Rome and the East
be Roman tribal names:φυλῆςἈν[.. .]—Aniensis? [.. .]εργια—Sergia? and
φυλῆςῬωμ..ας—Romilia?^198 As elsewhere, we are confronted with com-
plex mutual influences whose overall effect we cannot claim to understand.
Nothing suggests that further grants of colonial status followed in the reign
of Gordian III (..–), in spite of the Persian campaign on which he
met his death. But several such grants seem to have come in the reign of his
successor Philip (..–). In some instances the evidence is minimal. All
that we know of Damascus as acoloniais the legend COL DAMAS METR on
coins from Philip’s reign to that of Gallienus.^199 Other cases are clearer. One
is Flavia Neapolis (present-day Nablus) in Samaria, which had been made
a city by Vespasian. Under Philip the new colonial status is reflected in a
remarkable variety of different Latin coin legends: COL SERG NEAPOL;
COL IUL NEAPOLI; NEAPOLIS COLON; NEAPOLI NEOCORO COL.
Then, under Gallus and Volusianus, there is COLON(IA) NEAPOLI(S).^200 In
this case it so happens that a rabbinic source, a commentary on Lamenta-
tions, seems to provide a reflection of the new rank: ‘‘After Jerusalem was
destroyed Caesarea became a metropolis [MṬRWPWLYN], Antipatris a city
[MDYNH] and Neapolis acolonia[QLWNYY’].’’^201 The Midrash on Lamen-
tations is thought to date to the fifth century. If so, it is interesting, and con-
sonant with the other evidence, that Caesarea’s status as ametropolisshould
be more visible than that ascolonia; but the more recent grant, of colonial
status to Neapolis still attracts attention.
. See H. M. Cotton, W. Cockle, and F. Millar, ‘‘The Papyrology of the Roman Near
East: A Survey,’’JRS (): nos. –. OnP. Bostra, see now J. Gascou, ‘‘Unités admin-
istratives locales et fonctionnaires romains. Les données des nouveaux papyrus du Moyen
Euphrate et d’Arabie,’’ and H. M. Cotton, ‘‘Appendix: Administrative Divisions in Arabia,’’
in W. Eck, ed.,Lokale Autonomie und römische Ordnungsmacht in den kaiserzeitlichen Provinzen
vom .–. Jh. (), – and –, respectively.
.BMC Syria, lxxiv–v, –.
.BMC Palestine, xxv–xxxiv, –. See K. W. Harl, ‘‘The Coinage of Neapolis in
Samaria,’’Am. Num. Soc. Mus. Notes (): .
.Midrash Ekha Rabbati. (ed. Buber. , ). Translated by A. Cohen inMidrash
Rahbah, Lamentations, ed. H. Freedman and M. Simon (), , where the references to
Antipatris and Neapolis in Buber’s text are rejected, without however any reason being
given. I was grateful to Aharon Oppenheimer for confirmation that Buber’s text is accept-
able. Antipatris had been founded by Herod the Great—see Schürer, Vermes, and Millar,
HistoryII (), —but a remarkable confirmation of the historicity of the context is
offered by coins of Antipatris from the reign of Caracalla or Elagabal, probably the latter,
with the legendΜΑΥΡΑΝΤΑΝΤΙΠΑΤΡΙΣ. See Y. Meshorer,The City Coins of Eretz-
Israel and the Decapolis(), no. .