Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-pkt8n Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-16T03:18:20.244Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Inscriptions of South-East Chios, II1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 October 2013

W. G. Forrest
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The column drums of the temple at Phanai and the blocks and mouldings of Emporio have attracted a number of occasional scribblings; some of these are cut, many are scratched or punched in rows of single or multiple dots, for others the surface of the stone has only been ‘slightly stunned’. Most are memorial and need no general comment after Rehm's treatment of the Μνήσθη formula. Those that are complete are all of Rehm's ‘motherland’ type and the rest should no doubt be restored on the same pattern.

In general they are of little interest and less importance; indeed the main thing we should like to know about them is their date since in several cases the text has run on from block to block (nos 25, 28 (a), (b), and (c), and 29 (a)) and was therefore inscribed while the blocks were still in their original position. At the moment we have a terminus ante quem in the sixth century A.D. for the destruction of most of the pagan buildings on the site when the basilica church, in which most of the surviving fragments have been found, was built.

Type
Research Article
Information
Annual of the British School at Athens , Volume 59 , November 1964 , pp. 32 - 38
Copyright
Copyright © The Council, British School at Athens 1964

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Hunt, D. W. S.'s phrase, BSA xli (1940–1945) 37.Google Scholar

3 Philologus xciv (1940–1) 1–30.

4 Archaeological Reports, 1954, 46.

5 We can guess at a date for no. 28 (c) 2 (see commentary), but even that is only a guess.

6 Unless we count the worship of Artemis, Ephesian (Part I, BSA lviii (1963) 61).Google Scholar

7 Stud. did not think that these were fragments of a drum but the coincidence of diameters (cf. nos. 21 and 24) is striking.

8 Archaeological Reports, 1954, 45–46.

9 Boardman, art. cit. 179.

10 For this use cf. Tod, M. N., JRS xxxiii (1943) 84.Google Scholar Another human possibility is that Neoteros is used as a title (cf. Caratzas, S. C., Glotta xxxii (1953) 251 ff.Google Scholar). This strikes me as equally implausible here.

11 Buttrey, T. V., Amer. Num. Soc. Mus. Notes vi (1954) 100Google Scholar, denies this possibility without good reason. Cf. Nock, A. D., Aegyptus xxxviii (1958) 292 n. 12.Google Scholar

12 What the significance is remains unclear; see Bonner, C. and Nock, A. D., HTR xli (1948) 213–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nock, art. cit.; T. V. Buttrey, art. cit.; Moretti, L., Aegyptus xxxviii (1958) 203–9.Google Scholar

13 NS 1935, 98; AE 1935, 128; SEG xv. 546. On Moretti's treatment of the Chian stone (art. cit. 206 f.) see Fraser, P. M., JEA xlvi (1960) no. 13.Google Scholar But although Moretti is wrong about the text, he could be right about the goddess.

14 IGRR iii. 1079. From Deir el Kalaa. Cf. Riewald, , Diss. Phil. Hal. xxiii. 324Google Scholar n. 1 (non vidi).

15 The second always very common in Chios.

16 For a detailed description of an identical piece, see J. Boardman, art. cit. 189, Group I (B).

34 Another recently published stone (reading “Ὅροι Ἱερο-π[ο]ιῶν; SEG xix 592) also supports my contention, I think, that the Hieropoioi of Chios were a gentilicial group, not a magisterial college (art. cit. 176, n. 15).