Bostran era

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

The Bostran era (also called the era of Bostra, the Arabian era or provincial era

Bostra, which became the headquarters of the Sixth Legion stationed in the province.[3]

Dates and names

The start date of the Bostran era was once a matter of dispute, in part because the

vernal equinox.[7][5] The Bostran calendar—as the calendar of Arabia or of the Arabs[5]—is one of sixteen that appear in the Florence, Leiden and Vatican hemerologia.[8]

The Bostran calendar was used in texts of the

Greek and in Arabic.[3][9][10] Inscriptions from Arabia Petraea which do not specify the era but simply provide a year number are usually in the era of Bostra. In documents, this era is usually indicated by the phrase "[year] of the province" (e.g., Aramaic lhprkyʾ). Sometimes the province is specified by the name "Arabia" or "Bostra" (e.g. Greek τῆς ἐπαρχείας Ἀραβίας, tes eparcheias Arabias, or τῆς Βοστρηνῶν, tes Bostrenon; Aramaic lhprk bṣrʾ). Such indications, however, are rare for inscriptions, where usually only a year number appears.[11] The occasional use of the name "Bostra" for dating should not, however, be taken to indicate that it was the capital of the province; Petra was in fact more prominent in the early years. The dating formula and the use of the Bostran era have no special connection to the city beyond the fact that as the seat of the main Roman military base, it was symbolic of the incorporation of Nabataea as a province. The Chronicon Paschale makes clear that the new dating system was common to the whole province.[12][13]

There are only three inscriptions that use the name of the city of Bostra to clarify the year and they are dated to AD 265/6, 397/8 and 538/9. There are also two inscriptions from AD 576/7 and 581/2 in the same calendar that specify the year as being that of

Palaestina Tertia from Petra to Elusa after the earthquake of 551 are the proximate causes of the shift in nomenclature.[14]

Some documents after AD 127 are dated by the era of the "new" province (νέα ἐπαρχεία Ἀραβία, nea eparcheia Arabia), perhaps in conjunction with the first census in the new province, which was taken in that year.[15]

Usage

The Bostran era was used extensively in "commemorative and honorific inscriptions", but less frequently in "administrative and legal documents".[2] Its usage was not enforced by the Romans and many cities continued to use local calendars on locally minted coinage. These included the Pompeian era (63 BC) in some cities of the Decapolis and the era of Capitolias (AD 97/98).[16] The Bostran era may itself be a spontaneous local response to the political changes which rendered the old Nabataean regnal year numbering impossible.[17]

The oldest example of the era is found in an Nabataean inscription at

Naḥal Ḥever (AD 120).[17] The earliest attestation in Greek is from a papyrus also from Naḥal Ḥever (AD 125).[17] An official inscription of the Emperor Gordian III at Bostra (AD 238/9) uses the provincial era.[13] A unique and oft-cited example of Bostran dating comes from a bilingual inscription of AD 108/9 at Madaba. The Nabataean dating clause reads "third year of the eparch of Bostra". There was no such office and the Roman legate did not sit at Bostra, rather the inscription awkwardly combines the new dating method with the old one of dating by the Nabataean king's regnal year.[13]

There is some uncertainty whether the era of Arabia was ever used outside the province of Arabia (roughly the

Hebrew letters may use the era,[9] but David Goodblatt doubts it.[18]

The use of the era spread with the province of Arabia and its successors. The inscriptions of 397/8 and 538/9 are from

Islamic period, even as late as AD 735. In the later period, the calendar era was almost never identified explicitly.[21]

Notes

  1. ^ Other variants include "Bostrean era", "era of Arabia" [or "the Arabs"], "era of the province [of Arabia]" or "era of Provincia Arabia" (EPA). See Fiema 1988, passim; for the abbreviation EPA, see Mercier 2001, p. 102.
  2. ^ a b Fiema 1988, p. 109.
  3. ^ a b c Bowersock 1970, p. 39.
  4. ^ Gyllenbok 2018, p. 264, and Samuel 1972, p. 177, provide tables showing the correspondence between Bostran and Julian dates.
  5. ^ a b c Butcher 2003, pp. 125–126.
  6. ^ Mercier 2001, p. 101.
  7. ^ Gyllenbok 2018, p. 264.
  8. ^ Samuel 1972, p. 177.
  9. ^ a b Wasserstein 1989, p. 95n.
  10. ^ a b Hoyland 2018, pp. 334–335.
  11. ^ Fiema 1988, pp. 110–111.
  12. ^ Millar 1993, p. 94: "Roman provinces did not have capitals".
  13. ^ a b c Fiema 1988, p. 112.
  14. ^ Fiema 1988, pp. 116–118.
  15. ^ Cotton 1997, p. 204.
  16. ^ Fiema 1988, p. 110.
  17. ^ a b c Fiema 1988, p. 111.
  18. ^ a b c Goodblatt 1999, pp. 252ff.
  19. ^ Millar 1993, p. 388.
  20. ^ Fiema 1988, p. 119.
  21. ^ Wasserstein 1989, p. 101–103.

Sources

Further reading

  • Freeman, Philip H. (1986). "Appendix 1. The Era of the Province of Arabia: Problems and Solution?". In H. I. MacAdam (ed.). Studies in the History of the Roman Province of Arabia: The Northern Sector. British Archaeological Reports. pp. 38–46.
  • MacAdam, Henry Innes (1986). "The Provincial Era". Studies in the History of the Roman Province of Arabia: The Northern Sector. British Archaeological Reports. pp. 34–36.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bostran_era&oldid=1220359164"