Journal of Roman Studies http://journals.cambridge.org/JRS Additional services for Journal of Roman Studies: Email alerts: Click here Subscriptions: Click here Commercial reprints: Click here Terms of use : Click here Roman Inscriptions 2006–2010 Alison E. Cooley and Benet Salway Journal of Roman Studies / Volume 102 / November 2012, pp 172 ­ 286 DOI: 10.1017/S0075435812001074, Published online: 01 October 2012 Link to this article: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S0075435812001074 How to cite this article: Alison E. Cooley and Benet Salway (2012). Roman Inscriptions 2006–2010. Journal of Roman Studies, 102, pp 172­286 doi:10.1017/S0075435812001074 Request Permissions : Click here Downloaded from http://journals.cambridge.org/JRS, IP address: 144.82.107.89 on 05 Nov 2012 SURVEY ARTICLE Roman Inscriptions 2006–2010 ALISON E. COOLEY AND BENET SALWAY IGENERAL I.i General Introduction The aim of this quinquennial survey remains the same as its predecessor, as for the most part does the format, though the team is regrettably reduced by one.1 With an eye to the study of the Roman world, we hope to signal the most important newly published inscriptions, signicant reinterpretations of previously published material, new trends in scholarship, recent studies that draw heavily on epigraphic sources, and noteworthy developments in the various aids to understanding inscriptions (both traditional printed material and electronic resources). In the context of this journal, the geographical range and chronological scope reect the contours and history of the Roman state from its beginnings down to the end of the seventh century. As such, not only does the survey naturally take in Greek as well as Latin texts, but also epigraphic material in other languages relevant to the Roman world. In the hope that they might usefully reect the various elds of primary interest to readers of this journal, we have maintained the categories established in the last survey. These comprise, after material of general interest and signicance, principal divisions under the headings of (II) Government, law, and authority, (III) Cities, (IV) Funerary epigraphy, (V) Religions, and (VI) Language, literature, and onomastics. The structure of the rst section has been changed somewhat in order to give greater prominence to those inscriptions here singled out as historical highlights. The organization of the discussion within each section (or subsection) generally moves between the thematic, chronological, and geographical, as seems to suit the material best. As noted already in the introduction to the last survey, the quantity of new material and studies published within a ve-year period has now reached such a level that it is neither possible nor desirable to offer comprehensive coverage. An indicator of the volume is the fact that the annual round-up of L’Année épigraphique now regularly runs to over 1,800 entries, which, as its editor has observed, is due as much to the greater attention paid to fragmentary and non-monumental texts as it is to new discoveries.2 Nevertheless, two areas in particular account for signicant numbers of new nds. Not only economic development but also, and increasingly, locally directed archaeological excavations in Turkey mean that the Anatolian provinces continue to yield a rich harvest of epigraphic nds. The most spectacular examples in recent times have come not so much from the traditionally productive areas of Ionia, Lydia, and Caria but from the Tekke peninsula (ancient Lycia), the subject of a three-day conference concerned 1 Primary responsibility for the individual sections is as follows: Cooley I.ii, I.iii (Italy and the West), I.v, II.i–ii, III (Italy and the West), IV; Salway I.i, I.iii (Balkans and Greek East), I.iv, I.vi, II.iii–iv, III (Balkans and Greek East), V–VI. Credit for masterminding the enterprise belongs to Cooley. The authors wish to thank the journal’s anonymous readers for suggesting various improvements. Abbreviations for epigraphic publications follow F. Bérard et al., Guide de l’épigraphiste4 (2010), those for periodicals L’Année philologique. Citations by author and date refer to the consolidated bibliography at the end of the survey. 2 Corbier (2008) = AE (2008), 16. JRS 102 (2012), pp. 172–286. © The Author(s) 2012. Published by The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies. doi:10.1017/S0075435812001074 ROMAN INSCRIPTIONS 2006– 2010 173 with the impact of this new material on the history of the region.3 The other growth area continues to be the bronze diplomas issued to military personnel, mostly turning up unprovenanced on the antiquities market but almost certainly largely deriving from the Balkans. The number of new examples published in a year sometimes exceeds thirty or so, although many are fragments rather than complete artefacts. Accordingly, we are compelled to be selective and are not able to engage as closely with each publication as it may deserve. By way of compensation we have registered in the notes fuller summaries and reviews where they exist. Given the limits of our knowledge and expertise, it is also probable that our choices in particular areas are somewhat arbitrary and unrepresentative. For the specialist, the survey cannot substitute for the annual instalments of AE or the Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum nor for that essential bibliographic tool, the Guide de l’épigraphiste, which has recently reached its fourth edition and has already received its rst annual supplement (now available free of charge as a download).4 A handy online register of new publications of and on Latin inscriptions of the late antique and early medieval West was established by M. Handley in 2010.5 Navigation of past issues of the annual commentary on new nds and studies in the eld of Greek inscriptions provided by the Bulletin épigraphique of the Revue des études grecques has been assisted in two respects: as well as the consolidated, revised, and indexed collection of D. Feissel’s commentaries on the later Roman material from 1987 to 2004, signalled in the last survey,6 the notices of the later years of M. and Mme Robert (1978–1987) have recently received full indices.7 Probably the most substantial single publication to be considered for this quinquennium is the proceedings of the Twelfth International Congress of Greek and Latin Epigraphy, held in Barcelona in 2002.8 Despite the diversity of their contents, these two volumes offer particularly rich pickings — a result of the Congress’s thematic focus upon the provinces of the Roman Empire as seen through the epigraphic evidence. The regrettable absence of any indices to the limited edition printed version of the acts might represent a major impediment to their consultation, were it not for the publication of the proceedings on searchable CD-Rom. Nevertheless, although the congress was organized into thematic panels, aside from the opening and closing addresses, the published papers are presented strictly in alphabetical order of author’s name. It might then be helpful to pick out the plenary lectures and, for the majority that did make it into print, to signal their location in the published acts. The plenary sessions covered new nds in Greek epigraphy (A. D. Rizakis, V. Kontorini) and Roman epigraphy (G. Paci, M. Corbier),9 epigraphy of the transition between Republic and Empire (S. Panciera),10 cultural diversity in the Spanish provinces (F. Beltrán, A. U. Stylow),11 Greek epigraphy as a reection of the development of the polis (C. Roueché), socio-geographic mobility (H. Solin, O. Salomies),12 Greek epigraphy in the West (M. L. Lazzarini),13 interplay between text and monument (I. Di Stefano Manzella),14 and prosopography and 3 Schuler (ed.) (2007) = AE (2007), 1480 and SEG 57 (2007), 1630. 4 Bérard et al. (2010); Premier supplément, Juin 2011, available at http://www.antiquite.ens.fr/IMG/le/ pdf_guide_epi/2011_supplement.pdf 5 New Publications in Late Antique and Early Medieval Epigraphy 2008–: http://handley-inscriptions.webs.com/ newpublications.htm 6 Feissel (2006a), reviewed in AntTard 16 (2008), 349–56 (F. G. B. Millar). 7 Marcillet-Jaubert et al. (2010). 8 Mayer et al. (2007) = AE (2007), 2–7. 9 Rizakis (2007); Corbier and Fauduet (2007) = AE (2007), 4. 10 Panciera (2007a) = AE (2007), 3. 11 Stylow (2007). 12 Salomies (2007a) and Solin (2007d) = AE (2007), 116–17. 13 Lazzarini (2007). 14 Di Stefano Manzella (2007) = AE (2007), 3. 174 ALISON E. COOLEY AND BENET SALWAY provincial government (A. R. Birley).15 In comparison, the Thirteenth Congress, held in Oxford in 2007, on the theme of epigraphy and the historical sciences, was more balanced in its coverage of matters Greek (Archaic to Hellenistic) as well as Roman. Although comprehensive acta have not been produced, the summaries of all contributions, including even the posters, were published at the time.16 Indeed the poster, as a format for short communications at these meetings, came into its own for the rst time in Oxford, with eighty displayed, about half of which were also submitted electronically and, for the time-being at least, remain freely accessible.17 Meanwhile the plenary lectures are due to appear in print in time for the fourteenth CIEGL in Berlin.18 Rivalling the acts of the Barcelona Congress in scale and diversity is the three-volume publication of the conference of 2006 in honour of Silvio Panciera. The papers are arranged into thematic sections covering the republican period, the city of Rome, municipalities and coloniae, the aristocracy, the military, and the practice of epigraphy.19 As with the acts of the Barcelona Congress, the frustrating lack of any indices is (at least to some extent) compensated for by the availability of a searchable PDF from the publisher’s website.20 Noteworthy among the trends observable from the material collected in this survey is the fact that the development and consultation of electronic resources has become such an everyday part of the work of recording, cataloguing, and studying inscriptions that it may be redundant to devote a separate section to such matters in the future.