AE online project : Byzantine translations

It seems that items 3 and 4 must have been salvaged from Ephesus? Please consider this site:

http://homepage.univie.ac.at/elisabeth.trinkl/forum/forum1297/05wass.htm
"Although it had been known that four aqueducts supplied water to Ephesus, the intra-city distribution system and drainage network of this water - the subject of the present investigation - is presently imperfectly known. Three sets of urban reservoirs and fountains houses have been identified in the 1997 field work, as well as numerous segmented ceramic pipelines and large open channels. We have tracked the networks of piping, and located them and the reservoirs on a topographical map of the city. Particularly, we have studied an elaborate hydraulic junction consisting of a 2-4th century CE fountain house (the water tower), with its related piping, adjacent to the upper agora. A highly efficient system is evident: Water pressure to individual water lines appears to be adjustable by varying the hydraulic head in (4) feed pools supplied from a common upper reservoir. Pipe networks appear to spread out from this fountain house, supplying water at different flow rates to baths, fountains, and residences according to the requirements of each. Individual water lines were designed to match water requirements of major structures en route, with residual supplies to second-level users at the terminus of each line."

The major problem with this identification could be the names of the rivers and streams mentioned in the inscription since they seem to have more likely have been the sources of water for another city! Or maybe the use of the word "Ephesus" indicated the region?

Concerning item 4, Constantine mentioned may likely the same as the one who is given credit for building or rebuilding at Ephesus!

Regards,

Edited by opuslola - 03-Mar-2010 at 07:29

Originally posted by Chilbudios Meanwhile I traced Item 4 based on my reading. Even though I am not able to follow it on stone as suggested, probably this reading is reliable enough: http://epigraphy.packhum.org/inscriptions/oi?ikey=301417&bookid=172&region=5&subregion=12

Edited by Nickmard - 11-May-2009 at 15:16

Good work Chilbudios

But what I wanted to know was, what were the Venetians doing making Inscriptions in Ottoman millitary bases in 17th Century Istanbul (constantinople).

Originally posted by Chilbudios Here is item 3: http://epigraphy.packhum.org/inscriptions/oi?ikey=247983&bookid=490&region=8&subregion=29   Item 1 seems to be a Venetian inscription from late 17th century. I will try a translation next week.

I saw it. The information about it is correct and more extended.
As for the names yes they are Latin. I just wrote them in latin directly from their Greek form.

Btw, I was unable to read clearly Item 3, but i have now found it elsewhere and will translate it soon.

Originally posted by Theodore Felix   its not very likely that there were many exclusively Phrygian speakers here... if any. When we speak of local population and limitation of "Romanization" or "Hellenization" thats more of a rural phenomenon.

In Ephesus it was probably none and the Anatolians at that point seem to have abandoned their native tongue. However, towards central anatolia, Phrygian was pretty much alive until the 6th century AD. At least as it has been attested.

The level of literacy in the ancient world is a very iffy subject (not to say ALL could read Herodotus and Homer, but what about road signs and small inscriptions)... we cannot really make any assumptions on it. In this case, these inscriptions are from urban patrons and so we can maybe expect both a higher level of literacy and probably a universal knowledge of Greek... its not very likely that there were many exclusively Phrygian speakers here... if any. When we speak of local population and limitation of "Romanization" or "Hellenization" thats more of a rural phenomenon.

The Latin name of what is most likely a Greek (or Hellenized) Roman citizen definitely points to perhaps the second century AD. Tiberius Claudios is in there, so its clearly the Julio-Claudian dynasty, or perhaps shortly afterward at most.


Edited by Theodore Felix - 05-May-2009 at 23:04

Originally posted by Nickmard Would I be correct in thinking that the Romans of this period and even the Constantinian dynasty would not have been using Greek yet?

Since the Greek, Anatolian and Phrygian populations used Greek as a common language for many centuries before and were not latin speaking, a honourable inscription about someone that has to be remembered had to be in Greek. Otherwise, only Romans that were a minority would understand it.

The same example is later seen in Bulgaria. Even though the rulers were not slavic speaking a huge majority of the population would not understand if the inscriptions were in the altaic language of the aristocracy. It ended up that the ruling class was slavized.


Edited by Flipper - 05-May-2009 at 12:17

That is correct.
We talk about Roman period, not a Byzantine. The first Byzantine dynasty would be the Constantinian, one century later.