DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45047#0151
118
ΑΤΤΙΚΑ. — GYMNASTIC.
Gargettos is the only deme beginning with
ΓΑ-.
Line 14. Bockh’s copyist is here at fault. The
restored reading is of interest from the expression
«Κ Μυρι(νούττης). This deme of the tribe Aegei’s is
only known from inscriptions, and was at first con¬
founded with Μυρρινούσιοι or Μυρινούσιοι, a deme of
Pandionis, which, besides being very common in in¬
scriptions, is mentioned by Steph. Byz. and Photios.
But the two demes are distinct from each other, for
not only do they certainly belong to different tribes,
but also we find them mentioned side by side, as if
distinct, in an inscription in Bockh, Staatsh., iii.
p. 450. See also Ross, Demen, pp. 84, 85, 128, 129;
Leake, Top., ii. pp. 201, 276; Bockh on C. I. 297.
Both Μυρρινοΰς and Μυρρινούττη are sometimes spelt,
as here, with a single p.
Lines 16 and 19. [Όνή]σιμος and [XapQrav are only
probable restorations. Line 17. /I i/3ai/o[s·] is certain :
Pape gives several other examples of this name.
Ενκλ. may represent Εύκλείδου, Εύκλίους, or the like.
Line 20. ’ Εμπο. represents either ’Εμπόρου or ’Εμπο-
ρικού.
XL VII.
Fragment of a slab of white marble, broken on all sides except perhaps the right: breadth, 9} in.; height, 5} in. From Lord
Strangford’s Collection. C. I. 305 b; Archaolog. Zeit., 1864, p. 165; Le Bas, Attique, pt. i, No. 575.
5
10
H ΑΛ
Γ A h
ΣΖ; XoAAPTej
ΔΟΖΚΦΗΤ
•'POY ANT
ΪΪΓΤΗς:
ΔΙΟΙ
ΠΟΖΙΔΩΝίντ
ΑΣΚΛΗΓΠΟΔΟΤΟΣΣΩΣΙΣι
ΚΕΚΡΟΓΤΙΔΟΣ
ΜΥΣΤΙΚΟΣΕΑΕΥΣΕΙΝΙΟΥ
ΑφΡΟΔΙΣΙΟΣΑΡΤΕΜΙΔΩΡ
ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΣΑΡΤΕΜΙΔΩΡ
ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΣ> ΕΠΙΓ
ΕΡΑφΡΟΔΙΤΟΣΝΗφΟΝΤΟ
ΙΠπΟΘΕΩΝΤΙΔΟ
~Γ I Δ Η Σφ I ΛIΣΤΕI Δ
ΤΙΜΟΥ
We may restore as follows :·
Διονύσιος, or the like.
Ποσιδάνιο^ς
Παλ ’Ασκληπιόδοτος Σωσισ^τράτου
5 y ου Χολαργε.
δος Σφητ.
ώρου Άντ.
ηστης
Κίκροπίδος
Μυστικός ’Ελΐυσινίου
’Αφροδίσιος ’Αρτζμιδώ/^ου
Διονύσιος ’ Α ρτ^μιδωρ^ου
Διονύσιος Διονυσίου Έπιι^ικίδης
’ Επαφρόδιτος Νήφοντι^ς
ίο
' Ιπποθΐωντίδο[ς
τείδης Φίλιστείδ[ου
τίμου
This fragment altogether bears the appearance of
a gymnastic inscription, and is probably part of a
list of Ephebi, like Nos. xliii and xliv, where see
notes. The first column is much mutilated, but it
clearly contained a catalogue of names arranged
irrespectively of their tribal order. Whereas in
column 2, which is inscribed in smaller characters,
we find part of a list evidently drawn up in accord-
ance with the order of tribes everywhere observed
in inscriptions of the imperial period: viz. 1. Erech-
theis ; 2. Aegeis; 3. Pandionis ; 4. Leontis ; 5. Pto-
lemais; 6. Akamantis; 7. Adrianis; 8. Oeneis; 9.
Kekropis; 10. Hippothontis; 11. Aeantis; 12. An-
tiochis; 13. Attalis (Neubauer, Comment. Epig.,
p. 72, foil.). I should suppose the original monument
to have been a tall, narrow slab (possibly a Term):
the heading of the inscription gave the names of
the Kosmetes and Antikosmetes; then followed in
column 1 the various officers and teachers of the
gymnasium (and this appears to be the purport of
what remains of column 1), while in the lower part of
column 1 and the upper part of column 2 were in-
scribed the names of the Ephebi κατά φυλάς; lastly,
at the base of the second column, if not under both
columns, came the ίπίγγραφοι.
The abbreviations are obvious enough. The
ΑΤΤΙΚΑ. — GYMNASTIC.
Gargettos is the only deme beginning with
ΓΑ-.
Line 14. Bockh’s copyist is here at fault. The
restored reading is of interest from the expression
«Κ Μυρι(νούττης). This deme of the tribe Aegei’s is
only known from inscriptions, and was at first con¬
founded with Μυρρινούσιοι or Μυρινούσιοι, a deme of
Pandionis, which, besides being very common in in¬
scriptions, is mentioned by Steph. Byz. and Photios.
But the two demes are distinct from each other, for
not only do they certainly belong to different tribes,
but also we find them mentioned side by side, as if
distinct, in an inscription in Bockh, Staatsh., iii.
p. 450. See also Ross, Demen, pp. 84, 85, 128, 129;
Leake, Top., ii. pp. 201, 276; Bockh on C. I. 297.
Both Μυρρινοΰς and Μυρρινούττη are sometimes spelt,
as here, with a single p.
Lines 16 and 19. [Όνή]σιμος and [XapQrav are only
probable restorations. Line 17. /I i/3ai/o[s·] is certain :
Pape gives several other examples of this name.
Ενκλ. may represent Εύκλείδου, Εύκλίους, or the like.
Line 20. ’ Εμπο. represents either ’Εμπόρου or ’Εμπο-
ρικού.
XL VII.
Fragment of a slab of white marble, broken on all sides except perhaps the right: breadth, 9} in.; height, 5} in. From Lord
Strangford’s Collection. C. I. 305 b; Archaolog. Zeit., 1864, p. 165; Le Bas, Attique, pt. i, No. 575.
5
10
H ΑΛ
Γ A h
ΣΖ; XoAAPTej
ΔΟΖΚΦΗΤ
•'POY ANT
ΪΪΓΤΗς:
ΔΙΟΙ
ΠΟΖΙΔΩΝίντ
ΑΣΚΛΗΓΠΟΔΟΤΟΣΣΩΣΙΣι
ΚΕΚΡΟΓΤΙΔΟΣ
ΜΥΣΤΙΚΟΣΕΑΕΥΣΕΙΝΙΟΥ
ΑφΡΟΔΙΣΙΟΣΑΡΤΕΜΙΔΩΡ
ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΣΑΡΤΕΜΙΔΩΡ
ΔΙΟΝΥΣΙΟΣ> ΕΠΙΓ
ΕΡΑφΡΟΔΙΤΟΣΝΗφΟΝΤΟ
ΙΠπΟΘΕΩΝΤΙΔΟ
~Γ I Δ Η Σφ I ΛIΣΤΕI Δ
ΤΙΜΟΥ
We may restore as follows :·
Διονύσιος, or the like.
Ποσιδάνιο^ς
Παλ ’Ασκληπιόδοτος Σωσισ^τράτου
5 y ου Χολαργε.
δος Σφητ.
ώρου Άντ.
ηστης
Κίκροπίδος
Μυστικός ’Ελΐυσινίου
’Αφροδίσιος ’Αρτζμιδώ/^ου
Διονύσιος ’ Α ρτ^μιδωρ^ου
Διονύσιος Διονυσίου Έπιι^ικίδης
’ Επαφρόδιτος Νήφοντι^ς
ίο
' Ιπποθΐωντίδο[ς
τείδης Φίλιστείδ[ου
τίμου
This fragment altogether bears the appearance of
a gymnastic inscription, and is probably part of a
list of Ephebi, like Nos. xliii and xliv, where see
notes. The first column is much mutilated, but it
clearly contained a catalogue of names arranged
irrespectively of their tribal order. Whereas in
column 2, which is inscribed in smaller characters,
we find part of a list evidently drawn up in accord-
ance with the order of tribes everywhere observed
in inscriptions of the imperial period: viz. 1. Erech-
theis ; 2. Aegeis; 3. Pandionis ; 4. Leontis ; 5. Pto-
lemais; 6. Akamantis; 7. Adrianis; 8. Oeneis; 9.
Kekropis; 10. Hippothontis; 11. Aeantis; 12. An-
tiochis; 13. Attalis (Neubauer, Comment. Epig.,
p. 72, foil.). I should suppose the original monument
to have been a tall, narrow slab (possibly a Term):
the heading of the inscription gave the names of
the Kosmetes and Antikosmetes; then followed in
column 1 the various officers and teachers of the
gymnasium (and this appears to be the purport of
what remains of column 1), while in the lower part of
column 1 and the upper part of column 2 were in-
scribed the names of the Ephebi κατά φυλάς; lastly,
at the base of the second column, if not under both
columns, came the ίπίγγραφοι.
The abbreviations are obvious enough. The