-
Addenda to Agora I 4266 Cutter, ca. 304–271 B.C.
- University of California Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
50 1. This inscription preserves a resolution of the knights in praise of the hipparchs and phylarchs who served during the year 282/1. Agora I 7587 records a very similar motion of the Tarantinoi in praise of the same officers. J. Camp in his editio princeps of the new Agora inscription (“Excavations in the Athenan Agora: 1994 and 1995,” Hesperia 65 [1996] 254) has pointed out the similarities in language , place of setting up, and place of discovery of these two inscriptions. It is also notable that they were inscribed by the same workman. See Ch. Habicht, “Ein neues Zeugnis der athenischen Kavallerie,” ZPE 115 (1997) 121–124, for further prosopographical discussion of these officers and R. Parker, “Full Rations for the Tarantinoi in Athens,” ZPE 115 (1997) 136, for discussion of the meaning of enteleis. Addenda to the Cutter of Agora I 4266 Dates: ca. 304 –271 The Cutter of Agora I 4266 began work in the last years of the fourth century and continued inscribing down to about the year 270. See ADT 164 – 169 for a description of his lettering, photograph, and list of inscriptions. ADDENDA TO LIST OF INSCRIPTIONS Agora I 1918 Archon Ourias (281/0). Hesperia 7 (1938) 107–108; Pritchett-Meritt, Chronology 89–91; Agora XIX no. P52. Agora I 4330 Hesperia 29 (1960) 29. Agora I 7587 Archon Nikias (282/1). Hesperia 65 (1996) 252–258. ArchDelt 18A (1963) Archon Nikias (282/1). SEG 21 no. 525. 103–1051 Attic Letter-Cutters of 300 to 229 B.C. / 51 2. This inscription is mentioned by A.G. Kaloyeropoulou in her article “ÉApÚ tÚ ÑIerÚ toË Pangkrãtouw stØn ÉAy∞na,” in Proceedings of the Eighth International Congress of Greek and Latin Epigraphy, Athens 1982 (1987) II 300. I am indebted to Dr. Kaloyeropoulou for sharing a photograph of this inscription with me in advance of publication. 3. Line 1 of IG II2 653, for example. 4. Note however that he left no such space in either IG II2 684 or 704. 5. ArchDelt 18A (1963) 103–105 lines 25–32. Around numerals, he uses dots with about equal frequency. Thiasotai of Pankrates Unpublished.2 in praise of Philion and Theokomos The I 4266 Cutter has a marked preference for arranging his letters on the stone stoichedon. He either uses a strict pattern or occasionally—influenced , it is clear, by narrow letters such as iota and rho—he slightly modi- fies it for a few spaces in some lines. He only does this when the line length is 33 stoichoi or greater, though he does not invariably do it. See, for example , Agora I 4424 (Agora XV no. 71), which has 39 stoichoi and, except for one crowding in of iota in line 5, follows a strict stoichedon arrangement . When he adopts the strict pattern, he logically must forgo choices concerning word division, for that is one of the corollaries of stoichedon. His strictly stoichedon inscriptions thus have many widows. When he employs a modified stoichedon style, as in the cases of IG II2 652, IG II2 653, ArchDelt 18A (1963) 103–105, and Agora I 7587 lines 1–17, or a nonstoichedon style, as in IG II2 479, Agora I 1918, and I 7587 lines 18– 43, he strives for better word divisions and usually achieves syllabification. Even in these texts, however, it is notable that he occasionally allows a widow.3 Clearly word division and syllabification were important, but not all important. This cutter rarely used blank spaces in his decrees and never regularly. He does seem to have had some sensitivity to marking off the clause of ratification, the ¶dojen-clause, with a preceding blank space or two. In the one preserved instance he left two spaces before it (Agora I 4266 line 8 ⫽ Agora XVI no. 181) and in another two spaces have plausibly been restored (Agora I 4424 line 7 ⫽ Agora XV no. 71). Considerations of line length and spacing also suggest that at least one vacant space should be restored beforetheclauseinline6ofIGII2 653.4 Hisotheremploymentsofblankspaces were sometimes around numerals and occasionally to set off proper names.5 [35.168.18.209] Project MUSE (2024-03-29 14:08 GMT) 52 / Part II 6. A. G. Woodhead in the commentary to his new edition of IG II2 662 in Agora XVI (p. 247, on no. 172) assumes, I think implausibly, that II2 663 was a second official copy independently provided...