Towards a New Edition of Decrees of the Athenian Subgroups in IG II/III³

My research project entails the preparation of a fascicle containing inscribed decrees for the third edition of post-403 BCE Attic inscriptions in the Berlin Academy’s series, Inscriptiones Graecae, volumes II and III (IG II/III³). The second edition, published by Johannes Kirchner during World War I in 1916 (IG II/III² pars I, fasc. 2), has surpassed the century mark. It encompassed 104 decrees originating from various Athenian subgroups, including tribes, demes, phratries, gene, Tetrapolis and Mesogeioi. However, archaeological excavations conducted in the Athenian Agora and Attic countryside have unveiled numerous additional inscriptions over the past century. The majority of these new discoveries have been documented in the series, The Athenian Agora and Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum (SEG). It is crucial to acknowledge that the second edition heavily relied on squeezes (paper impressions) and that many inscriptions have not been examined through direct inspection (autopsy) since Ulrich Köhler, the editor of the first edition of IG II, published his volumes in 1877 (pars I. Decreta) and 1895 (pars V. Supplementa). Consequently, the previous editions have become outdated due to recent discoveries and advancements in the field of Greek epigraphy.

Prior to the formation of the international team in 1999, the principles for the new edition were firmly established. [1] In addition to adhering to these principles, careful autopsies of inscribed stones and the creation of transcripts (apographa) are essential for securing the exceptional quality of the new edition. This process serves as both a starting point and a foundation for confirming the readings and editing the entries. Furthermore, conducting through investigations and research on old publications, particularly 19th-century Greek journals, and delving into old archives, such as transcripts and notebooks belonging to travelers, archaeologists, and epigraphists, are crucial steps in this undertaking. We acknowledge the shortcomings of the second edition, particularly concerning significant information about the locations where the inscriptions were discovered and early readings.

As already known, the third edition of Inscriptiones Atticae Euclidis Anno Posteriores (IG II/III³) is divided into eight distinct parts. The first part, Leges et decreta, prioritizes the publication of the Athenian laws and decrees. The fourth part, Dedicationes et tituli sacri, encompasses public and private dedications, all of which were completed by Jaime Curbera in 2015, 2017, and 2019. Notably, the first fascicle of the eighth part, Defixiones, contains the long-awaited Attic curse tablets, which were just published in 2024. The Parthenon inventory lists from the fourth century BCE are scheduled for publication in the near future, as one of the second part, Tabulae magistratuum.

In relation to my research, the first part, Leges et decreta, comprises nine fascicles. An international team has dedicated their efforts to this part, and to date, three of the nine fascicles have been published in 2012, 2012, and 2015. As the original editors have stepped back, younger scholars have assumed the task of completing the remaining fascicles. This is also the case for me. In October 2022, the editorial board of the third edition requested that I revitalize the preparation and editing of the ninth fascicle. I officially assumed this role from the previous editors in June 2023.

The revised edition aims to enhance our understanding of the historical development of Athens and Attica. It delves into the organizational structures and activities of polis subgroups and the Athenian practices pertaining to the formulation and implementation of decrees. Decrees hold immense historical significance, providing direct information about the decisions made by the citizen assembly. These historical records offer invaluable insights into the political and social fabric of ancient Athens. [2]

The ninth fascicle, Decreta tribuum, demorum, phratriarum, gentium, et tetrapolitarum, encompasses all decrees of the Athenian subgroups from the beginning of the fourth century BCE to the end of the first century BCE. Due to the limited availability of decrees from the Attic demes prior to the fourth century BCE, [3] this fascicle provides a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the Athenian subgroups, both diachronically and synchronically. Additionally, it includes an optional category for decrees of dubious or uncertain origin, designated as Decreta generis dubii et incerta . Daria Russo’s monograph, which lists the epigraphical sources for each Athenian subgroup except gene, is useful. [4]

I. Decreta tribuum (approximately 80 tribal decrees): The ten new tribes introduced by Kleisthenes played a pivotal role in the institutional, religious, and military organization of the Athenian polis. Each tribe possessed shrines dedicated to their eponymous heroes, particularly on the Akropolis, where numerous tribal decrees have been unearthed. Notably, several tribal decrees date back to the commencement of the fourth century BCE. Recently, Sophia Alipheri revisited the decree of Pandionis with a dedication (SEG LXV 135).

II. Decreta demorum (approximately 135 deme decrees): The 139 demes constituted the fundamental units of Ancient Attica. Each deme possessed its own assemblies, officials, and priests. Remarkably, some demes even had their own theatres and hosted the dramatic festival known as the Rural Dionysia. [5] A substantial number of honorific decrees originated from these demes. A significant proportion of deme decrees are concentrated in two locations: 19 from Eleusis and 37 from Rhamnous. This concentration is attributed to their religious and military significance within the polis, as well as the extensive archaeological excavations conducted in these areas. [6] Georgios Steinhauer published new deme decrees from Acharnai (SEG XLIII 26), Halai Aixonides (SEG XLIX 141, 142, 143; SEG LIX 142), and Euonymon (SEG LVII 125). Alipheri reedited old deme decrees from Eleusis (SEG LIX 143) and Ikarion (SEG LXIII 105). Furthermore, Angelos Matthaiou published the joint decree of Kydantidai and Ionidai (SEG XXXIX 148) and reedited the decrees of Kollytos and the polis (SEG LVIII 108).

III. Decreta phratriarum (approximately 9 phratry decrees): The phratries played a crucial role in certifying young men for citizenship, implying that all Athenian citizens were likely members of phratries. The phratry decrees of the Demotionidai (IG II/III ² 1237) and the Dyaleis (IG II/III ² 1241) continue to attract attention. [7] However, we only know the names of nine or ten phratries. The primary challenge lies in the loss of half of the phratry decrees. I will continue my research and will examine the squeezes and early transcripts to retrieve the missing information.

IV. Decreta gentium (approximately 25 genos decrees): The gene played a role in Ancient Athens in selecting priests and priestesses for public cults. The precise number of gene is uncertain, but Robert Parker’s work enumerates 47 ‘certain and probable gene’ and 35 ‘uncertain and spurious gene’. [8] Notably, two Eleusinian gene, the Kerykes and the Eumolpidai, and the Salaminioi have issued a substantial number of decrees. The four decrees of the Mesogeioi were separately classified as Decreta Mesogiorum in earlier editions (IG II/III² 1244, 1245, 1247, 1248), but scholars now recognize them as a genos. Georgia Malouchou has conducted a comprehensive study of the Mesogeioi inscriptions. [9]

V. Decreta tetrapolitarum (2 Tetrapolis decrees): The Tetrapolis was an ancient association comprising four demes within the Marathonian region. Given the absence of a decree from the constituent demes, their collective identity as an association was exceptionally robust. Peter Wilson and I have argued that the recently published honorific decree of the Tetrapolis (I.Rhamnous 402) provides the first evidence of a Dionysia held by a corporate body larger than a single deme in Attica. [10]

The majority of decrees from the Attic subgroups were issued in honour of citizens who had made significant contributions to administrative and religious activities. In contrast, there was a separate group of deme decrees that regulated the audit of local officials. This procedure, known as euthynai, were paralleled with the polis institution. At the end of their term of office, officials were subject to legal and financial examinations for any misconduct. [11]

As we can see above, IG II/III² 1216 is one of the deme decrees regarding the euthynai and contains two small fragments a (EM 7729), b (EM 7730) of a white marble stele. [12] The findspot and name of the deme are unknown. The letter form suggests a dating to the third century BCE, as alpha lacks a crossbar, theta has no central dot, and upsilon typically consists of two strokes. I will focus on line 11 of fragment a. Köhler transcribed the stone in Athens and printed the majuscule letters as  without any restoration, as it appears nonsensical. This was followed by kirchner’s edition, which based on the squeeze preserved in Berlin. He printed minuscule text τευσυμ without commentary.

VI. Next Phase

Footnotes