Wilson1992 E.216 Catalogue of ephebes, 165/6 AD

Catalogue of ephebes, 165/6 AD

Wilson, Ephebic Inscriptions E.216 Date: AD 165/6

ἀγαθῆι [τύχηι] ἐπὶ νίκῃ τῶν θειοτάτων αὐτο[κρατόρων Μ Αὐρηλίου καὶ Λ Βήρου] Σεβαστῶν Ἀρμενιακῶν Παρθικ[ῶν μεγίστων, ἐπὶ ἄρχοντος Σέξτου] Φαληρέως ὁ κοσμητὴς τῶν ἐφή[βων Λ Ἑρέννιος Κορνήλιος ὁ καὶ] (5)Ἀττικὸς Ἀζηνιεὺς ἀνέγραψεν το[ὺς ὑπ’ αὐτῷ ἐφηβεύσαντας, τοὺς] πρώτους λευκοφορήσαντας διὰ τ[ῆς λαμπροτάτης εὐεργεσίας] τοῦ κρατίστου ἀρχιερέως · Τιβ · Κλ · Ἡρώ[δου Μαραθωνίου. ἠρώτη]- σεν ὁ πρόεδρος, ὅτῳ δοκεῖ λευκο[φορῆσαι τοὺς ἐφήβους τῆς] ἡμέρας ἐν ᾗ πρὸς τὴν Ἐλευσῖνα ἡ σ[τρατιὰ πορεύεται, ὅτῳ δὲ] (10)μὴ. οὐδεὶς ἐπῆρεν ^v Ἡρώδης εἶπεν· ὦ [ἔφηβοι, ἐμοῦ παρόντος χλαμύ]- δων λευκῶν οὐκ ἀπορήσετε. κοσμητὴς ἐφήβων · Λ · Κορνήλιος [ὁ καὶ Ἀττικὸς Ἀζηνιεύς] ἀντικοσμήτης· Μόσχος Ἑρμέρωτος [. . .] παιδοτριβοῦντος Ἀβασκάντου [τοῦ Εὐμόλπου Κηφισιέως].

col. 1

(15) σωφρον[ιστ]αί Αἴλ Παίων Παλληνεύς Δημήτριος Ͻ Χολλείδης Θεόδωρος Ͻ Στειριεύς Λέων Μιλίχου Βησαιεύς (20)Ἀμάραντος Σωτηρίχου Φαλη Ἡρακλέων Ͻ Φλυεύς ὑποσωφρονισταί Κλ Σωκράτης Μαραθώνιος Ἀφροδίσιος Ͻ Ἀθμονεύς (25)Κλ Νικόστρατος Μίλιχος Ͻ Βησαιεύς Σωτήριχος Ͻ Φαληρεύς [Εἰσ]ίδοτος Ͻ Σουνιεύς ἡγεμών (30). . . ⁵ . .ονος Ͻ Πειραιεύς [ὁ]πλομάχος [Ὀνήσιμ]ος Διομήδους Παλ [γραμμα]τεὺς καὶ ὑπογραμ [. . . . ⁸ . . . . ὁ] καὶ Ἡρακλέων Τι- (35)[μοκράτου]ς Θορίκιος . . . . . ⁹ . . . .ος [Ἐρεχθεῖ]δος [. . . Κ]ηφ uncertain number of lost lines [. . . Διο]νυσίου Κ[η]φ (40)[. . . Διο]νυσίου Κ[η]φ [. . . ῾Ρ]ούφου Λαμ [Αἰγεῖ]δος . . . Γαργήτ . . . -νου Γαργήτ (45)[. . . Δι]ομαιεύς . . . -ου Φιλά . . . -σίου Φιλά . . . Διονυσίου Φιλ . . . -ων (50)[. . . ο]υ Γαργήτ [. . . ο]υ ἐκ Μυρι [. . . Τελε]σφόρου Γαργήτ [. . . Φ]λυ vac. [. . . Διο]μαι (55)[. . . Γαρ]γήτ

col. 2

Εὐσχήμων Σι- . . . Νίκων Σατύρο[υ . . .] Δημήτριος Ἐβ- . . . Ἀττικὸς Ͻ Γαργ (60)Ἀλκαμένης . . . Ἄνθιμος Ἀφρ- . . . Μαρκιανὸς Ζ- . . . Πανδει[ονίδος] Φλ Μένανδ[ρος . . .] (65)Θεόδωρος Στ- . . . Πολυδεύκης . . . Τύραννος Σωσ- . . . Λεωντί[δος] Δημήτριος Ͻ . . . (70)Κλ Θεμίσων . . . Εἰρηναῖος Ͻ . . . Εἰρηναῖος Με- . . . Φιλοκράτης Ͻ . . . Διοκλῆς Ἀττικ[οῦ . . .] (75)Εὐτυχίδης Ἀττι[κοῦ . . .] Ὀνήσιμος Εὐτ- . . . Τύραννος Πρω- . . . Ζώσιμος Ͻ ἐξ Ο[ἴου] Μεγιστόδωρος . . . (80)Ἐπάγαθος Θάλλ[ου . . .] Πρωτογένης Ͻ . . . Δωσίθεος Μεν- . . . Ἕλενος Διονυσ- . . . [Ζώ]σιμος Μενα- . . . (85)[. .]όδωρος Μύρω[νος . . .] Ἀρτεμίδωρος . . . Πτολεμα[ίδος] Πο Λαβέ(ριος) Σεκοῦνδος Βερν Ἀντ(ώνιος) Ἐραστος Φλυ (90)[Ἡ]ρακλέων Ͻ Φλυ [.]λ[.] Πίθηκος Ἀ[π]ολλωνίου [Ἀ]θηνόδωρος Ἀπελλοῦς Διονυσόδωρος Ἀσκληπιάδου Πάμφιλος Ͻ Βερνι (95)Μενεκλείδης Εἰσιδότου Εἰσίδωρος Ἀττικοῦ Φλυ Διονύσιος Ἀπολλωνίου Σώφρων Ἐπαφροδίτου Βερ Διονύσιος Ἀφροδισίου Φλυ (100)Ἀπολλωνίδης Μηνοδώρου Φλυ Μηνόδωρος Ͻ Φλυ Θεμιστοκλῆς Δάφνου Φλυ Χρύσιππος Ͻ Φλυ

col. 3

. . . Φ- . . . (105)Ἀρτεμ- . . . Κε[κροπίδος] Ῥόδων . . . Διονυσ- . . . Εὐνομ[ος . . .] (110)Ἀντέρ[ως . . .] Γάλβα[ς . . .] Λυκο- . . . Τρυφ- . . . Εὐγ- . . . (115)Ἀπ- . . . Ζω- . . . Ἐλ- . . .

below columns 2-3 ὑποπαιδοτρίβης Τελεσφόρος [Ἀβασκάντου] Μιλήσιος

below columns 1-3

col. 1

(120)[ἐ]πένγρα[φοι] . . . -πος Ͻ [. . . Εἰ]ρηναίου vac. . . . -ου^⟦Φ⟧

col. 2

Φιλοκ⟨λῆ⟩ς Διοφάντου (125)Ὀλυμπικὸς Θάλλου Πομ. Ἀντίγονος vac.

Previous - Wilson, Ephebic Inscriptions E.214 Next - Wilson, Ephebic Inscriptions E.252
Translated text

References:

Wilson, Ephebic Inscriptions E.216 (Translated text) (AIO)

IG II² 2090 (PHI)

Translation by: Chris de Lisle

Monument type: Stele

Inscription type: List of names (ephebic)

Original location: [Diogeneion]

Findspot: Athens, St. Demetrios Katephores (EM 10042)

Transliterations on Places on

[1] Ephebic catalogues like this were erected annually from the late first century AD until the end of the ephebate in 267 AD. For the format, see AIUK 11 (Ashmolean), no. 10 and AIO Papers 12 sect. 1.3, and for the earlier history of the ephebate, see RO 89. An ephebic dedication, IG II³ 4, 421, also survives from this year. Invocation of emperors and their victories is common in Athenian inscriptions of the Roman period (see IG II² 1990. In this case, it refers to a specific victory – Lucius Verus’ sack of Ktesiphon and Seleukeia on the Tigris in late 165 AD, which brought an end to the Roman-Parthian war (161-165 AD). The title “Parthici Maximi” (l. 3) was added to the titulature of Lucius Verus and Marcus Aurelius as a result of this victory. At Athens, the change to the ephebes' cloaks (see n. 2) and the introduction of the Epinikeia (“Victory”) games for the ephebes were probably intended to celebrate this victory. The focus of these commemorative acts on the ephebate probably reflects the fact that it continued to be viewed as a form of military training in the Roman period, as it had been in earlier times. [2] For the armed ephebic procession to Eleusis, see AIUK 4.2 (BM), no. 17. The ephebic cloak (chlamys) was the defining symbol of the ephebate (cf. AIUK 11 (Ashmolean), no. 16). Traditionally, it was black – either in commemoration of Theseus’ black sails or in mourning for the Athenians’ murder of the mythical herald Kopreus. Tiberius Claudius Herodes, usually known as Herodes Atticus, was High Priest of the Athenian Imperial cult and the richest man in mid-second century Greece. He was also a prominent Roman senator (see AIUK 11 (Ashmolean), no. 15 with notes). The epithet “greatest” (kratistos) was used as a courtesy title for equestrians and senators, who had separate courtesy titles in Latin: vir egregius and vir clarissimus respectively. Herodes’ donation of cloaks to the ephebes is also mentioned in IG II² 3606, ll. 18-22, a poem he set up on his estate at Marathon, and in Philostratus Vit. Soph. 2.550. For the importance of the donation to his self-presentation, see AIO Papers 12 sect. 3.1. The brief vignette (ll. 8-11) is one of the only sources for the operation of the Athenian Assembly in the Imperial period. It indicates the continuation of Classical forms and institutions, like the presiding committee (proedros), and the formula for putting the question to a vote (cf. Demosth. 22.9; AIUK 4.2, pp. 9-10). In most cases where we have information, Assembly votes pass unanimously, see SEG 47.143a. For decrees of the Imperial period, see SEG 21.499. Herodes could address the ephebes directly because they were present at the Assembly, as observers and guards (Philostr. Vit. Soph. 2.550 with AIO Papers 12 sect. 3.1). [3] For the superintendent (kosmetes) and his deputy, see IG II² 3739 and AIO Papers 12 sect. 2.1. The deputy might be the historian Moschos of Halai, who dedicated IG II² 5506 (S. Follet Athènes, 1976, 215, n. 2), but there are other possibilities. For Abaskantos, the long-serving ephebic trainer, see IG II² 3737. The other ephebic instructors are listed at ll. 29-36, 118-19. [4] For the Controllers (sophronistai), see IG II² 2044 and AIO Papers 12 sect. 2.1. [5] The surviving portion of the catalogue gives the names of 74 citizen ephebes from six tribes. The other seven tribes are totally lost. This suggests a total cohort of around 150 citizen ephebes, which is at the high end of the spectrum for this period, but comparable to the 142 citizen ephebes in IG II² 2067 (154/5 AD). A few of the ephebes are attested later as members of the Council of 500 (ll. 59, 90, 94, 102), but most are otherwise unknown. The ephebes who had served as gymnasiarchs and agonothetai (see AIO Papers 12 sect. 2.3) do not seem to have been listed separately in this catalogue, which is unusual, but not unparalleled (cf. AIUK 4.3B (BM), no. 5). It is possible that they appeared in the lost upper portions of col. 2-3. [6] There are four sets of brothers in this catalogue. On such “ephebic twins,” see IG II² 1963 n. 2. [7] Telesphoros served as deputy trainer (hypopaidotribes) under Abaskantos from 162/3 or 163/4 until the latter’s death or retirement in 169/70. It is very likely that he was Abaskantos’ illegitimate son or freedman. This supports the idea that “Milesians” were a status group rather than actual migrants from Miletos (see IG II² 1996 n. 9). [8] On the “additional enrollees” (epengraphoi), see IG II² 2017 and AIO Papers 12 sect. 4.1. The list of additional enrollees probably continued on the lost portion of the stone. On complete ephebic catalogues from the mid-second century AD, there are usually more than a hundred additional enrollees (see AIO Papers 12 sect. 1.3).

Textual note: Wilson's text, which AIO follows, differs from that of the IG at ll. 13, 28, 44, 53, 56, 58, 72, 76, 79, 80, 83, 84, 86, 89, 104, 109, 121.

Added: 14 Jan 2021
Updated: 29 Mar 2024
Feedback

ID: AIO_2127