DOI Artikel:
Earle, Mortimer Lamson: A Sikyonian statue
DOI Seite / Zitierlink: https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.8678#0054
A NEW SIKYONIAN INSCRIPTION.
41
other; for Sikyon at least seems to Lave been conservative in a very
high degree
In this connection, we must, however, admit that too much stress
has been laid on the peculiar iocai form of the name, Se/cu&ji'. Roehl
(I. G. A., 17) claims that the inscription scratched on a spear-head
found at Olympia cannot be the work of a Sikyonian, because the early
local form of the name was Xckvcov, and not ~2,iKvu>v, as found in this
case: but one is startled to find in the Addenda (87a) a spear-head
inscription attributed to a Sikyonian, but apparently from the same
hand as the last, in which the form X == e occurs in the same word.
The similarity of the two inscriptions is most striking, notwithstand-
ing this variation, the same unusual pentagonal o occurring in each,
and the forms of the other letters, carelessly made it is true, being
essentially the same as those of /. G. A., 17. One is also surprised
to notice that Roehl reads 17, Xikvwv, rightly considering the three
parallel scratches at the end as a mark of punctuation,6 while lie reads
27a Add., teicvo)v[(wv), taking the perpendicular mark after the N —
which is taller than any of the undoubted letters—as I, although such
a form of iota is here, to say the least, in the highest degree improbable.
It seems to me quite certain that we should read, here, simply Se/cuwv.
The testimony of the coins cannot be adduced in support of any theory
of a consistent local employment of the form Seicvcov in the fifth cen-
tury at least;7 and, indeed, if the two spear-heads were engraved by
the same hand, we find here a confirmation of what we may gather
from the coins, namely, that the local usage was not at all stable, both
forms being used indifferently.8 We are then, in my judgment, quite
safe in numbering I. G.A., 17, among Sikyonian monuments.
We must, therefore, guard against an assumption of over-conserva-
tism on the part of the Sikyonians, but at the same time must not be
led to assume that their alphabet developed with the same rapidity as
that of Corinth, a point to be emphasized in estimating the probable
date of the inscription now under consideration.
Roberts, who groups together the inscriptions of Corinth and' its
colonies and those of Sikyon (G. E., pp. 119-37), distinguishes three
periods, as follows (pp. 134-5) : first, that comprising the most prim-
itive inscriptions, in which san, the older form of //, (A1), the crooked
eLineola quae ad dexlram exarala est, non est litterae vestigium, sed finem tituli indical.
''Of. Head, Ilistoria Numorum, p. 345.
82i/cutui/ioi is the reading of Fabricius on the serpent-column at Constantinople (c/.
Roberts, p. 259.)
41
other; for Sikyon at least seems to Lave been conservative in a very
high degree
In this connection, we must, however, admit that too much stress
has been laid on the peculiar iocai form of the name, Se/cu&ji'. Roehl
(I. G. A., 17) claims that the inscription scratched on a spear-head
found at Olympia cannot be the work of a Sikyonian, because the early
local form of the name was Xckvcov, and not ~2,iKvu>v, as found in this
case: but one is startled to find in the Addenda (87a) a spear-head
inscription attributed to a Sikyonian, but apparently from the same
hand as the last, in which the form X == e occurs in the same word.
The similarity of the two inscriptions is most striking, notwithstand-
ing this variation, the same unusual pentagonal o occurring in each,
and the forms of the other letters, carelessly made it is true, being
essentially the same as those of /. G. A., 17. One is also surprised
to notice that Roehl reads 17, Xikvwv, rightly considering the three
parallel scratches at the end as a mark of punctuation,6 while lie reads
27a Add., teicvo)v[(wv), taking the perpendicular mark after the N —
which is taller than any of the undoubted letters—as I, although such
a form of iota is here, to say the least, in the highest degree improbable.
It seems to me quite certain that we should read, here, simply Se/cuwv.
The testimony of the coins cannot be adduced in support of any theory
of a consistent local employment of the form Seicvcov in the fifth cen-
tury at least;7 and, indeed, if the two spear-heads were engraved by
the same hand, we find here a confirmation of what we may gather
from the coins, namely, that the local usage was not at all stable, both
forms being used indifferently.8 We are then, in my judgment, quite
safe in numbering I. G.A., 17, among Sikyonian monuments.
We must, therefore, guard against an assumption of over-conserva-
tism on the part of the Sikyonians, but at the same time must not be
led to assume that their alphabet developed with the same rapidity as
that of Corinth, a point to be emphasized in estimating the probable
date of the inscription now under consideration.
Roberts, who groups together the inscriptions of Corinth and' its
colonies and those of Sikyon (G. E., pp. 119-37), distinguishes three
periods, as follows (pp. 134-5) : first, that comprising the most prim-
itive inscriptions, in which san, the older form of //, (A1), the crooked
eLineola quae ad dexlram exarala est, non est litterae vestigium, sed finem tituli indical.
''Of. Head, Ilistoria Numorum, p. 345.
82i/cutui/ioi is the reading of Fabricius on the serpent-column at Constantinople (c/.
Roberts, p. 259.)