Current Epigraphy
ISSN: 1754-0909

This upcoming conference features several panels and papers of epigraphical interest. A preliminary programme can be downloaded here as a PDF file: CCC Programme.

The following new reviews may be of interest to epigraphers:

BMCR 2008.04.36: Review of: Sergio Daris, Dizionario dei nomi geografici e topografici dell’ Egitto greco-romano. Supplemento 4 (2002-2005). Biblioteca degli “Studi di Egittologia e di Papirologia” - 5. Pisa-Roma: Fabrizio Serra, 2007. Pp. 147. ISBN 978-88-6227-004-5. EUR 165.00 (pb).
[The reviewer, J.A. Straus, makes several useful suggestions and bibliographic additions.]

BMCR 2008.04.32: Review of: G. Cruz Andreotti, P. Le Roux, P. Moret, La invención de una geografía de la Península Ibérica. I. La época republicana. (Actas del Coloquio Internacional celebrado en la Casa de Velázquez de Madrid entre el 3 y el 4 de marzo de 2005). Málaga-Madrid: Servicio de Publicaciones del Centro de Ediciones de la Diputación de Málaga (CEDMA)-Casa de Velázquez, 2006. Pp. 250. ISBN 84-95555-91-3. ISBN 84-7785-744-X. €13.00.
And: G. Cruz Andreotti, P. Le Roux, P. Moret, La invención de una geografía de la Península Ibérica. II. La época imperial. (Actas del Coloquio Internacional celebrado en la Casa de Velázquez de Madrid entre el 3 y el 4 de abril de 2006). Málaga-Madrid: Servicio de Publicaciones del Centro de Ediciones de la Diputación de Málaga (CEDMA)-Casa de Velázquez, 2006. Pp. 377. ISBN 978-84-7785-122-6. ISBN 978-84-96820-06-7. €18.00.
[Volume 2 includes a paper by Joaquín Gómez-Pantoja, “Una visión ‘epigráfica’ de la geografía de Hispania central,” (no pp. refs.).]

BMCR 2008.04.20: Review of: Sinclair Bell, Glenys Davies, Games and Festivals in Classical Antiquity. Proceedings of the Conference held in Edinburgh 10-12 July 2000. BAR International Series, 1220. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2004. Pp. vi, 153; figs. 37, tables 7. ISBN 1-84171-580-8. $27.95 (pb).
[Some of the contributions appear to make use of epigraphical sources, e.g. Geoffrey Sumi, “Civic Self-Representation in the Hellenistic World: The Festival of Artemis Leukophryene,” 79-92.]

[Edit: please note the comment below, which contains an updated programme and additional information.]

Several of the papers in this interdisciplinary two-day seminar appear to be of interest for epigraphers.
Here is the full programme:

‘Sikelia: Multilingualism and cultural interaction in ancient Sicily’

There is evidence for a rich diversity of languages spoken in Sicily in the first millennium BC. The aim of this interdisciplinary conference is to bring together historians, archaeologists and linguists to examine issues of language and identity, multilingualism and language shift, colonization and cultural interaction in Sicily from the advent of writing to the first
century BC.

The seminar will be held in Room G21, The Faculty of Classics, Sidgwick Avenue, Cambridge CB3 9DA, England.
Contact: Olga Tribulato, ormt2@cam.ac.uk

Saturday 31st May

Languages and peoples of Sicily 1: Sicel and Elymian (9.30-10.50)
Paolo Poccetti (Rome “Tor Vergata”) Evidence for and Problems of the Sicel Language: A Survey
Simona Marchesini (Verona) Elymians between Greeks and Italians

Languages and peoples of Sicily 2: Punic (11.15 - 12.30)
Maria Giulia Amadasi Guzzo (Rome “La Sapienza”) Punic in Sicily
Irad Malkin (Jerusalem) Translating Gods and Heroes: Greeks and Phoenicians in Sicily

Greek in Sicily 1 (2.15-3.30)
Susana Mimbrera (Madrid/Cambridge) Sicilian Greek
Giovanna Rocca (Milan “IULM”) Cults and Rites from Greece to Sicily (new inscriptions from Selinus)

Greek in Sicily 2 (4.00 - 5.15)
Albio Cesare Cassio (Rome “La Sapienza”) Intimations of Koine in Epicharmus’ Sicilian Doric
Andreas Willi (Oxford) “We talk Peloponnesian” - Tradition and Linguistic Identity in Postclassical Sicilian Literature

Sunday 1st June

Historical and archaeological background: new perspectives (9.30-10.50)
Matthew Fitzjohn (Liverpool) Building Identities in Sikelia
Franco De Angelis (British Columbia) The Language of Conquest and the Dialect of Complexity: Rethinking Land and Labour in Early Greek Sicily

Bilingualism and language contact (11.15-12.30)
Gerhard Meiser (Halle) Traces of language contact in Sicilian onomastics
Olga Tribulato (Cambridge) Siculi bilingues? A glimpse into Early Roman Sicily

This is an informal discussion group, which usually meets Mondays, 1-2 pm (bring a sandwich if you like).
Venue: the first floor seminar room, Ioannou Classics Centre, 66 St Giles.

Monday, April 28: Angelos Chaniotis, “Automoloi in Hellenistic Crete: A (not that) new (but still unpublished) inscription from Chersonesos”

Monday, May 5: Peter Thonemann, ‘’A New Ptolemaic Inscription from Cyprus”
[The inscription discussed was A.H.S. Megaw, Kourion: Excavations in the Episcopal Precinct, Dumbarton Oaks 2007, pp. 368-374]

Monday, May 12: Getzel Cohen, “The Expression ‘Polis Hellenis’ ”
[not strictly an epigraphic talk, but conveniently placed here]

A programme for the second half of term will be circulated in due course, and will contain at least one talk on Latin epigraphy, in accord with last term’s democratic decision to drop ‘Greek’ from the name of the workshop.

[Edit: the rest of the programme has now appeared, as follows.]

May 19: Robert Parker, “Dikaiopoliton synallagai: sighting shot at the major new 4th c. reconciliation agreement from Dikaia” (E. Voutiras and K. Sismanides, Ancient Macedonia VII, 254-274).

May 26: Alan Bowman and Roger Tomlin, “The ‘Frisian Ox’ reconsidered”.

June 2: No meeting.

June 9: James Mosley, “From Republican to Imperial and from monoline to calligraphic: questions relating to the stylistic shift in the form of the Roman inscriptional letter.”

1-2 pm, Classics Centre, St. Giles
An informal discussion group open to all. Bring a sandwich!

15 October 2007
Riet van Bremen, The date and context of the Archippe decrees from Kyme (SEG 33, 1035-1041)

22 October 2007
Angelos Chaniotis, How did a young man spend his time in late Hellenistic Aphrodisias? A new funerary epigram

29 October 2007
Patrice Hamon, Democracy and strategoi in the Aeolian city of Kyme

5 November 2007
Charles Crowther, The Necropolis of Perrhe

12 November 2007
Robert Parker, A New Sale of Priesthood from Priene

26 November 2007
Thomas Corsten, A New Inscription from Pisidia

Susan Walker (Ashmolean Museum, Oxford) introduced this session with some remarks about the difficulties involved in persuading administrators to take the display of inscriptions seriously, especially within a large museum environment such as the British Museum. Yet both papers sounded encouraging notes in this session.

Isabel Rodà de Llanza (Catalan Institute of Classical Archaeology, Barcelona) in a presentation entitled “Exposicíon de inscripciones” surveyed recent evolutions of the idea of the epigraphic museum, using the evidence of colloquia on the subject and newly conceived or renovated museums. She suggested that some of the best museums were those that presented an integrated view of a few monuments in context, as opposed to those that attempted to offer an integral display of an entire epigraphic collection. Praise was also extended to museums that now make use of multimedia displays, such as the Musée d’archéologie et d’histoire de Montréal.

Charalambos Kritzas (Epigraphical Museum, Athens), “Teaching with Inscriptions: Beyond the Alphabet”, took as a starting point his role as director of the best collection of inscriptions in Greece. He focused on the elaboration of teaching and interactive displays at the Epigraphical Museum and also singled out the local museums of Rhodes and Chios that have recently been made more accessible and attractive to visitors. Kritzas seemed on the whole to agree with Rodà de Llanza’s acclaim of the ‘integrated’ epigraphic collection, and he concluded with a description of possibly the best example of the genre: the Museum of Byzantine Culture in Thessaloniki.

Julia Shear (University of Glasgow), “Herakleitos of Athmonon, Antigonos Gonatas, and the Panathenaia”, discussed the Athenian decree honouring Herakleitos of Athmonon, IG II(2) 677 (early 250’s BC). She argued, not entirely convincingly, that while most Hellenistic kings were allowed to contribute gifts personally to the Panathenaia, Antigonos Gonatas was unable to do so at the time of this decree and thus had Herakleitos make a donation on his behalf. Since only citizens and allies of Athens were allowed to participate in the festival, it would seem that Antigonos did not have such a status until ca. 255 BC, at which time he was granted citizenship according to Shear (using the evidence of I. Rhamnous 7.2-10 and IG II(2) 793.8-11, both decrees honouring Antigonos).

Delphine Ackermann (Université de Neuchâtel) presented a paper entitled “Le règlement religieux d’Aixonè: quelques réflections sur l’organisation du culte et le panthéon d’un dème de l’Attique”, a preliminary version of a new edition that will be included as an appendix in her dissertation on the deme of Aixone. The fascinating sacred law from Aixone (mod. Glyphada) has most recently been edited, with new fragments, by G. Steinhauer “Hieros Nomos Aixoneon”, in A.P. Matthaiou and G.E. Malochou (eds.) Attikai Epigraphai: Praktika Symposiou eis mnemen Adolf Wilhelm (1864-1950), Athens 2004, 155-173. Ackermann offered a synopsis of the various offerings to numerous deities which are catalogued in this sacred law and convincingly argued that this variety demonstrates that the inscription is a deme document, almost certainly from Aixone itself, and not the product of a phratry or genos, groups which had narrower pantheons. She proposed a few new interpretations of the context of the inscription, most notably, that the 5 drachmai allotted to each priest and priestess cannot be considered a sacrificial tariff since the amount largely exceeds all other known tariffs, and that this amount must instead be thought of as a ‘base salary’ for the priests (similarly the sum of 3 drachmai, which is granted in some cases for the sacrifice of a heuston teleon, would have been a supplement to this base salary).

Marietta Horster (Humboldt University, Berlin) in a paper entitled “(Self-)Representation of Priests and Priestesses in Fourth-Century Athens” catalogued the public recognition of priests and priestesses: known decrees honour almost exclusively foreigners in the fourth century. She also surveyed the evidence for private representation: votive offerings and funerary momuments, which were set up by Athenian priests and priestesses, not foreigners, but very few of them issue from a known cultic family or gene. Further implications of these findings remained unclear for the time being.

Catherine Keesling (George Washington University) delivered a very interesting paper entitled “Syeris, Diakonos of the Priestess Lysimache on the Athenian Acropolis (IG II[2] 3464)”. Through detailed comparison with other examples, she clearly demonstrated that this inscription must be a pillar type A base for a statue (using Raubitschek’s classification), with the capital of the pillar base missing. This usefully accounts for the difference in letterforms found on the inscription which had confused some of the earlier editors: lines 1-4 could have been originally inscribed on the capital and then reinscribed in the 3rd century BC or later, after the loss of the capital. The remaining lines seem to date to the 4th century BC, as is also confirmed by comparing the sculptor of the statue, Nikomachos, with other signatures of the same name: IG II(2) 4274 (4th century) and IG II(2) 3038 (a choregic monument dated to 364/3). Keesling is thus able to convincingly conclude that the Syeris honoured in IG II(2) 3464 must have been the diakonos of the famous Lysimache, the long-serving priestess of Athena Polias (IG II2 3453), whom David Lewis identified as the inspiration for Lysistrata (Selected Papers in Greek and Near Eastern History, ed. P.J. Rhodes, Cambridge 1997, 187-202).

Marijana Ricl (University of Belgrade), in “Neokoroi in the Greek World”, outlined the function of these cultic officials as temple wardens and sometimes as replacements for priests, drawing on a large number of inscriptions. She argued that in most contexts the terms zakoros and neokoros seem to refer to the same function. Yet it was apparent that a more detailed study of neokoroi would need to compare and contrast these officials with neopoiai and other groups of cultic officials.

Beate Dignas (Somerville College, University of Oxford) surveyed a few inscriptions recording foundations of new cults in “How to Found a Cult: Epigraphic Manifestations”, notably F. Sokolowski, Lois sacrées des cités grecques 129 (Anaphe) and 180 (Paros). Many interesting issues raised by this paper remain to be developed further, such as the distinction between individual and public motivations for a foundation as well as the involvement of foreigners in founding new cults and enhancing local forms of religious practice.

A paper by Eran Lupu (George Washington University), “Of Priests and Snouts: The Snout as a Priestly Prerogative in Greek Cult Regulations”, was read in absentia by the author’s wife, Catherine Keesling. Snouts were considered a refreshingly entertaining subject by the Oxford audience, yet they are only seldom attested in sacred laws: F. Sokolowski, Lois sacrées d’Asie mineure 21.5-6 (Erythrai) and 54.4 (Didyma), and possibly Lois sacrées des cités grecques 151.B.20 (Kos) where the restoration is not certain. Lupu suggested that the uncertain mention of an akrokolion, ‘extremity’, in a fragmentary sacred law, I. Ephesos 1263, may refer to a snout, but Lois sacrées d’Asie mineure 54 shows that this could not have always been the case, since it distinguishes between akrokolia and snouts. Various literary sources collected in Athenaeus 3.48 demonstrate that snouts were prized delicacies.

Maria Paz de Hoz (University of Salamanca), in “Confession Inscriptions and Other Testimonies of Aretalogy in the Greek World”, discussed several inscriptions from G. Petzl, Die Beichtinschriften Weskleinasiens, EA 22 (1994), and from P. Herrmann and H. Malay, New Documents from Lydia, TAM 24 Suppl. (Vienna 2007). Classifying confession inscriptions as aretalogical texts, she stressed that the main aim of these inscriptions was to publicize the power of gods to punish human transgressions (dunamis), over and beyond any notion of benevolent divine power. In the case of the texts from Maionia in Lydia, she argued that the “receding economical power of the sanctuaries as well as the loss of influence [of these sanctuaries] on the community”–factors perhaps tied to the rise of Christianity–led priestly officials to foster the practice of erecting these inscriptions.

After an introduction by Patrick Bakker (Université de Laval, Québec), which gave a brief overview of this “old yet always new” subject, there were four speakers in this very diverse panel:

Filippo Canali de Rossi (Liceo Scientifico Talete, Rome) gave a paper entitled “Achaean Military Support for Rome: A New Interpretation”, with the aim of clarifying the dating of Moretti, ISE 60. This inscription records the support lended by Achaean cities during a Roman campaign led by Gnaius Domitius (Ahenobarbus) against the Galatians. There are two possible identifications of the leader of this expedition, the consuls of 192 BC and 122 BC respectively. Adducing the evidence of SIG(3) 606, which records a dedication by Achaean mercenaries of a statue of Attalos II at Pergamon ca. 190 BC as a result of a campaign in Lydia, Canali de Rossi presented the hypothesis that the two military expeditions were linked and that the earlier date of ca. 192 BC for ISE 60 must be preferred.

Jean-Christophe Couvenhes (Université de Tours) presented a preliminary report on his work in preparing a corpus of Greek inscriptions which mention troops devoted to civic and territorial defense in Attica: “Péripoloi, kryptoi et hypaithroi dans la défense de l’Attique: permanence civique, influence royale”. He outlined in some detail the historical development of these various groups, which succeeded one another: peripoloi and peripolarchoi (generally from the end of the 5th century to ca. 332/280 BC), kryptoi (‘covert’ units, 287-229 BC), and hypaithroi (non-garrisoned troops, from 229 to probably the end of the 1st century BC). The question of the influence that Hellenistic kings may have had on these developments was briefly raised.

Henri-Louis Fernoux (Université de Bourgogne, Dijon), in “Représentations et faits de guerre dans cités grecques d’Asie mineure à l’époque impérial à travers le témoignage de l’épigraphie”, offered an account of the evolution of warfare in Asia Minor during the centuries of Roman imperial peace. Local conflicts between neighbouring cities such as Nikaia and Nikomedeia, illustrated by sometimes rich epigraphical dossiers (cf. L. Robert, “La titulature de Nicée et de Nicomédie: la gloire et la haine,” HSCP 81, 1977, 1-39 = OMS VI, Paris 1989, 211-249), show that warfare took place mostly on a psychological and covert level, and that effective ‘faits de guerre’ were few and far between.

Eduard Rung (University of Kazan), in “Diplomacy of Classical Greece and the Inscriptions”, presented a general overview of the large number of inscribed treaties of alliance (symmachia) between Greek cities which date from the 5th and 4th centuries BC. He is preparing a new study of these inscriptions.

The conference opened with a first plenary session which featured informative lectures by two prominent experts in the fields of Greek and Roman religion respectively.

Robert Parker (New College, University of Oxford) offered an overview of the value of inscriptions, especially sacred laws, for the study of Greek religion. He noted that these texts for the most part yield only chance fragments of useful ritual information, since they were often inscribed for other purposes (e.g. accounting, which appears to be the main purpose of cultic calendars like that of the Attic genos of the Salaminioi: F. Sokolowski, Lois sacrées des cités grecques, Supplément no.19). Assuming that most sacred laws were not written as blueprints for rituals, unlike the books used by marginal groups such as the Orphics, Parker offered two alternative reasons why sacred laws were inscribed: 1) to draw the attention of worshippers to details which were unexpected in normal ritual practice; and 2) to record innovations in ritual practice (traditional practices could thus remain unwritten). As a unique exception, he drew attention to the issue of pollution and purification, which appears to have required special exegesis. The salient examples are two famous cathartic laws: M. Jameson, D. Jordan and R. Kotansky, A Lex Sacra from Selinous (GRBM 11, 1993), and the sacred law from Cyrene, P. Rhodes and R. Osborne, Greek Historical Inscriptions no.97.

Parker’s presentation usefully presented a collection of interesting sacred laws to a wide audience yet it also raised at least a few concerns about this approach to the subject of epigraphy and Greek religion. First, detailed sacred laws like the cathartic laws of Selinous and Cyrene, not to mention other extensively detailed inscriptions like the regulation of the mysteries at Andania (F. Sokolowski, Lois sacrées des cités grecques no.65), seem to prove that epigraphic blueprints for rituals were not uncommon in the Greek world. Second, whether one can convincingly distinguish between innovations, exceptions, and traditional practice in Greek rituals is problematic and certainly warrants more caution in future research on the subject.

John Scheid (Collège de France, Paris) presented a discussion of Latin epigraphy and religion that neatly paralleled Robert Parker’s paper. He surveyed the genres of inscriptions that particularly illuminate the study of Roman religion: sacerdotal commentaries such as those of the Arval Brethren, regulations, fasti, defixiones, and votive inscriptions. This was followed by a brief history of the growing importance of epigraphy in scholarship from Mommsen and Wissowa to Degrassi and Panciera, culminating in an appraisal of Ittai Gradel’s, Emperor Worship and Roman Religion (Oxford 2002). Scheid further noted that the epigraphic sources for Roman religion are comparable with those for Greek religion, since the inscriptions are often ambiguous and laconic as far as details of rituals are concerned. He emphasised that religious texts were intended to be read by a limited audience, if not simply as dedicatory monuments addressed to a deity. In conclusion, Scheid praised the value of inscriptions for the study of graeco ritu festivals at Rome, notably the ludi saeculares (the relevant texts are collected in B. Schnegg-Koehler, Die Augusteischen Saekularspiele, Leipzig and Munich 2002).