DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.45927#0090
88
8. THE INSCRIPTIONS (H. Taeuber)
“For Artemis Ephesia and the Emperor Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus the Pious and his
family, and for the foremost and greatest metropolis of Asia, twice temple warden of the imperial cult, the polis
of the Ephesians, his sweetest home town ...”
The proposed text is exactly the same as that of IvE 431 (architrave) and IvE 438 (marble slab), both dedica-
tions of the so-called Vedius Gymnasium built by the same Vedius Antoninus in the years 147-149 A.D.,338 and
is continued on the frieze of the lower story (see below inscr. 2).
8.1.2 Inscription on the Lower Frieze (Inscr. 2, level 4; pls. 61; 75, 1-78, 2)
Our restoration starts on the first aedicula and leaves the corners and the outer wall sections to the left and to
the right blank. Accordingly, the text was about 17 metres wide. The strongest argument for this layout is frag-
ment 4-9, an almost entirely preserved wall block. Its text, mentioning Vedius’ wife Flavia Papiane, cannot be
moved to one of the wall sections to the left, while on the other hand the remaining end of the text [y]vvot[iKO(;
otUTov] is too long to put it on the right corner and to move 4-9 to the rightmost wall section. For a building
inscription of this date and importance, a symmetrical layout seems inevitable. The letters, written on a slightly
convex surface, are 12 cm high, except for Tau of pcrd and Phi of <J>k(otoviot(;) which exceed the margins of
the line. Punctuation signs between pcToc and <J>k(otoviot(;) (triangle) and between <I>k(otoviot(;) and noOTtotvfjc;
(hedera\, ligatures of N and H in notmotvfjc; and of T and H in rfjc;.
Ed.: Heberdey 1912, 172 (only fr. 4-9 and 4-10); IvE 460 (2) (same fragments and erroneous restoration
including Skizzenbuch 1685 E and F). Three more fragments were already in the Skizzenbuch (4-5, 1685 F;
4-6, 1686 in the upper right corner; 4-7, 3444). Skizzenbuch 1685 E belongs to 4-9, forming the lower part of
IIoOTiotvf]c The, as well as a new fragment discovered in 1966 (W/66/5, pl. 78, 2), showing parts of the letters
ETA (of pcra), thus handily closing a gap in block 4-9 between fragments A and B; unfortunately, the exten-
sive remains of this block (documented by J. Keil in 1908) have vanished in the meantime. The remaining five
fragments (4-1, 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, and 4-8) were stored in the epigraphic depot with no indication when or where
they were found (but see remark on inscr. 1).
II67Tk[i]o(; Ovf|b[toc; n]o7r|[kiov vide; KvpEi|vot] Av[tcoveivo^ ypotppot|TEV(; too bf||aov cwvkX]hti| [koc dcpjxicpfcix;
Acriotc; dcvc0r|]|K£v perd <J>k(otoviot(;) noOTtotvfjc; Tfjc; | [y]vvot[iKO(; otUTov dcpxicpciotc; ’Aoia<;].
“... Publius Vedius Antoninus, son of Publius, of the tribus Quirina, secretary of the people’s assembly, member
of the senate, highpriest of Asia, dedicated (this structure) together with his wife Flavia Papiane, highpriestess
of Asia.”
The inscription from the upper architrave (level 10) is continued here with the names and the titles of the dedi-
cants. According to our restoration, the name of Vedius III (the “Bauherr”) is given in the same way as in IvE
438 from the gymnasium (see above). All of his titles are attested, but in different inscriptions: ypotppotTEVi; too
bf|pov in IvE 1489 (see below inscr. 6), oovkAptiko^ in IvE 732339, dcpxicpcvc; Acriotc; in IvE 2065. Of these texts,
only the first one is dated to the years between 140 and 144.
After Tfj<; [y]vva[iKdc; oivtov, some additional words are needed to achieve a symmetrical layout of the text.
A logical choice would be the title dcpxicpciot Aerial, which is attested for Flavia Papiane in IvE 729; it is a
well documented phenomenon that wives (or, in some cases, female relatives) of highpriests also reached this
function.340
338 See now Steskal - La Torre 2008, especially 4. 92. 243. 303-306.
339 In IvE 4110 he is already called rapiac cotoSeSeiypevoq which marks his accession to the senate.
340 Friesen 1999, 306-307, who also points out that this was no honorary title, but that the women fulfilled sacrificial duties as well
as their male counterparts (306 note 25).
8. THE INSCRIPTIONS (H. Taeuber)
“For Artemis Ephesia and the Emperor Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus the Pious and his
family, and for the foremost and greatest metropolis of Asia, twice temple warden of the imperial cult, the polis
of the Ephesians, his sweetest home town ...”
The proposed text is exactly the same as that of IvE 431 (architrave) and IvE 438 (marble slab), both dedica-
tions of the so-called Vedius Gymnasium built by the same Vedius Antoninus in the years 147-149 A.D.,338 and
is continued on the frieze of the lower story (see below inscr. 2).
8.1.2 Inscription on the Lower Frieze (Inscr. 2, level 4; pls. 61; 75, 1-78, 2)
Our restoration starts on the first aedicula and leaves the corners and the outer wall sections to the left and to
the right blank. Accordingly, the text was about 17 metres wide. The strongest argument for this layout is frag-
ment 4-9, an almost entirely preserved wall block. Its text, mentioning Vedius’ wife Flavia Papiane, cannot be
moved to one of the wall sections to the left, while on the other hand the remaining end of the text [y]vvot[iKO(;
otUTov] is too long to put it on the right corner and to move 4-9 to the rightmost wall section. For a building
inscription of this date and importance, a symmetrical layout seems inevitable. The letters, written on a slightly
convex surface, are 12 cm high, except for Tau of pcrd and Phi of <J>k(otoviot(;) which exceed the margins of
the line. Punctuation signs between pcToc and <J>k(otoviot(;) (triangle) and between <I>k(otoviot(;) and noOTtotvfjc;
(hedera\, ligatures of N and H in notmotvfjc; and of T and H in rfjc;.
Ed.: Heberdey 1912, 172 (only fr. 4-9 and 4-10); IvE 460 (2) (same fragments and erroneous restoration
including Skizzenbuch 1685 E and F). Three more fragments were already in the Skizzenbuch (4-5, 1685 F;
4-6, 1686 in the upper right corner; 4-7, 3444). Skizzenbuch 1685 E belongs to 4-9, forming the lower part of
IIoOTiotvf]c The, as well as a new fragment discovered in 1966 (W/66/5, pl. 78, 2), showing parts of the letters
ETA (of pcra), thus handily closing a gap in block 4-9 between fragments A and B; unfortunately, the exten-
sive remains of this block (documented by J. Keil in 1908) have vanished in the meantime. The remaining five
fragments (4-1, 4-2, 4-3, 4-4, and 4-8) were stored in the epigraphic depot with no indication when or where
they were found (but see remark on inscr. 1).
II67Tk[i]o(; Ovf|b[toc; n]o7r|[kiov vide; KvpEi|vot] Av[tcoveivo^ ypotppot|TEV(; too bf||aov cwvkX]hti| [koc dcpjxicpfcix;
Acriotc; dcvc0r|]|K£v perd <J>k(otoviot(;) noOTtotvfjc; Tfjc; | [y]vvot[iKO(; otUTov dcpxicpciotc; ’Aoia<;].
“... Publius Vedius Antoninus, son of Publius, of the tribus Quirina, secretary of the people’s assembly, member
of the senate, highpriest of Asia, dedicated (this structure) together with his wife Flavia Papiane, highpriestess
of Asia.”
The inscription from the upper architrave (level 10) is continued here with the names and the titles of the dedi-
cants. According to our restoration, the name of Vedius III (the “Bauherr”) is given in the same way as in IvE
438 from the gymnasium (see above). All of his titles are attested, but in different inscriptions: ypotppotTEVi; too
bf|pov in IvE 1489 (see below inscr. 6), oovkAptiko^ in IvE 732339, dcpxicpcvc; Acriotc; in IvE 2065. Of these texts,
only the first one is dated to the years between 140 and 144.
After Tfj<; [y]vva[iKdc; oivtov, some additional words are needed to achieve a symmetrical layout of the text.
A logical choice would be the title dcpxicpciot Aerial, which is attested for Flavia Papiane in IvE 729; it is a
well documented phenomenon that wives (or, in some cases, female relatives) of highpriests also reached this
function.340
338 See now Steskal - La Torre 2008, especially 4. 92. 243. 303-306.
339 In IvE 4110 he is already called rapiac cotoSeSeiypevoq which marks his accession to the senate.
340 Friesen 1999, 306-307, who also points out that this was no honorary title, but that the women fulfilled sacrificial duties as well
as their male counterparts (306 note 25).
