In finished form this inscription was composed of two symmetrical halves, the first half inscribed by B, the second by X. It required planning to produce this
B X
[B |X I
arrangement, not necessarily elaborate planning however. The errors in the text (lines 1 1, 16, 21, 23, e.g.) show that the letters were not laid out on the stone. The space available on the Treasury wall (two adjacent blocks) 13 naturally suggested an arrange- ment in two halves, which could have been, and I think probably was, achieved simply by inscribing as many lines as necessary on the left until the approximate mid-point of the text was reached and then inscribing the rest on the right. This suggests consecu- tive rather than simultaneous inscribing by the masons. The determination of the layout
13 B.C.H., LXII, 1938, pl. XXXIX, 2 shows this clearly.
66
© American School of Classical Studies at Athens For personal use only. License: CC-BY-NC-ND.
THE INSCRIPTIONS BY THE II2 1028 CUTTER
on paper, however, could have been precise enough to allow them to work simul- taneously. Complete layout ofthis sort is uncommon and, considering the work involved, highly unlikely when it was not absolutely necessary. The most reasonable interpreta- tion of all the observable evidence is that B began with no. 48 (7h); X was called in to cut the second half, freeing B to proceed with the work on the other texts. When X finished with no. 48, he began on no. 26 (7d) (supra, pp. 55-56). An estimate of letters inscribed supports this reconstruction. The second half of no. 48 (minus the five lines cut by B) contained ca. 2,250 letters; the texts (hypothetically) inscribed by B while X was working on no. 48 (i.e. nos. 6 [7a]; 10 [7b]; 2 [7b]; 31 [7c], lines 1-5;
17 [7c], lines 1-5) contained approximately 1,600 letters. Some of the difference may be accounted for by the time B spent on layout.
7i (P1. 30). Additions to the record of the Pythais of Agathokles (106/5 B.C.).
(1) FD III 2, no. 13, col. I, lines 7-8 (P1. 30, a).
For attribution, note epsilon in line 8.
E(K vppaKL8&v Alvetas 'HpaKAEXSov
This addition is the only entry in column I; in reality, it extends to the left into the space occupied by FD III 2, no. 9 and bridges the space originally left blank between the two texts.
(2) FD III 2, no. 13, col. II, line 8 (PI. 30, a).
For attribution, note alphas and the use of serifs.
tJlavrts Xappvd Aof. XaptwvAov
B took advantage of a blank space at this point to add the name and title of the mantis; this man also held this position in the Pythais of 98/7 B.C. (7a, line 15).
La mention du tcavrTs, en particulier, aurait du etre gravee plus haut, vers la fin du no. 5; on I'aura sans doute ajoutee la, parce que XaplJvAos appartenait a la famille des Eupatrides (Colin).
The reason is incorrect, for as Boethius observes (Die Pythais, p. 101, note 4) "Fouilles 10, Z. 20 zeigt, dass er zu der Familie der Erysichtoniden gehorte." B, indeed, knew this and has indicated the independence of this entry by beginning it out almost at the outer guideline. His reason for not placing it at the outer guideline seems to be that he wished to indicate its independence without achieving the visual result that the title pJavTs should supersede Trv0ataiTat. The entry was made here because this was 67
© American School of Classical Studies at Athens For personal use only. License: CC-BY-NC-ND.
THE LETTERING OF AN ATHENIAN MASON
the first line blank after the usual position (nos. 5 and 13 are inscribed as a unit as Boethius has shown on pages 132ff.).14
The second sigma is inscribed over an upsilon (initially a haplography of XAPMYAO).
(3) FD III 2, no. 13, col. II, line 15 (PI. 30, a).
For attribution, note sigma and upsilon.
A toaKovpL3 A LOK [o] vpt8ov i This man was also a Pythaist in 98/7 B.C.; cf. 7b, line 63.
(4) FD III 2, no. 30, line 14 (P1. 30, b).
For attribution, note alpha and use of serifs.
'ApxLTr-Tr ApoJLOKAE0ovS
This, the last entry, was clearly added by B at a later time.
Both the physical positions of these entries and the hand reveal that they are later additions, made when B inscribed the record of 98/7. It is of some interest to note that an entry could be filled in after the passage of 8 years. Two of the additions are names of persons who actually participated in both Pythaids, indicating that personal ini- tiative often lies behind such additions.
The most interesting fact which emerges from the foregoing is the obvious trouble which those in charge took to ensure careful work. They brought in Athenian letter- cutters for the job15 and established rules to govern the inscribing. For example, they required incised guidelines, thus forcing the cutters to plan out their texts in advance with some exactness.16 Almost all mistakes were perceived and corrected at once;
thus, the work was done carefully with frequent checking. Study of these inscriptions has also shown that this tendency toward careful work was balanced and, in some cases, offset by the need or desire to complete the work quickly. Proportionately, almost as many mistakes occur in these inscriptions as in 6 (infra, p. 113); they are primarily minor errors and were probably generated by haste. The glare of the sun on the wall of the Treasury was, doubtless, also a factor. 17 Another bit of evidence indicating that the work was done with some haste is that serifs were omitted with greater frequency here than in the other inscriptions.
14 Daux, Delphes, pp. 710-716, discusses the relation of these texts in detail.
5 X was also from Athens. I have noted thus far, however, only one example of his work, II2 995.
16 Indirectly, this provides a rather meaningful comment on cutters' normal procedures, at least as those in charge of the Treasury perceived them.
17 Inscribing is not physically taxing, but it is hard on the eyes (see App. II). Unless B worked with an exceptionally good shading device, the sun, which shines directly on the wall of the Treasury for most of the day, would have caused great eyestrain. Cf. also p. 120 infra.
68