In 1996 a bilingual Greek-Carian inscription was found at Kaunos, in Caria (On Kaunos’ location on the border between Caria and Lycia, cf. MAREK 2006, pp. 80-81), in the harbour area behind the Stoa (On the finding context cf. FREI- MEIER 1997, pp. 3-6). It records a proxeny decree (On proxeny cf. MACK 2015) in honour of two Athenians citizens, Nicocles (On Nicocles cf. PAA 13 (2004), n° 715065 and n° 715067; APF, n° 10903), son of Lysicles, and Lysicrates, son of Lysicrates. This inscription was first published in FREI-MEIER 1997, consisting of only two of the three fragments currently recognised as part of the original stele. The text was then completed with a third fragment by FREI-MAREK 1998. The most recent publication of the inscription is in MAREK 2006 (K 1, 119-121); for the text and a summary of the bibliography related to the inscription cf. also SEG 47, n° 1568. The inscription, consisting of three fragments, begins with 18 lines of Carian script. Since this inscription was crucial to interpret Carian language (ADIEGO 1990a, ADIEGO 1990b, ADIEGO 1992, SCHÜRR 1992, SCHÜRR 1991-1993, ADIEGO 1993, ADIEGO 1994 and SCHÜRR 1996). A concise and clear synthesis of the history of the interpretation of Carian in ADIEGO 2010 and ADIEGO 2013; on Carian language cf. also ADIEGO 2007. It has been commonly studied by linguists (HAJNAL 1997; ADIEGO 1998a; ADIEGO 1998b; NEUMANN 1998; CARRUBA 1998; CRAIG MELCHERT 1998; HAJNAL 1998; MEIER-BRUGGER 1998; NEUMANN 1998; VAN DEN HOUT 1999; ADIEGO 2010, pp. 155-156).
Scholars advanced several hypotheses on the date of the decree, but none seems to be conclusive. On the basis of the style of the lettering, the inscription can approximately be dated between the end of the fourth and the beginnings of the third century B.C (MAREK 2006, K1, p. 119).
- Alexander the Great and the Conquest of Caria
- In 334/3 B.C. Alexander began the conquest of the Ionian Coast and laid siege to Miletus (Diod. XVII 22, 5; Arr. Anab. I 19, 6. On the siege of Miletus cf. ROMANE 1994, pp. 63-69). While the Persians were organising the resistance at Halicarnassus (Diod. XVII 23, 4), where Memnon of Rhodes was posted as commander of the troops (Diod. XVII 23, 5-6), Alexander’s siege engines were transported in loco by sea (Diod. XVII 24, 1). At the same time, Alexander started his march through Caria and while he was moving forward at the head of his soldiers, drawing to his side the cities located on his route, Ada I, of the Hecatomnid dynasty, approached him. Ada I was the youngest of Hecatomnus’ daughters, sister and wife of Idrieus, with whom she had been ruling over Caria for seven years. When Idrieus died, Ada I succeeded him, but in 342/1 B.C. her own brother Pixodarus deposed her as the reigning sovereign. Pixodarus, after trying to connect himself with Philip II by means of a marriage between Philip’s son Arrhidaeus, the future Philip III, and his own daughter, Ada II, associated himself in the management of power with the Persian Orontobates, who married his daughter. On Caria’s development during the Hecatomnid period cf. PEDERSEN 2013 and HENRY 2013, which focus in particular on the case of Halicarnassus; cf. also CARSTENS 2009; on the importance of the Hecatomnid period for the establishment of a Carian identity cf. PEDERSEN 2013, p. 45 and HELLSTRÖM 2009, pp. 279-280.
Meanwhile Alexander was carrying out without difficulties the submission of the entire coast, through Lycia and Pamphylia (Arr. Anab. I 24, 3.), down to Cilicia (4 Diod. XVII 27, 6 – 28, 5; cf. RUZICKA 1992, p. 146). While he was at Soli, in Cilicia, in 333 B.C., he learned that Ptolemy and Asander had defeated Orontobates, who had previously recovered the power in Halicarnassus and who was also in control of Myndus (Barrington, M61, E3), Kaunos (Barrington, M65, A4), Thera, Kallipolis, Cos, and Triopion (Arr. Anab. II 5, 7 = FGrHist Androt. 324 F 46; Curt. III 7, 3-4. For the location of Triopion cf. Barrington, M61, E4). While Myndus and Cos were possibly not part of the Macedonian dominions, still remaining in the area of Persian influence, it is likely that the other cities mentioned by the sources, namely Kaunos, Thera, and Kallipolis, being on Alexander’s route to Lycia, fell into his hands (and, through him, under Ada’s control) after the conquest of Halicarnassus in 334 BC (RUZICKA 1992, pp. 147-148). A temporary recovery of some Carian towns by Orontobates between 334 and 333 B.C. can be assumed, likely in coordination with Pharnabazus’ and Autophradates’ actions in Aegean: Orontobates could have launched his offensive in the summer of 333 B.C., starting from Kaunos and moving to the inland of Caria, thus keeping the Macedonian forces away from the coastal locations touched by Pharnabazus and Autophradates.
- NEW PROPOSALS FOR THE PROXENY DECREE’S DATING AND REASONS
- Starting from the palaeographical dating, that sets the inscription between the late fourth and the early third century B.C. (MAREK 2006, p. 119).
Carian could be used in Kaunos as an official language. LE ROY 2005 believes that the language issue is irrelevant, since Carian was not the official language of the decree and/or of the region in the time of drafting the inscription, but simply a translation of the Greek text of the grant for use by the inhabitants of the region. in contrast to the use of Greek (ADIEGO 2014, p. 243; SEG 47, n° 1568, 447; FREI-MAREK 1997, p. 55; LE ROY 2005, p. 341; LE ROY 1996, p. 353). Even on the cones coin, while in the first Hecatomnid phase the language in use was Carian, only Greek was used as the dynasty progressively established itself; cf. KONUK 2009 and 2013. In the bilingual Greek-Carian inscription recording an edict issued by Idrieus and Ada (351-341 B.C.) the Greek text, although shorter than the Carian, is the first to appear on the stone (C.Si. 2); cf. ROBERT 1945, n° 74 + D10 and n° 75; DEROY 1955, p. 317; RAY 1990, pp. 126-133; SCHÜRR 1992, pp. 136-137. In another stele bearing few lines of Greek and few lines of Carian text (C.Ki. 1), the latter is the first to appear, but there is no proof that the contents expressed in the two languages are the same; cf. MAREK 2013, p. 243. Finally, a list of priests composed partly in Carian partly in Greek does not provide insight on what may have motivated the choice of either language or even to establish the pre-eminence of one over the other (C.Hy. 1); cf. MAREK 2013, p. 243. Therefore, it seems to me that the bilingual Greek-Carian inscription of Kaunos is likely to be dated to the years between 334 and 331 B.C. A dating to these years, in fact, can justify both the “anomalies” that distinguish it from other inscriptions from Kaunos: the recourse to sδrual as eponymous derives from the precariousness of the central power, which did not occur either in the period before 334 B.C. or in the period following 331 B.C. and the integration of Caria in the Macedonian rule. The use of Carian as the official language suits well the period after the restoration of Ada in Caria, which would have required an enhancement of her local origin contrasted with the Persian Orontobates, and in relation to Alexander’s need to show himself as a liberator from the Persian rule. Even the study of the two Athenian honorands’ prosopography seems to confirm for the inscription a dating to the ’30s of the fourth century. Nicocles, son of Lysicles, of the deme Cidantides (JORDAN-CURBERA 2008, A, ll. 80-81; B, l. 100. Cf. JORDAN-CURBERA 2008, p. 143), in fact, appears as παράσιτος of the temple of Athena Pallene in the period 350-325 BC (SEG 34, n° 157, l. 16) 9, and at the same time he was a land-buyer in his deme for a value of 162.5 drachmas (IG II2 1597, l. 4).
