Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-8zxtt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-11T08:32:37.731Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Athens Honours Proxenos (IG i2. 146)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

Extract

This document is one of a number of Attic proxeny-decrees that A. G. Woodhead considered to be evidence for Athenian concern with the south-west Aegean towards the end of the fifth century B.C. He identified the honorand Proxenos as a native of Chalke, a small island off the west coast of Rhodes. I share the view of J. and L. Robert that Woodhead has not proved his case either for the date or for the ethnic.

The inscription is non-stoichedon, its engraving inexpert and careless, with several mistakes untidily erased and corrected. There is a mixture of Attic and Ionic letter-forms in the first three lines (gamma, eta, and lambda are Ionic, while xi is written chi sigma); otherwise the lettering is Attic, indicating a date before 403 B.C.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Hesperia xvii (1948) 54–60; the inscription is preserved in the Epigraphical Museum in Athens (EM 8119). I should like to express my gratitude to Mrs. Dina Peppas-Delmousou, the Director of the Epigraphical Museum, for permission to study this document and to publish a photograph of it. I should like also to thank Mrs. Peppas-0Delmousou and Professors D. W. Bradeen, J. Breslin, C. W. J. Eliot, M. F. McGregor, and E. Vanderpool for their advice and criticism of earlier drafts of this paper, and to acknowledge the financial assistance granted me by the Canada Council that enabled me to spend the summer of 1971 in Athens.

2 REG lxii (1949) 103–4 no. 42.

3 I know of no published inscription that is certainly by the same hand; however, there are points of similarity (especially delta, lambda, nu, omicron, and upsilon) in the hand of Face A of Gi i2. 310, dated 10429/8 B.c.; closer is the first hand of IG i2. 25, dated to 424/3 B.C. (alpha, beta, omicron, sigma, upsilon); less close are those of IG i2, 111 and 112, both dated in 410/9 B.C., and of IG ii2. 57, probably to be dated early in the fourth century B.C. A date in the 420s seems likeliest, though one closer to the end of the century is not impossible. The mixture of Attic and Ionic letter-forms in the heading is a peculiarity shared by the heading of SEG x. 108 (IG i2. 144 + 155), probably dated in 416/15 B.c.; I shall discuss possible connections between that decree and IG i2. 146 later in the course of this paper.

4 The name is a common one, during the fifth century and later, throughout Greece. In many cases its use as a personal name may have occurred first as a result of the desire to commemorate in a family the holding of the office of the proxenia by one of its members, after which it became a regular family name.

5 EA (1898) 12: [ἔδο]χσεν τε͂ι βολε͂ι κα[ὶ το̃ι δέμοι· ἀναγράφσαι πρό|χ]σενον το̃ν [Χαλκιδέον τὸν δεῖνα ἐστέλει λι|θ]ίνει ἐν πό[λει -----].

6 IG i2. 146, lines 4–7:

7 Loc. cit.:

8 Op. cit., plate I.

9 For instance, while Ionic lambda is found in lines 1 and 2, Attic lambda is preferred in lines 4 and 6; epsilon is preferred to eta in line 4, and chi-sigma serves instead of xi in lines 4 and 5.

10 IG i2. 143, line 5 provides a parallel for the phrase

11 See Meritt, B. D., Wade-Gery, H. T., and McGregor, M. F., The Athenian Tribute-Lists i (Cambridge, Mass., 1939) 439.Google Scholar

12 See Meritt, B. D., Hesperia xxi (1952) 344Google Scholar: in the fifth century B.C. there is no instance of the ethnic being used in honorifics without the article.

13 See Bechtel, F., Die historischen Personennamen der Griechen bis zur Kaiserzeit (Hildesheim, 1964; reprint of 1917 edition) 514 and 544Google Scholar; IG. i2, 304; ii2, 652.

14 Dr. D. M. Lewis informs me in correspondence that there are no instances from the fifth century of the phrase even where syntactical usage elsewhere in the decree might lead one to expect it, as here.

15 See IG i2. 143, probably dated in the 440s.