Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
This article is the result, not of weeks of intensive field survey, but of three days borrowed from other work in order to check specific topographical points. My thanks are due to Mr. Gough for company and transport to Sidrova in 1958; to Leverhulme Awards and the Royal Geographical Society, who made possible the reconnaissance of western Cappadocia in 1961 that included the visit to Başmakçı; and to Mr. G. D. B. Jones for his help at Başmakçı and for the photographs reproduced as Pl. XXVIII, a and c.
The discovery in 1956, at Kerti Hüyük between Aşıran, Beydilli and Salur, of a Derbetan dedication to Antoninus Pius, showed that Derbe was to be sought to the north-east rather than to the west of Laranda. The lack, at Kerti Hüyük, of any evidence of Byzantine settlement was, however, against its being the actual site, and our visit to Sidrova in 1958 was made with the intention of finding an alternative.
1 AS. VII, 1957, pp. 147 ff.Google Scholar; cf. J., and Robert, L., REG. LXXI, 1958, pp. 331 f., no. 490Google Scholar; also SEG. XVI, no. 758, for a more suitable restoration of line 14, where three letters at most are missing.
2 The name is variously given by travellers and maps as Sidrova, Sidivre, Sidirvar, etc., and has now been officially Turcicised as Sudurağı (“Water-stop”). As E. Honigmann in his commentary on Hierocles 675 (Corpus Bruxell. Hist. Byz., Forma Imp. Byz. Fasc. 1) seems to have recognized, the name is derived from that of Derbe.
3 A short description of the site and two photographs are given by Jacopi, G. (Boll. del R. Ist. di Archeol. VIII, 1938, pp. 30 ff.Google Scholar, also published separately as Esplorazioni e Studi in Paflagonia e Cappadocia, Rome, 1939)Google Scholar. Robert, L. (Rev. de Philol. LXV, 1939, pp. 212 f.)Google Scholar pointed out that Jacopi's identification of Başmakçı with Faustinopolis on the evidence of two milestones found by him (op. cit., pp. 32 f.) at Eminlik (below, p. 142) was not certain, but adds in its favour the observation that two of the epitaphs found by Jacopi at Başmakçı are of Roman citizens whose tria nomina are not derived from those of an emperor. For references to literary sources, earlier descriptions of Başmakçı and identifications of it with Faustinopolis, see Ruge in RE. s.v. Halala.
The plan of Başmakçı (Fig. 1) is based on a few compass bearings, one paced measurement, and a large number of vertical and horizontal angles scaled from photographs.
4 One of the two milestones found by Jacopi at Eminlik (op. cit. in note 3, pp. 32 ff.) was reported to have been brought from Bağderesi, 6 km. north of the village. If the accuracy of this report can be relied on, it confirms the reconstruction of the course of the road given above. Mr. Richard Harper has recently found remains of ancient buildings at Havuzlu, 8 km. south-east of Tyana, and suggests that the road may have passed this point. In this case it would have taken a rather shorter and more direct line to Faustinopolis, but would have crossed the summit of the hills at about 1,800 m.
The course of the road down the Çakıt from Tahta Köprü to Podandos and the Gates was described at length by Ramsay, (Geogr. Journal, XXII, 1903, pp. 357 ff.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, a description that must form one of the principal sources for any subsequent study of the Taurus passes.
5 Forrer, E. O., Klio, XXX, 1937, pp. 146 ff.Google Scholar; Garstang, J. and Gurney, O. R., Geography of the Hittite Empire, p. 72Google Scholar.
Forrer's identification of the Dana of Xenophon with Tynna rather than, as is generally thought, with Tyana (op. cit., p. 147; cf. RE. s.v. Tyana, cols. 1636 f., and s.v. Tynna) cannot be accepted without the production of evidence that Zeyve or some site near it was a considerable city in Xenophon's time.
6 Probably the church seen by E. Weigand (Forrer, op. cit., p. 149). Forrer's assumption that the Byzantine fortress Loulon lay in the immediate vicinity of Zeyve cannot be accepted without proof.
7 At the Museum we were told that it came from another site on the opposite side of the main road, which we were not able to visit.
8 CIL. III, 12214Google Scholar. The distance, APMXXXVI Λ∣Ε on the stone, is restored by Ramsay, (Geogr. Journ. XXII, 1903, pp. 401 f.)Google Scholar as a P(ylis) M(ilia) xxxviii, ἐ, interpreting the έ to mean that this was the fifth milestone within the territory of Faustinopolis. A possible alternative restoration would be a P(ylis) M(ilia) xxxvi⟨i⟩, λέ. This makes better sense while doing no more violence to the original reading, but would mean that the stone had been carried from 3 m.p. further east. The same stone, badly damaged, was later seen at Ulukışla by Jacopi (op. cit. in note 3, p. 33).
9 CIL. III, 12213Google Scholar; for the date, probably post-239, see PIR. (2) II, no. 1185. The third stone, which bears no distance, is given by Ramsay, (J.Ö.A.I. VII, 1904, Beibl. col. 111)Google Scholar, and independently by Jacopi (op. cit. in note 10, p. 33).
