sinope had a governor of unusually excellent personal
qualities. His construction of an aqueduct, by which a much
needed supply of pure water was brought from a distance of
sixteen miles in the interior, testifies to his care for the physical
well-being of the inhabitants, while his thoughtful and discrimi-
nating report in regard to the new superstition, Christianity,
shows a similar consideration of mental and spiritual welfare.’
CHAPTER Ios.
THE CIVILIZATION OF SINOPE.
“'l'o high Sinope’s distant realms
Whence cynics rail’d at human pride”.
Tennyson, Persia.
The external history of ancient Sinope, as we have now studied

it, interests us by its striking vicissitudes. But more important
1Cf, Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 310, 327-329.
2 Dio Cass. LIII 12; Strabo XVII 840; Suet. Aug. 47; Tac. Ann. I 74.
’ Pliny, Ep. X 90, 91. On the aqueduct cf. A. J. Ρ. XXVII, p. 131.
than battles, captures, recaptures, autonomies and successive sub-

jections is the internal history of its people, the instruction their
annals give in the development of the race in character and
culture, government, occupation, literature, and art.
Sinope’s position on the borderland between Orient and Oc-
cident gave it a strange and cosmopolitan mixture of nationalities.
The Assyrian element was in force down to the fourth century.
The native Paphlagonian was there. The subtle and finished
Greek, with his peculiar power of communicating his civilization,
the wily and treacherous Persian, and the resolute Roman suc-
cessively found their way to the chief Pontic sea-port and despite
depopulations and municipal tragedies of all sorts, Sinopean
civilization must, in its rude frontier fashion, have acquired
something of that universal character which Rome had in its
larger and more magnificent way, when in its hour of power the
different elements of the world were poured into it. There must
have been, at first successive and afterwards synchronous, many
different costumes and complexions, many languages spoken,
many cults observed, many conflicting ideas of honor and dis-
honor and many individual acts both brave and base.
What the characteristic spirit and temper of the people of this
frontier sea-port were is a question of profound interest. What
mental and intellectual qualities did Sinope’s able men nourish
and develop? An answer seems obtainable and is what would
naturally be expected. Life at the limit line of civilization is
perpetually bringing forward sharp contrasts between the rude
and the cultured, the cowardly and the brave, the blunt-minded
and the keen. Constant hardship and privation teach such men
to scorn delights and luxuries, to increase the catalogue of things
they can go without and to write the articles of necessity in the
fewest lines. The temper of mind becomes independent, brave,
terse, and cynical. That this was the characteristic Sinopean
spirit is evident from the quality of literary genius her men de-
veloped after being transferred to the congenial soil of Athens.
The Sinopean product there was the keen laconic contempt of
Diogenes (412-323) and in the new comedy ludicrous scenes
drawn from the realism of life and executed with a fine scorn
extending in Diphilus even to the chronology which makes Hip-
ponax and Archilochus suitors of Sappho.’ Not that Sinope
1 Athen, XIII 599 d.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 259
produced no historians or geographers,’ for our appendix of

Sinopeans will show that she did; but scarcely a line from them
has survived and chroniclers seldom mention their names, while
the apophthegms of Diogenes and the jests of Dionysius and of
the brothers Diodorus and Diphilus*® are repeatedly found in
quotations and fragments which have had too much life in them
to be allowed to die; and when the authors themselves passed
away their honored names were cut into Athenian gravestones.
The tradition that Diogenes fled with his father to Athens because
the latter had been detected in forging or adulterating coins, the
entrance of the young man into the school of Antisthenes, indeed
the whole career of this remarkable cynic are not to be cited in
this connection.’ Nor need the multiplied jests which Athenaeus
and Stobaeus quote be exploited; but the individual courage
amounting to recklessness which made Diogenes ask Alexander
to get from between him and the sun, the casting aside of the
wooden bowl after he saw the lad drink from the hollow of his
hand, the reduction of his living quarters to a pzthos, together
with the coarse fun of the comic poets, perpetually directed
against the irksome embarrassments of the parasitic temper,
which cannot live from its own resources but eats the bread of
belittling dependence upon the wealthy, may serve to reflect that
ready individual courage of man against man, that cheerful ac-
ceptance of hardships in matters of food and shelter and especially
that rough humor and biting scorn of everything soft and
effeminate, which is continually putting itself in evidence all
along the line of adventurous colonial life. The fully developed
form of Sinope’s peculiar talent, the only talent of which she
gives any great literary evidence, coming to flower when trans-
planted to the favoring soil of Athens in such instances as
that of Diogenes;* of the brilliant slave Cynic, Menippus,’ whose
skilful combination of prose and poetry led the Roman Varro
'E. g. Baton, Diophantus, and Theopompus.
*Cf. Prosopographia Sinopensis.
3Cf. Diog. Laer. Vitae Phil. VI; cf. Zeitschrift fiir Numismatik XXIII
(1901), p. 138; and Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 50, for coins with AIO and
“Ἱκεσίου on them; cf. also C.I.G. 7074.
4 What time these men went to Athens it is impossible to tell, but probably
it was early in their career, because they seem to have imbibed the spirit of
Athenian life so deeply. Their fragments show no explicit references to their
native town.
5 Cf. Prosopographia Sinopensis.
into imitation;'! of Hegesaeus the Cynic,’ and ofthe line of comic

poets which I have indicated, clearly points back to its hardy
beginnings in its indigenous Sinopean soil.
The scenic character of Sinope must always have tended to
induce in its people a spirit of boldness and freedom. The
mountains lay behind them and their lofty promontory com-
manded a far-reaching view of the sea. The combination of
mountain and sea, together with their geographic isolation, must
have helped them to that boldness and freedom of spirit and that
individualism and enterprise for whose presence in the Greeks of
the motherland so much credit is given to the similar features of
her natural scenery. Such people have the travelling instinct and
we are not surprised to find great numbers of them at Athens.”
A stronger testimony is the inscription of their names as πρόξενοι
at Delphi,‘ at Histiaea in Euboea® and, more remarkably still, at
the secluded interior town of Cleitor in Arcadia.°
Material for constructing the history of the governmental devel-
opment of Sinope is meagre. The tantalizing numismatic list of
magistrates’ belonging to the autonomous period yields the
names of no specific offices. The names of only two tyrants® are
known and the mention of public assemblies is bare of details.
From an inscription at Sinope (Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 312,
No. 40) we know that in the Macedonian epoch there were pry-
tanies as at Athens. We have alist of fourteen πρυτάνεις of whom
one is ἐπιστάτης τῆς βουλῆς and another γραμματεύς. -Even in Roman
times details of the method of the city’s government are lacking.
The municipal functions of the priestly rovrapyns are hardly evident
beyond the obligation to give public games at his own expense.”
From Roman mile-stones we learn the name of Aur. Priscianus
who was praeses pr(ovinciae) P(onti) and that praeses was used
1 A good specimen of the Menippean satire is Seneca’s Apocolocyntosis of
Claudius. Cf. Biicheler’s Petronius.
2 Pupil of Diogenes, cf. Diog. L., VI 84. An inscription from Sinope makes
even Perseus a Cynic, because he too carries a pouch and the ἅρπη, the equiva-
lent of the Cynic’s βάκτρον, cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 320-322. The harlot
Sinope, who took her name from her native town, should also be cited, cf A. J.P.
XXVII, p. 133.
3 Cf, Prosopographia Sinopensis. *Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 330.
Sf. Lbids ΡῬΡ. 572. 5539. ΘΟΕ ΤΡΙ- ΡΒ. 590.
7Six, Num. Chron. 1885, p. 50. 5. Timesilaus and Scydrothemis.
Cf, Am. 1. Arch-scs pp. 311, 312; ᾿- Η 9. τοοοῦΡ 15; Εουθ 89
Etudes Anc., 1901, p. 138.
ANCIENT. SINOPE. 261
in a technical sense before the time of Diocletian. The change

to praesides was made by Probus or Carus, not by Severus or
Aurelian, as has generally been supposed (cf. Mommsen, Rom.
Staatsrecht, pp: 240, 2633 Am. J.Arch. |..c:-pp. 328, 329; A. J.P:
XXVII, p. 139, n. 2). But Sinope’s early constitutional history
must go unwritten by moderns until the discovery of the ancient
one which Aristotle composed.
We know more about the occupations of the people. The
fish, the plough, the ship, are on the city’s coins." The maker of
amphoras and other pottery,’ the weaver of nets, the forger of
steel implements of good repute,’ the wood-cutters who felled the
trees for the timber-exports,*‘ the skilful Greek engineers and ship-
builders,’ were all there. The slave was there, though only two
are known by name,° the physician’ also and the priest and
priestess,° the soldier, and the sailor, always in evidence at such
asea-port. The lyre held by Apollo on coins’ reminds us of the
presence of musicians. And for the hours of recreation there
were athletic contests and, at least in Roman days, though no
remains of any amphitheatre are to be found, bull-fights and_
hunting exhibitions."
The early settlement of Sinope by the Milesian Greeks guaran-
teed its people a continuous course in physical culture. One of
them took the prize for boxing in the contest ἀγενείους πυγμήν at
the Amphiaraia at Oropus about 350 B. Cc." An Attic inscription
gives us the list of victories won by the Sinopean Valerius
Eclectus in 248 a. ἢ." Still another, Damostratus, won six
1 For the fish cf. Head op. cit.; Six, Num. Chron., 1885 ; Brit. Mus. Cat.; for
the plough cf. Imhoof-Blumer, op. cit. p. 7, no. 4, pl. 17; for the ship’s prow
Clee Anne OO py 125:
*Cf. Am. J. Arch. 1. c. pp. 294-302. SiCὉ An in bs ΣΧ ΥΤΙ; psy 145:
ΕΟ 7: OG VLL pp. 140) ΤΩΙ.
5 Cf. p. 245 and Polyaen. VII 21, 2,5 who says the Sinopeans hada multitude
ἀρχιτεκτόνων, τεχνιτῶν, τεκτόνων, ναυπηγῶν.
6 Manes: cf. Aelian V. H. 153, 28; Diog. Laert. VI 55; Seneca, De Tranq,
Animi VIII 5; Strabo VII 304; Strabo XII 553; Menippus: cf. Prosopogr.
Sinopensis. Cf. also Plaut. Curc. 443.
Tf Am: J.-Arch. I. c.,\p. 315, no. 44%
8 Cf. Ibid., p. 312, no. 39; p. 322, no. 63.
9Six, Num. Chron. 1885, pl. 11 18,19; J. H. 5. IX. p. 300.
ΟΣ Am. j.Areh. 1. c¢:,p: 511.
11Cf, Hestiaeus in Prosopogr. Sinopensis, also Am. J. Arch. 1, c., p. 330.
"Cf, Prosopogr. Sinopensis.
wrestling contests at the Isthmian games.’ I may add that there

is at Sinope itself at least one evidence of athletic glory. I found
there an inscription of which only one word remains, but that
word is παράδοξος, a victor in the πάλη and παγκράτιον." All these
evidences point to a multitude of other successful Sinopean con-
testants and to a still larger multitude of unsuccessful ones. This
love of athletics would, of course, be self-evident in Roman times,
even without Strabo’s mention of the gymnasium® and without
the inscription which gives the name of its director, Claudius
Potelius.*
Ancient Greece had one great literary focus at which, unless
hindered by some special civic enmity, as in Pindar’s case, all
literary genius centred. The literary element in Sinope’s civili-
zation, therefore, must not be judged by the works published
within her walls; for no such publications, unless possibly it be
the editing of her edition of Homer,’ can be proved. She must
be judged rather by the product of her citizens after they had
migrated tothe motherland. That product included the long list
of Baton’s histories, the work on earthquakes by Theopompus,
who is sometimes considered a geographer and sometimes an
historian, and the writings of Diophantus, who was historian as
well as general; it included the Cynic philosophies of Diogenes,
Menippus and Hegesaeus, and the Epicurean of Timotheus of the
first century B. σι; it included the comedies of Dionysius, Diphilus,
and Diodorus, and the epigrams of Heracleides.® In the field of
oratory, in fine, we must not forget Xenophon’s critical estimate
of Hecatonymus as δεινὸς λέγειν On a previous page I have
already indicated the field in which men of Sinopean origin said
their best remembered words. But the list of names we have just
recited shows that their general literary activity was not in-
considerable.
Sinope cannot boast with certainty of any painter or sculptor. 8
Doubtless she had paintings which, like those o the rest of the
Greek world, have perished. In any case, her streets and squares
and shrines were not devoid of statues. Those of her great
Cynic® may possibly have been carved in Sinope itself, but the
ΤΆ. Plan. 3; 25. ΣΆτη. J. Arch: 1 ος, ps 324-
3 Strabo XII 545. Am. Je-Archs ΤῸ ΡΥ Ζ1Ι.:
ΟΕ: ἈΠ pbs ΧΙ; ps 155: ® Cf. Prosopogr. Sinopensis.
7Cf. Xen. Anab. V, 5, 7.
8 Χρησστός is simply a λιθουργός of late date, cf. Am. J. Arch. l. c., p. 331.
9 Diog. Laert. VI 78.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 263
celebrated figure of Autolycus, which probably had its shrine,

for he was consulted as an oracle, was the work of the Olynthian
Sthennis in the fourth century.’ As to the sculptor of the storied
statue of Serapis, which according to Tacitus and others was
carried off to Egypt, we are not informed.’ And as to the precise
nature of the “sphere” of the astronomer Billarus we are equally
left in the dark.’ In later years statues of the emperors would
multiply and doubtless the cylindrical stone, now there, whose
top is hollowed out into a mortar for grinding corn, and which
bears an inscription to Marcus Aurelius‘ was the pedestal of a
statue set up in his honor. No doubt many pieces of sculpture
have been carried off to other lands. Thereis, forexample, in the
Museum at Constantinople an excellent sarcophagus from Sinope
with sculptures of boys bearing grapes. Many of plainer type
are still to be seen in Sinope. We have already had occasion°® to
mention the archaic coins of the fifth century bearing a head with
bulging eyes, high cheek-bones and typical smile, and on the
reverse the simple incuse square, and we have noted the finer
coins that were minted after Athenian influences had come with
Pericles, after 444 B.c.° The relief of Hera with a nymph be-
fore her mentioned in the Syllogos’ I could not find; but I
discovered a “‘ Funeral Banquet” relief of Roman date, which
has not been published. The execution is not of high order but
the design is worthy of mention because it is the only specimen,
so far as I know, which depicts so many pieces of armor together.
Usually there is only a shield or a helmet, but in this one there
are helmet, shield, greaves, and spear represented as hanging on
the wall. It is about 0.31 high by 0.35m. in width. Perhaps one
should not omit the two lions of inferior Roman workmanship,
one built into the wall, the other lying on the ground. These
and the ‘ Funeral Banquet” relief just mentioned are the only
objects of ancient art I noticed in Sinope, aside from a few terra-
cotta figurines. The disfigured bust thought by the inhabitants
to represent Autolycus has been carried off from its niche in the
wall of the Byzantine tower.” Meagre as these materials are, they
1Strabo XII 546; Appian, Mith. 83; Plut. Luc. 23; Lowy, Inschriften
Griech. Bildhauer 103%, 481, 541; Sthennis of Olynthus is identical with
Σθέννις ‘Hpodapov’ APyvaioc ; cf.also Overbeck, Antike Schriftquellen, 1343-1349.
acf..Chap. X init. *Strabo XII 546.
= Coleus ΠΠΠ 250: 6078: ΠΑ nbs ei, pers.
ΟΣ ρα pals3e 7 Syllogos κζ΄ 1900, pp. 263-264.
8Cf. Hommaire de Hell, op. cit., p. 346.
264 AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGY,
enable us to think of Sinope as having some satisfactions, perhaps

much more numerous than we can now conceive, for the constant
human desire to fix the forms of men and living things in stone.
Of the architecture of ancient Sinope, its art as carried into
building, no more can be said than of its other art. Notwith-
standing the care’ with which the city was built, the old structures
have perished. The only possible trace I could find of the
aqueduct is in the arches against which part of the city wall is
built.’ The wall also contains, as before noted,’ pieces of archi-
traves with inscriptions and columns. Twoof these inscriptions
testify to a building, or at least parts of a building, having been
erected at the expense of certain individuals. We know that
different men did sometimes put their means together to erect a
structure, while at other times the whole building was finished at
the expense of one person.’ Either supposition may have been
the fact in regard to these fragments. Quarries still exist out on
the promontory. The finest of Mithradates’ palaces was at
Sinope’ but all its adornments, together with the stoas, gym-
nasium, and market-place of later times, have disappeared and
left no trace.®
CHAPTER X:
THE CULTS AT SINOPE.

Many deities were worshipped at Sinope. The literary evi-
dence, which consists of Strabo’s account of an oracle of Autolycus®
and of what Tacitus, Plutarch, Macrobius and Clement of Alex-
andria say about Ptolemy’s securing the image of Serapis from
Sinope, is scant.”” But the inscriptions upon altars and upon other
stones, together with the legends and figures on coins, afford a
considerable bulk of testimony. By collating this we find at
Sinope cults of seven gods out of the Great Twelve: Zeus, Apollo,
1Strabo XII 545. ΘΟΕ A+). BP. x ΧΙ jp. 131.

2iCfaibide *Am. J. Arch. 1. c., p. 306, no. 33; p. 307, no. 34.
SCfibids p..307- 6 Hamilton, op. cit., p. 312.
7Reinach-Gdotz op. cit., p. 287; Diod. XIV 31; Οἷς. De Imp. Cn. Pomp.
21(8).
5 Cf. Ane b. XX ΤΙ. 130: ® Strabo XII 546.
Tac. Hist. IV 83, 84; Plut. de Iside et Osir. c. 28, 362a (source Manetho) ;
De Sollertia Animalium 36, 984; Eust. ad. Dionys. Per. 255; Steph. Byz. 5. v:
Clem, Protrept. IV, 48 (26 ed. Sylburg); Macrob. Saturn.1 4; Cyrill. Jul. p. 13
ANCIENT SINOPE. 265
Athena, Hermes, Ares, Poseidon, and Demeter;' of five of the

later importations: Dionysus, Asclepius, the Dioscuri, Serapis,
and Isis;? of four mythical heroes: Autolycus, Phlogius, Perseus,
and Heracles;* of four astral divinities: Helios, Selene, Hydra-
choos, and Sirius; and of six of the abstract or generalized con-
ceptions: Nemesis, Themis, Eros, Nike, Hygieia, and Fortuna.’
I found there also an altar θεῷ μεγάλῳ ὑψίστῳ. Lanaras had pre-
viously discovered one θεῷ ὑψίστῳ. There are no large altars.
That such existed we may argue from the presence of the great
statues of Autolycus and Serapis, but the iconoclasm of the
Christian and of the Mohammedan has left no trace of them.
Those to be seen at Sinope, numerous as they are, are small.
The largest one stands in a field and is only 91 cm. in height,
including the rough portion of 17 cm. which was under ground.°
Two others about 50 cm. high have been carried into an apothe-
cary shop.’ Another, 58 cm. high, stands in a back yard," and
another, 49 cm. high, supports the wooden post of a porch." All
have the same general form, with projecting bases and tops, and
1 Ζεὺς δικαιόσυνος μέγας, Am. J. Arch. [X (1905), p. 3023; Ζεὺς ἥλιος ναυδαμηνὸς
ἐπήκοος, Ibid. p. 303; for a similar epithet of Zeus, εὑρυδαμηνός, cf. Revue
Arch. 1888, II, p. 223; Sterrett, Wolfe Expedition, no. 589; J. Η. 5. XVIII,
p. 96; Ramsay, Cl. Review, 1905, pp. 417, 419. The Sinope inscription does
not favor Ramsay’s connection of the epithet with Men, the moon-god. The
epithet is probably local. Hermes, Am. J. Arch. 1. c., p. 323; on Poseidon
cf. below. All seven appear on coins, cf. works on coins as cited, p. 256,
note 3.
2 Asclepius, Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), p. 306; Serapis, Ibid. pp. 315, 331; Isis,
Ibid. p. 312; for Dionysus, the Dioscuri, Serapis, and Isis cf. works on coins
as cited, p. 256, note 3.
3 Autolycus, Strabo XII 546; Appian, Mithr. 83; Phlogius, Am. J. Arch. IX
(1905), p. 306; Perseus, Ibid. pp. 320-322. Heracles, Ibid. p. 305, also on coins,
cf. Imhoof-Blumer, Monnaies Grecques p. 230,no.13; Num. Chron. 1885, pl. 11,
18; for Heracles and Perseus cf. also the works on coins cited. For Perseus at
the neighboring town of Amisus cf. Cumont, Revue Archéologique V (1905), pp.
180f. Perseus was the mythical ancestor of the Achaemenidae with whom
Mithradates the Great, born at Sinope, claimed relationship.
*Cf. Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 323. For the head of Helios on coins of Sinope
cf. Mionnet, op. cit. suppl. IV, p. 574, 131; British Museum Catalogue of
Greek Coins, Pontus, pl. XXII, 15. De Koehne, Description du musée de
M. le prince Kotschoubey p. 59 thinks that the cult of Helios was introduced
into Olbia from Sinope. Cf. Hirst, The Cults of Olbia, J. H.S. XXII, p. 43.
ὃ Hygieia, Am. J. Arch. 1. c., p. 306; Themis, Ibid. p. 323; for the others cf.
works on coins as cited above.
ὁ Ibid. p. 304. T Ibid. p. 306. ‘Ibid. p. 303.
* Ibid. p. 306, nos. 28, 29. 10 Tbid. Ὁ. 305. 1 Tbid. p. 304.
inscriptions occupying the smooth space between. The inscrip-

tions are upon one side only and have the same general wording,
conveying the name of the dedicator, the god to whom set up,
and a general votive expression.
The statue and the shrine of Autolycus imply a temple where
those who consulted the oracle ofthe city’s founder might meet.
The two-columned portico in which Nemesis stands on many
imperial coins is proof that a temple of that goddess existed at
Sinope.” Another temple appears from the expression of the
woman Rheipane, who declared herself honored because she
dwelt ‘“‘near pure Serapis”’,, i.e., near to his temple.* If we
receive the stories which relate the carrying off of Serapis to
Alexandria their mention of a colossal statue and of the worship
of the god at Sinope are another indication of the existence ofhis
temple there. Other temples there doubtless were to other gods
named in the lists already given, but these three are reasonably
certain.
The sea-girt peninsula would not long be without some worship
of Poseidon.* On coins? the figure of the god appears both seated
and standing and in both cases with the familiar dolphin and
trident, one in one hand, the other in the other. The prominence
of this cult at Sinope appears from a decree giving valuable per-
quisites to the priest of Poseidon Heliconius.® He is to be exempt
from military duty. At public contests he is to have a wreath
and wine. Incertain months he is to have the right leg, the loins,
and the tongue of public sacrifices, and of private sacrifices the
loins or shoulder-blade and breast. The worship of this god would
naturally begin at an early date, and we find his image on many
pre-imperial coins as well as upon those of the later emperors.
1Cf. Strabo XII 546; Appian, Mithr. 83.
2Cf. coins of Trajan, Caracalla, Maximinus, Gordianus, Philippus Junior,
also Faustina, Tranquillinus in works cited, p. 256, note 3.
3 Cf, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 315. The temple undoubtedly stood in the Greek
Quarter where this inscription and Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 312, no. 40 were found,
not at the narrowest part of the isthmus just outside the walls to the south-
west, where a Byzantine church was excavated, as is stated in Parnassos
VI 869.
4 Cf. the name Poseidonius on vase-handles from Sinope, Am. J. Arch. 1. c.
pp: 300, 301. ΤΠοσειδεών occurs as the name of one of the months, cf. Dit-
tenberger, Sylloge’, 603.
5. Cf. Head, Hist. Num. p. 435 and other works on coins as cited, p. 256, note 3.
ὁ Cf, Dittenberger ].c. Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 331, no. 87, also shows worship
of Poseidon.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 267
The significance of Sinope’s worship of Apollo is somewhat

obscure. He was regarded as the founder of Miletus,’ and
Sinope was founded by the Milesians who naturally would pro-
mote the worship of their home-god at the new settlement. The
migration of the god from the west is further indicated in those
forms of the story of the rape of Sinope which spoke of her as
being brought from Boeotia by Apollo.” The representations on
coins are various. One is an archaic figure standing near a tripod,
with laurel branch in one hand and an ointment vase in the other.
Another represents him with laurel wreath, seated on the om-
phalos, with lyre in hand.’
The most prominent Sinopean deity was Serapis. From the
time of Hadrian on by far the most frequent figure on her coins
was Serapis,’ and if we go back to the fourth century B. Cc. the
testimony of the great Cynic is decisive in the same direction.
The Athenians declared Alexander to be Dionysus.’ ‘Then call
me Serapis”’ said Diogenes, implying of course that that was the
important local god of his native city.
The worship of the heavenly bodies was always prominent at
Sinope. Its name was probably connected with Sin, the Assyrian
moon-god and its early Assyrian settlers doubtless brought that
worship with them.® There has heretofore been no known
Sinopean inscription with Selene expressly mentioned nor even
any representation of Selene on coins; but a new inscription con-
tains the names of six deities, one of which is Selene.’ This is
one more testimony to the persistence of the moon cult. It is
worth noting that three of the other names, Helios, Hydrachoos,
and Sirius, also belong to heavenly bodies, the remaining two
being Themis and Hermes.
The Sinopeans hearing of Serapis in Egypt, a combination of
Osiris, the sun-god, and Apis,* identified him with their own native
god, Zeus Helios, and the Egyptians in turn hearing of the
Sinopean deity, Zeus Hades, who Reinach thinks was none other
1Curtius, Gr. Geschichte I 493. ACh ΑΕ. SVS pps 147, 148.
3 Cf. Head, Hist. Num. p. 435 and other works cited, p. 256, note 3.
4Num. Zeit. XXI (1889), pp. 2f., 385 f. A table I made shows that Serapis
is the most frequent figure on imperial coins. Nemesis is second.
5 Diog. Laert. VI 63. ® Cf. chap. IV (A. J. P. XX VII, p. 144 f.)
ΠΑ τὰ Io ΑΥΤΟΝ}: ον oe 222:
8 Wilcken, Sarapis und Osiris-Apis (Archiv III, p. 249 f.) objects to the
derivation of Serapis from Osiris and Apis. But cf. Lehmanns, Sarapis contra
Oserapis, Beitr. z. alt. Geschichte IV (1904), p. 396.
than the hellenized national god of the Paphlagonians,! identified

him with their Serapis, giving him attributes not Egyptian. Some-
thing like this, I think, is the explanation of the story that arose
about Ptolemy Soter having the colossal statue of the god of
Sinope brought to Alexandria.” In any case Helios and Serapis
were practically identified even in Egypt, just as we know them
to have been in Sinope.’
Along with the worship of Serapis naturally goes that of Isis,
whose head occurs on coins. A priestess of Isis is known from
an inscription found at Sinope.‘
The cult of the emperors, which in the provinces was so strong
as a political and social unifying force, flourished in Paphlagonia,
where we know there was, for example, a temple and cult of
Augustus.? A similar worship doubtless existed in Sinope.
Perhaps the inscription to Marcus Aurelius found there indicates
divine honors paid to him. The strongest evidence of emperor
worship in Sinope is the head of Augustus or some other emperor
on what we may call the divine side of coins, that is, the side
where the figures of deities were usually placed, and the name
of some other as yet undeified emperor on the other side.
Finally came Christianity, which placed the cross *®upon tomb-
stones and churches and for atime caused the pagan temples to
1 Reinach-G6tz, op. cit., p. 232; Meyer, Geschichte des Altertums II 2091.
Otto, Priester und Tempel im hellenistischen Aegypten, p. 11 f. thinks Serapis
is a chthonic deity native to Egypt and not originally an oriental god as
believes Preuschen in his Ménchtum und Sarapiskult. So also Bouché-
Leclercq, Revue de l'histoire des religions XLVI (1902), p. 1 f. On Serapis-
cult at Alexandria cf. also Lafaye, Histoire des divinités d’Alexandrie p. 16 f.;
Gruppe, Griechische Mythologie, p. 1576 f. (Von Miiller’s Handbuch der ΚΙ.
Alt. V, 2,2, 3); Mahaffy, Empire of the Ptolemies, p. 72; The Silver Age of the
Greek World p. 4or.
*Zoega, Nummi Aegyptii, p. 133, no. 309, thinks a coin of Hadrian repre-
sents the Sinopean statue being taken on board ship. On the whole mooted
question cf. Wilkinson, The Ancient Egyptians III, p. 95 f.; Plew, de Sara-
pide (KGnigsberg 1868), p. 20, who takes the name of the mountain near
Memphis, Sinopion, to be a mere fiction to connect the Sinopean tradition with
that of Memphis, and rightly I think, cf. also J. H. S. VI (1885), p. 289 f.;
Jahrbuch des arch. deut. Inst., 1897, Anzeiger, p. 169 ; 1898, pp. 154,166 f., 172 f.
Representations of Serapis in art always follow the Greek type probably
created by Bryaxis, cf. Reinach, Le moulage des statues et le Sérapis de
Bryaxis, Revue Arch. XX XIX (1902), p. 5 f.
ΟΣ LG: na68g4. Am. J. Arch.l..c. ps 306, no;30:
+ Tbide 512: 5 Cf. p. 256, note 2.
Sf, Am. J; Arch.l.¢:, pp: 31s, 322) 325, 326, 329
ANCIENT SINOPE. 269
be all but deserted and nearly ruined the market for sacrificial
animals. Many ofthe Christians, about whom Pliny the younger
wrote in his famous letter’ to Trajan, must have lived in Sinope,
for the “contagion of this superstition” “seized upon the cities”’,
of which Sinope was an important one. “The Christians were
wont to meet together on a stated day, before it was light, and to
sing among themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as to God and
bind themselves by an oath, not to the commission of any wicked-
ness, but not to be guilty of theft or robbery or adultery, never to
falsity their word, nor to deny a pledge committed to them when
called upon to return it”. A fuller discussion of the Christian
worship of this district as referred to in Pliny’s letter belongs to
the domain of Church History rather than to this paper. Yet
any account of Sinopean cults would be incomplete without
this much.
PROSOPOGRAPHIA SINOPENSIS.”
᾿Αγαθόδωρος, φροντιστής, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. IX, (1905),
P0322) nol ol.
᾿Αγί[ ελέΪδας Βαβύττου, πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313.
᾿Αθήναιος ᾿Αντιάνδρου Σινωπεύς grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) I, 3,
3339-
᾿Αθηνίω[ν] Διονυσίο[υ] Σινωπί εἼύ-ς], grave-stone, I. 6. (ΟΞ ᾺΘ
IT, 3, 3340.
Αἰβούτιο[s] MalE]euols],grave-stone, Am.J.Arch.|].c. p. 318, no. 53.
Αἰμιλιανὸς ᾿Οφιλλίου Κουρίωνος, grave-stone, ibid. p. 318, no. 52.
Αἰσχίνης, vase-fabricant, ibid. p. 301, no. 20.
᾿Ακύλαςς.ς Cf. ibid. p- 324, no. 68 ®) Japuv{ i jou ᾿Ακύλα.
᾿Αμφίλοχος Evy|evidou], ibid. p. 320.
’Alolveiros, φοράρις (forarius), dedicator to Helioserapis, ibid. p.
306, no. 30. Cf. Cagnat, Inscriptiones Graecae ad Res Romanas
Pertinentes III, 1, no. 93. é
᾿Απατούριος, vase-fabricant, ibid. p. 299, no. 11.
᾿Απήμα |yros, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 301, no. 15.
᾿Απολλωνίδης Ποσ(ε)ιδωνίου, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 300, no. 12; p. 301,
nos. 16, 17:
᾿Απολλώνιος Μενάνδρου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone in Athens,
cf.Robinson,
Berl. Phil. Woch., 1904, no. 49, cols. 1566 f.
1Plin, Ep. X 96.

* This list includes all names noted in inscriptions from Sinope and those
of Sinopeans found elsewhere. Father’s names are as a rule not listed
separately.
"Apia Πρεῖμα. Cf. 5. ν. Ἕρμων.

᾿Αρίστ[ αρ χ[ οἹς [᾿Δρ]}ιστά[ px lol v], πρύτανις, Am. J. Ατοῆ. 1. ς., p.
512:
᾿Αρτε]μίδωρος, vase-maker, ibid. p. 301, no. 15.
A ]σκ[λ 7ηπιόδωρος ᾽Ολύμπου, πρύτανις, 1014. Ρ. 312.
ἤλτταλος, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. Ῥ- 302, no. 22.
᾿Αφροδίσιος ᾿Αφροδισίου, πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313.
᾿Αφροδίσιος Εὐπόρου Σινωπεύς, ἔφηβος, I. Ο. (C. 1. A.) II, 467. Cf.
also 5. ν. Εὔπορος.
Βάκχιος Μνήσιος, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 319, no. 54.
Βάτων Σινωπεύς, ῥήτωρ and historian; Strabo XII, 546; Athenaeus
VI, 251 ὃ; X, 426; XIV,-639 αἱ Plut., Ais a55.0Susennht!
Gesch. der Gr. Lit. der Alexandrinerzeit I, 635 f.; Schwartz in
Pauly-Wissowa, Encyclopadie s. v. Baton; Miiller, Frag. Hist.
Gr. IV, pp. 247-350:. Date, third cent. Bic. ὍΘ αἰβὸ Ξ Ὁ.
Menippus.
BiAXapos, astronomer, possibly a Sinopean. Cf. Strabo XII, 546.
Βύηθος Λυσιμάχου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. 1. Aa) I akan.
Blotoxos Movac ..., dedicator, Am. J. Arch. 1: c. Ὁ. 306, no. 32.
Γάεις ᾿Απολλωνί δου] Σινωπε[ ύς], grave-stone, I. Ο- (ΘΛ Ἦν Ei;
2, 2907.
Γλαυκίας, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 301, no. 21.
Γλῆρις Λεμβίου, πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313.
Aapootpatos Σινωπεύς, athlete who won six times in the πάλη at
the Isthmian games, epigram. Cf. Anth. Plan. III, 25.
Δημήτριος Φίντιος, πρύτανις. Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 313.
Δημήτριος Σινωπεύς, Cavalry soldier and land-owner in Egypt.
Cf. Grenfell and Hunt, Amherst Papyri, part IH, nos. XLII and
LV. Date, first half of second cent. B. Ὁ.
Δημόστρατος Upopnbiwvos, πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 313.
Διογένης, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 297, no. 6.
At loyévns, φιλόσοφος, ibid. p. 308.
Διογένης 6 Σινωπεύς, the famous Cynic philosopher (414-323 8B.C.);
cf. Strabo XII, 546; Diog. L. Vita Diog.; epigram in Preger,
Inscr. Gr. Metricae no. 166. Possibly a tragedian also; cf.
Kirchner, Prosopographia Attica, no. 3804 and Pauly-Wissowa,
Encyclopadie 5. Diogenes. CA, Gaby: 7074 Διογένης Ἱκεσίου
Σινωπαῖος is probably a forgery.
Διόδωρος Σινωπεύς = Διόδωρος Δίωνος Σημαχίδης in 7:1: (Cc. [. A.)
Il, 3, 3343. Comic poet; cf: Athenaeus VI, 235 6, 230 Ὁ; X;
431 c; Preuner, Ein Delphisches Weihgeschenk p. 72; Meineke,
ANCIENT SINOPE. 271
Hist. Crit. pp. 418-419; Frag. Com. Graec. III, pp. 543-546.
Meineke and Kaibel in Pauly-Wissowa op. cit. and A. Miller
(Philologus LXIII, p. 354) classed him under the Middle Comedy,
but Capps (Am. J. Arch. IV (1900) p. 83) has shown that he is a
poet of the New Comedy. He took part in the comic contests at
Delos in the years 284 and 280 8. c. (B. C. H. VII, pp. 105, 107.
The dates given are those of Homolle, Archives de I’ Intendance
sacrée pp. 58, 127, which are two years later than in the B. C. H.).
Diodorus was also second and third at the Lenaea in Athens in
288 with the plays Νεκρός and Mawépevos. Diodorus was granted
Athenian citizenship and is called an Athenian in Auctor Lex. Ὁ
Hermann, p. 324. His deme is given in I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3343
on the family tomb-stone on which the name of Diphilus also
occurs. For the inscription, which Wilhelm has rediscovered, cf.
Wilhelm, Urkunden Dramatischer Auffithrungen in Athen (Son-
derschriften des Oest. Arch. Inst. in Wien, Band V1), p. 60. The
identification of Diodorus and Diphilus as comic poets is due
to Kumanudes, but he thought that Diodorus, father of Dion,
was the comic poet. Capps (I. c.) with theaid of I. G.(C. I. A.)
II, 972 proves that the comic poet was the son of Dion and
flourished about 300 B. 6. Kirchner, op. cit. 3959, thinks the
Διόδωρος ᾿Αθηναῖος of B. C. H. VII, p. 105 is not a different poet,
wrongly citing Capps. This Diodorus must be different from the
Διόδωρος Σινωπεύς, Whose name follows that of Διόδωρος ᾿Αθηναῖος
among the κωμωιδοί. The ethnicon Σινωπεύς is used in the Delian
inscriptions (B. C. H. VII, pp. 105, 107) because Diodorus of
Sinope did not receive Athenian citizenship till after 282 B. C. or
because he preferred to be known in Delos as a Sinopean to dis-
tinguish him from an Athenian of the same name who was
performing at the same time in Delos. There is no reason for
Wilhelm’s suggestion (op. cit., p. 61) that Διόδωρος ᾿Αθηναῖος was
also from Sinope and Διόδωρος Σινωπεύς Was his nephew, son of
Diphilus. A comic actor by the name of Diodorus occurs also
in B. C. H. IX, p. 134. Diodorus should not be read in G. D. I.
2565, |. 42 as restored by Kirchner Pros. 3934, cf. Wilhelm, op.
cit. p. 245.
Διονύσιος ᾿Απολλωνίου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, 1. G.'(C. I. A.) II,
3; 3342.
Διονύσιος Σινωπεύς, poet of the New Comedy; cf. Pauly-Wissowa
5. Dionysius (105); cf. Meineke, Hist. Crit. I, p. 419; Frag. Com,
Graec. III, 546-555; Athenaeus XI, 467 d, 497 c; XIV, 615 ε.
In the last passage Athenaeus quotes the play of Dionysius

called Ὁμώνυμοι; cf. also TX, 381 c. This led astray both Senge-
busch, op. cit. p. 13 and Streuber, op. cit. p. 90, who say there
was a grammarian Dionysius from Sinope who wrote περὶ ὋὉμωνύ-
pov. In I. G. (C. I. A.) 7 977 m, 1. 2 the name Dionysius
should be read, cf. Wilhelm, op. cit. pp. 128 f., 135, 180.
Διονύσιος Σινωπεύς, grave-stone in Rhodes, I. G. (I. G. Ins.) XII,
I, 465.
Διονύσιος, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 301, no. 18.
Διονύσιος ᾿Αρχίππου, ἐπιστάτης τῆς βουλῆς and πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313.
Διονύσιος Προκλέους Σινωπεύς, Kumanudes, ᾿Αττικῆς ᾿Επιγραφαὶ ᾽Ἐπι-
τύμβιοι NO. 2396; ἘΦ. ᾽Αρχ. 1852-1855, p. 921, no. 1505. This
inscription is omitted in the Corpus. For Πρόκλος cf. infra.
Διόφαντος ᾿Ασκλαπιοδώρου Σινωπεύς, general of Mithradates the
Great, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 331, no. 85. Perhaps to be identified
with the author ofthe Ἱστορίαι Movrixai (cf. Miller, Frag. Hist. Gr. ΙΝ,
p. 396). Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa Encycl. s. v. Diophantus
gives the third cent. B. c. as the date of the historian Diophantus,
but I see no reason for placing him so early. Agatharchides
who quotes him belongs to the end of the second cent. B. C.
(cf. Niese, Gesch. der Gr. und Mak. Staaten I, p.12). Diophantus’
victory over the Scythians was about 110 B. c. and he may have
written the Ποντικά before then. A man who knew all about the
Pontus would be just the one to send on such an expedition:
Niese, Rhein. Mus. XLII, p. 569 makes the identification.
Διόφαντος EvAaprixov, πρύτανις, Am.) ΔΈΘΠ fe. 0: 515.
Δίφιλος Δίωνος Σινωπεύς, I. G. (C. I. A.) ΤΠ 3, 3343, poet of the
New Comedy, brother of the comic poet Diodorus, cf. supra;
cf. Meineke, Hist. Crit. I, 446 f., Frag. Com. Graec. IV, 375-430;
Strabo XII, 546; Anonym. de Com. XXX, XXXI; Susemihl,
Gesch. der Gr. Lit. in der Alexandrinerzeit I, 260 f. Floruit
about 320, cf. I. 6. (C. I. A.) II, 977 g and Capps, Am. J. Arch.
IV (1900) p. 83, note. Cf. Pauly-Wissowa op. cit. s. Diphilus
and Wilhelm, op. cit. pp. 123, 132.
Δίων Διοδώρου Σινωπεύς, ες {61 A.) 1ΠΠ Ὶ 1325. father οἵ
Diphilus and Diodorus.
Adpos Διοσκουρίδου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, . ΟΣ ΟΣ ΑΘ:
2908.
Δῶρος, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 295, no. 1.
Σ |éEros ᾿Εγνάτιος ’Eyvariov 6 vids, ibid. p. 318, no. 51.
Εἰδᾶς, vase-maker, ibid. p. 301, no. 16.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 273
‘Exar@vupos, δεινὸς λέγειν, Sinopean ambassador to Xenophon’s

Ten Thousand at Cotyora, Xen. Anab. V, 5,7; Six, Num. Chron.
£885) P: 23:
Οὐαλέριος ΓἜκλεκτος Σινωπεύς, βουλευτής and athlete, I. G. (C. I. A.)
ΠῚ τ 20.
Ἔνδημος, ἀστυνόμος, Am. ie Awehe lec. p. 298, no. 8.
᾿Ἐπίδημος ᾽Ἐπ[.]ἐ[λ]π[ου], νομοφύλαξ, Am. J. Arch. l.c. p. 313.
Ἐπίελπος, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. |. c. p. 295, no. 3.
᾿Επιχάρης Θεαρίωνος, Sinopean ambassador, made πρόξενος of Histi-
aea, ibid. p. 333, no. 96.
L. E[rJen[nJius Pompeianus, sarcophagus ibid. p. 326, no. 72.
‘Eppatos Σινωπεύς. See Φαίδριον below.
Ἕρμων. Inscription’ found near Sinope, letters 0.03 m. high.
Ἕστιαῖος Σινωπεύς, athlete who won in the ἀγενείους πυγμήν at the
Amphiaraia at Oropus, I. G. VII (C. I. G.S., I) 414.
Ed«djs, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 299, no. 10; p. 300,
ΠΟ 12: ἢ. 301, Nos. 14,17.
Εὐλάλιος, epigram, ibid. p. 311.
Εὔνους Βιότου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. 6. (C. I. A.) III, 2, 2909.
Εὐξένη Swol mis |, grave-stone, eG lie pars V CG. LAVAS.
3343 Ὁ.
Evn| opos|, sarcophagus, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 314, no. 41.
I’. Kdtos Ev [τυχια]νὸς, vavk\apos, πρόξενος, Latyschev, Inser. Ant.
Orae Sept. Ponti Eux. IV, no. 72.
Zén, wife of M. Haterius Maximus, sarcophagus, Am. J. Arch.
lie. p. 315, NO. 44.
Ἡγησαῖος Σινωπεὺς ὁ Κλοιὸς ἐπίκλην, Cynic philosopher, pupil of
Diogenes; cf. Diog. L. VI, 84. The name Hegesaeus occurs also
as that of a δοῦλος τοῦ θεοῦ in a Greek inscription of the year 1781
A. D., still to be seen over the gate-way of Sinope and published
by Hommaire de Hell op. cit: I], pps 351, 352 7 ἘΝ ple ΧΙ 4
ἩἩγησίθεμις Ἣρωκλείδεω Σινωπέος, grave-stone, Goce eae) hii.
3, 3344. ͵ ; Ἐν
Ἡδύλη, member of the family of Dion, Diodorus, and Diphilus,
grave-stone; cf. I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3343:
Ἡρακλείδης, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 295, no. 2.
‘'EEPMMNOCX
APIATTPEIMAE
CIOY - AM®.
=e “Ἕρμωνος χ[ρηστὲ χαῖρε. | ἡ σύμβιος αὐτοῦ] ᾿Αρία Πρεῖμα ἑαυτῆς ἀνδρὶ
athe ea, one σίου ᾿Αμφ[ιπολείτη.
Ἡρακλείδης Μι[κρ]ίου, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 301, no. 13.

Ἡρακλείδης Σινωπεύς, writer of epigrams; cf. Anth. Pal. VII, 281,
392, 465.
᾿Ἡφαίστιος ᾿Εξηκέστου, πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 313.
Θεμιστῆς Νύμφ] ὠ͵νος, grave-stone, ibid. p. 322, no. 60.
Θέογνις Σινωπεύς, ibid. p. 332, nO. 93, epigram attributed to Simon-
ides.
Θεόπομπος Σινωπεύς, wrote περὶ Σεισμῶν; cf. Phlegon of Tralles in
Miiller, Frag. Hist. Graec. III, p. 622, 48.
Θεύδωρος, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 295, no. 3.
Θρασωνίδης, rhapsode, cf. Pp: 279.
‘Ikeoias ᾿Αντιπάτρου, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 298, no. 9; p. 299, no. 10.
Ἱκεσίας, father of Diogenes the Cynic, Diog. L. VI, 20.
Ἰουκοῦνδος, dedicator of altar to Heracles, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c.
Pp. 605, ἢ. 27:
Ἱστιαῖος, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 294, no. 1.
Λικιννία Καισελλία, grave-stone, ibid. p. 317, no. 50.
[Καλλικράτης] Μήτριος, Σινωπεύς, πρόξενος of Delphi ibid. p. 330.
Γάϊος Μάρκιος Knvowpivos, πρεσβευτὴς Καίσαρος, κηδεμὼν τῆς πόλεως,
ibid. pp. 309, 310.
Kirros Διονυσίου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. 6. (C. I. A.) I, 3, 3345.
Rangabé, Antiquités Helléniques II, p. 903, no, 1867 reads Σίττος.
Κλεαίνετος, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 302, no. 23.
Κλεοχάρης, pirate and prefect of Sinope; cf. p. 253.
Kopvoutioy Σινωπεύς, Child who died abroad (Rome), θρεπτός of
Diodorus, Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca 702; I. G. (1. ἃ. S., I.)
XIV, 1787; Cagnat, Inscr. Gr. ad Res Rom. Pert. I, 293.
Κτήσων, vase-maker, Am. 1. Arch. ]. c. p. 299, no. 9.
Adpaxos Χορηγίωνος, γραμματεὺς τῆς βουλῆς, ibid. p. 313. Also
πρύτανις.
Λάμαχος ᾿Αντίφου, grave-stone, ibid. p. 319, no. 54.

Δεόνιππος, pirate and prefect of Sinope, cf. p. 253.
Λε]ωμέδων ᾿Αριστώνα[ κ]τος, dedicator to Phlogius, ibid. p. 306,
no. 31.
Λέων Σινωπεύς, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3346. Grave-stele with
relief of lion.
K. Ackivvtos Ppovyts, mpokevytns, sarcophagus, Am. if Arch. doi.
. 715, πὸ- 75:
Λικίνιος Χρυσόγονος '᾽Ολυ.. - - «- ΣΡ ΠΡ. 290; no. 52.
L. Licinnius Fr(u)gi, an enormous grave-stone, ibid. p. 327,
no. 73.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 275
Ποπίλλιος Λουτατιανὸς vids Ποπ(ιλλίου) Οὐφικιανοῦ dis ἀρχιερέως καὶ

Σηστίας Μαρκιανῆς ἱερείας μεγάλης ᾿Αθηνᾶς, grave-stone, I, G. (C. 1. A.)
ΠῚ 2.7450:
Olcinius Macrinus, C. I. L. III, 14402.
Mdns Σαροάνδου, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 316, no. 49.
Σεουῆρος Maxep, dedicator to Zeus Hypsistos, ibid. p. 306, no. 29.
M. I... aréptos Μάξιμος, physician, sarcophagus, ibid. p. 315,
no. 44.
Μεγαλήμερος, χαλκεύς, ibid. p. 322, no. 62.
Μένιππος Σινωπεύς, Cynic philosopher, cf Dioot ος. lmall
the handbooks Menippus, from whom the Menippean satires took
their name, is spoken of as coming from Gadara in Syria. Strabo
XVI, 759, followed by Steph. Byz. s. v. Gadara, is the only
authority for this; and Diogenes Laertius’ statement in VI, 99,
that Menippus was in origin a Phoenician, is interpreted to mean
that he came from Gadara, for Gadara was in Coele-Syria, a part
of Phoenicia. But Diog. Laert. VI, 95 mentions a Menippus
from Sinope who became ἐπιφανής among the pupils of Metrocles.
Diog. L. then gives the life of Hipparchia, which is followed (VI,
99) by the life of Menippus. The probability is that this Menippus
is the same as the one in VI, 95, especially since the Sinopean is
not included among the Menippi in sec. 101. Diog. L. makes
the blunder of calling him a contemporary of Meleager whose
date is the first half of the first century B. c. The fact that
Meleager of Gadara wrote Menippean Satires is probably ac-
countable for Diogenes’ statement and led Strabo to say that both
came from Gadara. Menippus probably lived in the third century
B. C., cf. Probus ad. Verg. Ecl. VI, 31, Varro qui sit Menippeus
non a magistro cuius aetas /onge praecesserat. This is certainly
true if we identify the Menippus of Diog. L. VI, 99, who wrote
nothing σπουδαῖον and is undoubtedly the Cynic whom Varro
imitated in his Satirae Menippeae or Cynicae, with the Cynic
from Sinope who was a pupil of Metrocles (floruit about 270
Β. 6.). Zeller, Phil. der Griechen II, 1, p. 286, n. 3 identifies the
two. Itis possible to go further. Diocles, who had made a special
study of the lives of the philosophers and, therefore, ought to be
followed in preference to Strabo, says (apud. Diog. L. VI, 99)
that Baton from the Pontus was the master of Menippus. This
may be the Sinopean ῥήτωρ and historian, whose date falls also in
the third century (cf. Schwartz in Pauly-Wissowa, s. v. Baton and
Susemihl, op. cit. I, 635 f.). That Menippus was a slave, as
Diogenes says, we know also from A, Gellius II, 18, 7 and Ma-
crobius I, 11, 42. Of course it is possible that Menippus was
born in Gadara and went to Sinope where he lived with his master
Baton (so Susemihl, op. cit. I, p. 44 f. who gives the literature on
Menippus) but Sinope had enough slaves of its own without im-
porting any. .Menippus is an example of the characteristic
Sinopean temper referred to above inc. IX.
Mevioxos Μήνιδος Σινωπεύς, 1. G. II, pars V ce PAs 1 Ve 2) 3346 b.
Μένων Σινωπεύς, I. 6. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3348.
Μηνόδωρος ᾿Απολλωνίου Σινωπεύς; Comptes Rendus 1877, p. 277,
Roman inscription found at Kertch.
Mnvodida Maov Σινώπισσα, RG: (Ὁ: iB ie) Lik 2.2910;
Mnrpts [K ]αλλικράτους, πρύτανις, Am. J. Arch. |. c. p. 343.
Μῆτρις Νικάνδρου Σινωπεύς, Athen. ΜΙ. XIII (1888), p. 429. On
name Μῆτρις cf. Am. J. Arch. |. c. p. 330, no. 82.
Μητ[ρ |6[2 Jos (?) Δεινίου, Sinopean ambassador, πρόξενος of Histi-
aea; Am: J. Arch. 1. Ὁ Ὁ: 333.
Μιθραδάτης Σινωπεύς, the Great, cf. Strabo XII, 545 and p. 252,
n, I supra.
Μιθραδάτης, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1]. c. p. 298, no. 7.
Νάννα Διονύσοιο, ibid. p. 319, no. 55.
Ναύπων Καλλισθένους, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 302, no. 23.
Δούκιος Φιδικλάνιος Νέπως Σινωπεύς, lived to be more than a hundred
years old, cf. Phlegon, Macrobioi (Miller, Frag. Hist. Graec. III,
p:600, 1):
Νικίας Φι[λέου Ὁ] Σινωπεύς, I. G. KG; 8 A.) ΠΣ, 3348.
Niko. 20s Πλουτά[ρχου] Σιν[ζω
]π| εύς], 1. G. (C. 1. A.) III, 2, 2911.
᾽Ονήσιμος ᾿Ονησίππου Σινωπεύς, 1. G. (C. I. A.) III, 2, 2912.
’Ovnoixa Mér| @ |vos Σινω[ πέω |s [γυνή], eG: CG: Ife A.) IDE 3, 3349-
ΠάΪμφιλος Σινωπεύς, vrave-stone, 1G. (C4 A) TT, 35.3450:
Published in the Rhein. Mus. 1866, p. 513, no. 308 among the un-
edited inscriptions. The inscription, Πάμφιλος Σινωπεύς, published
in the Bolletino dell’ Instituto 1864, 48 has been overlooked.
This is probably the same inscription and the Ha has become
obliterated since the first publication.
Πασιχάρης Δημητρίου, ἀστυνόμος, Am. ).Areh. 1. Ὁ: pz 205,1n0-12:
Κ[λαυδία] Παῦλα, priestess of Isis, ibid. p. 312, no. 39. Cf. Cagnat,
op: cit...) ra nos 65;
’OPpirAdros Πολύκαρπος, dedicator to Asclepius and Hygieia, Am.
J. Arch. 1. c. p. 306, no. 28. Cf. ᾿Αἰμιλιανός supra.
Αἴλιος Θρεπτίων Ποντιανός, dedicator to θεὸς ὕψιστος, ibid. p. 306,
no. 29.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 277
Ποντικὸς [Θ]άλλου, sarcophagus, ibid. p. 314, no. 42.

C. Aelfius?] Pontius, ibid. p. 327, no. 74.
Ποσειδώνιος Me[ diov], πρύτανις, Am. J. Agch: eo Ὁ. 31}.
Ποσιδεῖος [© lea[pi |ovos, ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 301, no. 19.
Κλαύδιος Ποτέ[λιος], γυμνασίαρχος, ἄρχων τοῦ πρεσβυτικοῦ, ποντάρχης,
cic {1 1: 712; τὸ, 80: Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. III, 1, ne. 95-
"Apia IIpeiwa. Cf. 5. v. Ἕρμων.
AUR(ELIUS) PRISCIANUS, pr(aeses) pr(ovinciae) P(onti) d(evo-
tus) n(umini) m(ajestati) q(ue) eorum, A. J. P. X XVII, p. 139,
Ὧ 2), 200 f
Πρόκλος Σινωπεύς, renders thanks to Nymphs and Poseidon for
being cured, Am. J. Arch. p. 331, no. 87.
Ipwraydpas ᾿Αντισθένους Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. 6. (C. I. A.) II,
3) 3351.
Πρωταγόρας Κυνίσκου, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. ἹΕΡῸΣ p- 299, no. 11;
p. 301, no. 14.
Πύθης Διονυσίου, dedicator to Ζεὺς δικαιόσυνος μέγας, ibid. p. 302,
. nO. 24.
Πυθοκλῆς ἀστυνόμος, ibid. p. 301, no. 21.
Πυρρίας Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. αὐ ΟΥΑΙ Linas aan:
Ῥειπάνη, γείτων καθαροῖο Σαράπιδος, daughter of a pious and virtuous
father, ibid. p. 315, no. 48. Cagnat, op. cit. III, 1, no. 96 wrongly
reads Τειτιανή.
‘Poudeiva, joint-dedicator with her husband of an altar to θεὸς
μέγας ὕψιστος, ibid. p. 304.
Σαιουείνιος, sarcophagus, ibid. p. 314, no. 43.
SALVIUS, vir n(obilis) m(emoriae), unpublished grave-stone in
church at Ortoi, one hour from Sinope.*
Σέλευκος, pirate and prefect of Sinope; cf. p. 253.
=|éAAtos, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 324, no. 68.
Ti8. Κλ. Σεουῆρος, Σινωπεύς, Cured at Epidaurus, dedicator to
᾿Απόλλων Madedras and Σωτὴρ ᾿Ασκλάπιος, I. G. ΤᾺ (ΘΙ Pe. ΤΥ aye,
Λούκιος Σε[πτί]κιος ᾿Απόλαυστος, dedicator of altar to Ζεὺς Ἥλιος
ναυΪ
da μηνὸς ἐπήκοος, ibid. p. 303.
Σεραπίων Ἡφαιστίωνος Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, ΕΟ (GT. AS
2620242.
1 Large marble slab with gable at the top, 1.16 πὶ. high, 0.74 m. wide, 0.12 m,
thick. Letters vary from 0.08 m, to 0.10 m. in height.
VISEINIALI
IINGIONII Ξ
SALVIVS VIRNM
SIT
Σινώπη, Wife of Midias; cf. I. G. III, 3349 and Bechtel, Die

Griechischen Frauennamen, p. 60. Cf. also Sinopis, daughter
of Dionysius, wife of Diophantus in C. I. G., IV, 6991.
Σινώπη, a harlot named after her native town, who lived in the
first half of the fourth cent.B.c. Cf. A. J. P. XXVII, p. 133.
Add to references there Schol. Dem. XXIV, 762, 4 and Leutsch-
Schneidewin, Paroemiographi Graeci I, p. 451 (σινωπίσαι ἐπὶ τοῦ
ἀσχημονῆσαι ἀπὸ ἑταίρας τινὸς ἐκ Σινώπης).
Σκυδρόθεμις, tyrant and king of Sinope, Tac. Hist. IV, 83.
Σοφοκλῆς Δημητρίου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. II, 3, 3353.
Σοφοκλῆς Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. XII (Inscr. Gr. Ins.), 1,
466 (Rhodes).
Σπόρος Σινωπεύς. See Swrnpis below.
Στρατοκλῆς Διονύσοιο, grave-stone, Am.J. Arch. 1. c. p. 319, no. 55.
Σύρι[ο]ς, sarcophagus, ibid. p. 315, no. 46.
Zpodpias Πυθαγγέλου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) 11, 3,
3354:
Σωτηρὶς Σπόρου Σινωπέως, θυγάτηρ Νικομήδου ᾿Αντιοχέως γυνή, |. G.
(Gal, Ae) 11 3:.1::--.
Τεύθρας Θυμοχάρους, κεραμεύς, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 296, no. 4.
Τιβ. "Apaxros, ibid. p. 324, no. 67.
Τιμησίλεως, tyrant; cf. A. J. P. XXVII, pp. 151-2.
Τιμόθεος Σινωπεύς, Epicurean philosopher, Strabo XII, 546.
Τίμων Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, 1. 6. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3356.
Τι]μώριος, vase-maker, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p, 298, no. 8.
Φαίδριον “Eppaiov Σινωπέως θυγάτηρ, grave-stone, I. G.(C. I. A.) III,
2; 2912.
Φαρνάκης Φαρνάκου Σινωπεύς, died abroad, epigram, Kaibel, op. cit.
252.
Φειλητίων Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. CG Ι. /eXe) 111 2 2914.
Φήμιος ᾿Αντίφου, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. ]. c. Ρ. 219, no. 54.
Φιλή σιος, grave-stone, ibid. p. 319, no. 54.
Φιλοκράτης, vase-maker, ibid. p. 302, no. 22.
Φίλων Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, I. G. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3357.
Φίλων Διονυσίου Σινωπεύς, grave-stone, ΤΙ. Ὁ: KC. ie A.) ΠῚ 3; 3358.
Φορμίων Συνήμονος, grave-stone, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 319, no. 54.
Μάνιος Φούλβιος Πακᾶτος, grave-stone, same family as <Atktvvia
Καισελλία and the following name, ibid. p. 317.
Φούλβιος Πραιτωρεῖνος, vids of the preceding man, ibid.
Φρύνη Σινωπίς, grave-stone, I. 6. (C. I. A.) II, 3, 3359.
ANCIENT SINOPE. 279
Xaipis ᾿Αφεναῖος Φάλερες = ᾿Αθηναῖος Φαληρεύς perhaps, Am. ig

Arcehalee.-p: 210, n9.°56.
Χαρμοσύνα Σινωπίς, grave-stone, I. G. XII (Inscr. Gr. Ins.), 1,
467.
Χορηγίων Λεωμέδοντος, ἀστυνόμος, Am. J. Arch. 1. c. p. 298, no. 7.
Cf. also 5. v. Aduayos and Λεωμέδων supra.
Χρησστὸς Σινωπεύς, λιθουργός, ibid. p. 331, no. 87."
Incomplete names are here added.

.» ἀλλιος, vase-maker (?), ibid, p. 297.
... avira[s], Christian tombstone, ibid. p. 322, no. 59.
. eee. a (Ὁ) Μάρκου, ibid. p. 324, no. 68 and no. 66.
|| ermos INOS τ oe Σινωπεύς, πρόξενος Of Cleitor, Athen. Mitt.
VI (1881), p. 303 and Beilage 2.
. 2+. Θρασωνίδου Σινωπεύς, payrardds ; cf. Collitz, Gr. Dialekt-
Inschriften II, p. 742, no. 2564, 1. 11.
ἐν νιν \os, dedicator with his wife Ῥουφεῖνα to θεὸς μέγας ὕψιστος,
Ame}. Arch. lve: p: 304.
.... 0s Καλλισθένους], πρύτανις, ibid. p. 313. Cf. Ναύπων Καλλι-
σθένους Supra.
Πρ ots Πολυδώ[ρου], Σινωπεύς, dedicator to Serapis, ibid. p- 331,
no. 84.
.2.+s Φιλίππου, Σινωπεύς, πρόξενος Of Cleitor, Athen. Mitt. VI
(1881), p. 303 and Beilage 2.
Jouns Hopkins UNIVERSITY. Davip M. ROBINSON.
1Since this article was paged, I have received copies of three more unpub-
lished inscriptions on grave-stones found last August on the isthmus of
Sinope. These I hope to publish in the near future. They marked the
graves of Ἰούλιος Kadrevkéc(?), ναύκληρος ; of Μάνης, the name also of Diogenes’
slave (cf. p. 261, n. 6); and of Νάρκισσος.
ὉWo
oh
τή
fig a
American School
of Classical Studies
at Athens
GREEK AND LATIN INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE

AND ENVIRONS!
THE inscriptions the numbers of which are given in heavy-

faced type (Nos. 1-12, 24-27, 35, 80, 49, 50, 59, 64-79) I
discovered in Sinope and its environs during my stay there
in June, 1903, and publish here from squeezes and copies.
The others have already been edited but are added, with
corrections, for the sake of completeness.
VASE-HANDLES
In the apothecary shop of Mr. Hadji-Anestis in Sinope

there are several handles of amphoras stamped with inscrip-
tions, all found in the same place in Boz-tepé near the Greek
quarter. Nos. 13-23 come from the same spot, which seems
to have been a dumping place for ancient amphoras. Exca-
vations here would prove fruitful.
1. An oblong stamp: length, 0.045 m.; width, 0.015 m.
Letters, 0.003 m. in height. To the right a dolphin in the
claws of an eagle, the symbol which occurs on coins of Sinope
(cf. Brit. Mus. Cat. of Coins, Pontus, etc. pl. xxi, 15, 16, 17;
pl. xxii, 1-7; Head, Historia Numorum, pp. 434 f.).
SaaleleAel “στιαί[ου
ἈΞ ΤΥ ἀστυ[ νόμου
ΔΩΡΟΘ Δώρο [vors
11 desire to express my thanks to His Excellency Hamdy Bey, Director of

the Imperial Museum in Constantinople, and to Dr. Wiegand, who assisted me
greatly in my visit to Sinope. Mr. Myrodes of Sinope also did me great practical
service, and I am under obligations to Dr. Wilhelm and especially to Professor
Capps for various suggestions.
American Journal of Archaeology, Second Series. Journal of the 294
Archaeological Institute of America, Vol. LX (1905), No. 3.
INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE 295
The same inscription with the same symbol is found on an

amphora-handle from Kertch (cf. Becker, VW. Jahrb. 7. kl. Phil.
Suppl. X, p. 34, no. 12). The name Histiaeus as astynomus
occurs on other vase-handles from Kertch, some with the same
symbol (cf. Becker, V. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 502, nos.
28, 29; ibid. Suppl. X, p. 28, nos. 15a, 156 and p. 34, no.
11). The name Dorus as that of a Sinopean occurs in
MG COAL) Wl..2, 2908:
2. An oblong stamp: length, 0.06m.; width, 0.02 m. Let-
ters, 0.005 m. in height.
[ἀστυνόμου]
A= ΧΑ ΒΟΥ ΠΠασιχάρου
ΠΥ ΔΈΝ ΠΕ Pl τοῦ Δημητρί[ου
BAK ACES HS Ἡρακλεῖ
(6) ns
The name Pasichares, genitive sometimes Ilaovyapous, some-
times Πασιχάρου, occurs as that of astynomus on vase-handles
from Kertch and Olbia (cf. Becker, ibid. Suppl. IV, p. 471,
no. 34; p. 477, no. 10; p. 482, nos. 36, 37; Suppl. V, p. 507,
nos. 48, 44; Suppl. X, p. 28, no. 17, and Becker, Mélanges
Gréco-Romains, I, Ὁ. 493, no. 8). Heracleides as the name of
the potter occurs on a Thasian vase-handle (cf. Becker, chad.
Suppl. X, p. 20, no. 6, from Kertch and references given there
in note 17); but this is the first time the combination of these
two names occurs, so far as I know. For a Sinopean named
Heracleides, who wrote epigrams, cf. Anth. Pal. VII, 281,
392, 465. For Demetrius as a Sinopean name, cf. No. 40 and
Amherst Papyri 11. nos. 42, 55.
3. An oblong stamp: length, 0.06 m.; width, 0.02 τὰ.
Letters, 0.005 m. in height. To the right a bunch of grapes
as symbol.
Eee O:Y, ᾿Ἐπιέλπου
AS YaN? ἀστυνο μου
ΘΕΥΔΏΡΟΥ Θευδώρου
A vase-handle from Olbia (Becker, ibid. Suppl. IV, p. 478,

no. 16) is identical. It is not possible to decide whether we
296 DAVID M. ROBINSON
should read ἐπὶ "Ελπου or ’EméArov. Neither name is to

be found in Pape-Benseler, Griechische Eigennamen, or Fick-
Bechtel, Griechische Personennamen. Elpus might be a Kose-
name tor Elpinicus (for ἐπὶ, οἵ. Becker, ibid. Suppl. X,
pp. 113, 230). But the name ’Eséedzos occurs in an inscrip-
tion from Sinope (cf. No. 40). ᾿Επιέλπου ἀστυνόμου occurs
in NV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 478, no. 17; V, p. 498,
no. 14; and X, p. 26, no. 7. The form Θευδώρου instead of
the Icnic Θεοδώρου. which we should expect in a Milesian
colony, shows that the manufacturer was of Doric extrac-
tion. The same form appears ibid. IV, p. 483, no. 39; p. 484,
no. 45; X, p. 31, no. 8; in Dumont, Inscriptions Céramiques
de Gréce, VIII, p. 317, nos. 121, 122. The Ionic form occurs
on vase-handles, WV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. LV, p. 469, no. 23,
and Athen. Mitt. xxi, p. 177, no. 11.
4. An oblong stamp: length, 0.04 m.; width, 0.02 m. Let-
KEPAMI KEepape
|ws
ΠΕ Onieeamy Ony. Tev@pa τοῦ
ONEMEOR CAGE Y= Θυμοχάρους
κεραμέως is not a proper name, but refers to the proprietor of

the establishment (cf. Becker, N. Jahrb. 7. kl. Phil. Suppl. V,
p. 487, no. 47). The name of the fabricant Tev@pas occurs
ibid. IV, p. 478, no. 14 (TevOpa[vros]); V, p. 477, no. 6;
p- 497, nos. 12,13; p. 498, no. 14; p. 499, no. 16; X, p. 225,
no. 9. The usual form of the genitive is Tev@pavtos. Here
we have Tev@pa (for two forms of gen. ef. No. 2).
Letters, 0.003 m. in height.
EIS ἐπὶ
ASSES MCAS. ᾿Αγεμάχου.
ΝΑ ΛΕΈΠΟΥ Δαλείου
The same inscription is found on Rhodian vase-handles from

Olbia (cf. ἐδία. IV, p. 454, no. 2) and from Pergamum (cf.
δ]
Frankel, Die Inschriften von Pergamum, 11. p. 436, no. 781).

The magistrate’s name ᾿Α γέμαχος occurs frequently on Rhodian
vase-handles (cf. C./.G. 111, pref. nos. 10-12: Becker, Mé-
langes Gréco-Romains, I, p. 420, nos. 83-7: LG. XII, 1 (1. 6.
Ins.) 1065, 1, 2,3; Athen. Mitt. XXIII, p. 232; on an amphora-
handle found at Pergamum, Athen. Mitt. XXVII, p. 147).
Δαλίου is the usual form for the genitive of the Rhodian
month, but here e is carelessly used for ἐς due perhaps to the
form Καρνείου, also a month in the Rhodian calendar (for simi-
lar mistakes ci. WV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. X, p. 87). It is
not surprising to find vase-handles of Rhodian fabric in Sinope,
which was on friendly terms with Rhodes. In fact we learn
from Polybius (LV, 56) that, when Sinope was attacked by
Mithradates II, an appeal for help was made to Rhodes, and
the Rhodians sent besides other things ten thousand κεράμια
οἴνου. Perhaps we have the handle of one of these κεράμια.
(Streuber, Sinope, Ein Historisch-Antiquarischer Umriss, pp.
81-84, gives the right year for this attack, 220 B.c., but thinks
the besieger was Mithradates IV; I follow Meyer, Gesch. des
Kénigreichs Pontus, pp. 52, 56, and Reinach, Mithradate
Hupator, p. 40.)
AO hE Nia Διογένη
Ave NeleOey. ..αλλίου
The magistrate’s name Διογένης occurs frequently on vase-

handles. (Cf. O.7.G. III, pref. xiv, nos. 50-57. Dumont,
Inse. OCér. de Gréce, Ὁ. 176, nos. 206-220; p. 282, no. 60;
N. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. XVII, p. 294, nos. 26, 27;
Athen. Mitt. XXI, pp. 147 f., nos. 67-76.) For the genitive
in 7, cf. Meisterhans?, Gram. der att. Inser. Ὁ. 120, 9.
7. An oblong stamp: length, 0.07 m.; width, 0.02 τὰ. Let-
ters, 0.003 m. in height. To the right a Nike driving a quad-
riga, as symbol.
Ave YON SNES YON: ΕΞ ἀστυνομοῦντος

Ke JEG aeial LON ΞΟ Xop|[ny |(wvos τοῦ
NSE S ἘΣ ΟΝ ΝΞ Λεω[μ]}έδοντος
MIOPAAATH® Μιθραδάτης
Χορηγίων as ἀστύνομος occurs in ΟΝ, Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl.

V, p. 491, no. 59, and Χορηγίων τοῦ Λεωμέδοντος ibid. no. 50,
which has the same symbol as our vase-handle, the name of
the fabricant being Evaivetos. Μιθραδάτης as the name of
the fabricant occurs in Becker, Mélanges Gréco-Romains, I,
Ρ. 485, no. 14; WV. Jahrb.f. kl. Phil. Suppl. ΓΝ, p. 465, nos. 4, 5;
p: £66, no. 12; p. 480, no. 26a; 2bid. Suppl. V, p. 478; no. 11:
The combination of these two names has not previously been
found, so far as I know. But all three names were known in
Sinope (cf. Nos. 31, 40, and Strabo ΧΙ], 545). Hence it may
be we have here the stamp of a Sinopean manufacturer.

Letters, 0.004 m. in height. To the right a dolphin in the
claws of an eagle, the same symbol as in No. 1.
ΕἸΠΕ Ν ΑΕ ἐπὶ Evdn{ μου

ΜΩΡΙΟ Τι]μώριος
N. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 478, no. 15, from Olbia, and
ibid. Suppl. X, p. 27, no. 9, from Kertch, are identical. The
symbol is also the same, but we can draw no argument from
that, since it occurs on coins of Olbia as well as of Sinope.
For the omission of ἀστυνόμου see Becker, iid. Suppl. V, p. 478.
In NV. Jahrb. Suppl. X, p. 26, no. 8, and p. 220, no. 4, we have
"Emit ᾿Ενδήμου ἀστυνόμου. In the cases cited above and 7bid.
Suppl. V, p. 479, no. 14, and Suppl. X, p. 219, no. 3, acruve-
μου is omitted after ’Evénuov. The fabricant Τιμώριος is
known also from δια. Suppl. IV, p. 474, no. lla; Suppl. X,
Ῥ. 28, no. 17; Compte-Rendu (1859), p. 142, no. 21.

Letters, 0.004 m. in height. To the right a herm as symbol.
ΝΟ SY ἀστυ]νόμου
Pee VY SY ‘Ike |ovov τοῦ
AVNi al Ard oY, ᾽᾿Αντι[π|͵]άτρου
ΚΞΝ Κτήσων
Hicesias the son οἱ Antipater as ἀστύνομος occurs also in JV.

Jahrb. Suppl. V, p. 481, no. 24, from Olbia, with a statue of
Hermes as symbol, and also on a vase-handle from Athens with
the same symbol as our example (cf. Athen. Mitt. XXI, p. 178,
no. 14). Hicesias was the name of the father of Diogenes the
Cynic (C.1.G. 7074 and Diog. L. VI, 20) and so is a good
Sinopean name. Have we not here and in the following per-
haps a stamp of Sinopean manufacture? For the fabricant
Κτήσων cf. Becker, Mélanges Gréco-Romains, p. 486, no. 19;
ps -to1, mo. 29; p. 488, no. 31; p. 489; τον ΠΕ: ΝΠ}. fk.
Phil. Suppl. IV, p. 466, no. 18; p. 471, no. 29; V, p. 488,
NOPAS spNase oO, NO. 21.
10. An oblong stamp: length, 0.045 m.; width, 0.02 m. Let-

ters, 0.004 m.in height. Same symbol as in the preceding stamp.
=n ¥ ΝΟ ΥΝ ἀ]στυνομοῦν[ Tos
ONO ἘΠ ΟΥ τοῦ [Ἰκ]εσίου
ΓΞ ΔΝ ΠΡ ΡΥ τοῦ ᾿Αντιπάτρου
EY KA HS Εὐκλῆς
For the fabricant Εὐκλῆς cf. Becker, op. cit. p. 487, nos. 26, 80;
Ὁ 488, no. 32; WV. Jahrb.f. kl. Phil. Suppl. 1V, p. 470, no. 25,
and Nos. 14, 17 of this article.

Letters, 0.005 m. in height. To the right a Nike as symbol.
[ἀστυνόμου]
Ae se ONY IIpar |a[ yop jou
ΚΟΥ ΝΞ ΚΟΥ τοῦ KuvicKxou
ΑΑ ΟΊ o'= ᾿Απατούριος
The fabricant ᾿Απατούριος is found in Becker, Mélanges, I,

p. 486, no. 20; p. 489, nos. 43, 44, MW. Jahrb. 7. kl. Phil.
Suppl. V, p. 476, no. 1; p. 485, no. 38; p. 490, no. 57. The
same astynomus Protagoras, son of Cyniscus, and the same
symbol, are found in Becker, Mélanges, I, p. 488, nos. 36, 37 ;
N. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 489, no. 51. We have the
same astynomus in another vase-handle from Sinope (No. 14).
Yerakis reads Πρωταγόρου [τοῦ Λα]μίσκου, a name unknown
on vase-handles. He probably mistook N for M. We should
read Kuvicxov. For Protagoras as the name of a Sinopean cf.
ΞΟ (ΟἹ ΠΕ 5: 5961.

Letters, 0.004 m. in height. To the right a heart as symbol.
AS TeYIN So Meo YIN dees ἀστυνομοῦντος

ΑΘ ΟΝ A OY ᾿Απολλωνίδου
πο ΟΞ ΑΘ ΝΈΟΝ τοῦ ἸΠοσιδωνίου
Bay ΚΝ ΠΗ Ξ Εὐκλῆς
The same astynomus occurs in N. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl.

V, p. 477, no. 5. An identical vase-handle from Sinope (No.
17) is in the possession of Mr. Symeonidis. For Posidonius
οἵ. No. 40.
Dumont (CInse. Cér. de Gréce, p. 141) concluded that vase-
handles on which ἀστύνομος occurs are of Cnidian origin. But
Becker CW. Jahrb. 7. kl. Phil. Suppl. X, pp. 67 and 108) showed
that such vase-handles come from a city on the Pontus, and
named Olbia as the place of manufacture. The fact that so
many names found among Sinopeans (Choregion, Demetrius,
Diogenes, Dorus, Heracleides, Hicesias, Leomedon, Mithradates,
Posidonius, and Protagoras) occur on our vase-handles leads
me to doubt if all with an ἀστύνομος inscription were made in
Olbia. Sinope may also have manufactured amphoras, and
exported them to the northern shore where so many handles
similar to ours have been found.
Nos. 13-17 were published by Yerakis, Revue des Etudes

Anciennes, 1901, pp. 352, 353.
13. ἀστυνομοῦντος | | Ηρακλείδου | rob Μι[κρ]ίου

Yerakis reads Mz[m]cdov; but no such name occurs on vase-
handles. For Ἣρακλειδης τοῦ Μικρίου cf. NV. Jahrb. f. kl. Phil.
Pupp Veop-to2, πὸ ἈΠ: V.'p..480;no. 17: ΧΟΡ. 2:1. nos.
ΠΕ tp πο. Ὁ:
14. ἀστυνομοῦντος Ipwtayopou [τοῦ Κυ]νίσκου [Εὐκ]λῆς

Yerakis reads τοῦ Λα͵μίσκου. but cf. remarks on No. 11.
15. ἀστ])υνομοῦ τος] | ᾿Απημαήντου | [᾿Αρτε]μιδώρου

Yerakis reads ἽἽππολ ύτου in the second line. For ᾿Απημα»ν-
tou cl. NV. Jahrb.f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 477, no. 8.
10. ἀστυνομοῦντος | ᾿Απολλωνίδου | τοῦ Ilocadwviov | Eldas
17. ἀστυνομοῦντος | ᾿Απολλωνίδου | τοῦ Ποσιδωνίου | [Εὐ]-

KAS
Cf. No. 12. ᾿Απολλωνίδης τοῦ Ἰ]Ποσειδωνίου occurs in JN.
Jahrb. f. kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 477, no. 5a
18. Parnassos, VI, p. 869.

ἀστυνόμου Διονυσίου
19. “EXX. φιλ. Σύλλογος ἐν Κωνστ. (1880-81), IE’, παρ-

ἄάρτημα, p. 47, no. ὃ α.
ἀστυνόμου Ἰ]οΓ[ σι]δείου τοῦ [Θ]Ίεα[ρί]ωνος
Mordtmann in the Syllogos reads τοῦ ᾿Εάμωνος. but no such
name is known on vase-handles. The © escaped his eye, and
he mistook PI for M. For ἸΠοσιδεῖος τοῦ Θεαρίωνος cf. Λ΄. Jahrb.
jf- kl. Phil. Suppl. V, p. 486, no. 49; p. 488, no. 48. For
Θεαρίων cf. ibid. V, pp. 499, 500, and No. 96 of this article.
20. Syllogos, ibid. 8 B.
AgTUVOMOU | .......- | Αἰσχίνου
21. Syllogos, ibid. 8 γ.

ἀστυνόμου | Π]υθοκλέους Γλαυκία
22. Annali del. Inst. XTX (1847), p. 342.

ἀστυνόμου | ᾿Αττάλου Φιλοκράτους
23. Ibid.
ἀστυνόμου | Ναύπωνος | Καλλισθένου[ς] | KXeaivetos
The reading in the Annali is Ναυτίωνος : but cf. WV. Jahrb.f.
kl. Phil. Suppl. V, pp. 485, 493, 506.
DEDICATIONS
24. In a district called ®odrAa, near Gherzeh, the ancient

Karousa (οἷ. Arrian, Peripl.), six hours east of Sinope, a
very large block of native stone, 1.14 m. long; 0.73 m. high;
0.22 m. thick. The inscription is in the upper left-hand corner,
0.22 m. high, 0.45 m. long. Letters, 0.03 m. high, well cut.
DN NGOS NOW τ
MEFAA QI Ὁ
ΓΤΥΘΙΗΣ ΔΙΙΟΙΝΥΣΣΙΟῪ ὠ πΠύθιν Διονυσίον
ΣΤΡΑΤΗΙΓΩΝ ae
ΧΆΡΙΣ ΤΉΡΙΟΝ
Δικαιόσυνος as an epithet of Zeus is known, though rare (cf.
Bekker, Anecd. 34, 11; Eust. 918,48; Schol. Hom. Jl. 13, 29;
Kock, C.A.F. III, Adesp. 752). Kock says, “ videtur epithe-
ton a comico fictum,” but its occurrence in an inscription
brings new evidence against him. Dionysius is known as a
name for Sinopeans, but this is the first instance of that of
Pythes at Sinope. χαριστήριον is common in inscriptions after
the time of Alexander and of the Roman Age. It is fore-
shadowed in old Attic inscriptions by col χάριν ἀντιδιδούς or
the like; cin Πα: (Ὁ ἈΠ 1; 397 and £65 IX ΤΕ 5:
IIT), 390. Rouse (Greek Votive Offerings, p. 329) gives a
list of inscriptions in which χαριστήριον occurs.
25. At Lala in the Oretzan χωράφι (farm), about four hours

east of Sinope, a rectangular native-stone altar, with projection
at top and bottom and hole, 0.07 m. square, in top. The lower
part is rough, showing that it was meant to be set in the
ground. Total height, 0.91 m.; width, 0.35 m.; thickness,
0.32 m. Inscription, 0.305 m. high. Letters, 0.03 m.
at ROLY aya ΤΣ
AEIH \IGONAY Act Ἡλίῳ 1 [υδα-
MENG EMHKO¢ μήνῳ érnes[o
FEY KIO YEN, ene
(IOLATIOAAY See
ee GN. χάριν
XAPIN
On Zeus Helios ef. Robert-Preller, Griechische Mythologie,

p. 136, note 1; Farnell, Greek Cults, I, p.44; Roscher, Lex. Myth.
s. Juppiter. Zeus Helios at Sinope would be identical with
Serapis (cf. Nos. 30, 64). No such epithet as va... μήνω is
given either in Robert’s index or Bruchmanu’s Epitheta Deorum
or in the article ‘Jupiter’ in Daremberg et Saglio. Perhaps

va[vda]unve is to be read. Traces of Y appear on the stone.
A somewhat similar epithet of Zeus is Evpudapunvos (cf. JAS.
XVIII (1898), p. 96). ᾿Ἑπήκοος also is wanting in the lists
of Robert and Bruchmann, but it occurs in inscriptions from
the Pontus (cf. B.C_.H. XXV [1901], p. 28; Latyschev, Insc.
Ant. Orae Sept. Pont. Hux. II, nos. 438, 446-448, 454, 455,
457; Dittenberger, Orient. Graec. Insc. 28; 72, note2; CLG.
2290; J.H.S. XVIII [1898], p. 311, no. 13). On the inter-
change of ε and vc as in Aei cf. Meisterhans*, Gram. der att. Insc.
$10. Ae[t] is found in J.H.S. XTX (1899), p. 77, no. 35.
26. In the district Giousouphlou, in the Χωριὸ ᾿Εμριλῆ near

Chalabdé, where No. 27 was found, a marble altar upside
down, used as the base for a post of the porch of a house. [Ὁ
has a round hole cut through from front to back, connecting
with a similar hole from the bottom. Height, 0.49 m.; width,
0.36 m.; thickness, 0.30 m. Letters, 0.035 m.
θεῷ μεγάλ[ῳ
, ὑψίστῳ εὐχῆς}
χά[ριν ἀνέ]θη-
κε΄. . «Ὁ [A JOS
μετὰ [τῆς γυ]ναι-
x jos Ῥου[ φ]εί νης
In an inscription from Sinope already published (No. 29)

θεὸς ὕψιστος occurs, on which ef. Farnell, Greek Cults, I,
pp. 51, 151, 155; Robert-Preller, op. cit. p. 116, 11; p. 159, 2;
p: 866; B.C.H. VIII, p. 456 and XXV, p. 25. For the name
“Ῥουφείνη cf. J.H.S. XTX (1899), p. 129, no. 152. amelie see
XXV (1901), p. 88.
27.1 In Chalabdé, two hours from Ajandik, which is twelve

hours west from Sinope, a marble altar, 0.58 m. high, 0.265 m.
wide, 0.28 m. thick. Letters, 0.025 m. in height, except in
first line, where they are 0.015 m. high.
ATA 9HIT YXHI1 ἀγαθῇ τύχῃ

OE SAPARAEL θεῷ ᾿Ηρακλεῖ
Reve ele No 78 ᾿Ἰουκοῦνδος
BPN ArIN εὐχῆς χάριν
τὸν βωμὸν
oN ON ἀνέθηκε
AMEOQHKE
This inscription was very poorly published (Revue des Etudes

Anciennes, 1901, p. 357, no. 17) by Yerakis, who had not seen
the altar at all. He reads τῷ θεῷ Ηρακλεῖ | τόνδε βωμὸν | ‘lepo-
κόνδος | εὐχῆς χάριν ἀνέθηκε. I give the correct text from
my copy and squeeze. It is not surprising to find a cult of
Heracles at Sinope, for Autolycus, its mythical founder, was
a member of the expedition of Heracles against the Amazons
(Plut. Lue. 23; Appian, Mithr. 83; Apoll. Rhod. II, 959;
Val. Flaccus, V, 116; Hyginus, Fad. XIV). And it was
Heracles who took Sinope and established Greeks in it, cf.
EG eu δον 1200 A. τς LON.
1 Since this article was written I have noticed that Gustave Mendel also has
published Nos. 26 and 27 in B.C.H. XXVII, p. 898. In No. 27 he omits the
first line and fails to mention Yerakis,
28. Syllogos, ibid. p. 45, no. 2; B.C.H. XIII, p. 304, no. 8,

an altar.
᾿Ασκληπιῷ | Σωτῆρι καὶ | Ὑγιείᾳ τὸν | βωμὸν ᾿Οφίλ' duos
Πολύκαρπος εὐχήν.
The name Ophillius occurs in an ee from the neigh-
boring Karousa (ef. 6.1. 6. 4166, our No. 52).
29. Syllogos, ibid. p. 45, no. 3; B.C.H. XIII, p. 304, no. 1.

θεῷ ὑψίστῳ |Αἴλιος Θρεπτίων | Ilovrvavos Σεουῆρος
Ss
Maxep
οἱ [ ἀδελφοὶ εὐξάμενοι
90. Syllogos, ibid. p. 44, πο. 1.

θεῷ | Ηλιοσα ράπει | ᾿Α[ο]υεῖτο[ς] | Φοράρι[ς] | εὐ[χήν
31. 6.1.6. 4162; Hamilton, Researches in Asia Minor, App.,

no. 60.
Λε͵ωμέδων ᾿Αριστώνα[κ͵]τος Φλογίῳ
Λεωμέδων is known as ἃ Sinopean name. Δωμέδων or Λωμέδων
is not. Phlogius was a companion of Autolycus, the mythical
founder of Sinope (cf. Plut. Luc. 23; Apoll. Rhod. 11, 956;
Val. Flaccus, V, 115; Hyginus, Fab. XIV; Anon.’ Perzpl.
Pont. Euz. sec. 22 = Miller, Geogr. Graec. Min. I, p. ae
226
Ps. Seymnus, Orbis Descriptio, 945 = Muller, op. cit. p. 236).
32. Sylloyos, ibid. p. 41. Fragment of architrave built into

wall of the acropolis near No. 33.
ΒΊ7οΐσκος Mova.....
The name is probably to be restored as Botoxos, which occurs
in oriental inscriptions (cf. Dittenberger, Orient. Gr. Insc. 20,
26, 27, 29).
33.
29 Syllogos, ibid. p. 47; Le Bas et Waddington, Voyage
Arch. III, 1814; Hommaire de Hell, Voyage en Turquie et en
Perse, WV; p. 900» pl. χτ ὦ:
ov ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἀνέθηκεν καὶ TH
πατρίδ[ι] δ[ιὰ τοῦ] τρο[ φέ]Πως αὐτοῦ Λικινίου
Χρυσογόνου ’OXv.....
34. Built into the north wall, near No. 36, an architrave upside
down, with the following inscription. Length, 1.85 m.; width,
0.58 m. Letters, 0.06 τη. in height. Broken at both ends.
IONOm eM TATOO
ND ΤΕΡΟΝ
e a > / \ ΄ ᾽ \ 7 \ > \ \
ὁ δεῖνα ἀνέθηκε τοὺς κίονας εἰς TO περιστύλ]ιον, καὶ αὐτοὺς μετὰ
τῶν σπειροκ[ εφάλων λιθίνους κατεσκεύασεν
The recent destruction of the hospital brought to light this

inscription as well as No. 36. It was first published in 1829
by Rottiers, Itineraire de Tiflis ἃ Constantinople, p. 283, who
made a very careless copy, reading μετὰ ὧν orepoc-. It was
not seen by Hamilton, who visited Sinope in 1856. Some ten
years later Le Bas published a correct copy of the stone (Hom-
maire de Hell, Voyage en Turquie et en Perse, 1846-48, IV,
p-. 346 and pl. xi, 2), but he gives no credit to Rottiers for its
discovery. Both Rottiers and Le Bas say that the inscription
is built into the south wall, whereas it is in the north wall.
The inscription is also found in C./.G. III, p. 1114, Add. et
Corr. 4158. There it is taken to be the “ residua ex praescrip-
tis” of the epigram C./.G. 4158, and the idea is given that it is
on the same stone. The form of the alpha is wrong. It is in
every case A, not A. In fact, the inscription is on an architrave,
while C.7.G. 4158 is on a rectangular block, also built into the
north wall, but some distance away, and is perhaps to be con-
nected with the similar inscriptions on architraves at Sinope
(ef. No. 33). In O.LG. 3148, 1. 19, occurs the phrase xetova
σὺν σπειροκεφάλῳ, and ibid. 1. 29 Kelovas σὺν σπειροκεφάλοις. So
the likelihood is that αὐτούς is equivalent to κίονας and that the
columns for some structure, perhaps a περιστύλιον, have just
been mentioned. Le Bas takes αὐτούς to be “ chapiteaux,” and
σπειροκ[εφάλων]. “les volutes.” But the word comes from
σπεῖρα. the base of an Ionie column (cf. Pollux, Onomasticon,
VI, ο. 27, sec. 121), and κεφαλή, the capital of a column. [0
therefore means “base and capital.” In imperial times it was
the custom for people of wealth to share the expense of a

building (cf. for example, C.LG. 2713, 2714= Le Bas and
Waddington, Voyage Arch. 111. nos. 513-318). One paid for
the columns, another for the entablature. In the case of the
inscription from Sinope one man paid for the columns, in-
cluding base and capital.
35. Built into the wall of a house in the Turkish quarter,

a stone, broken on all sides, 0.26 τη. by 0.26 m., with the fol-
lowing inscription. Letters, 0.05 m. in height.
Διογένη [τὸν
φι]λόσοφο[ν ὁ δῆμ-
os] Σκυρεί[ων τὸν av-
τῶν] εὐεργέ την
ey «αὐ
One is tempted at first sight to restore Διογένη τὸν φιλόσο-

gov, and this may be right; but the form of the sigma dates
the inseription much later than the time of Diogenes the Cynic
from Sinope, of whom statues were erected (cf. Diog. Laer. VI,
78). It might be a later Diogenes, who lived in the time of
Vespasian (cf. Dio Cassius, LX VI, 15). Still the restoration
is uncertain. The name might be Athenogenes or Protogenes,
or the like. For the practice of decreeing honors and even
statues in the provinces, cf. Mommsen, Rém. Gesch. V, p. 266,
and Pliny, Ep. X, 58 and 60, where the case concerns a philos-
opher. For e representing short « cf. Mejsterhans®, Gram.
der att. Inse. § 15, 21. The earliest datable example pre-
»
viously reported is 1G. (C.1.A.) IIT, 694, 4 (after 98 a.p.).

Ours would be still earher.
36. Built into the north wall near the main central gateway,
where the hospital formerly stood, a large block of grayish
marble: height, 0.98 m.; width, 0.49 m.; height of letters,
0.03 m. The inscription begins 0.20 m. below the top of the
stone and ends 0.41 m. above the bottom.
TAIONMAPKION
ἘΠ QPINON Tatov Μάρκιον
K nvowpivov
Pipes ea FIN πρεσβευτὴν
Καίσαρος τὸν
Cee ro ON κηδεμόνα τῆς

πόλεως ὁ δῆμος
K-LAEMONATH&
BONE G) > CAMMOX
This Censorinus is undoubtedly the C. Marcius Censorinus ?

who was consul in the year 8 B.c. along with C. Asinius
Gallus, and proconsul in Asia and died there about the year
2 A.D. (Velleius, II, 102). He was praised by the Jews of
Asia (cf. Josephus, Ant. 16, 6, 2), and is called by Velleius
(loc. cit.) a “yir demerendis hominibus genitus,” which sug-
gests the epithet κηδεμόνα τῆς πόλεως Which is applied to him
in this inscription. He is honored in inscriptions from Perga-
mum? and Mylasa (C./.G. 26986). One might be tempted to
identify him with the Censorinus, the commander of the Roman
fleet which was defeated by Cleochares and Seleucus, tyrants
of Sinope, shortly before the capture of the city by Lucullus in
70 B.c. (ef. Memnon, 53 and 54 = Frag. Hist. Gr. III, pp.
554 ff.). But it is unlikely that a man who was old enough to
be commander of the fleet then should live till the year 2 A.D.
Furthermore, Horace in an ode to Gaius Marcius Censorinus
(Od. 1V,8), who is probably the same man, includes him among
his sodales, and from this we are justified in assuming that
Gaius Marcius Censorinus was born about the same time as
Horace (65 B.C.). κηδεμὼν τῆς πόλεως occurs already in Plat.
Kep. Ill, 412 Ὁ.
37. B.C.H. XIII, p. 302, no. 3; Syllogos, ibid. p. 47, no. 5.

Built into the wall of the Képheli-Djami.
᾿Αγριππείναν Γερ μανικοῦ Καίσαρος | ὁ δῆμος
38. Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca ex Lapidibus, no. 907;

6.1.6. 4158; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 58; Hommaire de Hell,
op. cit. IV, p. 847, pl. XI, 4; Le Bas et Waddington, op. cit.
III, no. 1812. Large stone, 0.86 τη. wide, 1.50 m. high, and
0.85 m. thick, now built into a square tower of the north
wall. Letters, 0.04 m. high. Three Christian crosses at the
top of the inscription.
1Cf, Dessau, Prosopographia Imperii Romani, 11, 8. ‘ C. Marcius Censori-

nus’; cf. also Pauly-Wissowa, Hncyclopddie, s. ‘Censorinus,’ no. 2.
2 Frankel, Die Inschriften von Pergamum, no. 422.
I add a reproduction from a photograph to show clearly the

forms of the letters and the division of the verses. It should
be noted that the pentameter begins further in than the hex-
ameter, and that the second half of each verse has a somewhat
deeper indentation than the beginnings of the pentameters.
Line + begins where the hexameters do because it is
longer than the others. The hexameters and pentameters are
divided at the caesura. This inscription shows probably the
Alexandrian method of writing elegiac verse. Neither EvAa-
voto nor Εὐδάμοιο nor Εὐλάμοιο is the correct reading in line 5.
Εὐλαλίοιο is clear on the stone.
39. O.L.G. 4157. Yerakis, Revue des Etudes Anciennes,

1901, p. 357, no. 16, gives a poorer copy than the C./.G. and
publishes the inscription as if it were unknown.
....08, [γ]εν[ ὁμ7]ε[ νον γυμ-
‘vlaciapyov, ἄρχοντα τοῦ
πρ]εσβ[ υτΊ]ικ| οὔ, πο]ντάρχην. ἐπιτε-
λέσαντα ταυροκα[ θάψια
εὐὼω 1
καὶ κυνηγέσιον
ηγέσιον καὶ δ [pe ns
\ 7. \
χίαν w[ey]ado[πΊρε[ π]ῶς. ἔκγονον

Κλαύδιον [lore| Xvov
aderp[ov δ]ὲ [7H]|s κρα] τίστης
συγκλητικῆς K[Aavdlas
IlavaAns, ἱερείας [θεᾶς
ΕΠ[σ]ιδ[ος,. 0 ]¢ συνπροσ] τάται
καὶ ὁ συνέφορ(ος) [ἐ]π᾿ εὐ[ νοίᾳ "τῇ εἰς av
τούς.
The reading in line 7, Κλαύδιον Τ]οτέ[λιον, is not given in
the C.I.G., but is clear on the stone.
40. Yerakis, Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, pp. 354, 355.
Stone 0.56 m. high, 0.31 m. wide, 0.08 m. thick. Letters very
indistinct. Inscription of the Macedonian epoch.
NISMO oN AAKe ΝΣ ΞΕΘ᾽ 719

ΕΓ Ξ ων τΕΥΙΆΑΝΕῚ ΕΝ ΤΟ
“ANH/ MH T ESTIAIFPY NEIA
ἌΡΙΞ lx .2@ ΞΙ ὁ
ΜΗΤΡΙΞ AAAIKPAT OY
DIVON 1 210= ΑΡΧΙΓΓΟΥ
AAMAX <
OZ KAAATZ OENO
\HMH TP 1° ¢INTIe&
OsPIAaN fos MEI~
AletANl i022 bYNAT el oor
ΑΓ ZX = ΒΑΡΎ ΠΟΥ
ΓΛΗΡΙΞ AEMBIOY
AoPoAlsloz ΑΦΡΌΔΙΞΊΙΟΥ.
ΗΔΑΙΞΤΙοΞ ΕΞΗΚΕΞ ΤΟΥ
τι ΕἸΠΙΠΌΟΣΑ ὩΡΌΞΞΕ ΟΥ ΠΡ ΠΟΥ
AHM ΟΞ ΤΡΆ ΤΟΣ ΕΡΘΕΊΗΕΙΘΙΘΙΝΙΘΣΕ
oYAHS= ΕΓΊΞΤ᾽ ΕὙΟΝΙΤΟΣ ΔΙΟΙΝΎΥΣιο
ΟΥ̓ΑΡΧΙΓΓΙΟΥ ΓΡΆΜΜΑ ΓΕΥΟΝΤΌΟΞΙ
AAMAX ΟΥ ΤΟΥ ΧΟΡΗΚΓΊΙΩΝΟΣ
ν[οἹμοφυλακ[οὔ]ντ[ο]ς ᾿Επιδήμου το[Ὁ] | ’Ex[c]é[rA]z[ov]

πρυτάνει[ς οἱ] ἐν τῶι | [ΠΠ]ανή[μωι] μη[νὶ] τ[ῆι ᾿'ΕἸστίαι
πρυ[ τα]νεία[.] “Apiot[a]px[o]s [Ap]eora[px]o[v] | Μῆτρις
[Κ Ἰαλλικράτους] | Διονύσιος ᾿Αρχίππου | Λάμαχος | ....0s
Καλλισθένοζυς] Δημήτριος Φίντιος [I Jooed@v0s Μει[ diov] |
Διόφαντος Εὐλαμπίχου ᾿Αγ[ελίδ]ας Βαβύττου Γλῆρις AeuBior |
᾽Α φροδίσιος ᾿Αφροδισίου ᾿Ηφαίστιος ᾿Εξηκέστου | [’A ]σκ[λ]η-
πιόδωρος Ολύμπου Δημόστρατος Ilpopn@iwvos | [β]ουλῆς
ἐπιστ[ ατ]εύοντος Διονυσίου τ]οῦ ᾿Αρχίππου * γραμματεύοντος |
Λαμάχου τοῦ Χορηγιώνος.
Yerakis’ copy of this inscription is unsatisfactory. In the

first three lines he made out only the word δήμου, and thought
we had a list of proxenoi or epheboi or founders or benefactors
of the temple of Serapis. The reading is, however, as I have
given it, and the list of names contains the πρυτάνεις for the
month ΤΠάνημος. It is interesting to know the number of the
mpuTaves in Sinope, and to learn that the office was about
the same as in Athens. Out of the fifty πρυτάνεις in Athens
one was chosen as president (ἐπιστάτης τῶν πρυτάνεων) and
presided at the βουλὴ (cf. Arist. "A@. Wor. ὁ. 44 f.). A
secretary (γραμματεὺς) was also appointed. So in Sinope
one of the fourteen πρυτάνεις (Διονύσιος ᾿Αρχίππου) was ἐπι-
στάτης βουλῆς and another (Λάμαχος) was γραμματεύς. In
l. 7 the name Lamachus is written in large letters and
the father’s name, given in the last line, omitted. For the
number of the πρυτάνεις in places other than Athens cf.
Swoboda, Griechische Volksbeschliisse, pp. T1, 88, 94, 200. For
a postscript being used instead of a prescript, ef. Swoboda,
op. cit. pp. 225 ff. For ‘Eoria πρυτανεία, to whom the list is
dedicated, cf. C.L.G. 2347, k 11 (p. 1059). ἰπίδημος C1. 1)
is formed similarly to the name ἔνδημος. which occurs on a
vase-handle found at Sinope (above, No. 8). The name ᾽πε:
edzros (1. 2) occurs also on vase-handles (above, No. 3). We
already knew that the Ionic calendar was used at Sinope. In
an inscription from there (below, No. 63) we have the months
Tavpeov and ΤΠοσειδεών. In 1. 3 of this inscription occurs

Ilavnuos. In 1. + Yerakis omits the father’s name. In 1. 6
he reads AKN..... Apximma. The stone gives Διονύσιος ’Ap-
χίππου. Inl. 7 he reads NAYA, but AAMAXO& in large letters
is clear on the stone. In 1: 12 he reads AM for ΑΓ, in 1. 18
ἐπιτροπεύοντος for ἐπιστ[ ατ]εύοντος. In]. 2 there is a vacant
space of two or three letters before πρυτάνεις. and in the post-
script, 1. 19, before ypaupatevovtos. Yerakis fails to note this
and other minor matters.
SARCOPHAGI
41. CLG. 4160; Hommaire de Hell, op. cit. IV, p. 344, pl.
x, 0; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 61. Sarcophagus, 2.10 m. long;
0.71 m. wide; 0.67 m. high. Letters, 0.04 m. in height.
ἱπγ ΠΠ ENOA Εὔπ[ορος ἐνθά-
PEK EM Arle EN δε κεῖμαι ἐτῶν
ΚΘ κθ΄
The reading in the C.L.G. is Evv[ou]e[aves, but an examina-
tion of the sarcophagus itself and of a squeeze from it shows
that there is not room enough for that name. The reading of
Le Bas Gin Hommaire de Hell, op. cit.) Evzropos has been over-
looked, but is undoubtedly right. For the name Εὔπορος cf.
IEG (CAGAD) Al, AGI. Ts 56:
42. Ο.1.6΄. 4163; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 56; Hommaire de

ell op -ccut. Vi 3p. 0405) pl ex, Ὁ:
Ποντικὸς | [Θ] άλλου ἐτῶν νη΄ | évO(a)be Keto
The reading on the sarcophagus is CAAAOY. The a in
ἐνθάδε is omitted on the sarcophagus. '
43. C.I.G. 4164; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 62.
Σ αιουείνιος OTTAOTEPOS WYNTALHV
Nv f e , > ,
τὴν πύελον ἐμαυτῷ καὶ οὐδεὶς ἕτερος ἀνοίξει

Ἁ ΄ ᾽ ΩΣ \ > \ .“ > /
μετὰ TO ἐμὲ κατατεθῆναι, ἐπεί τοι δώσει TH

cal / , aA
λαμπροτάτῃ κολωνείᾳ K ah
[4 / we,
The reading of Hamilton and the (΄. 1 α΄. in 1. 1 is Σαιουείνιος

ὁ [νεώτ]ερος. but there are no traces of the letters veor. The
letters are SAIOYEINIVS¢TIACIE. is the sign for δηνάρια.
44, O.0.G. 4165; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 59; Hommaire de

Hell, op. cit. 1V, p. 350, pl. xii, 3. A sarcophagus at Nesi Kieui.
M.1...Arépios Μάξιμος ἰατρὸς ἔθηκα
τὴν σ]ορὸν ἑαυτᾷ καὶ Lon τῇ γυναικί μου" χαίρετε
There is no need of changing ἑαυτῷ to ἐμαυτῷ as is done in
the O.1.G. The third person reflexive is often used in inscrip-
tions of late date for the first person.
45. Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, p. 353, no. 6. Sar-

cophagus used as a watering-trough near the Turkish Hospital.
K. Λικώνιος Φρουγὶς | προξενητὴς ἐνθάδε | κεῖται βιώσας κα-
λῶς | ἐτῶν μη΄
40. B.C.H. XIII, 304, no. 9. Sarcophagus used as ἃ water-

ing-trough at Kapou.
Σύρι[ο]ς ἐνθάδε κεῖμαι ἐτῶν | κθ΄
AT. O.1.G.4161; Hamilton, op. cit. no. 57; Le Bas et Wad-

dington, op. cit. III, no. 1813.
Τι(βέριον) Κλαύδιο[»ν]
“Ρηγεῖ νον]
Wap
Om
iw(oa) CO.I.G. 4159; Hommaire de Hell, op. cit. p. 848, pl. xi, 5.
Οὐδὲν ἀφαυρότερος χ[ρυ]σοῦ λίθος ε[ ὑκ Ἰλέο[ς] ἀνθεῖ
παρθενίης αἰδοῖ πεπυκασμένος. ε[ἰμ]ὶ δὲ γείτων
‘Pevravn καθαροῖο Σαράπιδος. ἔνθα με βουλ[ὴ]
θῆκε χαρισσαμένη ἀρετῇ πατρός. ὃν περὶ πάντων
τίμησαν βασιλῆες ἐ[ π᾿] εὐ[σ]ε[ βίᾳ] βιότοιο,
μάρτυρι πιστεύσαντες [ἐπίστασ Ἰίην ᾿Αμίσοιο
. ἀπαιδείησι [?|
GRAVESTONES
49. In an Armenian village or farm (χωρι6) owned by Con-

stantinos Balasides, near the village where No. 50 is, stone
built into the hearth of a house, 0.65 m. long; 0.27 m. wide at
the bottom, at top 0.25 m.; 0.075 m. thick. Letters, 0.03 τη.
high.
MAHS Mans
ZAP OAN ὌΝΟΣ Spon Coe
ANI D Ξ Xap
For Mans as a Sinopean name cf. 1G. COTA), TU, 232540:

Μηνόφιλα Maov Σινώπισσα. Maes is a name which oceurs in
the mother-town Miletus (16. Ee A, III, 2, 2746) and on
the north side of the Pontus (cf. Latyschev, op. cit. I, no. 86;
IY, nos. 272,427, <also Dittenberger, Orientis Graect
45258.
Inscriptiones, no. 275. and 1B; 0 115 ἘΚ (1894), p. 532,
no. 2. Strabo, XII, 553, informs us that Μάνης is a Paphla-

gonian name, and perhaps Mans is also. Σαροάνδης is a bar-

barian name. It reminds one of such Persian names as
᾿Αροάνδης (cf. Dittenberger, op. cit. nos. 264, 390, 391, 392,
393).
50. In an Armenian village, Pachar Oglou Akel, about three
hours east of Sinope, large marble slab with moulding at the
sides and broken gable at the top, 0.80 m. high, 0.54 m. wide,
0.08 m. thick. Height of inscription, 0.50 m.; width, 0.30 τη.
Height of letters, which are beautifully cut, 0.025 m.
rw
ΜΆΝΙΟΣ, ΦΟΎΛΒΙΟΣ) ie aied

MeO 2BION ZI ae
POYABIOSTIPAITOPE] Φούλβιος Teenie
NO>YIO> ETON K τι νος υἱὸς ἐτῶν κ΄
ENOAAEKEINTAI a ea ay
AIRINNIARADSEAAIAS|||
ENCAAEKEITAI-
Sis Kuo
ἐτῶν ν΄
ἘΤΩΝΟΝ Sp
As might easily be the case on a family tombstone the last

three lines seem to have been added later. They contain marks
of punctuation which are lacking in the first five. Moreover
the form of the @ is different, being in the last three lines ©, in
the first five @. The form of the ὦ also differs,
51. Inscription on gravestone built into the ἐκκλησία τῶν

ταξιαρχῶν at Karousa, 0.32 m. high, 0.383 m. long, broken on
all sides. Letters, 0.083 m. Built into the same church are
ΝΒ.
f
ΟῚ»
jl
ὺν
Fo
ΠΕ OG τὰ
€ PNATOT ἢ Σ]έξτος ᾿Εγν[άτιος
SEAS CEG Fale Bo a eee
να δ. cv.
ἡ
This inscription has already been published by Demitsas in
the Athen. Mitt. XIV (1889), p. 210, but his copy was incom-
plete. Larfeld, Griechische Epigraphik (1888-94), p. 285,
mentions it as a gravestone. The combination of Greek and
Latin in an inscription of Roman date is not surprising. For
the repetition of a name or s¢gnum at the end, cf. Mommsen,
Hermes, 1902, pp. 418 f., and Wilhelm, Wiener Studien, XXIV
(1902), pp. 596 f. The cognomen Sextus forbids us to identify
this man with the Egnatius who was consul of Bithynia and
Pontus in the time of Augustus (cf. Dessau, Prosopographia
Imp. Rom. s. ‘ Egnatius,’ no. 29).
52. ΘΓ. 4166; Hamilton, op. cit. 50. Stone built into
same church at Karousa.
Αἰμιλιανὸς ᾿Οφιλλίου Kovpiovos Kal...
53. CLG. 4167; Hamilton, op. cit. 51. Also at Karousa.
AiBovtio[s] Μα[ ξ]εμο[ς]

54. Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, p. 356, no. 14.
ILAMAILA
Geel OY eee
ch oPM ΩΝ] pee
- τι sl O No = ΣΡΡἼμοτος
eee
se Nei ah ONG
ee Bae
BAK X[-] Ce
MNH=s |°o=
BIA! eos τ
Yerakis, ibid., reads AAMAIA, but the | is the upper part of

the ¢ in the next line, and A is not » but the lower part of X.
Yerakis’ reading in the last line also is wrong. He reads ΦΙΝ.
He gives the form of the ὦ as W, but it is Q. In 1.5 the E
perhaps indicates that it is 1]. 5.
55. Parnassos, V1, 869; Neologos, 1882; B.C.H. XIII, p.

304, no. 10.
Navva | Διονυσοίο | Στρατοκλῆς | Διονυσοίο
56. Syllogos, ibid. p. 46, no. 6.
Xaipis | ᾿Αφεναῖος | φαλερες (?) = ᾿Αθηναῖος Φαληρεύς
57. Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1901, p. 355, no. 7. A met-

rical inscription on a large stone built into the north wall to the
right of a gateway. Yerakis (¢bid.) gives an incomplete copy,
and makes no attempt to divide into words, to restore, or to
interpret the verses.
1 ο]ὗτός [τοι τάφος ἀν] dp os ὃν ab σοφίης ὑποφήτην

2 οὐ]δ᾽ ἀνέφυ[ σε] πόλ[ις -.5. ]os Περσῆος ὅμηρον
8. οὕνεκα ὁ πτεροί[ης] τιν᾽ ἐπώνυμον αὖ € ὄν[ σε
4 οὕνεκα καὶ πτεροίης δι’ ἤερος “Ελλάδος ἄγοι (7)
ὅ οὗτος καὶ πρ[ νοεῖ] ΠΕερσεὺς κυνικῆς ἐπινοίης
oOὅ]ττι φέρ[ εἾι κίβισιν β[ ἀκ )τρω(ι) ἅρπην ἰσόμοιρον
After the first six verses is a space; and then follow at least
three more verses, so badly mutilated that only a few letters
can be read. ὃ
ohOONEPOL ἘΞΡ ὁ ΦΠοΤερὺς
Γω Ἃ ἼΦΙΛοΟΧΩΕΥΓ τῷ ᾿Αμφιλόχω Εὐγ[ενίδου ?
FFL ωὸ WORD TA -devat of .|Toyvos
x a?
“ Behold, this is the tomb of a man the like of whom, once more, a
prophet of wisdom, not even the (divine) state of Perseus caused to spring
up as her hostage, because that winged one in turn benefited a namesake, for
that he too on wings led the way through the air of Hellas. This Perseus
also is mindful of the Cynic philosophy, because he carries a wallet and, as
the equivalent of the staff, the scimitar.”
In 1. 3 πτεροίης is to be read as in 1. 4, where it is clear on

the stone. We should expect πτερόεις. In 1. 3, at the end, we
have AYEON or ΑΥΓΟΝ. Perhaps we can restore αὖ € ὄν[ησε.
in which case ἃ equals αὐτὸν, or éov[noe. In 1. 4 the reading of
Yerakis, ATON, can hardly be right, since the alpha is short.
But there is the same objection to dyo. The [ might be
C (sigma). On the stone N is not visible, only 1. In 1. 5
INSCRIPTIONS FROM SINOPE Souk
πρ[ονοεῖ just fills the space. The letters often are not close
together. The El of φέρει in 1. 6 takes the space of three
letters. In 1. 2 there is an empty space between Περσῆος and
ὅμηρον: and in |. 4 it seems as if the stonecutter intended to
join the H and Γ of πτεροίης, but did not carry out his inten-
tion, and left a space between the two letters. The stone
reads H LC. In 1. 6 after BAKTPW (not BATTW, as Yerakis
reads) occurs A, which is clearly an error of the stonecutter.
He cut A, the first letter of APTTHN, and then realized that he
had omitted an |. He tried to add the | before the A, A. Then
he crossed out the A thus, A, and began again the word ἅρπην.
The clew to the interpretation of this inscription in dactylic
hexameters is in the sixth verse. Yerakis reads --IKIBIEIN
as if it were the infinitive of some verb. But read Γ for E,
making κίβισιν, the wallet which Perseus wore (cf. Hesiod,
Scut. 224; Pherecyd. frag. 26). The dpzn (1. 6) also sug-
gests the mythical Perseus, whose cult at Sinope is attested
by many coins (cf. Head, Historia Numorum, p. 435; Knatz,
Quomodo Perset fabulam artifices tractaverint, pp. 34 f.; Roscher,
Lex. Myth. s. ‘ Perseus’). There was a legend that Perseus went
to the Hyperboreans (Pindar, Pyth. X, 45 f., and XII), and
perhaps the Greeks would think that his route was via Sinope
(ef. Paus. I, 31,2). The characteristic temper of mind of the
frontier town, Sinope, seems to have been cynical. Thence
came the three comic poets, — Dionysius (Athenaeus, XI, 467 p,
497 c; XIV, 615.8), Diodorus (Athenaeus, VI, 235 ©, 239 B;
MASE sco VII pp: 105; 107 5 Am: J Arch..1V [1900],
p- 83), Diphilus Gtrabo, XII, 546; 71: Il [C.LA. II], 3,
3345). Thence came the cynic philosophers, Diogenes (Strabo,
l.c.; Diog. L. Vita Diog.) and Hegesaeus (Diog. L. VI, 84).
Menippus, whose skilful combination of prose and poetry led
the Roman Varro into imitation, was perhaps born in Gadara
(Strabo, XVI, 759; Steph. Byz. s.v. Gadara), but he must
have lived at some time in Sinope, since he is called Σινωπεύς
by Diog. L. VI, 95 (cf. Susemihl, Geschichte der Gr. Lit. in
der Alexandrinerzeit, I, pp. 44 f.). Perhaps, then, our inscrip-
ΘΝ DAVID M. ROBINSON
tion refers to some cynic philosopher, possibly named Per-

seus (cf. 1. 3, ἐπώνυμον), who is likened to the mythical Per-
seus. In the κυνικῆς ἐπινοίης of 1. 5 there is possibly a hint at
the "Acéos κυνέη which Perseus wore (cf. Hesiod, op. cit. 226).
Just as Perseus carries his wallet (κίβισις ) and his scimitar
(ἅρπη) and flies through the air, so the cynic has his pouch
and staff (βάκτρον) and feeds on air (Diog. L. VI, 2, 76).
DO. Ἢ Sl; B05, no. 123) Revue des Etudes Anciennes,
1901, 5. 990. “πὸ: 15.
ἐνννννν Καὶ κτερίσματα κτερίσ[ αντα]
ἤδη πληρώσαντα. περιπλομένων ἐνιαυτῶν.
πεντήκοντα ἔτη. καὶ τελέσαντα χρόνον
7
59. Built into the wall of a house in Sinope, a block of mar-

ble, 0.25 m. long, 0.20 m. wide, and 0.13 m. thick. Letters,
0.03 m. in height. A Christian tombstone like Nos. 60-62.
ΘΕ CAG
RRS NTR
AJOTICOPY
60. B.CLH. XIII, p. 305, no. 11. In the Tchetlambouk-
mezarlik. : > e
+ θέσις | Θεμιστοῦ | τοῦ Nvud|[@ ]vos
61. Revue des Etudes Anciennes, 1001: 354. τὸ. ὃ:
+ θέσις [᾿Αγαθο δώρου | φροντιστοῦ
62. bid. no. 9.
+ θέσις | Μεγαλὴ μέρου | χαρκέ ov
χαρκέου is another form for χαλκέως.
MISCELLANEOUS
63. Dittenberger, Sylloge?, 603; Michel, Recueil, 734. De-

cree telling what parts of the sacrifices and what privileges the
priest of Poseidon Heliconius is to receive. Poseidon occurs
as early as the first half of the third century on coins of Sinope ;

ef. Num. Chron. 1885, p. 17, pl. ui; Head, Historia Numorum,
p- 430.
64. Built into the north wall of the Acropolis near the
entrance to the prison, a block of native stone, 0.36 m. by
0.38 m. Height of letters, 0.08 m. Stone much weathered.
Near it another inscription, which is no longer legible.
——————
—__— lie
HAIOC a
BeAHNH . 3
- PMHC cg
Y APHXOOC
C EIPIOC
The cult of Helios, with whom Serapis is often identified, we
knew already from inscriptions found in Sinope (Nos. 90, 48),
and we could infer from names of Sinopeans like Menippus,
Meniscus, Menodorus, Menophila, Menon, that there was a cult
of Selene in Sinope. In fact, the very word Sinope may be
derived from the Assyrian moon-god, Sin. For the cult of the
moon-god Men Pharnakou on the Pontus, ef. Roscher, Lex.
Myth. BEES 2 p- 2690, s. ‘Men.’ Hermes oceurs on coins of
Sinope (ef. Head, Historia Nuwmorum, p. 455; Catalogue of
Greck Coins in the British Musewm, Pontus, etc., p. 98, no. 31,
and p. 99, no. 36). In Trapezus, which was founded by Sinope,
————~
there was a temple and a statue of Hermes (Arrian, Peripl. Pont.
Hux. 3 = Miller, Geog. Gr. Min. I, p. 370). But here for the
first time we meet Themis, Hydrachous, and Sirius in Sinope.
9.0.4 DAVID M. ROBINSON
65. Built into the wall of the house of Hadji-Photides in

the Greek quarter, a block of marble, broken at both sides,
0.354 m. long, 0.16 m. wide. Letters, large and well cut,
0.08 m. in height. ;
\PAAo=0 π᾿]αράδοξο[ς
Here we have an athlete who conquered in the πάλη and

παγκράτιον on the same day. Whether the shorter form παρά-
δοξος or the longer form παραδοξονίκης is to be restored we have
no means of knowing. Both occur often in grave-inscriptions.
For the latter cf. also Plut. Comp. Cim. c. Lucull. 2; for the
former cf. Arr. pict. 2, 18, 22; Dio Cass. TT, 11.
66. Built into the wall of the same house, a broken block
of marble, 0.43 m. long, 0.28 m. high, and 0.13 m. thick.
ΙΑΜΑΡΚ
67. Syllogos, ibid. p. 47, no. 7.

Τιβ. “Apaxtos
68. In the Greek quarter, in the house of Mr. Alexandros,

marble slab, 0.19 τη. high, 0.18 m. broad, 0.07 m. thick. Let-
DdJapir|&-]
ov ᾿Ακύλα Χ do if
ε΄ ἔων τόκοΪς.
> ελλώου
Μάρκου
ΧᾺ
This is a business account of some kind on which interest

(τόκος) is paid. Perhaps ef (16) is the rate per cent, and
Χ doe (919 denarii) is the total of interest on * A (1000
denarii). The time would be something over three years.
For ᾿Αχύλας (Aquila) cf. Dittenberger, Or. Gr. Insc. nos. 206,
033. Ibid. no. 544, 1. 9, occurs another form of the genitive
(Ακύλου).
69. In Tinkilar, in the blacksmith’s shop of Chrestos Michael,

on the high-road, six hours from Sinope, stone with cross in
the middle and the following inscription around it. Height,
0.20 m.; width, 0.25 m.; thickness, 0.06 m. Letters, 0.025 m.
high. Found originally in the ruins of a mediaeval church in
the neighboring mountains.
εὐ α ΘΟ ΚΘ θ]εοῦ. θεοτόκου
70. Nos. 70 and 71 were found in a place called Προφήτης

*HXias, two hours from Sinope, by Mr. Myrodes, who was kind
enough to send me squeezes of the inscriptions. They are two
of the boundary stones of some precinct, renewed in the time
of Justinian. ‘The inscriptions are the same, but the lines are
differently divided, and in No. ΤΊ σ is omitted in παραφαύστου.
+tANE NEW OHCA + ἀνενεώθησα[ v

Cro MOVeth Tt Oy € x οἱ ὅροι ἐπὶ τοῦ εὐ-
ΓΞ ΣΕ ΕΝ ΘΥ ΚΑΙ ΦΙ σεβεστάτου καὶ φι-
ROX PICTOYAMA N λοχρίστου ἡμῶν
ΕΘ ες GlOY Cr βασιλέως ᾽Ιουστι-
NIA NOV TOYAIW NI νιάνου τοῦ αἰωνί-
OYAVT OYC TOVK Al ov Αὐγούστου καὶ
πο οΡ τορος αὐτοκράτορος
MAP AP VE TOYECON παραφαύστου τοῦ
ΕΠ ΑΟΞΟ ΤἌΆΤΟΥΙΛ ΠΟ τ ἰλ-
ΛΟΥΌΤΡΙΟΥ + τοῦ λουστρίου
7. +AANE, τ τὰ
ΘΙ Ρ ΟΙ TNT OVA ee ae
Coie TATOY KAI eee Kal
| KOX Ἐ erage OY φιλοχρίστου
HMWN Ν Prue | aca ata
ECON
IANOYTOYA
Garis
|WIN |
tetaraoor
Τοῦ al@vi-
ates
OYATOYCT OY bee 3.κι
pécriaApagayt —maeeon
K xX IXY TOKPATo Kal ΠΕΣ ΟΣ,
Grimes Ὁ ξοτάτου ἰλλο-

a OTAT Oy. ΓΝ ΛΘ υστρίου +
Vie Whoa
UNPUBLISHED LATIN INSCRIPTIONS
72. In the village Koumpeti, one hour and a half east of

Sinope, a sarcophagus, 1.96 m. long, 0.68 m. wide, 0.64 m.
high. Part where inscription is, 0.50 τὴ. by 0.31 τὴ. Letters,
0.04 m. in height.
PES ENialys L. Elrjen[n]ius

POMPEIANVS
ANNXXVI
μ᾿...ANN. 0 2
About L. Herennius Pompeianus we know nothing.
73. At Ephrem Pogasi, about two hours east of Sinope, only

a few feet from the sea, several huge adjoining stones, at least
seven in number. The one in the middle, 1.02 m. high, 1.62 m.
long, 0.42 m. thick, bears the following inscription. The in-
scription begins 0.15 m. below the top and 0.81 m. from the
left side. Letters, 0.135 τὰ. in height, some 0.14 m. This
would be a good place for excavations.
πο
ak 1"
eS
This is perhaps L. Licinius, who was praefectus frumenti dandi
and proconsul of Bithynia (cf. Dessau, Prosopographia Imp. Rom.
s. ‘Licinius, and Ruggiero, Dizionario Kpigrafico di Antichitd
Romane, 5. frumentarius, vol. II, p. 252). FR. is an abbrevia-
tion for frumentarius and the inscription is in Bithynia, and deals
with an important man, as is shown by the size of the stone and
the letters. Φρουγίς (No. 45) might suggest δὲ here, but
no line after R or V before G was ever cut on the stone. For
name Licinius cf. also No. 53.
74. On the farm of Hamil Kegia, about two hours and a half
east of Sinope, a block of native stone, broken and mutilated.
Height, 0.54 m.; width, 0.44 m.; thickness, 0.39 m. Letters,
0.03 m. high. Probably the dedication of a servus.
Imp jera{ tort

Cae[sart
Pontius...
r
Ae
ἡ Υ Se Sacerd.
p
S<SACERD< Sacrum
SACRVAA
75. In Kiren Tsoukouron, seven hours southeast from Sinope

by the only good high-road out of Sinope, a Roman milestone,
used as a post for a porch, 0.92 m. in circumference at the top,

1.04 m. at bottom. Height, 1.35 m. Letters vary, 0.03 m. to
0.06 m. The natives told me that this column and No. 76
were brought from the mountains near by.
‘DIO L ι" ΧΑ 2 ais Diocl{ etiano] FG008
M N P.F. invicto Aug. et

ΠΡ SG TOA ς Eo Fl. Val. Constantio et
FLVALCONS TANTIOET Gal. Val. Maximiano
GAWALMAXIMIANO πμοὐη!. Cae.
NOBILL CAE Mil. 1
bi Lent Aur. Priscianu [s
AVR PRS CIA NV Pr.Pr.P.D.N.M.Q. eorwm
PRPRPDNMQEORVM ΧΟΥ͂Σ
V D.N. Imp. Caes. Valerio Licinniano
DNIMPCAES VALE RIOUCINNIANO Tie Den. invicto Aug.
LICINNIOPFINVICT OAVC
Ne
Cae δ
On other side
FU’LC°” TANTINO Fl. Cl. Constantino

FL VLCONSTAN TIO et] Fl. [1 Jul. Constantio
ETFLCOSTANOBBC et Fl. Costano (?) B.B.C.
Fe, στινONT! vs Pontius
76. In same place as No. 75 another milestone, also used for

supporting the same porch. Height, 0.78 m.; circumference
at top, 1.02 m.; at bottom, 1.08 m.
|mM PC A 3 SA R | Imp. Caesari

MAVREZ M. Aurel .
GA ROPFINYV IC TOAYG Caro P.F. invicto Aug.
E TMAYRE ΤΟ ΕΝ Ὁ et M. Aurel. Carino
PILIOE'YS-EMAYGMN eee es
NOBIZ OC AESARIZZ a ee
VPPRAES 2
I have failed to find in (..Z. III a milestone from the Roman

province of Pontus and Bithynia or Helenopontus, which be-
longs to Carus or Carinus. ‘This may be the first one known.
77. In Erikli Djami near the village where Nos. 75 and 76

were found, a milestone with a much mutilated inscription.
IMPC SAR ey Caesar:

Aug. :
AVG J CSPASLANUS
VESPASIANVS
PONTMAXT RPOT Pont. Max. Tr. Pot. (VILIT).

CO DESIGN Cols. VELL] desiy. [1X]
Imp. Aug... Cos. des
141 COS DES
IMPAVG
For a similar milestone from Bithynia, ef. B.C_H. XXV,

pa 1-
78. In the fields near Chalabdé (fourteen hours west of
Sinope), a Roman milestone, 1.68 m. in length; circumference
at bottom, 0.95 m.; at top, 0.78 m.
FE ne Oe Probo
Fane th ΘΑ ΓΕΘ P.F. invicto Aug. Po[nt.
VA Ral Bre Ont PR Max. Tiabs Pot. LT. Pott.
BRO CASINO Ps MP PiZO> Casing: PoE. MP.
S/N SUIN oO ayn Be fed a Reasicae Casino
NOV RRP oR P De) hing acdSa tae
79. In the same place as No. 78 another Roman milestone,

1.49 m. long. Circumference at bottom 0.96 m.; at top, 0.82 m.
Two Christian crosses at the end of the inscription. I failed to
make an accurate copy of this. The inscription is about the
same as No. 78 and contains the name of the emperor Casinus.
The published Latin inscriptions from Sinope are CLl.L. ΠῚ,

938, 6977, 12219; 239, 6978; 240, 6981; 6979; 6980; 12220;
12...) 12222" $4402 b= 14402 Ὁ.
eee
i
INSCRIPTIONS FROM OTHER PLACES WHICH MENTION

SINOPEANS !
80. Athen. Mitt. VI (1881), p. 303 and Beilage 2. Inscription

from Cleitor, giving a list of proxenoi. Date, before the time of
the Achaean League. The part relating to Sinope is as follows:
Σινωπεῖς
1Πυπποὸος Aape
-ς Φιλίππου
; καὶ ἔκγονοι
\
81. ἘΦ. ᾿ΑῤΧχ. III (1884), p. 128, no. 5; ΤΟΙ ΟΟΥΘ 1),
I, 414. Date, between the years 366 and 538 B.c. Inseription
giving list of those who won in τὰ μεγάλα ᾿Αμφιαράϊα at Oropus.
1. 24. ἀγενείους πυγμὴν
1. 25. ‘Eottaios Σιε νωπεύς
82. B.C.H. VI (1882), p. 225, no. 58; Jahrbuch, 42, 629;

Collitz, Samm. der griech. Dialekt-Inschr. 11, 96294. Date, 240=
200 B.c. Decree by the Delphians to grant προξενία to a
Sinopean, son of Μῆτρις. Μῆτρις is the right name, not Ajpy-
τρίς or Δημήτριος ; cf. Wilhelm, Arch. Epigr. Mitt. XX, p. 73.
For name Μῆτρις ef. Dittenberger, Inser. Orient. Gr. no. 299 ;
Collitz, op. cit., 3029, 38; Latyschev, Pontische Inschriften,
p- 67, col. 6,1. 10. Attention has not been called to the in-
scription found in Athens and published in the Athen. Mitt.
XIII (1888), p. 429, Μῆτρις Νικάνδρου Σινωπεύς. which confirms
the name Μῆτρις in the Delphian decree. Bourguet (Revue des
Etudes Grecques, XVI, 1903, p. 96) would read [Καλλικράτει]
Μήτριος in the Delphian decree. (Cf. No. 40, 1. 5.)
83. OL.G. 11. 2059. Decree of the Olbians to crown @eo-

κλέα Σατύρου ἥρωα. Σινώπη stands at the end of the list of
those who have already crowned him.
1 T omit inscriptions which give only the man’s name, his father’s name, and
ethnikon. These will all be included in the Prosopographia Sinopensis which
the author expects soon to publish.
84. Syllogos, II’, παράρτημα, p. 65, no. 6. Inscription

found in Tomi.
Saparrié[e..../05 ΠΠολυδώ[ρου] κατὰ ὄναρ Σινωπεύς
85. Dittenberger, Sylloge?, 8326; Michel, Recueil, p. 258, no.

338. Found near Chersonesus. Date about 110 B.c. Decree to
crown Diophantus, son of Asclapiodorus, the Sinopean and gen-
eral of Mithradates the Great, for his many services in the wars
against the Scythians. A bronze statue of him is to be set up.
86. Latyschev (1901), Inseriptiones Antiquae Orae Sept. Ponti

Euaini, ΓΝ. no. T2. Fragment which fits (LG. II, 2134 6.
Proxeny decree in honor of TP. Καώς Εὐτυχιανὸς Ναύκλαρος
Σινωπεύς. In O.L.G. thid. read Katov for Ka[p jor.
87. Cumont in Revue des Etudes Grecques, XV (1902), pp.

332-332, no. 51. Found near Kavsa, now in Mersivan.
Πρόκλος ΣινωΪ πεὺς ὑ γι]είνας εὐχαρι[ στῶ ταῖς} | Νύζμ᾽)φαις
καὶ ἸΠο[σειδῶνι] τῷ παντωφ(ε)λ[ίμῳ...] | κόπτ(ε)ιν πρεπίε)ιε
[πόδα ἰάθη δὲ Kal..| αὐτοῦ συνφόρο)υς. Χρησστὸς Σινω-
[weds] | λιθουργὸς ἐποίει
88. OLG. 897; LG.(C.LA.) UI, 25 Τ0: Found in Athens.

Ποπίλλιος | [A ]outatiavos | Σινωπεύς, υἱὸς Ποπ(ιλλίου) Ov-
φικιανοῦ | dis ἀρχιερέως καὶ | Σηστίας Μαρκιανῆς | ἱερείας peya-
Ans ᾿Αθηνᾶς. | ἐνθάδε κατάκειται | ἐτῶν κβ΄
ΘΡ GOAe yetll, 1 129. 91: 2485... list, of

victories won by Οὐαλέριος "Exdextos Σινωπεύς, βουλευτής.
90. LG. 1V (CLP. I.), 956. Found at Epidaurus. Date,
294 4.p. Dedication by Tiberius Claudius Severus (Tif. KX.
Σεουῆρος Σινωπεύς), who had been cured at Epidaurus, to
Apollo Maleates and Asclepius.
I add here five epigrams in honor of Sinopeans.

91. Kaibel, Epigrammata Graeca, 252. Found in Pantica-
paeum. Relief of a man with a boy standing beside him.
Pharnaces, son of Pharnaces, a Sinopean, died abroad and a

cenotaph was set up for him at home.
92. Kaibel, op. cit. 702. Found at Rome. Kopvoutiwv died

away from home at the age of two years, two months, and two
weeks.
93. Simonides, 101 (174).
Σῆμα Θεόγνιδος εἰμὶ Σινωπέος. ᾧ μ᾽ ἐπέθηκεν
Γλαῦκος ἑταιρείης ἀντὶ πολυχρόνου
94. Anth. Plan. 111, 25. Epigram in honor of Damostratus

the Sinopean, who won six tines at the Isthmian games.
95. Compte
Ἴ Rendu, 1877, ’ p. 277. Epigram
S in honor of
Menodorus, son of Apollonius, the Sinopean.
96. Of the following inscription Dr. Wilhelm, secretary of

the Austrian archaeological school in Athens, with much difh-
culty made a squeeze and a copy. With great generosity and
kindness he has allowed me to give his copy here. The in-
scription consists of thirty-four lines of more than sixty letters
of very small size. It shows the relations between Sinope and
Histiaea in the third century B.c. According to Dr. Wilhelm,
the date of the inscription is the first half or middle of the
third century B.c. For the first lines cf. Wilhelm, Eine Proxe-
nenliste an Histiaia, in the Arch.-Epigr. Mitt. aus Oester. 1891.
ἔδοξεν | ὃ τῶι δήμωι" ἐπειδὴ Σινωπεῖς ἄποικοι... being on good
terms with the Histiaeans and the λοιποὶ “EXAnves have sent
an embassy to renew the old friendship. 1. 7, συν[αί] ἵτιοι
γεγένηνται σωτηρίας. 1. 11, καὶ ὅτι ᾿Αρμοξένωι πολίτει ἡμετέρωι
... [ἔδωκεν2] | 26 δῆμος δωρεὰν τάλαντον περιποιούμενος τὴν
πρὸς τὸν δῆμον τῶν “Ἱστιαιέων χάριν. καὶ | Bray προυπάρχουσαν
φιλίαν ταῖς πόλεσιν ἀνανεοῦνται K.T.r. the ambassadors ask to
set aside a ὑπόμνημα δι(αγ)φόρως ? | 1" γεγραμμένον καθελεῖν, τὰ
φιλάνθρωπα διαφυλάττοντες κιτ.λ. In ll. 16/17 we have the
well-known formula ὅπως | ἂν οὖν εἰδῇ ὁ δῆμος ὁ τῶν Σινωπέων
ὅτι ἐπίσταται K.T.r. (that the demos of Histiaea is always grate-
ful to its friends for τὰ κοινὰ εὐεργετήματα and taking care καὶ
κοινῆι τῆς πόλεως Kal ἰδίαι τῶν ἀφικνουμένων [els ᾿Ιστίαιαν]}). In
1. 20 begins the answer given to the ambassadors of Sinope,
ἀποκρίνασθαι | "'μὲν τοῖς πρεσβευταῖς ὅτι ἡ πόλις οὐ μόνον πρὸς
> 2 fal 2] \ - “ -“ ς , > , Ν
[τοὺς ἑαυτῆ]ς γείτονας οἰκείως διάκειται ἀλλὰ | [κα]ὶ [τοῖ]ς Σινω-

πε[ῦ]σιν ἐκ παλαιοῦ φίλοις καὶ ἀδελφοῖς... continues friendly,
ete. After such phrases in lines 21--ῶθ, the decree runs as
follows, 1. 27 — opic@a ἐξ ἴσου τά τε δίκαια καὶ τὰ φιλάνθρωπα
Joe .... τοῖς παραγενομένοις “δΣινωπέων καθάπερ τοῖς ἰδίοις πο-
λίταις καὶ εἶναι ἀσφάλειαν καὶ ἀσυλίαν τοῖς ἀφι “᾿κνουμένοις
Σινωπέων εἰς τὴν πόλιν ἢ εἰς τὸ ἐμ[ πορ]ιο[ν ὃ ἔχει] ὁ δῆμος ἀπὸ
᾿Ἱστιαιέων | Kat τῶν ἐνοικούντων" ὑπάρχειν δὲ Σινωπεῦσιν καὶ
τὰ λοιπὰ φιλάν
\
ἴθρωπα παρὰ τοῦ δήμου ὧν ἂν χρείαν ἔχωσιγ
X\ / 1910 \ le) δή - ΕΝ / »
καὶ πρόσοδον πρὸς τὴν βουλὴν καὶ Tov | *dhwov μετὰ τὰ ἱερὰ Kal
\ , a \ \ \ \ 99) - \ Ν ς Ν \
ἰσοτέλειαν καθάπερ καὶ ᾿Ἱστιαιεῦσιν ἐν Σινώπηι" καλεῖν 89 δὲ καὶ

ὅταν τὰ Σωτήρια θύηι ἡ πύλις ἐπὶ ξένια Σινωπέων τοὺς ἐν-ἐπιδη-
μοῦντας. | *eivar δὲ καὶ τοὺς πρεσβευτὰς Μητ[ρ] 6 βι7]ον) Aea-
viov (the first name is not sure), ᾿πιχάρην Θεαρίωνος προξένους
... the rest is lost.
Davip M. RoBINson.
RAS TE
24 ΠΥ
Wthe
ἣ ly
4,
+a
τὴν
| ne
51
ar
yu
<5 ying:
y
Ri
ἸΟῪ ’ jie
AR
By LF ᾿
4 ‘tas
Tacs
ie Sat
ea
ay
4atea ne
Mie
a ἃ
hive
we
Denn
“ἂν
λα
νυ, ιν νῳ
᾿ “Ὁ Site iA,
aD) Aa Pee ὼ Bs
yd Sts
Dab
ἼΩΝ
1AN ᾿ ἐπι AY
Uses Ἷ
rs 4 ohh
RS
i ᾿ ; i ᾿
ἣν ᾿ a)
EMME
᾿ AN
HI HAH),
; ΔῊΝ i nt
; ἡ ἡ ρα
ΠΝ TNH
if Wily
ie
bet) thy i]
hei
Pe Mune
yan Hs
Pet
Ἵ Til Ny

Ancinet Sinope

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ancinet Sinope

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ancinet Sinope

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

0

Robinson, David Moore

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS

(DEPARTMENT OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE)

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS

(DEPARTMENT OF THE GREEK LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE)

aha", ee ae Wie tat) ae en,

ΤῊΝ ΑΝ ' a ἐδ] ΝΟ " ah Ae,

᾿ ar, piv at:=

The configuration of the country round Sinope, its geographic

southeasterly portion sends its stream out horizontally from a

ΤΟΥ Am. J. Arch. IX (1905) p. 315, no. 44.

of Amisus and the district of Sinope at the river Halys,’ still

nices. Many other pieces of carving have been carried away by

IMPORTANCE OF THE SITE.

Sinope was also the name of a prominent courtesan at Athens

southern shore of the Pontus τὴν Σινώπης παραλίαν, and Eratosthenes

THE COMMERCE OF SINOPE.

The ship’s prow often found upon the obverse of coins of

large quantities at Olbia.1_ Becker’ assumes from the large number

1Cf. Am. J. Arch. IX (1905), pp. 294-300.

1 Reinach-Gotz, op. cit. p. 225.

the Sinopean, whom Xenophon’s Ten Thousand met at Cotyora,

1Xen. Anab. V 6, 3 ff.; B.C. H.1gor, p. 41 ff.; Reinach-G6tz, op. cit. p.

(Od. 1 14, 11). Great quantities of ship-timber doubtless found

main place of export.’ It is found near Sinope, and in Cappadocia

fications that certain structural lines be drawn with a pigment

(θρέμματα) as employed in the classifications of the Greeks,

THE FOUNDING OF SINOPE.

and Furtwangler thinks of Sinope, as being at about that time

Deileon and Phlogius, Thessalians”’. Scylax’ ina loose way calls

1Scylacis Caryandensis Periplus 89 (Miiller, ibid. p.66). Soalso Nicephorus

Aegina or Parnasse. Sometimes she is carried off from Assyria

of prosperity before the Cimmerian inroad in 782 mentioned by

DaRK AGES AND RENAISSANCE.

among its total of 1200 ships 80 contributed by the Greeks on

wrecked at Heraclea.'' But from this time Sinope’s condition was

a force with so adventurous a history back of them. In any case

Jouns Hopkins UNIVERSITY. Davip M. ROBINSON.

1 Anab. V 5, 23. Cf. Judeich, Kleinasiatische Studien, pp. 40, 260,

κυ. ae bag Ta eax,᾿ Aly Sas 2

ordered Datames off, and he abandoned the siege and withdrew

that they indicate Persian officials actually in power at Sinope.'

them with his treatment of the Lacedaemonians shows that they

SINOPE AND THE PonrtTic KINGS.

'Diod. XVIII 3 tells us that Paphlagonia was given to Eumenes, but

suggests the young man’s rapid and ambitious appropriation of

l Appian, Mithr. 9; Plut. Demetrius 4; On Mithradates Ktistes cf. also

discloses the previous friendly and trading relations between the

but failed to push the matter.'| Pharnaces also sent ambassadors,

combination of Oriental cruelty and despotism with Greek culture

SINOPE UNDER THE ROMANS.

Sinope does not figure in the first war between Mithradates

seized what valuables they could, gave their soldiers liberty to

the Euxine. Thither the father, defeated by Pompey, had fled.

Another chronological era dates from this time.’ It marks a new

stones were set up in the vicinity and a multitude of inscriptions,’

The external history of ancient Sinope, as we have now studied

than battles, captures, recaptures, autonomies and successive sub-

produced no historians or geographers,’ for our appendix of