CsapWil 153-62 Decree of Ikarion regulating Rural Dionysia

Decree of Ikarion regulating Rural Dionysia

Csapo and Wilson II, 153-62 Date: ca. 450-425 BC

[- - -]ℎε στέλε̣ Ι̣[- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -] [ἔδοχσε]ν Ἰκαριεῦσι: Μενέστ[ρατος εἶπε(ν)· . . . .] [. . . ⁶ . . .]ι̣ τν δεμοτν καὶ τν Ἰκα[ριοῖ οἰκόντον δύο ἄ]- [νδρε ἐκ] τ̣ν ἀχορεγέτον, ℎότιν’ ἂν̣ [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] (5)[. . . ⁶ . . .]. ἀντίδοσιν δὲ ναι τν χρ[εμάτον . . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . . ἐνα]- [ντίον τ] δεμάρχο εἴκοσι ἑμερν [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . ἒ μὲ ? ]ναι ἀντίδοσιν. ^v τὸν δέμ[αρχον . . . . . . ¹¹ . . . . .] [. . . ⁵ . . τὸ] χορεγὸ ἀποφαίνεν τρισ[. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . ⁵ . . τρ]αγοιδὸς καταλέγεν τον [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] (10)[. . . . ⁷ . . . -]ος̣ καὶ τὸ χορεγὸ ἐχσομο[σα- . . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . . -]οσιν δέκα ἑμερν ἒ μ[ὲ ναι ἐχσομοσίαν? .] [. . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . .] δὲ τ ἀγάλματος ℎαπ[τ- . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . . -]ν τ δεμάρχο καὶ τὸῖ̣[. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . . -]αι αὐτοῖς. ^v ἐχσομοσ[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] (15)[. . . . τοῖς πρ]οτοχόροις μὲ π[ρ]οℎε[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . . -]ς. ^v ΑΕΓΟΝΑ πέντε καὶ [δέκα . . . . . . ¹² . . . . . .] [. . . . . . ¹¹ . . . . . -]ον. ^v τοῖς προτοχόρ[οις . . . . . . . ¹³ . . . . . .] [. . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . . ἐ]πειδὰν ἐνιαυτὸν ℎ[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . ¹¹ . . . . . ἀ]ποπέμπεν ἐὰμ με δ[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] (20)[. . . . . . . ¹³ . . . . . . -]ν ἒ ἀποτίνεν πεν[τε . . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . ¹² . . . . . . τ]ραγοιδο[.] ^ṿ τ̣ὸ χο[ρεγὸ . . . . . . ¹² . . . . . .] [. . . ⁵ . . πέντε καὶ δ]έκ’ ἀνδράσι ℎεκ[α- . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . .] καθ’ ἕκαστον τὸ[ν . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . ¹⁰ . . . . . Διο]νύσο· πράττε̣ν δὲ [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] (25)[. . . . . . ¹² . . . . . . ἑ]ο̣ρ̣τὲν τὸ χορεγὸ [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . ¹³ . . . . . . -]ονος ἒ ἀποτίνεν [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . . -]σι̣ τὲν ἑορτὲν θ[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . ¹² . . . . . . με?]νὸς τι ℎεβδόμ[ει . . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . ¹¹ . . . . . πέμ]π̣τεν ἑμέραν απ̣[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] (30)[. . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . . -]ρο ἐν τι Πυθ[ίοι . . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . . -]γ̣ρον ἒ ἀποτίν[εν . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . . τ]ον χορεγον. ^v [. . . . . . . . . ¹⁷ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . ¹² . . . . . . φαλλ]ικὸν ἄιδεν [. . . . . . . . . ¹⁷ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . . τ]ον τραγοιδ[ον . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] (35)[. . . . . . . . . ¹⁷ . . . . . . . .]ες τὸν χορὸ̣[ν . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . . ἒ] ἀ̣ποτινέτο [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . ¹⁶ . . . . . . . . πρ]αττέτο ℎο δ̣[έμαρχος . . . . ⁸ . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . ¹⁹ . . . . . . . . .]γες μεδέ λ[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . ¹⁹ . . . . . . . . .]μενὸς χρε[ματίζεν . . . . ⁸ . . . .] (40)[. . . . . . . . . ¹⁸ . . . . . . . . . δ]ρ̣αχμὰς κα[ὶ . . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . ¹⁸ . . . . . . . . . κ]α̣ὶ πραττέ[το . . . . . . . ¹³ . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . ²⁰ . . . . . . . . . . -]ο. ^v τοι̣ χο[ρ- . . . . . . . ¹⁴ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . ²⁰ . . . . . . . . . . -]ν ἔλαχε ℎ[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . ²⁰ . . . . . . . . . . -]ομ μὲ διδ[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] (45)[. . . . . . . . . . ²⁰ . . . . . . . . . .]γ̣ες. ^v τοδ[- . . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . . ²¹ . . . . . . . . . . -]ι τὰς το[. . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . . ²¹ . . . . . . . . . .]ν̣τελεο[. . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . . ²² . . . . . . . . . . . -]σαι εσ[. . . . . . . . ¹⁵ . . . . . . .] [. . . . . . . . . . . ²² . . . . . . . . . . .]εν τ[. . . . . . . . . ¹⁷ . . . . . . . .]

Previous - Csapo and Wilson II, 148-52 Next - Csapo and Wilson II, 162-64
Translated text

References:

Csapo and Wilson II, 153-62 (Translated text) (AIO)

IG I³ 254 (PHI) (IG Online)

SEG 54.58

SEG 65.47

Russo, Ripartizioni, D55 face B

Translation by: Stephen Lambert

Images: Ohio - (1)

Monument type: Stele

Inscription type: Decree (Deme Ikarion)

Findspot: Ikarion, under front wall of Byzantine church (NM 4833B)

Transliterations on Places on

[1] On the deme Ikarion and its inscriptions see IG I³ 1015, with notes.

Textual Note. AIO follows the text of Csapo and Wilson, which is based on IG, revised following autopsy by A. Makres, in A. P. Matthaiou and G. Malouchou eds., Attikai Epigraphai. Praktika Symposiou ... Adolf Wilhelm (2004), 123-40 (= SEG 54.58) and (with a longer line length) P. Wilson, Hesp. 84, 2015, 97-147 (SEG 65.47). 1 [hιερὰ] hε στέλε̣ [το͂ Διονύσο], "the stele is sacred to Dionysos", Hiller (IG). | 28 Ποσιδεο͂νος με]νὸς τε͂ι hεβδόμ[ει ἐπὶ δέκα, "on the seventeenth of the month Posideon", Csapo and Wilson | 31 ἐχς ἀ]γρο͂ν, "from the fields", Csapo and Wilson | 47 [hιερὸ]ν τέλεον̣, "a full-grown sacrificial animal", Lewis (IG).

This decree of Ikarion is inscribed on the "front" of a stele (usually described as the "back"), on the "back" of which are the deme accounts, IG I³ 253. Based on script, it has been thought that the decree was inscribed after entries I-III had been inscribed on the other side, perhaps ca. 440 BC. This is plausible, though the heading in l. 1 seems to imply that this was the "front" face of the stele, and it cannot be ruled out that the differences in the script used at different points on this stone reflect different individual writing styles that were broadly contemporary, in which case the decree may have been inscribed before entry I was made on the other side. It seems preferable to date both sides cautiously to "ca. 450-425 BC".

The decree regulates the organisation and financing of the Ikarian Rural Dionysia. Though fragmentary, the flow of the sense in ll. 1-12 is clear enough: two sponsors (choregoi) are to be appointed from deme members and residents who have not served before. Although it was not a particularly small deme (bouleutic quota 5), the proportion of deme members who were wealthy was low (the wealth index for Ikarion is 0.8, compared with the avearge of 1.39, R. Osborne, Demos, 1985, 45-6, 196-204), and this helps explain the inclusion of non-member residents among the candidates for the choregia. Unlike the choregoi in the city, those in Ikarion were not appointed for a specific individual performance, but two of them shared the costs of the whole festival. For this arrangement cf. the three choregoi appointed in Thorikos, SEG 34.107. Inscriptions, including this one, suggest that tragedy was the only dramatic genre to feature at the Ikarian Rural Dionysia, though the literary tradition also associated Ikarion with the origins of comedy (Csapo and Wilson II, 158). Ll. 5-7 provide for antidosis, a procedure more familiar at city level by which those appointed to a choregia (or other liturgy) could challenge someone else to perform the liturgy in his place, or else undergo an exchange of property (Ath. Pol. 56.3). This is the earliest evidence for antidosis, but whether the process actually originated in Ikarion and was taken up by the city later is uncertain. There follow provisions for "registration" (katalexis) of the tragoidoi (probably "members of the tragic chorus", cf. IG I³ 969, with n. 3) and for the choregoi (and perhaps for the tragoidoi also) to make formal application under oath to be excused (exomosia). This again parallels the procedure stipulated at Ath. Pol. 56.3, which explains the various grounds that could be adduced in such an application, e.g. previous performance of the liturgy, not old enough, etc. The rest of the inscription is too fragmentary for the flow of the sense to be reconstructed, though there is sometimes enough to indicate the topics covered. [2] Touching the statue will have been part of the oath procedure for the exomosia. The statue was doubtless the archaic statue of Dionysos, IG I³ 1015. [3] Here begins a section of the decree dealing with the protochoroi, a rare word whose meaning is uncertain. Csapo and Wilson argue for the sense, "chorus leaders" (later known more commonly by the term, koryphaioi). [4] Csapo and Wilson suggest that this possible reference to "15", and the possible occurrence of the same number in l. 16, both relate to the number of members of the chorus. Sophocles is said to have increased the number of chorus members (scil. in city performances) to 15, cf. IG I³ 969, with n. 3. [5] It seems that different demes held their Dionysia at different dates in the winter month, Posideon, to accommodate performers (and audiences) wishing to attend more than one festival. Csapo and Wilson restore the date in this line as 17th Posideon, and take it as the first day of a three-day festival. [6] The Pythion at Ikarion was located next to the Dionysion and the theatre and the two cults seem to have been connected, cf. IG I³ 1015. Csapo and Wilson speculate that this passage may have required a preliminary offering to be brought to the Pythion "from the fields" (echs a]grōn, 31). [7] The "phallic song" was a characteristic component of the Rural Dionysia, cf. Ar. Acharnians 261 with Csapo and Wilson II, 19-24, 161. [8] Perhaps a reference to a special deme Assembly to deal with business arising from the Ikarian Dionysia. The decree IG II² 1178 may have been passed at this Assembly in the following century.

This decree illustrates the lengths to which a deme such as Ikarion, with its proud dramatic tradition, might feel the need to go at this period to compel its (in this case relatively small number of) wealthy members and non-member residents to meet the costs of staging theatrical performances (note also the frequent recourse to fines). Other demes had different approaches, e.g. Thorikos seems to have "sold" its three sponsorships to the highest bidders, SEG 34.107; and after the Athenian financial crisis of the 350s BC, Ikarion, in common with other demes, increasingly deployed the more voluntaristic tool of the honorific decree and the associated hortatory intention to incentivise wealthy members to serve their community, see IG II² 1178.

Added: 30 Sep 2022
Updated: 7 Mar 2024
Feedback

ID: AIO_2549