^{page 215 note 1} Städte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens, i. p. 2; cf. also Davies, , Anatolica, p. 202.Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 2} The chaussée, which once ran from Adalia to the Eurymedon, is useless beyond the Kestros, and a side-track is now followed. Our ride to Manavgat beyond the Eurymedon was for the first part through standing water.

^{page 217 note 1} At the foot of the plateau in the neighbourhood of Barsak the Katarraktes appears twice for a short distance in two deep diiden. In both cases the level of the water is some distance below the level of the plain. There is a considerable volume of water which rushes with great force from the foot of the rock and disappears after a short distance.

^{page 217 note 2} We would suggest that the name of the village Ellez, to the east of Barsak, is derived from ἐλαίαις though Ramsay, (A.J.A. 1887, p. 368Google Scholar) derives the name, which occurs elsewhere, from Elyes or Ilyes, a corruption of Elias. A similar name is perhaps concealed in the inscriptions at Bazar-Ghediyi (Nos. 8, 10).

The remains of oil-presses are not infrequent in the district; at Ellez some fine olive-trees are to be seen, and Mr. G. A. Keun, H.B.M. Vice-Consul at Adalia, drew our attention to the stumps of an old olive-grove near Karaba'yr.

^{page 217 note 3} ‘In planitie Attaliae, supra portam aedificii; misit Schönbornius’ The inscription now lies fallen and is broken on the left. We read Σατορνεῖ ος os in l. 1, for Schönborn's Σατορνεῖ Δος In l. 2 read ἐν τῷ χωρίῳ κατεσκεύασε. There is no gap in the word μάνδρας although the line is now incomplete after the letters ΜΑΝΔΙ. There were traces of a third line much worn.

^{page 218 note 1} v. Spratt and Forbes, i. p. 228.

^{page 218 note 2} The name of the site, which seems to have been a κώμη dependent on Perge, is discussed below p. 230.

^{page 220 note 1} We were told that the inhabitants of Assar-Karamanle had formerly lived at Indjik but deserted the site some ten years ago when the village was destroyed by fire. The ancient site itself has suffered much, many of the inscriptions on sarcophagi standing to the N.W. of the site having been completely obliterated.

^{page 221 note 1} In the forthcoming number of J.H.S. (xxxii. 2).

^{page 221 note 2} This was perhaps the case with the greater part of the plateau, cf. the inscriptions from Bazar-ghediyi, Nos. 1–10. At Tchibukkan, Rott, (Kleinasiatische Denkmäler, p. 360, No. 51)Google Scholar copied an inscription with the formula τῷ ἱερωτάτῳ ταμίῳ . . . καὶ τῇ Περγαίων ᾿Α[ρτέμιδι. We have, however, argued below (p. 224) that with the decline of Perge the site at Indjik rose into greater importance during the Byzantine period.

^{page 221 note 3} Karamanian Coast ², p. 139; cf. also Lanckoronski, i. p. 19. Beaufort has a good description of the ancient watercourse leading down to the shore, ‘which by the continual deposition of sediment has actually crept upwards in the shape of a wall. This self-made acqueduct is in some places nearly three feet high: the substance is a light porous stone and contains small pieces of petrified seed and stick.’ It is possible to see such aqueducts in the actual process of formation at the present day. A shallow canal is cut for irrigation, the sides of which are banked with low ridges of turf, which become encrusted with the deposit from the water as the stream overflows. The deposit from the stream is thus continually raising the level of its course, until further progress is checked and a new channel has to be cut.

On the quality of the water of the Katarraktes v. Spratt and Forbes, i. p. 219.

^{page 223 note 1} v. below, No. 29 a, b.

^{page 223 note 2} We have throughout used Pamphylia in the narrower sense as referring to the maritime plain. On the wider extent of the Byzantine province v. Ramsay, , H. G. pp. 415Google Scholar, etc.

^{page 223 note 3} The position of Olbia above the village of Gurma is marked as doubtful by Kiepert. The nature and position of the site however agree closely with Strabo's description (p. 667). Μετὰ Φασήλιδα δ᾿ ἔστιν ἡ ᾿Ολβία, τῆς Παμφυλίας ἀρχή, μέγα ἔρυμα Μετὰ Φασήλιδα δ᾿ ἔστιν ἡ ᾿Ολνία, τῆς Παμφυλίας ἀρχή, μέγα ἔρυμα. The hill above Gurma, which is really a small detached ridge with four peaks, is of great natural strength. The easiest ascent is from the south-west, where the site is defended by a wall built of loose, irregular stones. On the two middle peaks are fragments of good ‘Hellenic’ masonry (at one point standing to a height of seven courses), rock-cut steps and Hellenic sherds. At the foot of the ridge to the south-east are the remains of later buildings. The δήμου Οὐλίαμβος of Hierokles is interpreted by Ramsay as a corruption for δήμου ῾Ολβιανῶν (A.J.A. iv. p. 8), a view which is almost certainly correct, although Lanckoronski (i. p. 8) treats Ouliambos as a different place and reads ᾿Ολβία for Hierokles' ᾿Ιοβία

The χωρίον Τένεδος mentioned by the Stadiasmus (cf. Apollodorus ap. Steph. Byz.) as being twenty stades to the west of Attaleia is probably to be placed on the left bank of the Arab Su. The ruins are for the most part mediaeval (v. Spratt and Forbes, i. p. 216), but in front of the modern church of the Panagia are five ancient columns. The stone bearing the inscription No. 27. (temp. Diocletian) is now used as the doorstep of the Kahveh. It may mark the line of the road from Attaleia into Lycia by way of the Klimax or of the Tchandyr valley.

^{page 223 note 4} Ath. Mitt. x. p. 343; H. G. p. 420.

^{page 223 note 5} Kleinasiatische Denkmäler, p. 80; cf. Woodward, , B.S.A. xvi. p. 79.Google Scholar

^{page 224 note 1} v. Lanckoronski, ii. p. 78, and inscr. Nos. 223–4.

^{page 224 note 2} So Not. vii. In the later Notitiae Magydos is inserted between Attaleia and Eudokias.

^{page 224 note 3} (τον) Δικιταναύρων (Not. vii. Not. de Boor), Δικιτανάβρων (Not. viii.), Κιτανναύρω; (Not. ix.), Δικιοτανάβρων (Not. i.), Αδικηταναύρων (Not. iii. x. Not. ap. Gelzer, , Abh. der k. k. Akad. der Wiss., xxi.Google ScholarAbt. iii. p. 549), Αδείας Ταναύρων (Not. xiii.).

^{page 224 note 4} Ath. Mitt. x. p. 343.

^{page 224 note 5}

In the late Not. iii. the name Ariassos is misplaced.

^{page 224 note 6} This suggestion is not inconsistent with the view previously expressed (p. 221) that the site at Indjik during the Roman period belonged to the territory of Perge, which during the Byzantine period seems to have lost its importance (v. Ramsay, , H. G. p. 420Google Scholar). The nature of the ruins at Indjik proves the site to have been an important one during the Byzantine period.

^{page 224 note 7} v. Bérard, B.C.H. xvi. p. 426.

^{page 224 note 8} Pednelissos was placed conjecturally by Hirschfeld, at Syrt, (Berl. Sitzungsber., 1875, p. 125).Google ScholarRamsay, (A.J.A., 1888, p. 272)Google Scholar, however, argues from the position of the town in Hierokles and the Notitae that it is to be sought in the western part of the province Pamphylia, and with this view the evidence of the coin-types is in agreement. (Cf. Hill, B.M. Coins, Lycia, etc. ciii.) Radet, (Rev. Arch. 1893, p. 193)Google Scholar places the site in the neighbourhood of Tchandyr near the Pambuk-ovasi, such a position exactly suiting Polybius' narrative of the campaign of Garsyeris (v. 72 seqq.) The mention of Pednelissos in Strabo (p. 667) can hardly be considered to conflict with this view. If the words ὑπερκεῖται ᾿Ασπένδου are to be interpreted strictly, the site should be looked for between Aspendos and Selge. (We have to thank Mr. J. G. C. Anderson for the reference to Radet's work.)

^{page 226 note 1} C.I.G. 3919, l. 8; ‘κορακοῦν est claudere’ (Franz). For κόραξ (=repagulum) cf. Pollux, vii. 26. ῾´Ην῾´Ομηρος κορώνην λέδει νῦν κόρακα καλοῦσι

^{page 226 note 2} Nos. 4, 5, 6 (?).

^{page 226 note 3} No. 26.

^{page 226 note 4} Kleinasiatische Denkmäler, p. 366, No. 68.

^{page 226 note 5} B.C.H. xxiii. p. 178, No. 32.

^{page 226 note 6} Petersen, Reisen ii. No. 182.

^{page 226 note 7} C.I.G. 2827 2842

^{page 230 note 1} Anth. Pal. ix. 525, 12.

^{page 230 note 2} C.I.G. 5039.

^{page 230 note 3} B.C.H. xvi. p. 471 = I.G. ad res Rom. pert. iii. 422.

^{page 230 note 4} Cf. I.G. ad res Rom. pert. iii. 679 (at Patara) ἀγρὸν ὲν τῇ Κορυδαλλικῇ ἐν τόπῳ Χάδραις καὶ Παιδαγωγῷ

^{page 230 note 5} C.I.G. 4366 w.

^{page 230 note 6} v. genealogical table below.

^{page 232 note 1} Cf. a similar erasure at Tlos (Dittenberger, O.G.I. i. 560 = I.G. ad res Rom. pert. iii. 551).

^{page 235 note 1} v. B.S.A. xii. p. 471.

^{page 235 note 2} v. Kretschmer, , Einleitung, pp. 293Google Scholar, seqq.

^{page 236 note 1} Reading β]ληθῆναι for <ΛΗΘΗΝΑΙ. The first letter of the word is very faint, but seemed rather to resemble k.

^{page 236 note 2} The restoration was suggested by Mr. A. M. Woodward.

^{page 236 note 3} On the form γλωσσόκομον υ v. Rutherford, , New Phrynichus, p. 181.Google Scholar

^{page 236 note 4} C.I.G. 2448, viii. 25, 31.

^{page 237 note 1} Heberdey-Kalinka, , Denkschrift der k. Acad. in Wien, Philos. Hist. Kl. xlv. p. 8Google Scholar, No. 22. cf. Reisen, ii. No. 210 (in the Milyas); Sterrett, Epigraphical Journey, No. 63 (Tefenni), ᾿Ενάς Reisen, No. 211 (in the Milyas), No. 256 (Kibyra) ᾿Ενᾷ

^{page 238 note 1} B.S.A. xvi. p. 125, xvii. p. 212; A.J.A. 1886, p. 265, No. 5. For the variation in the spelling cf. Τέρβημις = Lycian Τρέβημις (quoted by Kretschmer, , Einleitung, p. 294Google Scholar; cf. p. 362).

^{page 238 note 2} Steph. Byz. s.v. Tlos. Tremiles is the eponymous ancestor of the Termilai (= Lycians, cf. Hdt. i. 173).

^{page 239 note 1} Ramsay, , Studies in the … Eastern provinces, p. 324Google Scholar, R. i. ll. 74, 89; p. 330, R. iii. l. 25.

^{page 239 note 2} p. 221.

^{page 240 note 1} [I have this entry in my notebook, but was unable to find the sarcophagus on my second and third visits.—H.A.O.]

^{page 242 note 1} C.I.G. 4352–7, with note: Θέμις Παμφυλιακὴ est institutum Pamphyliacum, nimirum ipsum illud ἐπιβατήριον hoc est festum ἐπιδημίας deorum, quod ab auctore Tuesiano nomen traxit. On the ἀγὼν Θέμιδος Woodward's note and refs. in B.S.A. xvi. pp. 117, 120.

^{page 242 note 2} Rott, H., Kleinasiatische Denkmäler, p. 366, No. 67.Google Scholar

^{page 242 note 3} Lanckoronski, ii. No. 259.

^{page 242 note 4} Lanckoronski, ii. Nos. 68, 69.

^{page 244 note 1} B.S.A. xvii. p. 207, No. 4A.

^{page 244 note 2} For o = Latin v cf. Polyb. ii. 20; τὴν ᾿Οάδμονα προσαγορευομένην λίμνην= lacus Vadimonis.(We have to thank Prof. Postgate for this reference.) An error parallel to the above is quoted by Lindsay, (The Latin Language, p. 50)Google Scholar from the edict of Diocletian where bulba (= vulva) occurs in the Latin inscription, βούλβη in the Greek.

^{page 245 note 1} C.B. ii. p. 419; cf. Studies in … the Eastern Roman Provinces, p. 373.

^{page 245 note 2} Plutarch, , Eum. 8.Google Scholar Further refs. in C.B. loc. cit.

^{page 246 note 1} C. I. G. 4342 b ³ = Cagnat, I. G. ad res Rom. pert. iii. 794, Κοκκηῒα [πλ]ανκία Μα - - - daughter of M. Plancius Varus, whom Cagnat suggests may be the proconsul of Bithynia c. 70 A.D. and of Asia c. 78–79 A.D. (V. Pros. Imp. Rom. iii. p. 42, No. 334).

^{page 246 note 2} Städteverw. p. 292. Refs. p. 553.

^{page 246 note 3} Traité d'Épigr. gr. p. 533.

^{page 246 note 4} v. Cagnat's note ad loc. with references to examples of this title being borne by women. The known examples of the title in general are collected by Liebenam, op. cit. p. 292. Those from the district by Woodward, , B.S.A. xvii. p. 210Google Scholar, No. 6.

^{page 246 note 5} Op. cit. i. p. 95.

^{page 248 note 1} J.H.S. xv. p. 129, No. 28.

^{page 248 note 2} I. G. ad res Rom. pert. iii. 450.