IOULIOS NIKANVR, NEOS OMHROS / JULIUS NIKANOR, NEOS hOMEROS

****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************

============================================================================================================================================================================================================================

Elias Kapetanopoulos

Professor Dr. (Greece-Rome)

Department of History

Central Connecticut State University

New Britain, CT 06050-4010 (USA)

Telephone:

(860) 832-2820 (office)

(860) 832-2804 (fax)

(860) 229-9960 (home)

E-mail: Kapetanopoulos@ccsu.edu

Web site: http://www.history.ccsu.edu/elias/elias.htm

Areas of Research: Attic epigraphy-Athenian institutions of the Roman period (200 B.C.-3rd c. A.D.), and early Makedon(ia)/Makedones.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

CENTER FOR ATHENIAN-MAKEDONIAN STUDIES:

PANAYHNAIS D' - PANATHENAIS IV

25 ÉIoun€ou 1998 > 25 June 1998 = 1 Febrouar€ou 2012 > 1 February 2012

This study presents the full testimonia of Julius Nikanor, the Neos hOmeros, with IG II² 1069 being restored anew. The Greek font is Athenian (+Unicode [rarely, Attika: V]). All rights reserved.

JULIUS NIKANOR, THE NEOS HOMEROS

The n°ow ÜOmhrow ka‹ n°ow Yemistokl∞w (Gaius) Julius Nikanor, who hailed from Hierapolis in Syria, figures highly in Athens' life in the years after A.D. 60 [but before A.D. 100]. This is presently the best date for Julius Nikanor, and since he hailed from Syria it may be that he should be connected with the coming of Philopappos to Athens, even though Julius Nikanor does not appear as one of Plutarch's friends. In any case, Stephanus Byzantius has coupled him with Poplios and Sarapion, the Stoics,who came to Athens about this time: s.v. ÑIerãpoliw ..., éfÉ o Nikãnvr ı n°ow ÜOmhrow ka‹ PÒpliow ka‹ Sarap€vn StvÛko€, and this would suggest that they are more or less contemporaries. Sarapion is apparently Plutarch's friend, as observed in ÑEllhnikå 33 (1981='83), p. 231, Appendix, K1.

At Athens, as the evidence shows, Julius Nikanor became a leading personality, and he had a contractual association with the island of Salamis. It has been speculated from a passage in Dio Chrysostom, Or. XXXI, 116: ... l°gein d¢ efi≈yhsan ofl diasÊrontew tØn pÒlin (sc. ÉAyÆnaw) ka‹ tÚ §p€gramma tÚ §p‹ t∞w Nikãnorow efikÒnow ˜w (…w) aÈto›w ka‹ tØn Salam›na §vnÆsato, that Julius Nikanor bought Salamis for the Athenians, after it had been lost. However, the surviving evidence about Julius Nikanor does not match Dio Chrysostom's §p€gramma which caused criticism of the Athenians. Consequently, there is still some obstacle in identifying indisputably Julius Nikanor with Dio Chrysostom's Nikanor. The evidence concerning the date of Julius Nikanor has been reviewed by the writer in ÑEllhnikå 33 (1981), pp. 217-237, with a summary in Greek, and his involvement with the island of Salamis was contractual, as observed above, rather than that the Athenians had lost Salamis (and to whom would the Athenians have lost the island?) and Julius Nikanor recovered it for the Athenians. Moreover, since he belongs to the years after A.D. 60, his nomen Julius cannot go directly to Augustus, as conjectured. His civitas was rather inherited from his father, or it was owed to a Julius patron of a non-imperial family. The theme of Salamis and Julius Nikanor has been restated in this journal as well [ZPE 111 (1996), pp. 79- 87] by Christian Habicht, and A. Geoffrey Woodhead has compactly dealt with the matter in The Athenian Agora, XVI (1997) [=Agora XVI (1997)], pp. 474-477, under No. 337=Hesperia 36 (1967), pp. 68-71, No. 13, which is a contract involving the Athenians, Julius Nikanor and Salamis or land there (above).

However, the present study is primarily concerned with a fuller restoration of the now lost IG II2 1069 [frgs. a and b], and also the full TESTIMONIA on Julius Nikanor are appended below. IG II² 1069 honors Julius Nikanor, and an apographum by A. Moustoxydis, a copy of which E. Erxleben sent to the writer some years ago (22.3.1979), was available. K. Pittakes' transcription [of IG II² 1069] in L'anc. Athènes, p. 493, together with O. Leuders' reading of frg. a, which he had found in a house at ıdÚw EÈaggelistr€aw No. 34, was republished by K. Keil in Rh.Museum 18 (1863), p. 57, and by W. Dittenberger in Ephem. Epigr. I (1872), p. 114, and IG III, No. 1, with some minor alterations. The text of IG II² 1069 by J. Kirchner, who also had at his disposal a second apographum of frgs. a and b, which Pittakes had made in 1831, is reproduced below for comparison purposes.

J. Kirchner's text:

ÉAgay∞i tÊxhi toË SebastoË Ka€sarow k[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - §p‹]

Lãkvnow êrxontow ka‹ fler°vw DroÊso[u Ípãtou - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]

§kklhs€a §p‹ t∞w §nnãthw prutane€[aw, [- - - - - - - - - - - - - - t«n pro]-

°drvn §pecÆfizen EÈyÊdomow ÉA[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - t∞w §j]

ÉAre€ou pãgou boul∞w ka‹ t∞w boul∞w [tvn X - - - - - - - - - - §pain°sai ÉIoÊlion] (5)

Nikãnora n°on ÜOmhron ka‹ n°on [Yemisyokl°a ka‹ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ]

ka‹ égvnoy°thn Sebast«n é[g≈nvn - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - strathgÚn]

kexeirotonhm°non efiw tÚn §[niautÚn tÚn §p‹ - - - êrxontow diå tØn §pim°leian ka‹ tØn

frÒnh]-

sin, ¥n ¶sxen T I O - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Nikãnvr a[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (10)

LINE 1: k[-], the kappa is dotted.

LINE 8: efiw, the iota is dotted.

This writer's newly emended text of IG II² 1069:

ÉAgay∞i tÊxhi toË SebastoË Ka€sarow k[a‹ toË dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€vn §p‹ Ga€ou ÉIoul€ou]

Lãkvnow êrxontow ka‹ fler°vw DroÊso[u Ípãtou .................... sunaxye€shw kur€aw]

§kklhs€aw §p‹ t∞w §nnãthw prutane€aw, [∏w §grammãteue ....................... t«n pro-]

°drvn §pecÆfizen EÈyÊdomow ÉArx[................. ka‹ ofl sunprÒedroi: chfisam°nhw t∞w §j] (4)

ÉAre€ou pãgou boul∞w ka‹ t∞w boul∞w [t«n X ka‹ toË dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€vn: Gãion ÉIoÊlion]

Nikãnora n°on ÜOmhron ka‹ n°on [Yemistokl°a ka‹ .....................................]

ka‹ égvnoy°thn Sebast«n é[g≈nvn ........................................... strathgÚn]

kexeirotonhm°non §n t(«i) §[p‹ ...................... êrxontow §niaut«i, diå tØn prÒfa]- (8)

sin ¥n ¶sxen (pr)Ú[w tÚn d∞mon tÚn ÉAyhna€vn. dedÒxyai t«i dÆmvi vvv §peidØ G. ÉIoÊliow]

Nikãnvr é[nØr égayÚw genÒmenow .................................................]

[....................................................................................]

[....................................................................................]

COMMENTARY:

Line 1: k[a€]. Moustoxydis read what has the shape of K, and for the restoration that follows, cf. Inscr. de Délos, No. 2535, lines 1-3: égayª tÊxhi/ toË SebastoË Ka€sarow ka‹ toË dÆmou/ toË ÉAyhna€vn, which dates from A.D. 94/5-102/3 (writer in ÑEllhnikå 33, 1981, p. 225). R. Neubauer proposed to read K[laud. N°rvnow] in Comment. Epigr. (1869), p. 147. One could perhaps interpret Moustoxydis' K as a N, which would then read as (N)[°rvnow], but this appears precluded, because the person that stands out in Nero's reign to at least A.D. 61/2 is T. Claudius Nouios ex Oiou, who is No. 541 in the writer's dissertation, The Early Expansion of Roman Citizenship into Attica during the First Part of the Empire, 200 B.C.-A.D. 70 (Yale University, 1963). The dissertation's scope may be found in ÉArx. ÉEfhm. 1981, Xronikã, p. 23, note 5, as well as the Greek name NoÊiow (Nouios rather than Novius as by some in the past), on p. 25, note 4.

LINES 1-2: [Ga€ou ÉIoul€ou]/ Lãkvnow êrxontow. The name Lakon suggests that this archon may have hailed from the Spartan family of Julius Eurykles; for an identification, cf. ÑEllhnikå 33 (1981='83), p. 237, K33. However, if he had served in Athens as archon eponymos, this important function should have appeared in his cursus honorum. Its absence would lead to the conclusion that the identification of the archon is undoubtedly erroneous.

LINE 2: DroÊso[u]. Pittakes has DROUSOU in L'anc. Athènes.

LINE 2 ad fin.: [sunaxye€shw kur€aw]. Cf. B. D. Meritt and J. S. Traill, The Athenian Agora, XV (1974), No. 460, line 5: boulØ sunÆxyh, of A.D. 209/10.

LINE 3: EKKLHSIAS, Pittakes in L'anc. Athènes; Moustoxydis, EKKLHSIA; [∏w §grammãteue, ktl.], this writer.

LINE 4: ÉArx[-], Pittakes. Moustoxydis indicated only an A. For [ka‹ ofl sunprÒedroi: chfisam°nhw t∞w §j] (this writer), cf. Agora XV (under Line 2 ad fin. above), No. 460, line 4. EÈyÊdomow ÉArx[-] is not otherwise known.

LINE 5: [ka‹ toË dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€vn: Gãion ÉIoÊlion], this writer.

LINE 6: n°on [Yemistokl°a ka€]; Pittakes has NEON; Moustoxydis NE.

LINE 7: [strathgÒn]; or perhaps [tam€an]?.

LINE 8: §n t(«i) §[p€, ktl., this writer. Pittakes has ENTONE in L'anc. Athènes, while Moustoxydis recorded TO .

LINES 8-9: diå tØn prÒfa]/sin; cf. Agora XVI (1997), No. 337 (TESTIMONIA below, under D), lines 9-10: profãsei xrhsãme/[now].

LINE 9: (pr)Ò[w, ktl., writer. Pittakes, TIO; Moustoxydis, TI.

LINE 10: é[nØr égayÚw genÒmenow; or perhaps (n)[°ow ÜOmhrow, ktl. Pittakes read an A after NIKANVR (cf. IG III, No. 1). Moustoxydis recorded no letters or traces of letters below line 9.

An archontum laterculus associates Julius Nikanor with T. Claudius Theogenes Paianieus, thus indicating that they belong to the same period. The document is IG II² 1723=SEG 26 (1976- '77='79), No. 166=ÑEllhnikå 33 (1981='83), p. 230 (=pp. 229-231), whose lines 14-17 read strathgÚw [§p‹ tå] ˜pla ÉIoÊliow/ Nikãnvr, n°ow [ÜOmhro]w ka‹ n°ow Yemis[tokl∞w]/ k∞ruj t∞w §[j ÉA]r[e€ou p]ãgou boul∞w Ti[b Kl]/ vacat Ye[og°]nhw PaianieÊw vacat (the iota in Ti[b] should be dotted). Moreover, the evidence suggests that Julius Nikanor belongs to the years after T. Claudius Nouios ex Oiou, namely, after A.D. 60/1, when Claudius Nouios is attested for the last time in IG II² 1990, lines 3-6: strathgoËntow §p‹ toÁw ıple€taw tÚ ˆgdoon ka‹ érxier°vw N°rvnow Klaud€ou Ka€sarow GermanikoË/ ka‹ DiÚw ÉEleuyer€ou §k t«n <§k t«n> ÑEllÆnvn v ka‹ §pi[m]elhtoË t∞w pÒlevw diå b€ou v ka‹ fler°vw Dhl€ou ÉApÒl/lvnow v ka‹ §pimelhtoË t∞w flerçw DÆlou v v ka[‹ érxi]er°vw toË o‡kou t«n Sebast«n v ka‹ ér€stou/ t«n ÑEllÆnvn v ka‹ nomoy°tou v Tiber[€ou] Klaud€ou v Nou€ou v §j O‡ou. Claudius Theogenes Paianieus falls chronologically after Claudius Nouios, which would automatically place Julius Nikanor after A.D. 60. Finally, it should be borne in mind that Claudius Nouios' and Julius Nikanor's paths do not cross, at least as the present evidence stands.

C. P. Jones (below) 171 [161-172]: Text. (27-3-2006)

THE new text of 1069 is published in the Newsletter 11.1 (15 May 2007) 3-6 of the American Society of Greek and Latin Epigraphy:

Elias Kapetanopoulos provides a new text of IG II² 1069

Gaius Julius Nikanor neos Homeros and neos Themistokles is honored in 1069, and this brief note is limited to a new version of this important document, though fragmentary, presented below, under (B).

(A) J. Kirchner's text in IG II²:

ÉAgay∞i tÊxhi toË SebastoË Ka€sarow k™™™`[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - §p‹]

Lãkvnow êrxontow ka‹ fler°vw DroÊso[u Ípãtou - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]

§kklhs€a §p‹ t∞w §nnãthw prutane€[aw - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - t«n pro]-

°drvn §pecÆfizen EÈyÊdomow ÉA[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - t∞w §j]

ÉAre€ou pãgou boul∞w ka‹ t∞w boul∞w [t«n X’ - - - - - - - - - - - §pain°sai ÉIoÊlion] (5)

Nikãnora n°on ÜOmhron ka‹ n°on [Yemisyokl°a ka‹ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]

ka‹ égvnoy°thn Sebast«n é[g≈nvn - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - strathgÚn?]

kexeirotonhm°non efi™™`w tÚn §[niautÚn tÚn §p‹ - - - êrxontow diå tØn §pim°leian ka‹ frÒnh?]-

sin, ¥n ¶sxen T I O - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]

Nikãnvr a[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -] (10)

NOTE. C. P. Jones’ text of 1069, ZPE 154 (2005) 171, differs slightly from Kirchner’s in lines 1 (k[a‹ toË g°nouw aÈtoË?]; K. Keil, Rh. Museum 18, 1863, 57: k[a‹ toË g°nouw aÈtoË]), 4 (EÈyÊdomow ÉArx[-]), 8 (kexeirotonhm°non efiw tÚn E[-]), and 10 (Nikãnvr A[-]). See below, for lines 1, 4, 8 and 10.

(B) The new text of 1069, as emended herein [it is also published in this writer’s web site, www.history.ccsu.edu/elias/elias.htm under Panathenais IV (herein)]:

ÉAgay∞i tÊxhi toË SebastoË Ka€sarow k[a‹ toË dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€vn §p‹ Ga€ou ÉIoul€ou]

_{ca. 13}

Lãkvnow êrxontow ka‹ fler°vw DroÊso[u Ípãtou . . . . . . . . . . . . . sunaxye€shw kur€aw]

_{ca. 16}

§kklhs€aw §p‹ t∞w §nnãthw prutane€aw, [∏w §grammãteue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .t«n pro]-

_{ca. 8}

°drvn §pecÆfizen EÈyÊdomow ÉArx[. . . . . . . . ka‹ ofl sunprÒedroi: chfisam°nhw t∞w §j]

ÉAre€ou pãgou boul∞w ka‹ t∞w boul∞w [t«n X’ ka‹ toË dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€vn: Gãion ÉIoÊlion] (5)

_{ca. 28}

Nikãnora n°on ÜOmhron ka‹ n°on [Yemistokl°a ka‹ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .]

_{ca. 31}

ka‹ égvnoy°thn Sebast«n é[g≈nvn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . strathgÚn]

_{ca. 16}

kexeirotonhm°non §n t<«i> §[p‹ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . êrxontow §niaut«i, diå tØn prÒfa]-

sin ¥n ¶sxen <pr>Ú[w tÚn d∞mon tÚn ÉAyhna€vn: dedÒxyai t«i dÆmvi v §peidØ Gãiow ÉIoÊliow]

_{ca. 41}

Nikãnvr é[nØr égayÚw genÒmenow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .] (10)

_{ca. 67}

[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]

_{ca. 67}

[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -]

COMMENTARY:

Lines 1 and 5, as completed, indicate a line length of about 67 letters.

LINE 1: k[a€]. Moustoxydis read what has the shape of K [LINE 2 below], and for the restoration, cf. Inscr. de Délos, No. 2535, lines 1-3: égayª tÊxhi/ toË SebastoË Ka€sarow ka‹ toË dÆmou/ toË ÉAyhna€vn, which dates from A.D. 94/5-102/3 (ÑEllhnikå 33, 1981, 225). R. Neubauer, for example, had proposed a reading of K[laud. N°rvnow] in Comment. Epigr. (1869), 147; see also under IG III 1.

LINES 1-2: [Ga€ou ÉIoul€ou]/ Lãkvnow êrxontow. The name Lakon suggests that this archon may have hailed from the Spartan family of Julius Eurykles; for an identification, cf. ÑEllhnikå 33,1981='83), 237, K33.

LINE 2: DroÊso[u]. Pittakes has DROUSOU in L'anc. Athènes, 493, and Moustoxydis’ apographum DROUSC [see ÑEllhnikå 33, 1981, 225]. NOTE: Someone wrote on the margin /ou, completing DroÊsou, with a comment there on Drusus in Italian.

LINE 2 ad fin.: [sunaxye€shw kur€aw]; cf. B. D. Meritt and J. S. Traill, The Athenian Agora, XV (1974), No. 460, line 5: boulØ sunÆxyh, of A.D. 209/10.

LINE 3: EKKLHSIAS, Pittakes; Moustoxydis EKKLHSIA (under Line 2 above, respectively); [∏w §grammãteue, ktl.], cf. Agora XV (Line 2 ad fin. above), No. 460, line 2: [pru]tane€aw, ∏w §grammãteuen.

LINE 4: ÉArx[-], Pittakes; Moustoxydis indicated only an A, or L? (respectively, under Line 2 above). EÈyÊdomow ÉArx[-] is otherwise unknown.

LINE 4: [ka‹ ofl sunprÒedroi: chfisam°nhw t∞w §j], cf. Agora XV (under Line 2 ad fin. above), No. 460, line 4: ka‹ ofl sumprÒedroi, and IG II² 3969 = SEG 49, 1999 = ’02, No. 209, lines 1-5: chf[isa]m°nhw t∞w §j ÉA/[re€ou pãg]ou boul∞w ka‹ / [t∞]w boul∞[w t«]n pentak / ka‹ toË d[Æmo]u / [o]s€vn (dotted letters omitted), 174/5-177/8 A.D. Cf. also D. J. Geagan, Hesperia, Suppl. 12 (1967) 144: IG II² 4196=SEG 33 (1983 = ’86), lines 1-6, post a. 125 p., and 4210, lines 12-15, post a. 128/9 p.

LINE 5: [ka‹ toË dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€vn], cf. IG II² 4193A, lines 1-3: ≤ §j ÉAre€ou pãgou boulØ ka‹ / ≤ boulØ t«n •jakos€vn / ka‹ ı d∞mow ı ÉAyhna€vn, fin. s. I p. The restoration of [Gãion ÉIoÊlion] at the end of this line is dictated by the name Nikãnora at the beginning of line 6.

LINE 6: n°on [Yemistokl°a ka€]; Pittakes has NEON; Moustoxydis NE (respectively, under Line 2 above).

LINE 7 ad init.: égvnoy°thn Sebast«n é[g≈nvn], see ÉArx. Delt€on 30, 1975 = ’78, 123 = ÑEllhnikå 33, 1981, 235, under K21, with NoÊiow §j O‡ou being the first égvnoy°thw of Sebasto€ ég«new in IG II² 3270, lines 4-5: toË ka‹ égvnoy°tou pr≈tou / t«n Sebast«n ég≈nvn Nou€ou toË File€nou §j O‡ou, a. 41 p. [see IG II² 4174, lines 5-6: ka‹ égvnoy°thw t«n Tiber€ou Klaud€ou Ka€sarow SebastoË ég≈nvn – NoÊiow File€nou §j O‡ou, a. 41 p.].

LINE 7 ad fin.: [strathgÒn], as in K. Keil, Rh. Museum 18 (1863) 57; or perhaps [tam€an]?

LINE 8: §n t<«i> §[p€, ktl. Pittakes has ENTONE, while Moustoxydis recorded ` TO’ (under Line 2 above, respectively).

LINES 8-9: diå tØn prÒfa]/sin; cf. Agora XVI (1997), No. 337, lines 9-10: profãsei xrhsãme/[now] = S. Follet, "Julius Nicanor et le Statut de Salamine" in L’hellénisme d’ époque romaine: nouveaux documents, nouvelles approches (Ier s.a. C-IIIe s.p.C), Actes du Colloque international à la mémoire de Louis Robert, Paris, 7-8 juillet 2000, éd. Simone Follet [De Boccard, 2004] 142, lines 20-21: Ωt]i™™`nioËn profãsei xrhsãme/[now] = C. P. Jones, ZPE 154, 2005, 162, line 20: [≤i]tinioËn profãsei xrhsãme[n- 5?].

LINE 9: ¥n ¶sxen <pr>Ò[w, ktl. Pittakes, HN ET ENTIO; Moustoxydis, HNESXENTI, with S almost complete and the upper half of X preserved (above, under Line 2 respectively).

LINE 10: é[nØr égayÚw genÒmenow; or possibly <n>[°ow ÜOmhrow, ktl. Pittakes read an A after NIKANVR; Moustoxydis recorded no letters or traces of letters below line 9 (respectively, under Line 2 above).

ELIAS KAPETANOPOULOS

Central Connecticut State University

S. Follet, BE 2007, 646-647, No. 226. S. Follet, commenting on line 1, refers to IG II² 2336, lines 1-2. Sterling Dow, <<The First Enneeteric Delian Pythais, IG II² 2336>>, HSCPh 51 (1940) 116, line 1: ÉAgayØ tÊxh t∞w boul∞w k`[a‹ toË] dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€vn.

IG II² 1046, line 1: ÉAgay∞i tÊx˙ t∞w boul∞w ka‹ toË dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€vn, Skirophorion a. 52/1 a. IG II² 1043, line 2: ÉAgay∞i tÊxhi t∞w boul∞w ka‹ toË dÆmou toË ÉAyhna€[vn], Boedromion a. 38/7 a.

IG II² 1088=S. Follet-D. Peppas Delmousou, BCH 121 (1997) 296, 2. Le texte [=SEG 47 (1997=2000) 55, No. 163], lines 1-2: ÉAgay∞i tÊ[xhi] / [toË yeiotãto]u AÈtokrãtorow K[a€sarow TraÛanoË ÑAdrianoË SebastoË], inter a. 131-138 p. The kappa in K[a€sarow] should be dotted, K`[a€sarow] (see photograph on 292). This last document reflects partially the formula of 1069, line 1, above.

G. W. Bowersock, below, p. 14.

TESTIMONIA attesting Julius Nikanor, who is No. 394 in this writer's dissertation (COMMENTARY above, under LINE 1), because of his dating at the time.

A. IG III 3899=RFIC 104 (1976), p. 377 (APPENDIX), line 6: ÉIoÊli]ow Nikãnvr vac. The suggestion is compromised by IG II² 2037, line 80: S°jstiow Nikãnvr SfÆttiow, ephebe in about A.D. 110/1.

B. IG II² 1069, restored and discussed above, pp. 2-7. ARXEIONMAA 3 (Athens, 1998) 91, No. 424. Lüders saw the inscription built into a house of ıdÚw EÈaggelistr€aw, ér. 34, with IG II² 2270 [fragmentary ephebic catalogue], see No. 331 therein.

P. EUSTRATIADOU, ARXEIO, Fãk. 2: Parãrthma ≤merolog€ou t∞w ÉArxaiolog. ÑUphres€aw, 10 Noembr. 1869. Eustratiades saw what came to be known as IG II² 1069, but in an abbreviated state of preservation, only frg. a. The surviving frg. a/l€yow was <<§n tª ofik€a BougoÊka, nËn Fl°gka, keim°n˙ ép°nanti t∞w §kkl. ÑRÒmphw>>. It is also noted: <<[ı MoustojÊdhw ‡svw ¶laben ént€grafon épÚ tÚn Pittãkhn] / oÎte e‰den aÈtÚw tÚn l€yon]>>. Through the kind services of Georgia Malouchou/Basileios X. Petrakos. What Eustratiades read of frg. a in red/text he presents with commentary

ÉAgayª tÊx˙ toË s[ebastoË Ka€sarow

Lãkvnow êrxonto[w ka‹ fler°vw DroÊsou

§kklhs€a §p‹ t∞w §[nnãthw prutane€aw

°drvn §pecÆfiz[en EÈyÊdomow érx.

ÉAre€ou pãgou boul∞[w ka‹ t∞w boul∞w

Nikãnora n°on ÜOm[hron ka‹ n°on

ka‹ égvnoy]°thn [sebast«n a

[kexeirotonhm°non en ton e]

[sinhn et entio]

[Nikãnvra ]

[18 ÉOktvbr€ou 2007/18 October 2007]

SEG 55 (2005=2009) 62-63, No. 247 [Follet’s-Jones’ interpretations].

C. IG II² 1086+A. N. Skias, ÉArx. ÉEfhm. 1895 [=ÉArx. ÉEfhm., No. 34+1086], col. 121, No. 34 (cf. Agora XVI [1997], p. 477)=new text, Simone Follet, << Julius Nicanor et le Statut

de Salamine (Agora XVI, 337)>> in L’hellénisme d’époque romaine (2004, below) 139-170, 440-441, Figs. 13-14 [new text, 142-143]=SEG 55 (2005=2009) 63-65, No. 248. Below, D. IG II² 1119 [frg. b]+Hesperia 36, No. 13. Kevin Clinton, Eleusis. The Inscriptions on Stone, etc., vol. IA: Text, The Archaeological Society at Athens Library No. 236 [Athens 2005] 325-328, No. 360= IG II² 1806+ (ca. 50-70?).

[----------------------------]L---OTO

[----------------------------]n t«n fÒ-

[rvn ---------------- §nia]utÚn t«n

[--vn ----- toÁw gevrg]oËntaw §[n] (4)

[tª Salameiniakª ÉIoul€]vi Nikãnori

[-----------------------------]an §ån Œsin

[-----------------------------]n ka‹ metå

[------------------------ aÈj]Æsevw o[-] (8)

[-----------------------------]tvn e(fi)w o-

[---------------------------- s]Ênfvnon

[-----------------------------]nh tÚn me-

[------------------------- pro]sÒdouw (12)

[-------------------------------------------]

(lacuna)

[--------------------- kay∆]w g°gra-

[ptai--------------------- ]w afi«naw

[----------------- ˜tƒ dÆpo]te oÔn trÒ-

[pƒ ---------------------- k]ayÚ sÊnfv- (16)

[non ---------------- §feurem]ãtvn µ sei-

[tvni«n --------------- ˜w ên] tolmÆs˙

[-------------------- tetrae]t€aw m€syv-

20 [sin -----------------------]v ≤ Salame[i]- (20)

[niakØ --------------------- ] to›w dhmio[ur]-

[go›w ---------------------- ] lambãnein tÚ

[-on m°row -----------------]kritÚn to›w fle-

[rosul€aw ---------- ÑRvma€]vn afirar€ƒ fu- (24)

[------------------- h boulØ t]«n ÉAreopagei-

[t«n ---------------///////]////////////

[---------------------------------]€an éfaire-

[-------------------------- ımol]ogoÊmenon (28)

[------------------------------- t]rÒpon meta-

[-------------------------- Sala]meiniak∞w

[g∞w ---------------------------- ]in ka‹ to›w me-

[----------------------------------] katå fulØn (32)

[-------------------------------- §]nge€nesyai

[----------------------------------]n mhdenÚw

[----------------------------------]n t«n gevr-

[goÊntvn ---------------------]lin sunkth- (36)

[mÒnvn ------------------------]e€shw aÈ-

[--------------------- t«n pol]it«n efiw tØn

[------------------------------- ı] d∞mow ı ÉA[yh]-

[na€vn -------------------------]n Ípope€pte[in] (40)

[----------------------------------] aÈjÆsevw

[----------------------------------]fyª ti efiw

[----------------------------------]om°nvn

[----------------------------------]°sevw a- (44)

[----------------------------------]menon tau-

[--------------------------------- é]net°yh §n

[----------------------------- diag]rãmmato[w]

[------------------------------------] nÒmimon (48)

[------------------------------ ÉAsk]lhpi“ ka‹

[------------------------------ ÉAyh]na€vn kt[Æ]-

[masi ------------------------------]d€vn ép[-]

[-----------------------------------------------------]

Restorations introduced in lines 2, 3, 4, 5, 8, 9, 12, 13-14, 18, 20, 21, 23-24, 31, 35, 36- 37, 40, 47 and 50-51. Cf. A. Skias' text in ÉArx. ÉEfhm.

D. IG II² 1119 [frg. b]+Hesperia 36, No. 13 [=Hesperia No. 13+1119 (frg. b)]=Agora XVI (1997), pp. 474-477, No. 337=Simone Follet, << Julius Nicanor et le Statut de Salamine (Agora

XVI, 337)>> in L’hellénisme d’époque romaine (2004, below) 139-170, 440-441, Figs. 13-14 [new text, 142-143]=SEG 55 (2005=2009) 63-65, No. 248. Above, C. IG II² 1086+A. N. Skias.

[---------------------------------------------]

[----------------]eme[-----------------------] (a)

[--------- é]metãyeton ka[-----------------------]

[----------] aÔyiw §som°nvn [......]mai [-------------]

[------- Íp]ot€yetai µ pvlÆs˙ µ k[ayÉ ˜n] dÆpote oÔn [trÒpon] (b)

[------ pr]osÒdouw efiw êllo ti metayª µ kayÉ ë tÚ sÊnf[v]- (5)

[non ------]e ÙnÒmati misy≈sevw µ §feuremãtvn µ seitv-

[ni«n -----]vn µ efiw ple€ona xrÒnon misy«sai tolmÆs˙ tØ[n]

[SalameiniakØn -] §t«n pros[y]°sei tØn t∞w tetraet€a[w v]

[m€syvsin ------------ Ωti]nioËn profãsei xrhsãme[ v]

[now ------------- toË ÑR]vma€vn afirar€ou ka‹ §j°stv v (10)

[----------------------]hn poioËsi tØn teimØn efiw v

[------------------------- §]m¢ efishghsam°nvn e v

[------------------------krito]n to›w flerosul€aw

[---------------------- t«i ÑRvma]€vn afirar€vi fu-

[-------------------------------- ≤ b]oulØ t«n (15)

[ÉAreopageit«n ----------------------] ka‹ OIOU

[-----------------------------------------]

lacuna

[-----------------------------------------]

[----------- t∞]w pÒlev[w -------------------] (c)

[----------- pr]Úw Salame›now h én[-----------] (20)

[----------- §]ke€nvn t«n pÒrvn sun[-----------]

[------------]Æsevw efiw tØn §pit[-------------]

[----------- m]etå tØn aÈtoË teleut[Øn --------]

[------------]lhn cÆfvi prÚw ëpanta [----------]

[------------]nesyai ÍpÚ ÉIoul€ou Nikãn[orow ---] (25)

[-------- oÈde;]nÚw ¶xontow §jous€an t[---------]

[-------- t«n] gevrgoÊntvn t«n §n t∞[i ---------]

[------------]Æsevw tØn §jous€an t[-----------]

[------------]w étele€aw ka‹ nËn ful[----------]

[---------- ÉEl]eus›na §p‹ prãsei fe[-----------] (30)

[--------------]S[...]PISE[---------------]

[-----------------------------------------]

lacuna

[-----------------------------------------]

[----------]ont[..]vn x[---------------------] (d)

[---------]ivn metÉ aÈtÚn ti[------------------] (35)

[--------- t]etagm°nhn ÙgdÒhi [---------------]

[----------]svi kayãper ka‹ e‰xon [------------]

[---------] genhmãtvn op[--------------------]

[---------]Òme[n]ow t«n e[--------------------]

[---------]nvn ka‹ ˜ti é[--------------------] (40)

[--------]skeuåw µ t[-----------------------]

[---- dian;]om∞w §n t[«i prutan€vi; -------------]

[---------] pote p[-------------------------]

[-----------------------------------------]

Unassignable fragments:

[-----------------------------------------]

[------------]e §x[-----------------------] (e)

[------------]omenoi [----------------------]

[------------]ta énet[---------------------]

[-----------]gramma[---------------------]

[-----------------------------------------] (5)

[-----------------------------------------] (f)

[--------------]eme[----------------------]

[-------------]pon µ pare[-----------------]

[----------- gen;]Æmato[w -------------------]

[-----------------------------------------]

[-----------------------------------------]

[--------------]amme[--------------------] (g)

[------------- §]pimelh[-------------------]

[--------------]S[-----------------------]

[-----------------------------------------]

Some alterations have been introduced into the text, lines 8, 26, 27 and 42; for the minutae, cf. Woodhead's text. For lines 25-31, cf. BE 1999, 608, under No. 211 [see below, under Simone Follet]. S. Follet. "Iulius Nicanor et le statut de Salamine (IG, II², 1119 complété = Agora XVI, 337" in L'hellénisme d'époque romaine: Nouveaux documents, nouvelles approches (Ier s. a. C. - IIIe s. p. C., Paris, 7-8 juillet 2000 [Colloque international à la mémoire de Louis Robert sous le patronage de l'AIEGL] (from the announced program).

SEG 49 (1999=2002) 56-57, No. 133. Decree (?) concerning Iulius Nikanor, Date? IG II² 1119+=S. Follet, BE (1999) 211 (above).

C. P. Jones (below) 162-163 (161-172): IG II² 1086+1119+B. D. Meritt, Hesperia 36 (1967) 68-71, No. 13. [27-3-2006]

SEG 53.1 (2003=2008) 60, No. 145 = BCH 127 (2003) 689.

E. IG II² 1723=RFIC 104 (1976), p. 376, lines 14-15: strathgÚw [§p‹ tå] ˜pla ÉIoÊliow/ Nikãnvr, n°ow [ÜOmhro]w ka‹ n°ow Yemis[tokl∞w] (ELLHNIKA 33 [1981] 225-227).

EKTYPON/SQUEEZE. EM 13215+9641, lines 6-11: DHMOKRA[-]SAYMONEU[-] /STRATHGOS[-]OPLAvIOULIOS[-] / vNIKANVRNEOS[-]SKAINEOSYEMIS[-] / KHRUJTHSEJ[-]R[-]AGOUBOULHSvTI[-] / vacat. YE[-]NHSPAIANIEUS vac. / KHRUKISKOSAT[-]SDIODOTOUMARAY[-]

Lines 13 Dhmokrã[thw )] ÉAymoneÊ`[w]

14 strathgÚw [§p‹ tå] ˜pla ÉIoÊliow

15 Nikãnvr, n°ow [ÜOmhro]w ka‹ n°ow Yemis[tokl∞w]

16 k∞ruj t∞w §[j ÉA]r[e€ou P]ãgou boul∞w T`€`[tow (;)]

17 Ye[o . . ]nhw PaianieÊw

18 khruk€skow ÉAtt`[ikÚ]w DiodÒtou Maray≈`[niow]

Markellos Th. Mitsos’ text, ÉArx. ÉEf. 1972, 56.

NOTE. The only necessary and crucial comment/observation here is on the end of line 9: BOULHSvTI[-], with a squeezed v, it seems, between S and T, as indicated. As to what is to be read after the T, the squeeze favors TI[-], as transcribed, but the iota dotted. The space after the T indicates that no O was inscribed there, for part of the omikron would have been detectable next to the T; what the squeeze, however, shows is an I reading [as Markellos Th. Mitsos, in the presence of this writer, read by means of the <<water-charcoal treatment>>=ELLHNIKA 33 (1981) 230]. Consequently, the TI[-] cannot be read as t[Ú bÉ], referring to Nikanor’s second hoplite generalship, for example, nor even completing the name Yemis/t[okl∞w]. The only possible reading then there is Ti[b. Kl.], with a dotted iota, as previously argued=RFIC 104.3 (1976) 376, ELLHNIKA (herein) 230: k∞ruj t∞w §j [ÉA]r[e€ou p]ãgou boul∞w Ti[b. Kl.] / vacat Ye[og°]nhw PaianieÊw vac., with a precedent in IG II² 3185, lines 6-7: strathgoËntow §p‹ toÁw ıple€taw Ti. Kl[aud€ou] / vacat Yeog°nouw Paiani°vw ka‹ §pi- = RFIC (herein) 376, note 1.

Both scanned from photographs of the Epigraphiko Mouseio [in the possession of this writer]. 2 AÈg./Aug. 2011

Cf. Follet, Simone, <<Julius Nicanor et le Statut de Salamine (Agora XVI, 337)>> (2004) 148,169 [below].

G. W. Bowersock, below, 12-13 = SEG 56 [2006=2010] 10, under no. 19, and 65, no. 210 bis [7 Mart€ou/March 2010]

F. IG II² 3786:

≤ §j ÉAre€ou pãg``ou b``ou-

lØ ka‹ ≤ boulØ t«n •ja-

kos€vn ka‹ ı d∞mo`[w ı]

ÉAyhna€vn [ÉIo]Ê`l`[ion Nikã]- (4)

ora _[n°on ÜOmhron ka‹]´

_[ n°on Yemistokl°a]´.

Line 1 ad init. Part of the eta is visible on the squeeze [below].

Line 1 ad fin.: b``ou-. Beta partially visible on squeeze [below].

Line 3: The omikron in dhmo`[w] appears traceable [squeeze, below].

Line 4: [ÉIo]Ê`l`[ion. Possibly traces [upper part] of the upsilon and lambda are discernible on the squeeze (below).

Apographon made from squeeze at the Institute at Princeton [19-8-70]:

HEJAREIOUPAGOUB[-

LHKAIHBOULHTVNEJ[-

KOSIVNKAIODHMO[-

AYHNAIVN [- (4)

NORA [-

vac.?

NOTE: H (ad init., line 1), L (ad init., line 2), K (ad init., line 3), A (ad init., line 4), N (ad init., line 5), only partially visible. Line 6: vac.? ad init.; my notation in Greek: fa€netai sån nå mØ ∑tan t€pote gramm°non, and my shading with a pencil of line 6 and below [2 lines], as with lines 4 and 5, may represent erasure, as Pittakis does [#3599] in lines 4, 5 and 6. The omega's form is V [Attika].

G. IG II² 3787:

≤ §j ÉAre€ou pãgou bo[ulØ ka‹ ≤ bou] -

lØ t«n •jakos€vn ka‹ ı [d∞mow]

ÉIoÊlion Nikãnora _[n°on ÜOmhron]´

vac. _[ka‹ n°on Yemistokl°a]´.

Line 1 ad init. Part of the eta is visible on the squeeze [below], and the first nu in n°on [line 3] may be discernible in the erasure.

Apographon made from squeeze at the Institute at Princeton [19-8-70]:

HEJAREIOUPAGOUBO[-

LHTVNEJAKOSIVNKAI[-

IOULIONNIKANORA[rasura]

/////////////////////////

////////////////////////

The apographon, as reproduced, indicates two lines of erasure. The nu may be traceable after NIKANORA (line 3). The omega's form is V [Attika].

H. IG II² 3788:

≤ §j ÉAre€ou pãgou boulØ ka‹ ≤ boulØ t[«n X]

ka‹ ı d∞mow ı ÉAyhna€vn ÉIoÊlion Nikã[nora]

n°on ÜOmhron ka‹ n°on Yemistokl[°a].

Apographon made from squeeze at the Institute at Princeton [19-8-70]:

HEJAREIOUPAGOUBOULHKAIHBOUL'''[-

K`AIODHM`OSOAYHNAIVNIOULIONNIKA`[-

NEONOMHRONKAINEONYEMISTOKL[-

vac.

The three ''' (end of line 1) should be at the bottom and they are traces of eta and kappa. The omega's form is V [Attika].

PHOTOGRAPH [received 22-8-66], EM 10417= II² 3788]: ≤ §j ÉAre€ou pãgou boulØ ka‹ ≤ boulØ t«[n .X.] / ka‹ ı d∞mow ı ÉAyhna€vn ÉIoÊlion Nikã[nora] / n°on ÜOmhron ka‹ n°on Yemistokl°[a vac.] / vacat. NOTE. Line 1: The OU in pãgou hardly traceable; the LH in boulØ partially visible; the V=t«[n] is detectable by the end tip of the left/right parallel stroke, and the V was inscribed over the KA of Nikã[nora], line 2. Line 2: ka‹ ad init., partially readable, as the A ad fin., Nikã[nora]. Line 3 ad fin., second E in Yemistokl°[a]: it is faintly detectable in the break after the L.

Scanned from photograph in this writer’s possession [3 AÈg./Aug. 2011].

I. IG II² 3789:

≤ §j ÉAre€ou pãgou boulØ

ka‹ ≤ boulØ t«n •jakos€vn

ka‹ ı d∞mow ı ÉAyhna€vn ÉIoÊ

lion Nikãnora _[n°on ÜOmhron]´

_[ka‹ n°on Yemistokl°a]´.

Apographon made from squeeze at the Institute at Princeton [19-8-70]:

HEJAREIOUPAGOUBOULH

KAIHBOULHTVNEJAKOSIVN

KAIODHMOSOAYHNAIVNIOU

LIONNIKANORANEONOMHRON vac.

KAI[..]O[..]E[.]IS[…]LEA vac.

The space after NIKANORA (line 4) is darkened in the apographon to indicate erasure, but in line 5 only the visible traces of letters are shown, with the missing letters in pencil. The omega's form is V [Attika].

New text:

≤ §j ÉAre€ou pãgou boulØ

ka‹ ≤ boulØ t«n •jakos€vn

ka‹ ı d∞mow ı ÉAyhna€vn ÉIoÊ-

lion Nikãnora _[n`°`o`n` ÜO`mh`r`o`n`]´ vac.

ka‹` [`n°]o`[n Y]e`[`m]is[tok]l`°a``` vac.

Only for this document a new text is presented here, according to the readings from the squeeze. The others above are listed with only minor changes, as noted therein.  All epigraphical <<niceties>> may not have been reproduced exactly [these may be done later, as well as others].

Kevin Clinton, Eleusis. The Inscriptions on Stone, etc., vol. IA: Text, The Archaeological Society at Athens Library No. 236 [Athens 2005] 328, No. 362= IG II² 3789, ca. a. 60 p.?

Lines 4-5: _n[°on ÜOmhron]´ / _k[a‹ n°on Yemistokl°a]´ (with both _n[ and _k[ dotted).

NOTE. In none of the inscriptions in which Ioulios Nikanor neos Homeros and neos Themistokles figures ÉAre€ou is spelled ÉArÆou, as is the case in the time of Augustus. There is, NOTE below, IG II² 3785: ≤ boulØ [ka‹] ı d∞mow Gãion/ ÉIoÊlion N[ik]ãnora ÉArÆo[u] uflÒn, but it is not certain whether this Nikanor is identifiable with the neos Homeros and neos Themistokles. [19-XI-2007]

For ÉArÆou in IG II² 3785: ≤ bou[lØ ka‹ ı] d∞mow Gãion vac. / vac. ÉIoÊlion N[ik]ãnora ÉArÆo[u] uflÚn vac. / vacat[--] vacat, cf. IG II² 4177, line 1: [≤ boulØ] ≤ §j ÉArÆou [pãgou] (c. a. 47 p.?), and 4183, lines 1-2: [≤ bou]lØ ≤ §j ÉArÆou / [pã]gou (med. s. I p.); cf. also IG II² 2892: êrxontow/ ÉAre€ou to[Ë]/ Nikãnoro[w]/ §j O‡o[u] (see Schmalz 2009 [below] 72, (89) IG II² 2892).

For example, cf. also IG II² 5156: Flaou€aw - - - / flerÆaw LhtoËw ka‹ ÉAr[t°midow] (seat, theater of Dionysos).

Sean G. Byrne, Roman Citizens of Athens (2003) 471, No. 2, (i), ii A.D.: (1) [fler]°`a Poseid«[now OÈat°rnion] /(2) ÖArhon Paiani°a [-] = RBelge 52 (1974) 63, No. 6.

IG II² 3785a+3785, scanned from two photographs of the Epigraphiko Mouseio [in the possession of this writer]. 2 AÈg./Aug. 2011

J. Prometheus 13 (1987), p. 2 (=pp. 1-10): ÉIliåw ≤ meyÉ ÜOmhron §g∆ ka‹ prÒsyen ÑOmÆr[ou]/ parstãtiw ·drumai t«i me tekÒnti n°v[i]. This epigram undoubtedly refers to Julius Nikanor; cf. SEG 37 (1987='90), No.

153.

Odyssey-Iliad

Iliad Epigram

Scanned from G.M.A. Richter, The Portraits of the Greeks, vol. I (1965), Figs. 110-111, 113. [16 July 2009]

Geagan, Daniel J., THE ATHENIAN AGORA, vol. XVIII, Inscriptions: The Dedicatory Monuments [The American School of Classical Studies, Princeton, NJ, 2011] 18-19, C29 (ca. A.D. 100).

K. Dio Chrysostom, Or. XXXI.116: ... l°gein d¢ efi≈yhsan ofl diasÊrontew tØn pÒlin (sc. ÉAyÆnaw) ka‹ tÚ §p€gramma tÚ §p‹ t∞w Nikãnorow efikÒnow ˜w (=…w) aÈto›w ka‹ tØn Salam›na §vnÆsato (above), which appears to be a reference to Julius Nikanor, because of the name Nikanor, Salamis and apparent chronology (ÑEllhnikã 33 [1981='83], pp. 219-220).

L. St. Byzantius, s.v. ÑIerãpoliw ..., éfÉ o Nikãnvr ı n°ow ÜOmhrow (above).

NOTE: Cf. IG II² 3785: ≤ boulØ [ka‹] ı d∞mow Gãion/ ÉIoÊlion N[ik]ãnora ÉArÆo[u] uflÒn. J. and L. Robert distinguished this Julius Nikanor from Julius Nikanor, the n°ow ÜOmhrow (see RFIC 104 [1976], p. 375; A. G. Woodhead, Agora XVI [1997], p. 477). PHOTOGRAPHS [received 22-8-66], EM 3124+3131= II²3785a+3785: vacat ≤ bou[lØ ka‹ ı] d∞mow Gãion vac. / vac. ÉIoÊlion N[ik]ãnora ÉArÆo[u] uflÚn vac. / vacat[--] vacat. NOTE. Line 1: The HB=≤ bou[lØ] are inscribed over UL=ÉIoÊlion of line 2, and they are partially visible, as also the O; the U in bou[lØ] is detectable by the end tip of the upright stroke. The O before D=[ı] d∞mow is not detectable. Line 2: The two iotas (I) are close to the two omikrons (O)=ÉIoÊlion. The first N in N[ik]ãnora is detectable by two partially preserved strokes. The A in ÉArÆo[u] and U in uflÚn are traceable by short visible strokes.

See NOTE. In none of the inscriptions, above.

REFERENCES:

Habicht, Christian, Athens from Alexander to Antony (Cambridge, MA, 1997) 312-313; Kapetanopoulos, Elias, "Gaius Julius Nikanor, Neos Homeros kai Neos Themistokles" [RFIC 104 (1976) 375-377], "Salamis and Julius Nikanor" [ÑEllhnikå 33 (1981) 217-237 (+summary in Greek)], and "The Iliad Epigram from the Agora of Athens" [Prometheus 13 (1987) 1-10].

Simone Follet, BE 1999, 608, under No. 211, opts for an earlier date [IG II² 1723, E above] than Kapetanopoulos', which correctly places Julius Nikanor to the period after A.D. 41/2 [full testimonia in ÑEllhnikå 33 (1981) 217-237]. The same is done by Alessandra Coppola, although not mentioning Kapetanopoulos, in "COSENSO E DISSENSO AD ATENE NELL'ETA DI AUGUSTO" [=BE 1999, No. 218, for full title] 667-670; by focusing on past speculations concerning the date and role of Julius Nikanor Coppola includes Julius Nikanor under the reign of Augustus, at the same time suggesting [669] that the explanation of the erasing of his titles n°ow ÜOmhrow ka‹ n°ow Yemistokl∞w [3786-3787, 3789 above, for example] may be found in Julius Nikanor, the son of Areios, of IG II² 3785 [above].

S. Follet, BE 2000, 482, under No. 309.

SEG 49 (1999=2002) 56-57, No. 133: IG II² 1119+, lines 25-32: ... [ge€]nesyai ÍpÚ ÉIoul€ou Nikãn[orow ka‹] t«n metÉ aÈtÚn [tØn n∞son kekthm°nvn?], [mhde]nÚw ¶xontow §jous€an t[oË tØn] tetagm°nhn ÙgdÒhn (dotted n) [t«n karp«n? éfele›n? t«n] gevrgoÊntvn t«n §n t∞[i n]Æsvi, kayãper ka‹ e‰xon §n (dotted §n) [xrÒnƒ t∞w ≤m›n? sunkt]Æsevw tØn §jous€an t[∞]w genhmãtvn Ùp≈[raw?, t∞w sugxvrhye€shw aÈto›]w étele€aw ka‹ nËn ful[att]om°[n]hw t«n e[fiw tØn n∞son ka‹ t«n efiw tØn ÉEl]eus›na §p‹ prãsei fe[rom]°nvn (dotted 2^nd e) ka‹ ˜ ti ê[llo égayÚn ı d∞mow ı ÉAyhna€vn aÈto›]w [§]p€ste[use? (dotted pi, e) ÉEån d° tiw meta]skeuãs˙ t[i toÊtvn, toËto]n Ípope€pte[in] ktl. (SEG text, p. 57).

Ùp≈[raw? = Ùpv[rin∞w?

Cf. E. Kapetanopoulos, “Salamis and Julius Nikanor,” ELLHNIKA 33 (1981) 220-221, and 233, K7. Simone Follet, <<Julius Nicanor et le Statut de Salamine (Agora XVI, 337)>> [below].

Elias Kapetanopoulos, Central Connecticut State University

==========================================

1981: Kapetanopoulos, Elias, “Salamis and Julius Nikanor,” ELLHNIKA 33 (1981) 217-237+PERILHCIS.

[C. P. Jones’ “grasping comment” in Phoenix 39.1 (1985) 34, under note 18 [30-35].] [15-4-2010]

2003: Byrne, Sean G., Roman Citizens of Athens, Studia Hellenistica 40 (Peeters; Leuven, 2003) 321-322, No. 94.

2004: Follet, Simone, <<Julius Nicanor et le Statut de Salamine (Agora XVI, 337)>> in L’hellénisme d’époque romaine. Nouveaux documents, nouvelles approches (Ier s.a.C. – IIIe

s.p.C), Actes du Colloque international à la mémoire de Louis Robert, Paris, 7-8 juillet 2000, édités par Simone FOLLET, De l’Archéologie à l’Histoire (De Boccard, 2004) 139-170, 440-441, Figs. 13-14. [31/1/2005]

Cf. page 145: oÈs€a Tiber€ou ÉIoul€ou Nikãnorow (A.D. 34/5).

2004: Bowersock, Glen W., <<The New Hellenism of Augustan Athens>>, Annali della Scuola normale superiore di Pisa, Classe di lettere e filosofia 7 [2004] 11-16 [1-16] = SEG 56 [2006=2010] 10, under no. 19, and 65, no. 210 bis.

Bowersock’s thesis: Julius Nikanor belongs to the Augustan years. An argument hyper-spiced with speculation. [5 ÉApril€ou /April 2011]

2005: Jones, Christopher P., <<AN ATHENIAN DOCUMENT MENTIONING JULIUS NICANOR>>, ZPE 154 (2005) 161-172. [27-3-2006]

BE 2007, 659, No. 286.

SEG 55 (2005=2009) 65-66, No. 248 bis.

2007: Kantiréa, Maria, LES DIEUX ET LES DIEUX AUGUSTES. Le culte impérial en Grèce sous les Julio-claudiens et les Flaviens: Etudes épigraphiques et archéologiques, MELETHMATA 50 [ATHENES 2007], APPENDICE

II, 219, No. 4.

2007: Elias Kapetanopoulos provides a new text of IG II² 1069 in the Newletter 11.1 (15 May 2007) 3-6 of the American Society of Greek and Latin Epigraphy [above].

S. Follet, BE 2007, 646-647, No. 226.

2009: Schmalz, Geoffrey C.R., Augustan and Julio-Claudian Athens: A New Epigraphy and Prosopography, Mnemosyne 302 [Brill: Leiden:Boston, 2009] 16-17, (7) IG II² 1069 [see new text above]; 18-19, (10) IG II² 1086; 19-20,

(11) IG II² 1119; 27-28, (17) IG II² 1723; 72, (89) IG ΙΙ² 2892; 161-162, (198) IG II² 3785; 162-163, (199) IG II² 3786; 163, (200) IG II² 3787; 163, (201), IG II² 3788; and 165, (202) IG II² 3789. (18-Feb-2009)

2010: Gangloff, Anne, <<Rhapsodes et poètes épiques à l’époque impériale>>, REG 123 (2010) 65.

2011: C.P. Jones, <<Nicanor again>>, ZPE, In Press (Jones’ bibliography online, Revised: May 2011). [25 ÉIoul€ou/July 2011] = ZPE 178 (2011): Jones, C.P., <<Julius Nicanor Again>> 79 [non vidi, 29 ÉIoul€ou/July 2011]

= ZPE 178 (2011) 79-83: JULIUS NICANOR AGAIN. [vidi 26 Septembr€ou/September 2011]

Comment:

The author of <<Julius Nicanor Again>>, as stated in the second <<opening>> paragraph of his article (p. 79), adopted an Augustan date for Julius Nicanor [/Nikanor] rather than a post Augustan because <<the Augustan one appears to be gaining ground>>.

Strabo’s statement <<the Athenians now possess Salamis>>: ka‹ nËn m¢n ¶xousin ÉAyhna›oi tØn n∞son (9 C394) has been read/interpreted out of context, for in that context Strabo speaks of the Megarian-Athenian rivalry and how Salamis came to be in the possession of the Athenians down to his time [and when the ephebes continued their customary visit to Salamis, although there are gaps in the evidence]. Epigraphic testimonia validate Nikanor’s association with Salamis, but in a sÊmfvnon/contract role [C. IG II² 1086, above]. Consequently, Dio (Chrysostom’s) statement [Or. XXXI.116, above] ¯w [/…w] aÈto›w ka‹ tØn Salam›na §vnÆsato does not accord with the surviving evidence that Nikanor bought/§vnÆsato Salamis for Athens (after Athens had lost the island and to whom?). On the same line, it is rather useless and at the same time misleading to speculate on the nature/contents of Dio’s §p€gramma tÚ §p‹ t∞w Nikãnorow efikÒnow (above). None of the surviving statue bases honoring Nikanor, as ÉIoÊliow Nikãnvr, reveal a connection with Dio’s §p€gramma, unless the epigram ÉIliåw ≤ meyÉ ÜOmhron §g∆ ka‹ prÒsyen ÑOmÆr[ou]/ parstãtiw ·drumai t«i me tekÒnti n°v[i] (above, under J] is really Dio’s offending epigram.

One other tangible observation about Dio’s Nikanor is that he lacks both the nomen ÉIoÊliow/Julius and a title of either n°ow ÜOmhrow or n°ow Yemistokl∞w. And this is presumably why in the very past Nikanor had been identified with Nikanor, the Macedonian commander, associated with Munichia/Piraeus. Stephanus (Byzantius), however, gives the title of n°ow ÜOmhrow and that Nikanor hailed from Hierapolis in Syria: ÑIerãpoliw ..., éfÉ o Nikãnvr ı n°ow ÜOmhrow ka‹ PÒpliow ka‹ Sarap€vn StvÛko€ (above). From Stephanus’ n°ow ÜOmhrow it can be said that Nikanor was best known by that title than by the second title of n°ow Yemistokl∞w, acquired without doubt when he came to Athens. His involvement with Salamis probably explains at least in part the n°ow Yemistokl∞w, but this title may have greater affinity to old Themistokles’ ingenuity in bringing about the victory at Salamis in 480 B.C. Now an attempt is being made to connect Nikanor with the family of the daidoËxow Themistokles known from Eleusis [p. 81]. However, this is mere speculation or merely a stir up of the waters to keep speculating on what might have been.

Moreover, since Nikanor comes from Hierapolis, Syria, and bears a Makedonian name, this may explain some of his troubles in Athens [that is, Nikanor may have traced his lineage to the old stratum of Makedonian settlers].

Moreover, the fact that (Julius) Nikanor hails from Hierapolis undoubtedly eliminates his identification/or vice versa with Julius Nikanor son of Areos/Areios [IG II² 3785: ≤ bou[lØ ka‹ ı] d∞mow Gãion vac. / vac. ÉIoÊlion N[ik]ãnora ÉArÆo[u] uflÚn vac.] (above), whose son is evidently the archon in IG II² 2892: êrxontow/ ÉAre€ou to[Ë]/ Nikãnoro[w]/ §j O‡o[u], dated to the middle of the 1^st cent. A.D. (above). This last one shows that Julius Nikanor of 3785, or at least his son, had become an Athenian, deme of Oion, with the son serving as êrxvn (herein). Nikanor, the n°ow ÜOmhrow, is not known to have become an Athenian, although he served, for example, as strathgÚw [§p‹ tå] ˜pla [1723 above]. One other remark is that this Nikanor of 3785 is honored by the boulØ ka‹ ı d∞mow, whereas Nikanor n°ow ÜOmhrow in the existing evidence is honored by ≤ §j ÉAre€ou pãgou boulØ ka‹ ≤ boulØ t«n •jakos€vn ka‹ ı d∞mow ı ÉAyhna€vn.

S. Follet also muddled the waters/yÒlvse tå nerå by introducing from a papyrus Tib°riow ÉIoÊliow Nikãnvr [above, 2004: Follet, Simone] and doubting the separate identities of Nikanor of 3587 and Nikanor n°ow ÜOmhrow, but again on mere speculation.

[IG II² 1035. This important document is also connected at times with Nikanor n°ow ÜOmhrow, and the present writer has discussed its date and the problems associated with it in ELLHNIKA 33 (1981) 224-225.]

IG II² 1069 [p. 80]. The stone with the upper left, third text of 1069 has been recovered and published [B. IG II² 1069, above]. This writer has also published an improved text of 1069 in May 2007 [above].

IG II² 1723 [p. 80], see above, under E. IG II² 1723. IG II² 1723 is an archontum laterculus in which Nikanor n°ow ÜOmhrow appears as strathgÚw [§p‹ tå] ˜pla [above, lines 14-15], with T.[-] vacat Ye[og°]nhw PaianieÁw as k∞ruj t∞w §[j ÉAre€ou p]ãgou boul∞w [lines 15-16, under E above]. The T.[-] has been made contentious in that it completes the name Yemis[-]/t[okl∞w] of line 15 rather than it goes with the indented name of Ye[og°]nhw of line 16, that is, T >` [KlaÊdiow] / vacat Ye[og°]nhw PaianieÊw. However, the Yemis[-]/t[okl∞w] version must seriously explain/justify the large vacat before the name Ye[og°]nhw, if the vacat does not indicate a continuation from line 15 to line 16. In any case, a good example here from the same period [more or less] is IG II² 3185, lines 6-7: strathgoËntow §p‹ toÁw ıple€taw Ti. Kl[aud€ou] / vacat Yeog°nouw Paiani°vw ka‹ §pi- [above, under E, middle of 1^st cent. A.D.]. In addition, the form of 1723 as an archontum laterculus does not favor an Augustan date [these matters have been treated elsewhere, and presently they will not receive elaboration, except when necessary].

The << >> enclosures in blue below indicate in a manner how the author’s argument is constructed in defense of an Augustan date for Nikanor/Nicanor, while the article’s style concedes that it may not be so:

Page 79, 2^nd paragraph: <<appears to be>>, <<appears to show>>, <<he seems to>>, <<parties were apparently>>

Page 80, descending: <<indicates>>, <<should imply>>, <<probably>>, <<had presumably>>, <<but this seems far-fetched>>, <<and suggested>>, << and suggested>>, <<I have proposed>>,

Page 81, descending: <<might be>>, <<is suggested>>, <<it may well be>>, <<might therefore>>, <<would surely>>, <<perhaps>>

Page 82, descending: <<some time>>, <<it may be>>, <<it may be>>, <<more likely>>, <<as suggested>>, <<probably never>>, <<should at least>>, <<more probably>>, <<there need be

no>>, <<my belief>>, <<Some progress>>

Page 83, descending: <<recent assessment>>, <<if the Augustan date of Nicanor is established>>, <<Attractive as it might seem>>, <<the obstacles appear too great>>, <<Robert’s view would

involve>>, <<there seems>>, <<why he should not>>, <<implies that he was still>>

The commentary may be expanded/improved accordingly. [3/20 ÉOkt/Oct. 2011]

=================

Elias Kapetanopoulos

Professor Dr. (Greece-Rome)

Department of History

Central Connecticut State University

New Britain, CT 06050-4010 (USA)

Telephone:

(860) 832-2820 (office)

(860) 832-2804 (fax)

(860) 229-9960 (home)

E-mail: Kapetanopoulos@ccsu.edu

Web site: http://www.history.ccsu.edu/elias/elias.htm

Areas of Research: Attic epigraphy-Athenian institutions of the Roman period (200 B.C.-3rd c. A.D.), and early Makedon(ia)/Makedones.

============================================================================================================================================================================================================================

****************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************************