Appendix of Epigraphical Documents
The following inscriptions have been discussed in detail and are referred to throughout by these numbers. Each lemma has two parts: a genetic summary of editions, with key restorations described in parentheses; and a date, with discussion where controversy exists.
D1: Honorific Decree of an Anonymous City for Korragos
Ed. pr. Holleaux 1924. De Sanctis 1925, 68–78. I.Prusa 1001, with excellent photo. Virgilio 2003, no. 31.
Date: 188–171. If Korragos is identical to Corragus Macedo (Livy 38.13.3; 42.67.4), this text likely dates to just after 188. In any case, the context is “postwar,” so 186–183, 168–166, as well as 156–154 (A. Chankowski 2010, no. 406) have been proposed. Much turns on what event is meant by παράληψιν in l. 8.
D2: Royal Documents of Eumenes II from Taşkuyucak
Ed. pr. Herrmann and Malay 2007, no. 32 = SEG LVII 1150. Thonemann 2011a (a very different text, most importantly with respect to the addressee of the document represented by Side A: a new reading of ll. 5–6, the toponym Ἀπ[ολ]-|λωνιουχάρακος replaces the name and patronymic of the ed. pr.: Ἀπ[ολ]-|λωνίου Χάρακος. Consequently, Thonemann understands Side B as the petition of Apollonioucharax, restoring in ll. 16–17 ὑ-|μῶν for ed. pr.’s <ἡ>-|μῶν. Also significant is the restoration of και[νὴ γῆ (?) in the lacuna of Side A l. 4. Side B l. 24 contains unjustified punctuation before συντετάχαμεν). Cf. Bencivenni 2015, reattributing Side B to Eumenes II, but contra, see Patrice Hamon BE (2016) no. 433.
Date: 165/4.
D3: Letter of Eumenes II to Artemidoros Concerning the Kardakon Kome
Ed. pr. Segre 1938, with photo missing the left part of the inscription. Maier 1959–1961, v. 1, no. 76. Virgilio 2003, no. 28. For commentary, see Ashton 1994; Tietz 2003, 346–52.
Date: 181.
D4: Letter of Eumenes II to Temnos
I.Pergamon 157. RC 48 (with two major changes: Welles eliminated much of the publication clause as restored by Fränkel in Fragment D ll. 25–27, and Welles excluded Fränkel’s Fragment E, arguing that it belongs to an honorific decree). Bold restorations are offered by Piejko 1987, 724 (for Fragment D l. 3: καὶ δύο (?) μ]έρη τῆς δεκ[άτης ἀφίημι ὑμῖν]; and for Fragment D passim Piejko 1989 restores ἵ|να δὲ καὶ ἱκανῶς ἔχητε εἰς τὴν διο]ίκησιν τῆ[ς π]όλεως καὶ [εἰς τὰ] ἱερὰ καλῶς ἔχων εἶναι ἐδόκει μοι ὑπο]υργ[ήσασθα]ι κατὰ πόλιν σ[τοάν, | ἀφ᾽ ἧς ἡ ἀεὶ γενησομένη πρόσοδος προστιθεῖ]το ταῖς ἄλλ[αις ταῖς τῇ | πόλει ὑπαρχούσαις προσόδοις καὶ τελ]έ̣σματ[α — —]; cf. Herrmann in SEG XXXIX 1332).
Date: Reign of Eumenes II (197–158/7).
D5: Honorific Decree of Metropolis for Apollonios
Ed. pr. I.Metropolis 1, with poor quality photo = SEG LIII 1312. Jones 2004, (offering different restorations for Side B ll. 28–36, the final fragmentary ll. of the lateral face; as does Philippe Gauthier BE (2004) no. 281; as does Virgilio 2006).
Date: 145/4 or 144/3. This is the date of the decree on Side B; Side A bears a posthumous decree for Apollonios of 130. Thus, the decree of Side B seems to have been republished after Apollonios’ death in the Revolt of Aristonikos. See further, SEG LXIV 1093.
D6: Honorific Decree of Apameia for Kephisodoros
Ed pr. MAMA VI 173, with good photo. Bringmann et al. 1995 no. 254 [E], (incorporating restorations of Louis Robert BE (1939) no. 400 for ll. 11–15, most importantly [τοῦ βασιλέως ἀργ] for [καὶ τοῦ δήµου, ἀργ] in l. 12). See also A. Chankowski 2010, no. 395 (with new restoration in l. 16 for [γυμνασίωι τῶν τε ἐφήβ]ων, either [τῶι γυμνασίωι τῶν τε νέων καὶ τῶν ἐφήβ]ω̣ν or [τῶι γυμνασίωι τῶν τε νέ]ω̣ν).
Date: 188–159, or perhaps more precisely 168–166 (Robert).
D7: Decree of Teos Awarding Land to the Technitai of Dionysus
Ed. pr. Demangel and Laumonier 1922, with poor photo of squeeze = SEG II 580. Pickard-Cambridge 1953, no. 7 (incorporating new restoration of heading of Robert 1937, 39–44). Bringmann et al. 1995 no. 262 [E]. Csapo and Slater 1995, with English translation. Le Guen 2001, no. 39. Aneziri 2003, no. D2. Meier 2012, no. 51.
Date: 229–223, 218–206, or the decades following 188. Most discussion of the text concerns the date. While the most recent treatments of Le Guen and Aneziri opt for pre-188 dates, criteria such as the measurable “friendlinesss” of relations between the technitai and Teos are not to be relied upon. Things did turn sour, but several commentators have still suggested a post-188 date (summarized by Meier 2012, 360 n. 692).
D8: Letters of Eumenes II to Toriaion
Ed. pr. Jonnes and Ricl 1997, with rather poor photo = SEG XLVII 1745. Gauthier BE (1999) no. 509 raises several contextual issues that are dealt with variously in the following editions, which otherwise reproduce the ed. pr. (the transliteration and meaning of ed. pr.’s ἐν̣ χωρίοις in l. 27 – ἐν̣γχωρίοις after Schuler 1999 – and a possible restoration of ‹ἡ›µῖν for edd. pr.’s ὑµῖν in l. 30; Virgilio 2003, no. 30, which prints ε̣[ὖ]
(?)|δοκιµάζ̣ῃ in ll. 45–46, following Gauthier; ISE 196). I.Sultan Dağι 393 (after autopsy prints ἡµῖν in l. 30). Similarly, Bencivenni 2003, 333–56, with long commentary. See also restoration of Müller 2005, 357 with n. 8 (ἑτέρα̣ν – scil., πρόσοδον for ed. pr.’s ἑτέρων – in l. 44). A new restoration in Savalli-Lestrade 2018 (proposing in ll. 23–24 the word δωρ̣[ε]|ά for δολ[ί]|α, the noun “gift” for the adjective “deceitful”).
Date: The document is typically dated shortly after 188 and related to the Settlement of Apameia. However, Savalli-Lestrade 2018 places it in the context of the war with Prousias I of Bithynia, ca. 184 BCE.
D9: Honorific Decree of Andros for an Anonymous Gymnasiarch
Ed. pr. Sauciuc 1914, no. 4. Paschalis 1925, no. 26. IG XII Suppl. 250. Allen 1983, no. 21. Bringmann et al. 1995, no. 230 [E] (incorporating all the restorations of Robert 1960, 116–25, which were made from a squeeze of Klaffenbach, most importantly l. 8: ὑπὲρ τοῦ βασιλέως συνεπόµπευσεν ἄγων ἴδιον βοῦν καὶ [ἔθυ]σεν παραχ[ρ]ῆµα τὰ πο[µπευθέντα ἱερεῖα]). Petrocheilos 2010, no. 9.
Date: Middle of the second century. Petrocheilos argues for 175–159 in order to take account of the two royals in l. 10: ταῖς βασιλίσσαις.
D10: Honorific Decree(s) of Notion/Colophon-on-the-Sea for (Prince) Philetairos
Ed. pr. Macridy 1905. Holleaux 1906 (with major improvements of first 18 ll.). Holleaux 1938–57, v. 2, 51–60 (incorporating the restorations of Robert 1937, 153–54 and passim, most notably, ll. 6–7: ψήφισ[µα προεγράψαντο περὶ τοῦ] τιµῆσαι). Kotsidu 2000, 358–60. Allen 1983, no. 20. Gauthier 2006, with Robert’s photographs (contains a number of new restorations, including οἱ µε-|[τέχοντες τοῦ τόπου (?), τῶν νέων] in ll. 5–6). A. Chankowski 2010, no. 208 endorses Gauthier’s restoration in l. 33: παλαίστρα.
D11: Festival Calendar of Gymnasium of Kos
Ed. pr. Paton and Hicks 1891, no. 43. Syll.3 1028. Herzog 1928, no. 9. LSCG 165. Iscr.Cos. ED 45. Bringmann et al. 1995, no. 225 [E] (from a squeeze). Kotsidu 2000, 244–49. IG XII 4 1 281.
Date: 158–138, for which see IG XII 4 1 281, using regnal dates of Attalos II from titulature in ll. 40–41.
D12: Letter of the Future Attalos II to Amlada
Ed. pr. Jüthner et al. 1903, no. 22 = OGIS 751. Schroeter 1932, 49. RC 54 (taking account of restoration of Holleaux 1918, 17–19 in ll. 6–7: ἐπισκευ[ῆς ἕνε]-|[κ]ε). Swoboda, Denkmäler 74. Allen 1983, no. 23.
Date: Late 160s, if the revolt of the Galatians is the war referred to in l. 5 (ἐν τῷ Γαλατικῷ πολέμῳ), but no later.
D13: Letter of an Attalid King to Cleruchs
Ed. pr. I.Pergamon 158. RC 51, (crucially, exchanging Fränkel’s restoration for Robert’s – no citation, but see Virgilio 2003: “Robert apud Welles” – in l. 17: εἰ̣[κοστήν, ἐκ δὲ το]ῦ for ed. pr.’s ἐ[κ µὲν τοῦ οἴνο]υ). Segre 1935. Virgilio 2003, no. 29, with excellent photos of all three fragments.
Date: Reign of Eumenes II (197–158/7)?
D14: Letter of the Future Attalos II Concerning the Katoikoi of Apollo Tarsenos
Ed. pr. Conze and Schuchhardt 1899, 212–14. Schroeter 1932, Fragment 17. RC 47. Piejko 1989, 395–409 (proposes lengthy new restorations, though the stone is lost and neither a photo nor a squeeze exists. Of particular interest are two restorations contra Welles, but following Wilhelm 1943, 35–40 and 61, as well as Feyel 1940, 137–41: πανηγύρεως in l. 4 and π̣ανή̣γ̣υ̣ρ̣ι̣ν̣ in l. 12; cf. criticism of Piejko’s text in SEG XXXIX 1337). Chandezon 2003, no. 50, which calls itself a conservative retreat while including the aforementioned restorations in ll. 4 and 12.
Date: 185.
D15: Letter of the Future Attalos II to Two Royal Officials from Pessinous
Ed. pr. Avram and Tsetskhladze 2014 = SEG LXIV 1296, earlier references SEG LV 1401. Ricl 2014 and Thonemann 2015a suggest important corrections, reviewed by Patrice Hamon BE (2015) no. 658 and SEG (notably, editors diverge over punctuation of the long prepositional phrase that begins [κ]αὶ διὰ in l. 7, which captures the status quo ante. Hamon’s suggestion of particle and punctuation incorporated into SEG text in ll. 8–9: γεγράφεναι ἡμᾶ[ς|δ’ ἅ[ etc.; φιλάνθρωπον. Also, in l. 10, ἔχ〈ει〉ν replaces edd. pr.’s {ΕΧΟ̣Ν}; and in l. 13 ἐαθῆναι ἔχειν replaces edd. pr.’s ἔχον̣[τ]〈α〉ς̣ ἔχειν, clarifying the nature of the petitioner’s request).
Date: Edd. pr.’s low date of ca. 160 increasingly seen as implausible, first, on the prosopography: Could the official Herodes, presumably the one active at Toriaion (D8) in the 180s, have remained so at Pessinous in the 160s? A context in the 180s is now generally also favored on historical grounds. For high date in 180s, see Thonemann (ca. 183, in context of the war with Prousias I of Bithynia and Ortiagon, pace Savalli-Lestrade 2018, 175; even a few years earlier, Coşkun 2016, 54 n. 18).
Open access