Abstracts Accepted for the Graduate Workshop
Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor
(Classical Studies, University of Waterloo ON, 1-2 May 2014)

Organizing Committee:
Brett Bartlett, Altay Coşkun, Del John Houle, Tanner Rudnick
Contact: dhoule844@gmail.com
Further enquiries also to acoskun@uwaterloo.ca 

Dr. Mariachiara Angelucci, University of Pavia, Italy & Visiting Scholar University College London, UK, mariachiara.angelucci@gmail.com 
Rome in Asia Minor in Hellenistic Times: the Reaction of the Greek Intellectuals
The Greek intellectuals were spectators of events that marked the end of the balance created by the Hellenistic kingdoms in the East and broken by the actions of Rome, that would lead to a significant change of scenery in the eastern Mediterranean. In my paper I will analyze and clarify their position towards the rising of the Roman power. In some cases, their attitude is explicit, in others it can be deduced from their works. I will focus especially on Polemon of Ilium, author of the second century B.C., who pays attention to monuments, myths and traditions of the Greek cities in Greece and Asia Minor, which had stood out in the past for their political, religious and cultural role. Even if he never refers to historical and political facts, his antiquarian interest is urged by contemporary events. In addition, I intend to take into account Hegesianax of Alexandria Troas, who was ambassador of Antiochus III in Rome in 193 B.C. and wrote Troika, and Agathocles of Cyzicus, who composed Peri Kyzikou and Hypomnemata. Demetrius of Scepsis disagreed with their positions in favour of Rome and denied the coming of Aeneas in Italy and the Trojan origin of Rome. He argued explicitly against Hegesianax, but it is likely that his dispute was also extented to Polemon and Agathocles, even if his fragments do not reveal it.

Brett Bartlett, MA Candidate, University of Waterloo ON, brett_m_bartlett@hotmail.com
Cicero and the Allies of the Provinces: Rome’s Mistreatment of Provinces in the Maniliana
In the 1933 Teubner edition of Cicero’s Pro Lege Manilia, Reis emended a corruption at §14 concerning Rome’s use of her imperium in the provinces. In addition to redeeming a few words that Clark had designated as a gloss in his Oxford edition (1905), the reading provides a notable dichotomy between Rome’s administration of Greece and Asia Minor and the rest of her provinces. Indeed, this passage is one of many that are crucial in establishing Asia Minor as a singular province, unlike all others, incomparable in value and desperately wanting a general of singular virtue, such as Pompey. This paper will demonstrate why Reis’ reading is the best restoration of the text and how it affects our understanding of Cicero’s arguments therein. To this end I shall first employ textual criticism to account for the divergent tradition in the manuscripts and thereby support Reis’ reading. Here the ‘unciceronian’ style that is found at §14 in ‘sicut ceterarum provinciarum socios’, which Clark concluded was a gloss, shall be briefly discussed and defended. Next I shall discuss in far more detail the importance of this reconstruction to the structure of the speech as a whole, for which I shall draw from Steel’s Cicero, Rhetoric, and Empire (2001). I shall then discuss briefly the ramifications that this reading has on other passages in the Maniliana where Cicero severely criticizes Rome’s administration of the provinces, most notably the possible interpolation at §64-68 (see Mendner 1966) and reconcile Cicero’s strategy with the political realities at Rome in 67 BC.

Dr. Edward Dandrow, University of Central Florida, Edward.Dandrow@ucf.edu 
The Coinage of Pessinous in the High Empire 
This paper will serve as an introduction into the coinage of Pessinous, the former temple state of Cybele which early under Roman rule had also become the urban centre of the Tolistobogian Galatians. Particular attention will be paid to the choice of the deities depicted on the coins, our main source for the civic pantheon during the High Empire. Cf. John Devreker: Les monnaies de Pessinonte, in idem & M. Waelkens: Les Fouilles de la Rijksuniversiteit te Gent a Pessinonte, 1967-1973, Bruges 1984, vol. I, 173-215, with vol. II 142-157 pls. 254-269; 269; Melih Arslan: Pessinus ve Tavium Sikkeleri, in Anadolu Medeniyetleri Müzesi, 2005 Yıllığı, Ankara 2006, 125-181; A. Coşkun: Der Ankyraner Kaiserkult und die Transformation galatischer und phrygisch-galatischer Identitäten in Zentralanatolien im Spiegel der Münzquellen, in idem et al. (eds.): Repräsentation von Identität und Zugehörigkeit im Osten der griechisch-römischen Welt, Frankfurt/M. 2009, 173-211. 

Liam Gale, MA Candidate, University of Edingburgh, UK, Liam.Gale@ed.ac.uk
Mercenaries or Allies? A Re-Evaluation of the Military Role Played by the Galatians during the Hellenistic Period
In the eyes of the Greeks and Romans, the Gauls who settled in central Anatolia were, above all else, warriors. This perception dominates in the primary sources and has understandably created a military-first approach to how we view the Galatians. The military relationship between the Greeks and the Galatians provides a window through which we can better explore and understand their place in the Hellenistic world. Modern scholarship has traditionally viewed the Galatians as mercenaries, and thus, as apolitical players in the political landscape of the Hellenistic world. This is however both highly misleading and unfaithful to the primary sources. I will argue that the Galatians had far more political and military agency than they have previously been credited. Assuming the Galatians primarily played the role of mercenaries detracts from scholars’ ability to view them as a dynamic and political force and instead, assigns to them the place of an inconsequential power. Rather than presenting the Galatians as mercenaries, the primary sources may instead portray them as allies when fighting alongside the Hellenistic kings. Furthermore if we accept that the Galatians were primarily allies, then they must have wielded far more political power in Asia Minor than has previously been believed and had the diplomatic ability and will to navigate the complexities of Hellenistic diplomacy. This paper will also investigate how and why this view arose, and the effect it has had on modern scholarship. 

Del John Houle, MA Candidate, University of Waterloo ON, dhoule844@gmail.com
Soldiers and Hellenism in the Third-Century Seleucid Military
The relative absence of Syrians in Polybius’ and Appian’s descriptions of the Seleucid military is conspicuous, and has led some to the conclusion that they were never included in the Seleucid army at all. It is the object of this study to suggest a different possibility. Building upon Cohen’s studies of the Seleucid colonies (1978; 1995; 2013), especially those founded in Asia Minor, as well as his treatment of Hellenistic military associations (koina), this paper will argue that while these associations appear to have assumed a single ethnic label (including “Macedonians”, “Galatians”, and “Thracians”), they eventually came to be composed of active military personnel from multiple ethnicities. As such, this paper will not only present the Seleucid military as a vehicle for Hellenization, but also attempt to account for the role of the “missing” ethnicities in our ancient sources; it will argue that the “Macedonian” Seleucid soldiers referred to by our ancient sources may actually represent an ethnically heterogeneous group.

Lukas Lemcke, PhD Candidate at the University of Cologne, Germany, Lukas.Lemcke@gmx.de
Measuring Roman Power in Late Antique Asia Minor: the Case of Cappadocia
Fergus Millar’s often praised and frequently criticized monograph on the Emperor in the Roman World (1977) has greatly stimulated the debate surrounding the Roman art of government. The rising interest in late antique studies has extended this discussion into the reign of Diocletian and beyond, and numerous monographs have since appeared illuminating both functional and theoretical aspects of Roman rule. Whichever angles of investigation scholars have chosen to pursue, their discussions are firmly embedded in an understanding of the late Roman state as authoritarian. However, such labeling is imprecise, and thus obfuscates that which it seeks to illuminate: the character of Roman government. This paper is an attempt to obviate this effect by moving the discourse surrounding the regime authority of the later Roman Empire onto firmer ground. In a case study focusing on Cappadocia, it seeks to evaluate late Roman governance on the provincial level using the Polity IV model (M.G. Marshall et al.: Polity IV Project: Political Regime, Characteristics and Transitions, 1800-2012, 2012). With data gained through primary evidence as well as scholarship on the administrative history of Cappadocia (e.g., S. Métivier: La Cappadoce (IVe - VIe siècle), 2005) and Roman government (e.g., C.M. Kelly, Ruling the Later Roman Empire, 2004), the administrative leadership of the province is awarded scores according to indicators provided through the Polity IV model. This evaluation results in an overall polity score, which can be used for comparative analysis to give historians a more precise understanding of the governing authority of late Roman provincial government in Asia Minor from a modern perspective.

Tanner Rudnick, BA Honours Candidate, University of Waterloo ON,	 tanner.rudnick@gmail.com
Deiotaros I Philorhomaios: Amicus populi Romani optimus
The foreign policy of the Roman Republic was characterized by a reliance on external allies to manage affairs on the edges of the Roman sphere of influence. The administration of overseas territories was a burden which the senators of the Roman Republic were hesitant to bear: they instead preferred to lend their support to their allies while granting them a degree of autonomy. In return the Senate demanded total and unwavering loyalty from these allies and reserved the right to limit or retract the benefits granted. This (usually) mutually beneficial relationship is often called amicitia populi Romani, while the Romans themselves called their partners amici and often socii as well. By the 1st century BC, these amicitiae were frequently not merely formally-recognized relations between the Senate and a foreign dynast, but were commonly also shared between the dynast and one or more prominent Roman figures. A paradigmatic example of a beneficiary of this amicitia is the Galatian chieftain and later king Deiotaros I Philorhomaios (ca. 100-41 BC). His career is characterized by close relationships with Roman generals and politicians, Pompey and Cicero in particular, and this despite the fact that he would eventually face Caesar himself under suspicion of plotting to assassinate the dictator. His friendship with Cicero in particular would now come to his rescue: the orator defended Deiotaros in Caesar’s home, lacing his arguments against the accusation with examples of Deiotaros’ loyal service over the preceding forty years. Through detailed examination of Cicero’s oration entitled Pro rege Deiotaro, in combination with references to some of his published letters and other speeches, a picture of Roman amicitia can be drawn with Deiotaros as its archetype for the 1st century BC. 

Dr. Federico Russo, Postdoctoral Fellow at the University of Konstanz, Germany, 	
Federico.Russo@uni-konstanz.de
The Role of Pergamum in Early Roman Expansionism in Asia Minor: Political Support and Propagandistic Strategies.
Though with different nuances, it is commonly accepted that Rome exploited the Trojan myth in order to increase her credibility in the Greek world in the period of expansionism in Greece and Asia Minor between the 3rd and the 2nd century BC. The Trojan myth would thus have played a fundamental role in favouring relations between Rome and Greek communities both from Greece and Asia Minor. Nevertheless, the mechanism which underlay this process is not completely clear: in particular, means of dissemination of the myth and the reasons which induced many Greek cities to acknowledge it are still obscure. If it is true that the concept of Trojan-Roman syngeneia represented a major means of acceptance of this legend, it should not be forgotten that evidence provides us with a much more multifaceted and complex image of the use the Trojan myth in Roman-Greek relationships. Cases such as those of Lampsacus and Ilium and sources such as Polemon of Ilium, Hegesianax of Alexandria Troas and Agathocles of Cyzicus show the variety of forms and meanings which the Trojan legend of Rome acquired, and reveal the key-role that the Kingdom of Pergamum had in making it a political instrument. It is not accidental, indeed, that Pergamum had a specific function in introducing the cult of the Magna Mater – from Pessinous – in Rome in the same years. Focusing on both the evidence of the Trojan myth from the end of the 3rd century BC and the role that Pergamum had in Roman-Seleucid negotiations preceding the Syrian war, this paper aims, on the one hand, at analysing the mechanisms which led to an increasing exploitation of the Trojan legend in the context of early Roman expansionism in Asia Minor, and, on the other hand, at assessing the role that the kingdom of Pergamum played in both spreading the Trojan legend and supporting Roman foreign policy. This paper will finally show that the Trojan legend of Rome was not a mere celebrative device, but rather a fundamental premise of Roman expansionism in Asia Minor.  

Andrew St. Thomas, BA Honours Candidate, University of Waterloo ON	
astthoma@uwaterloo.ca
The Ottoman Reception of Anatolia
The period beginning with the decline of the Byzantine Empire and ending with the final conquests in Anatolia by the Ottomans is one of extraordinary importance in this region’s history. While the Ottomans were very much an amalgam of cultures, with Byzantine institutions and communities continuing to thrive during their rule, over the course of these years the cultural and physical landscape of Anatolia was markedly changed; from the initial Byzantine defeat at Manzikert in 1071 to Mehmed II’s final campaigns, Anatolia transitioned from a definitively Roman and Hellenistic character to one reflecting principally a Turkish ethnic identity. The purpose of this presentation will be to delineate the principal military engagements, settlement patterns, and cultural interactions which propelled and demarcated this transition. These factors serve to elucidate the causes of Ottoman-Byzantine conflict together with the role played by Classical institutions and attitudes throughout the Ottoman reception.