The Classical Review http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR

Additional services for The Classical Review:

Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here

An Unrecorded Attic Colony in ?

Lewis R. Farnell

The Classical Review / Volume 20 / Issue 01 / February 1906, pp 27 - 31 DOI: 10.1017/S0009840X00993557, Published online: 27 October 2009

Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0009840X00993557

How to cite this article: Lewis R. Farnell (1906). An Unrecorded Attic Colony in Euboea?. The Classical Review, 20, pp 27-31 doi:10.1017/S0009840X00993557

Request Permissions : Click here

Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/CAR, IP address: 147.188.128.74 on 23 Mar 2015 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 27 extant line of the 'AOrprauav iro\vrtia and in meaning fourteen chapters earlier. (2) As Plutarch, V. Solonis c. 12, referring to the to the meaning of apia-rivSrjv with such a same event, viz. the constitution of the court verb as alpeio-dai in the undoubted writings which tried the Alcmaeonidae. I do not of Aristotle there can be no shadow of doubt. challenge Mr. Greenidge's statement that If we turn to Politics ii. 11, 1273 a 23, 26, when applied to these early constitutions the same mode of election which in the one api

AN UNRECORDED ATTIC COLONY IN EUBOEA?

(A paper read before the Oxford Philological Society, 1905.)

I MAY be permitted to revive the discus- transportation, quoting other examples of sion of a document of which the importance inscribed stones being carried from one place appears to have been overlooked and the to another sometimes perhaps as ships'- true interpretation not yet agreed upon. A ballast. In the following number of the few years ago a mutilated inscription was same journal, 1903, p. 133, Papabasileios found in Euboea in the territory of Chalkis replies to Wilhelm and tries to maintain his and published with conjectural emendations original position. by Papabasileios in the Ephemeris Archai- Any one at all familiar with Attic epi- ologiki, 1902, p. 29. Leaving aside what is graphy will at once be convinced by the ex- conjectural, we discern at a glance that the amination of the inscription that Wilhelm is block contains a portion of a Upos vo/xos, the right in his main contention, and the epi- ritual-code of some community, prescribing graphical knowledge and insight of this sacrifices to various deities and apportioning scholar are well known. The writing and to various sacred or secular officials their re- the vocabulary prove the document to be of spective perquisites of the offerings: we re- Attic origin; and the authority of the cognise also a purely Attic dialect and a form Greek editor's opinion is destroyed by his of writing that prevailed in Attica near to the assertion that the script of Chalkis and middle of the fifth century B.C. and for Eretria were at this time the same as the nearly a generation later, before the alphabet Attic: students of Greek epigraphy and was completely Ionicised. The Greek scholar dialects are aware that this is contrary to who has published it maintains that it is a the facts, and Wilhelm rightly exposes the Chalkidic document and that the divinities inaccuracy of this supposition in his final and heroes mentioned belong to the old state reply (Eph. Arch. 1904, p. 103). religion of Chalkis and Euboea. But in the On the other, hand, the decision of the same number of the Eph. Arch. p. 137, his latter scholar that the content of the inscrip- opinion is strongly controverted by Wilhelm, tion, the cults of deities and heroes clearly who insists on the purely Attic character of the decipherable in the list, is wholly consistent writing and the vocabulary and argues that with what we know of the Attic religion, all the personages of the worship belong to does not entirely commend itself on reflec- Attic religion and finally explains its dis- tion ; and still less convincing is the Greek covery in Euboea as due to some accidental editor's view that the cults are wholly 28 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. Euboeic. We must always bear in mind heroic honours in Euboea as the ancestor of that our record is incomplete, as Wilhelm an Ionic stock, and this fragment of the points out, and we must beware of dogmatis- inscription cannot be urged as proof of the ing too rigidly on the basis of it: divinities Attic rather than the Euboeic character of and heroes were no doubt often worshipped the document. in localities where no ancient authority at- A 1. 10 shows us the letters El EN TO I tests their presence. Still the fairly ample EUAIEI which Papabasileios interprets as. evidence at our disposal creates a certain 'A<£po8tTci h> T<3 iXcutl — ' Aphrodite in the probability as to questions of cult-localities, olive-yard,' and calls attention to the inter- without which we could not argue on these esting fact that in the neighbourhood of lines at all. Now certain of the divine Chalkis there exists a chapel Ilavayias T>}S personages mentioned here are no more Attic than Euboeic, Pythios, Artemis, 'JSAauwoT/s. But Wilhelm maintains that for instance. We must look for in the space before the first two letters El more definitely local figures and still more there is no sign of T (this is clear from the for local appellatives that we can fix to a facsimile) and he discovers traces of the certain geographical point. oblique stroke of the Attic U ; if this is Wilhehn believes that he has found some certain, a point which the facsimile published of these in the inscriptions, enough to prove does not enable us to determine, his restora- the Attic character of the whole. In column tion is inevitable 'HpaKXei iv ra\rj a deme of the Hippothoontid tribe (C.I.A. the unknown name of an unknown promon- 1, 164, 1. 6, 170, 7, 173, 4: Steph. s.v. tory supposed to be in Euboea is ineffectual. 'EAcuevs). He does not however explain or But Wilhelm's proof that the Kynosoura notice the curious use of the article in the where sacrifice was offered to Tropaios phrase iv T& 'EAatet, which throws some was in Salamis, was very confusedly stated doubt on the identification which he proposes, in his first paper and not clearly given in his for the article as far as I can find is never last. However when we compare Herodotus used in this way with a deme: it is there- 8, 76-77 with Paus. 1, 36, 1 and G. I. A. 2, fore somewhat more natural to interpret iv 471, we may conclude that the long promon- TO iXcutZ as='in the olive-yard,' a vague tory in Salamis almost opposite the temple phrase directing us to no known locality, of Artemis Munychia on the Attic shore was although i\aitvs is not found elsewhere in called Kynosoura (the name agrees excel- this sense.1 lently with its shape) and that this was where the epheboi sacrificed to Zeus Tropaios (vide At the end of column A there are certain also Milchbfer Text zu Karten von Attica blurred strokes visible which Wilhelm con- vii, viii, 27). We may remember that there fidently interpretsas [NYN][A]l£ K[A]| was another Kynosoura at Marathon, and [AX]E[UOOl]. The original then must that here also there may well have been an reveal something more than the published altar of Zeus Tropaios to commemorate the copy. We may trust his authority as to the great battle; only there is no record of it. letters, and I cannot suggest any other It is reasonable then to accept Wilhelm's restoration than his. Nevertheless he is view that this phrase in the inscription rather too hasty in using this as a clinching refers to the Salaminian cult. 1 For iKaifis in the sense of ' a place of olives,' Line 11 shows the letters OOOI AMNOS, a common noun of local significance, Papabasileios and the first letters are evidently part of the compares such forms as Bovaxcis, xaneis, QeWtis (Eph. Arch. 1902, p. 36). The first example is name of some deity or in the dative: certainly relevant. $€\\evs is the name of an Papabasileios suggests Xouthos, the ancestor Attic deme, and the termination ' evs,' which occurs of the Ionic stock or Kothos a dimly remem- in the names of many of these demes (cf. 'E\arpeis bered Euboean hero ; other restorations ap- in Delos), is thought to be adjectival. But the deme *eXAeus means ' a rocky place'; and it seems pear possible, and if Xouthos (XSOOOl) that the termination could be used for the forma- is the most probable as Wilhelm maintains, tion of a local descriptive name, whether a proper we can easily understand his name appear- or a common name. If the Attic deme 'EAaieuj meant originally 'the olive-place,' such a word ing among the cult-figures of the Marathonian could occur elsewhere as descriptive of similar lo- tetrapolis, though it has not yet been found calities. Neither the Greek editor nor the German there; but he could also have received scholar considers the question about the article. THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 29 proof that the document is dealing here with occurred in an Attic inscription found in a purely Athenian cult; certainly the cult- Attica, we should not be startled. The association of the and Achelous ancients have not bequeathed us an exhaus- was established on the banks of the Ilissus tive record of Attic religion, and no one (Plat. PKaedr. 230 B) ; but he should have professes to know the whole. But where it considered, if he was aware of the fact, that is a question whether a document belongs it also existed at Oropus, in the district of to Attica or Euboea, the name of Glaukos the Euripos (Paus. 1, 34, 2). occurring as a cult-name in it makes for the But the most convincing proof that the Euboeic theory, for his home was at Anthe- content of the document belongs in part at don on the Euripos and according to one least to the sphere of Attic religion is afforded story Euboea was his mother. by line 5 of column A where the words But there is no cult-name in either OUYTOI refer to the cult of Hippolytos column which is as unmistakeably Euboeic or Aphrodite i 'l7nroA.iJT([>, both hero and as that of Hippolytos is Attic : unless we goddess being worshipped on the Attic Acro- were to accept the conjectured restoration of polis owing to Troezenian influences. It is Papabasileios for 1. 8 Col. B ['Apre/tuSos Ni]- surprising that this fact which is fatal o-aias which can scarcely be called convincing. to the hypothesis of the purely Chalkidic We may then describe the inscription as character of the inscription should have been a document found in the neighbourhood of ignored by the Greek editor (for the Attic Chalkis written in Attic script and dialect, cult vide my Cults, vol. 2, p. 658 and Aphro- d containing allusions to purely Attic religion dite R ll ). but also to cults that seem to belong to the On the other hand Wilhelm does not Euripos district rather than to Attica. And sufficiently appreciate the difficulty of ac- Wilhehn's hypothesis though preferable to counting for the inclusion of such cults the other scholar's does not explain all the as those of Glaukos and Eros (Col. A 1. 12 phenomena; nor does it help us to understand and 1. 4) in a genuine Attic calendar. As on what sort of occasion and under what cir- regards1 the latter, a mere argument from cumstances this state-archive was inscribed. the silence of our records is admittedly It does not seem to be a statement of accounts unsatisfactory; but here we can say more showing the expenses incurred by officials in than that they have hitherto given us no their management of the various local rituals: evidence that Eros was admitted among the only one cipher-sign is discernible in what divinities of the Attic state : they allow us remains of both columns (B 1. 11). It is to maintain that if he was admitted at least not the Upbs vd/xos of a single Attic dis- before the time of and Plato trict or deme ; for on Wilhelm's view of the certain definite statements in these authors text, we find cults of Salamis Athens and are unintelligible; for both deny that there Elaieus grouped together. Nor can it be a was any such cult, and though they were comprehensive enactment dealing with wrong as regards the Greek world as a Attica as a whole; for its mention of 6 whole (witness and Parion) they dpxvyenys compels us to believe that it is must have known the truth about the reli- dealing with the ritual of some single cult- gion of their own native land (vide Cults, centre. k vol. 2, Aphrodite R 119 : the altar said to And finally we may feel that it is a prima have been erected by Charmos in the time facie objection to Wilhelm's theory, that it of Peisistratos, if the story is genuine, supposes the inscription to have been brought belonged merely to private cult, vide Athenae. by mere chance to the locality where it was p. 609 ", Paus. 1, 30, 1). The matter then found, and we may maintain that before resort- stands thus : we may say that we know the ing to this hypothesis we ought first to con- Eros-cult at this time to have been non- sider the possibility that it was originally Attic, we do not know whether it did or did and purposely set up there, though composed not exist in Euboea, but we have reason for and inscribed by Athenians. believing that Boeotian cult-influences were I would suggest that the real solution of rife in the latter region, and that the Thes- the problem lies in the proper interpreta- pian Eros was at this time a widely recog- tion of the word apxr/yerrji, which occurs at nised deity in . As regards Glaukos, least once (Col. B 1. 7). It is remarkable the case is somewhat different, but the con- that the significance of the term in such a clusion we should draw from the known context and the clue that it supplies should facts is the same. There is no trace of this have been entirely overlooked by Wilhelm marine demigod elsewhere on the soil or in and that the Greek editor should have the waters of Attica. But if his name nothing more to say about it than that 30 THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. pxnyi is probably the name of a Chalkidic and if so would probably be recommended to magistrate, though he is aware that the maintain the cults of their old homes and to proper title of the official in this community adopt certain others that were likely to be was 'Hye/wov. efficacious in their new. As - the style and nomenclature of this The advantage of this hypothesis as com- inscription is wholly Attic, we must inter- pared with any yet put forth is that it ex- pret dp^ycn/s in the Attic sense. The poets plains at once the employment of Attic use the word quite loosely with the meaning writing and dialect, the Attic character of of ruler or leader; but it did not occur in certain figures of the worship and the ap- the Attic technical terminology as a title of parently non-Attic character of others, and any ordinary magistrate or official, nor as it also supplies the motive for the publica- far as I am aware was it so used in other tion of a new religious code; and it accounts, Greek communities.1 In its technical appli- for the mention of the dpxjyyenjs. It is not cation it usually designated the divine or easy indeed to find another example of the heroic ancestor or founder of the city founder or leader of the colony enjoying this, or tribe or deme: thus Athena herself was title in his life-time ; he is usually the OIKIOTIJS dp^iyyeTts of Athens, as Apollo was apyrfyerq^ or KTtcmjs; and where we elsewhere findmen - of other communities; and the various tion of 6 apxifyeTrjs in narratives or records, eponymous heroes of Attic tribes and demes of cult2 we recognise him to be the divine might be worshipped as apxqyeTai. And the or heroised ancestor of the community; but. real individual who was the OIKKTTT/S of a new the examples are far too few to enable us to colony would be honoured as dpxi?y£'r>?s after affirm that it could not be applied to the his death. It is possible also that at Athens living founder and there is nothing in the the word might be sometimes applied to the word to suggest why it should not be. founder of a new cult, a significance which If the hypothesis put forward contains we may attach to the term in an Argive the truth, the importance of the inscription sepulchral inscription which designates a is greatly enhanced; for it becomes the only priestess—who is represented on the stone record of an otherwise unattested Athenian with sceptre and key—as dc^ayeris. Follow- settlement in the neighbourhood of Chalkis ing this leading clue I would therefore and Eretria after the re-conquest of the island venture this explanation of the whole by Pericles in B.C. 445. Strabo,3 Diodorus,4 document before us: it is a ritual-code regu- and Plutarch 5 only mention the Attic settle- lating the public worship of a settlement ment on the land of Histiaea in the north of of Athenian citizens who have been sent the island; the last author speaks indeed of out to colonise vacant lands in the neigh- the expulsion of the Hippobotae from bourhood of Chalkis or Eretria : the settlers Chalkis by Pericles, but is silent as to the are chosen from various Attic demes and sending of cleruchs thither. The scholiast transplant with them some of their indi- on Aristophanes 6 talks vaguely and uselessly genous local cults, from the neighbourhood about Athens planting cleruchies in Euboea of Athens, from Salamis, or the tetrapolis: (' iKKqpovyy)(Tav awnjv') but adds the impor- they also adopt certain worships that belong tant statement from Philochorus that only to the new soil or to the vicinity, such as Histiaea was colonised and that the rest of those of Glaukos and Eros : the leader of the the country iir 6/toA.oyta KaTao-Ta#}vai. We colony is the dpjfijyenjs who will receive divine have the actual texts of the compacts which honours after his death. It appears from Athens made with Chalkis and Eretria,7 one the context in which his title appears on the clause guaranteeing that no citizens should stone that he is still living, for he is associated be exiled. Yet we are told that Pericles with certain officials who enjoy perquisites did expel the Chalkidic Hippobotae, and at the sacrifices. One of the first acts of the whether Plutarch was right or wrong in newly settled community would be to legis- this matter, the Euboean losses in the late concerning the Upd or public liturgies, campaign might have left certain lands for which purpose they might consult Delphi, vacant which Attic cleruchs could settle on without breach of the public compact. 1 Herodotus 9, 86 calls the leading men of the Medising faction at Thebes ipxty*™ "^ '•rpdnovs, 2 E.g. in the recently discovered inscription in but he is evidently using the word in its vague Delos, Bvll. Corr. Hell. 1903 (xxvii. p. 75, 1. 99). literary sense, and we know that the technical oiKofio/jLTJirai rby irepfj8o\ov TOV !Ap«ner*v. name for the magistrates at Thebes was not this. 3 P. 445. In the Delphic-Spartan rhetra apxay^rai is used as * 12, 7 : 12, 22. a synonym for the kings, but Plutarch in his in- 5 Perid. 23. terpretation (Lye. 6) does not imply that this was 6 Clouds 213. ever their official title in their life-time. i C.I.A. iv. 27». THE CLASSICAL REVIEW. 31 On a small tablet found near the Propy- the resettlement of Lesbos after the revolt; laea * in the writing of the latter part of the but the former opinion that we should fifth century we find record of an Athenian restore es 'Bpsrpiav might find favour again, diroucia h *Ep . . . .; the stone is broken at a if the interpretation of our new document tantalising point: the accepted restoration is which I have proposed were to be accepted. now « "Eptaov and refers the inscription to LEWIS R. FARNELL. 1 G.I.A. 1, 339.

THE RELATION OF THE RESOLVED ARSIS AND RESOLVED THESIS IN PLAUTUS TO THE PROSE ACCENT.

No satisfactory attempt has ever been admission of dactyls, anapaests, and proce- made to account for the existence of the leusmatics to the dialogue metres. As these strict rules observed by Plautus, and the rules serve purposes so very similar, they early Roman dramatists generally, in the use naturally overlap sometimes; but it will be of dactyls, anapaests, and proceleusmatics in convenient to consider them in the form in dialogue verse. Why, for instance, is a dac- which they are usually stated. It is demon- tylic word not a good substitute for a trochee, strable that they are all particular cases, or seeing that an anapaestic word is a perfectly at least corollaries of a single law, which good substitute for an iambus ? Or why is may be stated thus :— an anapaest divided as in hds\tibus 6m\nibus Except in the first foot of a colon, a re- forbidden, while a dactyl divided as in qude solved arsis or thesis must, in dialogue metres, uo\Us faci\am omnia is perfectly legitimate 1 begin in a syllable which would bear in prose It is true that explanations have been sug- the primary or secondary word-accent, or a gested of one or two particular rules, but sentence-accent? they are far from convincing. Thus the rule As regards the proceleusmatic, it has al- forbidding caesura in a resolved thesis in ready been shown by A. W. Ahlberg that dialogue verse is explained by Prof. Lindsay both the arsis and the thesis of that par- as due to the desire of the Roman drama- ticular foot must begin in syllables accented tists not to add to the length of the 'irra- in prose (De Proceleusmaticis, etc., Lund, tional ' thesis by ' the pause that inevitably 1900, p. 36. Cf. Ritschl, Prol. Trin. p. 289). attends upon the conclusion of a word.'* His method was the collection and classifica- But it is not the fact that a pause necessarily tion of all the proceleusmatics occurring in or usually occurs between words in a spoken the dialogue metres of Plautus and Terence. sentence, the division of sentences into words Such a method would be hardly practicable being logical, not phonetic. Further, caesura for the resolved arses and theses generally; is just as strictly forbidden in the resolved but I hope, by a different method, to show arsis of the same feet, which arsis is not that every resolved arsis or resolved thesis ' irrational.' It is therefore hard to see why found in Plautus is constructed in obedience such an explanation is offered. All these to the same law. The one seeming excep- rules have for their object the determining tion— the case in which a resolved arsis of the conditions under which certain feet seems to begin in a short final syllable— may be admitted to trochaic and iambic will be separately discussed below. It should verse, and these feet resemble one another be observed that, like the proposed law, the in having ' irrational' theses, and resolution particular rules which are deducible from it of the arsis or of the thesis or of both. as corollaries do not apply to the first foot What is needed therefore is a comprehensive of a colon.3 Also the few iambic and trochaic explanation. The true reason for the ex- lines occurring in the Cantica should not be istence of any one of these rules will prob- ably be the reason for the existence of all 2 It need hardly be said that this law did not at first occur to the writer in the form in which it is the rest. To show that such a comprehensive here presented. It emerged in the course of a explanation is possible is the purpose of the minute analysis of many hundreds of lines, under- present paper. taken with a view to discovering the exact means by which the dramatists avoided metrical ambi- Writers on Plautine metric usually recog- guity. It is here demonstrated in what seems to nize some five or six rules regulating the be the briefest possible form. 3 See O. Seyffert in Berl. Phil. Woch. 1891, 1 Introduction to Captiui, 1900, p. 68. p. 926.