19. THASIAN CONTROVERSIES*
Introduction
My paper, 'The Foundation of Thasos',1 evoked some sharp rejoin ders from French experts in Thasian studies, which was not sur prising, since it questioned some cherished beliefs. At the time I made no reply, because I felt I had made my case and had noth ing to add. The issues of pre-Greek Thasos, the foundation date of the Greek colony, and its early days have, however, remained cur rent, and I return to those matters in the first part of this paper. In the second part I look again at the Great List of Theoroi. In this case I published a paper,2 differing from some of the conclu sions of Salviat,3 a paper in which I offended against a fundamen tal principle of epigraphy, that one should not treat a text without autopsy of the inscription itself. My breach of that rule was a calcu lated risk, because I yield to no one in my respect for Salviat's work, and thought I could rely entirely on his account of the document.
* I am very grateful to Harold Mattingly and Sara Owen, who kindly read parts of this paper in draft and made helpful suggestions, and to Alexandra Coucouzeli and Jorge Moreira for creating the figure. The following special abbreviations are used in this paper: IT= A.J. Graham, "The Foundation ofThasos," BSA 73 (1978) 62-98; 'Great List' = A. J. Graham, "On the great list of theori at Thasos," Ancient World 5 (1982) 103-21; IG = IG xii. 8; Martin, 'Colonie' = R. Martin, "Thasos colonie de Paros," ASAA 61 (1983) 171-7; Martin, 'Relations'= R. Martin, "Relations entre metropoles et colonies: aspects institutionnels," ci>tA.ia<; xaptv. Miscellanea di studi classici in onore di Eugenio Manni (Rome 1980) 4, 1435-45; Pouilloux, 'Fondation' = J. Pouilloux, "La fondation de Thasos: archeo1ogie, 1itterature et critique historique," Rqyonnement grec: lwmmages a Charles Delvoye (Brussels 1982) 91-101; 'Prosopographie' = "Prosopographie thasienne," Rech. ii (see below) pp. 253-311; Rech. i = J. Pouilloux, Recherches sur l'histoire et les cultes de 7hasos i (Etudes 7hasiennes iii, Paris 1954); Rech. ii = C. Dunant and J. Pouilloux, Recherches sur l'histoire et les cultes de 7hasos ii (Etudes 7hasiennes v, Paris 1957); Salviat, 'archontes' = F. Salviat, "Les archontes de Thasos," OpaKtuca tou fJ OtE9vm'><; auvEOpiou EAAT]VtKTJ<; Kat A. He did not, however, mention important facts, which he was able to use in his reply to my paper.4 Since I have now had the oppor tunity to study the blocks of the inscription preserved in the Louvre5 (and those in the museum at Thasos),6 I can now return to this controversy. Precolonial and Colonial The main contentions of my paper on the foundation of Thasos were: l) that the pottery found in the deep soundings of the Champ Heraklis and Champ Dimitriadis is truly precolonial, even though it was correctly dated by P. Bernard to, in general terms, the first half of the seventh century; 2) that the abundant Cycladic pottery, the earliest of which may be dated c. 650, thus provides the first archae ological evidence of the arrival of the Greek colonists from Paras; 3) that the literary evidence, widely thought to attest a higher date (c. 680) for the foundation of the colony, offers, when correctly inter preted, no better date than about the middle of the seventh cen tury; 4) that we can, therefore, conclude that there is no conflict between the indications of the two categories of evidence, and the foundation of the Greek colony should be dated c. 650. In addition, there were some subsidiary conclusions and specula tive suggestions, viz.: l) that the literary evidence does not show that Telesicles, the father of Archilochus, was the oikistes of the Greek colony; 2) that the colonization was probably forcible; 3) that the opportunity for Greek colonization in the Thracian region may have been offered by the ending of Phoenician interests in that part of the Mediterranean. Apart from brief expressions of dissent, three substantial replies to my paper were published, two by Martin and one by Pouilloux. 7 It ' BCH 1983. 5 It is a great pleasure to acknowledge my kind reception by the Director and Staff at the Louvre, who made the conditions for my work ideal. I also thank the Research Fondation of the University of Pennsylvania for a grant to finance my travel, both to Paris and Thasos. 6 I am most grateful to Dr. H. Koukouli-Chrysanthaki, Ephor at Kavala, and to her Staff for allowing me to study the inscriptions in the Museum of Thasos, and providing excellent facilities. I was not able to see the block Thasos Inventory 249 (= Reck. i. 35), as it could not be located. 7 Martin, 'Colonie' and 'Relations'; Pouilloux, 'Fondation'.