Rome, the Greek World, and the East, Vol. 2 - Government, Society, and Culture in the Roman Empire

Trajan 39

itemsofinformationarerecordedashavingreachedPlinyfromtheEmperor
(nonetheless,itiscertainthattherewillhavebeensomesuchcommuni-
cations;seeEckinn.16above).Fourthly,notalloftheletterswhichPliny
sent received an answer. Fifthly, a conspicuous feature of Pliny’s letters is
that they quite often had attached to them petitions (libelli) submitted by
interestedparties;somecamefromprivatepersons,buttherewerealso,as
wehavenotedearlier,othersoriginatingfromcities:thecolonyofApamea,
thecityofNicaea,andthefreecity(civitas libera)ofAmisus.^53
Sixthly,Plinywaspermanentlyonthemove.Thequestionofthe‘‘capital
cities’’ of provinces has been much discussed recently, notably in the mas-
siveandscholarlyvolumebyRudolf Haensch,Capita Provinciarum.^54 Inthis
instanceitturnsouttobeimpossibletoidentifyacapitalcity(caput)ofthe
provincefromPliny’sletters.Butinanycasethisparticularprovincewasa
doubleone,composedofthebulkofoneformerHellenisticroyalterritory,
Bithynia,andofatruncatedsection,thenorth-westerncoastalregiononly,
ofanother,Pontus.ThemajorrecentworksbyStephenMitchellandChris-
tian Marek have set out the extraordinarily complex successive boundary
changeswhichfinallyleftPontus,theeasternpartofPliny’sprovince,asno
morethananextendedcoastalstripreachingasfarasAmisus,andonewhich
wasconsiderablysmallerinareathanthePompeianprovinceofPontushad
been.^55 Functionally,itseemsfromPliny’slettersthatthisPonticzonewas
treated as a mere adjunct to the Bithynian part of the province.The chart
showsthatforthewholeof hisfirstyearPlinydidnotvisititatall.Butit
was,beyondallquestion,inPontus,andnotinBithynia,thatheencountered
theproblemoftheChristians.
Thelettersformingthecorrespondencearegroupedintheoriginaltext,
astheyareinthechart,bytopic,withTrajan’sreply,iftherewasone,fol-
lowingthelettertowhichitrelates.Onefunctionofthechartistoillumi-

53. Petitionsfromindividuals:epist.10,59(petitionsof FlaviusArchippusandhisac-
    cuser,FuriaPrima);81(petitionofCocceianusDion);106–7(petitionofP.AcciusAquila,
    centurionofthesixthmountedcohors).Petitionsfromcities:47–48(petitionofthepeople
    ofApamea);83(petitionofthepeopleofNicaea);92–03(petitionofthepeopleofAmisus).


54. R. Haensch,Capita Provinciarum: Statthaltersitze und Provinzialverwaltung in der römi-
    schen Kaiserzeit(Mainz, 1997). For the assize system (conventus), see the discussion on pp.
    18–19.ForPontusandBithynia,seethedetailedtreatmentonpp.282–90,rightlyleaving
    thequestionofa‘‘capital’’oftheprovinceopen.


55. SeeS.Mitchell,AnatoliaI(Oxford,1993),61–62,withmap3oppositep.40;C.Marek,
    Stadt, Ära und Territorium in Pontus-Bithynia und Nord-Galatia(Istanbuler Forschungen 39,
    Tübingen,1993).