We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 January 2015
The capacity of the individual to maintain several identities concurrently is well established, as is the ability of dress to reflect (passively) or to announce (actively) the social identities of its bearer. Within a multi-national structure such as the Achaemenid Persian Empire the semiosis of dress is especially complex. Since dress functions as a form of non-verbal communication, study of the language of dress of past cultures must appeal to the widest possible range of literary and visual sources.
Analysis of the visual arts within the Persian sphere shows careful attention to vestimental definition of the Iranian ‘dominant ethno-class’ and its separation from the dress of the subject peoples in the western empire. Artistic and literary evidence for the Greek and West Anatolian experience of the Persian Empire testifies to the extent of the Persian presence in the west. It also shows the cultural flexibility of the local populations, who might occasionally emulate the Persian model by adopting Persian dress while retaining the traits of their traditional cultures.
I would like to thank Bruce Marshall and Paul Burton for inviting me to take part in a most enjoyable conference. Much of the following arises from research undertaken for a book on Persians in Greek art, as that subject raises many interesting questions about clothing as an ethnic marker. Ted Robinson and Kathryn Welch gave valuable help with Roman material; for assistance with images I thank Defne Cimok, Matthew Gibbons, Johann Griesbach, Tobin Hartnell, Sabina Köhler, Amélie Kuhrt, Julie Mabbs and Lâtife Summerer with Roy Hessing.
1 Plut, . Lys. 3.2Google Scholar: 
.
2 Important summary: Briant, P., Histoire de l'empire perse (Paris 1996)Google Scholar = Briant, P., From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire, trans. Daniels, P.T. (Winona Lake IN 2002)Google Scholar.
3 Arjan Tomb: Álvarez-Mon, J., The Aryan Tomb at the Crossroads of the Elamite and the Persian Empires (Leuven 2010)Google Scholar. Persepolis Treasury Room 33 yielded a ‘bundle of gold thread’ ‘with small fire-blackened beads’, deemed to be ‘probably the remnant of a gold-embroidered fabric’: Schmidt, E.F., Persepolis I: Structures, Reliefs, Inscriptions (Chicago 1953) 167 and 179Google Scholar; illustrated fig. 25, p.78. The subsidiary suite of Persepolis Treasury Hall 41 yielded many tiny gold beads: Schmidt, Persepolis I, 180Google Scholar.
4 The contents of Cordwell, J.M. and Schwarz, R.A. (eds), The Fabrics of Culture: The Anthropology of Clothing and Adornment (The Hague and New York 1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, are mostly about defining communication within a social group and occasionally about negotiating identity within an imperial context (e.g. Nigeria).
5 Lurie, A., The Language of Clothes (New York 1981) 84–114Google Scholar
6 For the evolution of togate dress as the benchmark of Roman identity, see Denen, E., Romulus’ Asylum: Roman Identities from the Age of Alexander to the Age of Hadrian (Oxford 2005) 274-9Google Scholar. Stone, S., “The Toga: From National to Ceremonial Costume”, in Sebesta, J.L. and Bonfante, L. (eds), The World of Roman Costume (Madison 1994) 13–45Google Scholar, focuses rather on the (meanings of the) evolution of the garment in Rome.
7 Schmid, , Persepolis I (n. 3) 85–90, pl. 27-49Google Scholar. Often reproduced, e.g. Kuhrt, A., The Persian Empire. A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period (London and New York 2007), fig. 11.22-11.23 (a-d)Google Scholar; Curtis, J.E. and Tallis, N. (eds), Forgotten Empire: The World of Ancient Persia (London 2005)Google Scholar cat. no. 20. Root, M.C., The King and Kingship in Achaemenid Art (Leiden 1979)Google Scholar remains fundamental on Persepolis. Walser, G., Die Völkerschaften auf den Reliefs von Persepolis (Berlin 1966)Google Scholar, focuses on the identities of the individual peoples, through examining also the evidence of the funerary monuments since, unlike the Apadana reliefs, they are inscribed.
8 Naqsh-i Rustam, Tomb of Darius: Schmidt, E.F., Persepolis III: The Royal Tombs and Other Monuments (Chicago 1970) 80-9Google Scholar; frontispiece. The drawing reproduced here is after Kuhrt, The Persian Empire (n. 7) fig. 11.14; see detail drawing of the throne-bearers of the better preserved Tomb I in Walser, Reliefs von Persepolis (n. 7) Falttafel, reproduced by Kuhrt, The Persian Empire (n. 7) fig. 11.15, and Briant, , Histoire de l'empire perse (n. 2) 176, fig. 11Google Scholar. Cf. Throne-bearers from the Hundred-Column Hall: Briant, loc. cit. 174, fig. 10.
9 Such acronyms as ‘DNa’ and (below) ‘DSf’ relate to the system of cataloguing of Persian inscriptions set up by Kent, R., Old Persian Grammar, Texts, Lexicon (New Haven 1953)Google Scholar and re-edited and expanded by Lecoq, P., Les inscriptions de la Perse achéménide (Paris 1997)Google Scholar, both of whom provide translations.
10 Translation: Kuhrt, , The Persian Empire (n. 7) 502-3Google Scholar, with references.
11 DSf recently translated anew: Kuhrt, , The Persian Empire (n. 7) 492Google Scholar. An analogous use of dress is to be found in Roman art: Gergel, R.A., ‘Costume as Geographic Indicator: Barbarians and Prisoners on Cuirassed Statue Breastplates’, in Sebesta, and Bonfante, (eds), Roman Costume (n. 6) 191–209Google Scholar.
12 E.g. London BM 132505, blue chalcedony cylinder seal: Merrillees, P.H., Catalogue of the Western Asiatic Seals in the British Museum. Cylinder Seals VI: Pre-Achaemenid and Achaemenid Periods (London 2005) 60–70, no. 65, pl. 24Google Scholar; Curtis, and Tallis, , Forgotten Empire (n. 7) cat. no. 415Google Scholar.
13 E.g. London 89333: Curtis and Tallis, Forgotten Empire (n. 7) cat. no. 423; Teheran 6580 from Persepolis: Curtis and Tallis, loc. cit., cat. no. 424.
14 See e.g. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, H., ‘Yauna by the Sea and Yauna across the Sea’, in Malkin, I. (ed.), Ancient Perceptions of Greek Ethnicity (Washington DC 2001) 323-46Google Scholar, and Rollinger, R., ‘Some Observations on “Greeks” in the Achaemenid Empire according to Cuneiform Texts from Babylonia and Persepolis’, in Briant, P. and Chauveau, M. (eds), Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts culturels dans les pays de l'empire achéménide. Actes du colloque Paris 2007 (Paris 2009) 331-51Google Scholar. See also from the Persian-held West: the sarcophagus from Çan in Mysia has a Persian-looking rider spearing a round-shield bearer: Sevinç, N.et al., ‘A New Painted Graeco-Persian Sarcophagus from Çan’, Studia Troica 11 (2001) 383–420Google Scholar; Ma, J., ‘Mysians on the Çan Sarcophagus? Ethnicity and Domination in Achaimenid Military Art’, Historia 39 (2008) 1–16Google Scholar.
15 In view of the arguments of Greenewalt, C.H., ‘An Exhibitionist from Sardis’;, in Mitten, D. G.et al. (eds), Studies Presented to G.M.A. Hanfmann (Mainz 1971) 29–46Google Scholar, I accept the opinion of, e.g., Koch, H., Es kündet Dareios der König: vom Leben im persischen Grossreich (Mainz 1992) 108-13Google Scholar, rather than Walser, Reliefs von Persepolis (n. 7), on the identity of Delegations VI and XII. Mitra: Boardman, J., in Boardman, J. and Kurtz, D.C., ‘Booners’, Greek Vases in The J. Paul Getty Museum 3 (Malibu CA 1986) 50Google Scholar, discusses, outlining the debate that caused him not to use the term. His fig. 30 shows examples from ‘all over’ the Near East: men of Carchemish at Nimrud, Phoenicians at Nimrud and North Syrian Neo-Hittites and Phrygians at Khorsabad.
16 A preliminary exploration of this matter appears in Miller, M.C., ‘Imaging Persians in the Age of Herodotos’, in Rollinger, R.et al. (eds), Herodot und das Persische Weltreich / Herodotus and the Persian Empire (Wiesbaden 2011) 123-57Google Scholar; see also Miller, M., ‘Town and Country in the Satrapies of Western Anatolia: The Archaeology of Empire’, in Summerer, L., Ivantchik, A. and von Kienlin, A. (eds), Kelainai-Apameia Kibotos: Développement urbain dans le contexte anatolien (Bordeaux 2011) 328-9Google Scholar.
17 Manisa 3389: dated late 5th century by Chr. Roosevelt, , The Archaeology of Lydia, from Gyges to Alexander (Cambridge 2009) fig. 6.27Google Scholar. Note that the upper half of the stele features a man in Lydian military dress riding a Persian horse.
18 Manisa 4360: Greenewalt, ‘An Exhibitionist from Sardis’ (n. 16). New photographs: Dedeoǧlou, H., The Lydians and Sardis (Istanbul 2003) 41Google Scholar; Lintz, Y., ‘Greek, Anatolian, and Persian Iconography in Asia Minor: Material Sources, Method, and Perspectives’, in Darbandi, M.R. and Zournatzi, A. (eds), Ancient Greece and Ancient Iran. Cross-Cultural Encounters (Athens 2008) 260Google Scholar.
19 Baughan, E.P., ‘Persian Riders in Lydia? The Painted Frieze of the Aktepe Tomb kline’, International Congress of Classical Archaeology XVII (Rome 2008) 24–36Google Scholar, discusses a possible third example in the riders wearing Persian riding dress on the kline of a tomb that otherwise has more Anatolian than Lydian features.
20 Summerer, L., ‘Imaging a Tomb Chamber: The Iconographie Program of the Tatarli Wall Paintings’, in Darbandi, and Zournatzi, A. (eds), Ancient Greece and Ancient Iran (n. 19) 265–300Google Scholar; see also Summerer, L., ‘From Tatarh to Munich. The Recovery of a Painted Wooden Tomb Chamber in Phrygia’, in Delemen, I. (ed.), The Achaemenid Impact on Local Populations and Cultures (Istanbul 2007) 129-56Google Scholar, ‘Picturing Persian Victory: The Painted Battle Scene on the Munich Wood’, in Ivantchik, A. et Licheli, V. (eds), Achaemenid Culture and Local Traditions in Anatolia, Southern Caucasus and Iran: New Discoveries (Leiden and Boston 2007) 3–30Google Scholar, and Summerer, L. and von Kienlin, A. (eds), Tatarh. Renklerin Dönüsü / The Return of Colours (Istanbul 2010)Google Scholar.
21 Mellink, M.J., ‘Mural Paintings in Lycian Tombs’, in Akurgal, E. (ed.), Proceedings of the Xth International Congress of Classical Archaeology, Ankara-Izmir, 1973, Vol. 2 (Ankara 1978) 805-9Google Scholar, and field reports in AJA 1971-1975; final publication by Stella Miller in progress. Jacobs, B., ‘Drei Beiträge zu Fragen der Rüstung und Bekleidung in Persien zur Achämenidenzeit’, Iranica Antiqua 29 (1994) esp. 126-35CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Frequently illustrated, notably in colour: Summerer, and von Kienlin, , Tatarh (n. 21) 329Google Scholar. Also Cook, J.M., The Persian Empire (London 1983) pl. 30Google Scholar; Miller, , ‘“Manners Makyth Man“: Diacritical Drinking in Achaemenid Anatolia’, in Gruen, E.S. (ed.), Cultural Identity in the Ancient Mediterranean (Los Angeles 2011) 97–134Google Scholar with further references.
22 In view of Xanthos’ complicated history, it is not clear whether we can adduce the iconography of the Nereid Monument as evidence of Persian dress worn by a non-Persian population: some figures in Persian dress take part in the hunt frieze, as well as the tribute scene on Frieze 3 that may show locals in procession bringing tribute to the satrap; London BM S895+ S897, West, Tribute. London BM S889, Frieze 3 East, Hunt. Childs, W.A.P. and Demargne, P., Fouilles de Xanthos, VIII: Le Monument des Néréides. Le décor sculpté I-II (Paris 1989) pl. 115-120 (hunt), pl. 124-125Google Scholar (procession).
23 London BM ANE 132114: Searight, A., Reade, A.J. and Finkel, I., Assyrian Stone Vessels and Related Material in the British Museum (Oxford 2008) 32-3, cat. no. 269, fig. 15Google Scholar; Jenkins’ suggestion about Artemisia noted p. 33. Colour image: Curtis, and Tallis, , Forgotten Empire (n. 7) cat. no. 140Google Scholar.
24 Schoppa, H., Die Darstellung der Perser in der griechischen Kunst bis zum Beginn des Hellenismus (Heidelberg 1933) 37Google Scholar. On war-sickles: Sekunda, N., ‘Anatolian War-Sickles and the Coinage of Etenna’, in Ashton, R. (ed.), Studies in Anatolian Coinage from Turkey (London 1996) 7–17Google Scholar, who illustrates the Konya relief, now reproduced in colour: Cahill, N.D., The Lydians and their World (Istanbul 2010) fig. 22Google Scholar. Tartarlı weapon dancers, identification: Summerer, , ‘Imaging a Tomb Chamber’ (n. 20) 267-70Google Scholar; Summerer, and von Kienlin, , Tatarh (n. 20) 123, fig. 2a-2bGoogle Scholar.
25 Würzburg L 571 (H4646): ARV 1010.10, Langlotz, E., Griechische Vasen in Würzburg (Munich 1932) pl. 217Google Scholar, Beazley Archive Database (BAD) 214133. Also Athens NM 14718; ARV 1010.11, Miller ‘Imaging Persians’ (n. 16) fig. 11, BAD 214134; see further 138. Beardless Orientals of the group are presumably Amazons: Laon 37.1049 (ARV 1010.12); Basel BS461 (Para 438.109ter as Achilles Ptr.): CVA Basel 3 (Switzerland 7) Vera Slehoferova (Bern 1986) pl. 35.
26 Bittner, S., Tracht und Bewaffnung des persischen Heeres zur Zeit der Achaimeniden22 (Munich 1987)Google Scholar, mistakenly takes these oinochoai as evidence that it is a Persian weapon. See Miller, , ‘In Strange Company: Persians in Early Attic Theatre Imagery’, in Beaumont, L.A.et al. (eds), Festschrift in Honour of J. Richard Green. Mediterranean Archaeology 17 (Sydney 2004) 168-70Google Scholar, for a quick outline of some of the contexts of the Near Eastern ‘sickle-sword’.
27 The term is Briant's, P., ‘Ethno-classe dominante et populations soumises dans l'Empire achéménide: Le cas de l'Egypte’, in Kuhrt, A. and Sancisi-Weerdenburg, H. (eds), Achaemenid History, III: Method and Theory (Leiden 1988) 137-73Google Scholar; recent discussions of the issues, with references: Brosius, M., ‘Keeping up with the Persians: Between Cultural Identity and Persianization in the Achaemenid Period’, in Gruen, (ed.), Cultural Identity (n. 21) 135-49Google Scholar, and C. Tuplin, “The Limits of Persianization: Some Reflections on Cultural Links in the Persian Empire’, in Gruen, loc. cit. 150-82.
28 Kassel ALG57: Attic red-figured kalpis attributed to Nikoxenos Painter, c. 500. Boardman and Kurtz, ‘Booners’ (n. 15) 51, fig. 12; BAD 9426. I am indebted to William Slater for this insight.
29 Miller, , Athens and Persia in the Fifth Century B.C. A Study in Cultural Receptivity (Cambridge 1997) chap. 7Google Scholar.
30 E.g. the side view of Midas on London E447 (stamnos, name vase of Midas Painter, BAD 213470) and Syracuse 4322 (bell krater, BAD 6908): Miller, , ‘Midas as the Great King in Attic Fifth-Century Vase-Painting’, Antike Kunst 31 (1988) pl. 19.1 and 19.2Google Scholar; and possibly the running Persian on Berlin V.I.3156 (skyphos, follower of Douris, BAD 209946): Miller, Athens and Persia (n. 29) fig. 25.
31 
32 Izmir OS45: excavated at Old Smyrna, Klazomenian column krater, c. 540-530 (by context), possibly of the Urla Group: Cook, R.M. and Dupont, P., East Greek Pottery (London 1998) 101Google Scholar. Cook, J.M., ‘Old Smyrna: Ionic Black Figure and Other Sixth-Century Figured Wares’,BSA 60 (1965) 123-4, no. 45Google Scholar as North Ionic, with fig. 6 (dwg.) and pl. 30; Boardman, , Early Greek Vase Painting (London 1998) 148 and fig. 350Google Scholar.
33 For Klazomenian sarcophagi, see Cook, R.M., Clazomenian Sarcophagi (Mainz 1981)Google Scholar. Albertinum Group date p. 60: G1, G11, G13, G15a (now Princeton y1990-9), G28; to which add New York Market (details n. 39 below). Dating summarised on chart of Cook, loc. cit. 148. Cook's Clazomenian Sarcophagi, newly summarised and updated: Cook, and Dupont, , East Greek Pottery (n. 32) 120-8Google Scholar. I briefly discuss the sarcophagi with ‘Persians’ in Miller, ‘Imaging Persians’ (n. 16) 128-31Google Scholar.
34 Cook, , Clazomenian Sarcophagi (n. 33) 114Google Scholar.
35 E.g. Klazomenian sarcophagi (black-figured): Berlin 3245, Cook, Clazomenian Sarcophagi (n. 33) G28, Albertinum Ptr.; drawing in Cook and Dupont, East Greek Pottery (n. 32) fig. 17.2 shows placement within overall decorative schema. Brussels A 1988, Cook, , Clazomenian Sarcophagi (n. 33) G16Google Scholar; Munich 8774, Cook, , Clazomenian Sarcophagi (n. 33) G27Google Scholar; Louvre CA 1024, Cook, , Clazomenian Sarcophagi (n. 33) G13Google Scholar – vignette on side panels only. All dated 500-480; all but Berlin 3245 attributed to Albertinum Group. Cook, in Cook, and Dupont, , East Greek Pottery (n. 32) 126Google Scholar, comments that their work shows some East Greek elements, but owes more to Attic.
36 Their ancient meaning is much debated; for some different perspectives see Vos, M.F., Scythian Archers in Archaic Attic Vase-Painting (Groningen 1963)Google Scholar, Lissarrague, F., L ‘Autre guerrier. Archers, peltastes, cavaliers dans l'imagerie attigue (Paris 1990)Google Scholar, and now Ivantchik, I.A., ‘Who were the “Scythian” Archers on Archaic Attic Vases?’, in Braund, David (ed.), Scythians and Greeks. Cultural Interactions in Scythia, Athens and the Early Roman Empire (Exeter 2005) 100-13Google Scholar, and ‘“Scythian” Archers on Archaic Attic Vases: Problems of Interpretation’, Ancient Civilisations from Scythia to Siberia 12.3-4 (2006) 197–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
37 Louvre CA 1024, headpiece: Cook, , Clazomenian Sarcophagi (n. 33) G13, pl. 54, 59.3Google Scholar; illustrated also in Miller ‘Imaging Persians’ (n. 16) fig.1. One possible cavalry battle, Cook's G.12 (Leipzig T.3340), is very fragmentary, so that it is very difficult to distinguish details.
38 Izmir 3493, Klazomenian sarcophagus dated c. 500-470, from Old Smyrna: Cook, , Clazomenian Sarcophagi (n. 33) 37, G.11, pl. 52Google Scholar.
39 Cook's closing observation that the ‘Persians’ may be acculturated Klazomenians, is significant: Cook, , Clazomenian Sarcophagi (n. 33) 116-7Google Scholar. This would help explain the insertion of a ‘Persian’ head in outline technique on an upper side panel on a fragment on the New York Market (Christie's New York, sale 12.7.2000, Nr. 417).
40 Tolun, V., ‘A Persianizing Terracotta Statuette from Assos’, in Delemen, I. (ed.), The Achaemenid Impact on Local Populations and Cultures (Istanbul 2007) 271-4Google Scholar. I am indebted to V. Tolun for information regarding the lack of osteological evidence from the tomb.
41 A parallel is possibly reflected in the tradition of horsemen terracottas in the Levant: they adopt Persian dress in the Persian period and the Macedonian kausia in late 4th c, studied by Moorey, and reported by Tuplin, , ‘Limits of Persianization’ (n. 27) 163Google Scholar.
42 E.g. Parker, R., On Greek Religion (Ithaca 2011) 226Google Scholar.
43 Hansen, D.P., ‘An Archaic Bronze Boar from Sardis’, BASOR 168 (1962) 27–30Google Scholar. London BM 1907.12-1.542: Barag, D., Catalogue of Western Asiatic Glass in the British Museum (London 1985) no. 46Google Scholar.
44 London BM 1873.05-05.22, a fragmentary inner sima relief: Pryce, F.N., Catalogue of Sculpture in the Department of Greek and Roman Antiquities of the British Museum (London 1928) 90, cat. no. B 231Google Scholar. Muss, U., Die Bauplastik des archaischen Artemisions von Ephesos (Vienna 1994) 87, fig. 101Google Scholar, corrects Pryce's reading that the shod foot is feminine.
45 Tent: Plut, . Alk. 12.1Google Scholar; Athen. 12.534d as Persian, surely sharing a common source. Riding cloth: Meritt, B.D., “The Saddle-Cloths of Alkbibiades’, in Evjen, H.D. (ed.), Mnemai. Classical Studies in Memory of Karl K. Hulley (Chico CA 1984) 93-6Google Scholar, who seems not to have known the Anatolian iconographical evidence for bumps fore and aft of a riding cloth, which makes his interpretation of [τ]ύλο hιππείο δύο (IG i3 421.187 - see IG i3Addenda) as saddle-cloths even more likely. Τύλο means ‘any swelling or bump’ or a ‘pad'. I will discuss the glyptic evidence for the riding pad in my fuller study of Persians in Greek art.
46 Themistokles defected through Ephesos: Thuc. 1.137; the intercepted envoy planned to be returned via Ephesos: Thuc. 4.50.3; Lysander arrived with a fleet of 70 ships in 406 (Xen, . Hell. 1.5.1Google Scholar); a major meeting of East Greeks at Ephesos in early 405 (Xen, . Hell. 2.1.6Google Scholar).
47 Meritt, B.D., Wade-Gery, H.T. and McGregor, M. F., Athenian Tribute Lists (Cambridge MA 1939) 277Google Scholar, register no entries for years 41-44 (= 414/3-411/0), and write the summary: ‘Revolt (?) 413/2. Thuc. 8.19.3. In Persian hands 411/0. Thuc. 8.109.’.
48 A succinct overview with helpful phase plans: Scherrer, P., “The Historical Topography of Ephesos’, in Parrish, D. (ed.), Urbanism in Western Asia Minor (Portsmouth RI 2001) 66-7Google Scholar (Hellenistic predecessors), 69-74 (Augustan urban design and Tetragonal Market summary).
49 Heberdey, R., ‘Vorläufiger Bericht über die Grabungen in Ephesos 1902/1903’, ÖJh 7 (1904) 49–50Google Scholar, which is the initial presentation of the South Gate's architecture and inscriptions. Wilberg, W. and Keil, J., ‘Part I: Die Agora’, in Reisch, Emilet al., Forschungen in Ephesos III (Vienna 1923) 40–60Google Scholar (gate); 52-53 (gilt bronze letters), with fig. 85-86, and restored elevation fig. 96. Further studies: Alzinger, W., Augusteische Architektur in Ephesos (Vienna 1974) 9–16Google Scholar; Weber, E., ‘Zu den lateinischen Inschriften von Ephesos’, in Friesinger, H. and Krinzinger, F. (eds), 100 Jähre Österreichische Forschungen in Ephesos (Vienna 1999) 140Google Scholar; Rose, B., ‘The Parthians in Augustan Rome’, AJA 109 (2005) 54-5, n. 196CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
50 Inscription: Kearsley, R.A., Greeks and Romans in Imperial Asia. Mixed Language Inscriptions and Linguistic Evidence for Cultural Interaction until the End of AD III (Bonn 2001) #151Google Scholar; Meric, R.et al., Die Inschriften von Ephesos, VII.1 (Bonn 1981) #3006Google Scholar; Ehrenberg, V. and Jones, A.H.M. (eds), Documents Illustrating the Reigns of Augustus and Tiberius (Oxford 1976) #71Google Scholar; Dessau, H., Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae VII.1 (Berlin 1892-1916) #8897Google Scholar. Herbert-Brown, G., ‘C. Asinius Gallus, Ti. Claudius Nero, and a Posthumous Agrippa in Ephesus (ILS 8897)’, Selecta Classica 15 (2004) 131-51CrossRefGoogle Scholar, explores further political implications of the inscription.
51 Greek text: 
. The epitaph was recovered in secondary use as a paving block; the deceased is frequently associated with the euergetist (Kearsley, Greeks and Romans in Imperial Asia [n. 50] #19; Engelmann, L.et al., Die Inschriften von Ephesos III [Bonn 1980] #851Google Scholar; Wilberg and Keil, ‘Part I: Die Agora’ [n. 49] 99). Eck, W., “The Presence, Role and Significance of Latin in the Epigraphy and Culture of the Roman Near East’, in Cotton, H.et al. (eds), From Hellenism to Islam. Cultural and Linguistic Change in the Roman Near East (Cambridge 2009) 25Google Scholar, succinctly articulates a common interpretation of the gate's inscription: ‘two freedmen of Agrippa who were transferred to Augustus’ hands after their patron's death.’ In fact, the unusual layout of the inscription, with Mazaeus’ name on the north wing under Augustus and Livia, and Mithridates’ name on the south wing under Agrippa and Julia, may suggest that the two men had served different masters and were joined by a past association with Ephesos. Note that the Greek inscription, prominently over the recessed central arch, in its summary form omits the names of the patrons and introduces the city in euergetistic mode.
52 Herbert-Brown, ‘C. Asinius Gallus’ (n. 50) 140, (uniquely?) notes the important fact that the men bore Persian names (141, n. 42; Alzinger, Augusteische Architektur in Ephesos [n. 49] 11, says ‘Orientals’). Another man with a Persian name, Publius Cordius Pharnakes, had a bilingual funerary inscription in early imperial Ephesos: Kearsley, Greeks and Romans in Imperial Asia (n. 50) #31; Merkelbach, R. and Nollé, J., Die Inschriften von Ephesos VI (Bonn 1980) #2240AGoogle Scholar. The argument could be made that Mazaeus and Mithridates were from Pontus or Parthia, but it would then be difficult to explain why they chose to build at Ephesos; it will be recalled that in the first century BC there were two occasions of major civic upheaval at Ephesos, either of which could have resulted in the enslavement of these two men (or their parents). Rose, ‘Parthians in Augustan Rome’ (n. 50), when mentioning this arch, did not suggest the donors were Parthians. Kearsley, loc. cit. 15-16, suggests that the terms of Mithridates’ funerary inscription identify him as local man.
53 Onomastic evidence reflecting the long-term impact of the Persian Empire on the population of the region was especially collected by Louis Robert, based on epigraphical evidence: e.g. Robert, , Noms indigènes dans l'Asie-Mineure gréco-romaine (Paris 1963) 216-7, 345-9Google Scholar, and Documents d'Asie Mineure (Athens 1987) 30-1Google Scholar.
54 A popular concept of the 1970s and 1980s.
