CLASSICAL NOTES

I. LUCIAN AND THE GOVERNOR OF CAPPADOCIA

In the story of Lucian's relations with Alexander, the false prophet, this statement is made: Alexander 55) έπηγόμην δὲ καὶ στρατιώτας δύο, λογχοφόρον καὶ κοντοφόρον, παρὰ τοῦ ἡγουμένου τῆς Καππαδοκίας, φίλου ὄντος, λαβών, ὡς με παραπέμψειαν ἄχρι πρὸς τὴν θάλατταν. This governor of Cappadocia, in the opinion of W. von Christ, was Arrian, the historian, and Christ uses the passage to show that Lucian and Arrian were acquainted. Such a use of the passage is quite impossible, as can be readily shown. In the first place Arrian's, term in Cappadocia ended in the year 137.2 At that time Lucian was probably under 20 years of age. But the Lucian of this episode was certainly a mature man, not a boy. In the second place it is generally agreed that the heyday of the imposter Alexander was in a period after 150. Riess dates him about 150 to 170. Arrian then is of course not the governor whom Lucian mentions as a friend.

It may, however, be possible to identify this governor if this episode in Lucian's life can be dated a little more definitely within the period 150 to 170. An examination of this sketch of Lucian's, the Alexander, with a view to datable incidents, yields the following. A Severianus is mentioned (cap. 27) who, on the advice of Alexander's oracle, so Lucian says, invaded Armenia and was badly defeated. This is an historical event which, we know, took place in 160-161 or perhaps early in 162.6 Again, Lucian says (cap. 58) that at the instigation of Alexander the name of the city where he lived was changed to Ionopolis. It is known from coins that this change was made in the period 161-169." We are told furthermore (cap. 36) of Alexander's claim that he could cure cases of the plague. This plague began in 166.8 Again some events are mentioned (cap. 48) which took place at the beginning of Marcus Aurelius' wars with the Germans, late in 166. The dates of these events, which are found mentioned in the various chapters of the sketch, would seem

1 Müller H. Buch VII, II, 2 (1913), p. 583, n. 5; cf. n. 2.

2 P.-W. 2, 1230 ff. Prosop. Imp. Rom. I, 243.

3 Lucian was born about 120. See Christ, op. cit., p. 550.

to indicate that Alexander was especially famous in the sixties of the second century.

Other indications lead to the same conclusion. After relating the affair of Severianus (mentioned above) and some similar incidents, Lucian says that all these happened within the bounds of Asia Minor (cap. 30), and that after that Alexander's fame spread to Rome itself. Too much is not to be expected of Lucian in the way of a chronological order of events; but this at least would seem a clear proof that Alexander became widely known only after 160. It was after 160 then that a certain Rutilianus, at Rome, heard of Alexander, came under his influence, and ultimately married his daughter (cap. 30-35). Just after this follows the mention of the plague of 166, with a pretty clear indication that the order is chronological (cap. 36). The marriage referred to evidently took place between 160 and 166.10 Lucian tells us furthermore that Rutilianus was a man of 60 at the time (cap. 35), and of experience in many official positions (cap. 30), and that he died at the age of 70.

The information to be derived from an inscription which was put up in honor of Rutilianus agrees very nicely with the evidence from Lucian. This inscription (C. I. L. XIV, 3601) proves that Rutilianus had held many official positions, notably the governorship of Moesia in 158-160, or about 166 (cap. 48), and the proconsulship of Asia in 172.11 This position in Asia, or a similar one in Africa, was regularly the last and most honored office of the senatorial career. It was naturally held by a man of years. From the time of this position, 172, we can figure back to a date not before 162 for the marriage of Rutilianus, since he died about ten years after his marriage. And since the marriage probably took place before 166, as has been shown, his death must have occurred by about the year 176.12 These figures are obtained without insisting too strictly on the exactness of Lucian's statements about Rutilianus' age.

Now Rutilianus was indirectly concerned in Lucian's encounter with Alexander. After describing how he barely escaped death by the wiles of the faker, Lucian says: (cap. 57) "I even thought of bringing suit against him-but the governor of Bithynia and Pontus,

10 Fr. Cumont (in Mem. Cour. par l'Acad. Roy. Belgique XL (1887), Alexandre d'Abonotichos, p. 48 ff.) claims 165 as the date.

11 Stout, Govs. of Moesia, p. 25-26. Rat and Bayet, Les Curatores Viarum in R. E. A. II (1914), p. 65 ff.

12 Cf. Cumont, op. cit., p. 52.

Avitus (?),13 begged and prayed me to give it up, for, on account of his regard for Rutilianus, he could not, he said, punish the man even if he caught him in a criminal action." From this statement it is evident that very close relations must have existed between Alexander and Rutilianus. It seems very proper to infer that Rutilianus had married the daughter of Alexander by the time of this episode. Hence the episode is to be dated after 162, in all probability. At all events the date must be after 160, for only after that year did Rutilianus become acquainted with Alexander. Near the end of the sketch we find that Rutilianus was still alive after the death of Alexander (cap. 60). Since Rutilianus himself died about the year 176, it is plain that the episode which we are dating must have occurred considerably earlier than that year. Evidently it is to be dated well within the period 160 to 176.14 This conclusion agrees very nicely with the evidence first given to show that Alexander was widely known in the sixties, and with the fact, evident throughout the sketch, that Lucian was a mature man at the time.

We are now in a position to solve the problem of the identity of the governor of Cappadocia and friend of Lucian who gave Lucian an escort of soldiers. From about the year 160 to the middle of 175 and even later the list of governors is probably complete. The first is Severianus, who was so badly defeated in Armenia not later than the spring of 162. He can hardly be the man. In the first place his term is too early. In the second place Lucian describes him (cap. 27) as "that fool Gaul," a term hardly applicable to a friend. His successor, in all probability, was Statius Priscus, who successfully continued the war in Armenia in 163 following.15 This man might very well be Lucian's friend. But it must be noted that his term was taken up by this very serious war, which in fact was the immediate cause of his appointment to Cappadocia. It is hardly possible that he had any time to think of Lucian's convenience, and it is not at all likely that he had any soldiers to spare for an escort especially through Roman territory. His successor may have been

18

18 Jacobitz reads AUELTOS for the MSS avròs. I do not think therefore that my argument can be based on this reading. If it is correct however, we learn that this incident occurred between 161 and 169 probably, for within this period Avitus was governor of Bithynia. (Dig. Just. L, 2, 3, 2.) In particular Avitus is known from an inscription to have been governor in 165. See G. Hirschfeld in Sitzber. der Akad. (1888), p. 875.

14 This terminus ante quem may be placed a year or two earlier. Lucian mentions (cap. 57) Eupator as king of Bosporos at the time of this incident. This king's reign was over by 174-175 at the latest. See P.-W. 3, 1, 784. Head, Hist. Num. p. 504. Croiset definitely dates the incident See below, n. 17.

in 164; Cumont, in 167 or 168.

15 Harrer, Studies in Syria, p. 33. Stout, Govs. of Moesia, p. 27.