The Role of the Decapolis Region in connecting Inland Syria with the Mediterranean Coast, «ARAM», 23, 2011, pp. 497-507 PDF

Preview

Summary

ARAM, 23 (2011) 509-525. doi: 10.2143/ARAM.23.0.2959671 THE ROLE OF THE DECAPOLIS REGION IN CONNECTING INLAND SYRIA WITH THE MEDITERRANEAN COAST Dr. LEONARDO GREGORATTI (University of Udine – Italy) Since the publication of M. Rostovzeff’s fundamental book on caravan cities in 1932, no academic work...

Description

ARAM, 23 (2011) 509-525. doi: 10.2143/ARAM.23.0.2959671

THE ROLE OF THE DECAPOLIS REGION IN CONNECTING INLAND SYRIA WITH THE MEDITERRANEAN COAST Dr. LEONARDO GREGORATTI (University of Udine – Italy)

Since the publication of M. Rostovzeff’s fundamental book on caravan cities in 1932, no academic work dealing with the commercial relationships between Rome and the East could avoid considering the case of Palmyra.1 The major role played by the Syrian city in our knowledge of Roman administration in the East is by no means restricted only to the great number of its epigraphical texts, which nevertheless represent an invaluable support in order to counterbalance the relative scarcity of literary sources about inland Syria under imperial sovereignty.2 Moreover, some of these texts contain explicit references to the commercial activity practised by the city’s leading class, providing a significant piece of evidence that made it possible for us to improve our knowledge of the trade routes through which oriental goods reached the Roman empire.3 The geographical references provided by Palmyrene traders or by ordinary citizens who committed the inscriptions give essential aid in defining in detail the itineraries followed by caravan expeditions outside the Roman borders. Most of the place names found in these inscriptions, such as Babylon, Spasinou Charax and Vologesias to mention only the most frequent, refer to urban communities located deep in Parthian Mesopotamia.4 1 M. Rostovzeff, Caravan Cities, (Oxford, 1932); Among the many studies committed to this topic one of the latest is worth mentioning: G.K. Young, Rome’s Eastern Trade: International Commerce and Imperial Policy, 31 BC-AD 305, (London/New York, 2001). 2 Most of the Latin, Greek and Aramaic texts from Palmyra have been published in J. Cantineau, Inventaire des inscriptions de Palmyre I-IX, (Beyrouth, 1930-1936); vol. X edited by J. Starcky, (Damas, 1949); vol. XI edited by J. Teixidor, (Beyrouth, 1965); vol. XII edited by A. Bounni and J. Teixidor, (Damas, 1975), to which must be added the more recent D.R. Hillers and E. Cussini, Palmyrene Aramaic Texts, (Baltimore-London, 1995). 3 The so-called Palmyrene caravan inscriptions; M. Rostovzeff, “Les inscriptions caravanières de Palmyre”, Mélanges Gustave Glotz, II, (Paris, 1932), 793-811; for a more updated list see also M. Gawlikowski, “Palmyra and its Caravan Trade”, Palmyra and the Silk Road, International Colloquium, (Palmyra, 7-11 april 1992), AAAS, XLII, (1996), 139-145; J.-B. Yon, Les notables de Palmyre, (Beyrouth, 2002), 263-264. 4 Babylon: Inv IX, 11 (24 A.D.); Charax: Inv X, 7 (28-88 A.D.); J. Cantineau, Inscriptions palmyréniennes, (Chalons-sur-Saône, 1930), n° 34 (50/51 -70/71 A.D.); Inv X, 40 (81 A.D.); 38 (131 A.D.); 81 (135 A.D.); 114 (138 A.D.); 112 (140 A.D.); CIS 3928 (155 A.D.); Inv X, 111 (156 A.D.); X, 90 (157 A.D.); X, 107 (159 A.D.); J. Cantineau, “Tadmorea III”, Syria, 19, 1938, 75, n° 28c; Inv X, 29 (161 A.D.); X, 19; CIS 3948 (193 A.D.); Vologesias: Inv X, 112 (140 A.D.); CIS 3916 (142 A.D.); Inv X, 112 (150 A.D.); CIS 3949 (211 A.D.).

94097_ARAM_23_24_Gregoratti.indd 509

11/02/13 08:31

510

THE ROLE OF THE DECAPOLIS REGION IN CONNECTING INLAND SYRIA

To a much lesser extent, the epigraphical texts proved useful in order to define on which roads and by what means the loads were carried from the Euphrates bank to the oasis of Tadmor once they reached Roman land.5 Commercial expeditions and business taking place within Arsacid or Characenian territory, that is to say at the limits of the area interested in Palmyrene trade enterprise, were certainly something remarkable in the eyes of the whole citizenry. They were therefore mentioned in many of the texts that the city council or the traders in charge of the expeditions dedicated to the powerful Palmyrene businessmen. Although the names of those places did not have the same “exotic” value for the Syrian recipients of the texts that they could command for a citizen of the western Empire or even for modern scholars, they nonetheless constituted in Palmyrene imagery a symbol of the lucrative trade operations on which the city’s prosperity was established.6 On the other hand, the journey along the desert tracks to and from the river Euphrates (and to and from Dura Europos) seems to have been considered less important, and for this reason not worth mentioning, in those same honorific texts. Moreover, the inscriptions taken into consideration give no clue about the fate of the goods moving westward once they left the caravan city in order to reach the harbours of the Mediterranean coast and the European market. Palmyrene texts unquestionably remain the most important source of information concerning trade connections with the East, but with reference to the commercial traffic between provincial borders and the coast, the usefulness of such an epigraphical source is greatly reduced. The reconstruction of such movements, in particular the identification of the routes most frequently used by long-distance merchants, appear extremely problematic, as they occur in all the provinces of the Roman Empire. Beyond the steppe area, the increasing density of population and settlements, and therefore the greater complexity of the road network, reveal the features of a composite economic reality in which long-distance trade, no matter how remunerative it would have been, leaves no clear traces. In this far more urbanized milieu and in the absence of local sources comparable to the Palmyrene 5 From this point of view the inscription found in Umm el ’Amad is particularly important: a few kilometers south of the town on the site later identified with the caravanserai of Gennaes mentioned in the same text; SEG VII. 135; PAT 1062; R. Mouterde and A. Poidebard, “La voie antique des caravanes entre Palmyre et Hit au IIe siècle ap. J.-C. d’ après une inscription retrouvée au S.-E. de Palmyre (mars 1930)”, Syria, 12, (1931), 101-115, t. XXV-XXVI. 6 For a general point of view on the topic: E. Will, “Marchands et chefs de caravanes à Palmyre”, Syria, 34, (1957), 262-277; M. Gawlikowski, “Palmyre et l’Euphrate”, Syria, 60, (1983), 53-68; J. Teixidor, “Un port romain du désert, Palmyre et son commerce d’Auguste à Caracalla”, Semitica, XXXIV, (Paris, 1984); L. Dirven “The Nature of the Trade between Palmyra and Dura-Europos”, ARAM, 8, (1996), 39-54; A. Marcone, “Moneta e commercio in una città di frontiera: Palmira tra II e III secolo d.C.”, Moneta, mercanti, banchieri: i precedenti greci e romani dell’Euro, Atti del colloquio internazionale, Cividale del Friuli, 26-28 Settembre 2002, (Pisa, 2003), 187-204.

94097_ARAM_23_24_Gregoratti.indd 510

11/02/13 08:31

L. GREGORATTI

511

ones, giving explicit information on trade activity, it is impossible to discern the movement of the Oriental goods. In these areas of intense exchange the products of flourishing local activities such as farming and manufacturing, sharing the same routes, intermingled themselves with the far more precious loads. It will be necessary, in an attempt to fill this gap, to take into consideration the urban reality of inland Syria to look for alternative sources capable of shedding light on the matter. Henry Seyrig, in an article which appeared in 1936, proposed a solution to the problem identifying the town of Emesa on the Orontes, 150 km west of Palmyra, as the main commercial partner of the caravan city.7 The strategic position of Emesa, lying at the crossroads of many important routes, and the proximity of the two cities, played a fundamental role in determining Seyrig’s choice. He assigned to long-distance trade a prominent role in Emesenian economy, describing the city as a sort of minor caravan centre whose entire development depended on its more prosperous neighbour. Seyrig’s point of view seems to be supported by proof only in relation to the first years of the first century A.D. by a fragmentary Aramaic inscription from Palmyra, which records the diplomatic efforts conducted both at the Emesenian court8 and in the far-off Characenian kingdom9 by a certain Alexandros on behalf of Germanicus, Tiberius’ delegate for the East (18/19 A.D.).10 Concerning the later decades Seyrig’s theories are hard to confirm, since the archaeological data in our possession for the first two centuries of Emesenian history is actually very scarce and this renders it extremely difficult to make any hypothesis about Emesa’s effective wealth. The earliest available information concerns a much later period, depicting a town whose prosperity seems not to be irreparably affected by Palmyra’s downfall, as Seyrig sustained.11 7 H. Seyrig, “Antiquités syriennes 76. Caractères de l’histoire d’Émèse”, Syria, 36, (1959), 184-192. 8 For the Arab dynasty reigning in Emesa until the first century A.D.: R.D. Sullivan, “The Dynasty of Emesa”, ANRW II. 8, (1977), 198-219. 9 A Parthian vassal state placed in southern Mesopotamia, destination of most of Palmyrene commercial expeditions; S.A. Nodelmann, “A preliminary History of Characene”, Berytus, XIII, (1960), 83-121; M. Schuol, Die Charakene, Ein mesopotamisches Königreich in hellenistischparthischer Zeit, (Stuttgart, 2000). 10 J. Cantineau, “Textes palmyréniens provenant de la fouille du temple de Bel”, Syria, 12, (1931), n°. 18, 139-141; H. Seyrig, “Antiquités syriennes 9. L’encorporation de Palmyre à l’empire romain”, Syria, 13, (1932), 266-268; J. Teixidor, “Un port romain”, 11; M. Gawlikowski, “Palmyra and its Caravan Trade”, 140; E. Frézouls., “Palmyre et les conditions politiques du développement de son activité commerciale”, in Palmyra and the Silk Road, 149; F. Zayadine., “Palmyre, Pétra, la mer Erythrée et les routes de la soie”, Palmyra and the Silk Road, 168. 11 It has been observed that the vastness and fertility of the territory of Emesa would have been sufficient to grant the town economy total autonomy from Palmyrene trade. P.-L. Gatier, “Palmyre et Émèse ou Émèse sans Palmyre”, Palmyra and the Silk Road, 431-436. Archaeological data from the Emesa classical period is very scarce and limited mainly to the dynastic

94097_ARAM_23_24_Gregoratti.indd 511

11/02/13 08:31

512

THE ROLE OF THE DECAPOLIS REGION IN CONNECTING INLAND SYRIA

We have to consider the fact that any variation in the extremely mutable political situation of the Roman Near East was capable of deeply influencing the characteristics of the international trade system. It is therefore likely that the economic frame in which Alexandros acted underwent some major changes during the late first and the second centuries A.D., in connection with the rise of Palmyrene power and the end of Emesa’s autonomous state, the progressively stronger military struggle between Rome and the Parthians and the shift southward of the areas of commercial interest, caused by an increasing use of the sea routes connecting India, Egypt and the Persian Gulf.12 Undoubtedly some kind of economic contacts took place between Emesa and Palmyra due to their contiguity,13 but it will be useful to note that no convincing proof exists attesting to an intensive use of the road departing from Emesa to the east before the Severean period.14 In other words, nothing seems to suggest that Emesa remained, if it ever was,15 the most important western destination of Palmyrene goods up to the third century A.D., since later sources lead us to think rather of an independent economical experience of the two towns. Furthermore, the opinion that the strict economic relationships between the two centres remained unchanged from Alexandros’ times despite major economic and political mutations seems improbable. Since Emesa seems not to offer a convincing solution to expand the problem of the communications between desert Syria and the coast during Palmyra’s apogee, perhaps it would helpful to focus the attention southward, to the area of Nabatean trade activity, taking into consideration the southern routes connecting Palmyra to Damascus and the Decapolis. The archaeological situation of these centres is far better known than in Emesa since these regions have been widely explored and documented, thanks to the extensive work of territorial research carried out in recent years.16 funerary objects found in the Tell Abu Sabun necropolis: H. Seyrig, “Antiquités syriennes 53. Antiquités de la nécropole d’Émèse, Syria, 29, (1952), 204-250; Syria, 30, (1953), pp. 12-24. 12 G.W. Bowersock, “Syria under Vespasian”, JRS, 63, (1973), 133-140. 13 D. Schlumberger, “Bornes frontières de la Palmyrène”, Syria, 20, (1939), 43-73. 14 Apart from the boundary stones along the Epiphaneia-Palmyra road fixing the limits of Emesenian territory, all milestones found on the routes between Emesa and the east date to the very last years of the second century A.D. or later; P. Thomsen, “Die römischen Meilensteine der Provinzen Syria, Arabia und Palaestina”, ZDPV, 40, (1917), 25. 15 It must be noted that Germanicus’ text is the only document directly correlating Emesa and Palmyra in this period. The Mesene region is mentioned together with a certain Orabzes, perhaps a Characenian king, and a certain Shamshigeram “Supreme King”, very likely in Emesa. As can be inferred, the text is extremely fragmentary and does not give further explanation as to what relationship tied together all the named people. 16 As stated in the recent book by D. Kennedy, Gerasa and the Decapolis: A “Virtual Island” in Northwest Jordan, (London, 2007).

94097_ARAM_23_24_Gregoratti.indd 512

11/02/13 08:31

L. GREGORATTI

513

The commercial importance of the Damascus oasis,17 a nodal point where the Syrian roads met the traffic routes coming from the Arabian peninsula (Royal Highway), was well-known since the first century B.C., when it became one of the goals of the Nabatean kings’ expansion policy.18 Their political influence lasted, according to Paul’s account, long after the Roman conquest.19 During the Flavian period, maybe already under the Julio-Claudians, trade interests brought the Nabateans north of Damascus, at the same moment in which Palmyra was quickly building its economic power.20 It is highly probable that the Nabatean kings in this later phase stretched their sphere of influence in order to take control of those routes where the more intense and lucrative commerce could be found. The presence of the Nabateans can be thereby considered as reliable evidence indicating which routes were most interested in long distance trade. Some epigraphical texts tell us for sure of the presence of Nabateans in Palmyra,21 while an inscription dated to 95 A.D. found at the holy place of Dmeir, 40 km east of Damascus,22 refers to people connected with some officers of king Rabbel II,23 and suggests that at that time there was a direct road used by traders travelling between the two Syrian towns. It is remarkable that Pliny in that well-known passage where he describes Palmyra’s political and 17 The town was at that time surrounded by a fertile area. Particularly famed were figs, plums, pistachios and wine produced in Damascus district; Plin., N.H., XIII, 51; Athen., Deipn., I, 18; II, 49 d-e; Teophr. Hist. Plant., III, IV. 3; Iulian., Ep., 80; T. Weber, “DAMASKJNA, Landwirtschafliche Produkte aus der Oase von Damaskus im Spiegel griechischer und lateinischer Schriftquellen”, ZDPV, 105, (1989), 151-165. 18 In this period Damascus was a town strictly connected with the Nabatean kingdom of Aretas III; Flav. Ioseph., Ant. Iud., XIII, 392; Bell. Iud., I, 89; H. Bietenhard, “Die syrische Dekapolis von Pompeius bis Trajan”, ANRW, II, 8, (Berlin-New York 1977), 256-257; D.F. Graf, “Hellenisation and the Decapolis”, ARAM, 4, (1994), 1. 19 Paul, 2 Cor., 11. 32-33; Gal., 1. 15-24; Acts 9. 23-25; narrating his escape from the city Paul mentions an êqnárxjv of the Nabatean king Aretas IV (9 B.C – 40 A.D.) in charge of guarding the city gates, whose real authority and power remain unclear. According to the general opinion Damascus belonged for a short period during Caligola’s reign to the Nabatean kingdom which imposed a royal governer on the town a. Paul’s episode demonstrates that in the first half of the first century A.D. the Nabatean influence in Damascus was strong and that the city hosted a far-from negligible Arab population; G.W. Bowersock, Roman Arabia, (Cambridge – London, 1983), 68; E.A. Knauf, “Zum Ethnarchen des Aretas 2 Kor 11 32”, ZNW, 74, (1983), 145-147; E. Trocmé, “Le rampart de Damas: un faux pas de Paul?”, RHPR, 69, (1989), 475-479; J. Taylor, “The Ethnarch of King Aretas at Damascus, A Note on 2 Cor 11, 32-33”, RB, 99, (1992), 719728; R. Wenning, “Die Dekapolis und die Nabatäer”, ZDPV, 110, (1994), 16-17; D.A. Campbell, “An Anchor for Pauline Choronology: Paul’s Flight from ‘The Ethnarch of King Aretas’ (2 Corinthians 11: 32-33)”, JBL, 121, (2002), 279-282. 20 See the list of Palmyrene caravan inscriptions at note 4. 21 J. Teixidor, “The Nabatean Presence at Palmyra,”, JANES, 5, (1973), 405-409. 22 E. Brümmer, Der Römisches Tempel von Dmeir. Vorbericht, DM, 2, (1985), 55-64. M. Klinkott, “Ergebnisse der Bauaufnahme am “Tempel” von Dmeir”, DM, 4, (1989), 109-161. 23 CIS II. 161.

94097_ARAM_23_24_Gregoratti.indd 513

11/02/13 08:31

514

THE ROLE OF THE DECAPOLIS REGION IN CONNECTING INLAND SYRIA

geographical situation mentions only two other cities explicitly, that is to say Seleucia on the Tigris to the east and Damascus to the west of the desert oasis.24 In this same period the Nabateans were also gradually strengthening their economic influence over the Decapolis, from where a branch of the Wadi Sirhan route towards the Persian Gulf started.25 In these cities, in particular in the town and territories of Gerasa and Philadelphia,26 there is considerable evidence of a relevant presence of subjects of the Arabian kingdom. At Gerasa, one of the better documented Decapolis towns, excavations brought to light an impressive number of Nabatean coins27 while a funerary inscription from Petra, the historical the Arab kingdom capital, mentions a certain Petraios 24 Plin., N.H., V, 88: Abest ab Seleucia Parthorum, quae vocatur Ad Tigrim, CCCXXXVII p., a proximo vero Syriae litore CCIII et a Damasco XXVII propius; R. Dussaud, Topographie historique de la Syrie antique et médiévale, (Paris, 1927), 247; M. Rostovtzeff, Caravan Cities, 104; J. Starcky, M. Gawlikowski, Palmyre, (Paris, 19852), 36-37; H.J.W. Drijvers, “Hatra, Palmyra und Edessa”, ANRW, II, 8, (Berlin-New York 1977), 839-840; B. Isaac, The Limits of the Empire, the Roman Army in the East, (Oxford, 1990), 142-143. 25 For some authors, Transjordan lands belonged to Arabia: Polib., V, 71; Plin., N.H., V, 15. 70; 16. 74; Flav. Ioseph., Bell. Iud., III, 46-47; E. Will, “L’urbanisation de la Jordanie aux époques hellénistique et romaine: conditions géographiques et ethniques”, A. Hadidi, SHAJ, I, (Amman, 1982), 238-239; D.F. Graf, “The Nabateans and the Decapolis”, in PH. Freeman and D.L. Kennedy, The Defence of the Roman and Byzantine East. Proceedings of a Colloquium Held at the University of Scheffield in April 1986, (Oxford, 1986),785-796; P.-L. Gatier, “Philadelphie et Gerasa du royaume nabatéen à la province d’Arabie”, P.-L. Gatier, B. Helly and J.P. Rey Coquais, Géographie historique au Proche-Orient (Syrie, Phénicie, Arabie, grecques, romaines byzantines), Actes de la Table Ronde de Valbonne (16-18 Septembre 1985), (Paris, 1988), 159-170; “La présence arabe à Gérasa et en Decapole”, in H. Lozachmaeur, Présence arabe dans le croissant fertile avant l’hégire, Actes de la Table ronde internationale organisée par l’Unité de recherche associée 1062 du CNRS, Études sémitiques, au Collége de France, le 13 novembre 1993, (Paris, 1995), 109-118; R. Wenning, “Die Dekapolis und die Nabatäer”, 1-35; “The Nabataeans in the Decapolis-Coele Syria”, Aram, 4, (1992), 79-99. 26 At Philadephia several Nabatean coins, ceramics, an inscription (At Zizia: RES 1284 = IGLJ II. 154) and a probable Nabatean tomb have been discovered: G. Harding, “A Roman Tomb in Amman”, ADAJ, 1, (1951), 30-33; “The Pottery from the Roma...