of the Greco-Roman Era in certain ancient Sites of Asia Minor. 29 
On this I shall offer only one more observation, in addition to those I have 
already made. This relates to the probable date, which I should be inclined to fix 
to the age of Octavianus, and shortly subsequent to the period when the Senate 
decreed him the title of Augustus.* The grounds of this conjecture are, it is 
true, very far from being satisfactory, as there is little or nothing im the titulus 
itself to direct us to a settlement of its chronology. But the following facts are 
well known, and may be found available, at least in a remote degree, to our 
purpose, namely, that Octavianus is styled in medals the builder of the city of 
the Teians, in consequence of the munificence with which he contributed to its 
restoration ; that one of his first acts after the conflict at Actium, was, to arrange 
the affairs of the Roman provinces in Asia Minor, in order whereunto he visited 
that quarter in person, and remained in it for a considerable time; and lastly, 
that he consolidated his newly acquired supremacy by the permanent establish- 
ment of a large military force, of which one-third was quartered in the Asiatic 
provinces and those adjacent to them, namely, Egypt and Africa.f 
Now, this titulus makes express mention of the restoration of an important 
public edifice. If of the Teians, what seems more reasonable to conclude, than 
that the restorer had been one of the Emeriti of the emperor, who wished to pay 
his court to his sovereign by aiding him in his munificent designs, and who per- 
haps had been employed by him in carrying them out; who, moreover, turned 
the influence which his patriotism had secured him, to the best account, by 
facilitating the measures adopted by the emperor in order to the recruiting his 
standing army ? 
The first of the tituli of Aphrodisias, to which I now proceed to direct your 
attention, will illustrate the former of these grounds of presumption. This informs 
us expressly of its epoch, namely, the reign of the second Constantius Augustus. It 
likewise tells us, that it had been set up by a distinguished functionary, to com- 
memorate his restoration of that part of the fortifications of the city. Now, we 
possess independent evidence of Constantius himself having contributed to 
* Vid. Ancient Universal History, vol. xiii. p. 371. 
+ I may refer, for the foregoing statements, to volumes vii. p. 119, and xiii. pp. 366, 373, of the 
same work. For Augustus’ munificence towards the citizens of Teos there is numismatic evidence. 
Compare Eckhel. vol. ii. p. 564. 
