Parerga to the Stadiasmus Patarensis (16): The Roads, Settlements and Territories
In this contribution the author discusses three issues relating to the course of the roads and settlements mentioned in the Stadiasmus Patarensis (SP): 1- All the roads recorded on the SP were measured from within the borders of town centres, except for those settlements given with the preposition δ...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | deu |
| Published: |
Akdeniz University
2016-05-01
|
| Series: | Gephyra |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/gephyra/issue/22143/318433?publisher=nalan-eda-akyurek-sahin |
| Summary: | In this contribution
the author discusses three issues relating to the course of the roads and
settlements mentioned in the Stadiasmus Patarensis (SP): 1- All the roads
recorded on the SP were measured from within the borders of town centres,
except for those settlements given with the preposition διά. 2- The territories
of the settlements were observed in the composition of the road list and
indicated through διά when required. 3- All the settlements recorded on the SP
had an autonomy with reference to fiscal basis and possessed territorial
rights. The author begins the discussion with the use of the prepositions διά,
εἰς and ἐπί, which relate to territories or natural formations, town zones and
borders respectively, and the articles that were not used for the settlement
names, but for the regions or natural formations recorded on the SP. The author
understands the SP was not constructed as a route guide for travellers, as it
does not provide “routes” (itinera) but “roads” (viae) and, in consequence, it
should be regarded as an official inventory of the roads, and consequently it
is suggested that the recorded distances indicate the actual lengths of the
roads between town-zones of settlements. Finally, based upon the argumentation
outlined above, the author points out the autonomous nature of the settlements
recorded in the SP. He also discusses the possible reasons for the omission of
some ports, and concludes that it was because they were either, not poleis at
the time or, they were ports under the control of other settlements, such as
Andriake of Myra, with the roads given to the cities to which these ports
belonged. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1309-3924 2651-5059 |