Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nmvwc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-27T18:31:34.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pour encourager les autres: Athens and Egesta encore

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Alan Henry
Alan Henry
Affiliation:
Monash University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A propos of his earlier attempt to demonstrate, by means of measurements, computer-enhanced images and laser technology, that the archon of IG i311 was Antiphon (418/17), not Habron (458/7), Mortimer Chambers now quotes with approval the favourable verdict of J. Tréheux: ‘la mésure des intervalles entre les lettres, la superposition des photographies multiples et, surtout, le bombardement du marbre par un rayon laser ont prouvé (les photographies en couleur A et B ne permettent pas d'en douter)

Type
Shorter Notes
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 45 , Issue 1 , May 1995 , pp. 237 - 240
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1995

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 See Chambers, M. H., Galluci, R. and Spanos, P., ‘Athens' Alliance with Egesta in the Year of Antiphon,’ ZPE 83 (1990), 38–63 (hereinafter Chambers 1990)Google Scholar, with Plates I–III and colour Plates A, B (= Acta of the International Seminar in Greek and Roman Epigraphy, ed. Ian Worthington, Bonn, 1990, 38–63).

2 See ‘The Archon's Name in the Athenian-Egesta Alliance (IG I311),’ ZPE 98 (1993), 171–4Google Scholar. (Cf. also Chambers' paper in CJ 88 (1992), 25–31Google Scholar, especially the Addendum on pp. 29–31).

3 REG 104 (1991), 469Google Scholar.

4 See “Through a Laser Beam Darkly: Space-age Technology and the Egesta decree (I.G. i3 11),’ ZPE 91 (1992), 137–46 (hereinafter Henry, 1992)Google Scholar; and cf. also my comments in The Anc. Hist. Bull. 7 (1993), 49–53Google Scholar.

5 At least the issue is being pursued in a gentlemanly way, with little or no racket-abuse. Absit odium epigraphicum!

6 See note 2 above, ZPE 98 (1993)Google Scholar, hereinafter referred to as Chambers, 1993.

7 I thought I had made myself clear; I apologize for any obscurity in my original presentation.

8 Chambers, 1993, 171.

9 Chambers, op. tit., 172.

10 Henry, 1992, 144–5.

11 My colleague Prof. Gordon Lister, a geologist with particular expertise in the area of Greek marbles, commented to me in a letter of 9 May 1989: ‘I can imagine that the zone of microcracking, viewed from behind, would be a little like looking at a neon sign with conical glasses on. The image would have a certain degree of ambiguity.’

12 Chambers, 1993, 172.

13 Chambers, 1990, 44.

14 Chambers, 1993, 172.

15 Cf. Henry, 1992, 144.

16 Chambers, 1993, 172.

17 Lest the reader should grow weary over such details, Chambers, 1993, 173, relegates this unwelcome anomaly to a footnote (n. 11).

18 Henry, 1992, 141.