Appendix A

This stone was first described by Léon Renier, whose report was published in Ernest Renan's Mission de Phénicie (1864–1874: 774–77). Renan did not publish a photo, but included a raw drawing of the inscribed lintel. Victor Guérin also discussed the inscription, with a critique of Renier's restoration (see below, on lines 5–6), in Description géographique, historique et archéologique de la Palestine, Partie 3: Galilée (1880: 447–49). The inscription was frequently cited (from Renier's text) and included in Jean-Baptiste Frey's Corpus inscriptionum judaicarum (2.972), but was not seen again until 1984. L. Roth-Gerson examined the stone anew and published it in Greek Inscriptions from the Synagogues in Eretz-Israel (1987: 125–27, no. 30); subsequent references have cited Roth-Gerson's text and discussion.1 The stone is presently located in the garden of the president's residence in Jerusalem and was examined by and photographed under the supervision of R. Hachlili and A. E. Killebrew in the summer of 2009.I offer here a corrected text (the Greek accentuation and punctuation in earlier publications was erratic), with some commentary. I supply the standard (Dow 1969: 3–13) epigraphic editorial symbols: Letters within ( ) = completion of intentional abbreviation on the stone.Letters within [ ] = resolution of text unreadable or missing (because of broken edges) on the stone.Letters within [[ ]] = intentional erasure on the stone, where conjectured letters are restored.These editorial conventions are not indicated in the translation; this text is typical of its genre, era, and political context. I cite some standard epigraphic collections: CIL = Corpus inscriptionum latinarum. Berlin, 1863–IG = Inscriptiones graecae. Editio minor. Berlin, 1924–ILS = Inscriptiones latinae selectae. Edited by Hermann Dessau. Repr., Berlin, 1974.SEG = Supplementum epigraphicum graecum. Amsterdam; Leiden, 1923–SIG3 = Sylloge inscriptionum graecarum. Edited by W. Dittenberger. 4 vols. 3rd ed. Leipzig, 1915–1924.I cite from ILS and SIG3 by inscription number: e.g., ILS 422, SIG3 390. I cite from CIL, IG, and SEG by volume number and inscription: e.g., CIL 3.218, IG 2.10, SEG 35: 1972.‘Yπèρ σωτη[ρί]ας τ[ῶν κυρί]ων ἡμῶν αὐτοκρατ[όρων]καισάρων Λ. Σεπτ[.] Σεου[ήρου]Εὐσεβ. Περτ. Σεβ. καὶ Μ. Αủρ. Ὰ[ντωνεῖ]LIMESTONE BLOCK LINTELLimestone block lintel (Figs. 1–2). Length: 1.25 m (broken); height: 60 cm; width: 60 cm (left section missing). Letters: 5–6 cm. Wreath: 33 cm outside circumference; inside: 18 cm; height of letters: 3–4 cm. Damage to upper right corner, right face and side; some damage to lower left face and side. Line 5 partially erased (see below).FIG. 1Photo of the Qazion inscription.(Photo by S. Krapiwko. © The Qazion Archaeological Project.)FIG. 2Drawing of the Qazion inscription.(Drawing by S. Krapiwko. © The Qazion Archaeological Project.)νου [[καὶ Π. Σεπτ. Γ ]]έτα υίῶν αủ[τοῦ ἐξ]εủχῆς Ίουδαίων.On the left, inside the wreath:καὶ Ίουλίας Δόμνης Σεβ[αστής] “For the health and well-being of our lord emperors, the Caesars, Lucius Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus, and Marcus Aurelius Antoninus and Publius Septimius Geta, his sons, in accord with the vow of the Jews.”On the left, inside the wreath: “and of Julia Domna Augusta.”The Severan dynasty encouraged affirmations of support and loyalty, of which this inscription is typical.2 There is no implication in this inscription of a dedication in relation to the imperial ruler-cult.The text may be dated, but only approximately. The basic point is that Septimius and both sons are “Caesars,” that is, ruling jointly. On 8 January 198 CE, Septimius renamed his eldest child, age 8, M(arcus) Aurelius Antoninus Augustus—commonly, but not officially, known as Caracalla3—and “ruled” jointly with him as Augustus (that is, Caracalla would be Severus' successor). In January 198 CE, as well, the younger son, L(ucius) Septimius Geta was declared “Caesar” (see below, on line 5),4 then by 210 CE, “Augustus” (Birley 1988: 132).5 Geta's name at that point was apparently P(ublius) Aurelius Antoninus Geta (Augustus), but (as I note below) he was commonly and officially styled P. Septimius Geta (Mastino 1981: 154).Inscriptions mentioning Geta are notoriously difficult to date, especially when no mention is made of Geta's first (in the period 198–202 CE?) or second (203 CE?) consulships. In the present text, Geta is named as Imperator Caesar and, as noted above, he was not designated “Caesar” until early in 198 CE. We may, however, suggest an appropriate temporal context for the dedication of our inscription (and probably other pro salute inscriptions in Palestine). Septimius and his family were in Syria, Palestine, and Egypt in 197–199 CE, before departing for the Danube frontier by the end of 199 CE (Birley 1988: 133–35; Isaac 1992: 436). A frequently unreliable source, the vita Septimii in the Scriptores Historiae Augustae, reports that in itinere [from Syria to Egypt] Palaestinis plurima iura fundavit (“on the journey, he established a great number of rights for the Palestinians”: vita Sept. 17.1). On this point, the Historia Augusta was correct: in addition to attending to administrative organization in Egypt (Jones 1971: 327), Severus bestowed the formal title “colonia Lucia Septimia Severa” on at least two cities in Palestine: Eleutheroplis (Beth Guvrin/Beit Jibrin) and Lydda (Diospolis). Both were assigned significant territory; both dated (on their coinage) their “foundation” to 199–200 CE (Birley 1988: 135; Tsafrir, Di Segni, and Green 1994: 118 for “Eleutheropolis,” 171 for “Lydda”; Jones 1971: 278–79 and n. 71). 198–199 CE (probably the latter), then, would be an appropriate chronological context for our inscription. There is, however, no reason to believe the imperial entourage, on its way to and from Egypt, came anywhere near Qazion.line 1: σωτηρίας: To translate σωτηρία as “salvation” imparts too much of a Christian flavor (e.g., Moralee 2004: 47). ‘Yπèρ σωτηρίας is the standard Greek translation for Latin pro salute (salus, salutis = “good health, prosperity”): compare, for example, another epigraphic dedication on behalf of the health and welfare of an imperial household, SIG3 890 (251 CE); cf. SIG3 908. In Severan era Latin inscriptions, pro salute appears, for example, in the following dedications: CIL 8.1628 = ILS 429; CIL 8.4197 = ILS 450; CIL 13.6659 = ILS 428; and CIL 14.6 = ILS 414.lines 1–2: τ[ῶν κυρί]/ων: The upper right of the stone lintel has suffered further damage from the time of Renan (see Figs. 1–2). The down-stroke of τ can be read. There is room on that line for τ[ῶν κυρί]. In line 2, ων can be clearly read.line 2: ἡμῶν: The personalization, “of our emperors,” has parallels: e.g., SIG3 890, line 5; SIG3 1173, line 5. The Latin equivalent is dominorum nostrorum = “of our lords.”lines 2–3: αὐτοκρατόρω[ν]/ καισάρων: typical of Severan inscriptions in Greek. In SIG3 883 (from Philadelphia), Severus is styled αὐτοκράτωρ καῖσαρ. Our inscription offers a standard identification of Severus, but his full list of honorific titles is not given. By 195 CE, his titulature included far more than is given on our stone (see, e.g., CIL 6.954 = ILS 418; ILS 413, 416, 417) and by 204 CE (for example), Severus could be identified as Imp(erator) Caes(ar) L(ucius) Septimius Severus Pius Pertinax Augustus Arabicus Adiabenicus Parthicus Maximus Fortissimus Felicissimus (e.g., CIL 6.1035 = ILS 426).lines 4–5: Ὰ[ντωνε]/ ῖνου: Ὰντωνεῖνου or Ὰντωνῖνου. Both spellings are attested.line 5: [[Π. Σεπτ. Γ]]έτα: The stone shows clearly that the name of Geta was incompletely chiseled out (see Figs. 1–2; already noted in the drawing of the inscription in Renan 1864–1874). This is typical; after Caracalla's murder of Geta on 26 December 211 CE (Dio Cass. 78.2; Herodian Hist. 4.4.3; Birley 1988: 218 no. 22; Mastino 1981: 15–16), Geta suffered official damnatio memoriae, “condemnation of memory.”6 Statuary, coinage, and texts (papyri and inscriptions) displaying Geta's name were defaced.7 On two dedications, ‘Yπὲρ σωτηρίας, of the Severan family at Gerasa, for example, Geta's name was chiseled out.8 On a milestone from Cyprus, Geta's name was incompletely erased in both the Latin (line 10) and Greek (line 26) versions of the text: L. Sep[[timio Getae nobilissimo Caesari]]: CIL 3.218 = ILS 422 (198 CE). On the Arch of Septimius Severus in the Roman forum, the erasure of P. Septimio Getae nobilissimo Caesari can still be read in line 4: CIL 6.1033 + 31230 and 36881= ILS 425 (this inscription dates to 202–203 CE, see Richardson 1992: 28–29; Gordon 1983: 158–59 no. 73).Other examples at Rome include CIL 6.227 = ILS 427 (204–early 205 CE): L. Sept. Getae erased; see also CIL 6.1047 and 1076. Particularly interesting is ILS 457: regio XI (Rome) dedicated a bronze plaque to P. Septimio Getae nobilissimo Caes(ari). No erasure as the plaque was simply thrown into the Tiber.Erasure of L. or P. Septimio Getae nobilissimo Caesari found elsewhere: Sicca Veneria (Africa): CIL 8.1628 = ILS 429; Thamugadi (Africa): ILS 434; Cuicul (Djemila, Numidia): CIL 8.8804 = ILS 435; Seligenstadt (Germania Superior): ILS 428; Auzia (Mauretania): CIL 8.9035 = ILS 459; and Mactar (Africa): ILS 458. For a partial list of Greek and Latin inscriptions on which Geta's name was erased, see Mastino 1981: 153–54.Geta suffered damnatio memoriae not just of his name: a well-known tempura tondo from Egypt (now in Berlin), originally with portraits of the Severan family (Severus, Julia, and their two sons), survives with Geta's face obliterated (Andreae 1977: 440, no. 540; Birley 1988: pl. 16; Lichtenberger 2011: 339 and no. 266; cf. nos. 165, 205–6). In a bas-relief on the Arch of the Argentarii in the Forum Boarium at Rome, the representation of Geta has been entirely chiseled off and his named erased from the dedicatory inscription (CIL 6.1035, line 3 = ILS 426; Haynes and Hirst 1939: 3–7, 20–23; Ryberg 1955: 137–38, with fig. 75a–b; see also Richardson 1992: 29).line 5: As previously restored, the name of the younger son reads as L. Sept(imius) Geta. It should be P. Aur(elius) Antoninus Geta, but there is obviously not room on the stone for that. The explanation for this curiosity is that on inscriptions (see above) and on his coinage, Geta is described simply as L(ucius) or P(ublius) Sept(imius) Geta (Pius Augustus etc.).9 Only from late 209/early 210 CE is Geta's titulature on coins “Imp(erator) Caes(ar) P. Sept(imius) Geta Augustus.”10 Therefore, I have corrected the restoration in line 5 to Π. Σεπτ. Γέτα. Geta appears as P. Septimius Geta Caesar or Aug(ustus) in these Latin inscriptions: ILS 433, 457, 458, 455; cf. (in Greek) SIG3 880.lines 5–6: έξ] εύχῆς, as Guérin 1880: 448 noted, renders precisely the common Latin phrase ex voto. For εύχή = votum (= “prayer/vow/dedication”), see Liddell, Scott, and Jones 1996: 739, s.v. “εύχή 1.(fin).”Renier canvassed the possibility of reading καì προσ]/ευχῆς, “and of the house of prayer” (see Liddell, Scott, and Jones 1996: 1511, s.v. “προσευχή”). As Guérin observed, however, προσευχῆς should require the definite article τῆς.11 There would not appear to be room on the stone for a restoration καì τῆς προσ]/ευχῆς; thus we prefer έξ] εύχῆς, a precise calque of the Latin ex voto.Ίουδαίοι: presumably, Jews of conscious ethnic and religious identity. See Gregg 2000: 547–57.line 7: Julia Domna: An all but certain dedication to her (and probably others in the imperial family) appears on a lintel block from elsewhere, in the Golan, at El-'Âl (Gregg 2000: 526–27).Renier (in Renan 1864–1874: 774–76), followed by Di Segni (1997: 1.320), hypothesized that on the right (broken/missing) section of the stone there may have been a wreath parallel to that on the left. I concur with this supposition. If so, the lintel block would fit exactly the doorway of the structure under consideration. If there was a second wreath to balance visually the left wreath, it surely would have contained an inscription. Two possibilities present themselves. First, if the formal, epigraphic names of Fulvia Plautilla, who was married to Caracalla from 202 to 205 CE, were within the wreath—Pu(blia) Fulvia Plautilla Aug(usta)—they would have been chiseled off after 212 CE (Birley 1988: 220, no. 29; see, e.g., CIL 6.220 and 1035 = ILS 2163 and 426; CIL 6.1074 = ILS 456; CIL 10.7336 = ILS 455). But there would not have been sufficient space to identify her within the wreath as the wife of M. Aurelius Antoninus (Caracalla). Far more likely, the wreath contained Julia Domna's formal (and frequently attested) title, mater castrorum, “mother of the (legionary) camps.”12 In that case, what would have been inscribed within the missing wreath would have been μητρὸς κάστρων [see, e.g., SIG3 880 line 5: the Severan foundation charter of Pizus, on the Hebrus (Maritsa) River, in Bulgaria].13When was Geta's name erased from our inscription? After his murder, of course, in December, 211 CE, and before the assassination (near Carrhae) of Caracalla, on 8 April 217 CE (Herodian 4.13.5–7),14 Caracalla's eventual (218–222 CE) successor, M. Aurelius Antoninus (Elagabalus), “restored” the memory of Geta. Qazion was not, of course, a metropolis and the Jews there may not have had reason to obliterate quickly (in 212 CE) the epigraphic memory of Geta. We may surmise that by mid-late 215 CE, they had very good reason to erase Geta from their dedicatory stone. Caracalla marched east from Italy in 214 CE, to lead a military expedition into Parthia. He wintered at Nicomedia in 214/215 CE and was probably at Phrygian Gordion in early 215 CE,15 then at Antioch. In the summer of 215 CE, he visited Alexandria, to return to Antioch in 216 CE (Dio Cass. 78.16–78.22–23; Herodian 4.8.6–10; Millar 1993: 143; Magie 1950: 2.1551–54 [nn. 41–45]). Caracalla journeyed to Alexandria from Antioch presumably on the well-traveled coastal via maris. But those near to and at Qazion had no certainty that members of the imperial entourage would not visit their region. Better to make sure the name Geta was not seen locally in 215 CE

Ancient history · Art · Art history · Critical edition · Inscribed figure · Linguistics · Literature · Palestine · Punctuation · African history and culture analysis · Ancient Mediterranean Archaeology and History · Archaeology and Historical Studies · Classics · History · Mathematics · Philosophy

• Le comunità giudaiche nell’ecumene severiana. Alcuni aspetti della politica di Settimio Severo nei confronti degli Iudaei

  Open Access•Martina Bono•Erga-Logoi Rivista di storia…•2023

  Add to list

• Mutilation and Transformation

  Eric R Varner, Eric Varner•Mutilation and Transformation•2004

  Add to list

• Illustrated Introduction to Latin Epigraphy

  Arthur E Gordon•Illustrated Introduction to Latin…•1983

  Add to list

• Nouvelles inscriptions de Gerasa

  Pierre‐Louis Gatier•Syria•1985

  Add to list

• Conventions in Editing

  James W Poultney, Sterling Dow•The Classical World•1970

  Add to list

• A New Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome

  L Richardson•A new topographical dictionary of…•1992

  Add to list

• Roman Rule in Asia Minor, Volume 2 (Notes)

  David Magie•Roman Rule in Asia Minor, Volume 2•1950

  Add to list

• Rites of the State Religion in Roman Art

  Inez Scott Ryberg•Memoirs of the American Academy…•1955

  Add to list

• Marking Religious and Ethnic Boundaries

  Open Access•Robert C Gregg•Church History•2000

  Add to list