Vezirköprü İmparator Yemini’nin Tekrar Gözden Geçirilmesi

Öz

İmparator Yemini içeren az sayıda epigrafik belge arasında Augustus Dönemi’nde kaleme alınan Ve­zir­köp­rü yazıtı en bilinenidir. Burası Pompeius tarafından kurulan ve yazıtta adı geçen Neapolis ile özdeş­tir. Bu Paphlagonia kenti sonra Neoklaudiopolis adını almıştır. İ.Ö. 3 yılına ait imparator yemini 1900 yılında Franz Cumont tarafından bulunmuş olup deşifras­yonu için şimdiye ka­dar onun okuması temel alınmaktaydı. Yazar İstanbul Arkeoloji Müzesi’nde ko­ru­nan ya­zı­tı tekrar göz­den geçirerek bazı düzeltmeler ve yeni yorumlar sunmaktadır. Ayrıca ya­zı­tın günü­müz­deki durumu hakkında geniş bilgi verilmektedir. İnceleme sonucunda Cumont’un okumalarının büyük oranda doğru olduğu tespit edil­miş­tir. Ayrı­ca Cu­mont’un bazı okumaları düzeltilmiş ve özellikle satır 5, 11, 13, 25, 41’de yeni oku­ma­lar su­nul­­muş­tur. Cumont’un bazı önerileri ise ya taşta yeterince yer olmadığı veya harflerin yanlış okunmuş ol­maları nede­niyle ­­reddedilmiştir (satır 4, 22, 39). Yazıt taşıyıcı üzerinde yapılan inceleme sonucu ay­rıca Cu­mont tara­­fından verilen taş ölçülerinin de yanlış olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Makalede ayrıca ya­zıtın içer­di­ği edebi, coğrafik ve tarihi bilgiler hakkında yeni yorumlar yapılmaktadır. Buna göre söz konusu im­pa­rator yemininin ken­tin siyasi sta­tüsünde değişiklikler yapıldığında yürürlüğe gir­di­ği düşünül­mektedir. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• İmparator Yemini,Augustus,Neapolis,Vezirköprü,Neoklaudiopolis,Andra¬pa,Pytho¬doris,Otopsi,Düzeltmeler

A Re-examination of the Imperial Oath from Vezirköprü

Öz

The present article is a re-examination of the Greek text of the imperial oath from Neapolis, found in Vezirköprü by Franz Cumont in 1900. Until now the inscription, which is kept in the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, has not been subjected to a revision. Although the stone itself has suffered additional damage since its discovery, the inscribed text is still easily legible. Most of the readings proposed by Cumont are shown to be correct, and in several in­stances the present author is able to confirm and improve readings where Cumont had been in doubt (ll. 5, 11, 13, 25, 41). Nonetheless, several of the previous restorations are impossible, either because there is not sufficient room for them, or because remains of letters contradict these readings (ll. 4, 22, 39). In addition, it is shown that the dimensions and the shape of the stone given by Cumont are incorrect. The re-examined text forms the basis of four comments on the literary, geographical and historical context of the inscription. It is argued that the oath was taken at a critical point in time when the city changed political status.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Imperial oath,Augustus,Neapolis,Vezirköprü,Neoklaudiopolis,Andrapa,Pytho¬doris,autopsy,re-examination

Kaynakça

1. Anderson 1900 J. G. C. Anderson, Pontica, JHS 20, 1900, 151–158.
2. Anderson, SP I J. G. C. Anderson, Studia Pontica I. A journey of exploration in Pontus, Bruxelles 1903.
3. Anderson et al., SP III J. G. C. Anderson – F. Cumont – H. Grégoire, Studia Pontica III: Recueil des inscriptions Grecques et Latines du Pont et de l’Arménie, Bruxelles 1910.
4. Anderson 1923 J. G. C. Anderson, Some questions on the date and place of composition of Strabo’s Geography, in: W. H. Buckler – W. M. Calder (edd.), Anatolian Studies presented to Sir William Mitchell Ramsay, Manchester 1923, 1–13.
5. Bekker-Nielsen 2012–2013 T. Bekker-Nielsen, 350 years of research on Neoklaudiopolis (Vezirköprü), OrbTerr 11, 2012–2013, 3–31.
6. Bekker-Nielsen 2013 T. Bekker-Nielsen, Neapolis-Neoklaudiopolis. A Roman city in Anatolia, in: Ü. Yalçin (ed.), Anatolian Metal IV, Bochum 2013, 203–213.
7. Bekker-Nielsen 2014 T. Bekker-Nielsen, To be or not to be Paphlagonian? A question of identity, in: T. Bekker-Nielsen (ed.), Space, place and identity, Stuttgart 2014, 63–74.
8. Burnett et al., RPC A. Burnett – M. Amandry – P. P. Ripollès, Roman provincial coinage. Volume I: From the death of Caesar to the death of Vitellius (44 BC–AD 69), London 1992.

9. Cancik 2003 H. Cancik, Der Kaiser-Eid: Zur Praxis der römischen Herrscherverehrung, in: H. Cancik – K. Hitzl (edd.), Die Praxis der Herrscherverehrung in Rom und seinen Provinzen, Tübingen 2003, 29–45.
10. Castillo 1994 C. Castillo, El nuevo juramento a Augusto encontrado en la Bética, in: Y. Le Bohec (ed.), L’Afrique, la Gaule, la Religion à l’époque romaine. Mélanges à la mémoire de Marcel Le Glay, Bruxelles 1994, 681–686.
11. Connolly 2007 S. Connolly, ὀμνύω αὐτὸν τὸν Σεβαστόν: The Greek oath in the Roman world, in: A. H. Sommerstein – J. Fletcher (edd.), Horkos: The oath in Greek society, Exeter 2007, 203–216.
12. Christol – Loriot 2001 M. Christol – X. Loriot, P. Alfius Avitus et P. Plotius Romanus, gouverneurs de Galatie, AC 70, 2001, 97–121.
13. Cumont 1900 F. Cumont, Inscription grecque de Vézir-Keupru dans l’ancienne Paphlagonie (Asie Mineure), CRAI 44, 1900, 687–691.
14. Cumont 1901 F. Cumont, Un serment de fidélité a l’empereur Auguste, REG 56, 1901, 25–45.
15. Dalaison – Delrieux 2015 J. Dalaison – F. Delrieux, La cité de Néapolis-Néoclaudiopolis : Histoire et pratiques monétaires, RN, 2015 (in preparation).
16. Dessau 1906 H. Dessau, Die Entstehung der Aeren von Gangra und Amasia, ZN, 1906, 335–343.
17. Gelzer 1918 M. Gelzer, Iulius (Caligula), in: RE 10, 1918, 381–423.
18. González 1988 J. González , The First Oath Pro Salute Augusti Found in Baetica, ZPE 72, 1988, 113–127.
19. Fujii, Imperial Cult T. Fujii, Imperial cult and imperial representation in Roman Cyprus, Stuttgart 2013.
20. Herrmann 1938 A. Herrmann, Φανάροια, in: RE 38, 1938, 1759.
21. Hermann 1960 P. Herrmann, Die Inschriften römischer Zeit aus dem Heraion von Samos, MDAI (A) 77, 1960, 70–84.
22. Hermann, Kaisereid P. Herrmann, Der römische Kaisereid, Göttingen 1968.
23. Herrmann 1985 P. Herrmann, Der Kaiser als Schwurgottheit. Ein Inschriftenfragment aus Milet, in: E. Weber – G. Dobesch (edd.), Römische Geschichte, Altertumskunde und Epigrafik. Festschrift für Arthur Betz zur Vollendung des 80. Lebensjahres, Vienna 1985, 303–314.
24. Jones, Cities A. H. M. Jones, The cities of the Eastern Roman provinces, Oxford 1971.
25. Kahl 1995 G. Kahl, Pontica I, OrbTerr 1, 1995, 109–120.
26. Kahl – Olshausen 1991 G. Kahl – E. Olshausen, Bericht über die epigraphische und numismatische Landesaufname im Samsun İli 1990, IX. Araştırma Sonuçları Toplantısı, Ankara 1992, 611–616.
27. Kaygusuz 1982 I. Kaygusuz, Deux inscriptions de Gangra-Germanicopolis (Çankırı), ZPE 49, 1982, 177–183.
28. Le Gall 1985 J. Le Gall, Le serment à l’empereur: une base méconnue de la tyrannie impériale sous le Haut-Empire?, Latomus 44, 1985, 767–783.
29. Leschhorn, Antike Ären W. Leschhorn, Antike Ären. Zeitrechnung, Politik und Geschichte im Schwarzmeerraum und in Kleinasien nördlich des Tauros, Stuttgart 1993.
30. Marek, Stadt C. Marek, Stadt, Ära und Territorium in Pontus-Bithynia und Nord-Galatia, Tübingen 1993.
31. Marek, Pontus et Bithynia C. Marek, Pontus et Bithynia. Die römischen Provinzen im Norden Kleinasiens, Mainz am Rhein 2003.
32. Macridy 1905 T. Macridy, Altertümer von Notion, JÖAI 8, 1905, 155–173.
33. McLean, Introduction B. H. McLean, An introduction to Greek epigraphy of the Hellenistic and Roman periods from Alexander the Great down to the reign of Constantine (323 B.C. – A.D. 337), Ann Arbor 2002.
34. Mitchell, Anatolia S. Mitchell, Anatolia. Land, men and gods in Asia Minor. Volume 1. The Celts and the impact of Roman rule, Oxford 1993.
35. Mitford 1960 T. B. Mitford, A Cypriot oath of allegiance to Tiberius, JRS 50, 1960, 75–79.
36. Mommsen, Staatsrecht T. Mommsen, Römisches Staatsrecht. Zweiter Band. Zweiter Abteilung, Leipzig 1877.
37. Munk Højte 2006 J. Munk Højte, From Kingdom to Province: Reshaping Pontos after the Fall of Mithridates VI, in: T. Bekker-Nielsen (ed.), Rome and the Black Sea Region. Domination, romanisation, resistance, Aarhus 2006, 15–30.
38. Olshausen 2014 E. Olshausen, Pontos: profile of a landscape, in: T. Bekker-Nielsen (ed.), Space, place and identity, Stuttgart 2014, 39–48.
39. Premerstein, Vom Werden A. von Premerstein, Vom Werden und Wesen des Prinzipats, München 1937.
40. Ramsay 1893 W.M. Ramsay, Micrasiana, REG 6, 1893, 251–257.
41. Rémy, Évolution B. Rémy, L’Évolution administrative de l’Anatolie aux trois premiers siècles de notre ère, Lyon 1986.
42. Rowe, Princes G. Rowe, Princes and political cultures, Ann Arbor 2002.
43. Ruge 1949 W. Ruge, Paphlagonia, in: RE 18.4, 1949, 2486–2550.
44. Seibert 1970 J. Seibert, Der Huldigungseid auf Kaiser Tiberius, Historia 19, 1970, 224–231.
45. Smallwood, Documents E. M. Smallwood, Documents illustrating the principates of Gaius, Claudius and Nero, Cambridge 1967.
46. Sterrett, Inscriptions J. R. S. Sterrett, Inscriptions of Assos, in Papers of the American School of Classical Studies in Athens, Boston 1882.
47. Vitale, Eparchie M. Vitale, Eparchie und Koinon in Kleinasien von der ausgehenden Republik bis ins 3. Jh. n. Chr., Bonn 2012.
48. Waddington et al., Recueil W. Waddington – T. Reinach – E. Babelon, Recueil général des monnaies grecques d’Asie Mineure 1.1. Pont et Paphlagonie, Paris 1925.
49. Wardle 1997 D. Wardle, An Allusion to the Kaisereid in Tacitus Annals 1.42?, CQ 47, 1997, 609–613.
50. Weinstock 1962 S. Weinstock, Treueid und Kaiserkult, MDAI (A) 77, 1962, 306–327.
51. Wilson, Historical Geography D. R. Wilson, The Historical Geography of Bithynia, Paphlagonia and Pontus in the Greek and Romans Periods: A new survey with particular reference to surface remains still visible, (unpublished Oxford BA thesis) 1960.