Provenance and location

Ancient city: Hierapolis
Modern city: Pamukkale (Turkey)
Province: Phrygia Pacatiana
Diocese: Asiana
Regional prefecture: Oriens
Provenance: Hierapolis, from the excavations of the theatre
Current location: Some blocks are sequentially arranged in front of the Theatre of Hierapolis, the smaller ones are in the reserve of the "MAIER" (Missione Archeologica Italiana a Hierapolis).
Ancient location: public space

Type and material of the support and text layout

Text category

Building inscription commemorating the restoration of the Theatre of Hierapolis

Greek text

Critical edition

Edition based on Ritti 2017, p. 595 with different readings of the blocks 35-37 by Feissel (BE 2018, 434)

Block.19: [Αὐτοκράτορα?] Εὐσεβῆ... Εὐτυχῆ καὶ Μακαρίαν Ὑπατι[κὴν]: Fellows 1841, pp. 425-426, nr. 200; τὴν εὐτυχῆ καὶ μακαρίαν ὑπατι[κὴν]: CIG 03, 3908 (b); [σ]κουτλόσει εἰς τὴν εὐτυχῆ καὶ μακαρίαν ὑπατ[- - -]: IGR 04, 808
Block.34: [καλὸς κἀγαθὸς ἄ]νθρωπος καὶ σωτὴρ ἀληθῶς: Judeich 1898, pp. 68-69, nr. 4 (d); IGR 04, 808
Block.35-36: τ[ὸ πᾶν ἐτελεί]ωσεν or [συνεπλήρ]ωσεν: Jones 2018, p. 925; τ[ὸ? ἀνενέ]ωσεν: Ritti 2017, p. 595
Block.36-37: κατὰ λόγου: Ritti 2017, p. 595
Block.37-39: γαλλόγου προθυμῶς συ[- - -]: CIG 03, 3908 (c); [χορ]ηγήσαντος διὰ χρημάτων εἰς κ[ατασκευήν?]: CIG 03, 3908 (a); γαλλόγου προθυμῶς συ[μβοηθ?]ήσαντος διὰ χρημάτων εἰσκ[ομισθέντων ὑπ'αὐτοῦ? καὶ διά τ]ῆς τῶν ἰδίων ἀγροίκων βοηθείας: Judeich 1898, pp. 68-69, nr. 4 (l; m; n); πρ[ο]θυμῶς συ[μβοηθ]ήσαντος διὰ χρημάτων εἰσκ[ομισθέντων ὑπ'αὐτοῦ? αὶ διά τ]ῆς τῶν ἰδίων ἀγροίκων βοηθείας: IGR 04, 808

Translations

English

“To good fortune. During the truly happy and divine reign of the great emperor Constantius, triumphant, surrounded by sovereignty over land and sea, and of Constantius Caesar, beloved of God, who manifested himself to us in a magnificent way, the theater, which threatened to collapse and revealed itself to be a danger for most of the metropolis, began to be demolished on the kalends of September, during the consulate of Sergius. The reconstruction began on the kalends of June, during the consulate following that of Sergius, and was completed, with the marble facing, during the fortunate and peaceful consulate of our venerable emperors, Constantius, for the fifth time, and Constantius Caesar, for the first time; in accordance with the dispositions of Flavius Philippus, a very admirable man worthy of all praise and prefect of the sacred praetoria, on the report of Flavius Antonius Iulianus, our governor of perfectissimus rank: the superintendent of all the work, without any extraordinary taxation, was the same Iulianus, benevolent and authentic savior and guardian of the whole province, and [he carried out this work], while all the register of the city’s ruling class, by means of spontaneous payments of money and by means of the contribution of his own farmers, cooperated with enthusiasm; [were supervisors of the work the curials (?) T(itus)?] Aeb(utius) Eupolis Apphianos and P(ublius) Treb(onius?) [Palladios?].”

French

“A la bonne chance. Pendant le règne vraiment heureux et divin du grand empereur Constance, triomphateur, entouré de la souveraineté sur terre et sur mer, et de Constance César, bien-aimé de Dieu, qui s'est manifesté à nous de façon magnifique, le théâtre, qui menaçait de s'effondrer et s'annonçait comme un danger pour la plus grande partie de la métropole, a commencé à être démoli lors des kalendes de Septembre, pendant le consulat de Serge. La reconstruction a commencé aux kalends de Juin, au cours du consulat qui a suivi celui de Serge, et s'est achevée, avec le parement de marbre, au cours du consulat heureux et serein de nos vénérables empereurs Constance, pour la cinquième fois, et Constance César, pour la première fois ; à la disposition de Flavius Philippus, homme très admirable, digne de tous les éloges et préfet des prétoires sacrés, sur le rapport de Flavius Antonius Iulianus, notre parfait gouverneur : il était le surintendant de tous les travaux, sans imposer aucune imposition extraordinaire, le même Iulianus, bienveillant et authentique sauveur et gardien de toute la province, et [l'organisateur de toute la reconstruction], coopérant avec élan tout l'album de la classe dirigeante de la ville, par des versements spontanés d'argent et par la contribution de ses fermiers ; [étaient les surveillants des travaux les curiales ( ? ) T(ito) ?] Aeb(utius) Eupolis Apphianos et P(ublius) Treb(onius ?) [Palladios ?].”

Italian

“Alla buona fortuna. Durante il regno invero felice e divino del grande imperatore Costanzo, trionfatore, circonfuso della sovranità sulla terra e sul mare, e di Costanzo Cesare, amatissimo da Dio, che si è manifestato a noi in modo magnifico, il teatro, che minacciava il crollo e si annunciava un pericolo per la maggior parte della metropoli, cominciò a essere demolito alle calende di settembre, durante il consolato di Sergio. L’inizio della ricostruzione avvenne a partire dalle calende di giugno, durante il consolato successivo a quello di Sergio, e giunse a termine, con il rivestimento in marmo, durante il fortunato e sereno consolato dei nostri venerabili imperatori Costanzo, per la quinta volta, e Costanzo Cesare, per la prima volta; per disposizione di Flavius Philippus, uomo assai mirabile e degno di ogni lode e prefetto dei sacri pretorii, su relazione di Flavius Antonius Iulianus, il perfettissimo governatore nostro: fu il sovrintendente di tutta l’opera, senza che intervenisse alcuna imposizione fiscale straordinaria, lo stesso Iulianus, benevolo e autentico salvatore e custode di tutta la provincia, e [portò a compimento quest’opera], cooperando con slancio tutto l’albo della classe dirigente cittadina, mediante versamenti spontanei di denaro e l’apporto dei propri agricoltori; [sono stati supervisori dell’opera i curiali (?) T(ito)?] Aeb(utius) Eupolis Apphianos e P(ublius) Treb(ellius?) [Palladios?].”

The inscription and its prefects: critical commentary, updating, overviews

This long inscription was carved in the mid 4th Century on forty-two blocks, making up the architrave of the second order of the scaenae frons of the Theatre of Hierapolis.

Some of these blocks had already been examined by other scholars during the 18th Century (see the critical edition). However, the latter combined the blocks of our inscription with those of another (the Severan inscription on the architrave of the first order, text by Ritti 2017, pp. 500-501), inadvertently uniting pieces of two different texts. Finally, Tullia Ritti working in conjunction with MAIER (Missione Archeologica Italiana a Hierapolis) re-assembled the forty-two blocks of the architrave correctly following the little guide letters sequentially carved on the extremity of each one (the letter on the right side of each block is the same on the left side of the following one). In such a way she was successfully able to restore almost the entire text (Ritti 2017, pp. 587-603).

Thanks to her reconstruction it was possible to explain where the different dedications of the Theatre of Hierapolis originally were. The architrave of the second order held two inscriptions: the earlier one in honour of Caracalla (Ritti 2017, pp. 514-515) was carved on the left side of the building in front of the cavea, while our later one in honour of Constantius II ran along the facade and the right side; there was also a third Severan dedication on the architrave of the first order (Ritti 2017, pp. 498-506). The stone-cutter of our later inscription evidently tried to emulate the epigraphic appearance of its ancient counterparts, both with regard to writing and decorative elements in order to uphold the tradition.

Our inscription recorded building works on the Theatre of Hierapolis, whose structure (or part of it) was in danger of imminent collapse. Although the reasons for the intervention are not given, poor maintenance and/or the earthquakes at the end of the Severan age may well have been factors.

The text starts with an auspicious formula and the titles of the emperors Constantius II Augustus, as triumphator and dominus of land and sea (τοῦ τροπαιοφόρου καὶ γῆς καὶ θαλάττης ἀναδησαμένου τὸ κράτος Κωνστ[αντίου] μεγάλου βασιλέως), and Constantius Gallus Caesar, as dear to God and charitable to the subjects (τοῦ θεοφιλεστάτου καὶ καλῶς ἡμεῖν ἐπιφανέντος Κωνσταντίου τοῦ Καίσαρος), whose name was subject to dealbatio (whitewashing, escaping the erasure due to the high position of the text) when he suffered damnatio memoriae after his death in 354 AD.

The inscription then specifies, in exceptional detail, the beginning of each phase of restoration by referring to the consulate of the first consul (a post-consular formula due to the absence of consuls for the year 351 AD, see AE 2017, 1497), showing a clearly planned operation. First comes the demolition (λύσις), carried out by removing the damaged or precarious parts, which took place on the calends of September 350 AD (καλάνδαις μὲν σεπτεμβρίαις τὴν λύσιν ἤρξατο λαμβάνειν, ἐπὶ τῆς ὑπατίας Σεργίου), under the consulate of Sergius (CLRE, pp. 234-235), up to the end of May 351 AD. Indeed, on the calends of June 351 AD (ἀπὸ καλ(ανδῶν) ἰουνίων ὑπατίας τῆς μετὰ Σέργιον) began the restoration proper (κατασκευή) of the theatre followed by finishing works (σκούτλωσις), necessitating the application of the expensive marble covering. The restoration was completed in an unspecified moment of 352 AD, when Augustus Constantius II and his Caesar Constantius Gallus were consuls for the fifth and the first time respectively (εἰς τὴν εὐτυχῆ καὶ μακαρίαν ὑπατίαν τῶν σεβασμείων αὐτοκρατόρων ἡμῶν Κωνσταντίου τὸ πέμπτον καὶ Κωνσταντίου Καίσαρος τὸ πρῶτον; CLRE, pp. 238-239). The inscription was thus put up upon completion of the work (352 AD or later).

After mentioning the phases of the restoration and their duration, the inscription goes on. In order to exalt both the complexity and speed of the work, the illustrious officials involved in this project are listed by order of rank and their various roles are described with hyperbolic and eulogistic formulas. First in the list is our praetorian prefect Flavius Philippus (τοῦ θαυμασιωτάτου καὶ πάσης εὐφημίας ἀξίου, καὶ τῶν ἱερῶν πραιτωρίων ἐπάρχου), who dealt with the approval and the supervision of the building project. Next comes the provincial governor Antonius Iulianus (PLRE I, Iulianus 14, p. 471), who sent an istantia (ἀναφορά) to Philippus warning of the risk of the theatre’s collapse, including a project and an evaluation of the expenses, requiring the prefect’s consent (Ritti 2017, pp. 613-615). In order to avoid the leverage of an extraordinary tax (superindictio), as proposed by the praeses, Philippus also agreed to grant the project a fiscal exemption.

The provincial praeses perfectissimus of Phrygia Pacatiana Antonius Iulianus (τοῦ διασημ(ωτάτου) ἡγεμόνος ἡμῶν) was the real promoter of this intervention (γέγονεν δὲ τοῦ παντὸς ἔργου κατασκευαστής) by evaluating, according to his official capacities, which buildings needed to be restored and running the theatre. He was praised for his administrative ability (μηδεμίας διαγραφῆς γενομένης) and for having brought advantages to the entire province (ὁ φιλάνθρωπος καὶ σωτὴρ ἀληθῶς καὶ τῆς ἐπαρχείας πάσης κηδεμών). The funds used for building works came mostly from those managed by the provincial governor, but they were also voluntarily supplemented by the curial class (πολιτευτικόν) through economic and manual support, largely thanks to their farmers (Ritti 2017, pp. 617-619). The sequence of interventions in the case of a Latin inscription would probably have been: disponente Fl(avio) Philippo v(iro) c(larissimo) praefecto praetorio, referente atque curante Antonio Iuliano v(iro) p(erfectissimo) praeside provinciae, or per instantiam Antonii Iuliani etc.

Finally there are the names, partly lost, of certain members of two illustrious local families, the Aebutii and Trebonii who saw to the construction work (Ritti 2017, pp. 617-620).

Since Flavius Philippus was mentioned as praetorian prefect in this text, Ritti concluded that he was still in charge when the restoration was finished and the inscription carved on its architrave (Ritti 2017, pp. 645-650). According to this assumption, therefore, after his embassy to Magnentius’ camp in 351 AD and his concomitant imprisonment (see PPRET 27), Flavius Philippus was not only freed, but was also still praetorian prefect of the East in 352 AD. Nevertheless, another scenario ought to be considered.

Although Zosimus attests to the presence of Flavius Philippus at the side of Constantius II in 351 AD during the Illyrian war against Magnentius, he does not indicate that he was the praetorian prefect (Zos. 02, 46, 02: τῶν ἐν μεγίστοις ἀξιώμασιν ἄνδρα καὶ φρονήσει προέχοντα). He probably held the praetorian prefecture of the East until 350/351 AD (as already claimed by Moser 2018, p. 204), when he examined the report and approved the restoration project of the theatre. But this does not mean to say that he was in charge of the project until its completion. On the Hierapolis inscription the office of Philippus is separated from his name and comes after his eulogy (τοῦ θαυμασιωτάτου καὶ πάσης εὐφημίας ἀξίου, καὶ τῶν ἱερῶν πραιτωρίων ἐπάρχου). As in other surviving inscriptions for the senator, the praise of Philippus precedes the office, the term of which would appear to be concluded (PPRET 27, PPRET 28, PPRET 31; not the case in PPRET 29 which portrays him however as a praetorian prefect). When Philippus accompanied Constantius II to Sirmium (Pannonia) in 351 AD during the Illyrian war and was sent as ambassador to the camp of the usurper, it is unlikely that he was still prefect of the East, since he would not have been able to carry out his functions. Philippus probably followed his master as a comes, implying that someone else must have immediately taken his place as praetorian prefect.

Once Philippus gets taken prisoner by Magnentius (Zos. 02, 49, 02), he disappears from our literary sources. Perhaps he was freed (see PPRET 27), in any case the inscription on the Theatre of Hierapolis confirms that he did not suffer any other misfortunes after that (as assumed by Jones 1955, p. 232; PLRE I, p. 696; Vogler 1979, p. 137; Kelly 2004, p. 189; Maraval 2013, p. 190; Deligiannakis 2018, pp. 33-34), because when Constantius Gallus’ name was removed due to damnatio memoriae in 354 AD, the name of Philippus was left intact. It was probably after the battle of Mursa (September 351 AD) that the emperor Constantius II decided to honour his most loyal supporter and friend, Philippus, erecting gilded statues of him and portraying him in his most prestigious and powerful role, that of praetorian prefect (PPRET 27 and PPRET 28).

Bibliography

Barnes T.D., Praetorian Prefects, 337-361, ZPE, 94, 1992, 249-260.

Castello M.G., Il quaestor Montius e il vicarius Fl. Magnus: alcune riflessioni sul reclutamento del funzionariato sotto Costanzo II, Historikà, 1, 2011, 145-185.

Deligiannakis G., The Last Pagans of Cyprus: Prolegomena to a History of Transition from Polytheism to Christianity, in Horster M., Nicolaou D., Rogge S. (eds.), Church Building in Cyprus (Fourth to Seventh Centuries). A Mirror of Intercultural Contacts in the Eastern Mediterranean, Münster 2018, 23-44.

Fellows C., An Account of Discoveries in Lycia, Being a Journal Kept during a Second Excursions in Asia Minor, London 1841.

Jones A.H.M., The Career of Flavius Philippus, Historia, 4, 1955, 229-233.

Jones C.P., The Institutional History of Hierapolis, JRA, 31, 2018, 921-927.

Kelly C., Ruling the Later Roman Empire, Cambridge 2004.

Judeich W., IV. Inschriften, in Humann C., Cichorius C., Judeich W., Winter F. (hrsg.), Altertümer von Hierapolis, Berlin 1898, pp. 67-179.

Maraval P., Les fils de Constantin: Constantin II (337-340), Constance II (337-361), Constant (337-350), Paris 2013.

Moser M., Emperor and Senators in the Reign of Constantius II. Maintaining Imperial Rule between Rome and Constantinople in the Fourth Century AD, Cambridge 2018.

Ritti T., Iscrizioni pertinenti all’edificio teatrale di Hierapolis, in De Bernardi Ferrero D., Ciotta G., Pensabene P. (a cura di), Il teatro di Hierapolis di Frigia. Restauro, architettura, epigrafia, Genova 2007, 389-427.

Ritti T., Andriantes kai eikones ... met’epigraphes oikeias. Contributi dell’epigrafia ieropolitana di età imperiale alla conoscenza delle opere figurative, in D’Andria F., Romeo I. (eds.), Roman Sculpture in Asia Minor: Proceedings of the International Conference to Celebrate the 50th Anniversary of the Italian Excavations at Hierapolis in Phrygia, Held on May 24-26, 2007, in Cavallino (Lecce), Portsmouth 2011, 173-192.

Ritti T., Hierapolis di Frigia. IX. Storia e istituzioni di Hierapolis, Istanbul 2017.

Ritti T., Miranda E., Guizzi F., La ricerca epigrafica: risultati dell’ultimo quadriennio e prospettive future, in D’Andria F., Caggia M.P. (a cura di), Hierapolis di Frigia. I. Le attività delle campagne di scavo e restauro, 2000-2003, Istanbul 2007, 583-618.

Vogler C., Constance II et l’administration impériale, Strasbourg 1979.

Praetorian prefects and epigraphic habit