IGIV2 803 Boundary marker of agricultural estate on Aigina

Boundary marker of agricultural estate on Aigina

IG IV² 2 803 Date: 455-445 BC or 431-404 BC

Boundary marker of the precinct.^[1]

Previous - Polinskaya, Horoi on Aigina, no. 1 Next - Polinskaya, Horoi on Aigina, no. 3

References:

IG IV² 2 803 (Translated text) (IG Online)

IG I³ 1481 (PHI)

Polinskaya, Horoi on Aigina, no. 2

Translation by: James Hua

Monument type: Cippus

Inscription type: Boundary marker (precinct)

Findspot: Aigina (Kokkaláki) (Mus. Aeg. 2411)

Transliterations on Places on

[1] This is one of 18 “boundary markers” (horoi) for plots of land engraved around Aigina in the second half of the fifth century BC (IG IV² 2, 792-804, 1074, SEG 59.347-350 = I. Polinskaya, Hesperia 78, 2009, 231-67, nos. 15-18 [PDF]). Two may be modern forgeries (IG IV² 2, 794 and 796, cf. H. Goette, Ross und Griechenland, 2005, 226-31). Most are engraved on stelai of white, blue, and island marble, but six are rupestral (IG IV² 2, 795, 1074, SEG 59.347-350). This one was found near Kokkalaki in the northern part of the island (between Souvala and Paleochora).

There are four variations: (1) five inscriptions simply record the word “boundary marker” (horos, IG IV² 2, 1074, SEG 59.347-350). (2) three inscriptions combine this with “of the precinct” (temenos, IG IV² 2, 802-804). The third and fourth types specify the god or gods to which that temenos is sacred: (3) six inscriptions specify Athena (IG IV² 2, 792-797); (4) four that were originally of type (2) have had the names of Apollo and Poseidon added to them (IG IV² 2, 798-801).

The dates and authorship of these inscriptions have been much debated. The inscriptions, written in Attic dialect and script, appear to have been erected by Athenians; no horoi inscriptions are attested in Aigina before Athenian intervention on the island. Two historical contexts have been proposed. The editors of the first edition of IG IV, followed by A. Furtwängler, Aigina: Das Heiligtum der Aphaia, 1906, 6 and Smarczyk, Untersuchungen, 1990, 118-24, proposed a date of 431-404 BC, when the Athenians expelled the Aiginetans en masse and imposed an Athenian cleruchy on the island (Thuc. 2.27, Plut. Per. 34.2, Diod. Sic. 12.44.2, Strabo 8.6.16; on cleruchies see IG XII 6, 1 264 with notes). However, Barron, JHS 103, 1983, 1-12, IG IV², and IG I³ placed them earlier in 455-445 BC, after Aigina was defeated by Athens in c.457 and forced to tear down its walls and pay tribute (Thuc. 1.105.2). This dating was based on erroneous dating of the lettering (especially sigma and rho) and the presence of Ionic spelling and letters in some inscriptions. Barron and Figueira, Athens and Aigina, 1991, 118-19 further argued that the inscriptions were composed by ‘Ionian’ traders on Aigina before Athens’ conquest in 431. Figueira also proposed that the descendants of the Aiginetan exiles who fled to Attica in 490-480 (Hdt. 6.90) had returned and helped to establish these “Atticised” cults.

Polinskaya (231-67) has raised a number of historical and epigraphic counter-arguments, in particular noting that the dialect and script is predominantly Attic (not Ionic), highlighting the uncertain dating of the letter forms sigma and rho (anywhere between 450-410 BC, p. 235), and proposing that a large tract of Aigina would need to be owned by Athens to impose these horoi (better fitting the events in 431). Consequently, she redates the inscriptions firmly to 431-404 BC, during Athens’ cleruchy. These horoi thus represent the acquisition and re-distribution of much land on Aigina by Athenian cleruchs after the local population’s expulsion. They have been compared to other horoi set up by Athens’ fifth-century empire in its subject poleis, including Kos (IG I³ 1491-1491bis), Samos (IG I³ 1492-1499), Lemnos (IG I³ 1500-1501), Chalkis (IG I³ 1502), and Mytilene (Thuc. 3.50.2), although Aigina is a special case because its entire population was removed.

The function of these boundary markers has been much debated, but must be tied to their find locations and the meaning of the designation temenos. They were found scattered around the island (see map in Polinskaya, 231). Based on the attribution to the three gods, some scholars (e.g. Barron, JHS 103, 1983, 6; T. Figueira, Athens and Aigina, 1991, 115-18, B. Smarczyk, Untersuchungen, 1990, 118-24) have argued that these boundary stones delimit physical “sanctuaries” or “cultic precincts” of these gods, imposed by Athenians (or returning Aiginetans, see below) in various locations. However, Polinskaya has noted that the horoi for individual gods are too widely spread across the island to represent individual “cultic precincts”. Moreover, the majority were found in the northern half of the island on land which was agriculturally productive; remains of ancient farmsteads have been found near several of them. Consequently, Polinskaya argues that these boundary stones mark profitable “agricultural estates” owned and leased out by the Athenian cleruchs who settled the island after the conquest of the island in 431 BC. They had no religious function, but were made nominally sacred to the god(s) as a thanks-giving for their aid in the conquest (Polinskaya, 244-46, 253-55, 263; Polinskaya, A Local History of Greek Polytheism, 2013, 268-69).

The four most recently found inscriptions (SEG 59.347-350) are located on rock-surfaces around Sphendouri, a sloped outcrop overlooking the sea in south Aigina, with less productive soil. Given this topography, Polinskaya (264) argues that these estates’ function was also military and strategic: the Athenian cleruchs claimed land that offered wide viewsheds of the surrounding sea and approaches to Aigina, to guard the island from external attacks.

Added: 19 Aug 2025
Updated: 19 Aug 2025
Feedback

ID: AIO_3398