Στεφάνωι Tracy
γραμμάτων ἀττικών δαίμονι

11 (fig. 1). FRAGMENT OF A DECREE. Upper left fragment of a pedimental stele of grey marble, broken on the right side and below. The original top, back, and left side are preserved; the pediment’s left corner is broken off. It was found on the 25^th of February 2000, inside Hadrian’s Library, in a section cut through the South Wing. It is now kept in the Storeroom of Hadrian’s Library (3 Areos str.) which houses the finds from the area to the north of the Acropolis (Inv. no. BA 1429).

2H. 0,18 m.; W. 0,155 m.; Th. 0,135 m. (pediment), 0,11 (stele); LH. 0,006 m. (omikron, theta 0,005 m.).

185/4 ΝΟΝ-ΣΤΟΙΧ. ca. 40
Θ[ ε ο ΐ]
έπὶ Εύπολεμο[υ αρχοντος επὶ τής -- ca. 10 -- ỏγδό]-
ης πρυτανείας [ἧι Στρατόνικος Στρατονίκου Ἁμαξαν]-
τεὺς ἐγραμμάτ[ευεν' δήμου ψηφίσματα' Ἁνθεστηριῶ (?)]-
νος δεκάτει ὑστ[έραι, -- ca. 7 -- τῆς πρυτανείας' ἐκκλη]-
σία έμ Πειραιαῖ τ[ῶν προέδρων ἐπεψήφιζεν -- ca. 8 --]
Βακχίου Ἀγκ[υ]λῆθ[εν καὶ συμπρόεδροι’ ἔδοξεν τῶι]
[δ]ήμωι ^vv [- ca. 4 -]' []

lacuna

3Line 2: only a tiny portion of the dotted omicron is preserved.

4Line 8: after the iota of the word [δ]ήμωι follows a vacant space of two letters, followed by a lacuna of four letters and after that I discern the upper part of a vertical hasta (just below the eta of line 7); this trace belongs to the name of the proposer. Due to the break in the stone, we cannot be sure as to the exact length of the space that the cutter left vacant before inscribing the speaker’s name2.

5After studying the squeeze of the inscription, S. V. Tracy identified the cutter as “The Cutter of IG II² 913” (Tracy 1990, 71-79), one of the most important and prolific cutters working in Athens around 190 BC.

6What remains of the text belongs to the prescript of a decree of the demos (ll. 4, 7-8). The approximate length of the lines can be restored from the certain restoration of l. 3. Although I also consider as safe the restoration of l. 7 (37 letters), it is not possible to determine if the cutter left a vacant space before the word ἔδoξεv3.

7Line 2. Five other decrees are known4 dating from the archonship of Eupolemos (PA, 5920); from the calendar equations it is not possible to determine the character of the year (cf. IG, II², 897, commentary). Scholars of the Attic Calendar consider the year as an ordinary one (it was the first year of the 14^th Metonic cycle)5.

8Line 2 fin. I consider the restoration safe because it is the only one by which the syllabic division rule is not violated.

9Line 3. Στρατόνικος Στρατονíκου Ἁμαξαντεὺς (PA, 12951) is known only as the secretary of the prytany in the year of the archonship of Eupolemos. The ephebe by the same name of 123/2 (PA, 12952; IG, II², 1006 + SEG, 38, 114, col. IV, 113) is probably his grandson.

10Line 4. δήμου ψηφίσματα The singular form is equally possible (δήμου ψήφισμα). However, Henry (1977, 89) notes that the plural form was much more common. The earliest occurrence of this phrase dates to 229/8 (IG, II², 832, l. 3).

11Line 4 fin. The restoration of the month is deduced from the prytany (l. 2 fin.), but is not absolutely certain.

12Line 6. For the meeting of the assembly έμ Πειραιεῖ, see Hansen 1987, 14 and note 109. In his study of the evidence for the 2^nd century, McDonald 1943, 51-56, noted that an assembly took place in Peiraeus at some point in the last 10 days of the month, and plausibly identified it with the fourth and last assembly of the prytany (cf. Arist., Ath., 43.3).

13Line 7. Although the name Βάκχιος is a common one (cf. LGPN II s. v.), it is only attested once in the deme Ankyle, thus making it possible for the president to be a distant descendant of [Β]ακχίου I [Δ]ιονυσíου I [Ἀγ]κυλῆθε[ν] (IG, II², 5245; 350-300 BC).

14Line 7 fin. I rule out the restoration ἔδοξεν τεῖ βουλεῖ καὶ τῶι I [δ]ήμωι, because that would make line 7 longer by approximately seven letters at least. The decree is non-probouleumatic6.

152 (fig. 2). THE PRYTANEIS OF AIGEIS (?) HONORED. Fragment of a stele of grey marble, broken on all sides. It was found in the area of Hadrian’s Library during the removal of the soil covering the Voevodaliki7. It is kept in the same Storeroom as the previous inscription (Inv. no. BA 108).

16H. 0,12 m.; W. 0,14 m.; Th. 0,115 m.; LH. 0,005-0,006 m. (omikron 0,004 m.).

init. s. II ΝΟΝ'ΣΤΟΙΧ. ca 48

vacat 0,012

[ἐπί ἂρχοντος, ἐπì τῆς Α] ἰγεῖδος ἓκ[της πρυτανείας]

[ἐ]γραμμάτευε[ν]

[]τει καì εἰκοσ[τεῖ]

['τῶν προέ]δρων ἐπεψή[φιζεν]

[καì συμκρόεδροι' ἔδοξεν τῶι] δήμ]]ωι Ηρα[]

[εἶπεν' ὑπὲρ ὦν ảπαγγέλλου]σιν οί πρυτ[άνεις τῆς Αἰγεῖδος?]

[τά πρό τ] ῶν ἐκ[κλησιῶν]

lacuna

17Line 2: of the dotted gamma only part of the horizontal hasta remains.

18Line 5: the letters ΔHM are inscribed in a rasura. The omega is superscribed over an iota without the stone’s surface having been chiseled away. Under the right half of the mu may be discerned an erased omega which in turn is superscribed on a tau.

19Line 5 fin.: the last preserved letter trace is the upper part of a vertical hasta that may belong to the letters iota or kappa.

20S. V. Tracy on the basis of the study of the squeeze concluded that the cutter is close to “The Cutter of IG, II², 1329” (Tracy 1990, 125-127), but not identical with him. This particular cutter worked in the decade of 183/2-175/4, to which, judging from the letter-forms, we can approximately date the present text.

21What is preserved forms part of the preamble of a decree of the demos (l. 5) by which honors are granted to the prytaneis of Aigeis8 (l. 6). The length of the lines (ca. 48) is deduced from the secure restoration9 of ll. 6-7: ὑπὲρ ὧν άπαγγέλλου]σιν οἱ πρυτ[άνεις τῆς Αἰγεῖδος? ὑπὲρ τῶν θυσιῶν ὧν ἔθυον τά πρò τ]ῶν ἐκ[κλησιῶν τῶι τε Ἀπόλλωνι τῶι Προστατηρίωι κλπ.].

22Considering the approximate number of letters in each line, I note the following:

1. The name of the secretary of the prytany (l. 2 in.) is of a length of approximately 24 letters.
2. LL. 3-4 are restored as follows: [---]τει καì εἰκοσ [τεῖ τῆς πρυτανείας ἐκκλησία --ca. 9-- τῶν προέ]δρων κλπ. The assembly was held most probably έμ Πειραιεῖ10.

23The possibility of our fragment belonging to an already published decree led me to the study of the texts of prytany inscriptions of the first half of the 2^nd century BC. From the investigation I concluded that our fragment could possibly be:

1. A fragment of the right part of stele IG, II², 890 (Ag., XV, 174) dated to the archonship of Symmachos (188/7). The length of the lines (43-48), the prytany (l. 1), the length of the secretary’s name, the calendar equation (l. 3), the assembly held in the Peiraeus (l. 4) are all facts that permit the association of the two.
2. A fragment of stele Ag., XV, 200 (Sonikos archon, 175/4).

24The first inscription (IG, II², 890) in question is missing11. The autopsy of the second (Agora Inv. No. 4253) showed that the letter-forms are different from those of our decree. It was inscribed by “The Cutter of Agora I 247” (Tracy 1990, 102).

25Since we do not possess any information concerning the missing inscription IG, II², 890 (Ag., XV, 174), any attempt to associate it with our inscription would be entirely speculative. We do possess, however, one small piece of evidence that does somewhat strengthen this hypothesis. Recently, the small fragment EM 13406 (fig. 3), first published by Stroud 1971, 192-193 no. 42, pl. 34, was identified12 as the left part of ll. 16-20 of the missing stele IG, II², 890. The autopsy of this fragment showed that the letters (as regards their forms, height and distances) are identical with those on the new fragment. Stephen Tracy confirmed the observation and concluded that they were cut by the same hand13. I am not, however, in a position to compare the marble, because of the small size of EM 13406.

26The similarity between the two fragments strengthens the possibility of our inscription belonging to IG, II², 890, but I cannot rule out the possibility of the two fragments belonging to two different stelai inscribed by the same cutter, with decrees granting honors to prytaneis. The relation of the present inscription, therefore, to the missing IG, II², 890 must remain an open question, despite the strong evidence we possess for it14.