Talk:Seleucia Pieria

= Comments =

what?
What does Seleucia Pieria have to do with Samandagi? The article doesn't say. I'm confused! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tedernst (talk • contribs) 23:55, 9 December 2005.

Changes
Seleucia-in-Pieria was not the port of Antioch in Cilicia as it said in the previous version, but Antioch on the Orontes. More information in this article may need to be revised, but I don't have time.

Heres the entry from the Oxford Classical Dictionary:


 * Seleuceia (2) in Pieria  was founded c.300 by Seleucus (1) I, after his victory at the battle of Ipsus (301) secured him north Syria. Seleuceia was built at the mouth of the river Orontes, providing the Seleucids with a naval base of strategic and economic importance, linked by the Orontes to Antioch (1). Seleucus I was buried here by his son Antiochus (1) I, who ‘built a temple over him and surrounded it with a sanctuary and called the sanctuary Nikatoreion’ (belonging to the Nicator (Conqueror) i.e. Seleucus I; Appian, [Sigma]ugr; 63), housing a cult of uncertain character for the dead king. Polybius (1) (5. 59–61) importantly describes a well-fortified city, built on the foothills of Mt. Coryphaeum with its suburbs, business quarter, fine temples, and civic buildings. Most of the archaeological remains are of Roman date, including the theatre. The civic institutions of the Hellenistic polis, including magistrates, priests, and governor, are revealed by Seleucid period inscriptions and by the Gurob papyrus, which attests the ceremonial welcome given to Ptolemy (1) III as capturer of the city in 246 (Fragmente der griechischen Historiker 160). Seleuceia, whose offensive and defensive value to the Seleucids was emphasized by Polybius, was regained by Antiochus (3) III (219). It then had 6000 ‘free men.’ The comparative size of the male population in this period is uncertain, since whether these figures represent male citizens only, or the total of free male inhabitants, remains obscure. In 108 Seleuceia received its freedom, which was confirmed by Pompey (64) in reward for its resistance to Tigranes (1). It was the station of an imperial fleet; Vespasian improved the harbour, whence St Paul had sailed on his first mission c. AD 46.

Crusader period
I have deleted the section about the Crusader period. There is some confusion about the later history. Absolute Astronomy at http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/List_of_ancient_Greek_cities gives St Symeon as another name for Seleucia Pieria, and the Catholic Encyclopedia states that it recovered its importance in the Crusader period and that St Symeon was then its port. This seems clearly wrong. Histories of the First Crusade such as Steven Runciman's state that St Symeon was the port of Antioch, and do not mention Seleucia Pieria. Other sources (apart from those copying the Catholic Encyclopedia) treat Seleucia Pieria and St Symeon as separate, and give no history of Selecucia after the 526 earthquake. According to Ancient Warfare Magazine at http://www.livius.org/se-sg/seleucia/seleucia_pieria.html Seleucia never recovered from the earthquake. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:16, 18 November 2010 (UTC)