Fish Lists in the Wilderness

Home , Anthedon (Boeotia), Anthedon (Palestine), Antiphanes (comic poet), Epaminondas, Missolonghi

FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS: The Social and Economic History of a Boiotian Price Decree Author(s): Ephraim Lytle Source: Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Vol. 79, No. 2 (April-June 2010), pp. 253-303 Published by: The American School of Classical Studies at Athens Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40835487 . Accessed: 18/03/2014 10:14

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The American School of Classical Studies at Athens is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Hesperia: The Journal of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions HESPERIA 79 (2OIO) FISH LISTS IN THE Pages 253~3°3 WILDERNESS The Social and Economic History of a Boiotian Price Decree

ABSTRACT

This articlepresents a newtext and detailed examination of an inscribedHel- lenisticdecree from the Boiotian town of Akraiphia (SEG XXXII 450) that consistschiefly of lists of fresh- and saltwaterfish accompanied by prices. The textincorporates improved readings and restoresthe final eight lines of the document,omitted in previouseditions. The discussioncovers the arrangementof the text and the sources of the lists, one of which probably originated in a customhousein the nearby port of Anthedon, as wellas thelarger social and economiccontext of the decree, which has beengenerally misunderstood.

An enigmaticHellenistic inscription on twostones from the Boiotian town ofAkraiphia (SEG XXXII 450) consistschiefly of a longlist offish names accompaniedby numbersthat are presumedto be prices.1Although its importancehas been recognizedby some scholars, and theevidence it pro- videslies at the heartof influentialrecent work on fishingand the ancient economy,the inscriptionnevertheless remains little studied and its wider implicationslargely unexplored. This maybeattributable inpart to itsorigins in themurky waters of Hellenistic Boiotia, but it is also thecase thatmany of the document'smost important features have been misinterpreted. This réévaluationof the decreeis dividedinto six sections.It begins witha reviewof the modernhistory of the inscriptionand a new edition of the text,which, apart from the shortprescript, appears never to have beenreexamined, in spiteof deficiencies in theeditto princeps, including the omissionof the final eight lines. This reexaminationleads in thefollowing sectionto new conclusionsabout the composition of the document and its

1. ForAkraiphia, see Fossey1988, Once calledKarditsa, the modern village Sosin and KentRigsby for their careful pp.265-275, with references; more re- has beenofficially renamed Aicpocíípviov. criticismof early drafts, to theanon- centlyDer neuePauly 1, 1996, cols. 408- I wouldlike to thankthe 9th Epho- ymousHesperia referees for valuable 409, s.v.Akraiphia (P. Funke).Various rateof Prehistoric and ClassicalAntiq- suggestions,and to MarkLandon and formsof the name are attested in antiq- uitiesand especiallythe ephor, Vassilis MollyRichardson for many improve- uity(ÄKpocupicc, ÄKpocicpia, ÄKpaicpiai, Aravantinos,for granting me permis- mentsto thetext. All translationsand ÄKpaicpiov,ÄKpaiipviov, ÄKpaicpvia), sionto studyand republishthis in- photographsare my own. givingrise to manytransliterations. scription.I am also indebtedto Joshua

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 254 EPHRAIM LYTLE arrangementon thestones. In thethird and fourth sections I explorethe originsof the two separate lists offish that appear in the document, and the relationshipbetween those lists and the economies of Akraiphia and the neighboringport of Anthedon. In thefifth section I reexaminethe prices recordedin the inscription and their implications for our understanding of therole offish in ancient food culture and the importance ofmarine fishing inthe Greek economy. Finally, I argue that the social context of this price decreeis morecomplex than previous discussions suggest.

THE HISTORY AND TEXT OF THE INSCRIPTION

In 1934M. P.Guillon extracted a badly weathered limestone block from thesuperstructure ofa modernwell in thevillage of Karditsa, on thesite of ancientAkraiphia. This stone,block B of theinscription, preserved tracesof at least41 linesof text recognizable as an alphabeticlist offish namesaccompanied by acrophonic numerals. In his publicationof the inscription,Michel Feyel managed to readthe names of 17 fish,only six ofwhich were accompanied by a whollylegible number.2 Nevertheless, he deducedthat the inscription represented a list of maximumprices expressedin obolsand chalks per mina, and he datedit, on thebasis of letteringand dialect, to theearly 2nd century b.c. The dateis consistent withhis interpretation ofthe list as a productof the political and social upheavalin Boiotiaduring this period, when, according to Polybios,the increasingpower of demagoguesforced the strategoi to enactpopular decreeson behalfof the poor.3 Feyel'spublication attracted little attention. Rostovtzeff cited the "curi- ousinscription from Acraiphia" in two footnotes in his Social and Economic theHellenistic World.4 and Léon Lacroix . 2. Feyel1936, pp. 27-36. Historyof D'ArcyThompson 3. 1936, 36. the forthe ofGreek fish names Feyel p. recognized inscription'simportance study 4. Rostovtzeff1941, vol. 3, p. 1369, andpublished, simultaneously, short articles on thenames that Feyel had n. 35, and p. 1615,n. 128. managedto read.5 Otherwise, scholars largely ignored the inscription until 5. Thompson1938; Lacroix1938. 1965,when Christian Llinas discovered in thevillage a secondinscribed Feyelhazarded a specificidentification forfewer than a half-dozenof the block,which also contained an alphabeticallist of fish names with prices namedfish, not surprising given the andapparently belonged to thesame inscription. Claude Vatin eventually notoriousdifficulties involved in publishedthe text of thisnew stone (block A), togetherwith a revised matchingancient fish names with the editionof the text of the first (block B).6 Paul Roeschsoon republished speciesknown to modernscience. theprescript on blockA (linesA.l-A.i.7), which contains the names of Feyel'stask was furthercomplicated thefact that A themagistrates responsible for the inscribing of the decree and a clause by Thompsons Glossary In ofGreek Fishes (1947) wouldnot be stipulatingthat the fishmongers employ certified weights.7 onlythree foranother decade. Both fulllines and four half- Roeschcorrected Vatin's text in a half- published lines, nearly Lacroixand Thompson were able to dozenplaces, and his discussion did much to rectify "certaines inexactitudes improveFeyeFs commentary, and surles institutions d'Akraiphia et de la Béotie."8 Lacroixproposed a numberof resto- thatwere Surprisingly,no one appearsever to havereexamined block B orthe rations(1938, pp. 55-56) better ofblock A A.i.8-42and Vatins subsequentlyconfirmed. part (lines ii.4-42).Meanwhile, pub- 6. Vatin1971 SEG XXXII hasworked its tothe center of a numberof discus- (= 450). lication way important 7. Roesch1974 (= SEG XXXVIII sions,ranging from the role of price controls in Classicaland Hellenistic 377). poleisto thenature and scaleof ancientfisheries and theirimportance 8. Roesch1974, p. 5.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 255

Figure1. BlockB, Thebes Museum

to Greekeconomies. With these larger questions in mind,I receivedper- missionin 2004 to study the blocks in the Thebes Museum. Block A could notbe located,but I was ableto examineblock B (Fig. 1) on a number 9. When I visitedthe Thebes Mu- ofoccasions.9 It became thatVatin's text could be in seumon 1 apparent improved May 18,2004, foundblock B I alsodetermined that an additional lineson seton itsside behindthe manyplaces. eight blockB, immediately recorded butomitted Vatinfrom his almost guardshack in thecourtyard. I could byFeyel by edition, certainly notlocate block A. I returnedto the belongto thesame inscription. The restorationofthese lines leads to very museumon May 22, whereI metYan- differentconclusions about the arrangement ofthe text on thestones, the nis Kalliontzis,entrusted by the Greek natureof the lists it contains,and the decree's larger social and economic withthe task of EpigraphicSociety context.I begin by presenting a revised text.10 compilinga catalogueof the museum s 3,000or moreinscriptions. He had not seenblock A. I can findno referenceto ThebesMuseum, no inv.nos. (in 1936,block B hadthe provisional anyonehaving seen it afterPaul Roesch, inventorynumber 10) who reportedhaving examined it at the BlockA: H. W. Th. 0.18 L.H. 0.010-0.014m. museumin 1972.The remodeled 0.70, 0.65, m; newly Block B: H. max.W. max.Th. 0.63 L.H. 0.010- museumwas scheduledto openin May 0.74, 0.41, m; 2009 butas ofMay 2010,it remains 0.016m. closed.It is myhope that when the Edd. Feyel1936, pp. 27-36 (B.l-41); Vatin1971 (A and B.l-33) museumopens, block A willhave [= SEGXXXH450]; Roesch 1974 (A.l-7) [= SEGXXXVlll377]. Photo- resurfaced. graphs:Vatin 1971, p. 96,fig. 1; p. 101,fig. 2; p. 103,fig. 3 (blockA); Feyel 10. SinceI havebeen unable to 4 examineblock A, I havenot 1936,pl. (blockB). attempted Lacroix to improvethe readings of A. 1-42 Bibliography: 1938;Thompson1938; Rostovtzeff 1941, vol. 3, publishedby Vatin and Roesch,apart p. 1369,n. 35, p. 1615, n. 128; Daly 1967,pp. 20-21; J. Robertand fromadjusting spacing, enclosing re- L. Robert,BullÉp 1972, 196; Etienne and Knoepfler 1976, p. 302,n. 133; storedtext in squarebrackets, indicat- Gallant1985, pp. 39-42, appendix2; Schaps1987, 1988; 1988, numerals meansof a distinctive Fossey ing by 275;Curtis 1991, 170;Davidson 1997, 187; 1997, font, at A.i.39, p. p. p. Magnetto p.386, restoringligatures n. Bresson Rose 518- A.ii.7,and A.ii.22,and offeringmodest 3; Migeotte1997, p. 49; 2000a,pp. 174-177; 2000,pp. restorationsor emendationsat A.i.18 519;Sosin 2004; Collin-Bouffier 2008, pp. 101-103, and appendixes 2 and 3, andA.ii.12 (discussedbelow). pp. 117-120;Mylona 2008, pp. 103-106.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions EPHRAIM LYTLE

ca. 225-175 b.c. BLOCK A

xi) aycovapxi)x') en9ApioxoK^EÎoç ap%ovxoç, AjjavîocçÀiovcruGÎco, àiktîoç Àiovcroaico, lapoK^eîç 'Eyxópjiao, èoxaXoKÒmicav xcx8eSo[yjiéva] oimèp xco0aÀ,axxf|co- Ko-uvcmpeiaxioçH 5 xcbçôè xò Bataxxxfiov Kouvòç Kocp%apíaoTT tucoXíovxocçk(ùXï'iev Kavôcxpco7iavxò[ç] H axa0|Liî[ç] Ko[9]apoîç- KokkoúkcovHTTX Atapeiaxao [.]XX KopaKÍvcov [price] Ajiía[ç .]XX Ka?i?iicûvo')|icû[price] 10 Ayváoco [price] AcxßpaKoc[jiéôôovoç?] [price] Äpmvco [. .]XX xco|iíovoç tco jívairico[price] AXXoTiiácov[price] Moúpco Kaxxò é7icx[vcû]

Ar[ ] [price] M[e]À,avó[p]cov[price]

A?iaK[ ]co KoGapco[.] n[.]cxpp[ ] [price]

15 Av[.]kco[ ] [price] [ ]

A[ -] [price] [ ]

BoyyAxot[tco][price] [ ]

BocTÍôoçKoGapôcç [ ]

AßopcxxcoT7XX [ ] - - 20 Bopax[- -] [price] Tivoßcxxco[- ? price] BccTpáxcojiéôôovoç [.]TT Tívaç Kooapaç Hfl [ ]XX TacpíôcovKTIX [ ] iKapfjvaç ÌHXX [ ] lKop7cícojiéôôovoç [price] 25 [ ] xcojLiva[iTico] [price] [ ] xcojiíovoç [price] [ ] [Oá]ypco xcojié[ôôovoç] [price] [ ] Ocx[y]pcov|ivair|cov [price] - [ ] [xco]aUco [- ? price] 30 [.]AriN[ -] X[ ] [....]A[ -] [ ] [. . . .]TTAO[ ] [ ] [.]A[ ] XapaK[í]ao [price]

[B]ejißpaoco[v] [price] X[ ] 35 ] [Jakh -] [--- ^ róvypcoxco [ ] [xcoòcMuo 7t]avxòç [price]

xcoòjLKpáXco [price] [ ]ŒN[ ] - xcoâXXco [- ? price] (¿vaç T7[ ]

r^aßpicxo HT7X [ ]E[-- ]

40 TaJucopiôSovoç [. .]X [ ]HMA[ ] 'ivavf'mHXXX [ ] [ ] [ ]

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS

BLOCK B

'Epo-oBpcoJiíovoç [price] fE'|/8iTcE)[v]é7cá[vco] 0pouxx[í]ôcovFIX 0o')vvok8Ít[coxa>] 5 o'mo[y]aoTpicû11 XX xcoaXÀcoI[.]X GowvíôcovI XX MIxAxxçHJTX Koxxoixpco[.]T7X 10 'IGodXíôcovHJIX 1717101)pCO ! [- -] FíornoçHTTX Kópioç vvv [price] KiGápcofxéôôovoç 15 juvairicoHJIX x& aXktoTcavxòç [price] Kecrcpeîoçxéo jiéô(ô)ovo(; eí|Lii[|i]vociTicuI xco (líovoçHJTX 20 AIMNHON BapaKcotô (ivaif|co[price] to ijiiiiLivaiTicûHTIX TÔvjiióvcov t&ç |xv[aç][price] Aaßpi%cot6ò iivairjco [H]XX 25 xcovjiióvcov xaç jivaç TíXvac Ilo'uKpiôcûvxaç fiv- aç H vac BaXA,8ic[ ] [price] 30 Xockockoç7cot)poc[|Li]cû FT 'Eyxç^ioijoçjul8ÔÔo[voç] xav jULvavITTX TAETE0NA[..]AI[- - -] nXaxivi[ ] 35 xàv 8^8vx[ep--] jivav H xà[v - ]- vcovTTX vac xàv ôè 5a7i[- ]- NEIIZMAÍSÍI[ ] 40 QAlÑh[.]*AN[-- -] [- - ]TT[- ]

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 258 EPHRAIM LYTLE

HTTindicates ligature. I give the readingsof previouseditors exactly as printedin theirminuscule texts. A.I ap%ovxeçVatin, ocp%ovxoç Roesch. A.3 'E7i%ópuaoVatin, 'Ey^ópuao Roesch; eoxocJioKcmeioav koct toc [ ] Vatin,èaxaÀOKÓ7C8iaav toc ôe8o[yjiéva] Roesch. A.i.4 ovnepVatin, ovnép Roesch. A.i.7 oxocojiûçAIII[.]oiç Vatin,oxocoui^ç] Ko[0]ocpoîç- Roesch. A.i.9 Auíafc.]XX Vatin.Ä.i.ll [. .] XX Vatin.A.i.18 Baxíôoç' KoGapaç [ ] Vatin.A.i.19 nXX Vatin.A.i.20 Bopcxx[co]?,Bopax[ ] Vatin. A.i.22 ] XX Vatin.A.i.38 xcoaXXco [tcocvxoç] [price]?, xco aXkco [ ] Vatin.A.i.39 mx Vatin.A.ii.7 mx Vatin.A.ii.10 Acißpccicoc[ ] Vatin.A.ii.12 kÒcxxò ina [ ] Vatin.A.ii.20 Tivoßcxxco[icoGocpco] [price]?, Tivoßcxxco[ ]Vatin. A.ii.21 Hn Vatin.A.ii.22 mx Vatin.A.ii.29 [xò] àXX(ù[7cccvxòç] [price]?, [xco] ocXÀ,co [ ] Vatin.B.l ['E]po')0pco - - Feyel,'EpouGpco uiovoç Vatin. B.2 *E'|/eix[cov Feyel,'Exj/eixcoM £7ioc[Vatin. B.3 0pocixxvac covI Feyel,0paixx[ . . ]covIX Vatin. B.4 Oouvvcp - - Feyel,0owvokeìx[ Vatin.B.5 OYI1 . . AIITPÇIXX Feyel,o')7io[y]aaxpico IIXX Vatin.B.6 xcooXkaò I vac Feyel.B.7 Gowvíôcov IXX vac Feyel.B.8 (K?)íxâç (i.e., (K})í%kaqyK omitted)inX vac Feyel, "l%kaqinXX Vatin.B.9 KoxxoúcpcoinX Feyel,Vatin. B.10 'IGodMôcovnx vacFeyel, 'iGoiAiôcov MX Vatin.B.ll ircTioúpco Feyel,'innovpuN [ ] Vatin.B.12 FícottoçI ... ? Feyel,IIIX Vatin.B.13 Kópioçvac...} Feyel, Kópioç [ ] Vatin.B.15 inX Feyel,Vatin. B.17 p.éS(ô)9[voç?]Feyel (i.e., |jiô(8)o[voç?],A omitted),jiéôovoç Vatin. B.18 ei|i[i]|uiv[a]ïr|coI ... ? Feyel, duxuvcuricûI[ ] Vatin.B.19 inX Feyel,Vatin. B.21 Bapáiccoxôjivairico ... ? Feyel,BapaKco xcò jivairico [ ] Vatin.B.22 xcoiuiuvairico .ITX. ? Feyel, xcoìjiijLivairico IIIX Vatin.B.23 xcov(iióvcov xaç jav(ôcç). . ? Feyel,xcov uxóvcov I xaç jivaçVatin. B.24 Aaßpi%coxco |ivaïf|co IX . ? Feyel,Aocßpixco xco uvocir|co [ Vatin.B.25 jnv(aç)Feyel. B.27 no')(p)píôcov(i.e., IloD(p)píôcov,lapis K) xaç nv(aç) Feyel.B.29 KA..EI Feyel,BaUep [ ] Vatin.B.30 XA . ocKoç n Feyel,Xockockoç TuODpatjiJco n Vatin. B.31 'Ey%éîo- - Feyel,'Eyxéîo')oç jjlçôôo[voç ] Vatin.B.32 .AZir. .Nin. . ? Feyel,xaç M-iov[oç]mX Vatin.B.33 TAITE. .A. .Ail Feyel, raoxpijLicxpyaç[ ] Vatin.B.34 11AATINI.. . Feyel(i.e., two missingletters followedby an apex). B.35 TANEHENTFeyel. B.36 uvocvHTA Feyel.B.37 NQNnX vac Feyel.B.38 xcxvôè AAr Feyel.B.39 NEIEZM.NIFeyel. B.40

ÍMINfíT. . . . Feyel.B.41 Il?) Feyel.

Translation

"During the archonshipof Aristokles,the agonarchsAminias son of 11. Vatin(1971) failseven to make Dionysios,Dikaios son of Dionysios,and Hiarokleisson of Enchormas use ofThompson 1947, which could be as noted inscribedthe things decreed concerning the produce of the sea. Let those itself significantlyimproved, byGeorgacas (1978, p. 75). The sellingseafood sell with certified weights: cuckoo wrasse for [.]XX chalks; already firstspecies in thelist, àtapecxriç, offers bonitofor [.]XX chalks;. . ." an interestingexample. It is clearlyin thewrasse family (Labridae), but it is A completetranslation is preventedby the text's poor state of preserva- difficultto assignsecure modern tion,and would also involvethe vexed problem of identifying ancient Greek equivalentsto themany Greek terms forwrasses, a fishnames with species known to modernscience. It is notmy intention to problemcomplicated by competingdescriptions and a hostof dealwith that problem here, although it will be obviousfrom the following synonymsin theearly modern scientific discussionthat Vatin's commentary is unreliable.11Details aside,the nature literature.Vatin identifies this fish as of thelist is clear:the prescript is followedby the namesof perhaps65 to Labrusctnaedus, an obsoletedesignation 70 saltwaterfish and theirprices, as well as a muchshorter list containing byLacépède ultimately derived, like the

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 259

thenames of at leastsix freshwater fish and theirprices, introduced under a separateheading in line B.20. All names are in the genitiveand prices are apparentlyquoted per minas weight. Most specieswould have been sold whole,but in the case of larger varieties,distinctions are sometimes made forvarious cuts, as, forexample, in theentry for bluefin tuna (lines B.4-6): Oo')vvok£Ít[cotô] I o')7co[y]aaTpico IIXX I to äXktoI[.]X ("bluefin,for the bellymeat, two obols,two chalks [per mina],for the restone oboi, [.]X chalks[per mina]")-12The listalso sometimesspecifies different prices for larger or smallerspecimens of the same species,as in linesB. 17-19: Kecrcpeîoçico |jiô(8)ovoç I £Íui[u]vouricoI icoI jiíovoçHJTX ("gray mullet larger than a half-mina,one oboi [permina], smallerthan a half-mina,11 chalks[per mina]"); similarly, lines B.21-23: BocpaKcoto uvcuricû[price] I tooiuxuvouricu HTIX I tcovjiiovcov xàq |iv[aç] [price]i^barakos of a minasweight [price], of a half-mina'sweight 11 chalks, fora mina ofthose smaller[than a half-mina],[price] chalks"). A final,curious feature of the listis the factthat three of the names (linesA.i.14, A.i.18, and A.ii.21) areaccompanied by the adjective KoBocpóç, whichalso occursin the prescript(crcoc0|Ln)[ç] Ko[0]ocpoîç, line A.i.7), ap- parentlyto denote"certified" weights. Vatin suggests that in the list the wordmeans "authentique" and is intendedto distinguishcertain fish from similarsubspecies of a lesservalue.13 This explanationhas been rejected by a numberof scholarsand variousalternative interpretations have been proposed.14Context strongly suggests, however, that Vatin's explanation is essentiallycorrect and thatthe word is used in a similarsense both in the prescriptand in the list.At its firstoccurrence in the list,the textis too fragmentaryto offerany help.15The othertwo entries,however, for

Labruscynaedus of Linnaeus, from thehigh fat content. In the19th cen- thatit means"cleaned" or "gutted," as descriptionsin Latinliterature of a fish turyit was cannedseparately in Sicily it sometimesdoes in modernGreek calledcinaedus. Thompson (1947, and soldunder a distinctlabel as ven- (1974,p. 7, n. 14). In fact,Kotoocpóç pp. 10-11,s.v. àtapearnç) gives Lin- tresca.In Japan,where it is calledtoro is notattested in thissense in ancient naeus'sdesignation and proposesa and servedraw, the belly meat is the Greekand, given the many large spe- numberof other identifications as well, mostprized cut from a fishthat can sell ciesthat would have been sold in cuts butthe correct species is probablyone forastronomical sums (on January5, butare unaccompanied in thetext by notmentioned by Thompson at all.The 2001,the Associated Press reported anysuch qualification, it is hardto see assumption,based on itsinclusion in thesale ofa 444-poundbluefin in whythe adjective should be added thepresent list, that the fish had some Tokyo'sTsukiji fish market for a record onlyto thesethree entries. Sosin (2004, commercialvalue, together with other $173,600).That theancient Greeks p. 193,n. 2), pointingout that weights evidence,including a statementby shareda similarpassion for bluefin and scalesin fishmarkets might easily Apollodorosof Athens {apud Athen. bellymeat is provednot only by the becomeencrusted, suggests that the 281e; FGrHlAA F214) thatcctapeaxcxi anomalouslyhigh price recorded here law stipulates"clean weights" in order areon thewhole orange but show butby the quotations in Athenaios "toprevent artificially inflated weights patchesof purple (tò uèvöXov Kippoei- (7.302d-e and 357a) fromauthors and prices."The adjectiveKocBapóç does Ôeíç,TiopqvupíÇovTeç 8è mra uva |iépr|), praisingthis particular cut. indeedcommonly mean "clean," but suggestthat it is bestidentified with 13. Vatin1971, p. 102,an explana- heavierweights would not disadvantage thecuckoo wrasse (Labrus mixtus). For tionapproved by J. Robert and L. Ro- thebuyer and thequestion of why the moreinformation on thisspecies and bert(BullÉp 1972, 196). adjectiveis used onlywith certain thosementioned below, see FishBase, 14. See mostrecently Collin-Bouff- speciesremains. an onlinedatabase with over 1,500 ier2008, pp. 101-102,n. 46. Roesch 15. Vatin(1971, p. 104) identifies collaboratorsand detailedentries for suggeststhat in theprescript the adjec- thefish in lineA.i.14 (Ataxic[ ]co morethan 30,000 species. tivemeans "honest, accurate, verified" Koôocpû)[.]) with"tiXockocttîv, qui est 12. 6oi)vvÓk£itoçcan onlyrefer to (1974,p. 8), butthat it has an entirely un grospoisson de la familiedu thon," thebluefin (Thunnus thynnus). Unlike differentsense when used in thelist of butas Thompsonobserves (1947, theblood-red flesh of the rest of the fish,where he notesthat the term is ap- p. 75ys.v. fi^aicaifiveç), it is impossible bluefin,the belly meat is whitedue to pliedonly to largerspecies and suggests to hazardan identification.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2ÓO EPHRAIM LYTLE

ßocxic,skate (line A.i.18), and pivr|,angel shark (line A.ii.21), are telling, for thereis comparativeevidence to indicatethat skate and angel sharkwere sometimesdeliberately confused by fishmongers attempting to pass offone as theother.16 Occasionally too thelist may have attemptedto distinguish betweenspecies commonly referred to by the same name.17

THE NATURE OF THE DOCUMENT AND ITS ARRANGEMENT ON THE STONES

A listof namesof sea fish,grouped alphabetically by initialletter and accompaniedby prices,begins in the leftcolumn of blockA at line 8, con- tinuingdown the leftcolumn and onto block B, whichcontains a single columnof equal widthaligned with the left column of A. The alphabetical listof marine species is interruptedat lineB.20 bya nonalphabeticallist of freshwaterspecies; the list of sea fishthen resumes at the top of the right columnof block A. This arrangementis, in Vatin'sassessment, "curiously chaotic."18 He attemptsto explainit byproposing that the stonecuttersimply appended thelist of freshwater fish to thebottom of block B, perhapsat a laterdate. The originaldecree, he argues,was federaland concernedsolely with the produceof the sea, and he supportsthis interpretation by identifyingthe archonAristokles, named in line A.I, with a knownarchon of the Boi- otianLeague duringthe period from 224 to 210 b.c.19The appendedlist of freshwaterfish, he concludes,was a local addendum,necessitated by Akraiphia'sproximity to Lake Kopaïs. As Roesch notes,however, there is littlereason to identifythe Aris- toklesnamed in thisinscription with the federal archon known from other sources.There is no referencein theprescript to the Boiotiankoinon, nor

16. Angelshark (Squatina squatina) Archippos(23 K-A; Athen.227a): soldwith the "wings" removed, or, is,as Thompsonnotes (1947, p. 221), AiyÚTCXlOÇHlOCpCOTOCTOÇ TCOV Í%6')COV K(X- perhapsmore likely, between two "themost skate-like of the Sharks." 7rr|Xoç,/"Epuaioç, oç ßiociôépcov pívocç distincttypes. In modernMediterra- Alan Davidson(2002, p. 35) observes yocXeoúçte rccoXeî/koci tovç taxßpocmc neanfish markets the flesh of the thatit is customaryin Mediterranean éviepeúcov,obç ÀiyoDciv fiuív ("The thornbackis oftenconsidered superior fishmarkets to findonly the "wings" of mostshameless fishmonger is the to similarspecies (Davidson 2002, skateoffered for sale, and Devedjian EgyptianHermaios, who stripsthe p. 35). Cf.LSJ, rev. suppl., s.v. aßopoc- (1926,p. 165) notesthat in theIstanbul skinoff of his angelshark and dogfish, toç:"(perh. = àpópatoç= àópatoç), fishmarket in theearly 20th century, it and gutshis sea bass,so theysay"). kindoffish." was notuncommon for fishmongers to A differentinterpretation ofthe pas- 18. Vatin1971, pp. 97-98. tryto passoff the "wings" of angel sageis proposedby Collin-Bouffier 19. On thearchon Aristokles, see sharkas skate.A good analogyis af- (2008,p. 98), who arguesthat Archip- Feyel1942a, p. 44. Vatin(1971, p. 102) fordedby the different varieties of pos is feigninghorror at a necessary neverthelessrecognizes that the àycov- dogfish.Faber (1883, p. 143) reports practiceintended to preventspoiling. ap%')(line A.I) seemto havebeen com- thatin Adriaticmarkets the meat of the 17. In theentry for skate, where moncivic officials in Boiotia,equivalent spinydogfish was consideredmuch Vatinindicates a lacunain lineA.i.18, to theagoranomoi found elsewhere in superiorto theothers and thelesser it is likelythat none exists: the follow- theGreek world, a viewat leastas old varietieswere often sold in theirstead inglines, which would otherwise be as Keramopoullos'spublication of withthe skin stripped off to deceive alphabeticallyout of order, should inscribedlists of officials from Thespiai buyers.Dogfish are often sold in the belongto thesame entry. If so,then (1931-1932,p. 28). The evidenceis samemanner in modernGreek fish thesubheadings Äßopaxco TTXX and discussedby Roesch (1965, pp. 141- markets,and it is preciselythis prac- Bopórc[ ] maydistinguish either 145). In thisarticle I referto theAkrai- ticethat is attackedin a fragmentof betweenthose sold whole and those phianàycovapXD simply as agoranomoi.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 2ÓI

anyother indication consistent with a federaldecree. Aristokles is therefore morelikely to be a local archon,as suggestedalready by Jeanne and Louis Robert,and again by Roland Etienneand Denis Knoepfler.20Indeed, the fIapoKÀ,eíç'Ey%ópu€co named in line A.3 as one of the threeaycovocpxt), or local Akraiphianagoranomoiy is probablythe same Hiarokleisson of Enchormasmentioned as an Akraiphianpolemarch in an inscriptionthat should date to ca. 210-203 b.c.21Even if the two men are not one and the same,we can be confidentthat the present inscription is not a federal decreeby the Boiotian League but a civicdocument produced by the polis ofAkraiphia.22 The implicationsof this have notbeen fullyappreciated. If the decreeis civic,then it standsto reasonthat it was locallydrafted, and itscurious arrangement is impossibleto explainas a consequenceof a local listhaving been appendedto a federalone.23 Afterreexamining block B and visitingthe site of Akraiphia, I am led to conclusionsvery different from Vatin's. First, there is good reasonto believethat the entireinscription was executedby a singlestonecutter in a singleoperation. The letteringof the two listsis indistinguishable,and the smoothlydressed margin to the leftof the texton block B appearsto correspondexactly to a similarmargin visible in photographsof blockA. Along the leftedge of block B, however,is a curiousfeature that appearsto be lackingon blockA: a ridgeof hammer-dressed stone that stands markedlyhigher than the inscribedarea (Fig. 1; the leftside of theblock is at thebottom). Feyel believed that this ridge would originallyhave been coveredby another stone in some kindof construction.24 A visit to thesite ofAkraiphia suggests a differentexplanation, however: that the stonecutter fashioneda panel forthe inscription in an alreadyexisting wall. The ridge of roughlydressed stone along the side of block B suggeststhat it once formedpart of a quarry-facedwall.25 The remainsof such walls, character- ized byblocks with level joints at thetop and bottombut oblique and even irregularjoints at thesides, are still visible around Akraiphia today (Fig. 2).26 Block B showssurfaces consistent with its use in sucha construction,being

20. J.Robert and L. Robert,BullÉp an exactcopy of a formaldecree, but theacropolis fortification wall atop 1972,196; Roesch1974, p. 6; Etienne theregulations and pricesinscribed by thehill known as Kriaria,immediately and Knoepfler1976, p. 302, n. 133. theAkraiphian agoranomoi may have southof the modern village. The gate These discussionsare occasionally beenvoted on bythe assembly, as sug- visibleat thelower right enters a for- overlooked(e.g., in Schaps1987). gestedby the phrase xa ôeôol/yuévoc],on tifiedoutwork explored in twobrief 21. Perdrizet1899, pp. 200-201, whichsee Migeotte1997, p. 49, n. 37; excavationsin 1965 (Garlan1974). no. 8, lines2-3: 'Iocpoictaíoç'Ey%ó pifioco. Bresson2000a, p. 174,n. 103. Partsof the wall climbingthe northern A differentHiarokleis appears in a list 23. Roesch(1974, p. 7) nevertheless slopeof the acropolis are ashlar and ofAkraiphian ephebes that the editors followsVatin's suggestion that the pseudo-isodomic,becoming trapezoidal suggestshould be datedafter the mid- freshwaterlist was appended,perhaps and irregularon thesummit and con- dle ofthe 3rd century b.c. (IG VII at a laterdate, and thatthe original tinuingto thesouthwest. The walls 2716,lines 16-17: 'Iocpoicta-îçXccpul[í- decreewould have been concerned rangein thicknessfrom 2.7 to 3.0 m. Ôoco).A secondAkraiphian Enchormas onlywith saltwater species. Evidenceof two distinct phases has is attestedin a listof recruits from the 24. Feyel1936, p. 27. beendetected, with the regularly 2nd early centuryb.c. (Perdrizet1899, 25. This explanationI owe in partto coursedsections perhaps constituting pp. 195-196,no. 3, line 12: 'Eyxópuocç discussionswith Phil Sapirstein,who Hellenisticrepairs to an originalcon- Äjx(piKpixco).Thename Enchormas recognizedblock B as havingbelonged structionof the 4th century b.c. On the is extremelyrare: see Bechtel1917, to a quarry-facedwall based solely on wallsand theirdating, see Garlan1974, pp. 149,352. myphotographs of the stone. esp.pp. 106-112. 22. The inscriptionis obviouslynot 26. Figure2 showsthe inner face of

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 262 EPHRAIM LYTLE

Figure2. Fortificationwall on the acropolisof Akraiphia

carefullydressed with a point above and below but not on its sides.The publishedphotographs of block A show onlythe frontof the stone,but Vatin'smeasurements suggest that it was a kindof plaque set directlyinto theface of the wall. When insertingblock A intothe wall, the stonecutter was carefulto cuta contiguous,approximately symmetrical panel in block B, directlybelow, in orderto hold a singlecolumn of textaligned with the leftcolumn of block A. There wereperhaps originally 42 lines of texton each block.27Vatin printsthe first33 lines of block B, but eightadditional lines (B. 34-41) appearon thestone (Fig. 3). These wererecorded by Feyel but omitted by Vatinwithout explanation. The textof SEG XXXII 450 followsVatin and subsequentscholars appear not to have noticedthe absence of the final lines.Given that many letters in theselines are clearly legible, one can only 27. In thetext printed above, block assumethat Vatin omitted them because he believedthat they belonged to B has only41 lines.Feyel (1936, p. 28), tracesof another line a document.In thishe have followedFeyel, who suggested however,reported separate may abovethe first numbered line in his in his thatthe lines constitute the ofa second commentary beginning text, edition.The surfaceof the stone at this one thatwould have continued on an additionalstone and was apparently pointis wornnearly smooth and I concernedwith the pricesof othercommodities.28 For Feyel,who knew couldnot make out any traces of letter- nothingof block A and itsprescript, the nature and arrangementof the lists ing,but the space would permit an additionalline. remaineda mystery.The onlyreasons he citesfor suspecting the beginning 28. 1936, 31, 34. of a new textat this are the size of thelettering and thefact that he Feyel pp. point 29. Vatin(1971, 95) notesthat was unableto read additionalfish names. p. any theletters on blockA are"plus hautes thanthose The lettersin theseeight lines are indeed considerably larger et pluslarges dans la partiesupérieure," in thepreceding lines (H. ca. 0.016 vs. ca. 0.011 m). Still,the lettering of and givesa rangeof 0.010-0.014 m for theinscription is irregularoverall. As Feyelhad alreadyobserved, the letters letterheight. 30. thedistinctive features in theheading AIMNHÍ1N, which introduces the list of freshwater species in Among thatappear in bothgroups of lines are lineB.20, arealso oversizedand showthe same increasedspacing (Fig. 4). FIwith an abbreviatedright hasta, Q The initiallines on block A are oversizedas well.29Size and apparently suspendedabove the line, and identical spacingaside, however, the styleof thelettering in linesB. 34-41 is to my serifs,especially pronounced in I, E, eyeindistinguishable from that of the preceding lines (Fig. 5).30These lines andQ.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 263

Figure3. BlockB, detailof linesB.34-41

Figure4. BlockB, detailof linesB.19-29

Figure5. BlockB, detailof linesB.30-35

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 264 EPHRAIM LYTLE followimmediately after line 33, separatedby no additionalspace, and they observethe sameleft margin. The largerlettering requires no explanation morecomplicated than an attemptto fillthe remaining space in thepanel, forwhich there are analogiesin inscribedlists of Boiotianephebes.31 The contentof the lines likewise suggests that they are part of the same document.The firstfour lines (B. 34-37) includewhat appear to be prices per mina,and the naturalassumption is thatthese too are pricesfor fish. The firstcluster of letters, I1AATINI, which is clearlyvisible on thestone, is notpart of any known Greek word. Given that the preceding lines contain the namesof freshwaterfish, however, and thatmany of thosenames are likewiseunattested, the letters can reasonablybe interpretedas yetanother fishname in the genitive,with the finaliota suggestingeither a genitive pluralin -iôcov(an endingthat appears frequently in the lists:cf. A.ii.22, B.3, B.7, B.10, and B.27) or one of the manydiminutives attested as fish names(-iov, -íÔiov, -íokoç, etc.).32 Althoughno knownancient fish name begins with the letters 7iA,octivi, the namesnkàxa^ and 7iÀ,octíotockoçare both attested.The firstseems to have referredspecifically to a freshwaterspecies.33 It is knownonly from Egypt,but in myview it is likelythat the name,like manyother Greek namesapplied to Nile fish,originally denoted a nativeGreek fish, and was onlylater transferred to an Egyptianspecies.34 The name rctamoTocicoçis

31. E.g., SEG XXXVII 385 (Thes- as barbel(Barbus barbus) was calledin editorsinterpret as a diminutiveof piai,ca. 245-240 b.c.). Thessalytaxupáia or TcotauotaxupaKo. nXãia^. 32. Most ofthe names of freshwater The formsIloDKpíÔcov (line B.27) and 34. Thompson(1947, pp. 123-125, fishrecorded in theselines are unat- XocKocKoçTroupo^ujco (line B.30) also s.v.KopotKÎvoç) finds "fanciful" the tested.BápocKoç (BapòcKco, line B.21) correspondto no attestedfish names. In Alexandrianetymology for nXàia^

findsa parallelonly in Hesychios lineB.29, where I readBaUeic[ ], whichassumes a derivationfrom nXa- (ßapoc%oc-íxooç 7coióç).The name VatirísBocÄAep [ ] findsa precisepar- TÚç,and he suggeststhe possibility of taxßpi%oc(Aocßpi%co, line B.24) cannot allelonly in variantmanuscript readings an underlyingEgyptian word. As noted corresponddirectly, as Thompson at Arist.,Hist. An. 568b26 and 602b26. byRobert (1963, pp. 154-155),Froeh- (1938) suggested,to thetaxßpaC (Euro- Even thecommon eel appearshere in ner(1875, p. 29) suggestsa likelier pean sea bass, Dicentrarchus¡abrax), a uniquedialect form ('EyXÇ^10V°Ç> derivationin hisdiscussion of a Lydian whichappears on blockA (unknown lineB.31). Finally,Vatins reading of epitaphcommemorating a certain toThompson) in thelist of saltwater rocGTpiuxxpYOcçin line B.33, while de- ArccpùçAriuTiTpíoi) n^áxa^ (Le Bas and species(taxßpocicoc, line A.ii.10). Thomp- rivedfrom a fairlycommon adjective Waddington1870, no. 662),whom he sonthought that ßapaKco in lineB.21 and followedby LSJ, rev. suppl., s.v. identifiesnot, following Buckler, as an was to be takentogether with Xiuvricov yocGTpi|iapYoc,appears nowhere else Egyptianslave "beloved" (ànyvq) by in thepreceding line as a singlealpha- as a fishname. This line,which Feyel Demetriosand namedfor the Nile fish beticentry for "the freshwater barakos" readas TAITE. .A..All and I readas nXàxa^ybut rather as "Apphys,son of followedby another saltwater species, TAITE0NA[..]AZ[- - -],is perhapsnot a Demetrios,(called) Platax," the latter theA,ocßpixco in line B.24. This error separatefish name at all buta descrip- beinga nickname,"Clapper," derived is perpetuated,along with others, in torbelonging to theentry for eels that fromthe verb nXaxayÉw. Strömberg Thompson1947, p. 140,s.v. taxßpoc^. beginsin lineB.31. The namesfor (1943,p. 75) independentlyproposed In insistingon Thompsons identifica- saltwaterfish are, by comparison, well thesame etymology for the name of tion,Rose (2000,p. 518) is probably attested.I returnto thisdifference theNile fish.Chantraine (1977, p. 912, mistaken.The suffix-i%oç is diminu- below(p. 272). s.v.nXáxaQ followsFrisk (1970, p. 553) tive,as Strömbergnotes (1943, p. 35; 33. The namenXáxa^ is attested in dismissingthis etymology on the forthe many Greek fish names with at Alexandriafor a Nile fishalso called groundsthat there is no evidencethat diminutivesuffixes, see hisindex, Koponâvoç(Athen. 7.309a). Perhaps theKopocKÎvoç made a clappingnoise. pp. 147-153),and thename refers in- relevanttoo is TtXataidov,which Still,the Greek name nXáxa^ might steadto a freshwaterfish similar either occursthree times in a shortaccount havebeen attached to theNile Kopoc- in appearanceor habitto thesea bass. offoodstuffs from Oxyrhynchus KÎvoçfor reasons unrelated to itsorig- Stephanides(1943, p. 202) reported {P.Oxy.VI 920,lines 3, 7, and 10, inaletymology. thata freshwaterfish that he identified 2nd-3rdcentury a.D.), andwhich the

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 265

attestedas an alternativefor nXáxa^, but was also used morewidely to refer to a largevariety of graymullet.35 Sources of the 19thand early20th cen- turyreport that a speciesof freshwater fish in thecarp family (Cyprinidae), presentin the lakes of Thessalyjust northof Boiotia,was locallycalled nXaxiToa.36It would be rashto concludethat the modernname mustbe a directsurvival of an ancientone, or thatntamvi[ ] in the present inscriptionrefers to the same fish.37Nevertheless, the possibilitythat it designatesa speciesin the carp familysuggests an interpretationof lines B. 34-37, whichare otherwiseimpossible to construe. If ntamvi[ ] is in factthe name of a fish,then the following lines (B.35-37) seemto recordprices for a minaofthat fish, with a differentprice foreach oftwo subcategories. In thefirst case (B.35-36) theletters ESENT are perhapspart of an adjectivee^8vx[ep- -], with the meaning"gutted."38 The second alternative(B. 36-3 7) would thenpresumably refer to whole fish.The distinctionbetween whole and guttedfish is made nowhereelse

35. Athenaios(7.308f ) reportsthat and suggeststhat the name might have Apostolides'description seems to fit Parmenonof Rhodesused the term evokednXaxvq, although I suspect theCrucian carp better than either the nXaxiaxaycocto referto theNile fish insteadan allusionto thenoteworthy roachor therudd. knownas KopocKÎvoçor nXáxa^,but he fertilityofthe gray mullet. Perhaps 37. It has been suggestedthat the also (3.118c) attributesto Dorion the relevantas wellis nXccxiq,used by GreeknXaxixca is borroweddirectly statementthat the largest of the uu>Aoi Dikaiopolisin hi. Ach.Yhl, apparently fromplotica, the Slavic name for the (graymullet, on whichsee Thompson in thesense of "wife." (On theetymol- sameor similarspecies (Miklosich 1947,pp. 161-162,s.v.) were some- ogyof this word see Chantraine1977, 1869,p. 553; furtherbibliography in timescalled TitaxTÍCTOtKoi as well. Over- pp. 873-874,s.v. néXaq.) Georgacas1982, pp. 310, 373). There lookedby Strömberg, Thompson, ób. Apostolides(1883, p. 3U;190/, is no evidenceto proveotherwise, but Chantraine,Frisk, and othersis a quo- p. 23) identifiesthe species as Cyprinus thesupposed Slavic origin of modern tationin DiogenesLaertius's life of kollariiHeckel, by which he clearly Greeknouns in -ITE-remains a subject Plato (3.7) ofthree lines from a satirical meansthe Crucian carp {Carassius ofmuch debate (see, e.g., Georgacas poemby Timon of Phlious (fr. 30 Diels carassiusLinnaeus), a speciessmaller 1982). = Suppl.Hell. 804),in whichPlato is thanthe common carp, but neverthe- 38. Wordsbeginning é^evx- are punninglyreferred to as "thenXaxi- lesscommercially valuable, which virtuallyunattested in Greek.Dioskou- crcocKoçwho led themall" (tcov tkxvtcov flourishesin habitats("shallow ponds, rides(2.62) describesa guttedsalaman- 8' freixo7ttaxTÍaT(XKoç).This appears to lakesrich in vegetation,and slow- derby means of a participleof the verb be theearliest attestation of the word movingrivers" 'FishBase, s.v. Carassius é^eviepíÇofiai;in itsonly other appear- and editorsgenerally agree that the carassius])similar to thosethat probably ance,also in Dioskourides(4.162), the senseis "thelargest of the mullets." characterizedthe ancient Lake Kopaïs. verbdescribes the removal of pith from BothFrisk and Chantraineacknowl- Stephanides(1943, pp. 203, 206), a plant.Archippos (fr. 23 K-A; Athen. edgea possibleconnection with however,was unableto findCrucian 227a) usesthe verb éviepeúco to de- nXãxci£jnXaxãK'o'',but neither can carpin thelakes and riversof Thes- scribea dishonestfishmonger who guts shedany light on theetymology of salyand Macedoniaand thoughtthat hissea bass(xoi)ç taxßpocKocc eviepeúcov). nXaxicxaKoq.Both reject Strömberg's Apostolideshad confusedit withtwo The adjectiveé^évxepoc is attestedin a suggestion(1943, p. 32) thatit is otherspecies in thesame family, the singleentry in thelexicon of Hesychios: derivedfrom an unattestedirregular roach(Rutilus rutilus) and therudd %cxÀá8oç• XiBcoôriç, è^évxepoç. This is superlativeof nXaxvq (*nXáxicxoq)y (Scardiniuserythrophthalmus). Among immediatelypreceded by a verysimilar which,in anycase, would hardly thelocal namesrecorded by Stepha- entry:%aXáÒzq- xà evcëpa,r' XiOcóôeiç. explainthe ending -ockoç. The word nidesfor these very similar species Both%aXáÒoq and xocXáÔeçare other- was also usedto referto thefemale arenXaxixcay TitaxxÍKoc, and mpa- wiseunattested, prompting Musurus to genitalia,at leastaccording to a gloss nXaxixca.The Cruciancarp is now restore%oXáÔeç ("guts") and to delete preservedin Hesychios(nXaxicxaKoq- occasionallyfound in thelakes and ÀiBcoôeiç,which he suggestedmight (y')v)aiK8ÎovaiÔoîov. Kai tyGûçrcoióç) streamsof northern Greece, but while havebeen introduced here from an • and Photios(nXaxÍGxaKoq to yuvoci- mostscholars (e.g., Crivelli 1995) as- earlierentry for %épaôoç ("rocky"). (For KeîovaiÔoîov). Strömberg (1943, p. 32) sumethat it is a recentintroduction, thetext of Musurus I havehad to rely treatsthis as a metaphoricalapplication theydo so "withoutany major infor- on theapparatus criticus in Schmidt ofthe fish name; Chantraine (1977, mation"(FishBase, s.v.). Economidis [1858-1868] 1965,vol. 4, p. 268.) p. 912, s.v.nXáxaty appears to agree (1972-1973,pp. 469-470) notesthat

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2Ó6 EPHRAIM LYTLE in the lists.39This is hardlysurprising, however, given that smallerfish werenormally sold whole,as indeedthey are in Greekfish markets today. Largerfish were sold bythe cut, occasionally with distinctions in pricefor thechoicer parts (as in A.i.36-38 and B.4-7). If therestoration e^evT[ep- -] is correct,it suggeststhat one varietyoffish regularly arrived at themarket in twodifferent conditions, an anomalythat may perhaps be providedby a modernparallel. Tccpocjuáç or kokkivo%aßiapi, the curedfish roe so common in Greek mezes,was traditionallymade fromthe roe of freshwater speciesin the carpfamily.40 If we assumethat the Hellenisticinhabitants ofAkraiphia made a similarproduct, then it is perhapsunderstandable why some fishwould arrivewhole and othersgutted, the latterhaving already been strippedof theirroe by fishermenor fish-farmers. Since partiallyprocessed fish carry more meat per mina than those deliveredwhole, such an interpretationwould explainthe differencein price.I can,however, find no Greekword meaning "whole" that will fit the lacunain linesB.36-37.41 Perhaps the distinctionwas betweena mina of thosethat had been gutted(females) and a minaof males,toc[v ápoéjlvcov. A possibleparallel appears in a nearlycontemporaneous papyrus document fromthe Egyptian Fayoum, which records orders for the dispatch of large quantitiesof fish,distinguishing in certaininstances between male (xov apaevcc)and female.42 The distinctionoccurs only in shipmentsof Kecxpeóç, a name thatrefers to one or morespecies of graymullet, historically the mostimportant commercial fish in Egypt,in partbecause its roe was used to makethe cured delicacy botargo.43 In ancientGreece cured-roe products

39. It is possible,however, that cer- ("To Architimos,greetings. We have (Edel 1961,pp. 211-218). Representa- tainvarieties of fish were processed in soldto Tholis the KeoTpeúç in theTajni- tionsof the process dating to theOld otherways (as in thecase ofskate, dis- eîov[perhaps "reservoir" rather than Kingdomdepict each stepin itsprepa- cussedabove, nn. 16 and 17,of which "storeroom"],with females and males ration,from the removal of the roe to onlythe "wings" may have been offered equal forequal at fiveobols each, but itsrinsing, pressing, and curing(Keimer forsale). theexcess males at fourobols each.") 1938-1939;Vandier 1969, pp. 643- 40. Devedjian(1926, p. 219) re- 43. See Thompson1947, pp. 108- 648). The distinctionsin sexand value portedthat in theearly 20th century, 110,s.v. KEGTpeúç. In his discussionof recordedin thepapyrus are neatly Turkishtarama was importedfrom thisdocument, Dumont (1977a) notes illustratedby the etymology of |i7tá(poc, acrossthe Black Sea. It was extracted theidentification ofthe fish, but does a modernGreek word for the female fromtaranga or taran,the roach (Ruti- notattempt to explainthe differences ofat leastone speciesof gray mullet lusruti/us), which could be capturedin in sexand price.The editorsof the (Mugilcephalus). As Georgacas(1978, hugequantities in therivers of southern papyrusacknowledge that the distinc- p. 173,n. 257) notes,this word is prob- Russia.A similarred roe is nowtaken tionbetween the sexes is "strange,"as is ablyderived from Italian paffa ("plump- froma numberof other Cyprinidae: see thefact that the excess males are sold at ness")and explainedby the fact that the especiallyGeorgacas 1978, pp. 146-148. a lowerprice, suggesting that "perhaps mullets ovaries,when ripe, might in- 41. As an alternative,one might theywere to be usedfor stocking pur- creasethe weight of the fish by close to suppressthe first nu in line37 and re- poses,or theroe may have been re- a third.Devedjian (1926, p. 196,n. 1) store,by analogy with lines A.i.38 and gardedas a delicacy"{P.Tebt III.l, reportsextracting a kilogram of roe A.ii.29,lav é^evT[ep--] I uvâvH tcx[v p. 59). That delicacywas botargo,of froma singlegray mullet weighing aMJI{v)a>vTTX ("a minaof gutted whichHughes and Wasson (1947, 3.5 kg.Unlike the fish that arrived forsix chalks, a minaof the others p. 415) offera concisedescription: guttedin themarket at Akraiphia, forfive"). "Botargois salted,dried, and soldin the thosereferred to in thepapyrus may - 42. P.Tebt.ULI 701r2,lines 43-45 originallobes oftenpreserved with a havebeen delivered alive: Devedjian - (235 b.c.): Apxrcíuíoi%ocípeiv. mnpá- coatingof beeswax and is a compact, (1926,pp. 194-195),in describinghow Kocuev0óÀ,i tòv KeoTpécc I tòv év Totjii- reddish-black,nutritious mass in which Turkishfishermen traditionally prepared eicoitòv àixr|v mi apGevocïaov rcpòçI theoriginal eggs have lost their iden- botargo,notes that the roe extracted ïcov àv(cí)(oßotayuc 5), tovôe ûrcep- tity."The productionof botargo from fromlive fish required less preparation 7Ú7TcovTaôcpoevot àv(ôt) (oßoAxnx; 4). graymullet has a longhistory in Egypt and was considerablymore prized.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 267

arerarely attested as itemsof long-distance trade.44 Nevertheless, it is certainthat the Greeks knew of such products, and theywere no doubtwidely producedand consumedat the local level.45Evidence fortheir production and consumptionin HellenisticBoiotia maywell be hiddenin lines B. 34-37, which mightbe speculativelyrestored as ntamvi[ôcov?]I xòcv è^8vx[épcov]I uvav H toc[vàpoé]lvcov TiX ("For carp(?),a minaof gutt[ed] forsix chalks,a mina of [males] forfive"). The finalfour lines of the inscriptionare even moreproblematic. Al- thoughlav ôé at the beginningof line B.38 makesit unlikelythat these linesbelong to a differentdecree, the particleôé is foundnowhere else in the listsand its appearancehere seems to introducea new clause.With the reading8octi[ ] forFeyel's ÀAF at the end of the line,a restoration suggestsitself: tocv ôè 8an[áva]'v eíç . . .,part of a commonformula specifying the partywho is to pay forthe publicationof the text.46It is difficult, however,to see how such a clause can be restoredusing the survivinglet- ters.47Instead, the finalclause mayhave been concernedwith some other regulationof sales in the fishmarket. In conclusion,then, it seemslikely that the entire inscription, including the finaleight lines, was cut by a singlestonecutter in a singleoperation. The necessityof cuttinga somewhatasymmetrical panel in the face of an existingwall is all that is requiredto explainthe "curiouslychaotic"

44. Thompson(1947, p. 112) Edict,although garum appears with a In antiquitysuch a nutritionally thoughtit "curious"that he couldfind priceof 16 denariiper sextarium (3.6; valuableresource is unlikelyto have onlya singleancient allusion to caviar Lauffer1971, p. 103). Nevertheless, beenentirely despised. orbotargo. That allusion,a referencein Byzantinesources prove that by the 46. The termmost commonly used Athenaiosto xá tôv íxBúcovKai tcov 9thcentury, the caviar of sturgeon was forthe cost of inscribing a decree is tapíxcovepa (3.121c), while clearly considereda delicacy,and it mayhave àvátaoutt(e.g., IG II2 1264,lines 24-27 acknowledgingthat roe products could beenexploited and tradedat leaston a [300/299b.c.]; IG XL 4 1039,lines be madefrom a hostof other fish, limitedscale already in antiquity.One 14-16 [3rdcentury b.c.]), but ôarcávri probablymasks a discussionof botargo ofthe ancient names for sturgeon, is also attested(e.g., I.Mylasa 636, manufacturedspecifically from gray àviamíoç, seemsto havecome to line5). Feyel(1936, p. 31) acknowl- mullet.The passageas a wholeappears designatethe secondary products of edgedthis possibility in his commen- to relyon thedietetic author Diphilos thesame fish, which may indicate that tary,but also suggestedôau[ia]lv as a of Siphnos,with the reference to roe itscaviar was tradedeven as faras dialectform of Çr||iíav,which would followingdirectly on a comparison Egypt,where the term appears in haveintroduced the terms of punish- betweenthe salted flesh of the Nile Ptolemaicpapyri (P. Cair. Zen. I 59121, mentfor sellers found in violationof fishKopaKÎvoç and thatof the [ivXXoq, lines2 and 8 [256 b.c.]; IV 59681r, thedecree. The tracesvisible on the anothername for gray mullet. The line9 and 59682r,line 6 [3rdcen- stone,however, agree better with pi importanceof the cured roe of the turyb.c.]; P.LondonVII 2141,line 11 thanwith mu, for the very bottom of lattermay have prompted the discus- [3rdcentury b.c.]; PSI V 535, line35 whatappears to be theright hasta of sionof roe in Diphilos.The word [3rdcentury b.c.]). thepi (whichhere descends only to botargoitself probably derives from coo 45. Recentcomparative evidence themidpoint of the line) is clearly xapixovand relatedterms in later suggeststhat in mostregions of main- visible. Greek(Hughes and Wasson 1947; landGreece cured roe could have 47. 1 can see no obviousway to con- Georgacas1978, pp. 167-187). Caviar, beenproduced in onlyrelatively small struethe letter cluster NEIIIMANI, and in whichthe roe is saltedafter being quantities.Figures reported by Geor- therestoration tôcv ôè Ôarç[áva]lveiç removedfrom its membranes, was also gacas (1978,pp. 248-250) indicate stillleaves the enigmatic IMANI[ ] probablyknown to theGreeks (Thomp- thatin the1970s the whole of Greece unexplained.Furthermore, the language son 1947,p. 17; Robert1962, p. 59), producedonly a fewthousand pounds in theprescript (tü aycovapxi). . . eaxa- althoughwhen compared to other annually.Panagiotopoulos (1916), ^oKÓTieiaavia Ôeôofyuiva],lines A. 1-3) secondaryproducts such as fishsauces however,records that in theearly mightbe takento implythat it was the orgarum the lack of explicit evidence is 20thcentury, fishermen in theMes- agoranomoiwho were responsible for curious.There is, for example, no price solonghilagoon alone produced inscribingthe decree. forcured roe in Diocletian'sPrice some4,000 kgof botargo annually.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2Ó8 EPHRAIM LYTLE arrangementof the text.The stonecutterwas given a single document thatbegan with a prescript,followed by a longlist of marine fish arranged alphabetically,then a second,shorter list of freshwaterfish, and finally, at the bottom,a clause concludingthe decree.He attemptedto preserve somethingof the arrangementof the originaldocument by inscribing the decree'sfinal clause at thebottom of block B.This arrangementnecessarily entailedinterrupting the listof saltwaterfish. Given theserequirements, his solutionwas thebest available.

FISH LISTS AND TAX COLLECTION

An importantquestion remains: why does the decree,drafted locally and intendedto regulateprices in thelocal fish market, contain two distinct lists thatare organized very differently? The authorsof the decree evidently did not compiletheir lists by observingthe fishavailable in the local market, wherefreshwater fish were sold side-by-side with marine species. Had they done so,there would havebeen no reasonto separatesalt from fresh, or to alphabetizethe formerand not thelatter. The arrangementof the textappears even more unusualwhen the Boiotian decree is comparedwith a roughlycontemporary inscription fromDelphi, which also consistsof a list of fishnames accompaniedby prices.48The stoneis badlydamaged and difficultto read,but enoughof the textis preservedto indicatethat the fishare named in no particular order.49Furthermore, the Delphic inscriptionrecords different prices for largerand smallerfish of the same species, a distinctionthat seems to derive fromthe practical experience of fishmongersselling fish by weight in the local market:if it takesx numberof a particularvariety offish to makeup a mina,the priceis y, but if it takesmore than x, the priceis z (wherez will obviouslybe somewhatless thany). This systemis markedlydiffer- entfrom the weight distinctions found in theinscription from Akraiphia, where,for example, fish are sometimes specified as "largerthan a half-mina" (linesB. 17-18) or"smaller than a mina"(line B.23). The systememployed at Delphi is onlyuseful when sellingfish a mina at a time,whereas that employedat Akraiphiawould also be usefulwhen selling fish in bulk,with the catchsorted both by speciesand by relativesize. The presencein the Akraiphiandocument of two distinctlists, very 48. Vatin1966 [= SEG XXIII 326], differentlyarranged, is curious,and I proposea simpleexplanation: the two datedby letter-forms to the 3rd cen- discussed Robert listshad differentsources. The alphabetizedroster of saltwater species was turyb.c.; brieflyby J. 309. froma whilethe freshwater which and L. Robertin BullÉp1967, copied preexistinglist, species, preserve I havenot had the no traceof an were fromscratch Unfortunately, op- alphabeticalsequence, perhapscompiled portunityto examinethis inscription. the forthe purposesof thisdecree. Where thendid the agoranomoifind Giventhe doubts voiced about many firstlist, why is it alphabeticallyarranged, and whydoes it includeonly ofVatin s readingsin otherinscriptions marinespecies? fromDelphi (see,e.g., BullÉp 1994, thetext should be con- The listof saltwaterfish, which includedbetween 65 and 394), perhaps originally sideredless than certain. 70 names, does not everylocally available species. certainly represent 49. E.g., 7iepK[cov]appears in line5, of valuablevarieties which Nevertheless,as a catalogue commercially (in '|/ópcovin line 13,and GuvíÔcofv]in similarspecies are oftensubsumed under a singlename), it is unusually line 15,with [ép]i)0piva>v a not un- thoroughand wouldrepresent the inventory of a remarkablywell- stocked likelyrestoration in line 14.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 269

fishmarket. By comparison,a 19th-centurysurvey of Adriaticfisheries, whichrelied on detaileddata and distinguishedcarefully between related species,reported that in 1878 more than a hundreddifferent species of seafoodwere brought to marketin the northeasternAdriatic.50 Consider- ablyfewer species, of course, were available in themarket of anygiven city overthe courseof a year:38 in thevillage of Megline,for example, 54 in Ragusa and Lussinpiccolo,55 in Zara, and 56 in Pola. Only the largest markets,such as those at Spalato,Trieste, and Rovigno,saw a varietyof fishgreater than or equal to the numberrecorded at Akraiphia(95, 78, and 70 species,respectively). Given thatthe listfrom Akraiphia probably includessome closelyrelated species under a singlecommon name, it is possiblethat the ancientfish markets of Boiotia mayhave been as diverse as the richest19th-century Adriatic markets. No such data are availablefor Greek fish markets of the late 19thor early20th centuries.The firstreasonably reliable catalogue of Greekfish, publishedby Nicolas Apostolidesin 1883, is notlimited to commercialor marinefish and is drawnfrom information gathered from different parts of the country.51A fewyears later, Horace Hoffmanand David StarrJordan produceda cataloguethat relied in parton speciescollected in Athenianfish markets.52The listincludes 216 species,not all ofwhich are commercially viable or commonlyconsidered edible. Hoffman's notes indicate that he was able to collectonly 82 species,and it is notcertain that all ofthese were foundin Athenianfish markets; moreover, a number are primarily freshwaterspecies, and modernGreek fish-market vernacular does notrecognize all ofthem as distinctvarieties.53 Since someof the species Hoffman collected wereunknown to Apostolides,it is safeto assumethat Hoffman includes fishthat would have appearedonly rarely in the market.54Nevertheless, it remainspossible that in the 1890s Athenianfish markets demonstrated a diversitycomparable to thatof the largerAdriatic markets.55 Given the anecdotal evidence preservedin Attic comedy,which is filledwith referencesto a dizzyingarray of seafood,it would not be

50. Faber1883, o. 141. weresometimes distinguished (see pp. 246, 248, 253, 257, 258, 261, 265, 51. Apostolides1883, pp. 5-35. Thompson1947, pp. 162-166,s.v. 274, 276. Giventhe state of ichthyol- 52. Hoffmanand Jordan 1892. u-üpocivccand uupoç),and it is possible ogyin the19th century, it is almost 53. It is unclearwhere Hoffman thatwe shouldread Eux>pf|vocç for certainthat some of these identifica- obtainedsome nonfood fish, such as Vatin'sotherwise unattested Imprivaç . tionsare in error. theabóyala ("littlesea horse")(Hoff- in lineA.ii.23. The sametendency to 55. The centralfish market in manand Jordan 1892, pp. 249-250). referto differentvarieties offish by a Athensstill offers a windowinto what His collectionalso includedthe com- singlename is seenin thetreatment of J.Davidson, in thetitle of his 1997 moneel (pp.244-245) y which was no closelyrelated species of the family study,called one ofthe "consuming doubtavailable in Athenianmarkets Atherinidae(Hoffman and Jordan 1892, passions"of the Athenians. Much of butprobably captured in freshwater, pp. 252-253), all simplyàGepívoc in thelocal diversityhas disappeared, as itwas at Akraiphia.Gymnothorax 19th-centuryGreek, as wellas many however,and overfishingcontinues to unicolorand Muraenahelena, two simi- speciesof Mugilidae (pp. 250-252), takea toll.Newspaper accounts pub- larspecies in thefamily Muraenidae, Sparidae(pp. 261-268), and Pleuronec- lishedin thewake of a Greenpeace were,according to Hoffman(pp. 247- tidae(pp. 277-278). Of thespecies studyof the Greek trade in illegaland 248), soldin themarket under the same Pomatomussaltatrix, Hoffman likewise undersizedfish note that even formerly modernGreek name, GU£pva. Both may notes(pp. 258, 271) thatthe fishmon- abundantspecies are disappearing (in havebeen sold at Akraiphiaas Moûpoç gers"probably did notdistinguish it Englishsee, e.g., Kathimerini [Athens], (lineA.ii.12), although the sources fromLichia amia!'' Sept.16, 2005, p. 1; AthensNews, Sept. suggestthat in antiquitythe species 54. E.g., Hoffmanand Jordan 1892, 23, 2005,p. 3).

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 270 EPHRAIM LYTLE

surprisingto discoveran inscribedlist in theAthenian Agora thatis simi- larlycomprehensive.56 That such a listsurvives not froma regionalurban centerlike Athens but froma largelyundistinguished town in Boiotia is, however,unexpected. If it can be takenas evidenceof the ready availability of sucha widevariety of seafood in Akraiphia, it would suggest, as Rostovtzeff recognized,that the ancient trade in freshfish was farbetter organized and conductedon a largerscale thanone mightotherwise imagine.57 The originand alphabeticalarrangement of thislist of saltwaterfish remainto be addressed.There is no reasonto believethat such a listcould have been takenfrom a literaryor encyclopedictext. Alphabetical cata- loguesof fishnames do not appearin the literaryrecord before the time of Augustus.58The listfrom Akraiphia bears little resemblance to anyof these,and to arguefor a literaryorigin would require positing the existence of a lost alphabeticalglossary offish names that excluded freshwater species and was compiledat a datewell beforethe earliest surviving evidence forsuch a work.Other lists of fishcertainly existed, in didacticor comic poetryand in scientificand medicalworks, but none of theseare likelyto have been arrangedalphabetically. Instead, the arrangementwould have been rootedin the dailypractice of fishermen,who arrangedspecies into broad classes (fish,crustaceans, mollusks), and then into smallergroups on thebasis of thehabitat in whichthey were captured. Such an arrangementis foundalready in the Hippocraticcorpus and in Aristotle,and as late as the2nd centuryA.D. it was stillpreferred by Oppian,who included in thefirst book of theHalieutika a lengthycatalogue of sea fisharranged byhabitat: the sandy, muddy, and marshyshores, the rocky places, and the open sea.59

56. A generouscollection of comic butan alphabeticallyarranged list i.e.,pelagic or open-waterspecies; 0001 passagesdevoted to fishcan be found sharingmany peculiar features with Ô' £VTOÎGI 7lT|XcbÔ8GlKal ÙôpTlXoiOl in books7 and 8 ofAthenaios. The thatof Xenokrates appears in Pliny, Xcopíoiaixòcç xpocpàç £%oi)aiv, the fish centralancient Athenian fish market HN32.145-151. Anotheralphabetical ofmuddy and marshyshores; and oi mayhave been located near the Stoa catalogue,augmented by literary cita- TroxajLiioiKai Àauvaîoi,the fish of rivers Poikileon thenorthern side of the tions,is foundin Athenaios(7.282- and lakes.Aristotle still finds room in Agora(cf. Alkiphron 1.3). The Agora 330). Fish liststhat appear in bilingual his scientificinvestigations to group excavationshave recently expanded in glossariesconstitute a separate category. variousfish by habitat (see, e.g., Hist. thatarea, raising the possibility that Suchlists survive in a numberof medi- An. 7.598a),but the popular tradition directevidence for the market may evalmanuscripts: see, e.g., Goetz 1892, is preservedmost clearly in Oppian's eventuallybe discovered. pp. 16, 88, 186,256, 317; Papendick Halieutika.Oppians cataloguebegins 57. Rostovtzeff1941, vol. 3, p. 1615, 1926. Earlypredecessors of these glos- withthe species that prefer sandy, n. 128. sariesare preserved in papyri:P.Oxy. muddy,and marshyshores (1.95-121), 58. Fora briefdiscussion of the XXXIII 2660 and 2666(a) (lst-2nd thenlists those found in manyvarie- evidencefor such lists, see Richmond centurya.D.); SBXLV 12137 (second tiesof rocky habitat (1.122-178), 1973,pp. 74-75.The earliestsurviving halfof the 2nd centuryA.D.). beforeturning finally to thepelagic exampleappears in a shorttreatise, 59. The secondbook of the Hippo- species(oi 8' èvauetpfiioiaiv ocA,t|v riepiTTÎç arcò xcov èvúÔpcov Tpocpfjç, by craticIlepi Aiocírriç,usually dated to the neXáyeGcxvë%oi)oi, 1.179). Traces of an obscuremedical writer, Xenokrates 5thcentury b.c. and oftenascribed to thesecategories can be foundin many • ofAphrodisias (Ideler [1841] 1965, Hippokrates'teacher, Herodikos of othertexts, including, e.g., the treatise pp. 122-133).Datable references in his Selymbria,discusses the healthful byXenokrates of Aphrodisias (see workplace Xenokrates no earlierthan propertiesof various foods, including n. 58, above)and a fragmentof Anti- thelate 1st century b.c., and perhaps seafood(2.58). The fishare clearly phanes(fr. 127 K-A; Athen.7.303f) somewhatlater (Wellman 1907). His groupedby habitat: oi rceipaioi,the thatridicules a rusticfor eating only the listof species is onlypartly alphabetical, rock-fish;oi TtXavfJTai,the"wandering," kindof seafood found close to shore.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 2"]'

All ofthese habitats are represented by the fish recorded in theinscrip- tionfrom Akraiphia, suggesting the existenceof a well-developedfishing industrycapable of exploitinga broad rangeof marineecosystems. This conclusionis preciselythe opposite ofthat drawn by Thomas Gallant,who in an influentialstudy published in 1985 treatedmarine fishing in ancient Greece as no morethan a risk-managementstrategy.60 In Gallant'swork, Rostovtzeff's portrait of fisheries as a vibrantand vitalsector of the Greek economyis replacedby a minimalistview of a resourcethat, like other "wild gatheredplants and animals,"would have been exploitedchiefly in response to periodicdearths, and "couldonly have played a marginal,supplementary role."61Gallant's fishermen are simplypeasant farmers occasionally trying to scareup an extrabit ofprotein, without, it would appear,much success: "fartoo oftenthe solitary fisherman with his reedpole would returnhome withan emptycreel."62 Gallantcites the relative abundance of demersal versus pelagic species in the inscriptionfrom Akraiphia as evidencefor his claim thatancient Mediterraneanfisheries would have been largelyshore-based and there- foreextremely limited in scale.63In fact,however, the ratioof pelagicto demersalspecies listed in theinscription closely mirrors the ratios recorded forthe 19th-centuryAdriatic region. In otherwords, the evidenceof the inscriptionreflects ecological realitiesrather than ancienttechnological deficiencies. A numberof Gallant'sspecific claims about the technological limita- tionsof ancientfishing are similarlyunreliable, including the argument thatnets were only employed in shore-basedfisheries.64 Aegean fishermen not onlyfished the reefsand beachesbut ventured from shore in seawor- thyboats, employingfixed and driftingnets, dragnets, and a bewilder- ing arrayof specializedlines, hooks, and traps,and theydid so not as a subsistencestrategy or in responseto periodicdearth but because with skilland toil theycould earna profitby sellingtheir catch in increasingly monetizedmarkets.65 Here the evidence fromthe HellenisticAegean standsin starkcontrast to comparativeevidence from the peasant economy of Malay fishermenintroduced by Gallant,66and to archaeologicaland

60. Gallant1985; summarizedin acknowledgedin a Hellenisticepigram fish,the device of the seafaring net- Gallant1991, pp. 120-121. attributedto Leónidasof Tarentum fishermen,and his sharpharpoon, the 61. Gallant1991, p. 121. {Anth.Pal 6.4; Gow and Page 1965, spearof Poseidon, and thetwin oars 62. Gallant1991, p. 121. Ancient p. 124,no. 52): fromhis boats, these, the remains of a sources,however, agree with a number t EùmuTrèçf ayKioxpovKai 8oú- longpractice, the fisherman Diophan- ofmodern ethnographic studies in vam ôoi)Ài%óevxa/%cbpfiif|v Kai xàç tosdedicates, as is fitting,to thelord of suggestinga relatively clear distinction íxOuÔókouçG7TupíÔaç /Kai xoûxov his craft." ' betweenfarmers or part-time agricul- vT|KToîaiv£7i i%9iL)(n T8%vaa6évxa / See, z.g.yAnth.Pal. 6.5, 6.23,6.28, turallaborers and fisherman:see KÚpxov,àXinXájKTOiv evpejaa oiKxußo- 6.90,and thesimilar funerary epigrams Mylona2008, pp. 67-69. taov,/ Tpr|%úv xe xpióÔovxa,noaeiôacó- 7.295 and 7.305. On therelationship 63. Gallant1985, p. 25. vioveyxoç, / Kai xoùçè^ ócKaxcovôi%6a- betweentrade, monetized markets, and 64. Gallant1985, pp. 24-25; forthe Ôíouçépéxaç / ó yputeuçAióípavxoç ancientfishing economies, see Lytle, weaknessofthat argument, see, e.g., àvaKxopi6r|KaTo xé^vaç, / á>ç Géuiç, forthcoming,and pp. 295-296,below. Purcell1995, p. 149,n. 12; Bekker- àp%aíaç^eí'|/ava xe^voaúvaç. 66. See Gallant1985, p. 12 and Nielsen2002b. "Well-benthook and longpoles and passim;relying on Firth1966; Fraser 65. The diversityof specialized line,and hisfish-carrying baskets, and 1960,1966. equipmentused by Greek fishermen is thistrap devised against the swimming

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 272 EPHRAIM LYTLE ethnographicevidence for technologicallymore primitivefisheries in Peru and the Sahara.67 In my view,the importanceof ancientGreek fishingcommunities and the advancesin knowledgeand technologythat they produced tend to be under-rather than overestimatedby most ancienthistorians. For example,while Bintliff 's theorythat the development of Aegean maritime culturehad itsroots in the"transmerance" of prehistoric Greek fishermen has been criticized,it remainsthe case thatthe close relationshipbetween fishermenand the sea probablyplayed an importantrole in the develop- mentand extensionof Aegean trade.68This relationshipis hintedat by thediscovery in manyancient shipwrecks of fishingtackle through which the crewssupplemented their diet.69 It maybe reflectedeven in the lists offishfrom Akraiphia, where the contrastbetween the saltwaterspecies, whichare generally well attested, and thefreshwater species, most of which are not otherwiseknown, could be a consequenceof the greatermobility of marinefishermen.70 The wide varietyof marinespecies recorded in the inscriptionfrom Akraiphiapoints to a well-developedfishing economy. The alphabetical arrangementof the list,however, is not derivedfrom popular tradition norfrom any known literary source. The mostlikely explanation for the arrangementhad alreadyoccurred to Feyel,who, in his discussionof the purposeof the inscription,suggested two possibilities:that the numbers listednext to the fishrepresent either the maximumprice to be paid or the tax to be assessedper mina foreach species.He rejectedthe second

67. In Peru,at CerroAzul, a site fishand shellfishexclusively from the to includepelagic species and their annexedin the15th century by the shore:see SerraRafols 1957; Antho- open-waterhabitats. Although its date pre-Incankingdom of Huarco, a spe- nioz 1967,1968; Mercer 1976, is medieval,the fishing vessel ("Skerki cializedeconomy seems to havedevel- pp. 174-177; 1980,pp. 120-121. A") foundamong the wrecks of cargo oped at an earlydate, with fishermen 68. Bintliff1977, pp. 117-122; shipson theSkerki Banks between catchingand preservinglarge quantities criticizedby, e.g., Efstratiou (1985, Sicilyand Tunisia is suggestive;see Bal- offish that were then carried to the p. 7); Jameson,Runnels, and van Andel lardet al. 2000,pp. 1596,1598, fig. 4. interiorby llama caravan. The richness (1994,pp. 314-315); and Powell(1996, The factthat in antiquitymost fishing ofthe region's fisheries allowed this p. 54), althoughthe latter acknowledges in theAegean took place within a few earlyindustry to developwithout par- thelikely historical relationship be- milesof the coast, as indeedit stilldoes alleladvances in shipbuilding,which tweenfishing and trade. today,is likelydue as muchto ecology remainedremarkably primitive. The 69. Parker(1992, p. 29) reportsthe as to technology:the Mediterranean is strictlycoastal nature of these fisheries presenceof fishing tackle in at least relativelybarren below a depthof 250 is reflectedin thefish bones from the 29 ancientwrecks, and concludesthat m and thecoastal shelves in theAegean siteand in thegrave goods of the "fishingwas obviouslya normalactivity arerelatively steep. fishermen,which typically consist of on board."A similarconclusion is 70. In an interestingdiscussion of twodifferent nets, both shore-based, supportedby an Archaicivory plaque ancientfish names, Mylona (2008, butsuitable for different habitats. Local fromthe sanctuary of Artemis Orthia pp. 69-70) notesthis gap in ourevi- coastalfishermen still employ the same at Sparta,which depicts a crewmem- dencefor freshwater species. The netsand classifythe available species by beron a largesailing vessel hauling mobilityof marine fishermen is also habitat,recognizing three types: peña, a fishover the stern (Dawkins 1929, likelyto havebeen a factorin the costa,and playa (rocky coast, sandy pp.214-215, pls. 109, 110).We now widespreaduse ofsaltwater fish names beach,and stonybeach). See Marcus knowthat Mediterranean trading withorigins that are, in Thompsons 1987a,1987b; Marcus, Sommer, and vesselsoften employed direct sailing estimation(1947, p. 79), "non-Hellenic, Glew 1999.Like theircounterparts at routesfrom an earlydate (see, e.g., likemuch else of the vocabulary of the CerroAzul, the nomadic fishermen of Ballardet al. 2002), and it is easyto Greekfishermen." (Cf. also theremarks thewestern Sahara and theprehistoric imaginehow their knowledge of in- in Thompson1936, p. v.) CanaryIslanders traditionally harvested shorefishermen might have expanded

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 273

possibility,both because the sums seemed too highto be taxesand because therewas no evidencethat Akraiphia controlled a seaportin thelate 3rd or early2nd centuryb.c.71 Of course,nothing prevented an inlandcity from imposinga local taxon importedfish, but theparallels suggest that such a taxis unlikelyto havebeen assessedper species and permina, which would have requiredofficials to unpack,identify, and weighthe fish,and thento calculatethe specificsum owed. Papyrusdocuments indicate that, in the Roman period at least,import duties of this sortwere insteadnormally assessedas a flatrate per donkey-or camel-load.72 In a seaport,on the otherhand, where fish arriving at the dock were sortedand weighed,there is no reasonwhy a taxshould not be assessedper minafor each species.Taxes on fishwere indeed widely levied in Hellenistic ports.73Although it has been proposedthat these taxes were assessedon retailsales,74 that hypothesis is unlikely.A relevantfragment of Diphilos preservedby Athenaios (fr.32 K-A, lines 1-4; Athen. 6.226e) has not receivedthe attentionit deserves:

OX)TTCOTlOl' í%6í)Ç OÍÔOCTlJJACOTépODÇ íôcov.nóoeiôov, ei Ô8Káxr|vetaiußocvec oruTcova7iò xr'qTiufjç èmairiç fijiépocç, koXx>xôv 0ECOVâv T)G0a nXovaiaxaxoc,.

I have neverseen fishmore expensive. Poseidon, if you were collectinga titheon fishfrom the priceeach day,you would be by farthe richestof the gods.

The speakerin thispassage could be proposingan entirelynovel tithe, im- plyingthat Poseidon, or thecity, currently collects no suchtax. In myview, however,he is betterunderstood as sayingthat an existingtithe should be assessedin a differentfashion, based on the actualretail price of the fish (àrcòxr'q Tiufjç èmoiriç fijiépaç).The passage takesfor granted what the audiencewould alreadyknow: that tithes on fishin the Hellenisticperiod

71.Feyell936,p.33. Palmyreneversion at linesIIa.34-38) dutyis probablymeant by rfji 7té(iJixr|i 72. P.Wise. II 80 (a.d. 114) preserves specifyingan importduty of 10 denarii in line 81; see Migeotte1984, p. 285). a longlist of duties assessed at a cus- percamel-load for salt-fish, and an ex- Wilhelm(1939, pp. 361-363) suggests tomhousein Bacchiasin theFayum. portduty of three denarii per donkey- thata similartax on fishunderlies the Includedare entries for fresh fish, load.The differencecan onlypartly be 20% duty(tôcv rceujcTOcv) attested at assessedat therate of two drachmas explainedby the larger size ofa camel- Kalymna(Syll? 953, line 61). A sacred perdonkey-load (5.151-152), and load (max.ca. 175 kgvs. ca. 75 kg for law fromMykonos, roughly dated to saltedfish, assessed at sevendrachmas a donkey). theend ofthe 3rd century b.c., men- and one oboi perjar (5.169). While 73. Hellenisticexamples include an tionssacrifices to be offeredby the muchof Lower Egypt was awashin ixOúcovÔ£K(xrn together with a 7C£vtt|- council"from the duty on fish"(Syll? freshfish and locallyproduced salt- Kocmiat Delos (IG XI 2 287, lines9- 1024,lines 10-11: arcòtoo tétaruçtcov fish,many Greek inhabitants no doubt 10), and a ôem-criixGucov together with í%9[il)]covßo')Mi 7cpicx|jivr| iepeîoc eïkogi preferredthe Aegean and BlackSea a dutyon murexand otherregular I ÔpocxncovôiôÓtco). varieties,which arrived salted and customsduties at Stalaiin Crete(Syll? 74. See, e.g.,Busolt 1920, pp. 607- couldcommand relatively steep prices. 524, lines7-8; see Chaniotis1996, 608; Wilhelm1939, pp. 361-363. A similarpreference may be reflected no. 64). In thelate 4th century b.c., Reger(1994, p. 256) suggestsa taxon in a bilingualcustoms tariff of a.d. 137 a 20% dutyon fishis attestedat Kolo- "thesale offish" without specifying = fromPalmyra (CIS II.3 3913 OGIS phon(Meriti 1935, pp. 372-377 + wholesaleor retail;similarly Brun 1996, 629; see also Matthews1984), which Wilhelm1939, pp. 352-365,line 31: p. 136. includesentries (preserved only in the [xfjc7ié]u7Tcr|ç tcov í^oúcov; the same

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 274 EPHRAIM LYTLE werenot normallytaxes on retailsales. Instead, they would havebeen col- lectedlong before the fish arrived on thefishmonger's table, and therefore musthave been assessedbased on valuesthat had no directrelationship to the eventualretail prices. It is possible,of course,that these taxes were only collected after the deliveryand wholesale of the fish,although the available evidencefor Hellenistictaxation offers no obviousparallels. Moreover, such a process would hardlyrequire a detailed,alphabetical list of marinespecies with valuesper mina, nor would therebe anyreason to excludefreshwater species.In myview, the routine collection of Hellenistic customs duties offers a muchbetter analogy. These dutieswere assessed ad valoremand collected beforegoods enteredthe market,or, in the case of exports,before they could be loaded on board.a departingship.75 In a numberof cases,tithes on fish(ôemioci í^Gúcov)are attestedtogether with these customs duties, and lexicographersregularly equate the ôemiri and thosewho collectit with customsduties and agents.76Pollux (9.30), for example,includes ôemiri with éAAijuéviov,£Íkogtt|, and 7U£VTr|Kocrcr|in a list of termsfor dutiesassessed in the harbor,and togetherwith other terms for custom- houses(xetaovioc, 7i8vxr|KoaTO^ÓYia, qn)taxKTT|pia), he offersoernTíi^óyioc, ôeKaxe-oxfipia,and ôemicovioc.771 have recently argued that, in an inscription fromAthens, Hadrian directlyequates a tax on fishwith revenues fromimport duties (eiaocycoyioc).78 Indeed, it has evenbeen suggested,not entirelywithout cause, that fresh fish was routinelysubject to the Roman portorium.79Finally, an inscriptionof the 1st centuryA.D. fromEphesos recordsthe construction on theharbor front of a xeJuoviovxfiç íxomicfiç, a designatedcustomhouse for collecting just such a dutyon fish.80 In the courseof the routinecollection of dutieson seafood,officials could have made use of a listof fishwith ascribed values per mina in order to calculatethe declaredvalue of the catchsubject to duty.In a busy customhousethe alphabetization of such a listwould offerobvious advan- tages.Lloyd Daly,in his studyof the evidencefor the earlyGreek use of alphabetization,highlights the close relationshipin documentarypapyri betweenalphabetization and taxcollection.81

75. It cannotbe proven,of course, comedyby Antiphanes called The Catch discussionis Horsley1989, but the in- thatduties were always assessed ad (AAieuonivn)(fr. 28 K-A). Not sur- scriptionand itssocial, legal, and valorem,although De Laet (1949,p. 47, prisingly,one ofthe other two extant economiccontext deserve further study. n. 1) concludesthat the Hellenistic fragmentsof this comedy (fr. 27 K-A; The fundsfor the customhouse were periodseems to haveknown hardly any Athen.8.338e) is concernedwith sea- providedby a jointassociation of fish- otherform. food,while the second (fr. 29 K-A) ermenand fishmongers;similar associa- 76. Forexamples of such tithes, see mentionsa fishingline (ópuxáv). tionsof piscatores etpropolae are attested above,n. 73. On thelexicographers, see 78. IG IP 1103; see Lytle2007a. at Ostia {CIL XIV 409 [ILS 6146]) and Velissaropoulos1980, p. 212, n. 42. 79. De Laet 1949,pp. 206-208.The New Carthage(CIL II Suppl.3929 77. Similarly,for names of customs evidenceis difficult,however, and much [ILS 3624]). agents,Pollux (9.29) offersôeKocrn^oyoi ofit wouldbenefit from careful recon- 81. Daly 1967,p. 45: "Fromthese and ÔemTcòvaitogether with xeXcovai, sideration.I have recently argued, based half-dozendocuments it will be seen éicXoyeîç,éXAijiEviaiaí, eiicocrcoXóyoi, on epigraphicevidence from Delos and thatfrom the second century before and TievTrjKOGToXóyoi.Demosthenes thelex por tus Asiae, that Hellenistic Christ,under the Ptolemies, and con- too (23.177) appearsto equateôemiri- dutieson freshmurex were retained tinuingon downinto the period of Ro- taSyoiwith customs agents. It maybe as importduties in theportorium mandomination, the elaborate machi- significantthat Pollux found one ofhis provinciaeAsiae (Lytle 2007b). neryof tax collecting and accountingin termsfor customhouse, ôeKoctcovia, in a 80. 1.Eph.20. The mostthorough Egyptadopted and appliedalphabetic

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 275

The absence of freshwaterspecies fromsuch a list is also easilyex- plained as the resultof a dichotomyin Greek customspractice between marinefisheries, which were generally of open access,and inlandfisheries, whichwere often subject to specialregulation. Plato appearsto codifythis principlein Laws 7.824b-c. A numberof scholars believe that this passage is nothingmore than a convenientphilosophical construct, contradicted by quotidianpractice according to whichstates and templesroutinely laid claim to fishingrights at sea.82That view restslargely on misinterpreted evidence,however, the totality of which clearly indicates that Greek poleis generallylaid no claimto marinefishing rights or otherwiseattempted to restrictaccess.83 At thesame time, while marine fishermen may have had freeaccess to thesea, practicing their trade beyond the regulatory reach of the polis, their catchesdid not have freeaccess to the marketand weresubject to special dutiesbased on theirvalue. Freshwater fish, on theother hand, would have been capturedin lakes and streamsor raisedin ponds subjectto property rightsand specialregulations. There is no reasonto thinkthey would have been subjectto the same ôemiai íxOúcovas marinecatches, and theycer- tainlywould not have arrivedat the marketfrom the same harbors. The best explanationfor the peculiararrangement of the inscription fromAkraiphia is thatlocal officials, in draftinga decree to establishreason- able maximumprices in the fishmarket, borrowed a specializedlist used in the routinecollection of taxeson seafoodin a nearbyport. They may have modifiedthe pricesand otherwiseadapted the listfor their specific purposes,but the basic structureof the originaldocument survived. This hypothesissuggests in turna novelsolution to a farlarger problem. While muchhas been writtenabout the scatteredliterary and epigraphic evidencefor ancient Greek customs duties, no adequateexplanation has yet been offeredof the precisemechanisms by whichcustoms agents valued dutiablegoods in theHellenistic period. Alain Bressonhas recentlyargued thatimporters would have been requiredto declareintended sale prices and thatthese prices would have been used as thebasis forcustoms valuations.84As he notes,this argument profoundly affects our reconstruction ofthe working of theemporion, and morespecifically of the deigma>tradi- tionallyseen as an opportunityfor intense negotiation over price between

arrangementas partof its system. 83. 1 treatthis subject at length recently(see J. Robert and L. Robert, Thereis no wayof saying how much in an articlein preparation.Dumont BullÉp1973, 419; Heisserer1980, earlierthan the second century the (1977b,p. 55) and Bresson(2007, p. 176).This explanationnow seems to principlemay have been adopted for pp. 189-190) arelikely in error,for be widelyaccepted (see, e.g., Barrington thispurpose." Daly brieflymentions the example,in suggestingthat lasos s Atlas,map 61). Similarly,Dumont Akraiphiandecree as amongthe earliest ownershipof the "little sea" attested in (1977b,p. 56) pointsto thercopcpúpa epigraphicevidence for alphabetization, a Hellenisticinscription (Syiï.3 307 = recordedin Delian templeaccounts as notingmerely that it seemsto have I. lasos30) impliesgeneral civic control a clearexample of temples or states servedsome administrative purpose overmarine fishing rights. As suspected layingclaim to marinefishing rights. (pp.20-21). alreadyby Dittenberger (Syll? 307, I haverecently argued, however, that 82. See especiallyDumont 1977b, n. 5), the"little sea" was almostcer- theDelian rcopcpúpawas simplya duty relyingin parton Höppener1931, tainlya brackishlagoon, probably on thedelivery and sale ofcaptured pp. 150-167,and subsequentlyen- locatedin themodern plain southeast murex,analogous to otherattested dorsedin, e.g., Horsley 1989, p. 100; oflasos nearthe mouth of the Sarichai dutieson fishand murex(Lytle 2007b). Schwarz2001, p. 384. River,where a marshexisted until very 84. Bresson2008, pp. 99-109.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 276 EPHRAIM LYTLE

importersand buyers.In Bresson'sview, by the timegoods arrivedin the emporion,there would be verylittle room for negotiation over price because importerswould be constrainedby theirdeclared prices. He explainsthe literaryevidence for such negotiationby suggestingthat importers were onlyallowed to negotiateprices lower than their declared prices. Bressonsreconstruction of theprocess seems extremely unlikely. The questionis moreappropriately treated elsewhere and in greaterdetail, but I notehere that the epigraphic evidence is explicitabout the fact that declara- tionswere susceptible to auditwhen cargo was embarkedor disembarked, at whichpoint specific penalties might apply in theevent that an importer or exporterhad "undervalued"his cargo.85With one exception,discussed below,nowhere do thesecustoms laws anticipatewhat would have been, if we followBresson's interpretation, the most pervasiveform of fraud: declaringa sale price lowerthan the eventual,actual sale price.Nor is thereany trace in theliterary sources of this kind of fraud or theconsider- able bureaucraticmachinery that would have been requiredto preventit. Furthermore,exports were also subjectto customsduties, and it is hard to believethat their valuations could have been based on an eventualsale pricein some distantmarket. Finally,goods were oftensubject to customsduties even when they were not intendedfor sale, and thesegoods musthave been assessedby some othermechanism. The only evidencefor importers declaring sale pricesto customsagents is a Delian law governingfirewood and charcoal, and it has been arguedthat this is betterunderstood as an ad hocsolution to a specificproblem, its very existence implying that the same mechanisms did not normallyexist for other goods.86 Otherreconstructions ofthe process of customs assessment are equally unconvincing.871 propose instead that customs officials in the Hellenistic

85. E.g., an inscriptionof the late thedeclaration, counting the items declaredsale prices (which in Bressons 4thor 3rdcentury b.c. fromKyparissia assessedon a perarticle basis, such as viewwas customary),but were also {Syll?952 = IG V 1 1421) specifiesthat slaves,and weighing those assessed by prohibitedfrom lowering them. importersare required to givea declara- weight(lines 45-47). As Bressonnotes 87. Stanley(1976, pp. 291-292), for tionto thecustoms agents and paythe (2008,p. 101),this process appears to example,suggests that the value may dutywhen they offload their goods at be depictedin mosaics,reliefs, and havebeen based on a merchant'sexport thedock, before carrying them into the frescoesat Ostia.To theseshould be receipt.As Bresson(2000b) demon- emporionor attemptingto sellthem. addeda Romanmosaic from Tunisia, strates,the owners or captainsof most Similarly,exporters cannot load their whichshows slaves unloading from a shipsoffloading in Greekharbors would shipsuntil they have made a declara- shipobjects that appear to be metal indeedhave been able to producecer- tion,paid thetax, and summonedan ingots,perhaps lead, and carryingthem tainforms of written documentation. agentto be presentat theloading. to theshore, where two men in tunics Still,it is hardto believethat customs Violatorswill pay 10 timesthe duty. weighthem on a largebalance scale officialsin one Greekcity would rely on Furthermore,ifanyone is foundto have (Foucher1960, p. 78, no. 57.169). thedocuments produced in another undervaluedhis cargo(el Ôéxíç Ka 86. LDélos509. See, e.g.,Stanley Greekcity to determinethe value of a òÀ,vyoTi|j,áoTi),thecustoms agent can 1976,p. 293, forthe view that this law ships cargo,especially when the prices confiscatethe goods left undeclared. is exceptionaland thatcustoms duties ofcommodities could vary greatly from A customslaw fromKaunos (SEGXLV werenot normally assessed on thebasis portto port.It is evenharder to believe 639) and thelex portus Asiae (SEG ofdeclared sale prices.Bresson (2008, thatupon arriving in Ionianports, mer- XXXVIII 1180) agreein suggesting pp. 108-109,123-124) arguesthat chantstransporting natron from Egypt, basicallythe same procedure in the thelaw, which was clearlyintended to likethose attested in theAhiqar scroll, 1stcentury A.D., with the latter careful applyonly to importersof firewood and had theircargoes assessed on thebasis to specifythat when the importer charcoal,differed from normal practice ofAramaic export receipts (for this unloadshis shipthe customs agents chieflyin specifyingthat importers were customsrecord, see Portenand Yardeni shouldcheck the actual goods against notonly prevented from raising their 1993,C3.7; Yardeni1994; Briantand

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 277

periodroutinely relied on detailedprice lists similar to the one embedded in theAkraiphian decree in orderto arriveat the"real value" of imported and exportedcargoes assessed ad valorem**Such lists may have been a regularfeature of the vóuoi xeÀcoviKoíthat regulated customs collection in manyGreek portsby the 4th centuryb.c., and perhapseven earlier.89 Given thatthese lists would have been subjectto periodicrevision, there is no reason to expectthat theywould normallyhave been inscribed.90 The listpreserved in theinscription from Akraiphia, although it probably originatedin a customhousein a Boiotianharbor, survives only because it was borrowedand inscribedfor a verydifferent purpose.

AKRAIPHIA, ANTHEDON, AND THE ECONOMIES OF HELLENISTIC BOIOTIA

The portof Anthedon is themost likely source of seafood for Akraiphia.91 As with manyBoiotian city-states,the historyof Anthedonis obscure and the site has receivedlittle attention from archaeologists. In the late 19th centurythe AmericanSchool of Classical Studies at Athens con- ductedthree weeks of excavationsthere, and the harborwas surveyedin

Descat 1998). Indeed,this solution decreehonoring the strategos Epichares whichtheir grain had beenvalued for ultimatelybegs the question, given that (SEGXX1V 154,lines 17-19), and, customspurposes. theexport duties would themselves followingReger (1993, p. 313, n. 45), 89. Migeotte(2001, pp. 166,170- haverequired a valuation.Moreover, a similarexpression can perhapsbe 173),discussing two recently published manygoods, like the fisherman's catch, restoredin twoother inscriptions: inscriptions,one fromKlaros (Etienne wouldhave arrived in portunaccompa- IG IP 400,line 8 ([ttjçKcx6iGT(xu]évTi<; and Migeotte1998 [= S£GXLVIII niedby any documents to certifytheir Tijiffik),and IG IP 499, lines16-17 1404]) and theother from Athens value.What receiptscould privateers (xfjçk[oc9igt(X|jívt)ç tiut|]ç). Migeotte (Stroud1998 [= SEGXLVlll 96]), haveshown when they arrived in port (1997) collectsthe evidence and sum- observesthat detailed vóuoi xeXcoviKoí withgoods or slavesto unload?(The marizesthe debate over the origin werecommon in Greekcity-states questionis notmerely theoretical: on and meaningof the phrase. Bresson alreadyin the4th century b.c. The theclose relationships between piracy (2000c),suggesting analogies with expressionmia xòcvGÚyypacpov, which and more"legitimate" economic activ- PtolemaicEgypt, adds the evidence occursin theinscription from Kyparis- itiesin theHellenistic Aegean, see, e.g., frompapyri, concluding that Ka6eGxr|- sia (Sylt.3952 = IG V 1 1421; see n. 85, Gabrielsen2001.) KvilaTiur| means "official price," but above),seems to referto a similardocu- 88. This hypothesisalso suggests acknowledgingalong with previous ment;see Velissaropoulos1980, p. 210, anothersolution to themuch-debated scholarsthat in Athens,unlike in n. 33. Purcell(2005) surveysthe evi- problemof the meaning of the phrase Egypt,such prices could never have denceand concludesthat institutions KotGeGTnianatiutj in Athens.The beenrigidly fixed. He arguesinstead relatedto customscollection appear to phraseoccurs in two4th-century b.c. thatin Athensthe phrase denotes havebeen well developed even from a speechesascribed to Demosthenes.In pricesestablished as targetsfor public muchearlier date. thefirst passage (56.8), concerning officialspurchasing grain on behalfof 90. Romaninscribed customs tariffs agentsof the Egyptian grain monopoly thestate. In myview, Athenian officials suchas thosefound at Palmyra(OGIS stationedin variousports who have aremore likely to havebeen charged 629), Zarai (CIL VIII 4508), and Lam- sentback letters reporting xòcç Ka9eGTT|- simplywith buying grain as cheaplyas baesis(AÉ 1914,234) area different icuíaçTiuxxç, it has beentaken to mean possible.I suggestinstead that the "offi- matter,since they record not prices for "prevailingprice." In thesecond passage cial price"might have been the price calculatingduties ad valorembut fixed (34.49),however, it appearsto mean assignedfor the purpose of assessing tariffsthat would have been subject to the"established or officialprice": when customsduties. When localprices rose littlerevision. localgrain prices rose to 16 drachmas (or fell),these prices would remain 91. As notedalready by, e.g., Feyel permedimnos, Chrysippos earned the fixed,at leastin theshort term. Men (1936,p. 36, n. 1). The citylies on the gratitudeof the city by importing grain likeChrysippos, who were honored for northernstraits of Euboia, roughly and sellingit at xr'qKocGeornieuiocç xiufjç sellingat the"official price" rather than 20 kmfrom Akraiphia by an easy offive drachmas per medimnos. The pursuingthe market price, had merely route. phraseoccurs again in a 3rd-centuryb.c. agreedto sellfor the same price at

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 278 EPHRAIM LYTLE the1960s.92 References in ancientliterature are rare: Anthedon is included in the Homericcatalogue of shipsas the"furthest" Boiotian city, but it is primarilyknown for having been foundedon the spot of Glaukoss leap intothe sea and subsequenttransformation.93 The mostimportant source is HerakleidesKritikos (fr. 1.23-24 Arenz),who providesa vividaccount of the cityin the Hellenisticperiod.94 'Evieuoevdç Av0r|ôóvaoxáôioc p^'. óôòç 7cÀ,ayía,à'iaí,r'kaxoq 81' àypcovrcopeía. r' ôè nòXiqox> jueyá^ri ico jneyéGei,én' a')xf|çxfjç EußoüicficK8i|Liévr| Bataxaariç, xr'v jièv àyopàv exouoa Kaxáôevôpov 7caaav,otoocíç àvei^r|ji|iévr|v ôittocíç- amr' 8' eiSoivoç,euoxj/oç, aíxcparcavi Çodooc 8ià tò tt|v%cópav eivai Xvnpâv.Oi 8' évoiKoûvxeç oxeSòvnávxeq àXieíç, àrc' àyKÍaxpcov Kai íxBúcov,exi 8è Kai rcopcpúpaçKai OTtóyycovxòv ßiov ex°VT£Ç>¿v ouyioc?U)íçxe Kai (púicei Kai mJiußaicKaxayeyripaKÓxeç- Tcuppoi xaíç o'j/eaiv,rcávxeç 8è Xekxoí-xà 8' oncpaxéov òv')%cov Kaxaßeßpcofxevoi xaîç Kaxà ôáXaxxavépyaoíaiç • 7tpoo7C£7uov0óxeçTiopojioíç oí 7t^8ÍgxoiKai va')7cr|yoí,xt]v 8è xcópavox>% oiov èpyaÇójievoi,akX' o')8è exovxeç, aúxouç (páaKovxeçàjcoyóvo'oc eivai FÀaiaKo-uxov QaXaoaíov, oç à^ie-òçf]v òjLioXoyo-oiiévoç. FromThebes to Anthedonis 160 stades.The road is rough,the way a wagon-trackthrough fields. The cityitself is not greatin size,and lies on the Gulfof Euboia. It has an agorathat is entirelyshaded by treesand flankedby double stoas.The land is richin wine and richin fish,but has no grainowing to the poor soil. Nearlyall the inhabitantsare fishermen,making a livingmainly from hooks and fish,but also frommurex and sponges.They have grownold on the beachesamong the seaweedand the huts.95They are all thin,their hairbleached by the sun,their nails cracked and wornthrough workingthe sea, and manytoo have laboredas ferrymenand ship- builders.Not onlydo theynot work the land but theyrefuse even to own it,saying they are the heirsof seagoingGlaukos, he too a fisherman.

92. The mostrecent synopsis (Fos- thelast city on theBoiotian coast that centuryb.c. havebeen suggested for sey1988, pp. 250-257) describesthe facesEuboia, on accountof which the Herakleides,but Arenz in hisrecent Americanexcavations as "wretched" poetcalls it 'farthestAnthedon.'"). edition(2006) has arguedthat the (p. 252). On theresults of these exca- Blackman'sfrequently cited discussion workwas probablycomposed during vations,see Rolfe1890; the inscriptions ofthe ancient testimonia (Schläger, thedecade or so precedingthe Chre- werepublished separately in Buckand Blackman,and Schäfer1968, pp. 25- monideanWar (267-261 b.c.). For Tarbell1889. 1 couldfind no additional 28) overlooksa numberof important furtherdiscussion of this particular recordsin theAmerican School ar- literaryreferences and a handfulof passage,see thecommentaries of Pfister chives.For the survey of the harbor, inscriptionsnot collected in IG VII, as (1951,pp. 169-176) and Arenz(2006, see Schläger,Blackman, and Schäfer do thediscussions in Rolfe1890; RE I, pp. 151-152,208-209). 1968. 1894,cols. 2360-2361, s.v. Anthedon 95. Bresson(2008, p. 155) offersan 93. //.2.508: Av0r|ôóvat' ecxoc- (G. Hirschfeld);PECS, p. 59, s.v.An- interestingtranslation of these lines: leur xocoaav;explained by S trabo(9.2.13 thedon(P. Roesch);and Wallace 1979, "Lorsqu'ilssont âgés, ils passent [C 404-405]): lieraôè IccÀyavéaAv9r|- pp. 57-59. Knoepfler1986 remainsthe tempssur le rivageà la cueillettede ôœvTióXiç Xiuiva exouaa, éo%árn xfjç mostthorough and insightfuldiscus- l'orseilleou dansdes baraquesde pê- BoicûTiaKfjçnapaXiaç xfjç rcpòç Eußoia, sionof the city and itshistory. cheurs."The wordqrôKoç can indeed KocöarcepKai ó 7roir|TnçeiprjKev Ävörj- 94. The descriptionmay be some- referto orseille,a lichen (Rocella tinc- ôóva x' éGxaxócoaav("After Salganeus whatearlier than the inscription from torta)that grows on rockyMediterra- is Anthedon,which has a harborand is Akraiphia.Dates as lateas the2nd neancoastlines and can be usedto

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 279

AlthoughHerakleides sometimes appears to relyon literarysources as muchas autopsy,96his description is a valuableportrait of a modestpolis whosecitizens depended heavily, if notexclusively, on thesea fortheir livelihood.97 The remainsof the small ancient harbor, which is nowlargely abandoned,include a moleon theeast side and a larger,well-preserved mole on thenorth side. Along the south side is an enigmaticplatform (Fig. 6), calledby Schläger,Blackman, and Schäferthe southquay, adjacent to whichwere perhaps the agora and the double stoas mentioned by Hera- kleides.98Thedate of the harbor works is farfrom settled. Some scholars, perhapsrelying on theassumption that the city never recovered after its destructionat thehands of Sulla, date the visible remains to the4th centuryb.c.99 Schläger, Blackman, and Schäfer, on theother hand, conclude "thatall thevisible remains of harbour works belong to one period. . . to lateRoman or earlyByzantine times."100 The evidenceis notdecisive, producea dye.The suggestionthat probablythe correct interpretation" (2008,pp. 157-160).The fundamental Herakleideshere alludes to dyeproduc- (Schläger,Blackman, and Schäfer importancefor such cities of taxes tionis ingenious,but when technical 1968,p. 27). Plutarch'sexplanation, leviedin theirharbors was stated writersuse (pÛKoçto referspecifically to however,seems to relyon an earlier plainlyalready by Andreades (1933, Rocellatinctoria, they normally include discussionof the oracle by Aristotle, p. 297); morerecently, see Purcell2005 additionalqualifiers (cpûicoç üaXácmov and,as Pfisternotes, Herakleides' and especiallyBresson 2008, pp. 72-97. oúXov,Dioskourides 4.99; (pOKoçnòv- statementmay ultimately be derived 98. See Schläger,Blackman, and Tiov,Theophr.,Hist. PI. 4.6.4). In gen- fromthe same, apparently well-known Schäfer1968, fig. 4. In thelevel area eral,the word simply means "seaweed" oracle,which was also knownto Athe- adjacentto thesouth quay, the (see LSJ,s.v.), and I preferthe tradi- naios(1.31b-c). Bresson(2008, p. 260, Americanexcavations revealed a large tionalinterpretation (shared by, e.g., n. 72) has suggestedthat in describing buildingwith mosaics, described by Pfister1951 andArenz 2006), which Anthedonas eiSoivoçHerakleides does Rolfe(1890, pp. 98-99) simplyas a also moreclosely reflects the syntax of notmean to implythat it was gener- "Romanbuilding." As is apparentfrom thepassage. ally"rich in wine,"but only that it Rolfe's plan,it was actuallyan early 96. Pfister(1951, p. 172) suggests produceda certainamount of high- Christianbasilica, a factnoted already thatelements of Herakleides' descrip- qualitywine. byOrlandos (1937). Nevertheless,ear- tionmay have been derived from the 97. As Knoepfler(1986, pp. 596- lierbuildings may once have occupied literarytradition. This mightexplain 597) observes,an interestingecho of thesame site. thereference to Anthedonas euoivoç Herakleides'description of Anthedon 99. Previousscholarship on the ("richin wine"),a claimthat is notonly appearson a funerarystele found in the harborworks and theirdate is collected at oddswith Herakleides' own allega- city,which bears the image of a hatchet and discussedin Schläger,Blackman, tionthat the Anthedonians refused to in reliefand thewords vaüTtriyoc IIoGei- and Schäfer1968, pp. 22-25. Plutarch ownland or farmit, but also specifically Ôcova^(Jardé and Laurent1902, p. 324, (Sulla26.3) mentionsLarymna, Halai, contradictedby Plutarch (Mor. 295e-f ), no. 14). Anthedonobviously was not and Anthedonas thethree Boiotian who statesthat Boiotian Anthedon was exceptionalin thisregard. Pausanias, citiesdestroyed in 86 b.c. following devoidof vines, much as it was when forexample, alleges that half of the Sulla'svictory at Orchomenosover the HeinrichUlrichs visited in the19th inhabitantsof Bukis in Phokiswere Mithridaticarmy. Knoepfler (1992, century(1840, p. 36: "ImTal von murexfishermen (10.37.3), and Strabo p. 478, no. 125),however, points out Anthedonsah ichkeinen Weinstock"). similarlynotes that the citizens of lasos an overlookedinscription (OGIS 441 Plutarch'sassertion appears in a dis- "getthe greater part of their livelihood = I.Stratonikeia508), which includes cussionof an oracleattributed to the fromthe sea, for the city is richin fish Av9r|ôà)vBoicoTÍaç among the cities PythianApollo: tuv' oivov Tpvyiav, buthas poorland" (14.2.21 [C 658]: recognizingthe inviolability of the ETcelo')K Av0T|Ôóva vocíeiç ("Drink wine Kai to kXeigtovtoö ßiou toîç évGáôe sanctuaryof Hekate at Laginain Karia. mixedwith lees, since you do notlive £K GaXòíTTTjç-eiL)o'|/£Î yàp %copav t' e%ei The dateof the inscription is probably in Anthedon").Blackman argues that TtapaXimpov).Even in coastalcities veryclose to 80 b.c.,which suggests Plutarch'sstatement "is notconsistent withricher agricultural economies, thatthe city soon recoveredfrom any withthe statement of Herakleides. fishingwill have played an important damageinflicted by Sulla. Perhapsviticulture had declinedin role;see, for example, Bresson's com- 100. Schläger,Blackman, and Schä- Anthedonby the time of Plutarch, pellingportrait of the economy of fer1968, pp. 86-89. so thathe refusedto acceptwhat is Hermionein thesouthern Argolid

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 28O EPHRAIM LYTLE

Figure6. The southplatform of the however,and untilconfirmed by excavationthe date should remainan harborat Anthedon open question.101 In theirsearch for a listoffish to includein theirdecree, it is possible thatAkraiphian officials simply borrowed or copied a documentavailable at Anthedon,the nearest coastal city. On theother hand, the very fact that theyfound it feasibleto instituteprice limits might imply some degreeof controlover the supply offish itself; otherwise, such measures could easily haveled suppliersto avoidAkraiphia in favorof other, less restrictiveBoi- otiansettlements.102 While itis truethat there is no evidencethat Akraiphia evercontrolled a port,it is equallytrue that for local Boiotianhistory in the 3rd and early2nd centuriesb.c. we mustrely largely on inferencesfrom inscriptions.Akraiphia certainly controlled the importantsanctuary of Apollo Ptoios and seemsto have takenthe lead in reorganizingthe Ptoia in the 220s b.c.103The cityitself is almostentirely unexcavated; even the theater,attested in an inscription(IG VII 4148), has yetto be located.104

101. Schläger,Blackman, and Schä- structurethat I suspectmay have been evidencethat the festival existed before ferdid nothave permits to excavateand large,square tanks. It is entirelyabsent the220s, see Rigsby1987 (on SEG theLate Romansherds that they re- fromthe south quay. XXXII 456). movedfrom the joints between exposed 102.This is perhapswhy Feyel 104.The Frenchexcavations of the blocksdo notnecessarily constitute (1936,p. 36) foundthe measure "plus 1930sunder Guillon and Feyelalleg- evidencefor the original construction radical"and "plusmaladroite." edlyidentified the agora, but they re- date.Similarly, the argument based on 103. On thehistory of the sanctuary, mainunpublished beyond a fewbrief constructiontechniques is notentirely see RE XXIII, 1959,cols. 1505-1578, notes;see, e.g., BCH 60, 1936,p. 461. persuasive.The massesof mortar and s.v.Ptoion (S. Lauffer);Schachter 1981, Forthe more recent but very limited rubblein thenorth quay offer an im- pp. 52-73; and fora shortdiscussion workaround the city walls, see n. 26, perfectanalogy to otherLate Antique and bibliography,Fossey 1988, pp. 265- above.Construction of a newhighway limestonewalls with rubble and mortar 275. The dateand natureof the reorga- also uncovereda numberof cemeteries cores.This typeof construction is in nizationof the Ptoia areaddressed at outsidethe city, on whichsee Fossey anycase notused throughout the north lengthin Rigsby1996, pp. 59-67; see 1988,pp. 266-269. He justlyconcludes: quay,but restricted to partsof the also Sánchez2001, pp. 348-349. For "It is a greatpity that this important

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 281

Nevertheless,the visibleremains of circuitwalls, streets,and buildings suggesta citycapable of controllingan importantsanctuary and festival. The arableland availableto the citizens,on the otherhand, seems to have been extremelylimited. Ringed by the steepslopes of Mt. Ptoön to the east and the watersof Lake Kopaïs to the west,Akraiphia overlooks to the south one shortvalley, separated from the lake by a long dyke originallyconstructed in the Mycenaeanperiod.105 That the citydid not controladditional territory on the northside of thelake is confirmedby a 3rd-centuryb.c. inscriptionmarking the boundary between Akraiphia and its neighborKopai, which was cut intothe rockypoint known as Phtelio, northwestof the city.106It perhapstestifies to the increasingambitions of theAkraiphians that the Boiotian League was requiredto arbitratein this dispute,which was probablymotivated by economicconcerns.107 Seeingno possibilitythat Akraiphia controlled additional arable land, mostscholars have concludedthat the Akraiphianeconomy cannot have been founded,like that of most inland Greek city-states, on agriculture.108 It has been suggestedthat the cityprofited from the richfisheries in Lake Kopaïs and, to a lesserdegree, Lake Likeri.109Yet Akraiphiacontrolled verylittle of the Kopaïs shoreline,certainly less thanits neighborsKopai and Haliartos,and whateverrevenues the city derived from that source are unlikelyto have been sufficientto maintainthe economyand infrastruc- tureof a polis ofits size. The sanctuaryof Apollo would have contributed, indirectly,to the citys financialwell-being,110 and the rockyslopes of Mt. Ptoön itselfmight have supportedolive grovesor fed large numbersof sheep and goats.111 If the territorialambitions of the Akraiphianswere thwarted by Ko- pai to the northwest,they may have been more successfulin extending theircontrol to the east,over the villagesand land lyingbetween Lakes and apparentlywell preserved site also betweenAkraiphia and a neigh- 110. Fossey1988, p. 275. shouldbe so poorlyknown; much could boringstate. 111.The use ofpublic land for graz- be learnedfrom a fullsurface survey, to 108.The consensusis summarized ingis documentedin an inscriptionof saynothing of an excavation." byFossey (1988, p. 275): "The mainstay thelast quarter of the 3rd century b.c. 105. Fossey1988, p. 275,with bibli- ofancient Akraiphiai's economy can (SEG III 356), in whicha certainKal- ography.On theepigraphic evidence hardlyhave been agriculture even when lon,probably an Akraiphiancitizen, is forthe failure of the dyke in theEarly thebay of Kardhitsa was drained,for a recordedas havingforgiven the city an Imperialperiod, and attemptsto repair totalof c. 7 sq. km,even though very outstandingprincipal of 672 drach- it,see Oliver1971; Fossey1979, fertileland, could not support any large mas,SV2 obols, together with 835 pp. 554-560; Kalcyk1988. population."So too,more recently, drachmasof interest accumulated over 106.IG VII 2792; Magnetto1997, Magnetto1997, p. 387, n. 3. fiveyears. This generositywas rewarded no. 63: opiocK[co]7tr|vcûv 17tot' ÄKpr|- 109. Magnetto(1997, p. 386, n. 3), bya grantof grazing rights (epinomia) (pieîa[ç],I óprcT[á]vTcovBoicot [cov]. citingVatin's publication of the Akrai- for50 animalsin perpetuity.Kallon's 107. On theeconomic origins of phianfish list as evidence,notes that considerablewealth may have derived thedispute, see, e.g., Roesch 1965, thedispute with Kopai mayhave been fromhis flocks.In a secondinscription p. 64; Magnetto1997, p. 386. A much causedprimarily by competition for (SEG III 359), a certainEuklidas is earlier(perhaps 5th-century b.c.) additionalfisheries, not farmland. Fos- recordedas havingforgiven more than boundarymarker appears to referto sey(1988, p. 275) offersa similarargu- halfof a loan ofnearly a talent,for thesame two states: [¿ópoç Ä]Kpai- ment.The fisheriesin Lake Kopaïs whichthe city had offeredas security [(piéovI k]ocí Ko7r[aícov (Lauffer 1980, wereno doubtimportant to someof land sacredto Apollo.How theland pp. 161-162, no. 1; restorationssug- thecity's inhabitants, but the inscrip- was used is notstated, but grazing is gestedby Roesch [1980, p. 2, no. 1]). tionfrom Akraiphia can hardlybe con- notunlikely. See furtherMigeotte A thirdinscription, IG VII 4130,of struedas relevantevidence, given that 1984,pp. 74-78, no. 16; Chandezon the2nd centuryb.c., testifies to yet thevast majority of the fish listed 2003,pp. 45-47, no. 8. anotherterritorial dispute, probably thereinare marine species.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 282 EPHRAIM LYTLE

Likeriand Paralimniin the stonyvalley descending toward Anthedon.112 Ancientsources record four settlements in thisarea (Hyle,Peteon, Scho- inos,and Trapheia)and no fewerthan five archaeological sites have been detected.113The regionhas traditionallybeen consideredpart of the territoryof Thebes,114 an attributiondependent on the testimonyof Strabo (9.2.22, 26 [C 408, 410]), who reportsthat the kcoutiof Peteon and the %copocof Schoinoslie nearthe road fromThebes to Anthedonand are in theterritory of Thebes.115 Strabo,however, is not necessarilya reliablesource for the political divisionsof HellenisticBoiotia. One need look no furtherthan his assertion(9.2.34 [C 413]) thatMt. Ptoön and the sanctuaryof Apollo Ptoios also formedpart of the territory of Thebes. This claimmay have been true whenit was firstmade by Herodotos (8.135), butit can hardlyapply to the 3rd and 2nd centuriesb.c.116 It is likelythat Akraiphia or Anthedon,or perhapsboth, gained control over additional territory after the destruction ofThebes and thepartition of its territory in 335 b.c.,when, as Pausanias (9.23.5) notes,many of the survivors fled to Akraiphia,a citythat had been once in Theban territory.117Although it is certainthat much of the territoryof Thebes was eventuallyrestored, there is littlereason to assumethat thestatements of Strabooffer firm evidence for territorial borders during 118 the 3rd and early2nd centuriesb.c., or indeed at anypoint after335. Nevertheless,among modern scholars, only Thomas Corstenhas placedthe settlementsof Schoinosand Peteonoutside the territoryof Thebes.119

112.Fosseyl988,p.226.The Peteonand Hyletogether, and states see hxx.Anah1.9.9; Diod. Sic. 17.8-14; amountof dry land in thearea was explicitlythat Peteon is a villagebe- Just.E fit. 11.24;Plut. Alex. 11. apparentlysomewhat larger and the longingto Thebes, he makesno such 118.The restorationof Thebes lakesthemselves smaller before the assertionabout Hyle. He does,how- underCassander is recordedby Diod. drainingof the Kopaic basin. Today ever,imply that at somepoint Lake Sic. 19.53,Paus. 9.7.1,and IG VII wateris divertedaway from the basin Hylikeitself was in theterritory of 2439, on whichsee Holleaux1938. The and intothese two lakes by means of Thebes,and withit, presumably, the restoration,and theeventual return of ditchesand a tunnelthat begins just settlementof Hyle on itsshores: r' u£v Thebesto theBoiotian League, which westof ancient Akraiphia. yap écrciueyáA/n [Lake Kopaïs],Kai epigraphicsources confirm was delayed 113. Hyle,Peteon, and Schoinosare oÙKév xfi Orjßaioi, f] ôè uiKpa[Lake fornearly three decades, has recently mentionedin theCatalogue of Ships Hylike],ekeiGev òY ')7tovóutt>vnXr'pov- beendiscussed by Knoepfler (2001). (Schoinosin //.2.497, Hyle and Peteon |LiévT|,Keiu£VT| fxeta^i) 0r|ßcov Kai Äv6r|- The questionof Boiotian territorial in 2.500; Hyleis mentionedagain at ôóvoç(9.2.20 [C 408]) ("Lake Kopaïs divisionsspecifically during the period 7.221).Additional references are col- is largeand notin theterritory of ofthe Third Boiotian League (338-171 lectedin RE II, 1923,cols. 616-617, Thebes,but Hylike is small,is filled b.c.) is addressedby Roesch (1965, s.v.Schoineus/Schoinos (L. Burchner); throughunderground channels from pp. 46-73), whosereliance on Strabois REJX, 1916,cols. 117-119, s.v. Hyle Kopaïs,and liesbetween Thebes and manifest.Roesch recognizes, however, (F. Bölte);and RE XIX, 1937,col. 1128, Anthedon.").Most scholarsassume thateach territoryand citydeserves a s.v.Peteon (E. Kirsten).A fourthsite, thatAkraiphia would have had access detailedstudy taking into account all Trapheia,is mentionedonly by Nikan- to Lake Likeri,sometimes identified availableevidence (p. 48, n. 3). der{Ther. 887) and Stephanos,s.v. withthe ancient Hylike. Fossey (1988, 119. Corsten1999, pp. 27-60 (for Tpoccpeioc.On thevarious archaeological pp.225-229), however, identifies Hy- theBoiotian League) and esp.p. 44 sitesin thearea and thepossible identi- likewith the modern Paralimni, an (fora mapof the region during the ficationof some of these with the four argumentfor which this passage per- 3rdcentury b.c.). Corstenargues that settlementsattested in ourancient hapsoffers some support. Boiotiain the3rd century was divided sources,see Fossey1988, pp. 225-247. 116. Strabos probabledependence intoseven federal districts. Schoinos 114. See, e.g.,Fossey 1988, pp. 225- on Herodotosin thispassage is noted and Peteonappear to lie in thedistrict 247; Roesch1965, p. 49, map3. byRoesch (1965, p. 48). whosemajor settlements included Ha- 115.Although Strabo mentions 117. On thedestruction of Thebes, liartos,Akraiphia, Anthedon, Halai,

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 283

If the Akraiphiansdid in factgain possessionof some or all of this territory,then Akraiphia and Anthedon may have shared a commonborder in the 3rd centuryb.c. There is no evidenceto suggestthat Akraiphian controlextended as faras Anthedonitself - indeed,it is clear thatAn- thedon,having gained its independencefrom Thebes in the 4th century, remainedan independentmember of the League formuch of the follow- - ing century120but thatdoes not precludethe possibilityof some other kindof relationshipbetween the two cities.It is temptingto see a parallel betweenAnthedon and the Cretan cityof Stalai,which was allowedby itsstronger neighbor Praisos to maintainits independence, but was forced to hand overhalf of the revenuesaccruing from its 10% dutyon fish.121 Similarly,given the increasedimportance of the reorganizedPtoia in the late 3rd centuryb.c., one mightsuggest an analogybetween Akraiphia and othercities that controlled important sanctuaries, each affiliatedwith a corresponding"sacred harbor."122 Whatever the detailsof the relationship,it seemslikely that the alphabetizedlist of marinefish names in the Akraiphiandecree, like the fishthemselves on sale in the city'sregulated fishmarket, originated in Anthedon.

ACROPHONIC NUMERALS, FISH PRICES, AND REGULATION OF SALES

If thealphabetized list did indeedoriginate in a customhouseat Anthedon, itcannot be takenas a reliableindicator of the number and variety of species actuallysold in thefish market at Akraiphia.Many ofthe species listed may have appearedmore frequently on thedocks or in thewholesale market at Anthedonthan in inlandretail markets. Nevertheless, the prices recorded in theinscription, which must have been determined by Akraiphian officials and Boumeliteia.Knoepfler (2002, and 230 b.c.; see Knoepfler1986, to tÍuigoov,íx0')co(x jLièv Ka6árc£l[p K]ai pp. 146-147 and p. 155,fig. 7), while p. 606; Etienneand Knoepfler1976, rcpÓTEpov("On thefollowing condi- acceptingCorsten's theory in itsbroad pp. 294-295; Etienneand Roesch tions,the Praisians gave to thecitizens outline,redraws Corsten's map to once 1978,pp. 365-366,373-374. Knoepfler of Stalaithe land, the city, and islands againplace these settlements under (1986,pp. 606-608) proposesthat the thatthey now hold, and, of the [stan- Thebancontrol. Scholarly reluctance to IIoTiôaïxoçKocMvGco AvGaôóvioç who dard]customs duty and thetithe on assignany of this territory to a district appearsin a federaldecree from the murexand fish,of all ofthese [the Prai- otherthan Thebes may be due notonly Amphiareion(SEGl 115) shouldbe siansgive] half, with respect to thaton to Strabobut to Herakleides'descrip- identifiedwith the I1otiÔ(xï%oç who fishjust as previously").Similarly, tionof Anthedon as smalland itsin- servedas archonof the League in the accordingto Strabo(13.3.6 [C 633]), habitantsas essentiallylandless (see, 220s; ifso, it wouldimply that he and Aeolic Kymehad at a muchearlier date e.g.,Gullath 1982, pp. 77-82). This otherAnthedonians probably served in and forunspecified reasons ceded its reasoning,however, ignores a second a numberof lesser offices as well. rightto collectcustoms duties. possibility:that Akraiphia, not Anthe- 121. A decreeissued by Praisos, 122. See, e.g.,Robert's discussion don,controlled much of this area. apparentlyprecipitated by a conflict (1960,pp. 197-200) ofAthenian 120.A numberof Anthedonian withStalai, includes the following attemptsto appropriaterevenues from citizensserved as federalmagistrates: stipulation(Chaniotis 1996, no. 64 theiepòç Xiut|v of the Amphiareion. ApioTOK^eîçAyaaiTioç (IG VII 2723, [= Syll?524], lines4-8): etcìtoîcôe Roesch(1965, p. 165) suggestsa similar line4) and ApvoK^eíçAvioxiöao eÔcomvnpocíoioi Xtocaítociç tocv %lcppocv relationshipbetween Thespiai and the (IG VII 3207,line 8) saton thecouncil Kai tocvnokw Kai váoouç xàç Kai vuv portof Kreusis,which the city seems to ofephedriatesy theformer ca. 285 b.c. 8%ovI[tiK]ai èXÀ,iU£víoi>Kai Tiopcpúpaç havecontrolled continuously. and thelatter perhaps between 240 Kai í^Gúcovôeml[xa]ç, toútcov rcávicov

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 284 EPHRAIM LYTLE

themselves,still offer valuable evidence for the cost of fishat Akraiphia and in HellenisticGreece generally.Most of the discussionprompted by Vatiríspublication of the inscription has been concernedwith these prices, eitherwith their relative values compared to othercommodities, or with theiractual values in local currency. Discussionsof actual values require an understandingof the acrophonic numeralsystem employed at Akraiphia,for which this inscription offers the onlyevidence.123 The systemuses foursymbols in descendingorder: I, H, TI,and X. Three ofthese are easilyconstrued: the firstis an oboi,the seconda hemi-obol,and the last a chalk,which, in Boiotian currency,is one twelfthof an oboi. Comparisonwith other acrophonic systems suggeststhat TT should stand for rcévce and representfive chalks. That interpretation,however, would introduce apparent redundancies into the values expressedin theinscription, a fact that has led scholars,beginning already withFeyel, to suggestalternative solutions. The mostplausible of these is theproposal of Joshua Sosin, who suggeststhat Tí standsfor rcércapeç, Boiotianfor "four," here indicating four chalks.124 Sosin's solution has the advantageof introducingsuperfluities at onlytwo pointsin Vatins text. One of these(in line B.8) is based on a falsereading by Vatin;the other (in line A.i.19) could well be the productof a similarerror, although I was unable to examineblock A and thereforecannot confirm or correct thereading.125 To thepoints made by Sosin one mightadd thatunder his 123. See Feyel1936, pp. 32-33; systemthe value of HJTX,by farthe mostcommon price recorded in the Tod 1936-1937,p. 245 [= 1979,p. 71]; Vatin inscription,would be notone oboi and sixchalks, but 1 1 chalks.That price, 1971,pp. 102, 104; Schaps1987; one chalkshort of an an to below Sosin2004. oboi,might suggest attempt keep prices 124. Sosin2004. a psychologicallysignificant barrier. 125. VatinsinXX in UneB.8 is Althoughthe correct interpretation of the prices listed in theinscrip- impossible;there is no evidenceof a tion mayappear to be a trivialissue, it has importantconsequences. As secondchi on thestone (nor does Feyel Gallantwrites in thecrowning argument of his attackon Rostovtzeff,"The recordany), and he has missedthe finallink of theorthodox chain of can now be confronted: ligaturein HTLIn lineA.i.19 Vatin argumentation nXX. Sosinthis would was fish On the basis of the from he gives Following cheap?"126 inscription Akraiphia, denotesix chalks, for which we would answersin the thatfish "was on thir- negative.Alleging expensive, average expectinstead H, a half-obol.Sosin teentimes more expensive than wheat," he concludesthat for the Greeks (2004,p. 195) suggeststhat correct it would have remaineda luxuryitem, eaten only on specialoccasions by readingmay be HXX. 126. Gallant 39. a privilegedfew.127 Others have followedsuit. David Schaps,for example, 1985,p. uses the of fishat to concludethat "there was 127. Gallant1985, p. 40. prices Akraiphia nothing 128. 1988, 69-70. On about the of Attic while Schaps pp. intrinsicallyinflationary dialogue comedy,"128 priceinflation in comedy,see Finley JamesDavidson citesboth Gallant and Schaps in supportof his assertion 1952,p. 267, n. 29. As Schapscon- that"a dinner-partywith fish-dishes served to severalguests . . . would be cedes,many of the prices in Attic out of the questionfor any but the mostwealthy. A bottleof champagne, comedyare obviously exaggerated for a usefulmodern humorouseffect. Still, even the prices perhaps,proves parallel."129 he takesto be "real"find little or no These claims reston thin evidence.Gallant arrivesat his ratio of supportin theAkraiphian decree. 13:1 the offishwith the of wheat as recorded by comparing prices price 129. Davidson1997, p. 187. in an inscriptionof the 2nd centuryb.c. fromChaironeia.130 The ratio, 130.The inscriptionwas published however,is notbased simplyon theprices charged for standard measures byFeyel (1942b, p. 80, no. 3), who arrivedat a of3.5 drachmas (forexample, the price of a minaoffish vs. theprice of a choinixof wheat), figure per medimnos(pp. 84-85). The text,how- but ratheron a calculationof the total caloric contentper drachma.A ever,actually records the price of grain numberof scholars have criticizedthis thatit justly method,noting equates purchasedby KÓqnvoç (lines 6, 8-10), theabsolute value offish, a foodlow in energybut high in nutrients,with a measurewhose volume cannot be its caloric content,while ignoringaltogether its considerablecultural determinedwith any certainty.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 285

value.131Still, no one has challengedGallant's argument on itsown terms or pointedout thathis data are fundamentallyflawed. In calculatingthe price offish, Gallant relies exclusively on thedecree fromAkraiphia and the readingsprovided by Vatin.132The pricesof only a dozen fishare used,and foreight of thesethe pricerecorded by Vatin is inX. But Vatirísreconstruction of the Akraiphian numeral system is, of all thoseproposed, the least likely, because he ignoresthe ligature in themost commonprice, HJTX, reading it insteadas I11X,which he interpretsas one oboi and six chalks.There is no parallelfor the inscriptionof the letters III in ligature,and the sum of one oboi and six chalkscould moreeasily havebeen writtenas IH.133Simply restoring the ligatures has the effectof decreasingthe mostcommon price by six chalks.Sosin's interpretation of thesign TT reduces the price by an additionalchalk. It followsthat in eight of12 instances,or two-thirds of his entire sample, Gallant has overestimated the priceoffish by 65%.134 Moreover,Gallant s ratioassumes too lighta value forthe minaused at Akraiphia.Citing work on Boiotiancoinage, Gallant concludes that the officialweights (otoctGuí^ç] Ko[0]ocpoîç,line A.i.7) employedby Akraiphian fishmongerswould havebeen calibratedon a coin standardof ca. 430 g.135 Coin standardsand retailweights need not be the same,however, and an Aiginetanmina equal to ca. 630 g is farmore likely, as Feyel and others had alreadynoted.136 In Athenstoo duringthis period it appearsthat a JlIvoc é|i7iopiKT|equivalent to 138 drachmas,or ca. 600 g,was the standard.137In assuminga minaof 430 g, Gallantappears to have overestimatedthe cost offishby an additional40% or more. Yet anotherweakness in Gallants calculationis his assumptionthat theprices preserved in theinscription are averageprices. He maybe right, butin myview it is muchmore likely that they represent maximum prices, and thatnothing prevented fishmongers from selling their wares at a lower priceif theychose to do so. As ancientsources attest and moderncom- parativeevidence confirms, fish prices tend to fluctuatewidely in response to seasonalchanges in supply,and even overthe courseof a singleday.138 Freshfish is unlikemost other commodities in thatan unpredictablesupply

131. See Powell1996, pp. 14-15 11 chalks.(The readingIT7X without and 3, pp. 117-120. ("hisstrictly caloric interpretation of a ligaturedoes occuronce on blockB, 135. Gallant1985, p. 39. foodresources is somewhatsimplistic"); lineB.32. Giventhe extremely worn 136. Feyel1936, p. 31; see also Rose 2000,p. 517 ("misleading"); surfaceof the stone, all tracesof the Schaps1988, p. 67. Feyel(1936, Bekker-Nielsen2002a, p. 32 ("absurd"); ligaturemay have been effaced, or this pp. 32-33, citingHultsch 1882, p. 543) Wilkins2005, p. 22 ("misconceived"). maybe an errorof omission by the also consideredthe possibility of a 132. Gallant1985, pp. 39-41, stonecutter.On theother hand, the fish Boiotianmina equivalent to 2.5 Roman figs.6, 7. in thiscase is a noteddelicacy, eel, for pounds,or roughly819 g. On thebasis 133. Vatin(1971, p. 102) notesthat whicha priceof one oboi and five ofa "Theban"mina mentioned by a ligaturesin thegroup HTIX occur fre- chalksis notunimaginable. Also, the single4th-century a.d. source(Epipha- quently,but in his textand apparatus combinationof eta and pi appearsto nios,De mensurisetponderibus 314), he recordsonly II1X. Based on Vatins havebeen inscribed once without Hultschhad concludedthat the Boio- treatmentof these numbers on blockB, ligature,at A.ii.21.). tianspreserved the use ofthis ancient I havetaken the liberty of restoring 134. It willbe apparentthat other unitof measure.Feyel (1936, p. 32, ligaturesin linesA.i.39, A.ii.7, and studiesrelying on theprices given by n. 2) is rightlyskeptical of the authority A.ii.22 as well,even though I havenot Vatinor Gallantare equally unreliable: ofEpiphanios. beenable to examinethe stone. There see,e.g., most recently, Mylona 2008, 137. See /GIP 1013. is no reasonto expectany of these pp. 104-105,table 9.1; Collin-Bouffier 138. On thedaily volatility offish speciesto fetcha higherprice than 2008,pp. 101-103,and appendixes2 prices,see Reger2003, p. 175,n. 28.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 286 EPHRAIM LYTLE

is combinedwith a remarkablyshort shelf life. Fish thatare beginningto turnmust be sold promptly,and thosethat are well on the road to rotten can be had forsteep discounts, as can theleftover scraps of the largerfish sold in cuts:in antiquity,the head of a tunamight have made a finesoup but it would not have costthe same as a tunasteak.139 This is the realitythat underlies a passage by the comic poet Alexis (fr.130 K-A; Athen.6.226a-b), in whichan Atheniannamed Aristonikos proposesa law to regulatefish sales: o') yeyoveKpeíxxcov vouo0éxr|ç xoû nXovaíov ApioTovÍKoi).t TÍ0r|Giyòcp vüvl vójiov, XCOVix&UOTCCOÄXOV OGTIÇ CXVKtoX&V XlVl íx6')vimoTiurioccç árcoôcox' ètaixxovoç rjçeine Tijufjç, eíç xò ôeojicoxripiov eúBuçá7iáyea0ai xoöxov,iva ôeôoiKÓxeç xíiçà^íaç àyocTicòcnv,tixfjç èorcépaç aanpoòq arcavxaçàrco(pépcoatv oïmôe. KÓcvxccuGaKai ypaîç Kai yépcovKai rcaiÔíov 7cejjxp8eiçanavieq àyopácovGiKaxà xpórcov.

Has thereever been a betterlawgiver than wealthy Aristonikos? He hasjust now proposeda law that,if anyone of the fishmongers, havingstated the priceof his fish,should then sell his fishfor less thanthe price he stated,he shallimmediately be led offto prison, so thatthe fishmongers,properly frightened, will be contentwith fairvalue or else carryall theirfish home rottenin the evening. Thus the old womanand thegrandpa and the merechild sent to marketwill all in good orderpurchase fish. Earlierscholars have often assumed that the law proposedby Aristonikos in thispassage is a comic fiction,and Becker140suggested that it was a parodyof Plato,echoing Leg. 11.917b-c: 139. Athenaios(7.303a) quotesan appositefragment of Alexis (fr. 159 ó TtooÀxovóxiofiv év àyopa ur|ôércox£8Ú0 eínr'xiuàç covav n(úX% K-A): oiixocrcpóiepov KecpaX^v el taxßoi ànXr'vôè drccov,âv [ir'xx>yxávr' xamrjç, àrcocpépcov ópGcoç av Gúvvoi)/évójJiÇev éyxéÀeia Kal Gúvvaç ifhe holdof a àrcocpépoinakiv, Kai xaúxrjçxfjç íijuipaç jnfj xijuriari rcÀiovoç ur|Ôè 8%eiv("This guy, got tunahead, reckoned he had eelsand èÀ,áxxovoç. tunasteaks"). Athenaios interprets the as oftuna a Whoeversells anything in the agorawill not name two pricesfor passage praise heads, thatobviously misses the thegoods he sells,but he will name a singleprice and ifhe does not reading point. 140. Becker1878, p. 205. obtainit he will be allowedto takeback his wares,and on promptly 141. Becker'shypothesis was thor- thatsame dayhe will not name anotherprice whether more or less. oughlycritiqued already by Höppener (1931,pp. 137-139),and morerecently There are for Beckers however,and the good grounds rejecting proposal, byArnott (1996, pp. 363-364),who Aristonikosmentioned by Alexis is best identifiedwith a politicianfrom concludesthat "we have no reasonto Marathonknown to have authoreda numberof otherlaws duringthe doubthere an allusionto contemporary period334-322 b.c.141Moreover, Plato s law is onlyaccidentally similar history,and theidentification ofAlexis' withthe Aristonicus to the proposalof Aristonikos.Plato wishedto eliminatebargaining, or lawgiver politician ofMarathon." On thisAristonikos a that,as an affrontto truth,he seemsto find haggling, practice inherently see LGPNlly s.v.,no. 4; Hansen 1983, distasteful.Davidson thatAristonikos had a similar suggests purpose.142 p. 161. It is truethat Aristonikos s law would,as a matterof course,prevent bar- 142. Davidson1993, p. 56; 1997, gaining,but bargainingper se is not the law's primaryconcern. Rather it pp. 189-190.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 287

is thatfish prices fluctuate wildly over the courseof a day.Depending on theavailability of a sufficientnumber of buyers, a fishmongercan demand an extravagantprice, then gradually lower it as demand or the qualityof his supplydwindles, and ifanything is leftnear closing time he will dump it forthe bestprice he can get.Under such conditions,only those willing to watch the marketall day can get a reasonabledeal, while the elderly and disabledor the child sentto purchasefish for the familyhave to pay whateveroutrageous price momentarily prevails. This proposal must be consideredtogether with anotherpassage usuallyattributed to Alexis (fr.131 K-A; Athen. 6.226b-c),143in which Aristonikosappears again as the authorof a differentlaw aimed at the same problem: oi) yéyovejaeià EótaovocKpemcov oúôè eîç ÄpioTovixm)vouoGéxriç- xá x' aXka yòcp v£vo|io0éxr|K8noXXà mi tcocvxoîocôf|, voví X8kouvÒv eÍGcpépei vóuov xivà %p1)G0')V, XÒ JLlílTMùXeÎV KCcOíHUÍVOUÇ 8X1 xo')ç i%Qx>onáXaq,ôià xéÀ,ot>ç8' èaxr|KÓxaç- eíx' eiç vécoxácpr|Gi ypá'|/£iv Kpeuocjiévo-oç, Kal GôtxxovocTcojiéiixi/ODai xoí)ç còvo-ujjÍvodç, arcòjirixavfiç iiqòXovvteç, coo7i£p oí 9eoí.

No lawgiversince Solon has been greaterthan Aristonikos. He has introducedall sortsof otherlaws, and now he is introducinga new law,a goldenone, thatthe fishmongerscan no longersell sitting down,but muststand up thewhole time.And nextyear he says he'll proposethey do it hangingsuspended, and so send the pur- chasersaway even morequickly, dealing from a machinelike the gods [on the stage]. The passage is obviouslya comic invention,but the proposalthat fish- mongersnot be allowedto sitdown, absurd as it seems,is less certainlyin- vented.If thisis in facta genuineproposal by Aristonikos(as thatin the previousfragment is generallyheld to be), it can onlyhave been motivated by the idea thata fishmongerwho is forcedto standup willbe morewill- ingto unloadhis merchandisefor a fairprice as quicklyas possible.144The

143.Athenaios quotes this frag- ducesAristonikos for a secondtime, second(fr. 131) "is a grotesqueand mentimmediately after the fragment and in nearlyidentical language. extravagantfancy of the comic poet's, discussedabove (fr. 130 K-A; in the Meinekesuggests that after fr. 130 preparingthe way for a rcapàrcpoaÔo- epitomethe order in whichthe frag- and beforeKal 7ipo£^9à>vÔé cprjoiv an KÍavjoke" (Arnott1996, p. 381). This mentsare given is reversed),which additionalfragment from a different characterizationperhaps exaggerates he attributesto a playtitled "The playhas fallenout of the text. Arnott theabsurdity of the proposal, which Cooking-Pot" (Aeßric). The words (1996,p. 365) argues,less persuasively wouldprepare the way for the joke just withwhich he introducesthe second in myview, that the two fragments as effectivelyifit were in factgenuine. fragment(kœ! TtpoeXGœv ôé (pr|Giv) couldin factbelong to thesame play. On thepossibility that the character- suggestthat the two form a singlecon- 144.That bothmeasures are genu- izationof Aristonikos as vouo6éxr|ç tinuouspassage, but Meineke (1867, inewas arguedalready by Höppener reflectsthe fact that he proposedhis p. 97) is probablycorrect in arguing (1931,pp. 136-139). More recently, measuresnot in theassembly but as a thatthe second quotation cannot be- Arnotthas suggestedthat the first memberof a boardof vouoGéiai, see longto thesame play, since it intro- (fr.130) is probablyauthentic, but the Arnott1996, pp. 377-378.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 288 EPHRAIM LYTLE

dilatorypractices attributed to fishmongersin ancientsources seem to have been intendedto get a betterprice.145 The proposalsattributed to Aristonikosseem to acknowledgethat it was impracticalfor the state simply to fixfish prices. Indeed, they recognize and makeallowances for the factthat the priceoffish will fluctuatefrom dayto day,week to week,and season to season.146As at Delos, wherethe regulationof wood and charcoalimports stopped shortof simplypre- scribinga price,Greek lawmakers and marketofficials seem to havebeen willingto regulatesales, but hesitant,at least undermost circumstances, to simplyfix prices. A well-knownimperial letter from Pergamon, probably of Hadrianic date,is frequentlycited as evidencefor the regularfixing of prices(OGIS 484 [Oliver1989, no. 84], lines 16-22):

ÖGOCJJÌVTOI XCÛV XeUX&V Ò'|/apÌCOV GXa0|JXÛl 7ri7TpOCGKÓ|Ll£VaTIU&TOU ímò I xcovayopavojicov, xoúxcov, kòcv nXeíovaq uvaç còvr|GCuvxaí xiveç,íípebev fijiew xr'v xijlltív aúxouç ÔiÔóvaircpòç Kepuxx, coerce arc'oròxcov acoGlÇeooai xfji Trólei rryv £k xotj KoAXußoi) Tipóooôov. óuoícoçKai éàv nXeíoiveçG')v6éu£voi àpyopcov ôr|vapícov ôó^cogiv fjyopaKevaieíxa Ôiailpcovxai,Kai xoúxouçXektòv ÔiÔóvai xa^KÒv xcoiòxi/apiorcco^rii iva àvalcpéprixai érci xtív xpárceÇav.

And regardingthose small fish sold byweight and withprices fixed bythe agoranomoi,even if individuals should purchase many minas of them,I deem it bestthat they pay the costin bronzecoin, so that theproceeds from the exchangeare preservedfor the city.Likewise, evenif many individuals should get togetherin orderto make a purchasein silverdenarii and thendivide it up, eventhey should pay thefishmonger in bronzecoin in orderthat he maydeposit it with thebank.

In myview, this document ought to be interpretedfar more narrowly. The necessarycontext is thatmerchants in the Pergameneagora were obliged to use approvedbankers to exchangelocal bronze forsilver denarii at a fixedrate of 18:1, one as morethan the normalexchange rate for denarii to asses.The state,and itsapproved bankers, profited, not from the average citizen,but fromthe merchantswho wereforced to pay one additionalas forevery denarius when exchangingthe bronze coin thatthey collected fromcustomers. The systemhad apparentlybroken down when merchants beganto exchangedenarii directly, or to encouragetransactions using only denariiythereby bypassing the bankers, who in responseapparently tried to chargeone as everytime a denariuswas used in the market.The emperor

145.Athenaios (6.224c-227b) col- (ë'iCl)'|/£V C0a7t£p Tr|À£(pOÇ / TlpCOTOVGIG07CTÌ phron,which describes a halcyonday lectspassages illustrating the abuses . . . /obaei f 7tpoaé%cûvô' t oúôev oúÔ' followingthree days of winter storms offishmongers, particularly at Athens. aKTjKoœç / eKpouoe tcodMtcovv tiv', thatprevented the fishermen from Amongthem is a fragmentattributed lines6-10). Some scholars(e.g., Gau- launchingtheir boats. When theyfinally to Amphis(fr. 30 K-A; Athen.6.224e), thier1977, pp. 204-205) nevertheless returnto thebeach at Phaleronafter a whichdescribes a sellerwho, when continueto suspectthat all ofthe mea- good catch,they find the dealers wait- approachedwith an offer,"crouches in suresAlexis attributes to Aristonikos ing,ready to buyeverything except the silencelike Telephos . . . pretending aresimply comic invention. undersizedfish (tcov ^eTctoxepcov i%9')cov). to payno attentionor to nothave 146.The realitybehind this assump- The priceof fresh fish no doubtin- heard,and poundson an octopus" tionis evidentin thefirst letter of Alki- creasedduring such periods of shortage.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 289

then steppedin with this letterto clarifythat only the bankerswere to exchangedenarii and onlyasses were to be used in the market. Of all the productssold in the market,only xòc ÀercTÒc ò'|/ápioc (line 16) warrantspecial mentionin the Pergamenedocument. Bresson fol- lows Oliver in translatingthe phraseas "fishsold retail,"suggesting that at Pergamonfish prices were generally fixed.147 Anthony Macro similarly infersfrom this clause that"essential foodstuffs were priced by the agoranomoi"14SThe language of the inscription, however, as well as itscontext, suggeststhat xà Xenxà ò'|/ápiocare the same fishcalled "littlefish" by Athenaios(xcov Xznxâv í^Odôícov, 7.303a) and stillreferred to in similar termsin Greece today:the anchovy,sardine, and atherine,which remain formany the only affordableoption.149 The largervarieties would have been sold whole or in cuts,making it difficultfor groups of customers to go in togetheron exactlyone denariuss worthof, say, gilthead; even if the pricewere fixed,the exactcost would not be knownuntil the fish was placed on the scale. Customerscould, however,and apparentlydid, purchaseexactly one denarius's worthof small fry.The wordingimplies thatthe pricewas ratherlow and thatone denariusmight purchase a fair quantity,which explains why these customers were going in togetheron a singlepurchase. The fishmongersmight have encouragedthis by pass- ing on the cost of exchangeto customerspaying in bronze,or perhaps by offeringa marginallybetter price to customerswilling to pay in silver denarii. In his letteraddressing the problem,the emperoris carefulto specify that all transactions,even those involvingpurchases worth exactly one denarius,must employ bronze currency.At the same time,however, he reiteratesthat bankers must exchange denarii into bronze coin at therate of 1:17 (lines22-24). Even thoughthe state is carefullyprotecting its interests (the value of the bankingconcession), consumers are also protected:the cost of exchangeis to be bornesolely by the fishmongers,with the fixed pricefor small fry ensuring that it is not passed on to thosewho can least affordit. There is no reasonto suspect,on the basis of this inscription, thatany fishother than these small frywere sold at a fixedprice in the marketat Pergamon. Anotherletter ascribed to Hadrian, usuallyinterpreted in a narrow Eleusiniancontext and takento implya shortageof fishduring the mys- teries,is probablymore concernedwith the largerproblem of pricesat Athens,which were apparentlyhigh enough that Eleusinian fishermen were choosing to sell theirfish in Piraeus ratherthan in theirhome port.150The emperorsproposed solution, intended to increasesupply and simultaneouslylower costs by cuttingout middlemen,again stops well

147. Bresson2000a, p. 175,n. 106; necessarilycooked." This is wellillus- A,ei(8i)jiapuapívocç TparcélÇaç iß' aùv 2008,p. 42. tratedby a 2nd-centuryinscription tocîçßaaeaiv (i)ß')- Marbletables are 148. Macro 1976,p. 175. fromTralles in whichan illustrious easyto wash,provide good surfaceson 149. Olivertranslates oxi/ocpiOTtcoXrii citizen is honoredfor, among other whichto cut,and area commonfeature (line22) as "saltfish dealer," but as things,donating 12 marbletables, of ancientfish and meatmarkets. Davidson(1997, p. 27) notes,by the togetherwith their bases, ev xf' ov|/a- 150. IG IP 1103; Oliver1989, 2nd centurya.d. theterms o'j/apov and piol7tcóÀ£i(8i)("in thefish market") no. 77. See mostrecently Lytle ôvj/ápiovwere "perfectly commonplace (I.Tralleis77, lines18-21: àvaGévxaôè 2007a. wordsfor fish, not smoked, and not 8KTcov I íÔícov mi tòcçév xf' ò'j/apiol7ccó-

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2ÇO EPHRAIM LYTLE shortof attemptingto fixprixes. At leastin Athensit seemsthat emperor and agoranomoialike recognized that fish prices could not simplybe fixed withoutadversely affecting supply. The evidencediscussed above suggests that the prices for fish recorded at Akraiphia(and in the similarinscription from Delphi) are not fixed prices,but maximumprices, intended, at least on the surface,to protect consumersfrom abuse during periods of shortage or increased demand. On occasionfishmongers would no doubthave been forced to sellat a discount, and it is possiblethat the specieslisted in the decreeoften sold forless, perhapssometimes for considerably less, than the listedprice. The issue of commercialmiddlemen, raised in Hadrians letterto Athens,suggests yet another way in whichGallant's use of the pricedata fromAkraiphia may be problematic.The emperorclearly believed that the profitsmade by middlemencontributed to the highprice offish in Ath- ens. At Akraiphiathe problemwould have been even morepronounced. The distancebetween Akraiphia and the portat Anthedon(ca. 20 km) maynot have preventeda regularsupply of fishfrom reaching the town, but the cost of overlandtransportation must have added markedlyto the eventualsale price.151If so, thenthe pricesattested at Akraiphiamay not be representativeof thosein othertowns, especially near the coast. In short,a tripto theancient fish market was probablymuch less costly thanGallant and the scholarswho sharehis assumptionswould have us believe.Precisely how expensive was it?For all ofthe reasons discussed above, I hesitateto extrapolatebased on theprices recorded at Akraiphia. The average maximumprice in thisinland town appears to havebeen approximately nineobols perlocal mina.As comparativedata fromthe Adriatic and the Aegean demonstrate,however, the specieslisted with a priceof 11 chalks {pescenobile or pescefino in 19th-centuryAdriatic markets) are typically capturedin smallervolumes than those listed with lower prices. The lesser species{pesce ordinario or pesce populo in Adriaticmarkets) could usually be

151. Reger(2003, p. 174) suggests Akraiphia.Aristotle {Rh. 1365a25-26) thatthe "relatively low" prices recorded quotesan epigramfor an Olympic in theinscriptions from Delphi and victor(occasionally attributed to Simo- Akraiphia"recognize the likelihood nides[fr. 163 Bergk]):7ipóa6e uèv àuxp' thatfish offered for sale at thesesites couoiaive%cov ipa%eiav acikXav / i%6uc relativelyfar from the sea mayhave è£'ApyoDç eiç Teyéavëcpepov ("With alreadysuffered by the time they therough yoke on myshoulders I used reachedthe market." This ignoresbasic to carryfish from Argos to Tegea"). economicrealities: the only incentive The Arkadianfish trade is also attested fortransporting fish between coastal in one ofthe inscribed iamata from and inlandmarkets, and incurringthe Epidauros{IG IV21 123,lines 21-29). associatedcosts of transport, was an The textof this passage is extremely opportunityto makea profit:the in- lacunoseand has beenread and re- creasedcost of seafood in inlandmar- storedin a numberof different ways; ketsis necessaryif it is to arrivethere see,e.g., the provisional text and appa- at all. Foran overviewof the costs asso- ratusprepared by R. Merkelbach, ciatedwith land transport in antiquity, publishedin Dillen 1994,p. 260 (SEG oftencited as one ofthe most impor- XLII 293). It is clear,however, that it tantrestraints on economicgrowth, recountsthe experience of a fishmonger see Bresson2007, pp. 86-91. Freshsea- who carriedhis merchandisefrom the foodcould, however, be purchasedin coastto Tegea in orderto sellit in the townseven farther from the coast than agora.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 2ÇI

had foras littleas halfthe price of the better varieties, and manywould have been availablein greaterquantities.152 At Akraiphiathe averagecost of a minaof seafoodwas probablybetween half an oboi and ninechalks. Who at Akraiphiawould have been able to pay theseprices? No one has eversuggested that an unskilledlaborer could affordto walk intothe marketand buya tunabelly steak or a Boiotianeel, the two most expensive fishlisted in theinscription.153 It is importantto bearin mindRostovtzeff s claim,ignored by Gallant,that "the poorer classes [were]almost entirely dependentfor their opson on the cheaperqualities and especiallyon salted and driedfish."154 Yet these are precisely the products that are not adequately documentedby the inscriptionfrom Akraiphia. Because of thepoor state ofpreservation, no pricesare preserved for the species that ancient sources and comparativeevidence suggest would have been most affordableand availablein the largestquantities, the íxOúÔiaXenxá, or smallfry. Nor is thereany entry at all forpreserved fish.155 This omissionis no accident:it is clearfrom the literary evidence that the sale of saltedfish was a distinct trade,separate from that of freshfish.156 Documentary evidence from the

152. On thedifferent classes offish 154. Rostovtzeff1941, vol. 2, response,"By the gates, where salt-fish soldin Adriaticmarkets, see Faber p. 1177. Rostovtzeff's portrait of the is sold"('Etcì tocîç nvXaimv, o') to 1883,pp. 141-143.In Akraiphia,the Hellenisticeconomy, and therole of tápi%oçœviov). On thewords o') to speciesaccompanied by the most com- fishingwithin it, is in factfar more Totpixoçœviov the scholiast (1247a) monlypreserved price, 11 chalks,are nuancedthan Gallant s caricature elaborates:otcod to Tapixorccotaiov,ócvti generallythe same species considered allows.In thisrespect it is hardnot to toó) (moi) tocevxEkr' KtoXeîxai. This finoin Adriaticmarkets, such as gilt- agreethat the primitive-modernist locationwould have been convenient head and redmullet. The priceslisted approachto theseissues obscures more forthose living in thecountryside, like forlesser species, like skate, generally thanit reveals:on thispoint see Sailer therustic described by Theophrastos hoveraround half an oboi. Recent 2002,pp. 255-256; Bresson2007, p. 22. (Char.4.15), who askseveryone he Aegeancatch data are collected by the 155. Curtisis in errorin suggesting meetson hisway into town about the FisheryInformation, Data, and Sta- thatsalted fish is "includedamong sea priceof salt-fish, then announces that tisticsUnit of the Food and Agriculture fishlisted in theinscription" (1991, he plansto picksome up alongthe Organizationof the United Nations p. 117,n. 24. The entriesin B.4-7 do road.A designatedmarket for salt-fish (http://www.fao.org/fishery/statistics/en).not"divide salted tunny [9o')vvÓk£itoç] (TocpixÓTtcoÀiç),distinct from the agora, 153. Eel is accompaniedby a price intothree categories" (p. 170); rather and presumablyfrom the fish market ofone oboi,five chalks (lines B. 3 1-32), theydistinguish between the choicest as well,is similarlyattested at Chios in butHJTX (11 chalks)should perhaps be cutand therest of the bluefin tuna a fragmentattributed to the4th-cen- readfor inX (see above,n. 133).Tuna is (B.4-6) and smallervarieties of tuna turyb.c. sophistTheokritos of Chios similarlycostly (lines B.4-8), withthe (B.7). One couldprobably have pur- (GnomologiumVaticanum, no. 314 priceof bluefin belly meat exceeding chasedat Akraiphiaopieuvoio Tpiycovoc, Sternbach).The ancientsources pre- twoobols and eventhe smaller varieties triangularpieces of salted bluefin servea hostof terms for those involved oftuna selling for more than an oboi. shippedacross the Ionian Sea to Greece in thesalt-fish trade, of which the most Not suprisingly,tuna and eel arethe in amphorasand mentionedin a frag- commonis Tapixorccotaiç.This typically twodelicacies most frequently lauded mentascribed to Euthydemos{Suppl. denotesa retailer(Antiphanes fr. 126 in theliterary sources. They are occa- Hell.455, line 12), butfor this, one K-A [Athen.3.120a]; Alexisfr. 15 K-A sionallycited together, as in,e.g., Ar. wouldhave visited a TccpixorccoÀriç,or [Athen.3.117e]; Lucian Tox.4 and Vit. fr.380 K-A: ot>K£y%eXx>v Boicoxiav, ov salt-fishmerchant, not the market auct.11; Plut.Mor. 631d; cf.the verb yÀaÛKOv,o')%i 0')woa) / ÚTcoyáaTpiov wherefresh fish were sold. TotpixoTTCO^ecoin Plato Chrm.163b7 and ("neithera Boiotianeel, nor a glaukos, 156.Theophrastos {Char. 6.9) dis- LucianMenippos 17), but it is also used northe belly meat of a tuna")-The tinguishesbetween the markets of to describewell-known Athenian speakeris perhapsreferring specifically fishmongers(xa ixQvonáXm)and of importers(Tapixnyoí) such as Chaire- to varietiesbeyond the reach of the purveyorsof salt-fish (xà xapixoncûXia). philos,whose services are said to have poor,as in Eriphosfr. 3 K-A (Athen. Aristophanes(Eg. 1245-1247) con- earnedhis sonscitizenship (Alexis 7.302.e):Tcrika yap oí névr'xeqoúk firmsthe distinction: when Kleon asks fr.77 K-A [Athen.3.119f];Timokles exovxeçàyopáooa / ')7royáaTpiov 9úvva- thesausage-seller, "But tell me this: fr.23 K-A [Athen.8.339d]), and Phei- koç. . . ("Thesethings the poor cannot wereyou selling your sausages in the dippos(Alexis fr. 221 K-A [Athen. afford:the belly meat of the tuna . . ."). agoraor bythe gates?", he receivesthe 3.120a-b]).

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2Ç2 EPHRAIM LYTLE

Hellenisticperiod confirmsthe distinction,and Byzantinecomparative evidenceaffords a number of suggestive parallels.157 Archaeological evidence too suggeststhat already by the 5th centuryb.c. at Corinth,as at Pompeii muchlater, the salt-fishtrade was in the hands of merchantsoperating specializedshops.158 In otherwords, the pricesrecorded at Akraiphiacannot be used as evidencethat poorer Greeks could not affordfish, because the inscription giveslittle or no informationabout salted fish and the cheapervarieties of freshfish. It is thusmistaken to concludethat dinner parties with fish dishes wouldhave been out ofthe reach of all butthe wealthiest citizens. In Attic comedya passionfor seafood is as likelyto be expressedby tradesmenor smalllandholders as bywealthy aristocrats, and theevidence suggests that sympoticculture was by no means exclusiveto the upperclasses.159 This helpsto explainthe apparentlywidespread phenomenon of diningclubs, whichmust have served fish often.160 It is thisdemand for seafood even by thosewith restricted means thatappears to lie behindanother fragment of Diphilos preservedby Athenaios(fr. 31 K-A; Athen. 6.227e-228b), in whichone of the speakerswould have us believethat customers in the Corinthianfish market were required to pass a propertytest to ensurethat theywere not spending beyond their means. The speakersuggests that the law is intendedto preventcrime, but he clearlybetrays his trueconcern: such buyersare drivingup the price of fishthat traditionalaristocrats consideran entitlement.161

157. E.g., a sacredlaw fromKos 1991,pp. 131-141) suggestsa similar scalesof some of these fish, cut into specifiessacrifices to be madeby those stateof affairs in Graeco-Roman rectangularpieces, have survived: exam- "holdingthe contract on incensemer- Egypt.The Bookof the Eparchy a col- plesare on displayin theCorinth Mu- chants,beans, and salt-fish"(Sy¡¿.3 1000, lectionof regulations governing the seum(cf. Curtis 1991, pl. la). On the line15: toi ë%ovx£çtocv covàv Xißavo- activitiesof Byzantine commercial garumindustry at Pompeii,see Etienne TtcoXav,ÒGTipícov, Tapeí%o[i>]).The associations,specifies that dealers in and Mayet1998. editorsagree that this refers to the freshfish (i^Guorcpatai) sell their 159. See, e.g.,Wilkins 1993; 2005, ownersof contracts to collectcertain productonly in thefish market under p. 22. taxes.The law providesno evidencefor thesupervision of 7ipOGTorcai; they were 160.The literaryevidence suggests theexistence of a taxon eitherfish- legallyprohibited from dealing in thatfish routinely appeared on dining mongersor freshfish; rather, it stipu- smokedand saltedfish, which was the clubmenus: in Phoinikidesfr. 5 K-A latesthat the fishmongers, as a class, privilegeof general grocers (oa^Ôa- (Athen.8.345e), a cookthreatens to areresponsible for offering sacrifices uápioi),who in turnwere prohibited withholdfish from members of a club (line21: Gdóvtcoiôè xa [toct] lauta Kai fromselling fresh fish (13.1, 17.1-3; who havenot paid theirdues; in Alexis (x)oifiexaßoXoi xoi èv toîç ix(O)'UGiv), ed. Köder1991). See furtherODB, fr.15 K-A (Athen.3.117e), a club a factthat suggests the existence of a pp. 788-789,s.v. fishmonger, and member,when asked to payhis share, formalcommercial association. (For p. 885,s.v. grocer (A. P. Kazhdan). demandsan itemizedaccount that suchassociations at Kos,see Waltzing 158. See theconvenient summaries includesfish. 1899,vol. 3, pp. 64-65.) Otherinscrip- ofthe evidence from Corinth and 161. Lines21-23: oùkëaxiv i%6i)T)- tionsindicate that the sale offresh and Pompeiiin Curtis1991, pp. 115 and pòvvnò öox> u£iataxß£iv. /cwn%aç saltedfish were separate trades and that 90-96,respectively. At Corinththe fijicoveiç tôtA,á%ava ttjv nòXxv. rcepi thedealers were often subject to sepa- so-calledPunic Amphora Building TcovaeAavcov jia%ó|i£0' eócntep 'IcOuíoiç. ratetaxes and regulations:in a Hadri- seemsto havebeen used by a salt-fish ("Becauseof you it is notpossible to anicinscription from Magnesia on the dealerin themiddle of the 5th cen- purchaseanything fishlike, but you have Maeander(I.Magnesia 116), for exam- turyb.c. Roughly40% ofthe amphoras pushedour whole city into the vege- ple,a taxis assessedon thesale of foundin thebuilding were of a Punic tablemarket and we fightover celery salt-fish(tapeixoTccoXiot) èicaxocrcri, line type,suggesting that much of the fish as ifat Isthmia!")The allegedlink 35); a separatetax (í^Ginicfiç, line 42) is originatedin Spainor Morocco; see betweenthe purchase offish and crime evidentlyapplied to freshfish. The evi- Williams1979, pp. 117-118,pl. 46; is also thesubject of a fragmentof dencefrom papyri (collected in Curtis Koehler1981, p. 450. The skinand Alexis(fr. 78 K-A; Athen.6.227d-e).

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 2%

FIGHTING OVER FISH? IDEOLOGY IN THE MARKETPLACE

I havesuggested that the prices recorded in theinscription from Akraiphia couldhave been intendedin partto preventprice-gouging by fishmongers in periodsof shortage or increaseddemand. Passages such as thefragment ofDiphilos (fr.31 K-A) just discussed,which can be interpretedas a reac- tionagainst competition in thefish market, indicate that these price limits shouldbe understoodwithin a broadercultural context. Vatin,citing the fragmentarybut apparentlysimilar measure from Delphi,argues that the Akraiphian decree was intendedto preventfishmon- gersfrom taking advantage of visitors to thePtoia, which is consistentwith theview that regulatory measures of this kind were primarily a phenomenon ofreligious sanctuaries and the poleis that controlled them.162 The inscription, however,does notmention the sanctuary or thePtoia festival,which would have broughtcrowds to Akraiphiaonly for a week or two in late August. As evenVatin concedes, the sanctuaryof Apollo Ptoios could neverhave attracteda streamof visitors comparable to thosewho visitedDelphi.163 A balancedassessment of the evidence,some ofwhich has been pre- sentedabove, suggests instead that regulations on sale,including occasional attemptsto controlprices, were a normalfeature of the civic economy. This pointis stressedby Bresson in his republicationof a lst-centuryb.c. price listfrom Piraeus.164 This document,which clearly has nothingto do with religiousmatters, establishes maximum prices for various secondary delica- cies traditionallysold by tripebutchers, but tellinglyrefrains from fixing a maximumprice for beef or pork.It is aimed at the peripheralproducts, wherethe profiteering of butchers might reasonably be controlled.In this respectit is similarto the manyancient regulations that deal specifically with the sale of fish.165For the most part,tackling the largerproblem

162. See Vatin1971, p. 109; Gallant mêmemanière. N'est-ce pas plutôt causedby clouds on strike,perhaps." 1985,p. 39; Wörrle1988, p. 215, n. 84; l'actiondes agoranomesd'Athènes et This is certainlypossible, but perhaps Curtis1991, p. 170; Davidson1997, de Pergamequi peutfournir un paral- thelaw was intendedto prevent p. 187; Migeotte1997. lèle au texted'Akraiphia?" fishmongersfrom deceiving their 163. Vatin1971, p. 109. Pausanias 165. In additionto thosediscussed customersabout the freshness of their (9.23.6) givesthe distance from Akrai- above,we mightinclude in thiscate- merchandise.A fragmentof Antipha- phiato thesanctuary of Apollo as gorya law attestedin a fragmentof nesremarks on thestate in whichmany 15 stades,a fairestimate. Xenarchos(fr. 7 K-A, lines6-7; Athen. fishwere sold (fr.159 K-A, lines1-7; 164. Bresson2000a, which includes 6.225c-d),which supposedly prevented Athen.6.227e): oúkeoxiv oúÔèv 0r|píov a reconstructionofthe text and a de- fishmongersfrom watering their wares: xcòvix6')cov /àx')%éox£pov • xah 'ir' yap taileddiscussion of its meaning, super- éjielyàp oròxoíçoúkex' eax' é^oDaía / àno%pr'vàjcoGaveiv /aùxoîç àXovGiv, sedesthe editto princeps, Steinhauer paíveiv,aTieípritai Ôè xoíko xah vóucoi eîxa Kax£Ôr|8£G|jivoiç/eùGùc xacpiìvai, 1994 (BullÉp1995, 252), whileincor- ("Sinceit is notpermitted for them to 7iapaôo6évx£çocGXioi /xoîç i^ovorccotaxic poratinga numberof valuable sugges- water[the fish]; indeed, this is prohib- xoîçKocKcoç ànoXoviiévoiq /

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 294 EPHRAIM LYTLE

of supplywas beyondthe powerof agoranomoi,who focusedinstead on preventing"abuses" by retailers.Most oftenthese measures stopped well shortof establishingfixed prices. On the otherhand, it is not entirelysurprising to discoverthat more aggressivemeasures were occasionallytried, as seems to have been the case at Delphi and Akraiphia,or thata surprisinglyhigh proportionof our attestedancient price measuresare specificallyconcerned with fish. As Bressonnotes, such measureswere perhapsmore likelyto succeed when appliedto a perishableproduct like seafood.166Fishermen did not necessarilyhave the luxuryof choosingmarkets. Not everyvariety offish was suitablefor preserving, and the considerableinvestment in labor and rawmaterials required to preservethem ensured that, whenever possible, fishwas marketedfresh. Bressonalso suggeststhat, because of the low socialstatus of fishermen and fishmongers,civic officials need not have held them in thesame regard as producersand distributorsof commoditiessuch as grain.The issue of classis extremelyimportant, and it maybe relevantto theinscription from Akraiphia,although I suspectthat it is considerablymore complicated than a simpledisparity of status between fisherman or fishmongerand civicof- ficials.The complexityof the issue has been demonstratedby Davidson, who exploressome of the intricateand oftencompeting ideologies that intersectwith unusual frequency in ancientdiscussions offish.167 Feyelviewed the inscriptionfrom Akraiphia as a concreteexample ofthe demagoguery criticized by Polybios (20.6), who assertsthat certain strategoiof the BoiotianLeague even took to providingdisbursements to the poor.168As I have arguedabove, however, it is unlikely,given its civic nature,that the Akraiphian decree was a productof federaldemagoguery. Still,one mightargue that these measures could have been motivatedby a local demagoguecatering to "poor"Akraiphians who wereclamoring for cheaperfish. In supportof this idea it is temptingto adduce anothercriti- cismoffered by Polybios(20.6.5-6), thatthe Boiotians,having forgotten theirformerly proud and austerecharacter, chiefly spent their time and resourcesglutting themselves: xoúxoiçô' TìKOÀot)0r|G£Kai ëxepoç Çfj^oç oúk e')T')%f|ç.oi U£vyàp axeicvoixàç oúoíaç ox>xoîç mxà yévoçeTuyevojiévoiç x£À,£')xa>vx£c ànéXeinov,ÖTtep r'v e6oç rcap'aúxoíç rcpoxepov,aXX9 dç e'>co%íaç Kai jiiéGaçSiexíGevxo Kai koivocçxoîç (pítançè^oío-ov noXkoi ôè Kai xcové%óvxcov yeveòcç àTcejiépiÇov xoîç ur|vòç jctaícoxcov eíç xòvur]va ôiaxexayuivcov Tjjiepcov. 166.Bresson 2000a, p. 177. 167.Davidson 1997. Men Attendantupon all of thiswas anotherunfortunate passion. 168. Feyel1936, p. 36. Folybios dyingchildless were leaving their property not to theirrelatives, as (20.6.2-4) singlesout a certainOphel- was formerlycustomary among them, but bequeathingit forfeasts tas as theworst offender: ëvioi ôè tcòv Kai èrcoíovv and and makingit commonproperty among friends. GXpairiycov juiaGoôoaíaç drinking £K TCOVKOIVCOV TCÛV And even of thosewith families left the shareof their TOIÇ àttÓpOlÇ CXvGpCO- many larger 7CCOV. . . 'OcpéA/caç,aieí xi rcpocemvocov so thatthere were Boiotiansfor propertyto theirdining clubs, many o Koreatò rcapòvéôÓKei to')ç rcoXÀoùç whomthere were more feasts each monththan days appointed to cb(p£A,£Îv,¿teta ôè icona rcávxaçànoXeiv the month. ElieXkzvóiioXoyoDjxévcoç.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 295

Historianstend to argue over the veracityof Polybioss critiqueon its own terms.169In myview, however, this diatribeis most interestingfor its familiarity.The Boiotianshave tradedtheir former rugged simplicity and attendantvalues forfashionable tastes and the pursuitof pleasure. These are the usual clichésof the conservativesocial critic.The underly- ing concerns,however, are the same issuesof class and ethicsof monetary exchangethat lie behindAristotle's discussion of what he calledf] kxt|tiktì XpeuocTiGTiKTiiéxvr|.170 I do not mean to suggest that the dominant economic mode in HellenisticBoiotia involvedanything other than traditionalagricultural production.As Aristotle'sdiscussion makes clear,however, other means of generating,accumulating, and endowingwealth were increasingin importancealready in the 4th centuryb.c., and the resultingcultural ten- sionsare reflected in thereactionary biases found in a wide rangeof literary texts.Much ofthis economic activity involved market exchange, and while it may not have generatedgreat affluence for any significantpercentage of the population,it did give rise to a class of individualswho measured much of theirproperty in movablewealth, including coin. Unconcerned by quaint notions about self-sufficiency(narrowly defined), they were happyto spendit. This relationshipbetween trade and the demandfor fresh fish is perhaps best illustratedby the accountsfrom Hellenistic Delos, wherethe revenuesfrom a titheon fishindicate that by the middleof the 3rd centuryb.c., the island'sresidents were consuming fresh fish in considerable quantities.171Indeed, the accounts suggest a directcorrelation between the increasingconsumption of seafoodand theisland's growing population of residentforeigners.172 By the early2nd centuryb.c., thisvibrant dynamic oftrade and consumptionat Delos had evenattracted the special attention of parasites,if we believea fragmentof the comicpoet Kritonin whicha parasiteabandons Piraeus for greener Delian pastures,"having heard that thisplace alone possessedthree ideal qualitiesfor the parasite:a market richin fish,a spendthriftthrong, and the Delians, themselvesparasites of Apollo."173

169. On thetreatment of Boiotian on fishvalued well in excessof 20,000 suggestsa correspondingincrease of historyby Polybios, see Feyel1942a. drachmas. some280% in thenumber of rented 170.Arist. Pol. 1256b40-41.On 172. Revenuesfrom a titheassessed domiciles.It is presumablynot a coin- thispassage and Aristotle'sattitudes on rentsappear in theaccounts of 279 cidencethat the revenues recorded towardtrade, see especiallyBresson (IG XI 2 161,line A.26), 274 (IG XI 2 forthe ')7ioxpÓ7iiov or íxBúcov ôem-rn 2000d. 199,line A.16), and 250 b.c. (IG XI 2 (thetwo are probably identical: Ho- 171. 1 treatthis evidence in detail 287, line9). As Regernotes (1994, molle1890, p. 442) increasedby ap- in Lytle,forthcoming. An account p. 256), evenif Homolle's estimates proximatelythe same percentage over from250 b.c. recordsrevenues from ofthe precise number of resident for- thesame period. an í%0il)cuvÔeicárri of 1,850drachmas eigners(1890, pp. 440-441) areunreli- 173. Fr.3 K-A (Athen.4.173b), (IG XL 2 287,line 9). In orderto re- able,the figures given in theaccounts lines4-8: eiç AfjÀ,ové^Geîv r'Qéhr'G' coverthis sum plus the additional 5% can be used to estimatethe total num- £K IleipaiCÛÇ / 7KXVTCÛVOCKOVCOV ÔIÓTI surchargeon thevalue of the bid, and berof rented domiciles. Given that rcapaoÍTCuiicmoç / outoç xpía uóvoç allowingfor profit and theadditional rentsin thefirst half of the 3rd century àyaOà K£KTfjo9aiôoiceî, / eüovj/ov costsinvolved in collectingthe duty, the appearto haveremained remarkably àyopáv, trcocvToôarcavoukowc' ò%Àov,/ taxfarmer entrusted with the contract stable,the increase in theamount of ocòtoUçnapacixovq xox>Geou xoùç musthave envisioned collecting duties thetithe between the 270s and 250 b.c. Ar'Xiovq.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 2ç6 EPHRAIM LYTLE

Délos is in manyrespects unique, and while thereis no evidenceof conflictbetween merchants and citizenson theisland, in otherHellenistic poleis commercialgrowth sometimes led to tensions,as Gary Regerhas demonstrated.174Reger highlights some of the issues using a passage of Aineiasthe Tactician (29.1-10), whichdescribes the capture of a cityafter weaponshidden in thewares of merchantswere smuggled into the hands of conspirators.The moralis clear:in the Hellenisticpolis the merchant, whethercitizen or foreigner,represented a potentiallydestabilizing force. Seafoodoccupied an especiallyproblematic ideological space, in part because its consumptionstood largelyoutside the aristocraticideals of theself-sufficient oíkoç and thetraditional economy of gift-exchange. Its purchaseinvolved competition mediated not by class but by price,and in thiscompetition an aristocrathad no inherentadvantage over a resident foreigneror a cook buyingon behalfof a diningclub. In myview, the cul- turaltensions arising from the frictionbetween these different economic modes and theirassociated ideologies lie at the heartof both Polybios's diatribeagainst the proliferationof diningclubs in HellenisticBoiotia and Diphilos's humorousaccount of the Corinthianmeasures aimed at restrictingaccess to the fishmarket. In Diphilos's Corinth,maintaining the ruleof law is merelya pretext.Access to the marketis said to be de- pendenton a testof means:"if a personhas property,the proceedsfrom it shouldbe sufficientto meethis obligations"(kocv jiièv oúoíocv £%ti /rjç ai TTpóaoôoiXúo-uai xàvaXcouaTa, / éôcvànoXavziv toîtov fiórixòv ßiov, fr.31 K-A, lines 4-6; Athen.6.227e-228b). But what,exactly, does this mean?How narrowlyare "property" and "proceeds"to be defined?Who, in actualpractice, would have been excludedfrom the marketplaceby these propertyqualifications? Afterquoting the passage by Diphilos, Athenaiosremarks (6.228b; fr.2 K-A), "Sophilos,in hisAndroides, thinks the same practiceought to be adoptedamong the Athenians, suggesting that two or three fish-market inspectorsbe selectedby the council" (to ôè e'0oçxorno Kai ÄÖr|vr|oiveivai à^ioî IcíxpiÀoçév AvôpOKÀeîòxj/ovouodç à^iôv aipeía6ai vnò xfiçßo')Ai|c St)' f' Kai xpeîç).There is no evidenceto suggestthat such timocratic measureswere ever seriously considered at Athens,where the availability of goods in the market,and the rightto competefreely for them, was oftenstrongly identified with democratic ideology.175 On the otherhand, the settingof maximumprices could alwaysbe justifiedas an attempt to protectthe demos.When introducedinto previouslyunregulated fish markets,however, such measures may have had less obviousconsequences,

174. Reger2003, esp. pp. 165-171. toûto, rcap(X7io|Li7rrivTioieîv / xcov í%9il>cov. and Diogeiton,by god, is bribingthem 175. In a fragmentfrom Antipha- vuvôiMcxToov cruvr|p7caK£v /xoùç bX'- all in orderthat he himselfcan bearit nes'comedy The Wealthy, the speaker, éaç, Kai (6r')Aioyerccov vnAia /obiav- off,and it is simplynot democratic, his frustratedby the slim pickings avail- xaç ócva7ié7T£iKevcbçaútòv cpépeiv, /kou devouringso much.")It is notmerely ableon thefishmongers' tables, urges ôt||liotikÓvyelomo ôpai Toiaûxa(pXcov. theexcessive consumption of Maton thestate to protectthe supply offish ("Indeed,what good arethe vnaiápxai? and Diogeitonthat he railsagainst, but (fr.188 K-A,lines 14-19; Athen. It oughtto be possibleto secureit by thefact that their actions subvert the 8.342-343a):xi oùvocpe^oç xcov vr|cn- law,to makea convoyfor the fish. For fairand openfunctioning of the apxcòv; eGTi 8ti / vó|icoi Kai(XK?i£iaai nowMaton co-optsall thefishermen, market.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 297

includingperhaps the need forrationing or otherrestrictions on sales.176 Similarly,by controllingthe incentivefor profit among fishmongers,it is possiblethat such measurescould have tiltedthe playingfield back in favorof the well-connected: even at Athenswe findsome evidencefor the continuedexistence of a paralleleconomy, offish circumventing the market and findingits way directlyinto the hands of aristocrats.177 Ifwe areto imaginean underlyingsocial tension at Akraiphia,it is not likelyto havebeen between the wealthy and theabject poor, who couldnever have affordedto spendwhat little bronze they had at the tripe-butcheror thefish market, and forwhom fixed maximum prices, even reasonable ones, can have made littledifference.178 The conflictis morelikely to havebeen betweentraditional landed elitesand thoseparticipating in and profiting fromvarious forms of marketexchange. In otherwords, demagoguery probablyhad littleto do withthis decree. In fact,we mightreasonably ask whetherthe assemblyhad any meaningfulrole at all in formulatingthe document.Bresson is justifiablyskeptical of the idea that the assembly took an activerole in determiningthe prices;he suspectsinstead that the list was preparedby the marketofficials themselves.179 As noted above, one of thesemen, Hiarokleis, may also have servedas polemarch,and he probablybelonged to a prominentAkraiphian family. There is no reason to suspectthat his colleagues,Aminias and Dikaios, would have had any particularaffinities for "the poor" either. Rostovtzefflong ago remarkedin passingthat "[a]n interestingside- lightis thrownon theeconomic conditions of Boiotia by a curiousinscrip- tionfrom Acraephia."180 1 trust that by now the"wilderness" in thetitle of thisarticle will be recognizedas deliberatelytongue-in-cheek. The pau- cityof literarysources either from or about Boiotia,especially during the Hellenisticperiod, is an unfortunatereality. It is not in anyway sugges- tiveof Boiotianreality, however, which was deeplyembedded in a hostof connectedregional and interregionalsocial and economiccontexts. I have attemptedto illustratesome of the waysin whichthese contexts meet in a singledocument from Akraiphia, with the hope thatit will now be seen as a greatdeal morethan a meresidelight on the economicconditions of Boiotia.

176. It is temptingto imaginethat K-A (citedabove, n. 175). In a letterof recallingKallias). In returnfor fresh somekind of price controls are behind Alkiphron(1.9) thefisherman Aigia- fishhe willreceive not only cash but an amusingstory related by Strabo leuswrites to theparasite Struthion also "someconsolation" (tiç 7capoc|JA)6ía) (14.2.21 [C 658]) abouta poetat lasos thathe hopesto avoid"the sharp hand duringthe Dionysia and theApaturia whoseaudience listens in raptattention ofthe agoranomo? (xfjç rciKpaç tcov festivals,a clear allusion to thetradi- untilthe moment the bell rings to an- àyopavójicov. . . %eipóç).He asksStru- tionaleconomy of gift exchange. nouncethe opening of the fish market, thionto serveas his intermediary(ôiòt 178. Bresson2000a, pp. 179-181. at whichpoint the theater is promptly cou rcpo^évou)and introducehim to 179. Bresson2000a, p. 174,n. 103. abandoned. one ofhis wealthy aristocratic friends 180. Rostovtzeff1941, vol. 3, 177. See, e.g.,Antiphanes, fr. 188 (tcovXaKKonXomwv, a phrase obviously p. 1369,n. 35.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 20.8 EPHRAIM LYTLE

REFERENCES

Andreades,A. M. 1933.A Historyof HistoryMatters: Studies Presented GreekPublic Finance, trans. C. N. toJens Erik Skydsgaard on His Brown,rev. ed., Cambridge, Mass. SeventiethBirthday {AnalRom 30), Anthonioz,R. 1967. Les Imraguen, ed. K. Ascani,V. Gabrielsen, pêcheursnomades de Mauritanie K. Kvist,and A. H. Rasmussen, (El Memghar),"Bulletin de V1FAN Rome,pp. 29-37.

29, pp. 695-738. . 2002b."Nets, Boats, and Fish-

. 1968."Les Imraguen,pê- ingin theRoman World," CIMed cheursnomades de Mauritanie 53, pp. 215-233. (El Memghar)(2ème partie)," Bul- BintliffJ.L. 1977'. NaturalEnviron- letinde l'IFJN 30, pp. 751-768. mentand Human Settlement in Apostolides,N. C. 1883.La pêcheen PrehistoricGreece: Based on Original Grèce:Ichthyologie, migrations, engins Fieldwork{BAR Suppl.28), Oxford. etmanières de pêche, produits, statis- Bresson,A. 2000a. "L'inscriptionagora- tique,et législation, Athens. nomiquedu Piréeet le contrôledes

. 1907.La pêcheen Grèce,2nd prixde détailen Grèceancienne," ed.,Athens. in A. Bresson,La citémarchande Arenz,A. 2006. HerakleidesKritikos (ScriptaAntiqua 2), Bordeaux, "Überdie Städte in Hellas": Eine pp. 151-182.

PeriegeseGriechenlands am Vorabend . 2000b."L'attentat d'Hiéron desChremonideischen Krieges et le commercegrec," in A. Bresson, (Quellenund Forschungen zur La citémarchande (Scripta Antiqua AntikenWelt 49), Munich. 2), Bordeaux,pp. 131-149 (= Econo- Arnott,W. G. 1996.Alexis: The Frag- mieantique: Les échangesdans V anti- ments.A Commentary(Cambridge quité:Le rôlede l'État [Entretiens ClassicalTexts and Commentaries d'archéologieet d'histoire1], éd. 31), Cambridge. P. Briant,R. Descat,and J. Andreau, Ballard,R. D., A. M. McCann, Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminges D. Yoerger,L. Whitcomb,D. Min- 1994,pp. 47-68).

dell,H. Oleson,H. Singh,B. Foley, . 2000c."Prix officiels et com- J.Adams, D. Piechota,and C. Gian- mercede grosà Athènes,"in grande.2000. "The Discoveryof A. Bresson,La citémarchande AncientHistory in theDeep Sea (ScriptaAntiqua 2), Bordeaux, UsingAdvanced Deep Submer- pp. 183-210.

genceTechnology," Deep-Sea . 2000d."Aristote et le com- Research,Part I: Océanographie merceextérieur," in A. Bresson,La ResearchPapers 47, pp. 1591-1620. citémarchande (Scripta Antiqua 2), Ballard,R. D., L. E. Stager,D. Master, Bordeaux,pp. 109-130 (= RÉA 89, D. Yoerger,D. Mindell,L. L. Whit- 1987,pp. 217-238).

comb,H. Singh,and D. Piechota. . 2UU7.L economiede la Grece 2002. "IronAge Shipwrecksin descités (fin VIe-Ier siècle a. C.) 1: Deep Wateroff Ashkelon, Israel," Les structuresetla production,Paris.

AJA106, pp. 151-168. . 2008. L'économiede la Grèce BarringtonAtlas = R. J.A. Talbert,ed., descités (fin ne-r sièclea. C.) 2: BarringtonAtlas of the Greek and Les espacesde l'échange, Paris. RomanWorld, Princeton 2000. Briant,P., and R. Descat. 1998."Un Bechtel,F. 1917.Die historischenPer- registredouanier de la satrapie sonennamendes Griechischen biszur d'Egypteà l'époqueachéménide," Kaiserzeit,Halle. in Le commerceenEgypte ancienne Becker,W. A. 1878. Charikles:Bilder (BIFAO 121),éd. N. Grimaiand altgriechischerSitte, zur genaueren B. Menu,Cairo, pp. 59-104. Kenntnissdes griechischen Privatle- Brun,P. 1996.Les archipelségéens dans bens2, rev.by H. Göll,Berlin. l'antiquitégrecque (Ve -IIe sièclesav. Bekker-Nielse^T.2002a. "Fishin notreère) (Centre de recherches theAncient Economy," in Ancient d'histoireancienne 157), Paris.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 299

Buck,C. D., and F. B. Tarbell.1889. Dawkins,R. M., ed. 1929. TheSanc- liersd'Orchomène et ceuxde Ché- "Discoveriesat Anthedonin 1889," tuaryof Artemis Orthia at Sparta, ronée,"BCH 102,pp. 359-374. AJA5, pp. 443-460. Excavatedand Described by Members Faber,G. L. 1883. TheFisheries of the Busolt,G. 1920. GriechischeStaatskunde ofthe British School at Athens, 1906- Adriaticand theFish Thereof: A Re- 1 (Handbuchder Altertumswissen- 1910 (JHSSuppl. 5), London. portof the Austro-Hungarian Sea- schaft4.1.1), Munich. De Laet, S. J.1949. Portor ium: Etude Fisheries,with a DetailedDescription Chandezon,C. 2003. L'élevageen Grèce surl'organisation douanière chez les ofthe Marine Fauna ofthe Adriatic (finVe-ßn Ier s. a. G): L'apportdes Romains,surtout à V époque du haut- Gulf,London. sourcesépigraphiques (Scripta Anti- empire,Bruges. Feyel,M. 1936."Nouvelles inscriptions qua 5), Bordeaux. Descat,R. 1997."Les prixdans l'in- d'Akraiphia,"BCH GO,pp. 11-36.

Chaniotis,A. 1996.Die Verträgezwi- scriptionagoranomique du Pirée," . 1942a.Polybe et l'histoire de schenkretischen Poleis in derhellenis- in Économieantique: Prix et for- Béotieau IIIe siècleavant notre ère, tischenZeit (Heidelberger althisto- mationdes prix dans les économies Paris.

rischeBeiträge und epigraphischen antiques(Entretiens d'archéologie . 1942b.Contribution à l'epi- Studien24), Stuttgart. et d'histoire3), éd.J. Andreau, graphiebéotienne (Publications de la Chantraine,P. 1977.Dictionnaire P. Briant,and R. Descat,Saint-Ber- Facultédes lettresde l'Universitéde étymologiquedela languegrecque: trand-de-Comminges,pp. 13-20. Strasbourg95), Le Puy. Histoiredes mots 4. 1 : (77-Y), Devedjian,K. 1926. Pêcheet pêcheries Finley,M. 1. 1952. Studiesin Land Paris. en Turquie,Istanbul. and Creditin Ancient Athens, 500- Collin-Bouffier,S. 2008. "Le poisson Dillon,MJ. P. 1994."The Didactic 200 B.c.:The Horos-Inscriptions, New dansle mondegrec, mets d'élites?" Natureof the Epidaurian Iamata," Brunswick. in Pratiqueset discours alimentaires ZPE 101,pp. 239-260. Firth,R. 1966.Malay Fishermen: Their enMéditerranée deV antiquité à la Dumont,J. 1977a. "La pêchedans le PeasantEconomy, 2nd ed.,London. Renaissance.Actes du 18ecolloque de Fayoumhellénistique: Traditions FishBase= R. Froeseand D. Pauly,eds., la VillaKérylos à Beaulieu-sur-Mer et nouveautésd'après le Papyrus FishBase,http://www.fishbase.org, les4, 5, et6 octobre2007 (Cahiersde Tebtynis701," ChrÉg52, pp. 125- version03/2010 (accessed May 1, la Villa Kérylos19), éd.J. Leclant, 142. 2010).

A. Vauchez,and M. Sartre,Paris, . 1977b."Liberté des merset Fossey,J. M. 1979."The Citiesof pp. 91-121. territoirede pêcheen droitgrec," theKopai's in theRoman Period," Corsten,T.1999. VomStamm zum Revuehistorique de droit français et ANRWW.71,pp. 549-591.

Bund:Gründung und territoriale étranger55, pp. 53-57. . 1988. Topographyand Popula- Organisationgriechischer Bundes- Economidis,P. S. 1972-1973."Kaxá- tionof Ancient Boiotia 1, Chicago. staaten(Studien zur Geschichte À,oyoçxcov íxGúcov ttjç 'EÀtaxÔoç," Foucher,L. 1960.Inventaire des Nordwest-Griechenlands4), HellenicOceanology and Limnology mosaïques,feuille no. 57 del'Atlas Munich. 11,pp. 421-598. archéologique:Sousse, Tunis. Crivelli,A. J.1995. "Are Fish Intro- Edel, E. 1961. Zu denInschriften auf den Fraser,T. M. 1960.RusembilamA ductionsa Threatto Endemic Jahreszeitenreliefsder"Weltkammer" MalayFishing Village in South FreshwaterFishes in theNorthern ausdem Sonnenheiligtum desNiuserre Thailand,Ithaca.

MediterraneanRegion?" Biological 1 (GöttNachr1961.8), Göttingen. . 1966.Fishermen of South Conservation72, pp. 311-319. Efstratiou,N. 1985.Agios Petros, a Neo- Thailand:The Malay Villagers, Curtis,R. I. 1991. Garumand Salsa- lithicSite in theNorthern Sporades: New York. menta:Production and Commercein AegeanRelationships during the Neo- Frisk,H. 1970. Griechischesetymologis- MateriaMedica (Studies in Ancient lithicof the 5th Millennium (BAR-IS chesWörterbuch 2' (Kp-Q), Heidel- Medicine3), Leiden. 241), Oxford. berg. Daly,L. W. 1967. Contributionstoa Etienne,R., and D. Knoepfler.1976. Froehner,W. 1875.Mélanges d'épi- Historyof Alphabetization inAntiq- Hyettosde Béotie et la chronologiedes graphieet d'archeologie, Paris. uityand the Middle Ages (CollLato- archontesfédéraux entre 250 et1 71 Gabrielsen,V. 2001. "EconomieActiv- mus90), Brussels. avantJ-C (BCH Suppl.3), Paris. ity,Maritime Trade, and Piracyin Davidson,A. 2002. MediterraneanSea- Etienne,R., and F. Mayet.1998. theHellenistic Aegean," RÈA 103, food:A ComprehensiveGuide with "Le garumà Pompéi:Production pp. 219-240. Recipes,3rd ed., Berkeley. et commerce,"RÉA 100,pp. 199- Gallant,T. W. 1985.A Fisherman'sTale: Davidson,J. 1993. "Fish, Sex, and Rev- 215. AnAnalysis of the Potential Produc- olutionin ClassicalAthens," CQ 43, Etienne,R., and L. Migeotte.1998. tivityof Fishing in theAncient World, pp. 53-66. "Colophonet les abusdes fermiers Ghent.

. 1997. Courtesansand Fishcakes: des taxes,"BCH 122,pp. 143-157. . 1991.Risk and Survivalin TheConsuming Passions of Classical Etienne,R., and P. Roesch.1978. AncientGreece: Reconstructing the Athens,London. "Conventionmilitaire entre les cava- RuralDomestic Economy, Stanford.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 3OO EPHRAIM LYTLE

Garlan,Y. 1974."Études d'histoire ed. G. H. R. Horsley,Sydney, militaireet diplomatiqueIX: pp. 95-114. Recherchessur les fortifications Hughes,J. P., and R. G. Wasson.1947. d'Akraiphia,"BCH 9S, pp. 95-112. "The Etymologyof Botargo," AJP Gauthier,P. 1977."Les ventespub- 68, pp. 414-418. liquesde bois et de charbon:À Hultsch,F. 1882. Griechischeund römi- proposd'une inscription de Délos," scheMetrologie, 2nd ed.,Berlin. BCH 101,pp. 203-208. Ideler,J. L., ed. [1841] 1965. Physiciet Georgacas,DJ. 1978.Ichthyological mediciGraeci minores, vol. 1, repr. Termsfor the Sturgeon and Etymology Amsterdam. ofthe International Terms Botargo, LDelos= F. Durrbach,P. Roussel, Caviar,and Congeners:A Linguistic, M. Launey,A. Plassart,and Philological,and Culture-Historical J.Coupry, eds., Inscriptions de Study(ripayuaTeioc tï|ç Amôruiíaç Délos,7 vols.,Paris 1926-1972. A8î|vcûv43), Athens. I.Eph. = H. Wankel,ed., Die Inschriften

. Y)%2.AGraeco-SlavicCon- vonEphesos la (IGSK 11.1),Bonn troversialProblem Reexamined: 1979. The-ITE- Suffixes in Byzantine, Ilasos = W. Blümel,ed., Die Inschriften Medieval,and Modern Greek: Their vonlasos I (IGSK 28.1), Bonn 1985. = Originand Ethnological Implica- IMagnesia O. Kern,ed., Die In- tions(npayuxxTeía xr'q AicaÔriuíaç schriftenvon Magnesia am Maeander, AGrivcov47), Athens. Berlin1900. Goetz,G., ed. 1892. CorpusGlossario- IMylasa = W. Blümel,ed., Die In- rumLatinorum 3, Leipzig. schriftenvon My lasa I: Inschriftender Gow,R, and D. L. Page. 1965. The Stadt(IGSK 34), Bonn 1987. GreekAnthology: Hellenistic Epi- IStratonikeia= M. Ç. Çahin,ed., Die grams,Cambridge. Inschriftenvon Stratonikeia ILI: Gullath,B. 1982. Untersuchungenzur Lagina,Stratonikeia, und Umgebung GeschichteBoiotiens in derZeit Alex- (IGSK 22.1), Bonn 1982. andersund der Diadochen, Frankfurt. /.Tralleis = F. B. Poljakov,Die In- Hansen,M. H. 1983."Rhetores and schriftenvon Tralleis undNysa I: Strategoiin Fourth-Century Die Inschriftenvon Tralleis (IGSK Athens,"GRBS 24, pp. 151-180. 36.1), Bonn 1991. Heisserer,A. J.1980. Alexander the Jameson,M. H., C. N. Runnels,and Greatand the Greeks: The Epigraphic T. H. vanAndel. 1994. A Greek Evidence,Norman. Countryside:The Southern Argolid Hoffman,H. A., and D. S.Jordan. fromPrehistory tothe Present Day, 1892."A Catalogueof the Fishes of Stanford. Greece,with Notes on theNames Jardé,A., and M. Laurent.1902. Now in Use andThose Employed "Inscriptionsde la Grècedu Nord," byClassical Authors," Proceedings BCH 26, pp. 322-398. = ofthe Academy of Natural Sciences of K-A R. Kasseland C. Austin,Poetae Philadelphia1892, pp. 230-285. comicigraeci, 8 vols.,Berlin 1983- Holleaux,M. 1938."Sur une inscrip- 2001. tionde Thèbes,"in Étudesd'epigra- Kalcyk,H. 1988."Der Damm von phieet d'histoire grecques 1, Paris, Akraiphia:Landsicherung und pp. 1-40. Landgewinnungin derBucht von Homolle,T.1890. "Comptes et inven- Akraiphiaam Kopaisseein Böotien, tairesdes templesdéliens en l'année Griechenland,"Boreas 11, pp. 5-14. 279,"BCH 14,pp. 389-511. Keimer,L. 1938-1939. La boutargue Höppener,H. 1931.Haliéutica: Bijdrage dansl'Egypte ancienne," BIE 21, totde Kennis der oud-grieksche Viss- pp.215-243. cherij,Amsterdam. Keramopoullos,A. D. 1931-1932. Horsley,G. H. R. 1989."A Fishing "'EjiiypacaiGearcicov," ArchDelt 14, Cartelin FirstCentury Ephesos," pp. 12-40. in NewDocuments Illustrating Early Knoepfler,D. 1986. Inscriptionsde la Christianity5: Linguistic Essays, Béotieorientale II: Anthédon,"in

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 3OI

Studienzur alten Geschichte: Siegfried and thelex portus Asiae,yy Phoenix 61, fiumara,8.-14. September1997 Laufferzum 70. Geburtstagam 4. pp. 247-269. (Aktender Gesellschaft fur grie-

August1981 dargebrachtvon Freun- . Forthcoming.Entirely chischeund hellenistischeRechts- den,Kollegen, und Schülern 2 (Histó- Ignorantof the Agora (Alciphron geschichte13), ed. E. Cantarella rica2), ed. H. Kalcyk,B. Gullath, 1.14.3): Fishingand theEconomy and G. Thür,Cologne, pp. 165-174. and A. Graeber,Rome, pp. 593- ofHellenistic Delos," in Belonging Miklosich,F. 1869."Die slavischen 630. andIsolation in theHellenistic World, Elementein Neugriechischen,"

. 1992."Sept années de recher- éd. S. Agerand R. Faber,Toronto. SBWien63.3, pp. 529-566. chessur l'épigraphie de la Béotie Macro,A. D. 1976."Imperial Provi- Mylona,D. 2008. Fish-Eatingin (1985-1991)/'Chiron 22, pp. 411- sionsfor Pergamum: OGIS 484," Greecefrom the Fifth Century b.c. to 503. GRBS 17,pp. 169-179. theSeventh Century A.D.: A Storyof

. 2001. "La réintégrationde Magnetto,A., ed. 1997. Gliarbitrati ImpoverishedFishermen or Luxuri- Thèbesdans le Koinonbéotien après interstataligreci 2, Pisa. ousFish Banquets {BAR-IS 1754), son relèvementpar Cassandre, ou Marcus,J. 1987a. Late Intermediate Oxford. les surprisesde la chronologieépi- Occupationat CerroAzul, Perú: A ODB = A. P. Kazhdanet al, eds.,The graphique,"in Recherchesrécentes sur PreliminaryReport (University of OxfordDictionary of Byzantium, le mondehellénistique. Actes du col- MichiganMuseum of Anthropol- 3 vols.,Oxford 1991. loqueinternational organisé à l'occa- ogyTechnical Report 20), Ann Oliver,J. H. 1971."Epaminondas of siondu 60e anniversairede Pierre Arbor. Acraephia,"GRBS 12,pp. 221-237.

Ducrey,Lausanne, 20-21 novembre . 1987b."Prehistoric Fishermen . 1989. GreekConstitutions of 1998 (Echo 1), éd. R. Frei-Stolba in theKingdom of Huarco," Ameri- EarlyRoman Emperors from Inscrip- and K. Gex,Bern, pp. 11-26. canScientist 75, pp. 393-401. tionsand Papyri (Memoirs of the

. 2002. "Oroposet la Confé- Marcus,J., J. D. Sommer,and C. P. AmericanPhilosophical Society dérationbéotienne à la lumièrede Glew.1999. "Fish and Mammals 178),Philadelphia. quelquesinscriptions 'revisitées,'" in theEconomy of an Ancient Orlandos,A. K. 1937."'H BaaiXncn Chiron32, pp. 119-155. PeruvianKingdom," Proceedings of tfiçAv9t|Ôóvoç," in Ap%eîovrœv Koder,J., éd. 1991.Das Eparchenbuch theNational Academy of Sciences 96, BvÇavnvœvMvrjfieîœv rfjç 'EÀÀáôoç Leonsdes Weisen (Corpus Fontium pp. 6564-6570. 3, Athens,pp. 172-174. HistoriaeByzantinae: Series Vindo- Matthews,J. F. 1984."The Tax Law of Panagiotopoulos,P. 1916."QaXaama bonensis33), Vienna. Palmyra:Evidence for Economic ix6')OTpo(piaKai oi íxOúeçthç Koehler,C. G. 1981."Corinthian Historyin a Cityof the Roman Xiuvo9ataxccrr|çMeGoXoyyioi)," Developmentsin theStudy of Trade East,"/#S74, pp. 157-180. AeÀnov 'YÔpoÀoyiKovIra6juov in theFifth Century," Hesperia 50, Meineke,A. 1867. Analectacritica ad ('Yjiovpyeíov'EGviktjç OÍKovo(iíaç) pp. 449-458. AthenaeiDeipnosophistas, Leipzig. 1, pp. 329-448 [= "Piscifacture Lacroix,L. 1938."Une listede nomsde Mercer,J. 1976. SpanishSahara, marineet les poissonsde la lagune poissonsdans une inscriptionbéo- London. de Missolonghi,"Bulletin de la

tienne,"in MélangesEmile Boisacq 2 . 1980. TheCanary Islands: Their StationBiologique (Ministère de (Annuairede l'Institutede philo- Prehistory,Conquest, and Survival, l'ÉconomieNationale) 1, 1916, logieet d'histoireorientales et London. pp. 329-392. slaves6), Brussels,pp. 49-56. Meriti,B. D. 1935."The Inscriptions Papendick,A. 1926.Die Fischnamen Lauffer,S., éd. 1971.Diokletians Preis- ofColophon," AJP 56, pp. 358- ingriechisch-lateinischen Glossaren, edikt(Text und Kommentare5), 397. Königsberg. Berlin. Migeotte,L. 1984.L empruntpublic Parker,A. J.1992. Ancient Shipwrecks

. 1980."Inschriften aus Boiotien dansles cités grecques: Recueil des ofthe Mediterranean and the Roman (II)," Chiron10, pp. 161-182. documentsetanalyse critique, Québec. Provinces(BAR-IS 580), Oxford.

Le Bas, P.,and W. H. Waddington. . 1997."Le contrôledes prix P Cair.Zen. I = C. C. Edgar,ed., Zenon 1870.Inscriptions grecques et latines dansles citésgrecques," in Économie Papyri:Catalogue général des antiq- receuilliesen Grèceet en Asie Mineure, antique:Prix et formation des prix uitéségyptiennes duMusée du CaireI, Paris. dansles économies antiques, ed. J. An- Cairo 1925. LGPNll = M. J.Osborne and S. G. dreau,P. Briant,and R. Descat, P.Cair.Zen.IV = C. C. Edgar,ed., Byrne,A Lexiconof Greek Personal Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminges, ZenonPapyri: Catalogue général des NamesII: Attica,Oxford 1994. pp. 33-52. antiquitéségyptiennes duMusée du

Lytle,E. 2007a. "FishlessMysteries or . 2001. "Quelquesaspects légaux CaireIV, Cairo 1931. High Pricesat Athens?Re-exam- etjuridiques de l'affermagedes taxes Perdrizet,P. 1899."Inscriptions d'Acrae- iningIG IP 1103,"MusHelv 64, en Grèceancienne," in Symposion phiae,"BCH 23, pp. 193-205. pp. 100-111. 1997: Vorträgezur griechischen und Pfister,F. 1951. Die Reisebilderdes He-

. 2007b."The Delian Purple hellenistischenRechtsgeschichte, Alta- rakleides{SBWien 227.2), Vienna.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 302 EPHRAIM LYTLE

P.LondonVII = T. C. Skeat,ed., Greek . 1996.Asy 'Ha: Territorial Invio- Papyriin theBritish Museum VII: labilityin theHellenistic World (Hel- TheZenon Archive, London 1974. lenisticCulture and Society22), Porten,B., and A. Yardeni.1993. Berkeley. TextbookofAramaic Documents from Robert,L. 1960."Sur une loi d'Athènes AncientEgypt 3: Literature,Accounts, relativeaux petites Panathénées," Lists,Jerusalem. Hellenica11-12, pp. 189-203.

Powell,J. 1996. Fishing in thePrehistoric . 1962."Les Kordakiade Nicée, Aegean(SIMA-PB 137),Jonsered. le combustiblede Synnada,et les P.Oxy.VI = B. P. Grenfelland A. S. poissons-scies:Sur des lettresd'un Hunt,eds., The Oxyrhynchus Papyri métropolitede Phrygieau Xe siècle: VI, London 1908. Philologieet réalités,"/^ 1962, P.Oxy.XXXIII = P.J. Parsons, J. R. Rea, pp. 5-74.

and E. G. Turner,eds., The Oxy- . 1963.Noms indigènes dans rhynchusPapyri XXXIII, London VAsie-Mineuregréco-romaine: Pre- 1968. mièrepartie (BAHIstanbul 13), Paris. PSIV = Papirigreci e latiniV, Florence Roesch,P. 1965. Thespieset la confédéra- 1917. tionbéotienne, Paris.

PTebt ULI = A. S. Hunt andJ. G. . 1974."Sur le tarifdes poissons Smyly,eds., The Tebtunis Papyri d'Akraiphia,"ZPE 14,pp. 5-9.

ULI (Univ.of California Pubi., . 1980."Appendix Epigraphica," Graeco-RomanArchaeology 3; Teiresias10, pp. 1-17. EgyptExploration Society, Rolfe,J. C. 1890."Discoveries at An- Graeco-RomanMemoirs 23), thedonin 1889,"AJA 6, pp. 96-107. London1933. Rose,MJ. 2000. "The Fish Remains," Purcell,N. 1995."Eating Fish: The in KommosIV: TheGreek Sanctuary, Paradoxesof Seafood,"in Foodin ed.J. W. Shaw and M. C. Shaw, Antiquity,ed. J. Wilkins, D. Harvey, Princeton,pp. 495-560. andM. Dobson,Exeter, pp. 132- Rostovtzeff,M. 1. 1941. TheSocial and 149. EconomicHistory of the Hellenistic . 2005. "The AncientMediter- World,Oxford. ranean:The View fromthe Cus- Sailer,R. 2002. "Framingthe Debate tomsHouse," in Rethinkingthe Over Growthin theAncient Econ- Mediterranean,ed. W. V. Harris, omy,"in TheAncient Economy, Oxford,pp. 200-232. ed. W. Scheideland S. von Reden, P.Wise. II = P.J. Sijpesteijn, ed., The Edinburgh,pp. 251-269 (= The WisconsinPapyri II (StudiaAmste- AncientEconomy: Evidence and Mod- lodamensiaad Epigraphicam,lus els,ed. J. G. Manningand I. Morris, Antiquumet PapyrologicamPerti- Stanford2005, pp. 223-238). nentia11), Zutphen1977. Sánchez,P. 2001. UAmphictioniedes Reger,G. 1993."The PublicPurchase Pyleset de Delphes: Recherches sur son ofGrain on IndependentDelos," rôlehistorique, des origines au IIe siècle ClAnt12, pp. 300-334. de notreère (Historia Einzelschr.

. 1994.Regionalism and Change 148), Stuttgart. in theEconomy of Independent Delos, SB XIV = Sammelbuchgriechischer 314-167 B.C. (HellenisticCulture Urkundenaus Ägypten XIV, Wies- and Society14), Berkeley. baden1981-1983.

. 2003. "Aspectsof the Role Schachter,A. 1981. CultsofBoiotia 1: ofMerchants in thePolitical Life Acheloosto Hera (BICS Suppl.38), ofthe Hellenistic World," in Mer- London. cantie politica nel mondo antico, Schaps,D. M. 1987."Small Change in ed. C. Zaccagnini(Saggi di storia Boeotia,"ZPE 69, pp.293-296.

antica21), Rome,pp. 165-197. . 1988."Comic Inflation in the Richmond,J. A. 1973. Chapterson Market-Place,"Scripta Classica GreekFish-Lore {Hermes Einzelschr. Israelica8-9 (1985-1988),pp. 66- 28), Wiesbaden. 73. K.J.1987. "A Decreeof Hali- Schläger,H., D. J.Blackman, and Rigsby, " artuson Cult AJP108, pp. 729- J.Schäfer. 1968. "Der Hafenvon 740. Anthedon,"^ 1968,pp. 21-98.

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions FISH LISTS IN THE WILDERNESS 303

Schmidt,M., ed. [1858-1868] 1965. . 1938."Note sur une liste latinesrelatives aux corporationsdes HesychiiAlexandrini Lexicon post de nomsde poissons,"BCH 62, Romains,Louvain. loannemAltertum, repr. Amsterdam. pp. 439-440. Wellman,M. 1907."Xenocrates aus

Schwarz,H. 2001. Solloder Haben? . 1947.A Glossaryof Greek Aphrodisias,"Hermes 42, pp. 614- Die Finanzwirtschaftkleinasiatischer Fishes,London. 629. Städtein derRömischen Kaiser zeit Tod, M. N. 1936-1937."The Greek Wilhelm,A. 1939."Athen und Kolo- amBeispeil von Bithynien, Lykien, AcrophonicNumerals," BSA 37, phon,"in Anatolian Studies Pre- undEphesos(29 v. Chr-284n. Chr.), pp. 236-257 (= AncientGreek Nu- sentedto WilliamHepburn Buckler, Bonn. meralSystems: Six Studies,Chicago ed. W. M. Calderand J. Keil, Man- SerraRafols, E. 1957."La navegación 1979,pp. 62-83). chester,pp. 345-368. primitivaen los maresde Canarias," Ulrichs,H. N. 1840. Reisenund For- Wilkins,J. 1993. "Social Status and Rivistade historia canaria 119-120, schungenin Griechenland2, Bremen. Fish in Greeceand Rome,"in Food, pp. 83-91. Vandier,J. 1969. Manuel d'archéologie Culture,and History, ed. G. Mars Sosin,J. D. 2004. "AcraephiaCounts: égyptienne5: Bas-reliefs etpeintures. and V. Mars,London, pp. 191- n forri(ETTAPEX)," ZPE 148, Scènesde la viequotidienne, Paris. 203.

pp. 193-195. Vatin,C. 1966."Un tarifdes poissonsà . 2005. "Fishas a Sourceof Stanley,P. V. 1976."Ancient Greek Delphes,"BCH 90, pp. 274-280. Food in Antiquity,"inAncient Fish-

MarketRegulations and Controls" . 1971."Le tarifdes poissons ingand Fish Processing in theBlack (diss.Univ. of California, Berkeley). d'Akraiphia,"in Inscriptionsde Grèce Sea Region(Black Sea Studies2), Steinhauer,G. 1994."Inscription centrale,éd. F. Salviatand C. Vatin, éd. T. Bekker-Nielsen,Aarhus, agoranomiquedu Pirée,"BCH 118, Paris,pp. 95-109. pp. 21-30. pp. 51-68. Velissaropoulos,J.1980. Les nauclères Williams,C. K., II. 1979."Corinth Stephanides,A. 1943."S/oußoAji eíç xr'v grecs:Recherches sur les institutions 1978: ForumSouthwest," Hesperia |I£A¿TT|V TCOVíx6ÚCOV TCÛVYÀi)K8(ÛV maritimesen Grèceet dans l'Orient 48, pp. 105-144. ùôoctcovxf|ç 'EÀtaxôoç," Prakt 18, hellénisé(Hautes études du monde Wörrle,M. 1988. Stadtund Fest im pp.200-210. gréco-romain9), Geneva. kaiserzeitlichenKleinasien: Studien Strömberg,R. 1943. Studienzur Ety- Wallace,P. W. 1979. StratosDescription zu eineragonistischen Stiftung aus mologieund Bildung der griechischen ofBoiotia:ACommentary, Heidel- Oinoanda(Vestigia 39), Munich. Fishnamen,Göteborg. berg. Yardeni,A. 1994."Maritime Trade and Stroud,R. S. 1998. TheAthenian Waltzing,J. P. 1899.Etudes historique sur RoyalAccountancy in an Erased Grain-TaxLaw of374/3 B. C. lescorporations professionnelles chez CustomsAccount from 475 b.c.e. {HesperiaSuppl. 29), Princeton. lesRomains depuis les origines jusqu'à on theAhiqar Scroll from Elephan- Thompson,D. W. 1936.A Glossaryof la chutede VEmpire d'Occident 3: tine,"BASOR 293, pp. 67-78. GreekBirds, London. Recueildes inscriptions grecques et

EphraimLytle University of Toronto department of classics 125 queen's park toronto, ontario m5s 2cj CANADA [email protected]

This content downloaded from 71.168.218.10 on Tue, 18 Mar 2014 10:14:19 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions