Current Epigraphy
ISSN: 1754-0909

Saturday 24 April, 2010
Trinity College Dublin

(In)formal epigraphy
This meeting examines formality and informality within epigraphic culture. What different types of formality and informality can we detect in epigraphic material and to what extent is this affected by the survival and recording of material? How does the use of space (where do we find epigraphic writing?), agency (who writes? who publishes?), or interaction with the inscriptions (who views them and why?) construct notions – or undermine them – about formality/informality? How do these ideas affect the reuse and reception of inscriptions, ancient and modern?

10.30-11.00: Coffee & registration
11.00-11.45: Dr Graham Oliver (University of Liverpool): Formality & informality in Attic inscriptions
11.45-12.30: Dr Jennifer Baird (Birkbeck College, London): Graffiti & inscriptions in Dura-Europos
12.30-1.00: Lunch
1.00-1.45: Dr Amanda Kelly (NUI Galway): Informal invective: inscriptions on sling shots
1.45-2.30: Short reports
2.30-3.30: Travel to UCD (Coffee on arrival)
3.30-5.00: Prof. Andrew Smith (UCD): Tour of the epigraphic collection in the UCD Classical Museum

Colloquium fees
Registration including tea, coffee, and the sandwich lunch:
€15.00 (BES/AIEGL members), €10.00 (BES student members), €25.00 (non-members).

Registration without lunch:
€10.00 (members), €5.00 (student members), €20.00 (non-members).

Taxi fare from TCD to UCD (for museum trip)
Between €5 and €20 one way (depending on how many people share a taxi. Please bring cash to pay the taxi driver).

For further information, or to reserve a place at the colloquium and a sandwich lunch, please contact Dr Claire Taylor (claire.taylor@tcd.ie). The deadline for registration is 9 April 2010.

(Download a poster of this announcement)

Paper delivered at the British Epigraphy Society Autumn Colloquium, November 21st, 2009, Oxford. Report by Emma Rix.

‘Inscriptions, Landscape, and the Built Environment in the Eastern Mediterranean and Iran in Late Antiquity’ (Oxford, November 2009)

Matthew Canepa, Oxford, November 21

In this paper, Professor Canepa demonstrated how the rulers of the Sassanian Empire used monumental sculpture and inscriptions to create and emphasise their cultural and racial decent from the Achaemenids, as well as simultaneously interacting with and differentiating themselves from their more recent predecessors, the kings of the Hellenistic Seleucid empire. A crucial feature of this interaction and hence of Canepa’s study was the way in which rock reliefs and other inscriptions interact with and become part of the landscape or building on which they are placed; this interaction can be a key part of their significance.

(more…)

Paper delivered at the British Epigraphy Society Autumn Colloquium, November 21st, 2009, Oxford. Report by Charlotte Tupman.

Claiming Space and Memory: the Development of Priestly Inscriptional Practices in Late New Kingdom Egypt (ca. 1190-715 BC)

Elizabeth Frood, Oxford, November 21

Dr. Elizabeth Frood of St. Cross College, Oxford, began with a paper which showed that although “epigraphy” does not exist as a discrete discipline within Egyptology, and there are elements to the study of Egyptian texts which do not pertain to the study of inscriptions in Greek and Latin, there is much that is familiar to the classical epigrapher.

Frood introduced a new project, currently in its development phase, to study the epigraphy of Egyptian temple environments. There were three elements to Frood’s paper: an overview of epigraphy in a temple context; a description of the nature and range of this inscribed material; and a case study of one particular inscription that could affect the way in which we understand Egyptian temple environments.

(more…)

Paper presented at the British Epigraphy Society Autumn Meeting. (Brief Report by Philip Davies)

The Earliest Runic Inscriptions: Problems of Language and Interpretation

Elizabeth Solopova, Oxford, November 21st, 2009

In keeping with the theme of the British Epigraphy Society’s Autumn Colloquium, (‘Epigraphy, but not as we know it’) this interesting paper took us away from the familiar territories of the Mediterranean to consider the Runic alphabet (or, to give it its proper name, futhark) used by Scandinavian and Germanic peoples from the second century through to, in the case of Scandinavia, the early modern period. Specifically, her paper examined the difficulties of interpreting ‘older runes’, these being the futhark as extant from approximately the 2nd to the 6th centuries AD. After this the futhark entered a phase of transition, developing and diversifying into regional variations, known collectively as ‘younger runes’.

(more…)

Reports given at British Epigraphy Society Autumn Meeting, November 21, 2009. (Brief summary by Gabriel Bodard)

1) Nicholas Milner on recent work at Oinoanda

Nicholas reported on the ongoing epigraphic work at the Oinoanda excavations (where he has been resposible for new inscriptions since 1994), funded by the DAI. New finds since 2007 include:

• several inscriptions on an octagonal tower in the Hellenistic wall including references to Apollo Hypsistos; the tower seems to have been an outdoor shrine to the Sun, and seems to settle the taxing question of which god was referred to by Hypsistos at this site;
• an inscription marking the foundation by C. Iulius Moles of a temple to Caesar, which appears to belong to the reign of Augustus;
• in 2009, a base bearing a verse inscription to Nemesis and a sundial;
• an inscribed lintel block from an early Christian church.

2) Ulrike Roth on Albert Rehm

Ulrike (incoming BES secretary) addressed the meeting with a question rather than a report. Albert Rehm was a German school-teacher and ancient historian (known for his epigraphic work), active in the periods before and after the Second World War, and was outspoken on the subject of the Nazi approaches to ancient history. He described himself as a “Third Humanist”, although this clearly meant something different from Werner Jaeger’s use of the same label. Rehm believed firmly in the importance of working in the field (where Jaeger was reluctant to sully his view of the ancient world by visiting modern Greece), hence his epigraphic research. Ulrike is looking for information, even stories and anecdotes, about Rehm’s fieldwork, in the hope that this might cast light on his vision of “Third Humanism”.

3) Jonathan Prag on financial inscriptions from Taormina

Jon described a collaborative project to republish and analyse 13 financial inscriptions from the Sicel city of Taormina (which was allied to Rome in the Second Punic War), that have been published in scattered publications of variable quality. (8 of the inscriptions are in IG 14; 4 were published by Manganaro from inadequate photographs.) The inscriptions reveal many details of the city’s finances and administration in the 2nd and 1st centuries BC: there are changes over time in the math used, as well as in the administration, the calendar, and the currencies in use. One text in particular offers a thorny problem of dating: it is written in Greek, so should be from before the Roman colony in 27 BC; the reference to the month of  “Quinctilis” should be from before 46; the reference to “duoandres” should be after 44. Manganaro suggests that the text may date from the period when Sextus Pompeius governed the city between 44 and 36, but much remains unclear. The new publication will make new joins between some of the text fragments, and will also thoroughly address issues with the provenance of the inscriptions, some of which are moved and only partially recorded in the excavation reports.

Paper presented at British Epigraphy Society Autumn Meeting. (Brief report by Gabriel Bodard)

Writing in Cypro-Minoan: Beyond Decipherment.

Silvia Ferrara, Oxford,  November 21, 2009

In this paper, Ferrara introduced the audience to problems in the decipherment and interpretation of inscriptions in the Cypro-Minoan script. Since there are only some 217 documents (comprising 4000 signs) in this script, decipherment is difficult if not impossible, and so identification of the language and context of the texts will depend more upon quantitative elements, the objects themselves, their distribution and other archaeological information.

(more…)

British Epigraphy Society Autumn Colloquium

FOREIGN EPIGRAPHY
or “Epigraphy, but not as we know it”
&
XIII Annual General Meeting

Saturday, 21 November 2009, MBI Al Jaber Building, Corpus Christi College, Oxford

10.30 (coffee) – 17.30 (close)

Full programme at BES website (although older events seem not to be archived, so this may disappear).

Paper delivered at the British Epigraphy Society Spring Colloquium, May 2nd, 2009, Oxford.

In the first presentation of the day Benjamin Gray gave a very thorough and densely packed study of the recently published decree from the Eretrian colony of Dikaia, dated between 365-359 BCE in the reign of Perdikkas III (Voutiras/Sismanides 2008 = BE 2008:263, 339).

The decree attempts to effect a reconciliation of the citizen body of this polis after some kind of civil strife, largely by imposing an amnesty on prosecutions for wrongs committed before the archonship of Gorgythos (with the exception of murders, which can be prosecuted on a single day at the end of the month of Daphnephorion). This moratorium, and the heavy penalties imposed on anyone who should attempt to break it, was clearly meant to draw a close to troubles that were threatening to tear the city apart. It is not known whether this was the result of social struggles between Macedonian and Amphipolitan influences, for example, or whether it was a purely local stasis. Perdikkas III of Macedon is appealed to to enforce this decree.

As such amnesties go, allowing even murder trials at all is both unusual and risky, which tells us something about the unique situation in this polis. There was a particularly strong concern for justice and the rule of law (the choice of the city’s name, Δίκαια, may itself have been politically motivated), for contract and procedure above the usual political virtues of stability and concord that are behind amnesties such as those as Alipheira, at Athens in 403, for example.

Gray concluded with some remarks on Greek ideas about the polis, oaths and pledges, and purification. There was vigorous and rich discussion among the audience on the readings of the epigraphic text. (Charles Crowther pointed out that the restoration of γνώμη]ν at the end of line 1 was impossible on grammatical grounds; Angelos Chaniotis added that it was also legally impossible, since Lykios was not a member of the community that passed this decree until after it was passed. Robert Parker also pointed out that the difficult reading δ̣ικασάτω st the start of line 8, must in fact read ὁρκωσάτω. If this was indeed a case of calling in foreign judges to settle a dispute, it is the earliest precedent for what later became a relatively common Hellenistic practice; Chaniotis pointed out that the violation of the sacred law of ἀσυλία in lines 6-7 was a clear sign of desperation, that this amnesty was a last resort attempt at reconciliation.)

Paper delivered at the British Epigraphy Society Spring Colloquium, May 2nd, 2009, Oxford.

The third paper of the Spring Colloquium was an exploration of female voices and emotions in sanctuaries. Chaniotis began by examining the literary evidence for typical female ritual behaviour, noting that authors including Diogenes Laertius (Vit. Phil. VI, 37-38), Theocritus (Id. II, 66-74; XV, 84-86) and Herodas (IV, 1-13) tend to ascribe certain (often negative) characteristics to women’s ritual behaviour. Amongst these characteristics are the wearing of special garments and make-up; vanity; chattering and gossiping in loud voices; exaggerated gestures; pushing past one another; and disorderly behaviour in general. Such behaviour is not in fact exclusively feminine, but is presented as such in the literary sources.

Inscribed dedications provide us with a rich source of information on female ritual behaviour. The emotions expressed in these dedications cannot be ignored, but must be contextualised. Chaniotis chose two sites as case studies for examining female voices: the sanctuary of the Mother of the Gods at Leukopetra, and the sanctuary of Demeter at Knidos. In each case he identified the standard formulae used for these dedications and explored the nature and significance of each of the deviations from the stereotypical formulae.

At Leukopetra, three main deviations from the standard form of dedication occur: entreating an angry goddess; displaying affection; and displaying trust or faith in the deity. In the case of dedications entreating an angry goddess, the gender of the dedicator appears to be irrelevant. However the gender of the god is significant, as such mentions of anger of the deity are only found in sanctuaries of goddesses. Several of these dedications entrust a stolen or lost item (and even a missing slave: I.Leuk. 53) to the goddess, thus making the theft or loss in essence her problem, and forcing the deity to act to punish a wrongdoer through her own anger. Where dedications display affection, such as in dedications of slaves and children to the goddess, it it notable that those composed by women are considerably more emotional and verbose. In the case of dedications expressing faith, trust in the ability of the god to affect the lives of the dedicators in a positive way is shown: thanks are given for miracles and for helping in specific situations, for instance in the case of a woman having problems with her husband (I.Leuk. 20). Men’s voices are not absent in this sanctuary: a text which describes the delivery of a deed of sale into the arms of the goddess (I.Leuk. 3) expresses piety and emotionality, which is perhaps more common when men are dedicating to goddesses.

A space particularly dominated by female rituals is the sanctuary of Demeter at Knidos, at which strong expressions of piety take the form of deviations from the standard formulae, aiming to emphasise worshippers’ individual devotion as distinct from that of other dedicants. However, the expressions used in prayers for revenge reveal a certain amount of interaction amongst groups of women, and between female worshippers and priests, in discussing their grievances and composing these texts. Concerns include being the victims of injustice (I.Knidos 148B, ll.4-5; 154, l.6), particularly where conflicts cannot be resolved in court because of lack of evidence. In these cases, dedicators turn to prayers of revenge in which curses against perpetrators are common. Chaniotis noted that these texts would have been recited aloud, with women’s voices heard displaying strong emotions. Jealousy, hatred, suspicion, curses and theatrical gestures are all evident as types of female ritual behaviour at this sanctuary.

The dedications at Leukopetra and Knidos concern the displays of emotion that take place during communication with deities. This inevitably unequal conversation necessitates the use of a strategy of persuasion on the part of mortals, who interact with each other as well as with the deities in sanctuaries, particularly at times of festival. The dedications reveal how such gatherings can influence emotions: voices are loud, angry and sometimes sad. Where men are also present at sanctuaries, they express sentiments that they might not otherwise have displayed, an example of such ‘unmanly’ behaviour being their total surrender to the authority of the goddess (Arkesine curse tablet, IG XII.7, p.1). These texts show that religious practices are dynamic processes due to the real interaction among worshippers, including communication of personal experiences to others, and the believed interaction between deities and mortals.

Paper delivered at the BES Spring Colloquium.

The final contribution at the 2009 BES Spring Meeting was remarkable by its conciseness, clarity and interest. It was a striking example of how some of our preconceived ideas on ancient Greek practices can be swiftly turned on their head by inscriptions.

The inscription (SEG LIV 214), dated to the 4^th c. BC, is incomplete and fragmented. The stele fragments were actually discovered by different individuals over a long period of time. This led to some confusion about the original location of the inscription, with the Greek scholars’ hypothesis of its coastal origins being confirmed by the discovery of the most recent fragment in the deme of Aixone (modern Glyfada). The question of the exact location of the inscription is presumably answered by the last fragment. It was found near other inscriptions mentioning their being set up in the sanctuary of Herakleidai, Hebe and Alcmene. The text is stoichedon and beautifully inscribed. The bottom section still shows grid lines for the sculptor to follow.

The text presents several issues discussed by Parker and Scullion. To start with, the question of who had commissioned the inscription is raised by the location of the stone. The sanctuary of the Herakleidai is where the deme of Aixone displayed its decisions. This would hint at the deme as the commissioner, although the possibility of a sub-deme body, such as a genos, cannot be excluded. Indeed, line 26 mentions a hero Paralos and the only known sanctuary to Paralos is in Piraeus, outside of Aixone’s control. This leaves open the possibility of a genos dedicating the stele, or of an as yet unknown sanctuary of Paralos in the deme of Aixone.

The number of priesthoods present here amounts to ten (although some are lost with the top of the inscription) which, with two others known for Aixone, would total to twelve for the whole deme. The text notably features two priesthoods (one priestess and one priest) for the same ‘mystery deity’, the Reverend (ἁγνή) Goddess. This title is usually given to the Syrian goddess and is otherwise not attested before the 2^nd c. BC. This occurrence probably belongs here to a different deity, possibly Persephone. The multiple priesthoods for the same deity are in any case unusual.

Scullion then described the last part of the inscription as changing in nature, since the content of the lists no longer includes double portions (of meat), sausages or cuts to be put on the sacrificial table. There is therefore no spare meat from the sacrifice, which in turn would indicate holocausts. The possible objection to this is the fact that hides are still given to the priest/-ess. There are examples in the Greek world of ‘whole-sacrifices’ of an animal that has been cut open (see for example at Cos, 4^th c. BC, Sokolowski LSCG 151 A 32-5) but the case of Aixone is different. Here the skin is preserved. The only ancient parallels are found outside the Greek world with examples from Leviticus (1:3-9; 7:8), Philo Judaeus (De specialibus legibus 1.30 [151]) and Punic and Semitic inscriptions (CIS I 165.3-4; I 167). This could lead to the conclusion that cutting up the animal before burning it whole was a usual practice, thus explaining the otherwise silent sources on the matter. For one, it would require less wood than the whole un-skinned animal. This undoubtedly challenges the mental image of the holocaust as the act of putting an intact animal, albeit a dead one, into the fire. It is also noted that the deities at Aixone concerned by these sacrifices have a chthonic character.

Parker finally noted that the only deity for whom no sum to purchase kindling is mentioned is Dionysos (lines 9-11). This suggests the possibility of omophagia.

Paper delivered at the British Epigraphy Society Spring Colloquium, May 2nd, 2009, Oxford.

The second paper of the day was a summary of arguments taken from a recently awarded PhD dissertation by Gillian Ramsey (Exeter). The purpose of this presentation was to show that the inscribe dossiers, containing letters to and from administrators and governors of the provinces of the Seleucid Kingdom, are not only evidence for the prosopography, offices, and administrative structures of the kingdom, but also for the network and variety of relationships between administrators and officers. As an illustration of the arguments and methodology behind this thesis, Ramsey used the example of the letters reporting and organizing the appointment in 209 BCE by Antiochus III of Nikanor to a senior priesthood. Ramsey’s approach challenges the traditional method of interpreting these texts, which is to assume that they reveal a very regular system of administration across the kingdom: rather, she demonstrated quite convincingly, not all regions of the kingdom would have be administered with identical structures. Some letters or dossiers may attest to ad hoc appointments, or to areas with different dynastic, political , or even personal situations; equating a hierarchy ranks between regions based solely on the sequence of letters in a dossier is impossible. The circulation of the news of Nikanor’s appointment, for example, and the assignment of responsibilities regarding his authority needed to be circulated widely; in some regions, working relationships and local responsibilities would have influenced who needed to be informed of these requirements more than mere hierarchy.

The epigraphic habit records the organization of the empire, and reflects the limitations and controls of individuals’ power. The letters use a polite form of greeting and address, but contain no titulature or honorifics; differences in wording or address (such as the extra greeting included in the letter of Zeuxis to Philotas, omitted in the otherwise identical text to Philomelos) may reflect an unknown relationship between the individuals, but probably also performs some political function. The addressees of the administrative letters were selected for their effectiveness at completing the task at hand (setting up and publicizing the infrastructure behind an important priesthood); the dossiers further the imperial bureaucracy and administration, and also reinforce the cohesion of regional networks. A uniform epigraphic practice does not necessarily reflect uniform organization and ranks in different regions. Rather, the variations within and between dossiers can communicate the relationships between officials as well as the interests and responsibilities of individuals.

The paper was followed by some lively discussion of the individual inscriptions and readings in this collection, and I believe the session was informative and valuable both for the audience and for the speaker.

Last call for registration for Spring Meeting:

2 May 2009, Corpus Christi College, Oxford.

Convenor: Robert Parker.

10.45 – 11.15: Coffee & Registration (Hall).

11.15 – 12.00: Ben Gray (Oxford): “After Stasis: the New Fourth-century
Reconciliation Agreement of the Dikaiopolitans”.

12.00 – 12.45: Gillian Ramsey (Exeter): “Reading the Seleucid Inscribed
Dossiers”.

12.45 – 14.15: sandwich lunch (a sumptuous feast of tasty sandwiches and cake).

14.15 – 15.00: Angelos Chaniotis (Oxford): “From Woman to Woman: Female Voices in Dedicatory Inscriptions”.

15.00 – 15.30: Tea

15.30 – 16.15: Robert Parker (Oxford) & Scott Scullion (Oxford): “Priests and Sacrifices at Aixone: the New World of SEG LIV 214″

Registration including tea, coffee, and the sandwich lunch: £10.00 (BES members), £5.00 (BES student members), £15.00 (non-members).

Registration without lunch: £7.00 (members), £3.00 (student members), £10.00 (non-members).

Existing student members of the BES may apply for a bursary to contribute towards the cost of attending the meeting (write to peter.haarer@classics.ox.ac.uk).

Please pay all fees on the day in cash.

For various practical reasons I would be very grateful, if you would like to attend the Spring Meeting, if you could register by e-mail (to peter.haarer@classics.ox.ac.uk) no later than Friday 24 April. NOTE that in a break with the normal practice I will sign you in for a sandwich lunch UNLESS you say that you do not want this. As ever, please notify any special dietary requirements.

This is a report by Shane Brennan (Exeter) on a paper given at the BES Autumn meeting, November 22, 2008:

Mathieu Carbon (Oxford), Sacred Law and Women’s Festivals, From Aristophanes to Mylasa

The final paper at the 2008 BES Autumn Colloquium was given by Mathieu Carbon. Restricted in time by a slight overrun on the programme, he nonetheless was able to engage the gathering with his work on the topical subject of sacred law and women’s festivals. (more…)

This is a report by Duncan Taylor, King’s College London, of a paper given at the BES Autumn meeting, November 22, 2008:

Charlotte Tupman (KCL), “Protecting the dead? Inscribed evidence for illegal behaviour at the Roman grave”

The first paper of the day was given by Charlotte Tupman, of King’s College London, whose contribution sought the ‘inscribed laws’ of the colloquium’s theme not in the ‘official’ pronouncements of the representatives of ancient states, but in the more personal genre of funerary epigraphy. Tupman provided an intriguing and thought provoking survey of a number of funerary inscriptions drawn from two very different urban centres within the Roman Empire: Rome itself, and Aphrodisias in Karia. These texts shared an explicit concern for the future mistreatments that might befall the grave sites and funerary monuments of which they formed a part. A wide variety of possible acts of desecration were anticipated by their composers and admonitions to the reader to refrain from such activities were supported by threats of retribution. Tupman’s paper emphasised the diversity of these elements, with a particular interest in the broader differences between the conventions of the two sites, but also the patterns and themes, which can be observed among them, and are suggestive, at the least, of many aspects of their legal and social contexts. (more…)

The theme for the Colloquium is “Inscribed Laws” and the event will be held in Strand Campus Room 2C at King’s College, London (directions to follow).  The programme for the Autumn Colloquium is as follows:

10.30: Coffee & Registration

11.00: Charlotte Tupman (KCL), “Protecting the dead? Inscribed evidence for illegal behaviour at the Roman grave”.

11.45: Benet Salway (UCL), “Form and function in Roman legal texts”.

12.30: Lunch

13.45: Short Reports

[14.30: Annual General Meeting of the British Epigraphy Society]

15.30: Tea

15.45: Mathieu Carbon (Oxford), “Sacred Laws and Women’s Festivals: Some Perspectives from Mylasa to Aristophanes”.

16.30: Reception.

Registration fees for the day are two pounds for members of AIEGL or the BES, and seven pounds for non-members. A sandwich lunch may be booked for three pounds by writing BEFORE 19 November to peter.haarer@classics.ox.ac.uk (please specify any special dietary requirements).

Further details of the programme, and offers of short reports may be sent to Dr. Charlotte Tupman (charlotte.tupman@kcl.ac.uk)