Two Hellenistic Inscriptions from Delphi - article ; n°1 ; vol.78, pg 49-67

Peter Mfraser

Description

Bulletin de correspondance hellénique - Année 1954 - Volume 78 - Numéro 1 - Pages 49-67
19 pages
Source : Persée ; Ministère de la jeunesse, de l’éducation nationale et de la recherche, Direction de l’enseignement supérieur, Sous-direction des bibliothèques et de la documentation.

Informations

• Publié par: BULLETIN_DE_CORRESPONDANCE_HELLENIQUE
• Publié le: 01 janvier 1954
• Nombre de lectures: 39
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

Peter M Fraser
Two Hellenistic Inscriptions from Delphi
In: Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 78, 1954. pp. 49-67.
Citer ce document / Cite this document :
Fraser Peter M. Two Hellenistic Inscriptions from Delphi. In: Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 78, 1954. pp. 49-
67.
doi : 10.3406/bch.1954.2432
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/bch_0007-4217_1954_num_78_1_2432TWO HELLENISTIC INSCRIPTIONS FROM DELPHI
Each of the following two inscriptions consiste of two fragments, of
which, in both instances, one is published and the other unpublished.
The attribution of the hitherto unpublished fragments of both was made
by Professor Daux in 1939, and was pointed out to me in Delphi in July
1951 by M. Jean Bousquet, for whose assistance in this and other matters
during my stay I am most grateful. Professor Daux has been kind enough
to allow me to publish thèse pièces and to give me the privilège of
publishing them in the Bulletin (1).
I. a) In the muséum at Delphi, inv. no. 3852. Seen by me in July 1951.
Photograph of squeeze, fîg. 1 a. Published by Pomtow, GGA, 1913, p. 170, no. 2.
It is referred to by A. J.-Reinach, Rev. Epigr. II, 1914, p. 104, and also in the note
at the end of the commentary on Syll. 3 390, and its bearing on the early period
of Aetolian control at Delphi is discussed by R. Flacelière, Les Ailoliens à Delphes,
pp. 87-88.
Measurements : max. ht. 0 m. 21, max. width 0 m. 24, max. thick. 0 m. 16.
Space between lines, 0 m. 007-0 m. 008. Height of letters, 0 m. 007-0 m. 009 ;
omicron, 0 m. 003.
The text of (a) was printed as follows by Pomtow :
., IA
πρέσβεις άποσταλέντε]ς ύπο βασιλέ[ως] [επειδή οι δεινές
[Πτολεμαίου προς το κοινον των Άμφικτυόνων, 'ίνα θεωρούς άποστέλλωσι, κ]αί
άποδέχωνται
[τήν θυσίαν καΐ τον αγώνα, δν τίθησιν ό βασιλεύς τώι πατρί, δε]δόχθαι τοις
Άμφικτύοσιν
(1) Ι am also especially grateful to Professor Daux for his criticisms and suggestions con-
cerning the substance of the article ; and to Dr. M. N. Tod for reading the proofs. 50 PETER M. FRASER
Fig. la. — Delphes. Inv. 3852. Fig. 16. — Delphes. Inv. 6695.
Fig. la. — Delphes. Inv. 4387. Fig. 2 6. — Delphes. Inv. 6721. :
.
.
•
■
.
HELLENISTIC INSCRIPTIONS FROM DELPHI 51 TWO
5 [ - - - και εν τοις άλλοις συλλαμβάνεσθαι τώι βασ]ιλεΐ Πτολεμαίωι τους Άμφ[ι]-
[κτύονας και νυν τήν θυσίαν άποδέχεσθαι και τόν γυμνικον αγώνα] έσεσθαι
ίσολύμπιον, καθάπερ
[ό βασιλεύς έπέσταλκεν, και μουσικον και ίππικόν, ψηφίσασθαι] δε και τους
άλλους απαντάς δσοι
[ _ _ _ τ0]ΰ θεού [κ]ατα τα δεδοχμένα τοϊ[ς]
[Άμφικτύοσιν και δούναι τα αυτά] άθλα καίτας τιμάς εκάστους τοΐ[ς]
10 [νικώσι τον αγώνα τών Πτολεμαίων (?) εν Άλεξανδρείαι καθ]άπερ και τοις τα
· 'Ολύμπια νενικ[η]-
[κότοις υπό τών πόλεων δίδοται ' έλέσθαι δε και] θεωρούς εξ αυτών τους
Άμφικτύο-
[νας και άποστεΐλαι εις Άλεξάνδρειαν προς τόν βασιλέα Πτο]λεμαΐον, δταν
ποιήι τήν θυσίαν και
: [τόν αγώνα τιθήι γυμνικον ίσολύμπιον, και μουσικον και ίππ]ι[κ]όν, άνε[νεγκ]εΐ[ν
δ]έ το δόγμα τό-
: [δε τους ίερομνήμονας ε'ις τας πόλεις, κ. τ. λ.].
My own reading of this fragment difïers in some important respects
from that of Pomtow :
IA...
]σιν 6 βασιλε[ . . ]
Jat άποδέχωνται
·,· ]δόχθαι τοις Άμφικτύοσιν
....·. ]λεΐ Πτολεμαίωι τους Άμφ[. .]-
]δέχεσθαι ίσολύμπιον καθάπερ
',■■-'.. ]δέ και τους άλλους απαντάς δσοι
■■ ]οΰ θεοΰ [κ] ατά τα δεδοχμένα τοις
]άθλα και τάς τιμάς εκάστους τοΐ[ . ]
]άπερ και τοις τα <Ό>λύμπια νενικ[.]- 10
]εωρούς εξ αυτών τους Άμφικτύο-
]λεμαΐον δταν ποιήι τήν θυσίαν και
- ]αιέων άνε. .γκέι. . ε το δόγμα το
b) In the muséum at Delphi, inv. no. 6695. Seen by me in July 1951. Photo-
graph of squeeze, fïg. 1 b. Unpublished.
Measurements : max. ht. 0 m. 12, max. width, 0 m. 17, max. thick., 0 m. 08.
Interlinear space and height of letters as for I (a).
πατρί αύτοΰ
κτύονες της
Πτολεμαίος τώ
αυτόν ίσολυμπ
της τε θυσίας
ΤνΟ' ' 52 PETER M. FRASER
(a) + (b). The following restoration aims primarily at establishing the
links between the two fragments, and the actual phraseology is uncertain
at many points :
[επειδή πρότερον μέν ό βασιλεύς Πτολεμαίος πρέσβεις άπέστειλεν οϊτινες
άπήγγειλαν (vel
άπέφαινον vel sim.) δτι θυσίαν ποιεί και αγώνα τίθησιν (ό βασιλεύς) τώι]
πατρί αύτοΰ [εν Άλεξανδρείαι ίσολύμπιον και έπέστειλεν ίνα μετέχωσιν ο]ί
'Α[μφι]-
κτύονες της [τε θυσίας και του αγώνος, και νυν θυσίαν ποιεί και αγώνα τίθη]σιν ό
βασιλε[ύς]
Πτολεμαίος τώ[ι πατρί και παρακαλεί £να θεωρούς άποστέλλωσι κ]αί άποδέ-
χωνται
αυτόν ίσολύμπ[ιον είναι ' τύχηι άγαθήι * δε]δόχθαι τοις Άμφικτύοσιν ·
5 της τε θυσίας [και του αγώνος μετέχειν (?) τώι βασι]λεΐ Πτολεμαίωι τους
Άμφ[ικ]-
τύον[ας και τον αγώνα δν τίθησιν άπο]δέ^εσθαι ισολύμπιον καθάπερ
[και ό βασιλεύς έπέσταλκεν, άποδέχεσθαι (vel sim.)] δέ και τους άλλους απαντάς
δσοι
[ ]ου θεού, [κ] ατά τα δεδοχμένα τοις
[Άμφικτύοσιν ' δούναι δέ και τά αυτά] άθλα και τάς τιμάς εκάστους τοΐ[ς]
10 [νικώσιν τών Άμφικτυόνων τόν αγώνα καθ]άπερ και τοις τα <Ό >λύμπια
νενικ[η]-
[κόσιν δέδοται ' έλέσθαι δέ και θ]εωρούς εξ αυτών τους Άμφικτύο-
[νας και άποστεΐλαι προς τον βασιλέα Πτο]λεμαΐον, όταν ποιήι τήν θυσίαν και
[τιθήι τον γυμνικον αγώνα τών Πτολεμ]αιέων, άνε[νε]γκεΐ[ν δ]έ τό δόγμα τό-
[δε τους ίερομνήμονας εις τάς πόλεις, κ. τ. λ·]
The inscription is closely parallel to Syll.3 390. It is the reply of the Delphic
Amphictyony to the request ma de by Ptolemy Philadelphus to that body to
recognise the Ptolemaieia ; Syll.3 390 is the reply of the Nesiotic koinon to the same
request. This latter, fairly complète, inscription must therefore, as Pomtow saw,
form the basis of the restoration of the Delphian text.
Pomtow reconstructed the text from fragment (a) so that line 2 constituted
the opening clause of the preamble, following the prescript, and lines 13-14 belonged
to the latter part of the decree containing the instructions to the Amphictyonic
hieromnemones regarding the exposition of the decree. In regard to the close of
the document Pomtow was evidently right, but the discovery of the new fragment
nécessitâtes changes in the earlier part, the restoration of which was unsatisfactory
even before the appearance of the new fragment.
The relation of (a) to (b) seems determined by two factors. (b), line 2, begins
κτύονες, and the preceding line must therefore hâve ended with οί 'Αμφι-. This is
not to be found in toto in (a), but part of it may be seen in the IA of (a) line 1, thus :
ο]ί Ά[μφι]. This gives a correct continuation in line 2. Again in [b), line 6, HELLENISTIC INSCRIPTIONS FROM DELPHI 53 TWO
init. τυον follows on correctly from τους Άμφ[ικ] at the end of (a), line 5, giving
τους Άμφ[ικ]τύογ[ας]. The relative position of the two fragments thus seems
assured.
The length of the lines may vary considéra bly according to the restorations.
The gênerai sensé is secured in every line save one (line 8) by the parallel text,
Syll.z 390, but what was omitted and what inserted in the way of formai phra-
seology must remain uncertain. Pomtow's lines are mostly between sixty-five
and seventy-five letters long (1) : my own suggested restorations give for the most
part a line of between fifty and sixty letters, though some are longer. Pomtow's
restoration μουσικόν και ίππικόν in line 7, which nécessitâtes this long line,
seems, if I understand it correctly, misconceived (even with his own incorrect
reading εσεσθαι), since it confuses the nature of the festival and the status for
which récognition is sought. It was evidently not within the power of the decree-
ing party, hère the Amphictyons, to détermine whether a festival should be
gymnastic or musical or both : this depended on the founder. The duty of the
Amphictyons (and of the Nesiotai) was to recognise its status as equal to that of
one of the great festivals (2). The phrase μουσικόν και ίππικόν seems therefore
out of place in this context, and no other line seems to necessitate a restoration
of this length. In any case it is évident, given the nature of the formulae employed,
that a considérable margin must be allowed.
Notes on the Texl.
Line 2 : Pomtow's ς ύπό βασιλέ[ως] is wrong. The stone has ^ INO, the oblique
stroke of the nu being clear. The restoration τίθη]σιν ό βασιλε[ύς] seems inévitable
but it involves a difficulty. (b), line 1, has πατρί αύτοϋ, and the parallel of Syll.3
390, lines 20 f ., shows that the restoration hère is probably something like [βασιλεύς
Πτολεμαίος... αγώνα τίθησι τώι]| πατρί αύτου [Πτολεμαίοι ]. On the other
hand lines 2-3 should evidently be restored [ αγώνα τίθη]σιν δ βασιλε[ύς]| Πτο
λεμαίος τώ[ι πατρί ]. In both passages the formula fits naturally, and is hard to
avoid. One explanation of this seeming répétition is that, as in Syll.3 390, the
first phrase occurs with référence to a previous occasion, while the occasion of the
présent decree is referred to in the words τίθη]σιν ό βασι