Hadrian, "prophet" in Didyma [ Marble ]
Inscription: id 133
Title
Hadrian, "prophet" in Didyma
Description
Fragment of a base broken on the left and bottom corners. Hadrian’s honours are inscribed in larger letters than the imperial letter.
Typology
Honorific inscriptionImperial letter
Inscription category
RomanGreek
Language
Greek
Language of entry
English
Physical characteristics
Hadrian accepts the position of prophêtês in Didyma and sends a letter to Miletus highlighting his piety and benefactions
Material(s)
Marble
Measurements
65 centimetres in height, 35 centimetres in width, and 50 centimetres thick. Letters are 2.6 centimetres tall in the first 4 lines and 1.8 in the rest of the document.
Original location (text)
Adyton of Apollo’s temple, DidymaAdyton of Apollo?s temple, Didyma
Actual location
Museum depot, Didim (E 23, Turkey)
Centuries (range of dating)
2nd CE
Date CE / start of range
135
Date CE - end of range (optional)
138
Publications
Rehm, Albert, Didyma: Die Inschriften, Berlin, Mann, 1958, p. 296, no. 494.
Edition
This edition is based on Rehm, Albert, Didyma: Die Inschriften, Berlin, Mann, 1958, p. 296, no. 494.
|
|
vacat [ἡ πόλις] ἡ Μιλησίων
|
|
|
vacat [Ἁ]δριανὸν
|
|
|
vacat [προφη]τεύσαντα
|
|
|
[Αὐτοκράτωρ Κα]ῖσαρ θεοῦ Τραιανοῦ
|
|
5
|
[Παρθικοῦ υἱός, θεο]ῦ Νέρουα υἱωνός,
|
|
|
[Τραιανὸς Ἁδριανό]ς, Σεβαστός, ἀρχ[ι]-
|
|
|
[ερεὺς μέγιστος, δημ]αρχικῆς ἐξο[υ]-
|
|
|
[σίας τὸ ιθʹ, αὐτοκράτωρ] τὸ βʹ, ὕπατ[ος]
|
|
|
[τὸ γʹ, πατὴρ πατρίδος, Μ]ιλησίων τ[οῖς]
|
|
10
|
[ἄ]ρχουσι καὶ [τῆι βουλῆι κα]ὶ τῶι δήμ[ωι]
|
|
|
vacat [χαίρειν.]
|
|
|
[κ]αὶ διὰ τὴν π[ρὸς τὸν θεὸν ε]ὐσέβειαν
|
|
|
[κ]αὶ ὑμᾶς τειμ[ήσων, ἐπεὶ ἐσ]τ̣ί μοι σύ{ν}-
|
|
|
[ν]ηθες τὰς εὐδ[οξούσας πόλει]ς̣ φιλοφ[ρο]-
|
|
15
|
[νε]ῖσθαι ταῖς π[ροσηκούσαις εὐεργεσίαῖς]
|
|
|
[- - -]
|
English translation
The translation is my own and seeks to remain as close to the original Greek syntax and line separation as possible.
The city of the Milesians/ (honours) Hadrian/ who has acted as prophêtês. The emperor Caesar, son of the god Trajan/, Parthicus, grandson of the god Nerva// Trajan Hadrian, Augustus, pontifex/ maximus, with tribunician powers/ for the 19th time, imperator for the 2nd, consul/ for the 3rd, father of the fatherland, to the/ magistrates and council and people/
greetings. Both because of my piety towards the god/ and because I am paying honours to you, for it is/ my custom to show favour to renowned cities/ with befitting benefactions/ [...]
English translation credit
Translation by author of the database record
Commentary
This inscription transmits two different documents. In the first three lines, honours by the city of Miletus for Hadrian are carved with bigger letters. The remaining space before the stone breaks (l. 4-15) contains a letter of the emperor to the local institutions: magistrates (ἄρχοντες/archontes), council (βουλή/boulê), and people (δῆμος/dêmos). The combination of both testimonies, together with related evidence found in this territory of the province of Asia, will shed light on the relations established between a Roman emperor and one of the most important religious centres in the eastern Mediterranean.
The imperial letter, even if fragmentary, records a more comprehensive titulature from which a dating can be proposed. The only secure element surviving on the stone is the second proclamation of Hadrian as imperator (αὐτοκράτωρ/autokrator). This title was most likely connected with the end of Bar Kokhba’s revolt (Eck, Ein Triumphbogen, p. 301-303) and would be dated after 135 CE. From this moment until Hadrian’s death in 138, the original editor of the inscription restores the 19th tribunician powers that would date between the 10th December 135 and 9th December 136. However, such a chronological precision should remain purely hypothetical. The most important point, at any rate, is that this letter and the corresponding honours are not directly connected with Hadrian’s constant travels throughout the provinces (see below), but rather with the end of his reign at Rome. Consequently, the content of this communication provides us with a good overview of the emperor’s reflection on his governance. In this regard, the key term is σύνηθες/synêthes (“customary”). Hadrian affirms between line 13 and 14 that, almost as a norm, he “had favoured (φιλοφρονεῖσθαι/philophroneisthai) renowned cities with befitting benefactions.” For this reason and because of his piety (εὐσέβεια/eusebeia) towards a god (Apollo), he was also paying honours to the citizens of Miletus. Before assessing the veracity of this claim, it is necessary to analyse the nature and context of the Milesian proposal.
Since the bottom of the inscription is lost, the reconstruction needs to be based on the upper section. In line 3, the aorist participle προφητεύσας/prophêteusas indicates that Hadrian had held and completed the position of prophetês. This office entailed supervising the activities of the oracular centre of Apollo at Didyma (see Fontenrose, Didyma, p. 45-55). The sanctuary, separated by a sacred road of ca. 30 km, belonged to Miletus and hence the honours and letter are concerned with the institutions of this city. From 494 BCE, Milesians are attested as prophêtai that were normally drawn by lot and remained in place for a year. They had to reside in the premises of Didyma and oversaw sacrifices, festivals, prayers and other services in honour of Apollo. Nevertheless, they were not responsible for delivering the mantic messages of the god as these were interpreted by a woman. In the Roman period, the office appears to have been held on a voluntary basis more frequently, local Roman citizens were not barred from it, and it could be bestowed as an honour. For this last reason, Hadrian was able to accept the nomination while he was at Rome. Only two additional Roman emperors are known to have been granted this prerogative: Trajan (I.Didyma 318) and Julian (Epist. 451bc), while the cultic structures remained active until the beginning of Late Antiquity (see Busine, Paroles).
The exceptionality of Hadrian’s case can be explained by virtue of the many inscriptions recording his reign that have been discovered at both Didyma and Miletus. Thanks to this evidence, it is possible to confirm that the emperor visited the city in 129 CE, probably straight after his second stay at Ephesus (I.Didyma 254; see Halfmann, Itinera, p. 204). As a result of this visit – considered sacred (I.Didyma 58) – a remarkably high number of altars referring to him as “founder” (κτίστης/ktistês) and “saviour” (σωτήρ/sôtêr) were produced (I.Milet 290-297, 301, 302). In Ephesus, the bestowal of such titles meant gratitude for significant benefactions and a similar scenario must be inferred in the case of Miletus. In fact, the good disposition of this city towards Hadrian predates his journey as shown by the discovery of two earlier honorific statue bases (I.Milet I,7 230-232). Thereafter, such signs of loyalty and gratitude did not cease (e.g.I.Milet I,2 21; I.Didyma 58, 153), so the final nomination as prophêtês needs to be understood against this background.
Didyma was one of the most renowned centres of Hellenism in the Mediterranean (see Parke, Oracles, p. 1-111). As such, Hadrian’s first visit and, later, the acceptance of the Milesian proposal comply with his allegedly customary governance. In the Greek peninsula, the analogous oracular sanctuary of Delphi had likewise been favoured with his presence and constructions, and the close relationship between this emperor and Athens was evident (Cassius Dio, Roman History XLIV.16.1-2; Pausanias, Description of Greece I.18.6-9; see Boatwright, Hadrian and the Cities, p. 144-157). The case of Ephesus, well attested both in 124 and 129 CE, has already been mentioned above. Therefore, Hadrian had good reasons to boast about an euergetic legacy at the end of his reign. Moreover, he had a long record of benefactions for traditional cults such as those of Apollo and Zeus (e.g. in Aizanoi and Cyrene), which supported his claim of religious piety too. Against such a positive narrative, the contemporary Jewish revolt is particularly conflicting. Hadrian had also visited Arabia and Judea (see Birley, Hadrian, p. 231-234) with monumental signs of his actions such as the arch of Gerasa or the Colonia Aelia Capitolina still surviving. And yet, two years after 130 the uprising led by the indigenous Bar Kokhba gained support and required an imperial response with officers such as Iulius Severus and Haterius Nepos. In our inscription from Didyma, it is possible to see that no reference to these negative episodes was made and Hadrian, instead, decided to focus on his propagandistic achievements towards the Hellenic past. Later sources will indeed ridicule the emperor as a Graeculus (“Greekling”; HA, Hadrian I.5; Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus XIV.2), and contemporary Greek authors are largely positive (see Fein, Die Beziehungen; Geiger, “The Bar-Kokhba”). Accordingly, one should not be surprised by the very scant and indirect epigraphic evidence illustrating the final Jewish revolt in the high Roman Empire.
The imperial letter, even if fragmentary, records a more comprehensive titulature from which a dating can be proposed. The only secure element surviving on the stone is the second proclamation of Hadrian as imperator (αὐτοκράτωρ/autokrator). This title was most likely connected with the end of Bar Kokhba’s revolt (Eck, Ein Triumphbogen, p. 301-303) and would be dated after 135 CE. From this moment until Hadrian’s death in 138, the original editor of the inscription restores the 19th tribunician powers that would date between the 10th December 135 and 9th December 136. However, such a chronological precision should remain purely hypothetical. The most important point, at any rate, is that this letter and the corresponding honours are not directly connected with Hadrian’s constant travels throughout the provinces (see below), but rather with the end of his reign at Rome. Consequently, the content of this communication provides us with a good overview of the emperor’s reflection on his governance. In this regard, the key term is σύνηθες/synêthes (“customary”). Hadrian affirms between line 13 and 14 that, almost as a norm, he “had favoured (φιλοφρονεῖσθαι/philophroneisthai) renowned cities with befitting benefactions.” For this reason and because of his piety (εὐσέβεια/eusebeia) towards a god (Apollo), he was also paying honours to the citizens of Miletus. Before assessing the veracity of this claim, it is necessary to analyse the nature and context of the Milesian proposal.
Since the bottom of the inscription is lost, the reconstruction needs to be based on the upper section. In line 3, the aorist participle προφητεύσας/prophêteusas indicates that Hadrian had held and completed the position of prophetês. This office entailed supervising the activities of the oracular centre of Apollo at Didyma (see Fontenrose, Didyma, p. 45-55). The sanctuary, separated by a sacred road of ca. 30 km, belonged to Miletus and hence the honours and letter are concerned with the institutions of this city. From 494 BCE, Milesians are attested as prophêtai that were normally drawn by lot and remained in place for a year. They had to reside in the premises of Didyma and oversaw sacrifices, festivals, prayers and other services in honour of Apollo. Nevertheless, they were not responsible for delivering the mantic messages of the god as these were interpreted by a woman. In the Roman period, the office appears to have been held on a voluntary basis more frequently, local Roman citizens were not barred from it, and it could be bestowed as an honour. For this last reason, Hadrian was able to accept the nomination while he was at Rome. Only two additional Roman emperors are known to have been granted this prerogative: Trajan (I.Didyma 318) and Julian (Epist. 451bc), while the cultic structures remained active until the beginning of Late Antiquity (see Busine, Paroles).
The exceptionality of Hadrian’s case can be explained by virtue of the many inscriptions recording his reign that have been discovered at both Didyma and Miletus. Thanks to this evidence, it is possible to confirm that the emperor visited the city in 129 CE, probably straight after his second stay at Ephesus (I.Didyma 254; see Halfmann, Itinera, p. 204). As a result of this visit – considered sacred (I.Didyma 58) – a remarkably high number of altars referring to him as “founder” (κτίστης/ktistês) and “saviour” (σωτήρ/sôtêr) were produced (I.Milet 290-297, 301, 302). In Ephesus, the bestowal of such titles meant gratitude for significant benefactions and a similar scenario must be inferred in the case of Miletus. In fact, the good disposition of this city towards Hadrian predates his journey as shown by the discovery of two earlier honorific statue bases (I.Milet I,7 230-232). Thereafter, such signs of loyalty and gratitude did not cease (e.g.I.Milet I,2 21; I.Didyma 58, 153), so the final nomination as prophêtês needs to be understood against this background.
Didyma was one of the most renowned centres of Hellenism in the Mediterranean (see Parke, Oracles, p. 1-111). As such, Hadrian’s first visit and, later, the acceptance of the Milesian proposal comply with his allegedly customary governance. In the Greek peninsula, the analogous oracular sanctuary of Delphi had likewise been favoured with his presence and constructions, and the close relationship between this emperor and Athens was evident (Cassius Dio, Roman History XLIV.16.1-2; Pausanias, Description of Greece I.18.6-9; see Boatwright, Hadrian and the Cities, p. 144-157). The case of Ephesus, well attested both in 124 and 129 CE, has already been mentioned above. Therefore, Hadrian had good reasons to boast about an euergetic legacy at the end of his reign. Moreover, he had a long record of benefactions for traditional cults such as those of Apollo and Zeus (e.g. in Aizanoi and Cyrene), which supported his claim of religious piety too. Against such a positive narrative, the contemporary Jewish revolt is particularly conflicting. Hadrian had also visited Arabia and Judea (see Birley, Hadrian, p. 231-234) with monumental signs of his actions such as the arch of Gerasa or the Colonia Aelia Capitolina still surviving. And yet, two years after 130 the uprising led by the indigenous Bar Kokhba gained support and required an imperial response with officers such as Iulius Severus and Haterius Nepos. In our inscription from Didyma, it is possible to see that no reference to these negative episodes was made and Hadrian, instead, decided to focus on his propagandistic achievements towards the Hellenic past. Later sources will indeed ridicule the emperor as a Graeculus (“Greekling”; HA, Hadrian I.5; Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus XIV.2), and contemporary Greek authors are largely positive (see Fein, Die Beziehungen; Geiger, “The Bar-Kokhba”). Accordingly, one should not be surprised by the very scant and indirect epigraphic evidence illustrating the final Jewish revolt in the high Roman Empire.
Thematic keywords
ApolloDidymaJewish revoltHadrianimperial pietyimperial visitMiletusbenefactioncitysanctuaryoracle
Keywords (original language)
̓ΑδριανόςαὐτοκράτωρσεβαστόςΜιλἠσιοςἄρχωνβουλήδῆμοςθεόςεὐσέβειασυνήθηςπροφήτης
Bibliographic reference
Rehm, Albert
1958
Didyma: Die Inschriften,
(Berlin :
Mann)Parke, Herbert W.
1985
The oracles of Apollo in Asia Minor,
(London :
Croom Helm)Halfmann, Helmut
1986
Itinera principum: Geschichte und Typologie der Kaiserreisen im Römischen Reich,
(Stuttgart :
F. Steiner Verlag)Fontenrose, Joseph
1988
Didyma: Apollo's Oracle, cult, and companions,
(Berkeley :
University of California Press)Fein, Sylvia
1994
Die Beziehungen der Kaiser Trajan und Hadrian zu den literati,
(Stuttgart :
Teubner)Birley, Anthony R.
1997
Hadrian, The Restless Emperor,
Roman Imperial Biographies
(London :
Routledge)Eck, Werner,Foerster, Gideon
1999
Ein Triumphbogen für Hadrian im Tal von Beth Shean bei Tel Shalem,
Journal of Roman Archaeology
12,
294-313Boatwright, Mary T.
2000
Hadrian and the Cities of the Roman Empire,
(Princeton :
Princeton University Press)Busine, Aude
2005
Didyma: Apollo's Oracle, cult, and companions,
(Leiden :
Brill)Geiger, Joseph
2016
The Bar-Kokhba Revolt: The Greek Point of View,
Historia
65,
497-519Halfmann, Helmut
2019
Hadrians Reisen: Alte und neue Erkenntnisse,
Epigraphische Notizen: Zur Erinnerung an Peter Herrmann
eds. Kaja Harter-Uibopuu
(Stuttgart :
F. Steiner),
235-248
Other sources
The Temple of Hecate and the Jewish Riot in Cyrene
[ Marble ]
Hadrian listens to Hymns in the Theatre of Ephesus
[ Marble ]
Delphi, Hadrian, and the local citizenship of a Roman soldier
[ Not reported ]
Hadrian and Zeus in Aizanoi
[ Marble ]
Arch of Hadrian at Gerasa (129-130 CE)
[ Marble ]
The council and people of Ephesus thank Hadrian
[ Marble ]
The inscription of the arch of Hadrian in Gerasa
[ Marble ]
Haterius Nepos, Arabia, and the Bar Kokhba revolt
[ Hard limestone ]
Iulius Severus, Hellenistic descendant, and Roman Governor in the Bar Kokhba Revolt
[ Unknown. I.Ankara 76 (see above) is made of white marble ]
Publication status
Yes
Realised by
Realised by (term)
Aitor Blanco Pérez
Drupal Node ID
3239
Publishing diplomatic option
No
Publishing translation option
Yes
Linked media
perfil_aitor.blanco_p_rez.jpg [13kB]delphi_citizenship.jpg [562kB]hadrian_arc_pan_edit.jpg [288kB]hadrians_arch84.jpg [402kB]arch_of_hadrian_jerash_2009.jpg [240kB]
