EpiDoc: News and Views

This year one of the strands in the programme of the Digital Humanities Observatory Summer School is an EpiDoc training workshop, which may be of interest to epigraphists (please circulate this announcement widely, especially to students):

This course will introduce attendees to EpiDoc markup, an XML schema for epigraphic and papyrological editions. The workshop is targeted at Classical scholars: we shall assume knowledge of Greek and/or Latin and some experience in Classical history or adjacent disciplines, but no technical expertise is required. We shall introduce students to the use of EpiDoc markup to record the distinctions expressed by the Leiden Conventions and traditional critical editions, and some of the issues in translating between EpiDoc and the major epigraphic and papyrological databases. Students will also be given hands-on experience in the use of the “Son of SOL” editing tool, currently implemented by the Duke Databank of Documentary Papyri, which facilitates the creation of validating EpiDoc XML via a ‘tags-free’ interface.

Registration for the summer school costs €300 students / €400 staff.
Subsidized/free places are available for members of Irish universities,
and we hope that a few bursaries will also be available for EpiDoc
students. Please get in touch with <gabriel.bodard@kcl.ac.uk> if you want more information.

Announcement: DHO Summer School registration now open

The DHO Summer School is now open for registration. The School will be held at the Royal Irish Academy in Dublin. EpiDoc is being offered as a course:

2010 DHO Summer School – Registration Now Open

www.dho.ie/ss2010

The DHO is pleased to announce that registration for the 2010 DHO Summer School, in conjunction with NINEs and the EpiDoc Collaborative, is now open.

The Summer School welcomes registrants from the various fields of the humanities, information studies, and computer science. Workshops and lectures cover subjects as diverse as text encoding, virtual worlds, and geospatial methods for the humanities. These are facilitated by leading experts, with plenty of time during evening activities for informal interaction.

This year, in addition to four-day workshop strands, the DHO is also offering mid-week, one-day workshops. For those unable to attend the entire Summer School, it is possible to register separately for these mid-week workshops and lectures.

As in previous years, the Summer School brings together Irish and International scholars undertaking digital projects in diverse areas to explore issues and trends of common interest. The programme will offer attendees opportunities to develop their skills, share insights, and discover new opportunities for collaboration and research. Activities focus on the theoretical, technical, administrative, and institutional issues relevant to the needs of digital humanities projects today.

The pricing for the full Summer School, as well as one-day workshops and lectures, is available on the registration page: http://dho.ie/ss2010/registration

Full details of the workshop strands, lectures and guest speakers can be found on the Summer School website at: www.dho.ie/ss2010

We look forward to seeing you in Dublin.

2010 DHO Summer School
in conjunction with NINES and the EpiDoc Collaborative

28 June – 2 July, 2010
http://dho.ie/ss2010

The third annual Digital Humanities Observatory (DHO) Summer School will take place in Dublin from 28 June to 2 July 2010. Following the highly successful 2009 Summer School, next year’s event will see the expansion of popular workshop strands such as:

• A Practical Introduction to the Text Encoding Initiative
• Data Visualisation for the Humanities
• An Introduction to EpiDoc Markup and Editing Tools
• The One to Many Text: Text Transformations with XSLT

The Summer School will feature lectures by Dr. Hugh Denard (King’s College London Visualisation Lab) and Dr Ian Gregory (University of Lancaster). Workshop facilitators include Dr Gabriel Bodard (King’s College London), Dr James Cowey (University of Heidelberg), Professor Laura Mandell (Miami University of Ohio), Dr Susan Schreibman (Digital Humanities Observatory), Justin Tonra (NUI, Galway) and Dana Wheeles (University of Virginia).

Major workshop strands will be conducted over four days allowing delegates to choose a mini-workshop on Wednesday from one of the following offerings:

• Geospatial Methods for Humanities Research
• Using Digital Resources for Irish Research and Teaching
• Visualising Space, Time and Events: Using Virtual Worlds for Humanities Research
• Finding the Concepts In the Chaos – Building Relationships With Data Models
• Planning Digital Scholarly Resources: A Primer

The introduction of the one-day mini-workshops allows people to choose to attend a single-day event only at a reduced cost.

2010 DHO Summer School
in conjunction with NINES and the EpiDoc Collaborative
28 June – 2 July 2010
http://dho.ie/ss2010

The third annual Digital Humanities Observatory (DHO) Summer School will
take place in Dublin from 28 June to 2 July 2010. Following the highly
successful 2009 Summer School, next year’s event will see the expansion
of popular workshop strands such as:

• A Practical Introduction to the Text Encoding Initiative
• Data Visualisation for the Humanities
• An Introduction to EpiDoc Markup and Editing Tools
• The One to Many Text: Text Transformations with XSLT

The Summer School will feature lectures by Dr. Hugh Denard (King’s
College London Visualisation Lab) and Dr Ian Gregory (University of
Lancaster). Workshop facilitators include Dr Gabriel Bodard (King’s
College London), Dr James Cowey (University of Heidelberg), Professor
Laura Mandell (Miami University of Ohio), Dr Susan Schreibman (Digital
Humanities Observatory), Justin Tonra (NUI, Galway) and Dana Wheeles
(University of Virginia).

Major workshop strands will be conducted over four days allowing
delegates to choose a mini-workshop on Wednesday from one of the
following offerings:

• Geospatial Methods for Humanities Research
• Using Digital Resources for Irish Research and Teaching
• Visualising Space, Time and Events: Using Virtual Worlds for Humanities Research
• Finding the Concepts In the Chaos – Building Relationships With Data Models
• Planning Digital Scholarly Resources: A Primer

The introduction of the one-day mini-workshops allows people to choose
to attend a single-day event only at a reduced cost.

Announcement
EpiDoc Training Sessions 2009
London 20-24 July
Rome 21-25 September

The EpiDoc community has been developing protocols for the publication of inscriptions, papyri, and other documentary Classical texts in TEI-compliant XML: for details see the community website at http://epidoc.sf.net.

Over the last few years there has been increasing demand for training by scholars wishing to use EpiDoc. We are delighted to be able to announce two training workshops, which will be offered in 2009. Both will be led by Dr Gabriel Bodard. These sessions will benefit scholars working on Greek or Latin documents with an interest in developing skills in the markup, encoding, and exploitation of digital editions. Competence in Greek and/or Latin, and knowledge of the Leiden Conventions will be assumed; no particular computer skills are required.

London session, 20-24 July 2009. This will take place at the Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King’s College London, 26-29 Drury Lane. The cost of attendance will be £50 for students; £100 for employees of universities or other non-profit institutions; £200 for employees of commercial institutions. Those interested in enrolling should apply to Dr Bodard, gabriel.bodard@kcl.ac.uk by 20 June 2009.

We hope to be able to offer some follow-up internships after the session, to enable participants to consolidate their experience under supervision; please let us know if that would be of interest to you.

Rome session, 21-25 September 2009. This will take place at the British School at Rome. Thanks to the generous support of the International Association of Greek and Latin Epigraphy, the British School and Terra Italia Onlus, attendance will be free.

Those interested in enrolling should apply to Dr Silvia Orlandi, silvia.orlandi@uniroma1.it by 30 June 2009.

Practical matters
Both courses will run from Monday to Friday starting at 10.00 am and ending at 16.00 each day.

Participants should bring a wireless-enabled laptop. You should acquire and install a copy of Oxygen *and* either an educational licence ($48) or a 30-day trial licence (free). Don’t worry if you don’t know how to use it!

EpiDoc Training Sessions 2009
London 20-24 July
Rome 21-25 September

The EpiDoc community has been developing protocols for the publication of inscriptions, papyri, and other documentary Classical texts in TEI-compliant XML: for details see the community website at http://epidoc.sf.net.

Over the last few years there has been increasing demand for training by scholars wishing to use EpiDoc. We are delighted to be able to announce two training workshops, which will be offered in 2009. Both will be led by Dr Gabriel Bodard. These sessions will benefit scholars working on Greek or Latin documents with an interest in developing skills in the markup, encoding, and exploitation of digital editions. Competence in Greek and/or Latin, and knowledge of the Leiden Conventions will be assumed; no particular computer skills are required.

London session, 20-24 July 2009. This will take place at the Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King’s College London, 26-29 Drury Lane. The cost of attendance will be £50 for students; £100 for employees of universities or other non-profit institutions; £200 for employees of commercial institutions. Those interested in enrolling should apply to Dr Bodard, gabriel.bodard@kcl.ac.uk by 20 June 2009.

We hope to be able to offer some follow-up internships after the session, to enable participants to consolidate their experience under supervision; please let us know if that would be of interest to you.

Rome session, 21-25 September 2009. This will take place at the British School at Rome. Thanks to the generous support of the International Association of Greek and Latin Epigraphy, the British School and Terra Italia Onlus, attendance will be free.

Those interested in enrolling should apply to Dr Silvia Orlandi, silvia.orlandi@uniroma1.it by 30 June 2009.

Practical matters
Both courses will run from Monday to Friday starting at 10:00 am and ending at 16:00 each day.

Participants should bring a wireless-enabled laptop. You should acquire and install a copy of Oxygen *and* either an educational licence ($48) or a 30-day trial licence (free). Don’t worry if you don’t know how to use it!

Paper delivered at the BES Spring Colloquium.

The final contribution at the 2009 BES Spring Meeting was remarkable by its conciseness, clarity and interest. It was a striking example of how some of our preconceived ideas on ancient Greek practices can be swiftly turned on their head by inscriptions.

The inscription (SEG LIV 214), dated to the 4^th c. BC, is incomplete and fragmented. The stele fragments were actually discovered by different individuals over a long period of time. This led to some confusion about the original location of the inscription, with the Greek scholars’ hypothesis of its coastal origins being confirmed by the discovery of the most recent fragment in the deme of Aixone (modern Glyfada). The question of the exact location of the inscription is presumably answered by the last fragment. It was found near other inscriptions mentioning their being set up in the sanctuary of Herakleidai, Hebe and Alcmene. The text is stoichedon and beautifully inscribed. The bottom section still shows grid lines for the sculptor to follow.

The text presents several issues discussed by Parker and Scullion. To start with, the question of who had commissioned the inscription is raised by the location of the stone. The sanctuary of the Herakleidai is where the deme of Aixone displayed its decisions. This would hint at the deme as the commissioner, although the possibility of a sub-deme body, such as a genos, cannot be excluded. Indeed, line 26 mentions a hero Paralos and the only known sanctuary to Paralos is in Piraeus, outside of Aixone’s control. This leaves open the possibility of a genos dedicating the stele, or of an as yet unknown sanctuary of Paralos in the deme of Aixone.

The number of priesthoods present here amounts to ten (although some are lost with the top of the inscription) which, with two others known for Aixone, would total to twelve for the whole deme. The text notably features two priesthoods (one priestess and one priest) for the same ‘mystery deity’, the Reverend (ἁγνή) Goddess. This title is usually given to the Syrian goddess and is otherwise not attested before the 2^nd c. BC. This occurrence probably belongs here to a different deity, possibly Persephone. The multiple priesthoods for the same deity are in any case unusual.

Scullion then described the last part of the inscription as changing in nature, since the content of the lists no longer includes double portions (of meat), sausages or cuts to be put on the sacrificial table. There is therefore no spare meat from the sacrifice, which in turn would indicate holocausts. The possible objection to this is the fact that hides are still given to the priest/-ess. There are examples in the Greek world of ‘whole-sacrifices’ of an animal that has been cut open (see for example at Cos, 4^th c. BC, Sokolowski LSCG 151 A 32-5) but the case of Aixone is different. Here the skin is preserved. The only ancient parallels are found outside the Greek world with examples from Leviticus (1:3-9; 7:8), Philo Judaeus (De specialibus legibus 1.30 [151]) and Punic and Semitic inscriptions (CIS I 165.3-4; I 167). This could lead to the conclusion that cutting up the animal before burning it whole was a usual practice, thus explaining the otherwise silent sources on the matter. For one, it would require less wood than the whole un-skinned animal. This undoubtedly challenges the mental image of the holocaust as the act of putting an intact animal, albeit a dead one, into the fire. It is also noted that the deities at Aixone concerned by these sacrifices have a chthonic character.

Parker finally noted that the only deity for whom no sum to purchase kindling is mentioned is Dionysos (lines 9-11). This suggests the possibility of omophagia.

Workshop at the e-Science Institute, Edinburgh, February 10-11, 2009 (see programme and registration):

Rationale: The meeting will bring technical and editorial researchers participating in, or otherwise engaged with, the IOSPE (Inscriptiones Orae Septentrionalis Ponti Euxini = Ancient Inscriptions of the Northern Black Sea Coast.) project together with researchers in related fields, both historical and computational. Existing projects, such as the Inscriptions of Roman Cyrenaica and Inscriptions of Aphrodisias, have explored the digitization of ancient inscriptions from their regions, and employed the EpiDoc schema as markup. IOSPE plans to expand this sphere of activity, in conjunction with an multi-volume publication of inscription data. This event is a joint workshop funded in part by a Small Research Grant from the British Academy, and in part by the eSI through the Arts and Humanities e-Science theme. The workshop will bring together domain experts in epigraphy, and specialists in digital humanities, and e-science researchers, which will provide a detailed scoping of the research questions, and the research methods needed to investigate them from an historical/epigraphic point of view.

The success of previous projects, and the opportunities identified by the IOSPE research team, raise questions of significant interest for the e-science community. Great interpretive value can be attached to datasets such as these if they are linked, both with each other, and with other relevant datasets. The LaQuaT project at King’s, part of ENGAGE, is addressing this. There is also an important adjunct research area in the field of digital geographic analysis of these datasets: again, this can only be achieved if disparate data collections can be meaningfully cross-walked.

The organizers would like to bring to the attention of interested colleagues this upcoming event dedicated to the digital publication of a new corpus of Ancient Inscriptions from the Northern Coast of Black Sea (IOSPE = Inscriptiones Orae Septentrionalis Ponti Euxini).

Enhancing and Exploring Epigraphic and Archaeological Data through e-Science

In Association with eSI Thematic Programme: e-Science in the Arts and Humanities

10 February 2009, 09:30 AM – 11 February, 04:00 PM

e-Science Institute, 15 South College Street, Edinburgh

Organisers: Stuart Dunn, Irene Polinskaya and Gabriel Bodard

The meeting will bring technical and editorial researchers participating in, or otherwise engaged with, the IOSPE (Inscriptiones Orae Septentrionalis Ponti Euxini = Ancient Inscriptions of the Northern Black Sea Coast) project together with researchers in related fields, both historical and computational. Existing projects, such as the Inscriptions of Roman Cyrenaica and Inscriptions of Aphrodisias, have explored the digitization of ancient inscriptions from their regions, and employed the EpiDoc schema as markup. IOSPE plans to expand this sphere of activity, in conjunction with a multi-volume publication of inscription data. This event is a joint workshop funded in part by a Small Research Grant from the British Academy, and in part by the eSI through the Arts and Humanities e-Science theme. The workshop will bring together domain experts in epigraphy, and specialists in digital humanities, and e-science researchers, which will provide a detailed scoping of the research questions, and the research methods needed to investigate them from an historical/epigraphic point of view.

Further details and programme can be found here. 

Inquiries may be directed to the co-organizer:

Dr. Irene Polinskaya

Department of Classics

King’s College London

University of London

Strand, London WC2R 2LS

Tel. (0)20 7848 1762/Fax (0)20 7848 2545

irene.polinskaya@kcl.ac.uk

Roman Libya: epigraphy, geography and archaeology

The Society for Libyan Studies and the Inscriptions of Roman Cyrenaica project are organising a joint colloquium and workshop, 13-14 February 2009, at King’s College London.

The Inscriptions of Roman Cyrenaica project (http://ircyr.kcl.ac.uk) which is funded by the Leverhulme Trust, aims to publish, online, the inscriptions of Roman Cyrenaica collected by Joyce Reynolds, together with related geographical data, provided by the Pleiades project (http://pleiades.stoa.org/) and illustrative material from the Ward-Perkins Archive at the British School at Rome. An associated project, Concordia, (http://concordia.atlantides.org) is producing an electronic reprint of Joyce Reynolds and John Ward-Perkins, Inscriptions of Roman Tripolitania.

The aim of the colloquium/workshop is to bring together scholars working on the history, archaeology and geography of Roman Libya; we plan to describe and compare our projects, and to discuss ways in which we can help and support one another, particularly by exploiting new media.

For more information and to book see the Colloquium website.

For those who are not subscribed to the Digital Classicist podcast RSS, I’d like to call attention to the latest “occasional seminar” audio and slides online: Marion Lamé spoke about “Epigraphical encoding: from the Stone to Digital Edition” in the internation video-conference series European Culture and Technology. Marion talked about her PhD project which is to use an XML-encoded edition of the Res Gestae Diui Augusti as an exercise in digital recording and presentation of an extremely important and rich historical text and encoding historical features in the markup.

We shall occasionally record and upload (with permission) presentations of interest to digital classicists that are presented in other venues and series. If you would be interested in contributing a presentation to this series, please contact me or someone else at the Digital Classicist.

Over on the Markup list (for discussion of text markup issues) we have been discussing the ligature of VI that appears in some Latin inscriptions. I asked:

We have come across several cases in the Inscriptions of Roman
Tripolitania of the symbol that looks a little like an Arabic '4', but
seems in fact to be a ligature of VI and stands for the numeral six (or,
followed for example by II, part of a larger numeral VIII etc.)

(1) is this a recognised symbol, and is there a Unicode codepoint that
is either dedicated to it or acceptable to use to encode this symbol (as
opposed to just for display)?

(2) is there a common name for this symbol, better than "six-ligature"
or "vi-ligature"?

(The symbol appears not to have a separate codepoint in Unicode, and nor should we expect it to be treated differently from U+2165, “Roman numeral six”, of which it is, after all, only a glyph variant. We have also, I think, answered the question of how to represent this symbol in EpiDoc [i.e. just like any other ligature].)

As an interesting aside, Paul Iversen suggested that there may some influence on this glyph-form from the Greek numeric stigma/digamma for six. There are plenty of other examples of the use of this symbol (including some useful Latin papyrological examples provided offlist by Rodney Ast). I include here the one photograph I have been able to find of a Tripolitanian example, where (VI)III = 9:

What do readers think? Is there any relationship between this and digamma? Is there a name for this ligature? Is there any argument for treating this any differently from a ligature of (NM) or (ΠΡ)?

This announcement has been doing the rounds this week (seen so far on Humanist, Classicists):

Telamon. Online Library of the Ancient Greek Inscriptions from Bulgaria

The aim of the Telamon project, which is hosted by St. Kliment Ohridski Sofia University, Department of Classics, is to create a digital library of the ancient Greek inscriptions found in Bulgaria. Their total number counts more than 3500 written in a period of about 1000 years (6th century BC — 4th century AD). Georgi Mihailov publishes those that have been discovered up to the mid 80’s in Inscriptiones Graecae in Bulgaria repertae.

The focus is currently on the digitilising the inscriptions of the most eminent poleis of the Roman Thrace, Philippopolis and Augusta Traiana. They are approximately 1600, 1200 of which are already included in IGBulg. A third of them, however, need some revision or correction, while other 400 are unpublished or published in dispersed and often inaccessible publications in Bulgarian. Therefore, we hope that the creating of an electronic database of these inscriptions will facilitate the study of the history, culture, and language both of the Bulgarian lands in antiquity and of the Greco-Roman civilization as a whole.

The main standard of applying the XML language in encoding the epigraphic monuments, known as EpiDoc and developed by an international team of specialists, will be put into operation.

Just one highlight in a BMCR Review well worth reading:

Specialists in a range of sub-fields will be consulting this volume for years to come, and the indices facilitate this. As Linderski observes, "without detailed indices all texts but particularly inscriptions are half mute" (412), but as he also points out, one now wants more: electronic editions fully machine-searchable. Academic publishers need to keep up with technology at the rate scholars do or they risk obsolescence.

This will be the ninth and final installment of our summer-long “Virtual Seminar on Some Unpublished Inscriptions from Corinth.” The other eight posts may be found by following the links backwards from here. I want to thank all of you who have participated in this seminar and who made it a most fruitful experience. I also want to wish my friend, colleague, and fellow epigrapher Don Laing all the best as he continues to struggle with the effects of his chemotherapy.

This final post features a fragment of white, micaceous marble preserving the upper right corner of an inscription of at least eight lines with red paint preserved in many letters. It is broken to the left, below, and on the back. It was found 12 August, 1977 in Quarry Trench XVI. A pair of parallel register lines has been lightly incised 0.009 and 0.010 m. respectively from the top edge of the stone establishing an upper margin. Intermittent faint traces of register lines appear above lines two to eight at intervals of 0.010 m. Photo, squeeze, and autopsy of stone.

Unpublished.
Height, 0.088 m. ; width, 0.090 m. ; thickness, 0.038 m.
Height of letters, 0.004 to 0.008 m. ; interspace, 0.002 to 0. 003 m.
Corinth inventory I-77-10 ; NB 652, p. 61 ; NB(FI) 687, pp. 36-37, Object 829

PROXENY DECREE?

fin. IV – med. II a. NON-STOIX

          [θεό]ς̣· vac. 0.084 m.                 1
[— — — — — ]ρίτου vac. 0.038 m.
[— — — — — —] τετάρται
[— — — — — —]ύ̣δωρον v
[— — — — — —]σσαν v                  5
[— — — — — —]πολιτεί-
[α— — — — — —]το vac. 0.030 m.
[— — — — — — —]υ̣ς v
[— — — — — — — —]

Apparatus:
Line 1: The final letter trace can be a gamma, sigma or tau. Given that it appears we have the upper right corner of a decree, [θεό]ς̣ seems likely. If [θεό]ς̣ was written without spaces between each letter and centered, the maximum number of letters per line was circa 25. That some care was taken to align this inscription is evident from the use of register lines.

Line 2: These letters probably belong to the end of a name rather than to the number [τ]ρίτου. If the numeral, we find μηνὸς τρίτου on some cities’ inscriptions, but the numeral in the dative in line 4 seems to preclude this. If a numeral it probably applies to some office, official body, or year ([ἔτους τ]ρίτου).

Line 3: We apparently have only the second instance of the day of a month on which a decree was passed attested at Corinth. The second alpha at the end signals that we do not have the koine.

Line 4: Only the upper right tip of a diagonal is visible, and upsilon seems most likely.

Line 5: The inscribing of the preserved portion of this line was difficult because of micaceous flaws in the surface. The letters ΣΣΑΝ belong either to the proper name [Κα]σσαν|[δρ-], or the ethnic [Κα]σσαν|[δρε-]; less likely is the word [θάλα]σσαν. The ethnic [Με]σσαν|[ιο-] seems to be excluded, for the inscriber observes syllabification (cf. line 6) so the iota should have appeared at the end of the line where there is plenty of space. It is not clear whether a patronymic was found in the lacuna, or perhaps the name of a second honorandus.

Line 6: The inscriber was so determined to observe word-end/syllabification that he risked chipping the stone by inscribing the final iota only 0.002 m. from the edge. The resulting chip has left only half of the iota’s hasta. The appearance of the word πολιτεί|[α—] (or [ἰσο]πολιτεί|[α—]) is the strongest indication that we have a proxeny decree (καὶ εἶμεν αὐτῶι καὶ ἐκγόνοις πολιτείαν…), for which we have only one other sure instance at Korinth (ICor 8,1 3).

Line 7: A piece of the tau’s vertical hasta is just visible. It is not clear why the inscriber left so much space to the right. If we compare this inscription with ICor 8,1 3, possibly we have some sort of preamble in lines 1-5 that ends with the phrase [πᾶσαν ἐπιμέλειαν ἐποιήσα]το, and then on the next line we have ἔδοξε τᾶι ἐκκλησίαι… or the verb [ἐψηφίσα]το. On the other hand, given that the name [—]ύ̣δωρον is in the accusative, we expect the clause ἔδοξε τᾶι ἐκκλησίαι to appear just before it, as it does on ICor 8,1 3.

Line 8: The initial traces preserve the tips of two diagonals that favor upsilon over chi. The next letter has only the upper horizontal with its left corner of what must have been a sigma.

Commentary:

We have a decree, probably a proxeny decree, but it is difficult to find a typical reconstruction that fits all the extant lines. Complicating matters of restoration is that on the only other extant proxeny decree from Korinth, there is what appears to be a random vacat of 3 letter spaces in the middle of one of the clauses. An admittedly very laconic reconstruction (and unparalleled from line 6 onwards) of a proxeny decree could be:

               [θεό]ς̣· vac. 0.084 m.               1
[ἐπὶ γραμματέος . .6-7.. ]ρίτου vac. 0.038 m.
[μηνὸς . . . . c. 11 . . .] τετάρται
[ἔδοξε τᾶι ἐκκλησίαι· Ε]ὔ̣δωρον v
[— — patronymic — Κα]σσαν-             5
[δρέα πρόξενον εἶμεν·] πολιτεί-
[αν δὲ αὐτῶι εἶμεν· — —]το vac. 0.030 m.
[— — — — — — — — —]υ̣ς v
[— — — — — — — — — —]

If wider, then we might have:

                                [θ          ε          ό          ]ς̣· vac. 0.084 m.                  1
[ἐπὶ γραμματ— — — — — — — — — — — —]ρίτου vac. 0.038 m.
[— — — — — — — — — — — μηνὸς — — — —] τετάρται
[— — — — — — — — — — ἔδοξε τᾶι ἐκκλησίαι· Ε]ὔ̣δωρον v
[— patronymic — καὶ — nomen — patronymic — Κα]σσαν-                5
[δρεῖς προξένους εἶμεν καὶ εὐεργέτας καὶ εἶμεν αὐτοῖς] πολιτεί-
[αν — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]το vac. 0.030 m.
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]υ̣ς v
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]

At the Digital Classicist work in progress seminar, held at the Insititute for Classical Studies in London on Friday August 8th, Charlotte Roueché gave a presentation under the title, ‘From Stone to Byte: Implications of the XML publication of inscriptions’. She discussed several categories of ancient and mediaeval texts, not only inscriptions, in a whirlwind history of how scholars have developed both “markup” and “citation schemes” to aid in the discussion of texts with other scholars. Editorial conventions and stable citation, both staples of modern scholarship, are the “semantic and structural markup” that are the keystones of TEI XML (and therefore EpiDoc).

Like all of the Digital Classicist seminars this year, Roueché’s presentation is available to download as a pocast audio file and attached slideshow.

Other seminars in this series treated explicitly epigraphic topics, including Porter, Baumann, and Tupman, but most would be worth following for anyone with an interest in the application of computer science to the study of ancient texts.

New York University: Programmer/Analyst (7421BR)

New York University’s Division of the Libraries seeks a Programmer/Analyst to work on the "Papyrological Navigator" (http://papyri.info), a major web-based research portal that provides scholars worldwide with access to texts, transcriptions, images and metadata related to ancient texts on papyri, pottery fragments and other material. The incumbent will work closely with the Project Coordinator (at Columbia University) and with scholars involved in the project at NYU's Institute for the Study of the Ancient World, Duke University and the University of Heidelberg, as well as with NYU Digital Library Technology staff.

The incumbent's initial responsibilities will include: migrating existing PN software applications from Columbia University to NYU; optimizing performance as needed; establishing a robust production environment at NYU for the ongoing ingest and processing of new and updated Greek text transcriptions, metadata and digital images; performing both analysis and programming of any required changes or enhancements to current PN applications.

This is a grant-funded position and is available for 2 years.

Candidates should have the following skills:

• Bachelor's degree in computer or information science and 3 years of relevant experience or equivalent combination
• Must include experience developing applications using Java
• Demonstrated knowledge of Java, Tomcat, Saxon, Lucene, Apache, SQL, XML, XSLT
• Experience with metadata standards (e.g. TEI, EpiDoc)
• Experience working in a Unix/Linux environments
• Preferred: Experience with image serving software (eRez/FSI), Java Portlets, Apache Jetspeed-2, and Velocity templates.
• Preferred: Experience designing, building, and deploying distributed systems.
• Preferred: Experience working with non-Roman Unicode-based textual data (esp. Greek)
• Excellent communication and analytical skills

Applicants should submit resume and cover letter, which reflects how applicant’s education and experience match the job requirements.

Please apply through NYU's application management system: www.nyu.edu/hr/jobs/apply.

At this page click on "External Applicants" then "Search Openings." Type 7421BR in the "Keyword Search" field and select search. NYU offers a generous benefit package including 22 days of vacation annually. NYU is an Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer.

New York University Libraries: Library facilities at New York University serve the school’s 40,000 students and faculty and contain more than 4 million volumes. New York University is a member of the Association of Research Libraries, the Research Libraries Group, the Digital Library Federation; serves as the administrative headquarters of the Research Library Association of South Manhattan, a consortium that includes three academic institutions. The Library’s website URL is http://library.nyu.edu

This is post VIII on our “Virtual Seminar on Some Unpublished Inscriptions from Corinth.” The seven previous posts may be found by following the links from here. This installment features three joining fragments of a finely prepared revetment of white marble with slightly tan accretions on the face. Fragments A (top left) and B (bottom) were found 13 April, 1935 in Area 1 of the Agora Southeast in a wall. They were later rediscovered on 7 April, 1938 in Agora South Central. Fragment C (top right) was found 9 July, 1976 in West Road Trench IV of Temple Hill. Photo, squeeze, and autopsy of joined stones.

Fragments A & B:
Published: Kent, ICor VIII,3, 115.
Corinth Inventory I 1583 ; NB 147 p. 104 ; NB 176, p. 89 ; CECI III 1583.

Fragment C:
Unpublished.
Corinth Inventory I-76-17; NB 654, p. 10 ; NB(FI) 655, p. 65, Object 664.

Measurements of the joined fragments:
Height, 0.150 m. ; width 0.220 m. ; thickness, 0.023 m.
Height of letters, 0.165 m. ; interspace, 0.020 m.

238-244 p.                NON-STOIX

[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — Ἀντ]ώ̣νι̣ον [•] Οὐ̣α̣[λέριον? • officium?]     1
[τοῦ • Αὐτοκράτορος • Καίσαρος • Μάρκου • Ἀντω]νίου • Γορδιάν[ου • — — — —]
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —].Ο̣Ρ̣Ι̣Ν̣Ο̣Υ̣Α̣Ν̣[— — — —]
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]

Apparatus:

Line 1: At the beginning, only the bottom of a round letter with the rising of a round stroke on the right is visible followed by a nu, then the bottom quarter of a hasta followed by an omicron, followed by another nu. Then there is an empty space below a broken field that is suitable for an interpunct. After the putative interpunct there is an omicron, then the foot of a slightly bowed hasta that is compatible with the upsilon or rho in the line below, which we take to be an upsilon. At the beginning of the line before the new fragment was found, Kent read [—]ο̣ν̣τ̣ο̣λ̣[—], but with the new fragment we can see that the last letter before the supplied interpunct is a nu, not a lamba. The last name could also be restored Οὐ̣α̣[λερίανον] or Οὐ̣ᾶ̣[ρον].

Line 3: The reading is very difficult and not at all secure. At the beginning of the line only the broadening of the tip of a stroke, perhaps diagonal, is visible at the top of the inscribed line. It is followed by the tops of several letters, the space between which does not seem wide enough to accommodate an interpunct. We believe the traces favor the letters given above, which are the same that Kent read. Possibly Κ̣ο̣ρ̣ί̣ν̣⟨θ⟩ο̣υ̣?

Commentary:

The traces in the line above and below Gordian’s name do not appear to be consistent with any of the formulae that usually accompany inscriptions in his honor. The stone possibly honors an Antonius Valerius or an Antonius Valerianus, who may have been an official of Gordian III. For a portrait head of Gordian III found at Corinth, see BCH 99 (1975) 603-4, fig. 39.

This is posting VII of our “Virtual Seminar on Some Unpublished Inscriptions from Corinth.” The previous six may be found by following the links from here. This post features three fragments of grayish marble all broken on the backside, two of which have not been published. Fragment A was found in September, 1937 in Shop XXVII of the South Stoa and preserves the left edge of the inscription (margin of 0.027 m.) but is broken elsewhere. Fragment B was found 8 July, 1976 in Quarry Trench 9 of the Temple Hill and preserves the right edge (margin of 0.025 m.) but is broken on the other sides. Fragment C was found 12 August, 1974 in Quarry Trench 4 of the Temple Hill and while broken on all sides preserves an un-inscribed surface of 0.013 to 0.016 m. below and thus appears to be the last line, or at least near the very end. The planes of fracture produce thinner fragments to the right and below. The inscribed surface of all three fragments has been dressed with a multi-toothed chisel of at least three or four teeth. The pattern of chisel marks is regularly vertical on Fragment A, but becomes increasingly disorganized to the right. Fragments B and C show this greater irregularity. The letter forms and spacing are very similar, and the stone itself seems to be of identical quality leaving little doubt that these pieces belong together. Photos, squeezes, and autopsy of stones.

Fragment A:

Published: Kent, ICor VIII,3,40 ; cf. Bousquet, REG 80 (1967) 300, adn. 1 (= SEG 25.327); cf. Stroud, Hesperia 41 (1972) p. 203 ; cf. Gebhard and Dickie, Corinth XX.261-78 (= SEG 51.339).
Height, 0.145 m. ; width, 0.15 m. ; thickness, 0.035 m.
Height of letters, 0.006 to 0.010 m. ; interspace, 0.006 to 0.008 m.
Corinth inventory I 1885 ; NB 170, p. 82.

Fragment B:

Unpublished.
Height, 0.080 m. ; width, 0.073 m. ; thickness, 0.017 m.
Height of letters, 0.007 to 0.010 m. ; interspace, 0.006 to 0.009 m.
Corinth inventory I-76-12 ; NB 632, p. 76 ; NB 655, p. 7, Object 607.

Fragment C:

Unpublished.
Height, 0.112 m. ; width, 0.094 m. ; thickness, 0.023 m.
Corinth inventory I-74-12 ; NB 610, p. 111 ; NB 611, p. 58, Object 465.

HONORARY DECREE OF THE DIONYSIAN ARTISTS

128 a.?                  NON-STOIX

Fragment A:

[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
τ̣εχνί̣τ̣ω̣[ν] ἀσφα[λεία— — — — — — ἀγαθῆι τύχηι δεδόχ]-      1
θα̣ι̣ τοῖς τεχνίτα̣[ις· ἐπαινέσαι μὲν — — — — — — — —]-
ν Ῥωμαίων καὶ ΑΠ[ — — — — — — — — — — φιλαγα]-
θίαν εἰς τὴν σύν[οδον — — — — — — — — — — — —]-
ων τοὺς μετέχ̣[οντας τῆς συνόδου — — —· εἶναι δὲ — —]-        5
οις τὰ τίμια ἂ κ̣[αὶ τοῖς — — — — — — — — — — — —]
. αυτων τ[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[.2-3.]τεχει̣[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]

Fragment B:

[— — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — — — — — — — —].[—]                     1
[— — — — — — — — —]ΑΜΕΝ
[— — — — — — — — —]Α̣ΙΣΤΑΚ  vac.
[— — — — — — — — —]ΠΑΡΑΤ   vac.
[— — — — — — — — ἀργ]ύριον     vac.      5
[— — — — — — — — —]ΦΟΙ
[— — — — — — — — — — —]

Fragment C

[— — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — — — — —]ΝΚΟ[— — — — —]       1
[— — — — —]ΩΙΤΟΥΛ̣[— — — — —]
[— — — — ἐπίσ]τανται̣ [— — — — —]
[— — — — κ]αὶ τῶν λοιπ[ῶν — — —]
[— — — ἀ]πολογισάσθω[σαν — — —]        5
                          vacat

Apparatus:

Fragment A:

Line 1: The careful drawing in NoteBook 170, p. 82 reveals that damage occurred to the upper left-hand corner of the stone shortly after discovery, for it displays the two letters preceding the chi that are clearly the remains of the foot of the tau and the bottom half of the epsilon. NB 170 also records the full iota after the nu, but only the upper tip of the iota’s hasta is visible today. The next letter space after the iota preserves the foot of a hasta the spacing of which is consistent with a tau. Kent (link above) read the seventh letter trace as an alpha and supplied [τε]χνί̣τ̣[ας], failing to see the trace of another letter. The alpha is regularly one of the larger letters and never far from the foot of the line and this trace is 0.002 m. higher than the previous letter trace. We believe it is more consistent with the left corner of an omega, thus requiring τ̣εχνί̣τ̣ω̣[ν].

Line 2: At the beginning of the line Kent read ω̣ν̣ τ̣οῖς etc. Our doubts about this reading were dramatically resolved by the drawing in NB 170. On the stone and a squeeze we had read the two lower tips of a splayed lambda-shaped letter followed by the foot of an adjacent hasta that does not join the previous diagonal stroke. There is space for one letter in front of the lamda-shaped traces. In addition, an omega is never that low in this inscription. The drawing in the NB, which is very reliable, leaves no doubt that at the beginning of the line we have ΘΑΙ. The restoration [δεδόχ]|θαι is virtually assured and means that this was a decree passed by the τεχνῖται. In the gap that follows we should have either [δεδόχ]|θα̣ι̣ τοῖς τεχνίτα̣[ις· ἐπαινέσαι μὲν…or [δεδόχ]|θα̣ι̣ τοῖς τεχνίτα̣[ις τοῖς ἐξ Ἰσθμοῦ καὶ Νεμέας· ἐπαινέσαι μὲν…].

Line 3: At the end of line 2 and the beginning of line 3 Kent proferred […τῶν κοινῶν εὐεργετῶ]|ν Ῥωμαίων. It could also be [τὸν δῆμον τὸ]|ν Ῥωμαίων] or [στρατηγὸν ὕπατο]ν Ῥωμαίων, or [στρατηγὸν ἀνθύπατο]ν Ῥωμαίων or other choices mainly involving a genitive absolute. At the end of the preserved portion of line 3 he read ἀγ̣[—]. Since the horizontal stroke extends to the left of a hasta, as is the case in the pi at the end of line 4 of Fragment C, and it does not in the gamma in line 5 of the same fragment, a pi is assured. The word beginning with ΑΠ may be the beginning of another infinitive such as ἀπ[οδοῦναι] or the beginning of a person’s name. I also wonder whether it may be a participle such as ἀπ[οσταλέντα], which here may indicate a praetor (Polybius refers to a Roman praetor as a στρατηγὸς ἐξαπέλεκυς).

Line 4: At the end of line 3 and beginning of 4 we could also have [καλοκαγα]|θίαν.

Line 5: Only a diagonal stroke is preserved at the end of the line, but there is little doubt that it is anything other than a chi.

Line 6: At then end of the preserved portion is there is the top tip of a hasta visible. At the end of line 5 and beginning of line 6 we probably have [εἶναι δὲ αὐτῶι καὶ ἐγγόν]|oις or [εἶναι δὲ αὐτ]|οῖς. Kent suggested that τὰ τίμια could possibly refer to the fine of ten talants imposed by C. Cornelius Sisenna (see Commentary below), but the position and context suggest they refer to honors.

Line 7: The tip of what is probably one broad letter is visible in front of the alpha.

Line 8: Kent read [με]τεχο̣ν̣[τ—], Bousquet read [με]τέχε̣ι̣, and Stroud read [. .]τεχε̣ι̣[—]. We believe the epsilon is assured. The space in front could accommodate two wide or three narrow letters.

Fragment B:

Line 1: The lower tip of a stroke is just visible on the stone.

Line 3: The dotted letter is either a lambda or alpha, probably alpha.

Line 5: At the end of the line after the final nu on the squeeze there is a mark that might look like a stroke above a scar, but on the stone it is clearly just a part of the scar and out of the margin anyway. [κ]ύριον is also possible.

Line 6: It is tempting to restore [Δελ]φοι|, which suggests this decree might have something to do with the dispute between the Isthmian/Nemeian τεχνῖται and their counterparts in Athens that was waged between 134 and 112 BC and involved the Pythian games at Delphi. See more in the Commentary.

Fragment C:

Line 1: [τῶ]ν κο[ινῶν] is the most probable restoration.

Line 2: At the end of the line in the photo I believe I may see the lower left foot of a splayed letter that both Don and I failed to see on the stone and squeeze (I will double check a squeeze in a couple of weeks). It looks like it may be the left foot of a lambda or alpha.

Line 3: The final letter is a full hasta broken only at the top and could only have been the part of a gamma, iota, mu, or nu. The context favors iota. We have some formula like [εἰδότες ὅτι ἐπίσ]τανται̣ [χάριτας ἀποδιδόναι οἱ τεχνῖται] or [ὅπως πάντες εἰδῶσιν ὅτι οἱ τεχνῖται ἐπίσ]τανται̣ [τὰς χάριτας ἀποδιδόναι τοῖς εὐεργέταις εἰς αὐτούς…].

Line 4. This line may refer to some left over money, or is a catch-all phrase to cover any of the remaining items that need doing, or it may have something to do with the remaining τεχνῖται, or it may have something to do with those who live in the future.

Line 5: It could also be [ἀ]πολογισάσθω [— —]. The subject or subjects of this verb will be officials of the Association, probably ὁ ταμίας, and/or ὁ γραμματεύς, and/or οἱ ἄρχοντες. The two most likely restorations are [καὶ τὸ γενόμενον ἀνάλωμα ἀ]πολογισάσθω[σαν·] or [καὶ ἀ]πολογισάσθω[σαν τὸ ἀνάλωμα πρὸς τοὺς κατόπτας]. The vacat below means we have reached the end of the decree. There may have been the names of various officials written below.

Commentary:

In the Hellenistic period, actors, musicians and others associated with the dramatic arts of Dionysos (οἱ περὶ τὸν Διόνυσον τεχνῖται) banded together to form powerful associations (κοινά / σύνοδοι) that were involved in a wide range of activities, including decrees that honored individuals or cities who had furthered their interests. One of the largest and most important was τὸ κοινὸν τῶν περὶ τὸν Διόνυσον τεχνιτῶν τῶν ἐξ Ἰσθμοῦ καὶ Νεμέας or The Association of the Artists of Dionysos from the Isthmos and Nemea. Fragment A has long been known to involve this group, but with the aid of the new readings, it can now be said with virtual certainty that this text is a decree of theirs in honor of Rome or some Roman official. One appropriate context for such a decree has long been known; a dispute between the Isthmian-Nemean Technitai and the Athenian Technitai that was waged between 134 and 112 BC and involved the Pythian games at Delphi. The details of this rivalry are known mainly from a fragmentary senatus consultum found at Delphi (FD III,2 70) that dates to 112 BC. The inscription informs us that during the praetorship (128 BC) of Publius Cornelius Lentulus there was a ruling favorable to the interests of the Isthmian-Nemean Technitai, possibly requiring the Athenians to join with them under one association. It was undoubtedly in return for this favorable ruling that the Isthmian-Nemean Technitai set up a statue for Lentulus at Delphi, the base of which still survives (Syll. (3) 704B). The Athenians were dissatisfied with the ruling, so in 118 BC they sent a delegation to Caius Cornelius Sisenna, who was proconsul of Makedonia, asking for reddress. Sisenna convened a meeting of the rival parties at Pella and imposed a new agreement on them that apparently recognized the Athenians and required the Isthmian-Nemean Artists to pay back the Athenians 10 talants. The Isthmian-Nemean Artists refused to endorse the ruling with their delegates’ signatures, they refused to return the money, and a schism followed. The Artists belonging to the Isthmian-Nemean faction held an assembly of its members at Sikyon while those who belonged to the Athenians met at Thebes. The Athenians then appealed to the Roman Senate accusing the Isthmian-Nemean Technitai of ignoring Sisenna’s ruling and misappropriating some of the funds that in part belonged to them. The senatus consultum of 112 reaffirmed Sisenna’s finding, referred the matter of the funds to an arbitrator, and thus generally pleased the Athenians.

Kent did not believe that Fragment A of our text referred to this dispute, because he felt it unlikely that it would have been set up in Korinth between the destruction of Korinth in 146 BC and its restoration in 44, nor did he think it plausible that the inscription would have ever been moved to Korinth. He thus posited a similar incident before 146 B.C. It seems entirely possible to me that, in whatever way this text made its way to Korinth, it refers to the dispute of 134-112 BC. Below I offer a possible restoration, interpreting it as a decree in honor of Lentulus that includes an image of him to be set up in Delphi. For this provisional interpretation I would welcome any suggestions, comments, or criticisms.

Fragment A:

[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
τ̣εχνί̣τ̣ω̣[ν] ἀσφα[λεία— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ἀγαθῆι τύχηι δεδόχ]-                1
θα̣ι̣ τοῖς τεχνίτα̣[ις· ἐπαινέσαι μὲν Πόπλιον Κορνήλιον Ποπλίου Λέντολον στρατηγὸν ἀνθύπατο]-
ν Ῥωμαίων καὶ ΑΠ[ — — — — — — — — διά τε τὴν εἰς τὸν θεὸν εὐσέβειαν καὶ τὴν φιλαγα]-
θίαν εἰς τὴν σύν[οδον· — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]-
ων, τοὺς μετέχ̣[οντας τῆς συνόδου τῶν ἐξ Ἰσθμοῦ καὶ Νεμέας τεχνιτῶν· εἶναι δὲ αὐτῶι καὶ ἐγγόν]-      5
οις τὰ τίμια ἂ κ̣[αὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις εὐεργέταις τῶν ἐξ Ἰσθμοῦ καὶ Νεμέας τεχνιτῶν — — — — — —]
. αυτων τ[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[.2-3.]τεχει̣[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]

Unknown number of lines lost, part of which may have said something like:

[στῆσαι δὲ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰκόνα χαλκῆν ἔχουσαν τήνδε τὴν ἐπιγραφὴν· "τὸ κοινὸν τῶν περὶ τὸν Διό]-
[νυσον τεχνιτῶν τῶν ἐξ Ἰσθμοῦ καὶ Νεμέας Πόπλιον Κορνήλιον Ποπλίου Λέντολον τὸν ἑαυτοῦ]
[εὐεργέτην Ἀπόλλωνι Πυθίωι"· — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]

Fragments B and C:

[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —].[—]          1
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]ΑΜΕΝ
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]Α̣ΙΣΤΑΚ vac.
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]ΠΑΡΑΤ vac.
[— — — — — — — — — ἐπιμεληθῆναι δὲ τῆς ποήσεως τῆς εἰκόνος παραλαβόντας τὸ ἀργ]ύριον  vac.   5
[ἅπαν ἀπὸ τῶ]ν κο[ινῶν χρημάτων τοῖς τεχνίταις, στῆσαι δὲ αὐτοῦ καὶ εἰκόνα χαλκῆν ἐν Δελ]φοῖ-
[ς ἐν τῶι ἱερ]ῶι τοῦ Ἀ̣[πόλλωνος ἐν τῶι ἐπιφανεστάτωι τόπωι, ὅπως πάντες εἰδῶσιν ὅτι οἱ τεχνῖ]-
[ται ἐπίσ]τανται̣ [χάριτας ἀποδιδόναι τοῖς εὐεργέταις εἰς αὐτούς. — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— — κ]αὶ τῶν λοιπ[ῶν χρημάτων — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
[— καὶ ἀ]πολογισάσθω[σαν τὸ ἀνάλωμα πρὸς τοὺς κατόπτας.]                                                                    10
                    vacat

If the general sense is correct, it would mean that the Isthmian-Nemean Technitai had used the common funds to pay for the inscription and for Lentulus’ statue. Undoubtedly this would have irritated the Athenians, and the funds expended on this may have been part of those 10 talants that the Isthmian-Nemean Technitai were asked to pay back.

This is installment VI of our “Virtual Seminar on Some Unpublished Inscriptions from Corinth.” For the previous five postings, follow the links from here. In this post we have two joining fragments of bluish-gray marble (photos are here and here) that record another foreign decree honoring Korinthian dikasts. Fragment A was found 9 July 1929 on the North Slope of the Temple between the “parãrthma” and the old road bridge ca. 2.60 m. below the bridge’s parapet. Fragment B was found 16 August, 1977 in Quary Trench XV of Temple Hill and joins to Fragment A to form the bottom left corner of the inscription with part of a tenon. Both fragments have been worked with a tooth chisel on their faces, both have preserved left edges, and both have a slight taper toward the back. Each of the preserved lines observes syllabic/word division. The left side of the tenon has a rough-picked surface and is preserved to a length of 0.032 m. and a width of 0.075 m. The distance from the left edge of the stone to the left edge of the tenon is about 0.11 m. Photos, squeezes, and autopsy of stones.

Fragment A:
Published: Kent, ICor 8,3 46 fragment b (who associated it with ICor VIII,1 6 = I-764, but see N. Robertson, Hesp. 45 (1976) 257, n. 5 — JSTOR link here — and my commentary below) ; L. Robert, REG 79 (1966) p. 738.
Corinth inventory, I-943 ; drawing in CECI II 943.

Fragment B:
Unpublished, joining with Fragment B. Cf. H.S. Robinson, AD 32B (1977) 57; Touchais, BCH 102 (1978) 660.
Corinth inventory I-77-13 ; NB 652, p. 64 ; NB 687, p. 55, Object 846.

Measurements of Fragments A & B together:
Height, 0.228 m. ; width, 0.184 m. ; thickness, 0.10 m.
Height of letters, 0.005 to 0.011 m. ; interspace, 0.011 to 0.016 m.

DECREE OF A FOREIGN STATE HONORING KORINTHIAN ARBITRATORS

fin. III – med. II a.       NON-STOIX

Fragments A & B:
[— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —]
μετὰ τὰ ἱε[ρ]ὰ̣ [— — — — — — — — — — — — —]        1
καὶ αἱ δεδομέναι̣ [— — — — — — — — — τοῖς δικασ]-
ταῖς καὶ γραμματε̣[ῖ — — — — — — — — — — — ἀ]-
ναγραφῆι εἶναι τό̣[δ]ε τὸ̣ [ψήφισμα· — — — — — — —]-
[.2.]ν ἀναθεῖναι ἐν τῶι ἐπ[ιφανεστάτωι τόπωι τῆς πόλεως·]      5
[.2-3.] ἐπιμεληθῆναι ΕΜΜΕ[— — — — — — — — —]
τοὺς προβούλους· καλέσαι δὲ α[ὐτοὺς καὶ ἐπὶ ξένια ἐπὶ τὴν]
κοινὴν ἑστίαν.      vacat
                 vacat

Apparatus:

Line 1: The lower tip of the alpha’s right diagonal is just visible.

Line 2: The inscriber has left out the crossbar of the second epsilon, as he does in the last epsilon of line five, but no other letter besides epsilon is possible. Only the lower half of the final iota’s hasta is visible.

Line 3: Under the right tip of the final tau’s horizontal there is an imperfection in the stone masquerading as an iota followed by the upper left corner of a triangular trace consistent with the upper left-hand corner of other epsilons.

Line 4: At the end of the line the upper part of a round letter follows the tau, then in the break between the fragments there is space for one letter followed by a lower horizontal on the new fragment, followed by a tau, and then the left edge of a round letter, thus necessitating τό̣[δ]ε τὸ̣ [ψήφισμα]. L. Robert called Kent’s restoration of lines 3 and 4 ([τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν ἐπὶ τῆι ἀ]/ναγραφῆι εἶναι·) a “un grand mystère” and, noting parallels at IG VII 271 line 20 and IG VII 272 line 105, suggested the restoration [ἐν ἀ]|ναγραφῆι εἶναι (we can add a third example at IG VII 273, line 56). It is usually a very bad idea to disagree with L. Robert, but it may be worth noting that all these examples are from Akraiphia and occur during the first century AD. In addition, the placement of the infinitive so far from the presumed conjunction in the previous line is rather odd. Now that we have the new fragment, one wonders whether the EINAI in line 4 may have been a dittography arising from the EINAI of ἀναθεῖναι below in line 5 so that one should read [ἀ]|ναγραφῆι {εἶναι}, where ἀναγραφῆι is the more usual aorist passive subjunctive. Alternatively, it could be the aorist passive infinitive and we should read [ἀ]|ναγραφῆ{ιει}ναι.

Line 5: At the beginning of the line there is space for two letters. Undoubtedly we have either [εἰς στή]|[λη]ν ἀναθεῖναι or [εἰς στήλην λιθί]|[νη]ν ἀναθεῖναι. The final epsilon once again lacks a medial crossbar, but no other letter is possible. This inscription was to be set up in front of a wall or some other structure in the most visible place of the city, which was probably Temple Hill where both fragments were found. As far as we know, there is no known location on Temple Hill where the tenon of this inscription would have fit. The Elean decree honoring Korinthian judges that was published by N. Robertson (Hesperia 45 (1976) 253-6, JSTOR link here) has a similar taper, and may have also employed a tenon.

Line 6: At the beginning of the line [συν]επιμεληθῆναι is also possible. It is highly unlikely that the ΜΕ[—] following the ΕΜ is the beginning of a city’s name (e.g., ἐμ Με[γάροις or ἐμ Με[γάληι πόλει]…). We could have the infinitive ἔμμεναι, or ἐμ μὲ[ν ludi, ἐν ludi δὲ…], or ἐμ μέ[σωι…], or possibly something like ἐμ με[γάλοις τραγωιδοῖς τῶν Διονυσίων], although admittedly this last suggestion would not be the usual formula and in any case would require more space than it appears this stone had. At Stroud, Hesperia 1972, no. 3, line 14 (JSTOR link here) we find a similarly enigmatic phrase [—]ως ἐν δὲ vv / [— —] occurring in roughly the same position of a very similar inscription.

Line 7: We have the first mention of Korinthian πρόβουλοι on an inscription found at Korinth or elsewhere as far as I know. See Commentary below.

Line 8: It appears that the inscriber began inscribing the epsilon in ἑστίαν as a sigma and then turned it into an epsilon. The eta in the phrase κοινὴν ἑστίαν is indicative of the koine and it completes a common formula found in a few different forms that helps us guess at the length. In addition, while the tenon is not fully preserved so that it is not known precisely how wide the inscription originally was, certainly at least half of it seems present. The epsilon in δὲ seems to be at about the half-way point of the presumed full tenon, which suggests an inscription circa 46 letters wide at the bottom. In my text above, the formula supplied is one of the most common, and it just so happens to fill the likely space perfectly and so seems secure. Given that the inscription tapers, that the letters vary considerably in size, and that the inscriber observes syllabification, the figure of 46 provides only a rough, yet important, estimate for the lines above.

Below is a possible restoration of 44-46 letters, exempli gratia:

[— — πρόσοδον πρὸς τὴν βουλὴν καὶ τὸν δῆμον πρώτοις]
μετὰ τὰ ἱε[ρ]ὰ̣ [καὶ προεδρίαν ἐν πᾶσιν τοῖς ἀγῶσιν· ὅπως δὲ]     1
καὶ αἱ δεδομέναι̣ [τιμαὶ τῶι τε δήμωι αὐτῶν καὶ τοῖς δικασ]-
ταῖς καὶ γραμματε̣[ῖ φανεραὶ καὶ Κορινθίοις ὦσιν, καὶ ἐν ἀ]-
ναγραφῆι εἶναι τό̣[δ]ε τὸ̣ [ψήφισμα· ἀναγράψαντας δὲ εἰς στή]-
[λη]ν, ἀναθεῖναι ἐν τῶι ἐπ[ιφανεστάτωι τόπωι τῆς πόλεως·]           5
[καὶ] ἐπιμεληθῆναι ΕΜΜΕ[— — — — — — — — — —]
τοὺς προβούλους· καλέσαι δὲ α[ὐτοὺς καὶ ἐπὶ ξένια ἐπὶ τὴν]
κοινὴν ἑστίαν.     vacat
        vacat

Commentary:

This inscription will be of great interest to historians of Korinth because for the first time Korinthian πρόβουλοι are attested on stone. It appears that part of their job involved making sure Korinthian honorandi received proper recognition. For πρόβουλοι in the Greek world and a summary of the views concerning their function at Korinth, see J. Tréheux, BCH 113 (1989) 241-247 (for Korinth see esp. pp. 245-7).

Note on dissassociating I-764 (photo here).

Here are my reasons for disassociating I-764 (Kent’s “fragment a” of ICor 8,3 46) from this text. First, as Roberston points out, the interlinear spacing of I-764 is different; it runs from 0.009 to 0.012 m, while on the other two joining fragments it varies from 0.011 to 0.016 m. (the variations are not progressively different on either inscription, rather on both there is variation in each line depending on the shape and size of the letters above and below). Second, while the letters are very similar and may be from the same workshop, the letters on I-764 are fairly consistent in height, measuring from 0.004 to 0.006 m., while those on I-943 (our Fragment A) and I-77-13 (our Fragment B) vary from 0.005 to 0.011 m. Third, the letters on I-764 are also more crowded, they are cut more deeply, their strokes are less precise in joining at the tips, and they do not follow an imagined register line as regularly as do our Fragments A and B. Fourth, the surface of I-764 is a darker blue. Fifth and last, the expected formulae suggest that I-764, even if it had smaller letters, belonged to a wider inscription than does our Fragments A and B.