Current Epigraphy
ISSN: 1754-0909

30 June, 2008

ZPE 164 (2008)

Filed under: publications — Tom Elliott @ 14:10

Gregg Schwendner has posted the newly-released table of contents for the latest issue of ZPE (with plenty of epigraphic content, of course).

25 June, 2008

Conference: Inscriptions and their uses in Ancient Literature

Filed under: events — Gabriel Bodard @ 14:27

Conference announcement:

Inscriptions and their Uses in Ancient Literature: a conference
Department of Classics and Ancient History
University of Manchester
June 25-26, 2009

This conference aims to explore the possibilities which the literary record of ancient inscriptions offer both to those interested in understanding ancient attitudes towards inscriptions and to those interested in exploring the broader relationship (and overlaps) between epigraphical and non-epigraphical modes of expression from a range of literary, historical and epigraphical angles.

Confirmed speakers include J. K. Davies, Damien Nelis and Jocelyn Nelis-Clement, Matthias Haake, Michael Squire, Julia Lougovaya, Andrej Petrovic, Martin Dinter, Yannis Tzifopoulos, Andrew Morrison and David Fearn.

We are also inviting offers of papers on themes which we consider central to this subject:

  1. The deployment of epigraphy (real, hypothetical or imaginary) or epigraphic language in particular authors or genres.
  2. The reception of inscribed documents (individual documents or types of document) in literary texts.
  3. The inscribing of already-circulated literary texts on permanent media.
  4. The relationship of ‘inscribed documents’ to ‘uninscribed documents’ in literary texts.

The deadline for titles and abstracts (of 300 words) is 15th August, 2008. All enquiries and offers of papers should be sent to the conference organisers, Polly Low ( or Peter Liddel (

Inscriptions as Evidence for Language and Dialect in Ancient Macedonia

Filed under: query — Tom Elliott @ 14:04

Last Saturday, Daniel Tompkins started an interesting discussion on the Classics-L list by asking:

What was the language of the ancient Macedonians? … I’d be very interested in hearing about epigraphic remains in geographic Macedonia, and in analyses of them, that might have a bearing on this question.

He’s had several helpful responses, but CurEp readers may have more to add (or may be interested in some of the sources and secondary work cited already). To see replies, select “next in topic” on the Classics-L archive page.

24 June, 2008

Virtual Seminar on Some Unpublished Inscriptions from Corinth III

Filed under: e-seminar,EpiDoc,events — PaulIversen @ 16:00

This is the third entry in our Virtual Seminar on some Unpublished Inscriptions from Corinth (see post I here and post II here). It will feature our first Latin inscription, which consists in four fragments of buff-colored micaceous marble. Fragment A was found beside the Lechaion Road in December, 1929 and has already been published, Fragment B was found 12 July, 1976 in Quarry Trench 9, Fragment C was found a day later 13 July, 1976 also in Quarry Trench 9, and Fragment D was found 6 August, 1974 in Quarry Trench 3. All the fragments are broken on all sides, except Fragment D, which seems to preserve part of the original right edge, although it is not at a right angle with the inscribed surface and therefore it may have been trimmed for reuse. The corner, however, is smoothly rounded here between the two adjacent faces and there are no partial letter traces at the edge. None of the four fragments join and it is not clear to us in what order they should be placed. Photos, squeezes, and autopsy of stones.


Date: 44 a. – 22/3 p.

Fragment A:

Published: Kent, ICor 8,3, 345.
Height, 0.0135 m. ; width, 0.127 m. ; thickness, 0.080 m.
Height of letters, 0.008 to 0.009 m. ; interspace, 0.004 to 0.006 m.
Corinth inventory, I-989 ; CECI II, I-989.

[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — —] • M(arcum) • Instle[ium Tectum — — —]      1
[— — — —] •̣ Corint[hu]m • C • Anṭ[— — — — —]
[— — — —]M • et • Q(uintum) • Cornelium [— —]
[— — — — —] p̣ṛobaruṇt • XX̣[— — — — — — —]
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]


Line 1: Kent read Instẹị[um Tectum], but the remnants of the last two preserved letters are clearly LE. For more on this reading, see the commentary below.
Line 2: There is some loss of the surface at the beginning of the line, but the traces of an interpunct may still be seen. Nothing of the H or V is visible. At the end of the line, Kent read Mịṇ[ucium], but this reading would require a space of 0.006 m. between the last stroke of the M and the I, which is three times greater than that found elsewhere on this stone and the new fragments. We believe that AN are clear, followed by the lower part of a hasta, the spacing and context of which suggest a T.
Line 4: The tops of the P and R are visible. The right hasta of the N is visible. After the first X, the trace of the upper left diagonal of another X is visible.

Fragment B:
Height, 0.070 m. ; width, 0.110 m. ; thickness, 0.043 m.
Height of letters, 0.007 to 0.009 m. ; interspace, 0.004 to 0.007 m.
Corinth inventory I-76-14A ; NB 632, pp. 83 ; NB(FI) 655, pp. 20-21, Object 620A.

[— — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — — —] . . . ỊỊA • decuṛ[ion— —]      1
[— — —]s • apparitoruṃ [— — — —]
[— —]er LXII • M • C[— — — — —]
[— — — —]ṣp̣uṇ[— — — — — — —]
[— — — — — — — — — — — — —]


There is a micaceous flaw in the surface running from the top line at the left of the A through the O in line two and the C in line three to the preserved end of line four that makes reading difficult.

Line 1: Traces of three letters followed by two hastae, the first of which leans slightly to the right. Then an A followd by an interpunct. The upper left corner with a piece of the rounded loop of the R is clear at the edge of the break.
Line 2: The upper left angle of the M is visible. [tribuniciu]s apparitoruṃ ?
Line 3: There is a generous space after the R, but no interpunct seems visible, rather a slight point of damage high in the line space.
Line 4: The first letter trace is most consistent with an S, but it could also be the top of a C or the rising tip of a T or F that is found elsewhere on these fragments. The second letter trace can be the top of a B, P or R. The final trace has a hasta and diagonal connected at the top left corner and to the right there is the tip of another hasta, most consistent with an N.

Fragment C:
Height, 0.105 m. ; width, 0.115 m. ; thickness, 0.048 m.
Height of letters, 0.007 to 0.009 m. ; interspace, 0.006 to 0.007 m.
Corinth inventory, I-76-14B ; NB 632, p. 86 ; NB(FI) 655, pp. 20-21, Object 620B.

[— — — — — — — —]ỊḄṚỊ[— — —]      1
[— — — — — — — —]nus • IIỊ[— —]
[— — — — — — —]C• Fideḷ[— — —]
[— — — — —]Ị• Caesaris [— — — —]
[— — — — A]ntiochus •I• [— — —]      5
[— — — —]canus • I[I — — — — —]
[— — — — —]ṾỊ • [— — — — — —]


Line 1: The bottom of a hasta, followed by a letter with a base that resembles a B or D, followed by two letter traces that conform well with the bottom part of an R or a crowded IC, followed by the faint trace of a hasta.
Line 2: At the end of the line, only a faint trace of the third hasta is visible. A fourth may have followed the break. The numeral is overlined.
Line 3: It is not clear if the C is the last letter of an abbreviation, such as PROC(urator) or C for C(uravit)/C(uraverunt) or a name such as C(aius). It is not clear to us whether Fideḷ[—] is part of a proper name or an adverb or adjective.
Line 4: At the beginning of the line the lower half of a hasta survives.
Line 6: The overline of the numeral seems to be preserved to its full length and so the restoration of another I seems assured.
Line 7: The upper left tip of a diagonal and to the right of it the tip of a hasta are visible and are consistent with a V. Then there follows the upper tip of another hasta slightly lower in the line followed by an interpunct. We seem to have the end of a large number without an overline (cf. the large number in line 3 of Fragment B, which is also not overlined).

Fragment D:

Height, 0.080 m. ; width, 0.070 m. ; thickness, 0.035 m.
Height of letters, 0.006 to 0.008 m. ; interspace, 0.005 m. to 0.016 m.
Corinth inventory, I-74-11 ; NB 610, p. 82 ; NB(FI) 611, p. 57, Object 464

[— — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — — —]aedes[. .]E[— — — — — —]         1
[— — — — Ma]ecius • A(uli) • f(ilius) • Co-
[rnelius — —(?)] vacat
[— — — — — — —]t •A• decu-
[— — — — — — — —]ṃ. vac. 0.016 m.        5


Line 1: Only part of the lower horizontal of the last E is visible.
Line 2: Or [D]ecius. Maecius is more common at Korinth.
Line 3: It is unclear whether the beginning of this line was inscribed or the text at the end of our line 2 continued at the beginning of line 4. It seems more likely that it finished here and a new entry was begun at the beginning of line 4.
Line 5: The two apices of a letter characteristic of an M elsewhere seem clear. Since there is a vacat of 0.016 m. to the right of this, it appears that we have the end of the line.


H.S. Robinson originally thought that these fragments might belong to the Lex Coloniae Corinthiensis (he noted that the words CAESARIS, DECVR[ION—], and APPARITORVM all appeared in the Lex Coloniae Genetivae Ursonensis and deduced a parallel). However, Mary Hoskins-Walbank while working on her dissertation (non vidimus) took a look at the stones and in some correspondence with Robinson expressed the view that they were more consistent with a fasti document – a view we find more likely. She also thought this stone might have been damaged in the earthquake of AD 22/3 and then discarded rather than suffering a damnatio memoriae.

One of the more intriguing aspects of this inscription lies in the reference to a Marcus Instleius in Fragment A, line 1, heretofore read as Insteius, who was one of the earliest duoviri of the colony of Korinth (established 44 BC). The spelling Insteius has been preferred by previous studies rather than Instleius undoubtedly because Instleius is not attested elsewhere (we do, however, find an A(ulus) Instuleius Tenax attested at Egyptian Thebes = Colosse de Memnon 2), while the name Insteius is attested in both Greek and Latin epigraphical and literary sources. The reading Insteius, however, is epigraphically impossible on this stone. Furthermore, the reading Instleius is corroborated on another stone from Korinth (ICor 8,3 149, line 1, photo here). Kent read the first line of this stone as [M •] INSTỊ[E]Ọ • C • F • TECTO, but he went on to add that “the letter following T can only have been I or L, and clearly was not an E. As there is no join between fragments a and b, as there would have been if the E had simply been omitted, I have assumed that the letters EI were erroneously transposed.” However, a transposition on this carefully carved piece of revetment seems scarcely believable. In addition, an L is more likely than an I given that the hastae of the other two instances of I on this same stone are taller while the close proximity of this letter’s hasta to the T that precedes it makes more sense space-wise if it is the hasta of an L (compare how the E in TECTO tucks in under the first T). In line 1 of ICor 8,3 149 we therefore propose reading INSTḶ[ΕΙ]Ο̣.

The reading Instleius rather than Insteius is further corroborated by a series of coins struck at Korinth (see Amandry BCH Suppl. XV pp. 124-128) that, given the rarity of the name Instleius, undoubtedly refer to our same man. On the reverse of several of these coins we find IIVIR paired with INSTL • CAS (example here), and on the reverse of others we find II VIR paired with INTS CAS (example here – where the order INTS is probably a ligature for INST). Previous scholars have interpreted the two men’s names as Inst(eius) and L. Cas. (for the last Amandry suggested L. Cas(tricius Regulus), while Kent suggested L. Cas(ius […]), but the placement of the interpunct between the L and C argues against such a reading and when we add the evidence of the coins to the inscriptions we once again are lead to believe his name was spelled Instleius. Perhaps the form Instleius may have been an older, alternative form of Insteius much like stlis is an earlier form of lis (as in Decemviri Stlitibus Iudicandis). Amandry (p. 36) places Instleius’ office of duovir in 42 or 41 and his office of duovir quinquennalis in 35.

If we assume Instleius is an alternate form of Insteius, this Marcus Instleius, as others have already pointed out, may have been the same man who fought at the side of Antony at the siege of Mutina in 44 BC (Cicero, Philippic 13.26) as well as at Actium in 31 BC (Plut., Antony 65.1).

23 June, 2008

BMCR Review of Orlandi, Epigrafia anfiteatrale

Filed under: review — Gabriel Bodard @ 12:28

Reviewed in BMCR 2008.06.28:

Silvia Orlandi, Epigrafia anfiteatrale dell’occidente romano. VI. Roma. Anfiteatri e strutture annesse con una nuova edizione e commento delle iscrizioni del Colosseo. Vetera, 15. Roma: Quasar, 2004. Pp. 600; pls. 28. ISBN 978-88-7140-265-9. €84.00 (pb).

Reviewed by R.T. Scott, Bryn Mawr College (
Word count: 833 words

Scott provides a short but glowing review of this volume of over 300 texts, focussing on the subtleties and historical focus of the study. The review ends with the words:

Orlandi’s teacher, Silvio Panciera, is fond of reminding his students that the real task of the epigraphist is to study not inscriptions but the world that has created them. In this splendid and authoritative volume Silvia Orlandi has done just this with great credit to him and to the memory of Patrizia Sabbatini Tumolesi.

18 June, 2008

The Son of Suda On Line: a next generation collaborative editing tool (seminar)

Filed under: events — Tom Elliott @ 09:57

From Simon Mahony via the Digital Classicist list:

Digital Classicist/Institute of Classical Studies Work-in-Progress
Seminar, Summer 2008

Friday 20th June at 16:30, in B3, Stewart House, Senate House, Malet Street, London

please note – this is a different room. Stewart House is the building on the Russell Square side of Senate House.

Dot Porter (University of Kentucky)
‘The Son of Suda On Line: a next generation collaborative editing tool’


I shall discuss the Son of Suda On Line (SoSOL), a proposed web-based, fully audited, version-controlled editing environment being built for the papyrological community but designed for applicability to other editing communities. It will enable the collaborative editing of texts in a framework of rigorous and transparent peer-review and credit mechanisms and strong editorial oversight.

The seminar will be followed by wine and refreshments.

For more information please contact or, or see the seminar website at

Instrumenta Inscripta Latina II

Filed under: publications — Tom Elliott @ 07:11

Alicia Canto forwarded the following notice, originating with AIEGL, to the inscriptiones-l list:

Instrumenta Inscripta Latina II: Akten des 2. Internationalen Kolloquiums, Klagenfurt, 5. – 8. Mai 2005
Herausgegeben von Manfred Hainzmann und Reinhold Wedenig
Verlag des Geschichtsvereines für Kärnten
«Aus Forschung und Kunst» Band 36 (Redaktion: Gernot Piccottini)
Klagenfurt 2008

  • Subskriptionspreis bis 31. 10. 2008: 46 € € + Versandkosten
  • Normalpreis: 69 € € + Versandkosten

The following index was appended in PDF form:

  • G. BARATTA – Pelles scriptae: Inschriften auf Leder und Lederwaren.
  • T. BEZECZKY – Amphorae from the West. Evidence of the long distance trade connection with Ephesus.
  • A. BINSFELD – Aussagemöglichkeiten von Ziegelstempeln am Beispiel des Materials aus der frühchristlichen Kirchenanlage in Trier.
  • J. BLÄNSDORF – Die Defixionum tabellae des Mainzer Isisund Mater-Magna-Heiligtums.
  • G. CICALA – Bolli su terra sigillata italica da Ascoli Piceno. I materiali della Collezione Civica del Museo Archeologico Statale.
  • M. DOHNICHT – Gemmen, Inschriften und ein nachgelassenes Manuskript.
  • U. EHMIG – Kleininschriften auf Amphoren im historischen Raum: das Beispiel Mogontiacum – Mainz und sein Umland.
  • P. FUNARI – The role of the Instrumenta Inscripta Latina in discussing the Roman Economy: Britain as a case study.
  • R. GARRAFFONI – Funerary Commemoration and Roman Graffiti: How Epigraphy can Contribute to Rethink Gladiators.
  • G. GLÖCKNER – Inschriften auf römischen Glasgefäßen aus Österreich.
  • K. GOSTENČNIK – Beinfunde als Schriftträger: Die Beinfunde aus der Stadt auf dem Magdalensberg und ihre Kleininschriften.
  • M. HAINZMANN – Variae lectiones: Ein Vorschlag zur Kennzeichnung von Neulesungen und Korrekturen.
  • J. KRIER – BANNA-Schälchen. Zu Verbreitung, Datierung und Funktion eines rätselhaften Fundobjekts der frühen Kaiserzeit.
  • D. MANACORDA – Populonia e l’instrumentum inscriptum: i bolli laterizi.
  • Y. MARION, F. TASSAUX – Tuiles et amphores estampillées de Loron (Croatie).
  • M. MAYER – Opercula, los tapones de ánfora: un indicador económico controvertido.
  • M. MÜLLER – Römische Augensalbenstempel – der aktuelle Forschungsstand.
  • J. REMESAL RODRÍGUEZ, P. BERNI MILLET, A. AGUILERA MARTÍN – Amphorenschriften und ihre elektronische Bearbeitung.
  • V. RIGHINI – I materiali fittili pesanti nella Cisalpina. Produzione e commercializzazione dei laterizi. I. Lateres publici e II. Figlinae.
  • G. THÜRY – Die erotischen Inschriften des instrumentum domesticum: ein Überblick.
  • R. TOMLIN – Dea Senuna: a new goddess from Britain.
  • R. WEDENIG – Geschirrgraffiti mit Frauennamen aus Noricum.
  • St. WEISS-KÖNIG – Ritzinschriften auf Keramik aus der Colonia Ulpia Traiana/Xanten – Eine Zusammenfassung.
  • G. WESCH-KLEIN – Glück- und Segenswünsche auf Ziegeln.
  • C. ZACCARIA – Instrumenta inscripta Latina: potenziale informativo e importanza dei corpora elettronici. Alcuni esempi dalla Regio X orientale.

We also glean the following additional details from the PDF file:

  • Format A 4, ca. 350 Seiten, zahlreiche Farbabbildungen, Hardcover
  • ISBN 978-3-85454-112-0
  • Vertrieb: Verlag des Geschichtsvereines für Kärnten, Museumgasse 2, A-9020 Klagenfurt
  • Tel.: ++43 –463/536-30573
  • FAX: ++43 –463/536-30550
  • E-mail:

12 June, 2008

Inscriptions mineures: conference, Lausanne, June 19-20, 2008

Filed under: news — Gabriel Bodard @ 17:21

Just seen this announcement for a conference at the University of Lausanne titled “Inscriptions mineures: nouveautés et réflexions”, to be held June 19-20, 2008, as part of the Ductus project: Association internationale pour l’étude des inscriptions mineures.

Pour mettre en place la structure de l’association [Ductus], une assemblée générale constitutive est organisée lors du colloque qui verra la constitution de Ductus. Il se tiendra les 19-20 juin 2008 à l’Université de Lausanne. Le thème de la manifestation sera : « Inscriptions mineures : nouveautés et réflexions ».

Full information and programme are online at the Ductus website at:

6 June, 2008

A New Latin Inscription from Gavignano

Filed under: news — Tom Elliott @ 18:46

Jeff Becker just drew my attention to this announcement on Archeoblog:

Il giorno 28 maggio 2008 con una brillante operazione, gli uomini del Comando di Tenenza della Guardia di Finanza di Colleferro, agli ordini del Ten. Giancarlo Urciuoli, hanno recuperato in località Rossilli nel Comune di Gavignano un’architrave in calcare, appartenente quasi sicuramente ad un edificio funerario in cui è riportata l’iscrizione latina su due righe


The article provides a rather full account of the find and its general context.

5 June, 2008

Virtual Seminar on Some Unpublished Inscriptions from Corinth II

Filed under: e-seminar,events — PaulIversen @ 09:53

The second posting of our Virtual Seminar features a tantalizing fragment of fine, buff poros limestone coated with a layer of fine stucco, broken on all sides with the back missing. The inscription has register lines that are set 0.011 m apart. H.S. Robinson initially felt that “The face of this fragment has suffered from exposure to fire and has turned gray; the fine gray surface is probably not a stucco (too thin) but represents a calcining of the outer ‘skin’ of the stone by heat” (NB 521, p. 179). Later, however, he agreed with the view that it was a layer of fine stucco. Found 17 July, 1972 in Temple Hill Trench X, which lay north of Wall 2. Photo, squeeze, and autopsy of stone.

Height, 0.10 m. ; width, 0.095 m. ; thickness, 0.092 m.
Height of letters, 0.005 to 0.007 m. ; register lines, 0.011 m. apart.
Corinth inventory I-72-5 ; NB 521, p. 179 ; NB 566, p. 9, Object 219.

fin. IV – med. II a.      NON-STOIX

[— — — — — — — — — —]
[— — — —]Χ̣ΑΙ[̣— — — —]           1
[— — — —]ΩΝ̣ΤΕ[— — —]
[— — —]ΑΙ[̣.]ΣΕΠΙΤ̣[— — —]
[— — —] δοκῇ αὐτο̣[ῖς — —]
[— — Κορι]νθίων τα[— — —]      5
[— — —] . σταμεν[— — — —]
[— — — —]Ε̣ΙΣΤΑΠ̣[— — —]
[— — — —]Λ̣ΕΤ[— — — —]
[— — — — — — — — — —]


Line 1: None of the stucco remains in this line but the letters are scratched deep enough to leave vestigia. At the beginning of the line only the bottom lower right serif of a diagonal-shaped letter is visible and the angle and placement suggest chi rather than kappa. At the end of the line only the lower portion of a hasta is visible.
Line 2: The letter after the omega is very difficult. The spacing suggests one wide letter, as is found on the rest of the fragment. We see the tip of the left apex of a letter. H.S. Robinson read a mu, but we believe there is only damage on the right side and so we read a nu. The spacing from the right side of the omega to the shaft of the tau in this line is 0.020 m. and in line 5 the three successive letters ΩΝΤ yield 0.019 m.
Line 3: At the beginning of the line after the alpha a hasta is visible and there may be the beginnings of two horizontal cross-strokes suggesting either a rho or epsilon. At the end of the line, the high elevation of the hasta and spacing indicate a tau.
Line 4: At the end of the line there is only the small trace of the lower left quadrant of a circular letter.
Line 5: Or possibly [συ]νθίωντα[ι —].
Line 6: At the beginning only a serif is visible. H.S. Robinson read the upper part of a vertical stroke, but it appears more likely that this cut is damage given that it has a slightly diagonal shape. We could also split up the words and read [—].στα μεν[—] or [—].ς τὰ μὲν [—], etc.
Line 7: The letter trace at the beginning of the line preserves a top horizontal and a left hasta, thus indicating epsilon. The final letter trace preserves a vertical and top horizontal of a gamma or pi. Pi seems more likely in scale.
Line 8: Only the apex of an alpha, delta, or lambda is visible that, given the preserved field, was preceded by a short letter.

The sense and purpose of this inscription remain obscure.

Update: I have corrected two errors in the date based upon A. D’Hautcourt’s comment (before I had mistakenly written fin. III – med. I a.).

My next post should be the week of 23 June.

Powered by WordPress