Inscriptional Records

for the Dramatic Festivals in Athens

Brill’s Studies in Greek and
Roman Epigraphy

Editorial Board
John Bodel (Brown University)
Adele Scafuro (Brown University)

The titles published in this series are listed at brill.nl/bsgre

 Inscriptional Records
for the Dramatic Festivals
in Athens
IG II2 2318–2325 and Related Texts

Edited, with Introductions and Commentary

by
Benjamin W. Millis
and
S. Douglas Olson

Leiden • boston
2012
Cover illustrations: Lysicrates monument (Courtesy of American School of Classical Studies at
Athens, Archives, Alison Frantz Photographic Collection) and Didascalia-fragment SEG XXVI 203
(Agora I-7151; courtesy of Agora Excavations, American School of Classical Studies at Athens).

Library of Congress Control Number: 2012941315

This publication has been typeset in the multilingual “Brill” typeface. With over 5,100 characters
covering Latin, IPA, Greek, and Cyrillic, this typeface is especially suitable for use in the
humanities. For more information, please see www.brill.nl/brill-typeface.

ISSN 1876-2557
ISBN 978 90 04 22912 9 (hardback)
ISBN 978 90 04 23201 3 (e-book)

Copyright 2012 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Global Oriental, Hotei Publishing,
IDC Publishers and Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,
photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher.

Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV
provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center,
222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA.
Fees are subject to change.

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

 For W. E. Millis, Sr.
in his tenth decade.
παλαιά τε πολλά τε εἰδώς,
Νέστωρ, οὗ καὶ πρόσθεν ἀρίστη φαίνετο βουλή
BWM

For Rachel and the boys.

σὺ γάρ μ᾿ ἐβιώσαο, κούρη
SDO
 Contents

List of Illustrations .............................................................................................................................................. ix
Foreword ............................................................................................................................................................... xi
Citation Style and Abbreviations ................................................................................................................... xiii

Introduction ......................................................................................................................................................... 1

Chapter One. The Fasti: IG II2 2318 .............................................................................................................. 5

Summary Discussion of the Restoration ................................................................................................ 7
Detailed Fragment-by-Fragment Discussion of the Reconstruction .............................................. 8
Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................................... 25
Technical Description .................................................................................................................................. 27
Text .................................................................................................................................................................... 29
Epigraphical Notes ........................................................................................................................................ 49
Prosopographical Notes and Comments ................................................................................................ 52

Chapter Two. The Didascaliae: IG II2 2319–23a, SEG XXVI 203 ........................................................... 59

IG II2 2320 ......................................................................................................................................................... 61
IG II2 2323a ....................................................................................................................................................... 70
IG II2 2323 ......................................................................................................................................................... 76
IG II2 2319 Column I ...................................................................................................................................... 108
IG II2 2322 ......................................................................................................................................................... 111
IG II2 2321 ......................................................................................................................................................... 113
IG II2 2319 Columns II–III ........................................................................................................................... 115
SEG XXVI 203 (= Hesperia 40 [1971] 302–5, No. 8) ............................................................................... 118

Chapter Three. Actors Competitions: SEG XXVI 208 (= Hesperia 7 [1938] 116–18, no. 22)
and IG II2 2324 ..................................................................................................................................................... 123
SEG XXVI 208 (= Hesperia 7 [1938] 116–18, no. 22) .............................................................................. 125
IG II2 2324 ......................................................................................................................................................... 129

Chapter Four. The Victors Lists: IG II2 2325A–H ..................................................................................... 133

IG II2 2325A (= 2325.1–20): Tragic Poets Victorious at the City Dionysia ..................................... 141
IG II2 2325B (= 2325.21–38): Tragic Actors Victorious at the City Dionysia ................................. 150
IG II2 2325C (= 2325.39–87bis): Comic Poets Victorious at the City Dionysia ............................ 156
IG II2 2325D (= 2325.88–115): Comic Actors Victorious at the City Dionysia .............................. 171
IG II2 2325E (= 2325.116–89): Comic Poets Victorious at the Lenaea ............................................. 178
IG II2 2325F (= 2325.190–234): Comic Actors Victorious at the Lenaea ........................................ 193
IG II2 2325G (= 2325.235–46): Tragic Poets Victorious at the Lenaea ............................................ 204
IG II2 2325H (= 2325.247–318): Tragic Actors Victorious at the Lenaea ........................................ 208
IG II2 2325 Incerta (= 2325.319–25) ........................................................................................................... 222
viii contents

Appendix. The Roman Fragments (IGUR 216, 215, 218) ......................................................................... 225

Bibliography ......................................................................................................................................................... 231

Indices
I.   Poets, Actors, Chorêgoi, and Producers ............................................................................................ 233
II. Athenian Archons ................................................................................................................................... 238
 List of Illustrations

List of Photos

1. IG II2 2318 frr. a + b + b2 ........................................................................................................................... 9

2. IG II2 2318 fr. c .............................................................................................................................................. 14
3. IG II2 2318 fr. d ............................................................................................................................................. 17
4. IG II2 2318 fr. e .............................................................................................................................................. 19
5. IG II2 2318 fr. f .............................................................................................................................................. 19
6. IG II2 2318 frr. g + h .................................................................................................................................... 21
7. IG II2 2318 fr. i .............................................................................................................................................. 23
8. IG II2 2318 fr. k ............................................................................................................................................. 24
9. IG II2 2318 fr. l ............................................................................................................................................... 25
10. IG II2 2320 frr. a + b .................................................................................................................................... 63
11. IG II2 2323a .................................................................................................................................................... 71
12. IG II2 2323 fr. a ............................................................................................................................................. 86
13. IG II2 2323 fr. f .............................................................................................................................................. 87
14. IG II2 2323 frr. g + e .................................................................................................................................... 88
15. IG II2 2323 fr. h ............................................................................................................................................. 89
16. IG II2 2323 frr. i + b + c/d .......................................................................................................................... 90
17. SEG XXXVIII 162 .......................................................................................................................................... 91
18. IG II2 2322 ...................................................................................................................................................... 111
19. IG II2 2321 ...................................................................................................................................................... 113
20. SEG XXVI 203 ............................................................................................................................................... 119
21. SEG XXVI 208 fr. a ....................................................................................................................................... 126
22. SEG XXVI 208 fr. b ...................................................................................................................................... 128
23. IG II2 2324 fr. a ............................................................................................................................................. 129
24. IG II2 2324 fr. b ............................................................................................................................................. 130
25. IG II2 2325 fr. a ............................................................................................................................................. 142
26. IG II2 2325 fr. b ............................................................................................................................................. 143
27. IG II2 2325 fr. p ............................................................................................................................................. 150
28. IG II2 2325 fr. f´ ............................................................................................................................................ 151
29. IG II2 2325 frr. d + e .................................................................................................................................... 159
30. IG II2 2325 frr. f + g ..................................................................................................................................... 160
31. IG II2 2325 frr. h + n´ .................................................................................................................................. 161
32. IG II2 2325 frr. b´ + c´ .................................................................................................................................. 172
33. IG II2 2325 fr. m´ .......................................................................................................................................... 173
34. IG II2 2325 frr. i + k + l + n and 2325 fr. m .......................................................................................... 180
35. IG II2 2325 frr. k´ + l´ + o + SEG XXVI 207 (fr. p´) .............................................................................. 181
36. IG II2 2325 fr. i´ ............................................................................................................................................. 194
37. IG II2 2325 fr. x ............................................................................................................................................. 195
38. IG II2 2325 frr. y + z + a´ + SEG XXVI 207 (fr. q´) ............................................................................... 196
x list of illustrations

39. IG II2 2325 frr. e´ + c .................................................................................................................................... 204

40. IG II2 2325 frr. r + s + t + u + v + w ........................................................................................................ 209
41. IG II2 2325 fr. d´ ............................................................................................................................................ 210
42. IG II2 2325 fr. q .............................................................................................................................................. 211
43. IG II2 2325 fr. o´ ............................................................................................................................................ 212
44. IG II2 2325 fr. g´ ............................................................................................................................................. 222
45. IG II2 2325 fr. h´ ............................................................................................................................................ 222

List of Figures

1. Reconstruction of IG II2 2318 showing placement of individual fragments .............................. 26

2. Reconstruction of IG II2 2323 showing placement of individual fragments .............................. 92
3. IG II2 2325A–H: Organization of lists and relative placement along architrave ...................... 140
 FOReWoRD
This edition grew out of our mutual interest in
the early history of Athenian drama and of Attic
comedy in particular. The inscriptions treated
here are far and away our most important source
of information for the history of the competi-
tions at the City Dionysia and Lenaea festivals,
and for the relative and absolute chronologies of
the individual poets and actors who participated
in them. Despite that fact, they have not been
studied systematically for over a century, despite
the addition of several new fragments recovered
since Kirchner’s time. Not coincidentally, a clear
understanding of how the Fasti (IG II2 2318) and
the Victors Lists (IG II2 2325) in particular are
to be restored, and of the larger implications
of the various lists and catalogues of actors and
poets for our understanding of the festivals and
their personnel, has slowly faded from living
memory. At the same time, tentative—and often
ill-founded—theories, for example about the
hexagonal structure on the architrave and walls
of which the Didascaliae (IG II2 2319–23a) and
the Victors Lists, respectively, were supposedly
inscribed, have gradually hardened into scholarly
doctrine.
Our aim in this edition has been to clarify
the content and character of these inscriptions,
as a way of restoring wider scholarly access to
them and allowing them to better assume their
proper historical, literary and prosopographi-
cal significance. Our work necessarily builds on
that of eminent predecessors, in particular Adolf
Wilhelm and Edward Capps, who first worked
out how the majority of the material was to
be restored. Except where noted, we have re-
examined the stones themselves, although in
a few cases their physical decay has forced us
to accept readings reported by earlier scholars
but no longer visible. Where our text diverges
from that offered by previous editors, those dif-
ferences should be assumed to be deliberate
and to represent an attempt to improve the epi-
graphic record. Although we renumber most of
the inscriptions, line-numbers from IG II2 are
also offered (in italics and in a reduced font) for
the reader’s convenience.
The practical epigraphic work that underlies
this edition was completed in the storerooms
of the Epigraphical Museum in Athens and the
American excavations in the Athenian Agora.
We would like to acknowledge the generous
assistance of the following individuals and insti-
tutions without whose kindness and cooperation
this project would never have been completed.
Charalambos Kritzas and Maria Lagogianni, suc-
cessive Directors of the Epigraphical Museum,
graciously provided access to the inscriptions
held in the Epigraphical Museum, making much
of the following study possible. The staff of the
Museum were unfailingly courteous and helpful,
and many took a lively interest in our work; we
know of few institutions as devoted to facilitating
the study of the antiquities in their care. At the
Agora, John Camp, Director of the Excavations,
kindly allowed access to the inscriptions stored
there, while Jan Jordan, Sylvie Dumont, and Craig
Mauzy all provided assistance in various ways and
were as helpful and welcoming as ever. We are
further grateful to both the Epigraphical Museum
and the Agora Excavations for providing us with
photographs of the relevant inscriptions. We are
also indebted to Angelos Matthaiou for gener-
ously providing a photograph of SEG XXXVIII
162. All necessary permits were obtained under
the auspices of the American School of Classi-
cal Studies at Athens, and we are indebted to
Stephen Tracy and Jack Davis, successive direc-
tors of the School, and Maria Pilali and Ioanna
Damanaki, successive administrative assistants
of the School, for their assistance.
xii foreword
John Traill was an invaluable source of infor-
mation and advice on prosopographical matters.
Leda Costaki provided important last-minute
help in obtaining photographs.
Adele Scafuro read the manuscript in semi-
final form with meticulous care, and offered
numerous helpful suggestions in regard to the
format and presentation of our arguments.
Millis is grateful to the British School at Ath-
ens, where the bulk of his work on this project
was completed. Much of this study could only
have been carried out in Athens, and the School
provided an ideal environment for such work.
The resources of the Penrose Library of the Brit-
ish School, the Blegen Library of the American
School, and, more recently, the Sackler Library of
the University of Oxford proved invaluable. Sara
Strack, as always, provided continuous help that
aided in the completion of this project and much
more. A debt is owed also to James, Thomas, Pen-
rose and Thompson, who all contributed, each in
his own way.
Olson gratefully acknowledges the support of
a Grant-in-Aid from the University of Minne-
sota, which made his work in Athens possible,
and of the Humboldt Foundation, under whose
auspices final preparation of the manuscript
took place at the University of Freiburg in late
2011. Andrew Seeley and Peter Wildberger, work-
ing with University of Minnesota UROP grants,
carefully proof-read a draft of the manuscript in
2010, checking 1000s of references and making
numerous small but significant corrections of
other kinds. Rachel Bruzzone offered support of
another but even more important sort.
We regret that Jeffrey Rusten (ed.), The Birth of
Comedy, and Ian C. Storey (ed.), Fragments of Old
Comedy, both appeared too late to be taken into
account in our discussions.
 Citation Style and Abbreviations

Numbering for fragments and testimonia of comic authors follows R. Kassel and C. Austin (eds.), Poetae
Comici Graeci (Berlin and New York, 1983–). Numbering for fragments and testimonia of tragic authors follows
B. Snell et al. (eds.), Tragicorum Graecorum Fragmenta (Göttingen, 1971–2004). Names of ancient authors are
abbreviated as in LSJ; periodicals are abbreviated as in L’Anneé Philologique. Bold-face within our commentary
indicates that the reader is referred not just to the line in question, but to our note ad loc.
We refer to the following standard reference works in abbreviated style:

ARMA Ἀρχεῖον Μνημείων τῶν Ἀθηνῶν καὶ τῆς Ἀττικῆς

Berve H. Berve, Das Alexanderreich auf prosopographischer Grundlage ii Prosopographie
(Munich, 1926)
Grainger J. D. Grainger, Aitolian Prosopographical Studies. Mnemosyne, Supplements 202.
(Leiden 1999)
IG Inscriptiones Graecae
IGUR L. Moretti (ed.), Inscriptiones Graecae urbis Romae (Rome, 1968–90)
LGPN Lexicon of Greek Personal Names (Oxford, 1987–)
LIMC Lexicon iconographicum mythologiae classicae (Zurich and Munich, 1981–99)
Nachtergael, Galates Georges Nachtergael, Les Galates en Grèce et les Sôtéria de Delphes (Brussels, 1977)
O’Connor J. B. O’Connor, Chapters in the History of Actors and Acting in Ancient Greece together
with a Prosopographia Histrionum Graecorum (Chicago, 1908)
PA J. Kirchner, Prosopographia Attica (Berlin, 1901–3)
PAA J. Traill (ed.), Persons of Ancient Athens (Toronto, 1994–2011)
SEG Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum
Stephanis I. E. Stephanis, Διονυσιακοὶ Τεχνῖται (Iraklio, 1988)
Syll.1 W. Dittenberger (ed.), Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum1 (Leipzig, 1883)
Syll.2 W. Dittenberger (ed.), Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum2 (Leipzig, 1898–1901)
Syll.3 W. Dittenberger (ed.), Sylloge Inscriptionum Graecarum3 (Leipzig, 1915–24)
 INTRODUCTION
Our knowledge of the history of the dramatic
competitions at the City Dionysia and Lenaea
festivals in Athens from the early 5th to the mid-
2nd centuries BCE and of the relative chronology
of the poets and actors who competed in them
depends in large part on a series of inscriptions
conventionally referred to as the Fasti (IG II2
2318, supplemented by one additional fragment),
the Didascaliae (IG II2 2319–24, supplemented by
two additional fragments) and the Victors Lists
(IG II2 2325, supplemented by three additional
fragments). The inscriptions are badly damaged
and cannot be entirely restored. But the ultimate
source of the information they preserve is cer-
tainly the Athenian state archives, making this
exceedingly valuable—if exceedingly difficult—
material.1
The versions of IG II 2318–25 presented by
Kirchner are out of date and on many points
misleading;2 Capps’ discussions of the material,
although fundamental, are scattered, provisional
1 For the Athenian state archives, see Sickinger (1999),
who discusses their relationship with the Fasti briefly on
pp. 42–7 (SEG XLIX 20). What relationship, if any, exists
between IG II2 2318–25 and the other inscriptions treated
here, and the lost Διδασκαλίαι (frr. 415–62 Gigon) and Νῖκαι
Διονυσιακαὶ ἀστικαὶ καὶ Ληναϊκαί (no. 135 Gigon) of Aristotle
remains unclear, although much of the period the inscrip-
tions covered postdates the philosopher’s death in 322
BCE. The most helpful recent treatment of the epigraphic
sources is Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 7–62, although her dis-
cussion focuses on actors and actors competitions, and her
treatment of IG II2 2318 in particular is eccentric and in
error on a number of significant points. Pickard-Cambridge
(1988) 101–7, 112–20, treats the material in only a summary
manner. The text provided by Mette (1977) is more com-
plete than that in IG II2, but is too idiosyncratic to be of
practical use.
2 The individual columns in IG II2 2318 in particular
are so long and lacunose that Kirchner chose not only to
close them up with summary notes (e.g. “a. 386/5–379/8
perierunt = 96 vs.”), but to omit numbers for most but
not all restored lines, making it difficult to visualize the
physical relationship among the fragments, upon which
and frequently in need of emendation;3 and
Ruck’s treatment of IG II2 2323 in particular fails
to extract much of the information the fragments
preserve.4 Wilhelm’s work consolidated all previ-
ous scholarship and added much that was new
and valuable as well. Although now outdated
and in need of revision, his texts and assump-
tions have formed the basis, whether explicitly
acknowledged or not, of almost all subsequent
work.5 We offer fresh texts of IG II2 2318–23 and
2325, incorporating fragments discovered since
Kirchner’s time and based on our own exami-
nation of the stones. Individual introductions
discuss the reconstruction and interpretation of
each inscription or set of inscriptions and its sig-
nificance for our understanding of the evolution
of the festivals and the chronology of the indi-
viduals who participated in them; epigraphical
the reconstruction depends. His text of IG II2 2325, while
less arbitrarily compact than his version of IG II2 2318, is
if anything more difficult to understand and occasionally
restores what appears to be the wrong number of columns.
Some of the incoherence of Kirchner’s text is due to the
fact that it was not based on fresh consideration of the evi-
dence, but was instead little more than a piecing together
into a continuous form of the fragments edited by Wilhelm
(1906a).
3 Capps (1899), separating material referring to the City
Dionysia and the Lenaea festivals in IG II2 2325; (1900a),
esp. 50–61, on the careers of Cephisodorus, Aristomenes,
Antiphanes and Menander; (1903), with particular atten-
tion to the reconstruction of IG II2 2318; (1906), on the
“Roman inscriptions”; (1907), detailed treatment of some
of the most difficult problems raised by both inscriptions,
with revisions and corrections of earlier positions; (1943),
announcing the discovery of fr. b2 of IG II2 2318, leading to a
reconsideration of the structure of the monument. Equally
fundamental, although out of date in many respects, is Wil-
helm (1906a) 6–33.
4 Ruck (1967).
5 Wilhelm (1906a); see also (1906b); cf. Wilamowitz
(1906). Among the most important scholarship subsumed
within Wilhelm (1906a) are the articles of Koumanoudes
(1877 and 1878), Köhler (1878 and 1880), and Bergk (1879).
2 introduction

and prosopographical notes follow. We also pres- tragic chorus was increased from 12 to 15 some-
ent and discuss two fragments of what appear to time around mid-century. The resources of the
be official records of contests for actors (but not Theater of Dionysus itself expanded gradually as
poets), perhaps associated with the Chytroi festi- well, e.g. with the introduction of painted stage-
val (SEG XXVI 208 and IG II2 2324). Three of the sets (allegedly in Sophocles’ time) and the the-
so-called “Roman Fragments” (IG XIV 1097, 1098a, atrical crane (first certainly in use in Euripides’
1098), which preserve additional details about the Medea in 432/1 BCE).
careers of a few individual 5th- and 4th-century IG II2 2318–25 make it clear that similar sub-
comic poets, are presented in an appendix.6 stantial changes in festival arrangements took
IG II2 2318–25 and the other texts presented in place often enough that such variations must
this volume are far and away our most significant almost be regarded as a norm. Thus even the
source for the careers of the majority of the indi- limited records preserved for us show that a
viduals whose competitive records they record. competition for tragic actors was introduced at
At least equally important, the inscriptions the Dionysia sometime between 451/0 and 448/7
provide a powerful corrective to the traditional BCE (inclusive); that competitions for tragic and
handbook-style vision of the dramatic competi- comic actors were introduced, perhaps simulta-
tions at the City Dionysia and the Lenaea in par- neously, at the Lenaea in the mid-430s BCE or
ticular as institutions whose form varied little so; and that an “old” (i.e. revived) tragedy was
if at all for hundreds of years. We know from added to the program at the Dionysia as a non-
other sources that comedies were added to the competitive event in 387/6 BCE. So too, in 342/1
calendar at the Dionysia early in the 5th century BCE at the Dionysia each tragic poet competed
(conventionally in 487/6 BCE; see IG II2 2325C with three plays (but no satyr play, unlike in the
introductory remarks), and that competitions in 5th century), whereas in 341/0 BCE each poet
tragedy and comedy were added at the Lenaea competed with two plays (and again no satyr
probably in the late 450s or early 440s BCE (see play); a single satyr play was part of the Dionysia
IG II2 2325E introductory remarks). We also program for tragedy in 341/0 and 340/39 BCE, but
know that the number of actors awarded to each was apparently another non-competitive exhibi-
tragedian staging plays at the Dionysia increased tion event, like the “old” tragedy; and in both 342/1
several times in the first half of the 400s BCE, and 341/0 BCE, three protagonists performed in
from one (originally the poet himself ), to two one play apiece for the three tragic poets at the
(at the beginning of Aeschylus’ career), to three Dionysia, and one protagonist also performed in
(by the end of Aeschylus’ career), and that the an “old tragedy”, but in 342/1 BCE, the protago-
nists rotated through the poets’ offerings in such
a way that each actor performed the first, sec-
ond and third plays in the three different sets of
6 We do not include the various lists of actors (e.g. IG II2
tragedies, whereas in 341/0 Thettalus performed
2419) that appear to be private monuments set up by the the first play in each set, while Neoptolemus per-
actors themselves and not ultimately derived from offi- formed the second. An “old” (i.e. revived) comedy
cial state records; these can be found in Ghiron-Bistagne was added to the program at the Dionysia as a
(1976) 78–114. Nor do we include state decrees honoring
persons connected with the dramatic festivals, since these third non-competitive event in 340/39 BCE, and a
are a very different sort of document, unrelated to official comic actors competition was added at the Dio-
festival records; Lambert (2008) collects and discusses ten nysia sometime between 330/29 BCE (when the
such decrees passed between 352/1 and 322/1 BCE. Simi- Fasti break off with no mention of it) and 313/12
larly extraneous to our study are the various monuments
erected by victorious chorêgoi; full collection and discus- BCE. Finally, sometime perhaps around 250 BCE,
sion of these remains a desideratum. the comic competitions at the Dionysia moved
 introduction 3

to a roughly every-other-year schedule; tragedies
were most likely staged at the festival in years
when comedies were not, and a mirror-schedule
was probably introduced at the Lenaea at the
same time, with tragedy performed there in years
when comedy was performed at the Dionysia,
and vice versa.
All this information and much else emerges
only from detailed study of the individual inscrip-
tions, to which we now turn.
 CHAPTER ONE

The Fasti: IG II2 2318

IG II2 2318 consists of 12 fragments of white “Pen- The heading probably extended across the
telic” marble from a large, multi-block inscrip- entire inscription, or at least the portions of it
tion that offered a record of the results of the produced by the first hand (see below). The pre-
dithyrambic and dramatic competitions at the served portion of the heading at the top of frr. a
City Dionysia on a year-by-year basis begin- and b2 reads [- - -]ΤΟΝ ΚΩΜΟΙ ΗΣΑΝ ΤΩ[. . . . . .]
ning most likely sometime near the end of the ΣΩΙ ΤΡΑΓΩΙΔΟΙ Δ[- - -], which Capps restored
6th century BCE.1 Almost all the fragments were to [ἀπὸ . . . .9. . . . ., ἐφ᾿ οὗ πρῶ]τον κῶμοι ἦσαν τῶ
found on the Acropolis; they appear to be unre- [ι Διονύ]σωι, τραγωιδοὶ δ[ημοτελεῖς] (“from the
lated to the structures on which IG II2 2319–25 archonship of . . . , in whose year revels first took
were inscribed. The vast majority of IG II2 2318 is place in honor of Dionysus, publicly funded tra-
lost. The inscription can nonetheless be almost gedians . . .”).3 Entries in the catalogue are set in
entirely reconstructed and the surviving frag- a standard form that begins with the name of
ments placed precisely within it. As a conse- the eponymous archon (supplying the date) and
quence, all the victories it records—including includes the names of the victorious tribes in
triumphs by some of the most famous names in men’s and boys’ dithyramb, the victorious comic
Athenian dramatic history, and others by men and tragic poets, the four victorious chorêgoi,4
of whom we otherwise know nothing—can be and eventually the victor in the tragic actors com-
given exact dates.2 The earliest preserved entry petition. After the fragmentary entry for 347/6
dates to 473/2 BCE, the last to 329/8 BCE. BCE (fr. e) the inscriber’s hand changes, and the
records of the contests in 343/2 BCE and later (frr.
f–i) likely represent a series of additions to the
1 We cite the fragments throughout using the letter- text. Similar additions are apparent in the Didas­
designations of Wilhelm (1906a), as does IG II2 and is now
conventional. Capps (1903) presents the entire inscription caliae and the Victors Lists, portions of which
(with the exception of fr. b2, discovered only much later,
and discussed in Capps [1943]), and we follow his general
line of analysis throughout, although with some corrections
and caveats in matter of detail. A number of the individual (a) Kirchner’s decision to number consecutively only lines
blocks on which the text was inscribed are reconstructed that are extant or that he chose to restore greatly obscures
below, but nothing can be said about the structure to which the relationship between the individual fragments, and (b)
they belonged aside from the fact that it was a wall of some fr. b2, discovered after Kirchner’s edition, cannot be accom-
sort, presumably a retaining wall or a wall of building. modated in his numbering scheme, even though it falls
2 Fragments of only 13 columns survive, but there must within lines he restored, because his numbering was based
have been at least one more to the left, since the top of on the false assumption (refuted below) that each column
Col. I in fr. a does not represent the beginning of either contained 140 lines.
the heading or the text. Most likely there were at least two 3 Capps (1943) 9–10, who speculatively restores the rest
more columns, but the lack of concrete evidence about of the heading τραγωιδοὶ δ[ημοτελεῖς . . . ἀγωνίσαντες ἐν ἄστει
when the competitions began makes it impossible to draw οἵδε νενικήκασιν] (“the following publicly funded tragedians
definitive conclusions on this point; see further below. The were victorious competing in the City Dionysia”). See in
line numbers in what follows are our own, although we general Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 25–6.
also provide IG II2 numbers (in italics, and in a reduced 4 For the institution of the chorêgia, see Wilson (2000)
font) in the margins of the text. The standard line numbers passim (p. 13 for the prominence of the chorêgoi in this
(those of Kirchner in IG II2) are inadequate for two reasons: monument).
6 chapter one
covered much of the 2nd century BCE. This is all
patently city archive material, and the implica-
tion is that fresh sets of entries was added to the
various inscriptions from time to time, doubtless
at official instigation, although why the task was
undertaken only every few decades rather than
annually is unclear.5 How late the entries in IG II2
2318 ultimately extended is unknown, although
they can scarcely have continued past the abo-
lition of the chorêgia and the introduction of
the agônothesia near the end of the 4th century
except in a radically different form.
Comparison of frr. a and b of IG II2 2318—
which preserve the names of eponymous archons,
chorêgoi and poets known from other sources to
belong to the first half of the 5th century BCE—
reveals that each annual entry in the earliest
preserved section of the inscription consisted of
11 items, one per line, in a fixed order:
(Item 1) the eponymous archon’s name;
(Item 2) the name of the tribe that took the prize
in the boys’ dithyramb;
(Item 3) the name of the victorious chorêgos in
the boys’ dithyramb;
(Item 4) the name of the tribe that took the prize
in the men’s dithyramb;
(Item 5) the name of the victorious chorêgos in
the men’s dithyramb;
(Item 6) the notice ΚΩΜΩΙΔΩΝ (“of the comic
poets”);
(Item 7) the name of the victorious comic chorêgos;
(Item 8) the name of the victorious comic
didaskalos (poet);6
(Item 9) the notice ΤΡΑΓΩΙΔΩΝ (“of the tragic
poets”);
(Item 10) the name of the victorious tragic chorê­
gos; and
5 One obvious hypothesis is some form of office-clean-
ing, which brought with it a desire to transform arguably
important old documents into a more permanent form
before they were discarded.
6 See the discussion of the use of this term in Section
B, below.
(Item 11) the name of the victorious tragic didas­
kalos (poet).
Lines 151–61 (from fr. b), reporting the result of
the contest in 459/8 BCE, for example, read:
(Item 1) In the archonship of Philocles
(Item 2) The tribe of Oeneis (was victorious) in
the boys’ dithyramb;
(Item 3) Demodocus was chorêgos;
(Item 4) The tribe of Hippothontis (was victori-
ous) in the men’s dithyramb;
(Item 5) Euctemon of Eleusis was chorêgos;
(Item 6) Of the comic poets
(Item 7) Eurycleides was chorêgos;
(Item 8) Euphronius was didaskalos;
(Item 9) Of the tragic poets
(Item 10) Xenocles of Aphidna was chorêgos;
(Item 11) Aeschylus was didaskalos.
Sometime around the middle of the 5th century
(see below, on fr. b2) a twelfth item, the name of
the victor in a new competition for tragic actors,
was added at the end of each year’s entry. This
slightly expanded 12-item, 12-line formula is used
in all remaining fragments of the inscription until
the late 330s BCE, at the bottom of Col. XII and
the top of Col. XIII, where the standard 12 items
are maintained but a new stone-cutter spreads
them out over a number of additional lines.
The regular structure of the annual entries in
IG II2 2318, combined with the fact that frr. b, d
and f all contain portions of at least two columns
with archon names preserved in both, allows the
length of the individual columns in the inscrip-
tion, and thus the minimum number of such
columns, to be calculated.7 Thus if the names of
two archons e.g. 10 years apart appeared directly
7 For earlier attempts to reconstruct the inscription
along the same lines, see Capps (1903) and (1943), whose
general line of analysis we follow, although with correc-
tions and caveats in matter of detail, all marked expressly
as such; Kaibel in Wilhelm (1906a) 169–75; and especially
Schenkl (1907). For archon names (all known in this period),
see Meritt (1977); Develin (1989).
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 7
opposite one another at the top of two columns
in a section of the inscription where each annual
entry required 12 lines, we could deduce that the
first column contained exactly 120 lines.8 If, on
the other hand, the same archons’ names were
preserved, but in the second column the name
appeared in the fourth line rather than the first,
we could deduce that the first column was not
quite long enough to contain 10 complete 12-item
annual entries. Instead, it must have had room
for nine complete entries plus the first nine items
in a tenth entry,9 with the three excess lines car-
ried over to the top of the second column, push-
ing down the archon’s name in the first complete
entry there by the amount of the deficit. The
same principle can be applied at any point in
the column and to any items in the standard 11-
or 12-item formula: as long as two datable entries
appear in opposite columns, the number of lines
between them—and thus the length of the col-
umn to the left—can be calculated. In the event,
every column in IG II2 2318 can be shown to have
contained 141 (perhaps, in one case, 140) lines,
and accommodating the fragments preserved for
us, along with the lost but regular—and there-
fore easily restorable—entries between them
requires 14 such columns, with other columns
(now entirely lost) to the left and, most likely, to
the right as well.
Summary Discussion of the Restoration
Fr. a of IG II2 2318 preserves part of the heading
and the upper portions of two columns, conven-
tionally referred to as Columns I and II of the
inscription, that record (in Col. I) victories by the
comic poet Magnes and the tragic poet Aeschy-
lus, with Pericles of the deme Cholargus as his
chorêgos, and (in Col. II) service by Cleaenetus
as chorêgos for the victorious tribe Pandionis
in the men’s dithyramb. No archon names, and
thus no specific dates, are preserved on fr. a. Fr. b
8 I.e. 10 x 12 lines.
9 I.e. 9 x 12 = 108; plus 9; = 117 lines.
contains portions of three columns, the second of
which includes inter alia two archon names and
the report of a victory by the tragic poet Aeschy-
lus in 459/8 BCE (sc. with the Oresteia trilogy).
The presence of a left-hand vertical edge on fr.
a, limiting the placement of fr. b in that direc-
tion, combined with what is known of the dates
of the historical individuals referred to in both
fragments, makes it clear that fr. b contains por-
tions of Columns I, II and III. Restoration of the
names of a poet and an archon in Col. I of fr. b
dates the victories recorded there 12 years earlier
than those that appear roughly opposite them in
Col. II. This in turn allows the length of Column I
to be calculated as 140 lines (although see below).
The annual entries in Col. III of fr. b have been
extended by one line, to accommodate a new
event, the actors’ contest, which must have been
held for the first time sometime between 451/0
and 448/7 BCE (inclusive).
Fr. b2 contains more of the heading and the
upper portions of what can now be recognized
as Columns III and IV of the inscription, although
the victories recorded here (like those in fr. a) can
at this point be dated only by reference to those
in fr. b, which stood some as-yet-undetermined
distance below. A seeming disparity in the verti-
cal placement of the entries in Col. IV suggests
that Col. III contained not 140 but 141 lines, and
evidence from other columns makes it likely that
this was true of the entire inscription, perhaps
including Col. I (which perhaps included a spe-
cial notice or the like taking up one line).
The regular character of the annual entries,
combined with our knowledge of the number
of lines in each column and the fact that frr. c–i
all fortuitously contain an archon’s name, means
that the position of the remaining fragments can
be fixed in relation to fragment b. The relation-
ship between frr. b–i, on the one hand, and frr. a
and b2 (which alone have a fixed physical posi-
tion within the inscription) can also be deter-
mined, via comparison of the preserved margins
on the stones, which come from four large blocks.
The constraints the position of the margins of
these blocks imposes on the position of frr. b–i,
8 chapter one
all of which must move in lockstep up and down
within the columns, can be accommodated only
if fr. b is located almost directly below frr. a and
b2. This allows the victories recorded in frr. a and
Detailed Fragment-by-Fragment Discussion of the
Reconstruction
fr. a (IG II2 2318.1–6, 143–6)10
[τ]ον κῶμοι ἦσαν τῶ[ι Διονύ-]
[Ξ]ενοκλείδης ἐχορήγε Πανδιονὶ[ς ἀνδρῶν]
Μ̣άγνης ἐδίδασκεν Κλεαίνετ[ος Κυδαθη : ἐχορή]
τραγωιδῶν κωμωιδῶ[ν]
Περικλ̣ ῆς Χολαρ : ἐχορή Θα[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
Αἰσχύλος ἐ[δ]ίδασκε
Two fragments of what are conventionally referred
to as Columns I and II of IG II2 2318 survive.11 The
first (fr. a) preserves the left-hand vertical edge
of the block (hereafter “Block 1”); a fragment of
the heading; from the top of Col. I, items 7–11
of a typical early 11-item annual entry, for a year
in which Magnes was the victorious comic poet
(line 3) and Aeschylus was the victorious tragic
poet (line 6), with Pericles of the deme Cholargus
as his chorêgos (line 5); and from the top of Col.
II, battered portions of items 4–7 of another typi-
cal annual entry, for a year in which Cleaenetus
was the victorious chorêgos in the men’s dithy-
ramb (line 144). Of the individuals mentioned in
Col. I, Magnes was an early Comic poet, whom
Aristotle (Po. 1448a33–4 = Magnes test. 2) and
the Suda (μ 20 = Magnes test. 1) both describe as
a younger contemporary of Epicharmus ( fl. 490s–
470s); Aeschylus’ first victory is dated by the
Marmor Parium (FGrH 239 A 50 = A. test. 54a)
to 484 BCE, and he died in 456/5 BCE; and
Pericles is first known to have been politically
active in the late 460s BCE, by which time he
10 For technical details and more substantial epigraphi-
cal and prosopographical commentary, see below.
11 Note that these are not the first two columns of the
original inscription (which must have included at least one
more column to the left, and probably two), but are instead
the first columns from which anything survives.
b2 to be dated, by fixing the number of lines that
separate them from the entries in fr. b, and fixes
the physical position of all the other fragments
within the inscription.
must have been at least 30 years old, and died at
a relatively advanced age in 429 BCE, meaning
that he was probably born in the mid-490s BCE.12
As for Col. II, Cleaenetus is a relatively rare name;
since dithyrambic competitions were organized
by tribe and the tribe in question is Pandionis
(line 143), the man referred to is almost certainly
Cleaenetus of the deme Cydathenaeon (PA 8460;
PAA 574425), whose son Cleon was prominent in
Athenian politics in the 420s BCE.13
The partially preserved annual entry at the top
of Col. I in fr. a is thus most naturally dated on
prosopographical grounds to sometime between
the late 470s BCE (when Magnes and Aeschylus
were both active, and Pericles was just old enough
to perform a liturgy) and 460/59 BCE (the year
before Aeschylus’ final Athenian production, the
Oresteia, referred to in fr. b). The much less com-
plete entry at the top of Col. II, meanwhile, could
belong to almost any year after that, although the
likelihood that Cleon was born before 470 BCE,14
meaning that Cleainetus was probably born
before 500, makes a date after the 440s BCE for a
chorêgia by the latter unlikely.
12 For the evidence (such as it is) for Pericles’ dates, see
Davies (1971) 456–8.
13 Aside from members of this family, no one named
Cleainetus is known from the tribe Pandionis.
14 Davies (1971) 319.

the fasti: ig ii2 2318
9

1. IG II2 2318 frr. a + b + b2 (EM 8217 + 8225 + 13368; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
10 chapter one

fr. b (IG II2 2318.11–24, 149–68, 290–9)

[  ca. 10   ] : ἐχορή Ἐ[ρεχθηὶς ἀνδρῶν]
[  ca. 8  ] ἐδίδασκεν Βίω[ν  -  -  - ἐχορήγει]
[ἐπὶ Φιλοκ]λέους κω[μωιδῶν]
[ - - - ἐχ]ορ̣ [Οἰ]νηὶς παίδων Ἀνδ[ -  -  - ἐχορήγει]
[κωμωιδῶν] Δημόδοκος ἐχορήγει Καλ[λίας ἐδίδασκε]
[ - - - ἐχ]ορήγει Ἱπποθωντὶς ἀνδρῶν τρα[γωιδῶν]
[ . . . . . . ἐδίδ]ασκεν Εὐκτήμων Ἐλευ : ἐχορή Θα[ -  -  - ἐχορήγει]
[τραγωιδῶν] κωμωιδῶν Κα[ρκίνος ἐδίδασκε]
[ - - -  ἐχ]ορήγει Εὐρυκλείδης ἐχορήγει ὑπ[οκριτὴς    -  -  - ]
[Πολυφράσμω]ν ἐδίδας Εὐφρόνιος ἐδίδασκε ἐπ[ὶ Καλλιμάχου]
[ἐπὶ Πραξιέργο]υ τραγωιδῶν
[Ἱπποθωντὶς πα]ίδων Ξενοκλῆς Ἀφιδνα : ἐχορή
[  ca. 8  ἐχο]ρήγει Αἰσχύλος ἐδίδασκεν
[  ca. 8   ἀνδρ]ῶν ἐπὶ Ἅβρωνος
[  ca. 10   ἐχ]ορήγ Ἐρεχθεὶς παίδων
[κωμωιδῶν] Χαρίας Ἀργυλῆ : ἐχορή
[  ca. 8   ἐχορήγ]ει Λεωντὶς ἀνδρῶν
Δεινόστρατος ἐχορ
κωμωιδῶν
[ . . . . . ἐχ]ορήγ[ει]

Col. I begins with item 7 in a typical 11-item entry
(line 2), while item 7 in the first (partial) entry
in Col. II appears three positions below this, in
the fourth line in the column (line 146). As the
discussion in the section that follows will make
clear, all these entries almost certainly belong
to a period before the tragic actors contest was
inaugurated. The number of lines in Col. I must
therefore have been some multiple of 11 (i.e. some
unknown number of complete 11-item annual
entries that filled the bulk of the column), plus
five (the “roll-over” lines, from the lost column
to the left, preserved at the top of Col. I), plus
three (the opening of the incomplete annual
entry whose items 4–7 are preserved at the top of
Col. II. But whether Col. I contained e.g. 63 lines,15
or 107 lines16 or 140 lines,17 remains at this point
unclear.
Fr. b consists of the right-hand portion of one
column of text (lines 11–24); a well-preserved sec-
tion of another (central) column (lines 149–68);
and the left-hand portion of a third column (lines
290–9). The main task at hand is to align these
columns horizontally with those in fr. a, and thus
to determine whether the material preserved in
fr. b represents portions of e.g. Columns I–III or
Columns II–IV. The first full entry in the central
column in fr. b records a victory by the comic
poet Euphronius (line 158) and another victory
by the tragic poet Aeschylus (line 161). The name
of the eponymous archon for 458/7 BCE, Habron,
is fully preserved at the beginning of the entry
for the following year (line 162). Euphronius and

16 I.e. nine complete annual entries @ 11 lines/year = 99

lines, plus 8 lines from two additional partial entries.
15 I.e. five complete annual entries @ 11 lines/year = 55 17 I.e. 12 complete annual entries @ 11 lines/year = 132,
lines; plus 8 lines from two additional partial entries. plus 8 lines from two additional partial entries.
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 11
Aeschylus must therefore have been victorious
in 459/8 BCE, when the latter staged his Oresteia
(hypothesis A. Ag.) and Philocles—whose name
is easily restored in line 151—was eponymous
archon.
As for the other, much more badly damaged
columns in fr. b, Lipsius (1887) 280–1 noted that
the name of the victorious tragic poet in line
17, to the left, was unusually long. He therefore
restored Polyphrasmon (TrGF 7), who appears
early in the catalogue of tragic victors at the City
Dionysia at IG II2 2325A.13, after Aeschylus and
Euetes (victorious only once), and before Nothip-
pus (also victorious only once) and Sophocles,
who according to the Marmor Parium (FGrH 239
A 56 = S. test. 33) took the prize for the first time
in 469/8 BCE. IG II2 2325 is organized by the date
of the poet’s first victory at the festival in ques-
tion, and Lenaea contests were not yet being
held in this period. If Sophocles’ initial victory
at the Dionysia came in 469/8 BCE, therefore,
Nothippus’ must have come in 470/69 or earlier,18
while Polyphrasmon’s must have come in 471/0
or earlier, and the space available in the inscrip-
tion for the archon name for the year after Poly-
phrasmon’s victory (line 18) can in fact be neatly
filled with Praxiergus, the eponymous archon for
471/0 BCE.
It thus seems likely that entries describing the
results of the competitions in 472/1 and 471/0 BCE
stood in the left-hand column of fr. b roughly
opposite the entries in the central column that
described the results of the competitions in 459/8
and 458/7 BCE, 13 years later. The individual items
in the entries in the central column are all three
lines lower than the corresponding items in the
entries roughly opposite them in the left-hand
column, precisely as in fr. a; and the left-hand
18 Or (theoretically) even earlier, since another poet
who had already been victorious might have taken the
prize again between Nothippus’ victory and Sophocles’
first in 469/8 BCE; see the discussion of the complexities of
dating individual entries in IG II2 2325 in the introductory
discussion to that inscription.
column in fr. b is thus most naturally taken to
have contained entries for 12 years @ 11 lines/year
(= 132 lines), plus an additional 8 lines (see above,
on fr. a), for a total of 140 lines of text.19
The badly damaged entry that occupies most
of the right-hand column of fr. b (lines 290–9),
the individual items of which stand, as expected,
somewhat below those in the fragmentary entry
for 460/59 at the very top of the preserved por-
tion of the central column, must accordingly
refer to the competition an additional 13 years
later, in 447/6 BCE. But the entry for this year
differs from the others in fr. b, in that it contains
a twelfth item (line 298) that gives the name of
the victor in a competition for (tragic) actors. In
addition, the individual items in the entry are not
just three lines below those for 460/59 BCE in the
central column but six below them. These three
additional lines of displacement must represent
the space taken up by references to the actors
competitions in years preceding 447/6 BCE; the
question is when the competition—the 5th-
century history of which is also attested at IG II2
2325B (where see introductory remarks)—began.
Capps, who assumed both that the central column
in fr. b (like the left-hand column) had 140 lines,
and also that one line per year was dedicated to
a notice of the result of the actors competition,
argued that the new competition must have been
introduced at the City Dionysia precisely three
years earlier,20 i.e. in 450/49 BCE. As the discus-
sion below will show, however, Columns III–VIII
most likely contained 141 lines, so that Column
II may have as well; and in lines 1010–11, in the
entry for 387/6 BCE, two lines immediately after
the archon’s name are dedicated to a notice that
an “old” tragedy was first performed at the festi-
val that year.21 Depending, therefore, on (a) how
19 This count may be one line too short (see below), but
the question cannot be resolved at this point and does not
affect the substance of the argument.
20 Capps (1903) 17.
21 Cf. lines 1565–6 (in a section added by a later hand),
where two lines immediately after the archon’s name are
12 chapter one

many lines the central column in fr. b contained, Col. II (the right-hand column in fr. a); the
and (b) whether or not a line or two was dedi- central column in fr. b (with entries for
cated to an announcement of the new item in 459/8 and 458/7 BCE) might belong to Col.
the program (and thus the records) when it first I (the left-hand column in fr. a); and the
appeared, the actors’ competition might have left-hand column (with entries for 472/1 and
begun anytime between 451/022 and 448/7 BCE23 471/0 BCE) in fr. b might belong to another
(inclusive). column further to the left (not preserved in
fr. a). But fr. a preserves the left-hand ver-
tical edge of Block 1, and if fr. b belongs to
Assigning the “Early Material” to Columns:
the same block—as Capps assumed that it
Horizontal Orientation
did, almost certainly correctly, although the
point will require some discussion below—it
The entries in the preserved portion of the cen-
cannot violate this border.24
tral column of fr. b are firmly dated to 460/59
(2) The left-hand column in fr. b might belong
(no useful information preserved), 459/8 and
to Col. II, in which case the central and
458/7 BCE by the eponymous archons’ names in
right-hand columns in fr. b would belong to
lines 151 and 162. The partial entries in the left-
Columns III and IV (not preserved in fr. a),
and right-hand columns of fr. b are seemingly
respectively. This arrangement seems impos-
dated as well (to 472/1 and 471/0 BCE, and 447/6
sible on prosopographical grounds: because
and 446/5 BCE, respectively), primarily but not
each column contained complete entries
exclusively by the physical relationship between
for 12 years and part of another entry, and
those entries and those in the central column.
because the entries preserved in the left-hand
Although no archons’ names are preserved in
column of fr. b refer to dates in the late 470s
either column in fr. a, the individuals mentioned
BCE, Pericles’ service as chorêgos referred to
in the partial annual entries it preserves belong
in Col. I in fr. a would have to have occurred
to this same period; the question is how fr. b is
at least 13 years earlier, in the mid-480s BCE
to be placed in relation to fr. a. To which of the
or before, when he was barely ten.
two columns, the tops of which are preserved in
(3) The left-hand column in fr. b is thus best
fr. a, do the three columns partially preserved in
taken to be part of Col. I; the central column
fr. b belong? And—a more complicated matter,
in fr. b to be part of Col. II; and the right-
which will require more extended discussion—
hand column of fr. b to be part of Col. III.
how much space was there between the top of
those columns (preserved in fr. a) and the entries
A third fragment of this section of the inscrip-
in fr. b?
tion, fr. b2, preserves an additional portion of the
Frr. a and b might be aligned horizontally in
heading and the beginning of two columns, and
any of three ways:
confirms this conclusion.25
(1) The right-hand column in fr. b (with entries
for 447/6 and 446/5 BCE) might belong to
24 This might not be the case, if fr. b came from one
course further down in the inscription and thus from a
dedicated to a notice that an “old” comedy was first per- different block with different borders. But this eventually
formed at the festival in 340/39. emerges as impossible; see below.
22 Assuming a column of 141 lines and no notice of the 25 For the discussion of fr. b2 and its implications that
new competition. follows, see in general Capps (1943). This portion of the
23 Assuming a column of 140 lines and a 2-line notice of inscription was discovered only in 1937, and was therefore
the new competition. not taken into account in the early discussions or in IG II2.
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 13

fr. b2 (IG II2 2318.284–6, 425–30)

σωι τραγωιδοὶ δ[ - - - ]
[ . . ω]ν Λαμπτρ : ἐχορήγει Ἰσοκράτη[ς - - - ἐχορήγει]
[Σοφο]κλῆς [ἐ]δίδασκεν Ἕρμιππος [ἐδίδασκε]
[ὑποκριτὴς Ἡρ]α̣ κλείδης τραγωιδ[ῶν]
Νίκων Α[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
Ἰοφῶν ἐ[δίδασκε]
[ὑποκ]ρ[ιτὴς - - - ]

The left-hand column in fr. b2 begins (line 284) accounted for in fr. a, what is preserved in fr. b2
with the tenth item (the name of the victorious is almost certainly the top of Columns III and IV,
tragic chorêgos) of an entry for a year in which and the text of the header is easily restored τῶ
the tragic actors contest was already in place (line [ι Διονύ]σωι τραγωιδοί.
286), and records victories by Sophocles (active As the attentive reader may already have
469/8–406/5 BCE; line 285),26 and by Heracleides noticed, the question of the number of lines in
(whose name appears first in the list of victorious each column of the inscription referred to briefly
tragic actors at the City Dionysia at IG II2 2325B.2) above must now be taken up in more detail. If
in the actors competition (line 286). The right- Col. III, like Col. I, contained 140 lines,29 Col. IV
hand column, meanwhile, begins three standard would begin with the sixth item of an annual
item-lines earlier, with a report of victories by the entry, viz. with the notice “Of the comic poets”.
comic chorêgos Isocrates (line 425),27 the comic Instead, that item must have stood at the bottom
poet Hermippus (line 426),28 the tragic chorêgos of Col. III, for line 425 (at the top of Col. IV in fr.
Nicon (line 428), the tragic poet Iophon (line b2) is the name of the victorious comic chorêgos,
429), who was Sophocles’ son and is elsewhere i.e. the seventh item in a standard 12-item annual
attested as first active in 429/8 BCE (hyp. E. Hipp. entry, so that the names of the tragic chorêgos
25–7 = Ion TrGF 22 T 2b), and an actor whose and tragic poet are three lines lower in the left-
name does not survive (line 430). The reference hand column than they are in the right-hand
to a tragic actors’ competition in line 286 places column (cf. lines 284 and 428; 285 and 429). The
the annual entry partially preserved at the top of obvious explanation of this seeming anomaly is
the left-hand column in 451/0 BCE or later (see that Col. III had not 140 lines but 141, as is cer-
above). As the tops of Columns I–II are already tainly true elsewhere in the inscription; thus in
fr. d the eponymous archon’s name in line 1009 in
what will be shown to be Col. VIII appears three
26 The restoration of Sophocles’ name in line 285 seems lines below the corresponding items in the entry
nearly certain. The only other known 5th-century tragedian from 12 years earlier roughly opposite it in Col.
whose name would fit is Xenocles I (TrGF 33), a son of
Carcinus I (TrGF 21); since the contest recorded here prob- VII (line 865), showing that Col. VII had 141 lines;30
ably took place no later than the late 440s BCE, restoring
Xenocles’ name in line 285 would make him a contempo-
rary of his father, making it clear that the idea ought to be 29 I.e. three items (preserved in the left-hand column
rejected. of fr. b2) carried over from the final entry in Col. II; plus
27 Like Nicon (below), otherwise unknown. 11 years of complete annual entries @ 12 items/year = 132
28 Hermippus appears at IG II2 2325C.23, immediately lines; plus five items from a partial entry for another as yet
before Aristophanes; since the latter’s first victory at the undated year at the bottom; = 140 lines.
Dionysia was almost certainly in 427/6 BCE (see IG II2 30 I.e. room for 11 years @ 12 items/year = 132 lines; plus
2325C introductory remarks), the victory by Hermippus a partial entry of 9 items, producing three lines of displace-
recorded there must have been in 428/7 BCE or earlier. ment in the next column; = 141 lines.
14 chapter one

while individual items in the entries in Col. IX
begin five lines below corresponding items in
the entries from 12 years earlier roughly opposite
them in Col. VIII, the additional lines of displace-
ment being accounted for by the use of two extra
lines to announce the introduction of the perfor-
mance of an “old tragedy” at the festival in the
entry for 387/6 BCE (lines 1010–11), showing that
Col. VIII as well had 141 lines. Most likely, there-
fore, all the columns in this portion of the text
had 141 lines, and it is tempting to hypothesize
that this was true of the inscription as a whole.31

fr. c (IG II2 2318.581–93)

[ . . . . . . . ] Παια[νιεὺς ἐχορ]
[Κάνθαρ]ος ἐδ[ίδασκε]
[τραγω]ιδῶν
[. . . ω]ν Παιανιεὺ�̣[ς ἐχορ]
[Με]νεκράτης ἐδ[ίδασκε]
[ὑπ]οκριτὴς Μυνν[ίσκος]
[ἐ]πὶ Ἀλκαίου
Ἱπποθωντὶς παίδων
Ἀρίσταρχος Δεκε : ἐχορ
Αἰαντὶς ἀνδρῶν
Δημο̣σθένης ἐχορήγει
[κ]ω̣ μωιδ[ῶν]
[ . . . ] . . [ ca. 7 ἐχο]ρήγει

2. IG II2 2318 fr. c (EM 8218; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum,
Athens)

There is no evidence of any other changes in the
structure of the City Dionysia competitions in
the late 5th century except for the synchorêgia
briefly instituted in 406/5 BCE (see below), and
every other annual entry in the portion of IG II2
2318 produced by the first hand (with the excep-
tion of the extra two-line notice for 387/6 BCE
discussed above), i.e. before 346/5 BCE, appears
to have used exactly 12 lines. This allows the
position of fr. c—and indeed of all the remain-
ing fragments of the inscription—to be deter-
mined precisely vis-a-vis fr. b. Fr. c preserves the
lower and right-hand margins of a block, along
with the archon name Alcaeus at the beginning
of what must be the entry for 422/1 BCE (line
587) and above that, in the entry for what must
be 423/2 BCE, notices of victories by Menecrates32
(TrGF 35) in the tragic poets competition (line
585), by Mynniscus in the tragic actors competition
31 If Col. II had 141 lines, Col. I (seemingly with only 140)
would be the odd man out (but see below on line 1270 [Col.
IX]). Perhaps one extra line was used for a unique purpose
or was left blank to avoid a flaw in the stone.
32 Perhaps to be identified with the man who won
the competition for tragic actors at the Lenaea sometime
around 431 BCE (IG II2 2325H.3) and the competition at
the City Dionysia three times (IG II2 2325B.8) beginning in
roughly the same period; cf. Wilhelm (1906a) 21–2.
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 15
(line 586; cf. IG II2 2325B.4; 2325H.6), and by
Cantharus33 in the comic poets competition (line
582). These competitions took place 24 years
after those reported in lines 294–8 of Col. III in
fr. b. Since each column in this section of the
inscription contained entries for 11 years, plus
most of the entry for a twelfth year, fr. c must be
from two columns to the right of Col. III, i.e. from top of Col. III in fr. b2 refers to a competition of
Col. V. As for the vertical relationship between
the two sets of entries, as was argued above,
Col. III seems to have contained 141 lines, and
the individual items in the entries in Col. IV were
three lines lower down than those in the entries
for 12 years earlier roughly opposite them in
Col. III. If Col. IV also had 141 lines (as seems
likely), every item in it must have been pushed
down by an additional three lines, meaning that
the individual items in the partially preserved
entries for 423/2 and 422/1 BCE in fr. c must
have appeared six lines below the corresponding
items in the partially preserved entries for 447/6
and 446/5 BCE roughly opposite them in Col. III
in fr. b.
Summary of Preliminary Conclusions
Analysis of frr. a, b, b2 and c allows the following
conclusions.
• The victories by Aeschylus and Magnes
recorded at the top of Col. I in fr. a occurred
between one and ten years earlier than the vic-
tory by Polyphrasmon in 472/1 BCE recorded in
Col. I in fr. b, and exactly 25 years earlier than
the victories by Sophocles and Heracleides
recorded at the top of Col. III in fr. b2.
• The victories by Hermippus and Iophon
recorded at the top of Col. IV in fr. b2 occurred
12 years after the victories of Sophocles and
Heracleides recorded at the top of Col. III, and
between one and 11 years after the victories
33 Thus Oellacher (1916) 116–18. Wilhelm restored Her-
mippus instead; see n. ad loc.
by Euphronius and Aeschylus in 459/8 BCE
recorded in Col. II in fr. b.
Difficulties nonetheless remain. The vertical
position of frr. b and c, i.e. how close they stood
to the top of the inscription, is fixed only by
the fact that the partially preserved entry at the
tragic actors (line 286). This means that this
entry cannot be for a year before 451/0 BCE (the
earliest the tragic actors competition could have
begun) and thus cannot be separated by more
than 36 lines34 from the top of the entry for 447/6
BCE partially preserved in lines 290–8 of fr. b. As a
consequence, the absolute dates supplied by the
archons’ names in frr. b and c cannot yet be used
to fix the undated victories recorded in frr. a and
b2. This difficulty can be resolved via comparison
with frr. d–f, and involves the larger question of
the physical structure of the inscription and the
blocks out of which it was constructed.
Fr. d preserves the lower margin of a block,
badly damaged portions of columns to left and
right, and a much more substantially preserved
central column. The presence of the eponymous
archon Theodotus’ name in line 1009 allows all
the entries preserved in the fragment to be dated
and assigned to columns by means of the method
described in detail above, on the assumption
(not falsified here) that every column in the
inscription contained precisely 141 lines (400/399
and 399/8 BCE in Col. VII; 388/7 and 387/6 BCE
in Col. VIII; 376/5 and 375/4 BCE in Col. IX). The
location of fr. d relative to that of fr. b can then
be determined in the same way that of fr. c was:
individual items in the entries in Col. VII ought
to be six lines lower than those in the entries for
24 years earlier roughly opposite them in Col. V;
individual items in the entries in Col. VIII ought
to be three lines lower than those in the entries
for 12 years earlier roughly opposite them in Col.
VII; and individual items in the entries in Col.
34 I.e. the entries for the three intervening years 450/49,
449/8 and 448/7 BCE @ 12 lines/year.
16 chapter one

fr. d (IG II2 2318.864–74, 1003–16, 1147–55)

Col. VII Col. VIII Col. IX
[ - - - ] ἐχο̣ [ - - - ]
[Ἀρ]α̣ ρὼς ἐδ[ίδασκ]εν [ - - - ]
[ὑποκριτὴς Νικόστρ]ατος τραγ̣ ωιδῶν [ - - - ]
[ἐπὶ Ἀριστοκράτου]ς Ἀρισ[τ]οκράτη̣ ς Φαληρ : [ἐχο] [Μόσ]χος Ἀ[γγελῆ : ἐχορή]
[ - - - παίδω]ν Σοφοκλῆς ἐδίδασκεν [κω]μωιδῶν
[  -  -  -  ] ἐ�χ̣ ορ ὑποκριτὴς Κλέανδρο[ς] [ 3–4 ]γνητος [ - - - ἐχορή]
[  - - -  ἀνδρῶν] ἐπὶ Θεοδότου [Ἀναξ]ανδρί�[̣ δης ἐδίδασκε]
[ - - - ]ε : ἐχορή παλαιὸν δρᾶμα πρῶτο[ν] [τρα]γωιδῶν
[κωμωιδῶν] παρεδίδαξαν οἱ τραγ[ωιδαί] [. . .]γένης Γ̣ [αργ : ἐχορή]
[ - - -  ] : ἐχορή Ἀντιοχὶς παίδων [Σο]φοκλῆς [ἐδίδασκε]
[ - - - ἐδίδα]σκεν Εὐγέτης Παλλη : ἐχο[ρήγει] [ὑπ]οκριτὴ�̣[ς - - - ]
[τραγωιδῶν] Αἰγηὶς ἀνδρῶν [ἐπὶ Ἱ]ππο[δάμαντος]
[ - - - ἐχορή]γ̣ Ἴασος Κολλυ : ἐχορήγ[ει]
[κωμωιδῶ]ν

IX ought to be five lines lower than those in
the entries for 12 years earlier opposite them in
Col. VIII (taking account of the two extra lines
in the record for 387/6 BCE, as noted above).
This calculation can be confirmed—and slightly
adjusted—via consideration of the relative posi-
tion of the margins preserved in frr. c and d. This
calculation in turn allows the physical structure
of the entire inscription to be recovered, and pro-
duces absolute dates for the victories recorded in
frr. a and b2.35
If fr. b is placed as high in the inscription as it
can be, more or less directly beneath frr. a and
b2, so that the undated partial entry at the top
of Col. II in fr. a (items 4–7 in a standard 11-item,
pre-tragic-actors-competition annual entry) is
completed by the portions of the entry for 460/59
BCE preserved in Col. II in fr. b (items 10–11), with
two lost lines (items 8–9) supplied between them,
the name of Philocles, the eponymous archon for
459/8 BCE, will stand on the ninth line of Col. II.
The first item in the entry for 446/5 BCE to the
right of this in fr. b will then stand on the 16th
35 For the argument that follows, see Capps (1943) 4–9.
line of Col. III. As noted above, fr. c moves up or
down in lockstep with fr. b; the first item in the
entry for 422/1 BCE (the name of the eponymous
archon Alcaeus in line 587) there will accord-
ingly, on this hypothesis, stand on the 22nd line
of Col. V. Fr. c preserves the lower and right-hand
margins of the stone on which it was inscribed;
the lower margin of the block is eight lines below
Alcaeus’ name, and thus comes just after the 30th
line of Col. V. The block (but not necessarily the
column) must thus have ended with the ninth
item in the entry for 422/1 BCE.36
36 On this hypothesis, Col. III contains items 10–12 of
the entry for the year to be provisionally dated 448/7
BCE (3 lines), plus 11 years (447/6–437/6 BCE) @ 12 lines/
year (132 lines), plus items 1–6 of the entry for 436/5 BCE
(6 lines), = 141 lines; Col. IV contains items 7–12 of the entry
for 436/5 BCE (6 lines), plus 11 years (435/4–425/4 BCE)
@ 12 lines/year (132 lines), plus items 1–3 of the entry for
424/3 BCE (3 lines), = 141 lines; and Col. V contains items
4–12 of the entry for 424/3 BCE (9 lines), plus 11 years
(423/2–413/2 BCE) @ 12 lines/year (132 lines), = 141 lines.
The tenth item in the entry for 422/1 BCE is thus the thirty-
first item in Col. V (9 lines for the partial entry for 424/3
BCE, 12 lines for 423/2 BCE, and 10 lines for the partial entry
for 422/1 BCE, = 31 lines).
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 17

3. IG II2 2318 fr. d (EM 12634; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

The lower margin of the stone to which fr. d
belongs was just below what would normally be
the eighth item in the entry for 387/6 BCE (the
victorious comic poet) but is in this case the
tenth line in the entry for the year, because of
the extra two-line notice about tragic revivals
discussed above. The rest of the entry for 422/1
BCE partially preserved in Col. V on fr. c must
have consisted of three lines (items 10–12); the
entries for 421/0–388/7 BCE can be assumed to
have required 408 lines (34 years @ 12 items/year);
and the portion of the entry for 387/6 BCE on the
lower portion of the block partially preserved in
fr. d appears to have contained ten lines. There
ought therefore apparently to have been a total of
421 (3 + 408 + 10) lines of text from the top of the
block below that from which fr. c comes, to the
bottom of the block that contained fr. d. But most
likely this number requires a slight adjustment,
since according to ΣValt.EΘBarb Ar. Ra. 404 (citing
Arist. fr. 447 Gigon), two chorêgoi apiece were
appointed for the tragic and comic competitions
at the Dionysia in 406/5 BCE, in the aftermath of
the disastrous Athenian defeat at Aegospotamoi.
Two more lines are accordingly needed to accom-
modate the names of the additional chorêgoi in
the entry for that year, so that the total space to
be accounted for is 423 lines. 423 = 141 + 141 + 141
(three complete columns); the implication is that
the lower margins of the blocks preserved in frr. c
and d come at the same point in the column. This
is true regardless of where frr. b, c and d are placed
vertically in the inscription, since these fragments
move up and down together.
18 chapter one

fr. e (IG II2 2318.1473–82)

[. . . .]ιλ[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
Ἄ̣ λ̣ ε[̣ ξ]ις ἐδ[ίδασκε]
τ̣ραγωιδῶν
Ν̣ [ι]κόμαχος Ἀχα[ρν : ἐχορή]
[Ἀσ]τυδάμ[α]ς ἐδ̣[ίδασκε]
ὑποκριτὴς Θ[ετταλός]
[ἐ]π̣ ὶ ̣� Θεμιστοκ̣ [λέους]
Ἐρεχθηὶς π[αίδων]
Δ[ι]ον̣υ̣σ[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
[Ἀ]κ̣ [αμαντὶς ἀνδρῶν]

fr. f (IG II2 2318.1536–48, 1673–81)

ὑ�̣π̣ο̣[κριτὴς] Ν̣ ι̣[κ]ό�̣σ̣τ̣[ρατος]
[ἐ]πὶ Ἀρ̣ι[̣ στο]φάνους
Οἰνη[ὶς] π̣ α̣ίδ�̣ ̣ω[ν]
Ν̣ ι̣κ̣ό�̣[στρα]τ̣ο̣[ς] Ἀ̣ [χ]αρν [ἐχο]
[ 5–6 ἐκ Κερ]α̣ μ̣ [: ἐ]χορή Ἱπποθων̣τ̣ὶς̣� ̣ ἀ�̣ νδρ[ῶν]
[ ca. 9 ἐ]δίδ[ασ]κε Ἄρ̣χ̣ι[̣ ππ]ο̣ς Πειραιε[ὺς ἐχορή]
[ὑποκριτὴς Ἀ]θηνόδ̣[ω]ρ̣ος [κωμωιδ]ῶν
[ἐπὶ Σωσιγένο]υς [ ca. 7 ]ο[ς] Κηφισ[ι]
[Αἰγηὶς παίδων] [ἐχορήγε]ι
[ ca. 9 Δι]ομε[ὺς ἐχορ]ή
[Ἱπποθωντὶς] ἀνδρῶ[ν]
[ 5–6 ἐκ Κοί]λ̣ ης ἐχορή
[κωμωιδῶν]
[ ca. 11–12 Εὐ]ω̣ νυ̣ ̣ : ἐ[χορ]
[ - - -   ἐδίδασκε]
[τραγωιδῶν]
[ ca. 15 ἐχ]ορ
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 19

4. IG II2 2318 fr. e (EM 8222; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

5. IG II2 2318 fr. f (EM 8220; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
20 chapter one

Margins are preserved at three other places in tions of Columns VII–IX; since we know from fr. c
the fragments and allow for much larger conclu- that a margin was located in the upper portion
sions. As noted above, of the inscription between Col. V and Col. VI,
Col. VI (of which nothing is preserved) was
• fr. a preserves the left-hand margin of a block; presumably inscribed on this block (hereafter
• fr. e (which contains portions of the entries for “Block 2”) as well. Col. X has also been lost
348/7 and 347/6 BCE, and which can thus be entirely. But fr. e preserves a vertical margin
placed, using the methods of calculation out- between Col. X and Col. XI, and although this
lined above, in Col. XI) preserves upper and margin was located further down the inscription
left-hand margins; (see below), it is a reasonable conclusion that the
• and fr. f (which contains badly damaged por- upper portions of Columns VI–X were inscribed
tions of the entries for 343/2 and 342/1 BCE in across Block 2, just as the upper portions of
one column, and for 332/1 and 331/0 BCE in a Columns I–V were inscribed across Block 1; the
second column to the right) preserves a lower fact that Block 2 as well had room for the head-
margin. ing plus exactly 30 lines of text (above, on fr. d)
makes it clear that its dimensions were identical
Fr. a contains portions of Columns I–II; fr. b con- to those of Block 1 to its left. Another block to
tains portions of Columns I–III; and fr. b2 con- the right of Block 2 (hereafter “Block 3”) must
tains portions of Columns III–IV. If we tentatively have contained the upper portions of Columns
accept the hypothesis—advanced above for con- XI–XIII.
venience’s sake, but now to be argued seriously— The archon’s name for 375/4 BCE appears on
that fr. b stood more or less directly under fr. a, the lowest preserved line of fr. d (line 1155) on
the block whose left-hand margin fr. a preserves what ought to be, on the thesis being developed
must have been at least four columns wide and here, the 26th line of Col. IX (although the stone
tall enough to accommodate the heading and at itself continues far enough below this to make it
least 26 lines of text.37 Compatible with this, the clear that it contained four more lines of text; see
lower margin preserved in fr. c was located below above). Assuming the standard three lines of dis-
what was apparently the 30th line (excluding the placement per 141-line column, the archon’s name
heading) in the column; although it is theoreti- for 351/0 BCE (24 years later) will have appeared
cally possible that one block contained Columns on the 32nd line of Col. XI; and the archon’s name
I–IV, while another block, perhaps extending for 347/6 in fr. e (line 1482) will have appeared 48
upward, contained Column V, more likely the lines (four years @ 12 lines/year) below that, in
heading and the first 30 lines of the catalogue the 80rd line of Col. XI. The upper margin pre-
on all five columns were inscribed on Block 1, of served in fr. e stands above the seventh item in
which fr. a preserves the left-hand margin and fr. the entry for the year before that (348/7 BCE), i.e.
c the lower and right-hand margins. between what must be the 73rd and the 74th line
Several other blocks can be reconstructed in a of Col. XI. This is therefore a different horizon-
similar fashion. As noted above, fr. d contains por- tal margin from the one preserved on frr. c and
d (which was located below the 30th line), and
this remains the case no matter where these frag-
37 I.e. the four lines of Col. II partially preserved in fr. ments—all of which, once again, move up and
a; plus the two lines needed to connect this fragmentary down in lockstep—are located in the inscription.
entry to the fragmentary entry for 460/59 BCE at the top of
Col. II in fr. b; plus the 20 lines of Col. II partially preserved The most straightforward conclusion is thus that
in fr. b. fr. e preserves the upper and left-hand margins of
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 21

6. IG II2 2318 frr. g + h (EM 53 + 8221; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

frr. g + h (IG II2 2318.1559–66, 1697–1707)

[ . . . . . . ἐ]κ Κερ̣[αμέων]
[τρ]α̣ γωιδῶν ἐ[χορήγει]
Ἀ̣ ρρενείδης Παι[α]νι : ἐχο Θεόφιλος ἐδίδ[ασκε]
Ἀ̣ στυδάμας ἐδίδ̣[α]σκεν τραγωιδῶν
ὑποκριτὴς Θ̣ εττ̣α̣λός [Θ]ηραμένης Κηφισι
[ἐ]πὶ Θεοφράστου [ἐχορ]ήγει
[π]α̣ λαιὸν δρᾶμ̣ [α πρ]ῶ[τον] [ . . . . ]κ̣ λῆς ἐδίδα[σκε]
[π]α̣ ρεδίδαξα̣ [ν οἱ] κω̣ μ[ωιδοί] [ὑπο]κ̣ ριτὴς
[Ἀ]ν̣τιοχὶς πα[ίδων] Ἀθηνόδωρος
ἐπὶ Κηφισοφῶντος
[Ἱ]ππ[ο]θωντὶς παίδ̣ω̣ν
22 chapter one

fr. i (IG II2 2318.1520–9, 1661–71)

[κωμωιδῶν] [ἐπ]ὶ Ν̣ ι[κήτου]
[ - - - ἐχ]ο Κεκροπ̣ [ὶς παίδων]
[ - - - ἐδίδασκε] Διοφαν[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
[τραγωιδῶν] Κεκρ̣οπὶς [ἀνδρῶν]
[ - - - ἐχορή]γ Ὀνή�̣ τωρ Μ̣[ελιτεὺς ἐχορήγει]
[ - - - ἐδίδασκε] κωμ̣ ωιδ[ῶν]
[ὑποκριτὴς -  -   - ] Διοπείθ̣[ης - - - ἐχορήγει]
[ἐπὶ Πυθοδότου] Προκλεί�[̣ δης ἐδίδασκε]
[ - - - παίδων] τραγωι̣δ̣[ῶν]
[ - - - ἐχορήγει] Φρ̣[ - - - ]
[ἐχορήγει]

a block (hereafter “Block 4”) that stood precisely for 341/40 BCE and 340/39 to the left, and of the
below Block 3 in the third course of stones.38 entry for 330/29 BCE to the right); and fr. i (which
If the archon’s name for 347/6 BCE in fr. e preserves portions of the entry for 332/1 BCE).
appears in the 80th line of Col. XI, the archon’s The vertical position of frr. b, c, d and e is still
name for 342/1 BCE (five years later) ought to unfixed at this point in the analysis, and one solu-
appear in the 140th line, virtually at the bottom tion to the problems raised by fr. f would seem
of the column.39 Instead, his name is followed (in to be to move all these fragments down in lock-
fr. f ) by bits and piece of items 2–10 of a stan- step two or more 12-line increments. This would
dard annual entry. Fr. f thus cannot stand where put frr. f and i not at the bottom of Columns XI
it seemingly should in the inscription, and must and XII (where Capps placed it) but somewhere
instead be placed at least eight lines higher, i.e. below the top of Columns XII and XIII, with frr.
in lines 132–41 of Col. XI or even higher. This g and h at the appropriate distance below them.
problem in turn has implications for the place- The lower margin preserved on fr. f would then
ment of fr. g (which preserves portions of the represent the bottom of the first course of stones
entries for 341/40 BCE and 340/39, and joins to in the inscription; the lower margin preserved
fr. h); fr. h (which preserves portions of the entries on frr. c and e would represent the bottom of a
second course of stones; and the upper margin
preserved on fr. e would represent the top of the
38 The reconstruction of the inscription at Ghiron- fourth course of stones. As Capps saw, however,
Bistagne (1976) 23 has fr. e out of place, and her placement no matter how the fragments are manipulated,
of the remaining fragments is accordingly garbled.
39 Since five standard 12-item entries, = 60 lines of text, the lower margin preserved on fr. f, if it is placed
intervened. somewhere near the top of Col. XII, always falls
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 23
7. IG II2 2318 fr. i (EM 8219; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
within the long section of continuous text in
Col. II preserved in fr. b. Given the care with
which the wall and the inscription on it seem
otherwise to have been planned and cut, this
radical asymmetry among the component blocks
seem impossible. Fr. f must accordingly stand at
least eight lines higher in Col. XI, and the obvious
conclusion is that one entire 12-item entry or the
equivalent was omitted from the catalogue some-
where between 374/3 and 343/2 BCE (excluding
347/6 BCE, for which the name of the archon is
preserved on fr. e) by means of an error by the
stone-cutter, whose eye leapt from a standard for-
mulation in one entry to the same formulation in
the next.40 On this thesis, the entry for 342/1 BCE
40 Although the error itself is easy to imagine, this
remains the most significant unsupported conjecture in
preserved on fr. f occupies lines 128–37 of Col.
XI, and the lower margin on fr. f does not mark
the bottom of the inscription, which extended
(assuming 141 lines per column) four lines below.
Fr. i must thus belong just above the right-hand
portion of fr. f, in Col. XII; fr. g must belong near
Capps’ reconstruction of the inscription. The possibility
that the contest was cancelled one year in the wake of a
social or military disaster of some sort, and that [ἐπὶ τοῦ
δεῖνα οὐκ ἐγένετο] ought to be restored somewhere between
374/3 and 343/2 BCE, cannot be ruled out, although we have
no positive evidence that an extraordinary step of this sort
was ever taken (or even contemplated). We have chosen
to deal with the problem by arbitrarily omitting 349/8 BCE
from our reconstruction of the text. Should additional frag-
ments of this portion of the inscription or new historical
evidence of another sort someday appear, limited renum-
bering may be necessary as a consequence.
24 chapter one
8. IG II2 2318 fr. k (EM 8223; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
the top of Col. XII; and fr. h must belong just to
its right in Col. XIII.41
The most significant result of all this calcula-
tion is that fr. b must belong where Capps placed
it, as high up as possible beneath frr. a and b2 on
Block 1. Once the vertical position of fr. b (and
thus of frr. c–i as well) is fixed, the absolute dates
41 The offset between entries in fr. i is five lines rather
than the expected three, as a result of the two extra lines
used in the entry for 340/39 BCE, which includes a notice
that an “old comedy” was first revived at the festival that
year. The offset in fr. f (which spans the same two columns,
but lower down) is six items, with the difference presum-
ably reflecting the use of two lines for a single entry at the
end of the 332/1 BCE list, as in fr. h. The tendency to use
two lines for some entries, especially those relating to the
chorêgos, is clearly visible on fr. h (here restored as the
top of Column XIII). On our reconstruction of the inscrip-
tion, the phenomenon begins in 332/1 BCE and increases
in frequency thereafter; 17 lines, for example, appear to
have been used to record the 12 items in the entry for
330/29 BCE.
it provides show that Magnes and Aeschylus took
the prize in the comic and tragic competitions,
respectively, in 473/2 BCE—a year in which, we
know from a different source, Aeschylus was
victorious with a set of plays that included Per­
sians (hyp. A. Pers. 16–17)—and that Hermippus’
victory in the comic poets competition came in
436/5 BCE. The records preserved in the Fasti
must thus have extended back into the mid-480s
BCE at least (if there was only one additional lost
column to the left), around the time when com-
edy was added to the program (see IG II2 2325B
introductory remarks). More likely there were at
least two now-lost columns to the left, with most
of the annual entries in them requiring only eight
lines (since there were no entries for comedy),
taking the beginning of the records back to the
turn of the century or so.42
42 The badly damaged frr. k and l cannot be placed
within the inscription.
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 25
9. IG II2 2318 fr. l (EM 8224; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
Conclusions
IG II2 2318 provides inter alia a series of fixed
dates in the history of the dramatic competitions
at the City Dionysia, which must have begun no
later than the mid-480s BCE. By 473/2 BCE at the
very latest, the festival featured competitions in
men’s and boys’ dithyramb, tragedy and comedy,
with each chorus or poet funded by an individ-
ual chorêgos. Sometime between 451/0 and 448/7
BCE (inclusive), a tragic actors competition was
added. In 387/6 BCE, an “old” tragedy was added
to the program. In 340/39 BCE, an “old” comedy
was added as well. As for the competitors them-
selves, among the tragic poets:
• Aeschylus was victorious in 473/2 BCE (6), with Pericles
of the deme Cholargus as his chorêgos (5), and again in
459/8 BCE (161)
• Polyphrasmon was victorious in 472/1 BCE (line 17)
• Sophocles was victorious in 448/7 BCE (285)
• Carcinus was victorious in 447/6 BCE (297)
• Iophon was victorious in 436/5 BCE (429)
• Menecrates was victorious in 423/2 BCE (585)
• Sophocles II was victorious in 388/7 BCE (1007) and again
in 376/5 BCE (1153)
• Astydamas II was victorious in 348/7 BCE (1478) and
341/0 BCE (1562)
• Either Philocles or Timocles was victorious in 330/29
BCE (1704)
Among the tragic actors:
• Heracleides was victorious in 448/7 BCE (286)
• Mynniscus was victorious in 423/2 BCE (586)
• Thettalus was victorious in 348/7 BCE (1479, if correctly
restored) and again in 341/0 BCE (1563)
• Athenodorus was victorious in 343/2 BCE (1539) and
again in 330/29 BCE (1705–6)
• Nicostratus was victorious in 332/1 BCE (1674)
Among the comic poets:
• Magnes was victorious in 473/2 BCE (3)
• Euphronius was victorious in 459/8 BCE (158)
• Callias was victorious in 447/6 BCE (294)
• Hermippus was victorious in 436/5 BCE (426)
• Cantharus or, less likely, Hermippus was victorious in
423/2 BCE (582)
• Araros was victorious in 388/7 BCE (1004)
• Anaxandrides was victorious in 376/5 BCE (1150)
• Alexis was victorious in 348/7 BCE (1475)
• Diopeithes was victorious in 332/1 BCE (1668)
• Theophilus was victorious in 330/29 BCE (1700)
 26 chapter one

fr. a fr. b2 fr. c fr. d frr. g + h

fr. b

fr. e

fr. i

fr. f

Fig. 1. Reconstruction of IG II2 2318 showing placement of individual fragments

 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 27

Technical Description Broken on all sides and back.

Editions: Palaiologos, AE (1886) 267–71; Kirchhoff
All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble. (1887) 1198; IG II 971f.

Editions of the inscription as a whole (or of all a + b.

fragments known at the time):43 Capps (1903); Editions: Michel (1900) no. 879; Wilhelm (1906a)
Syll.3 1078; IG II2 2318; Pickard-Cambridge (1988) 16–21.
101–7; Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 7–26; Mette (1977)
1–42. Fragment b2 (lines 1, 284–6, 425–30).
EM 13368 (formerly Agora I-4927); Areopagus
Fragment a (lines 1–6, 143–6 = IG II2 2318.7–11, North Slope, section Φ (north slope of the Are-
33–6). opagus) of the Agora Excavations, 28 May 1937.
EM 8217; Acropolis, in the early-modern vault of H 0.125; W 0.27; T 0.18.
the north porch, before 1845 (Rangabé); Acropo- The top, roughly smoothed with a claw chisel, is
lis, west of the Parthenon, 10 December 1840 (Pit- preserved; all other sides and the back are broken.
takis); by the mid-1870s, the fragment had been Editions: Capps (1943).
moved to the pinakotheke, where it was seen by
Leo. Fragment c (lines 581–93 = IG II2 2318.114–26).
H 0.09; W 0.275; T 0.165 (Wilhelm’s measure­ EM 8218; Acropolis.
ments).44 H 0.225; W 0.265; T 0.17.
The top, roughly smoothed with a claw chisel, The bottom and the right side, which seems to
and the left side, rough picked to form shallow have anathyrosis, are preserved; all other sides
anathyrosis, are preserved; all other sides and the and the back are broken.
back are broken. Editions: Köhler (1878) 107–9; IG II 971b; Syll.1
Editions: Pittakis (1853); Rangabé (1855) 717; Leo 406; Brinck (1886) 171–4; Syll.2 695; Michel (1900)
(1878); Köhler (1878) 104–107; IG II 971a; Syll.1 405; no. 879; Wilhelm (1906a) 21–2.
Brinck (1886) 164–71; Syll.2 694.
Fragment d (lines 864–74, 1003–16, 1147–55 = IG
Fragment b (lines 11–24, 149–68, 290–9 = IG II2 II2 2318.164–74, 195–208, 238–46).
2318.16–29, 39–58, 74–83). EM 12634; unknown.
EM 8225; Acropolis, east of the north porch H 0.25; W 0.38; T 0.08.
of the Erechtheum, in a late (?) wall running A small portion of the bottom beneath Columns
from the north wall of the Acropolis toward the VII and VIII is preserved; all other sides and the
Erechtheum, 1887. back are broken. A vertical gouge ca. 0.06 wide
H 0.25; W 0.29; T 0.16 (Wilhelm’s measurements). has effaced the left-hand side of Col. IX.
Editions: IG II 971c; Brinck (1886) 174; Wilhelm
(1906a) 2–25; Wilhelm (1906b).
43 Wilhelm (1906a) includes all fragments known at the
time, but does not present them as a continuous text; ref-
erences to this work are accordingly found under the indi- Fragment e (lines 1473–82 = IG II2 2318.277–86).
vidual fragments below. EM 8222; Acropolis, east of the north porch of the
44 We have made new measurements of the fragments Erechtheum, 1887.
wherever possible. In a number of instances, fragments
have been joined and/or set in plaster, preventing accurate
H 0.135; W 0.14; T 0.85.
new measurement. In such cases, we offer what appear to The top and left side, apparently without anathy-
be the most reliable measurements previously reported. rosis, are preserved; all other sides and the back
28 chapter one

are broken. The stone is badly worn and difficult Broken on all sides and back.
to read. Editions: Wilhelm (1906a) 27–9.
Editions: Kirchhoff (1887) 1069; IG II 971g;
Wilhelm (1906a) 25. Fragment i (lines 1521–4, 1661–70 = IG II2 2318.
320–9).
Fragment f (lines 1536–48, 1673–81 = IG II2 EM 8219; South slope of the Acropolis.
2318.289–301, 331–9). H 0.15; W 0.16; T 0.075.
EM 8220; Acropolis. Broken on all sides and back.
H 0.215; W 0.285; T 0.9. Editions: Köhler (1878) 109–10; IG II 971d; Brinck
The bottom is preserved; all other sides and the (1886) 174–5; Wilhelm (1906a) 30–1.
back are broken. The face is extremely worn and
very difficult to read. Fragment k (lines 1708–15 = IG II2 2318.364–72).
Editions: IG II 971e; Brinck (1886) 175–6; Wilhelm EM 8223; unknown provenance, bought by the
(1906a) 25–7. Archaeological Society (when part of their col-
lection, inventory no. λιθ. 4863).
Fragment g (lines 1559–66 [beginnings of lines, H 0.065; W 0.085; T 0.04.
with joins to fr. h] = IG II2 2318.312–19). Broken on all sides and back.
EM 53; North slope of the Acropolis, 1897. Editions: Wilhelm (1906a) 31–3.

Fragment h (lines 1560–5 [endings of lines, with Fragment l (lines 1716–17 = IG II2 2318.373–4).
joins to fr. g], 1697–1707 = IG II2 2318.313–18, 352–62). EM 8224; unknown provenance.
EM 8221; Acropolis, east of the north porch of the H 0.075; W 0.065; T 0.025.
Erechtheum, 1887. Broken on all sides and back.
Col. XIII is more shallowly cut and the letters are Editions: Wilhelm (1906a) 33.
more widely spaced than in the other columns.
Editions: Kirchhoff (1887) 1198; IG II 971h. Fragment m (lines 1718–20 = IG II2 3062).
Lost (?); Acropolis, east of the Parthenon, 1887.
g+h Editions: Kirchhoff (1888) 321; IG II 1287b; IG II2
H 0.215; W 0.485; T 0.095. 3062.
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 29

Text
Col. I
[πρῶτ]ον κῶμοι ἦσαν
(7) [Ξ]ενοκλείδης : ἐ�χ̣ ορήγε
(8) Μάγνης ἐδίδασκεν
(9) τραγωιδῶν
5/10 (10) Περικλ̣ ῆς Χολαρ : ἐχορή
(11) Αἰσχύλος ἐ[δ]ίδ̣ασκε
(1) [ἐπὶ Χάρητος] (472/1)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
10/15 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχ]ορ̣
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχ]ορήγει
(8) [ . . . . . . ἐδίδ]ασκεν
15/20 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχ]ορήγει
(11) [Πολυφράσμω]ν ἐδίδασ
(1) [ἐπὶ Πραξιέργο]υ (471/0)
(2) [Ἱπποθωντὶς πα]ίδων
20/25 (3) [  ca. 8 ἐχο]ρήγει
(4) [  ca. 8   ἀνδρ]ῶν
(5) [  ca. 10  ἐχ]ορήγ
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
29 (7) [  ca. 8 ἐχορήγ]ει
25 (8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(1) [ἐπὶ Δημοτίωνος] (470/69)
30–39 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
40 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀψηφίωνος] (469/8)
41–50 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Θεαγενίδου] (468/7)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
30 chapter one

(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
55 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
60 (10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Αἰσχύλος ἐδίδασκε]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λυσιστράτου] (467/6)
63–72 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λυσανίου] (466/5)
74–83 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λυσιθέου] (465/4)
85–94 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
95 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀρχεδημίδου] (464/3)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
100 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
105 (11) [Αἰσχύλος ἐδίδασκε]
(1) [ἐπὶ Τληπολέμου] (463/2)
107–116 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Κόνωνος] (462/1)
118–127 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐθίππου] (461/0)
129–138 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Φρασικλείδου] (460/59)
140 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
[  vacat  ]

Col. II

τῶ[ι Διονύ-]
33 (4) Πανδιονὶ[ς ἀνδρῶν]
(5) Κλεαίνετ[ος Κυδαθη : ἐχορή]
145/35 (6) κωμωιδῶ[ν]
(7) Θα . [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 31

(10) [ ca. 10 ] : ἐχορή

150/40 (11) [ ca. 8 ] ἐδίδασκεν
(1) [ἐπὶ Φιλο]κ̣ λέους (459/8)
(2) [Οἰ]νηὶς παίδων
(3) Δημόδοκος ἐχορήγει
(4) Ἱπποθωντὶς ἀνδρῶν
155/45 (5) Εὐκτήμων Ἐλευ : ἐχορή
(6) κωμωιδῶν
(7) Εὐρυκλείδης ἐχορήγει
(8) Εὐφρόνιος ἐδίδασκε
(9) τραγωιδῶν
160/50 (10) Ξενοκλῆς Ἀφιδνα : ἐχορή
(11) Αἰσχύλος ἐδίδασκεν
(1) ἐπὶ Ἅβρωνος (458/7)
(2) Ἐρεχθεὶς παίδων
(3) Χαρίας Ἀγρυλῆ : ἐχορή
165/55 (4) Λεωντὶς ἀνδρῶν
(5) Δεινόστρατος ἐχο[ρή]
(6) κωμωιδῶν
58 (7) [ . . . . . . ἐχ]ορήγ[ει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
170 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(1) [ἐπὶ Μνησιθείδου] (457/6)
174–183 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Καλλίου] (456/5)
185–194 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
195 (1) [ἐπὶ Σωσιστράτου] (455/4)
196–205 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀρίστωνος] (454/3)
207–216 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λυσικράτους] (453/2)
218–227 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Χαιρεφάνους] (452/1)
229–238 (2–11) [10 lines missing, i.e. items 2–11 in a standard 11-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀντιδότου] (451/0)
240 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
245 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
32 chapter one

(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
250 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]45
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐθυδήμου] (450/49)
252–262 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Πεδιέως] (449/8)
264–274 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
275 (1) [ἐπὶ Φιλίσκου] (448/7)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
280 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]

Col. III
-σωι τραγωιδοὶ
68 (10) [ . . ω]ν̣ Λαμπτρ : ἐχορήγε
285 (11) [Σοφο]κ̣ λῆς [ἐ]δίδασκεν
70 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς Ἡρ]α̣ κλείδης
(1) [ἐπὶ Τιμαρχίδου] (447/6)
(2) [ . . . ηὶς παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
290 (4) Ἐ[ρεχθηὶς ἀνδρῶν]
75 (5) Βίω[ν - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) κω[μωιδῶν]
(7) Ἀνδ[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) Καλ[λίας ἐδίδασκε]
295 (9) τρα[γωιδῶν]
80 (10) Θαλ̣ [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) Κα[ρκίνος ἐδίδασκε]
(12) ὑπ[οκριτὴς - - - ]
83 (1) ἐπ[ὶ Καλλιμάχου] (446/5)
300–310 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λυσιμαχίδου] (445/4)
312–322 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Πραξιτέλους] (444/3)
324–334 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
335 (1) [ἐπὶ Λυσανίου] (443/2)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]

45 The line-numbers of this and several succeeding years may have to be adjusted slightly if the precise year for the
introduction of the tragic actors contest is discovered and depending on whether there was a one- or two-line announce-
ment of the introduction.
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 33

(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
340 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
345 (11) [Σοφοκλῆς ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Διφίλου] (442/1)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
350 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
355 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Εὐριπίδης ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Τιμοκλέους] (441/0)
360–370 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Μορυχίδου] (440/39)
372–382 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Γλαυκίνου] (439/8)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
385 (3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
390 (8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Σοφοκλῆς ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
395 (1) [ἐπὶ Θεοδώρου] (438/7)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
400 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [Φερεκράτης ἐδίδασκε]
34 chapter one

(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
405 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐθυμένους] (437/6)
408–418 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λυσιμάχου] (436/5)
420/85 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]

Col. IV

δ[ - - - ]
425/90 (7) Ἰσοκράτης[̣ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) Ἕρμιππος [ἐδίδασκε]
(9) τραγωιδ[ῶν]
(10) Νίκων Α[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) Ἰοφῶν ἐ[δίδασκε]
430/95 (12) [ὑποκ]ρ[ιτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀντιοχίδου] (435/4)
432–442 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Κράτητος] (434/3)
444–454 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
455 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀψεύδους] (433/2)
456–466 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Πυθοδώρου] (432/1)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
470 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
475 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Εὐφορίων ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐθυδήμου] (431/0)
480–490 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀπολλοδώρου] (430/29)
492–505 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἐπαμείνονος] (429/8)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 35

505 (3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]

(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
510 (8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Εὐριπίδης ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
515 (1) [ἐπὶ Διοτίμου] (428/7)
516–526 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐκλέους] (427/6)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
530 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [Ἀριστοφάνης ἐδίδασκε]
535 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐθύνου] (426/5)
540–550 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Στρατοκλέους] (425/4)
552–562 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
96 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἰσάρχου] (424/3)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
565 (3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]

Col. V

[ - - - ]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
100 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
570 (8) [Κρατῖνος ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
105 (10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
575 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀμεινίου] (423/2)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
36 chapter one

110 (3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]

(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
580 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ . . . . . . ]ς̣ Παια[νιεὺς ἐχορ]
115 (8) [Κάνθαρ]ος ἐδ[ίδασκε]
(9) [τραγ]ωιδῶν
(10) [ . . . ω]ν Παιανιεὺ�̣[ς ἐχορ]
585 (11) [Με]νεκράτης ἐδί�[̣ δασκε]
(12) [ὑπ]οκριτὴς Μυνν[ίσκος]
120 (1) [ἐ]πὶ Ἀλκαίου (422/1)
(2) Ἱπποθωντὶς παίδων
(3) Ἀρίσταρχος Δεκε : ἐχορή
590 (4) Αἰαντὶς ἀνδρῶν
(5) Δημο̣σθένης ἐχορήγει
125 (6) [κ]ω̣ μωιδ[ῶν]
(7) [ . . . ] . . [ ca. 7 ἐχο]ρήγ
(8) [Εὔπολις ἐδίδασκε]
595/128 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀριστίωνος] (421/0)
600–610 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀστυφίλου] (420/19)
612–622 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀρχίου] (419/8)
624–634 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
635 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀντιφῶντος] (418/7)
636–646 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐφήμου] (417/6)
648–658 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀριμνήστου] (416/5)
660 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
665 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Ξενοκλῆς ἐδίδασκε]
670 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Χαβρίου] (415/4)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 37

(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
675 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [Ἀμειψίας ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
680 (10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Τεισάνδρου] (414/3)
684–694 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
695/129 (1) [ἐπὶ Κλεοκρίτου] (413/2)
130 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
700 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
135 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
705 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
140 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]

Col. VI

[ - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Καλλίου] (412/1)
708–718 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Θεοπόμπου] (411/0)
720–730 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Γλαυκίππου] (410/9)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
735 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
740 (10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Σοφοκλῆς ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Διοκλέους] (409/8)
38 chapter one

744–754 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
755 (1) [ἐπὶ Εὐκτήμονος] (408/7)
756–766 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀντιγένους] (407/6)
768–778 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Καλλίου] (406/5)
780 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
785 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(7a) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
790 (10a) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀλεξίου] (405/4)
794–804 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
805 (1) [ἐπὶ Πυθοδώρου] (404/3)
806–816 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐκλείδου] (403/2)
818–828 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Μίκωνος] (402/1)
830 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
835 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Σοφοκλῆς ἐδίδασκε]
840 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
141 (1) [ἐπὶ Ξεναινέτου] (401/0)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
845/145 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 39

Col. VII

[ - - - ]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
850/150 (10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λάχητος] (400/399)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
855/155 (3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
860/160 (8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς Νικόστρ]α̣ τος
865/165 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀριστοκράτου]ς (399/8)
(2) [ - - - παίδω]ν
(3) [ - - - ] ἐ�χ̣ ορ
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ]ε : ἐχορή
870/170 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ] : ἐχορή
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδα]σκεν
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορή]γ̣
875/175 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
176 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐθυκλέους] (398/7)
878–888 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Σουνιάδου] (397/6)
890–900 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Φορμίωνος] (396/5)
902–912 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Διοφάντου] (395/4)
914–924 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
925 (1) [ἐπὶ Εὐβουλίδου] (394/3)
926–936 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Δημοστράτου] (393/2)
938–948 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Φιλοκλέους] (392/1)
40 chapter one

950–960 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Νικοτέλους] (391/0)
962–972 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Δημοστράτου] (390/89)
974–984 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
985/177 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀντιπάτρου] (389/8)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
180 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]

Col. VIII

[ - - - ]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
990 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
185 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
995 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Πυργίωνος] (388/7)
190 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1000 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
195 (7) [ - - - ] ἐχο̣
(8) [Ἀρα]ρὼς ἐδ[ίδασκ]εν
1005 (9) τραγ̣ωιδ[ῶν]
(10) Ἀρισ[τ]οκράτη̣ ς Φαληρ : [ἐχο]
(11) Σοφοκλῆς ἐδίδασκεν
200 (12) ὑποκριτὴς Κλέανδρο[ς]
(1) ἐπὶ Θεοδότου (387/6)
1010 παλαιὸν δρᾶμα πρῶτο[ν]
παρεδίδαξαν οἱ τραγ̣[ωιδαί]
(2) Ἀντιοχὶς παίδων
205 (3) Εὐηγέτης Παλλη : ἐχο[ρήγει]
(4) Αἰγηὶς ἀνδρῶν
1015 (5) Ἴασος Κολλυ : ἐχορήγ[ει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶ]ν̣
209 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
1020 (10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 41

(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Μυστιχίδου] (386/5)
1024–1034 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
1035 (1) [ἐπὶ Δεξιθέου] (385/4)
1036–1046 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Διοτρέφους] (384/3)
1048–1058 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Φανοστράτου] (383/2)
1060–1070 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐάνδρου] (382/1)
1072–1082 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Δημοφίλου] (381/0)
1084–1094 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
1095 (1) [ἐπὶ Πυθέου] (380/79)
1096–1106 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Νίκωνος] (379/8)
1108–1118 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
210 (1) [ἐπὶ Ναυσινίκου] (378/7)
1120 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
215 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
1125 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
220 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]

Col. IX

[ - - - ]
1130 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Καλλέου] (377/6)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
225 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
1135 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [Ἀναξανδρίδης ἐδίδασκε]
230 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
1140 (10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
42 chapter one

(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Χαρισάνδρου] (376/5)
235 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
1145 (3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [Μό]σ̣ χος Αλ̣ [ - - - : ἐχορή]
(6) [κω]μωιδῶ[ν]
240 (7) [ 3–4 ]γνητο[ς - - - ἐχορή]
1150 (8) [Ἀνα]ξανδρί�[̣ δης ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τρα]γ̣ω[ιδ]ῶν
(10) [ . . . ]γένης Γ̣ [αργ : ἐχορή]
(11) [Σο]φοκλῆς [ἐδίδασκε]
245 (12) [ὑπ]οκριτὴ�̣[ς - - - ]
1155/246 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἱ]πποδ̣[άμαντος] (375/4)
1156–1166 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Σωκρατίδου] (374/3)
1168–1178 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀστείου] (373/2)
1180 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
1185 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [Ἀστυδάμας ἐδίδασκε]
1190 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀλκισθένους] (372/1)
1192–1202 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Φρασικλείδου] (371/0)
1204–1214 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
1215 (1) [ἐπὶ Δυσνικήτου] (370/69)
1216–1226 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λυσιστράτου] (369/8)
1228–1238 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ναυσιγένους] (368/7)
1240–1250 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Πολυζήλου] (367/6)
1252–1262 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
247 (1) [ἐπὶ Κησιφοδώρου] (366/5)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
1265 (3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
250 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 43

(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1270 (8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]

Col. X

[ - - - ]
255 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
258 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
1275 (1) [ἐπὶ Χίωνος] (365/4)
1276–1286 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Τιμοκράτους] (364/3)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1290 (4) [Ἐρεχθηὶς ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [Μενετέλης Ἀναγυρ : ἐχορή]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
1295 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Χαρικλείδου] (363/2)
1300–1310 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Μόλωνος] (362/1)
1312–1322 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Νικοφήμου] (361/0)
1324–1334 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
1335 (1) [ἐπὶ Καλλιμήδους] (360/59)
1336–1346 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐχαρίστου] (359/8)
1348–1358 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Κηφισοδότου] (358/7)
1360–1370 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀγαθοκλέους] (357/6)
1372–1382 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἐλπίνου] (356/5)
1384–1394 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
1395 (1) [ἐπὶ Καλλιστράτου] (355/4)
1396–1406 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
259 (1) [ἐπὶ Διοτίμου] (354/3)
44 chapter one

260 (2) [ - - - παίδων]

(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1410 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]

Col. XI

[ - - - ]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
265 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
1415 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
270 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Θουδήμου] (353/2)
1420–1430 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀριστοδήμου] (352/1)
(2) [Οἰνηὶς παίδων]
(3) [Ἀπολλόδωρος Ἀχαρ : ἐχορή]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
1435 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
1440 (10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Θεέλου] (351/0)
1444–1454 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
1455 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀπολλοδώρου] (350/49)
1456–1466 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
271 (1) [ἐπὶ Θεοφίλου] (348/7)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1470 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
275 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ . . . . ]ι̣λ[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) Ἄ̣ λ̣ ε[̣ ξ]ις ἐδ[ίδασκε]
1475 (9) τ̣ραγωιδῶν
280 (10) Ν̣ [ι]κόμαχος Ἀχα[ρν : ἐχορή]
(11) [Ἀσ]τυδάμ[α]ς ἐδ̣[ίδασκε]
(12) ὑποκριτὴς Θ[ετταλός]
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 45

(1) [ἐ]π̣ ὶ Θεμιστοκ̣ [λέους] (347/6)

1480 (2) Ἐρεχθηὶς πα̣ [ίδων]
285 (3) Δ[ι]ονυ̣σι[ - - - ἐχορήγει]
286 (4) [Ἀ]κ̣ [αμαντὶς ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
1485 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
1490 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Ἀρχίου] (346/5)
1492–1502 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Εὐβούλου] (345/4)
1504–1514 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
1515 (1) [ἐπὶ Λυκίσκου] (344/3)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1520 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχ]ο
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορή]γ
1525 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
287 (1) [ἐπὶ Πυθοδότου] (343/2)
(2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1530 (4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
1535/288 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ 5–6 ἐκ Κερ]α̣ μ̣ [: ἐ]χορή
290 (11) [  ca. 9 ἐ]δίδα̣ [σ]κε
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς Ἀ]θηνόδ̣[ω]ρ̣ος
(1) [ἐπὶ Σωσιγένο]υς (342/1)
1540 (2) [Αἰγηὶς παίδων]
(3) [ ca. 9  Δι]ομε[ὺς ἐχορ]ή
295 (4) [Ἱπποθωντὶς] ἀνδρῶ[ν]
(5) [ 5–6 ἐκ Κοί]λ̣ ης ἐχορή
46 chapter one

(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
1545 (7) [  ca. 11–12 Εὐ]ω̣ νυ̣ ̣ : ἐ[χορ]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
300 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [  ca. 15   ἐχ]ορ
(11) [Ἀστυδάμας ἐδίδασκε]
1550 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς Νεοπτόλεμος]
(1) [ἐπὶ Νικομάχου] (341/0)
305 (2) [ - - - παίδων]

Col. XII

[ - - - ]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
1555 (5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
310 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τρ]α̣ γωιδῶν
1560 (10) Ἀ̣ ρρενείδης Παι[α]νι : ἐχο
(11) Ἀ̣ στυδάμας ἐδίδ[α]σκεν
315 (12) ὑποκριτὴς Θ̣ εττ̣α̣λός
(1) [ἐ]πὶ Θεοφράστου (340/39)
[π]α̣ λαιὸν δρᾶμ̣ [α πρ]ῶ[τον]
1565 [π]α̣ ρεδίδαξα[ν οἱ] κω̣ μ[ωιδοί]
319 (2) [Ἀ]ν̣τιοχὶς πα[ίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1570 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1575 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Λυσιμαχίδου] (339/8)
1578–1588 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Χαιρώνδου] (338/7)
1590–1600 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Φρυνίχου] (337/6)
1602–1612 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Πυθοδήλου] (336/5)
1614–1624 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 47

1625 (1) [ἐπὶ Εὐαινέτου] (335/4)

(2) [Ἀκαμαντὶς παίδων]
(3) [Λυσικράτης Κικυν : ἐχορή]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1630 (6) [κωμωιδῶν]
(7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
1635 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
(1) [ἐπὶ Κτησικλέους] (334/3)
1638–1648 (2–12) [11 lines missing, i.e. items 2–12 in a standard 12-item year]
(1) [ἐπὶ Νικοκράτου] (333/2)
1650 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]
(5) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
1655 (7) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
(9) [τραγωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
1660 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς - - - ]
320 (1) [ἐπ]ὶ Ν̣ ι[κήτου] (332/1)
(2) Κεκροπ̣ [ὶς παίδων]
(3) Διόφαντ̣[ος ῾Αλιεὺς ἐχορήγει]
(4) Κεκρ̣οπὶς [ἀνδρῶν]
1665 (5) Ὀνή�̣ τωρ Μ[ελιτεὺς ἐχορήγει]
325 (6) κωμ̣ ωιδ[ῶν]
(7) Διοπεί[θης - - - ἐχορήγει]
(8) Προκλεί�δ̣ [ης ἐδίδασκε]
(9) τραγωι̣δ̣[ῶν]
1670/329 (10) Φρ̣[ - - - ]
[ἐχορήγει]
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
331 (12) ὑ�̣π̣ο̣[κριτὴς] Ν̣ ι̣[κ]ό�̣σ̣τ̣[ρατος]
(1) [ἐ]πὶ Ἀρ̣ι[̣ στο]φάνους (331/0)
1675 (2) Οἰνη[ὶς] πα̣ ίδ�̣ ω[ν]
(3) Ν̣ ι̣κ̣ό�̣[στρα]τ̣ος Ἀ̣ [χ]αρν [ἐχο]
335 (4) Ἱπποθων̣τ̣ὶς̣� ἀνδρ[ῶν]
(5) Ἄρ̣χ̣ιπ̣ ̣ [π]ος Πειραιε[ὺς ἐχορή]
(6) [κωμωιδ]ῶν
48 chapter one

1680 (7) [ ca. 7 ]ο[ς] Κηφισ[ι]

339 [ἐχορήγε]ι
(8) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
340 (9) [τραγωιδῶν]
341 (10) [ - - - ]
1685 [ἐχορήγει]
342 (11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]
343 (12) [ὑποκριτὴς]
[ - - - ]
344 (1) [ἐπὶ Ἀριστοφῶντος] (330/29)
1690 (2) [ - - - παίδων]
(3) [ - - - ]
[ἐχορήγει]
(4) [ - - - ἀνδρῶν]

Col. XIII

[ - - - ]
(5) [ - - - ]
1695 [ἐχορήγει]
(6) [κωμωιδῶν]
352 (7) [ . . . . . . ἐ]κ Κερ[αμέων]
ἐ[χορήγε]ι̣
(8) Θεόφιλος ἐδίδ[ασκε]
1700/355 (9) τραγωιδῶν
(10) [Θ]ηραμένης Κηφισι
[ἐχορ]ήγει
(11) [ . . . . ]κ̣ λῆς ἐδίδα[σκε]
(12) [ὑπο]κ̣ ριτὴς
1705/360 Ἀθηνόδωρος
(1) ἐπὶ Κηφισοφῶντος (329/8)
362 (2) [Ἱ]ππ[ο]θωντὶς παίδ̣[ων]
(3) [ . ] . [ ca. 8 ] . . [ - - - ]

Indeterminate number of lines lost

 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 49

Fragmenta sedis incertae

fr. k
Col. I
(8) [ - - - ἐχορήγ]ει̣
1710/365 (9) [κωμωιδῶν]
(10) [ - - - ἐχορή]γ
(11) [ - - - ἐδίδασκε]ν̣

Col. II
(5) Πολυα[ - - - ]
370 (6) κωμω̣ [ιδῶν]
1715 (7) Α̣ [ - - - ]

fr. l
(7/10) [ - - - ἐ]χ̣ορή
368 (8/11) [ - - - ἐδί]δασκε

fr. m
(7) [ ca. 6 ἐχ]ορήγ[ει]
(8) [ ca. 6 ]ος ἐ[δίδασκε]
1720 (9) [τραγωι]δῶ̣ [ν]

Epigraphical Notes
2. Dotted epsilon: only possible traces remain.
5. Dotted lambda: only the bottom tip of the left
diagonal is preserved.
6. Dotted delta: only possible traces remain.
11. Dotted rho: only the bottom tip of the vertical
is preserved.
14. Suppl. Wilhelm (1906a) 16.
17. Suppl. Lipsius (1887) 281–2.
144. Suppl. Dittenberger, Syll.1
146. Dot: a possible vertical stroke is preserved;
iota is possible but unlikely due to the lack of
known appropriate names beginning Θαι-.
152. Underlined nu: no trace is now visible. The
majuscule text of IG II 971f depicts the right half
of the letter as extant, as the photograph at Wil-
helm (1906a) 16–17 seems to do as well; the most
recent scholar to have seen traces of the letter is
apparently Mette, although his sometimes eccen-
tric use of epigraphical sigla creates doubt.
284. Dotted nu: only the upper part of the right
vertical is preserved.
285. Dotted kappa: only the tip of the bottom
diagonal is preserved.
286. Dotted alpha: only the apex is preserved.
294. Suppl. Capps (1899) 396.
296. Dotted lambda: possible traces of the apex
remain.
297. Suppl. Lipsius (1887) 281.
425. Dotted sigma: a trace of the top horizontal
is preserved.
581. Dotted sigma: only the righthand tip of the
bottom horizontal is preserved.
582. Suppl. Oellacher (1916) 116; [Ἕρμιππ]ος Wil-
helm (1906a) 21.
584. Dotted upsilon: only the bottom tip of the
vertical is preserved.
585. Dotted iota: only the bottom tip of the verti-
cal is preserved. Suppl. Köhler (1878).
586. Suppl. Köhler (1878).
50 chapter one
591. Dotted omicron: the letter has been largely
effaced by a gouge, and only traces of the bottom
right remain.
592. Dotted omega: only the upper right portion
of the letter is preserved.
593. In the name of the chorêgos, the upper tips
of two verticals are visible along the break. Dot-
ted rho: traces of the upper part of the vertical
and the top of the loop are preserved; beta is
possible.
594. Suppl. Bergk (1879) 331 n. 1.
864. Dotted alpha: only the bottoms of the diag-
onals are preserved.
867. Dotted epsilon: a trace of the top horizontal
is preserved along the break.
874. Dotted gamma: only the horizontal and the
upper tip of the vertical are preserved; the break
is such that epsilon is also possible.
1003. Dotted omicron: only the lower left part of
the circle is preserved.
1005. Dotted gamma: only a trace of the hori-
zontal is preserved.
1006. Dotted eta: the bottom of the left vertical
is preserved, as is perhaps the bottom tip of the
right vertical.
1011. Dotted gamma: only the left half of the
letter is preserved; pi is possible.
1016. Dotted nu: only the top of the right vertical
is preserved.
1147. Dotted sigma: only the right tip of the bot-
tom horizontal is preserved. Dotted lambda: only
the bottom part of the left diagonal is preserved.
1150. Dotted iota: only the bottom portion of the
vertical is preserved.
1151. Dotted gamma: only the right part of the
horizontal is preserved.
1152. Dotted gamma: traces of the horizontal,
and perhaps of the vertical, remain. Neither epsi­
lon nor pi—either of which would vastly expand
the number of demes that might be restored—
can be conclusively excluded.
1154. Dotted eta: only the upper tips of the verti-
cals are preserved.
1155. Dotted delta: only the apex is preserved.
1473. Dotted iota: only the bottom of the vertical
is preserved.
1474. Dotted alpha: only the diagonals remain.
Dotted lambda: damage to the interior of the let-
ter is such that alpha cannot be excluded. Dotted
epsilon: only the top horizontal and the vertical
remain.
1475. Dotted tau: only the right tip of the hori-
zontal is preserved.
1476. Dotted nu: only the upper tips of the left
vertical and the diagonal are preserved. Previ-
ously restored as [Κλ]εόμαχος (Köhler).
1477. Dotted delta: only the left diagonal is pre-
served; since the diagonal is slightly more upright
than elsewhere, the possibility that this cut is a
stray scratch cannot be excluded.
1478. Underlined upsilon: the majuscule drawing
of IG II 971g depicts the left diagonal, although
the letter seems not to have been read since then.
Underlined pi: Wilhelm, Kirchner and Mette all
read the letter (the latter with a dot); no clear
trace is now visible.
1479. Dotted pi: possible traces of the horizontal
and the right vertical remain. Dotted kappa: only
the vertical is preserved.
1480. Dotted alpha: only the apex is preserved.
1481. Dotted upsilon: only very faint scattered
traces remain, and the letter cannot be read with
confidence.
1482. Dotted kappa: only the end of the top diag-
onal is preserved. If kappa is read, [Ἀ]κ̣ [αμνατίς]
would seem to jut out slightly into the left margin.
1536. Dotted alpha: only traces of the diago-
nals remain; dotted mu: only indistinct traces
remain.
1537. Dotted alpha: only the apex is preserved.
1538. Dotted delta: only indistinct traces remain.
Dotted rho: only traces of the vertical remain.
1543. Dotted lambda: only the lower portion of
the right diagonal is preserved.
1545. Dotted omega, epsilon and nu: only indis-
tinct traces of all three letters remain.
1559. Dotted alpha: only the bottom tips of the
diagonals are preserved.
1560. Dotted alpha: only faint traces of the diag-
onals remain.
1561. Dotted alpha: only the bottom portion of
the right diagonal is now preserved, although the
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 51
letter is clearly visible in the photograph at Wil-
helm (1906a) 27.
1562. Dotted theta: only the bottom right por-
tion of the circle is perserved. Dotted tau: only
a trace of the horizontal remains. Dotted alpha:
only the bottom portion of the right diagonal is
preserved.
1564. Dotted alpha: only the bottom portion of
the right diagonal is preserved, although the entire
right diagonal, and possibly also the crossbar
(unless that is simply fortuitous damage), is visible
in Wilhelm’s photograph. Dotted mu: only the right
vertical is preserved, although Wilhelm’s photo-
graph seems to show both apexes of the letter.
1565. Dotted alpha: only traces of the right diag-
onal remain. Dotted omega: only the upper half
of the letter is preserved.
1566. Dotted nu: only the right vertical is now
preserved, although in Wilhelm’s photograph the
letter is clearly visible.
1661. Dotted nu: only possible traces of the bot-
tom tips of the verticals now remain; Wilhelm
read four vertical strokes, which he interpreted
as [ἐπ]ὶ Πυ̣[θοδήλου].
1662. Dotted pi: only the left vertical and the left
portion of the horizontal are preserved.
1663. Dotted tau: only the bottom part of the
vertical is preserved.
1664. Dotted rho: only traces of the vertical and
possibly the top of the loop remain; the letter is
somewhat clearer in Wilhelm’s photograph.
1665. Dotted eta: only the left vertical is pre-
served; the rest of the letter is obscured by mor-
tar or cement, although it is clearer in Wilhelm’s
photograph.
1666. Dotted mu: only the right vertical is pre-
served.
1668. Dotted iota: only the bottom tip of the
vertical is preserved.
1669. Dotted iota: only the top tip of the vertical
is preserved. Dotted delta: only the diagonals are
preserved.
1670. Dotted rho: only possible traces of the ver-
tical remain.
1673. ὑ�̣π̣ο̣[κριτής]: only the bottoms of the dotted
letters are preserved. Ν̣ ι̣[κ]ό�̣σ̣τ̣[ρατος]: traces of
the verticals of nu remain; only indistinct traces
of the other letters remain.
1674. Dotted rho and iota: only indistinct traces
remain.
1675. Dotted alpha: traces of the diagonals remain.
Dotted iota: only indistinct traces remain.
1676. Ν̣ ι̣κ̣ό�̣[στρα]τ̣ο[ς]: only traces of the dotted
letters remain, and none can be read with con-
fidence. Dotted alpha: only the left diagonal is
preserved.
1677. Dotted nu: traces of the verticals remain.
Dotted tau: traces of the horizontal remain. Dot-
ted iota: traces of the vertical remain.
1678. Dotted rho: only the loop is preserved.
Dotted chi: only traces of the upper left to lower
right diagonal remain. Dotted iota: only indis-
tinct traces of the vertical remain. Dotted pi: only
indistinct traces remain.
1698. Dotted iota: only the bottom tip of the ver-
tical is preserved.
1703. Dotted kappa: only the tip of the upper
diagonal is preserved.
1704. Dotted kappa: only possible traces of the
diagonals now remain, although the letter is vis-
ible in Wilhelm’s photograph.
1707. Dotted delta: only the apex is preserved.
1708. The first dotted space contains the tops
of a round letter; the second two contain top
horizontals.
1709. Dotted iota: only the bottom half of the
vertical is preserved.
1712. Dotted nu: only traces of the tops of the
verticals remain.
1714. Dotted omega: only the upper left portion
of the circle is preserved.
1715. Dotted alpha: the left diagonal is fully pre-
served; there appear to be traces of the horizon-
tal (as also in Wilhelm’s photograph, although he
read lambda), but these may simply be damage
to the stone.
1716. Dotted chi: only the lower right diagonal is
preserved.
1720. [τραγωι]δω̣ [ν]: IG II 1287b prints [ - - - ]ΔΙ[ - ].
Kirchhoff (1888) 321, the source of the IG text,
prints not an iota but only the middle third of
the letter; significantly, the stroke is printed not
52 chapter one

as a vertical but as inclining slightly to the left, 6. Aeschylus son of Euphorion of the deme Eleu-
and it is accordingly perhaps better read as part sis (PA 442; PAA 116140) appears in the City Dio-
of the left side of an omega. nysia victors list at IG II2 2325A.11 with an initial
victory dating, according to the Marmor Parium
Prosopographical Notes and Comments (FGrH 239 A 50 = A. test. 54a), to 485/4 BCE. Cf.
1. Numerous restorations have been proposed; 61, 105, 161. The set of plays with which Aeschy-
all are speculative, and only the identification lus took the prize in 473/2 BCE included Persians
of the first partially preserved word as [πρῶτ]ον (hyp. Pers. 16–17).
seems assured (with the letters πρῶ over the 17. Polyphrasmon (PA 12097; PAA 782020; TrGF 7)
missing column to the left). appears in the City Dionysia victors list at IG II2
2. Xenocleides (PA 11196; PAA 731765) is otherwise 2325A.13, two lines below Aeschylus, with an ini-
unknown. Of the three constituent parts of an tial victory dating sometime between 483/2 BCE
Athenian’s name (name, patronymic, demotic), (i.e. two years after Aeschylus’ initial victory; cf.
the patronymic is without exception omitted 6) and 472/1 BCE (if the victory recorded here
throughout this document, while the inclusion was his first).
of the demotic, regularly abbreviated, is variable. 18. Praxiergus (PA 12163; PAA 786790) is other-
With the absence of the demotic here, contrast its wise attested only at D.S. 11.54.1 (as eponymous
use in 5. The reason for the occasional absence of archon for this year).
the demotic is unclear. Considerations of space do 61. For the victory of Aeschylus (6) in 468/7 BCE
not seem to have been decisive, since the name with a set of plays that included Seven Against
of the chorêgos in 591, with no patronymic, for Thebes, cf. hyp. Th. 4–9 = test. 58a. Aristias (see
example, is the same length as that in 589, where IG II2 2325A.17) took second that year with a set
the patronymic is given. Although deme affilia- of plays by his father Pratinas (TrGF 4), while
tion mattered for the dithyrambic chorêgia, since Polyphrasmon (see 17) placed third. For Aeschy-
the chorêgos had to belong to the relevant tribe, lus’ competitive career, cf. 6, 105, 161; IG II2
the demotics of dithyrambic chorêgoi are omitted 2325A.11.
as often as those of dramatic chorêgoi. The type 105. For the victory of Aeschylus (6) with a set of
of contest was thus likewise not a deciding fac- plays that included Suppliants most likely in 464/3
tor. All omissions of the demotic are confined to BCE, cf. POxy. 2256 fr. 3 = test. 70.1–3, where ἐπὶ
the first third of the inscription (the last is in line ᾿Αρ̣[χεδημίδου] is the most plausible supplement
591, the chorêgos for the men’s dithyramb in 422/1 (although see Radt ad loc.). Sophocles (285) took
BCE), but this apparent trend may be exagger- second at the same festival, while Mesatos (TrGF
ated by the fact that a number of fragments from 11; probably to be restored at IG II2 2325A.16)
later sections of the inscription contain only the placed third. For Aeschylus’ competitive career,
left-hand portion of entries. For poets and actors, cf. 6, 61, 161; IG II2 2325A.11.
both the patronymic and the demotic are consis- 144. The name Cleaenetus is rare, and the individ-
tently omitted throughout. ual in question is almost certainly Cleaenetus of
3. Magnes (PA 9651; PAA 630950) appears in the the deme Cydathenaeon (PA 8460; PAA 574420 =
City Dionysia victors list at IG II2 2325C.8. 574425), whose son Cleon (PA 8674; PAA 579130)
5. Pericles son of Xanthippus of the deme Chol- became a prominent Athenian demagogue in
argus (PA 11811; PAA 772645; d. 429 BCE) was a the mid- to late-420s BCE. See in general Davies
member of one of Athens’ oldest and most dis- (1971) 318–19.
tinguished families, the Alcmaeonidae; this must 146. PAA 500975; Davies (1971) 211 (both reading
have been among the first liturgies he performed. Θαρ[ - - - ]).
Cf. Davies (1971) 455–7.
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 53
151. Philocles (PA 14516; PAA 935240) is other-
wise attested only as eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. D.S. 11.78.1).
153. Demodocus (PA 3463; PAA 315125) is other-
wise unknown.
155. Euctemon of the deme Eleusis (PA 5795;
PAA 438225) is otherwise unknown.
157. Eurycleides (PA 5963; PAA 444760) is other-
wise unknown, although Davies (1971) 204, not-
ing that the name is rare, suggests a connection
to the homonymous late-4th-century BCE hiero-
phant (PA 5964; PAA 444765) and the numerous
members of a prominent 3rd-century BCE fam-
ily from the deme Cephisia (e.g. PA 5966 = PAA
444790; PA 5967 = PAA 44795).
158. Euphronius (PA 6106; PAA 451045) is almost
certainly to be restored at IG II2 2325C.12 with a
single victory at the City Dionysia, which must
then be the one in 459/8 BCE recorded here.
160. Xenocles of the deme Aphidna (PA 11215;
PAA 732085) is also mentioned as Aeschylus’
chorêgos in hyp. Ag. 23 = A. test. 65a.3 (cf. 161),
but is otherwise unknown.
161. The victory by Aeschylus (6) in 459/8 BCE
recorded here was with his Oresteia tetralogy
(hyp. Ag. 21–3 = test. 65a). For Aeschylus’ com-
petitive career, cf. 6, 61, 105; IG II2 2325A.11.
162. Habron (PA 3; PAA 101455) is otherwise
attested only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. D.S. 11.79.1).
164. Charias of the deme Agryle (PA 15333; PAA
980950) is otherwise unknown, but his son Cha-
riades (PA 15310; PAA 980245) held a number of
important financial and religious offices in the
final decade of the 5th century BCE; see Davies
(1971) 569.
166. Deinostratus (PA 3190; PAA 302600) is oth-
erwise unknown, but the name is rare—there
is only one other 5th-century example—and
Davies (1971) 97, suggests that he might be identi-
fied with this man, also of the tribe Leontis (PAA
302605), who was killed in battle perhaps in 413
BCE (IG I3 1193.128).
213. [Κρατῖνος ἐδίδασκε] might be restored on
the basis of Euseb. Ol. 81.3, p. 111.26 Helm (= Cra-
tin. test. 4a; the Armenian version = test. 4b puts
the date one year later), if one accepts a corre-
spondence between a poet’s alleged floruit and
the date of his initial victory at the City Dionysia.
IG II2 2325C.14 in any case leaves little doubt that
Cratinus (PA 8755; PAA 584385) took the prize for
the first time sometime in the mid-450s BCE.
246. [Κράτης ἐδίδασκε] might be restored on the
basis of Euseb. Ol. 82.2, p. 112.15 Helm (= Crat.
com. test. 7a; the Armenian version = test. 7b puts
the date two years later), if one accepts the cor-
respondence described in 213. IG II2 2325C.16 in
any case leaves little doubt that Crates (PA 8739;
PAA 583995; O’Connor #307; Stephanis #1490)
took the prize for the first time sometime in the
late 450s or early 440s BCE.
284. Lewis (ap. Davies (1971) 76) restores [Βίω]ν
(PAA 266595) and suggests an identification with
the victorious chorêgos for men’s dithyramb in
447/6 BCE (291).
285. For the competitive record of Sophocles
son of Sophilos of the deme Colonus (PA 12834;
PAA 829200; first victorious in 469/8 BCE), see
345, 393, 741, 839; IG II2 2325A.15.
286. Heracleides (PAA 484720; O’Connor #214;
Stephanis #1074) appears first in the list of tragic
actors victorious at the City Dionysia (IG II2
2325B.2). This entry is the earliest evidence for
the actors contest, which began in 451/0 BCE or
later, meaning that Heracleides may have been a
repeat winner in 448/7 BCE.
291. Bion of the tribe Erechtheus (PA 2866; PAA
266590) is otherwise unknown; but see 284.
293. PAA 127205. Davies (1971) 29, suggests that
this may be Andocides son of Leogoras of the
deme Cydathenaeon (PA 827; PAA 127280; b. ca.
510–500 BCE), a member of a wealthy, powerful
Athenian family who served repeatedly as gen-
eral in the 440s and 430s BCE; the orator Ando-
cides (PA 828; PAA 127290) was his grandson.
294. Callias son of Lysimachus (PA 7829; PAA
553915) appears in the City Dionysia victors list at
IG II2 2325C.17 with two victories; the first dates
no earlier than 454/3 BCE and may well be the
triumph in 447/6 BCE recorded here.
54 chapter one
296. PAA 500175. For possible identifications,
see Wilhelm (1906a) 20–1; Davies (1971) 211.
297. Carcinus I son of Xenotimus of the deme
Thoricus is PA 8254; PAA 564125; TrGF 21. No
titles or fragments of his plays survive. For the
family (which produced at least two other tragic
poets), see 669 (on Xenocles); IG II2 2325A.43
(on Carcinus II); Davies (1971) 283–5.
345. For the victory of Sophocles (285) in 443/2
BCE with the set of plays that included Antigone,
see hyp. Ant. 13–14 = test. 25; Jebb, Antigone pp.
xlii–ilviii. For Sophocles’ competitive record, see
also 393, 741, 839; IG II2 2325A.15.
357. According to the Marmor Parium (FGrH 239
A 60), the initial victory, sc. at the City Dionysia,
of Euripides II son of Mnesarchides of the deme
Phlyeus (PA 5953; PAA 444585) came in 442/1 BCE
(test. 10b = test. 56). Euripides took the prize only
five times (test. 65a–b), including in 429/8 BCE
with the tetralogy to which Hippolytus belonged
(513), and some of these triumphs may have been
at the Lenaea.
393. For the victory of Sophocles (285) in 439/8
BCE, see hyp. E. Alc. 17 = DID C 11. For Sophocles’
competitive record, see also 345, 741, 839; IG II2
2325A.15.
402. For the initial victory of Pherecrates (PA
14195; PAA 920230; O’Connor #473; Stephanis
#2469) at the City Dionysia in 438/7 BCE, see
anon. de Com. III.29, p. 8 Koster (= test. 2.6);
IG II2 2325C.22.
425. Isocrates (PAA 542075) is otherwise
unknown. Cf. Davies (1971) 245.
426. Hermippus son of Lysis (PA 5112; PAA
404205) appears in the City Dionysia victors list
at IG II2 2325C.23. The victory recorded here is
likely his first.
428. Nicon (PAA 720090) is otherwise unknown.
Cf. Davies (1971) 412.
429. Iophon son of Sophocles of the deme Colo-
nus (PA 7584; PAA 537405; TrGF 22) took second
place behind Euripides in 429/8 BCE (cf. 513) and
remained active in the Theater until at least the
middle of the final decade of the century (Ar. Ra.
73, 78–9). The triumph recorded here must thus
have come early in his career. Seven titles and
two fragments of Iophon’s plays are preserved.
477. For the victory of Euphorion son of Aeschy-
lus of the deme Eleusis (PA 6079; PAA 450260;
TrGF 12) in 432/1 BCE, see hyp. E. Med. 41–3 =
DID C 12 = Euphor. test. 2. Sophocles took sec-
ond, while Euripides placed third.
513. For Euripides’ (cf. 357) victory in 429/8 BCE
with the set of plays that included Hippolytus, see
hyp. E. Hipp. 25–7 = DID C 13 = test. 63. Iophon
(cf. 429) took second, while Ion of Chios (PAA
543185; TrGF 19) placed third.
534. For the initial City Dionysia victory of Aris-
tophanes son of Philippus of the deme Cydath-
enaeon (PA 2090; PAA 175685) with Babylonians
in 427/6 BCE, see IG II2 2325C.24 and IG II2 2325C
introductory remarks.
570. For the victory of Cratinus (PA 8755; PAA
584385; IG II2 2325C.14; first victorious probably
in the mid- to late 450s BCE) in 424/3 BCE, appar-
ently near the end of his career, with Wineflask,
see hyp. Ar. Nu. V.1–2 = Cratin. test. 7c. Ameipsias
(cf. IG II2 2325C.28) took second, while Aristo-
phanes placed third (or perhaps lower, depend-
ing on the number of competitors that year).
581. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 581, no. A 107.
582. The presence of Κα[ - - - ] in the City Dio-
nysia victors list at IG II2 2325C.26, immediately
below Aristophanes and Eupolis (first victorious
in 426/5 or perhaps a year or two later), makes the
restoration of Cantharus (PA 8247; PAA 563810)
in both places almost inevitable. This was thus
most likely his initial victory.
584. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 581, no. A 108.
585. No complete titles or fragments of the plays
of Menecrates (PAA 643650; TrGF 35) are pre-
served, but he is perhaps to be identified with or
is a relative of the homonymous tragic actor (PAA
643655; O’Connor #329; Stephanis #1651; active in
the 440s and 430s BCE and perhaps later) whose
name is restored in the City Dionysia victors
list at IG II2 2325B.8 and who likely belongs in
the Lenaea list at IG II2 2325H.3 as well. Meritt
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 55
restored Menecrates as the author of a satyr play
revived perhaps sometime in the 230s BCE at SEG
XXVI 208.18, but this seems unlikely to be right.
586. Mynniscus of Chalcis (PAA 661940;
O’Connor #351; Stephanis #1757) appears as the
third victorious actor in the City Dionysia list at
IG II2 2325B.4.
587. Alcaeus (PA 572; PAA 120990) is otherwise
attested only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. D.S. 12.73.1).
589. Aristarchus of the deme Decelea (PA 1663;
PAA 164295) might—or might not—be the
Aristarchus (PAA 164155) who was general in 411
BCE under the Four Hundred; cf. Davies (1971)
48.
591. Demosthenes son of Alcisthenes of the
deme Aphidna (PA 3585; PAA 318425) was one of
Athens’ most prominent generals in the 420s and
410s BCE. He must have been born in 457 BCE
or earlier, since he was general already in 427/6
BCE; he died in Sicily in 413/2 BCE. Cf. Davies
(1971) 112–13.
594. For the victory of Eupolis son of Sosipolis
(PA 5936; PAA 442535) in 422/1 (with Flatter­
ers), see hyp. Ar. Pax III.39–41 = Eup. test. 13c.
Aristophanes took second (with Peace), while
Leuco (see IG II2 2325C.32) placed third (with
Phratry-members). For Eupolis’ competitive
career, see IG II2 2325C.25; IG II2 2325E.11. This
was most likely his second or perhaps his third
victory.
669. For the victory of Xenocles son of Carci-
nus of the deme Thoricus (PA 11222; PAA 732205;
Stephanis #1904; TrGF 33) in 416/5 BCE (defeating
Euripides), see Ael. VH 2.8 = DID C 14 = Xenocl.
test. 3. Cf. 297 (on Xenocles’ father Carcinus I); IG
II2 2325A.43 (on Xenocles’ son Carcinus II).
678. For the victory of Ameipsias (PA 708; PAA
123630) in 415/4 BCE (with Comasts), see IG II2
2325C.28; hyp. Ar. Av. I.8–10 = test. 5b. Aristo-
phanes took second (with Birds), while Phryni-
chus placed third (with The Recluse).
734–5. The victorious chorêgos was the anony-
mous speaker of Lysias 21.1–2; in 403/2 BCE, the
same man was the victorious chorêgos in comedy
for the poet Cephisodorus (PA 8341; PAA 568010),
although the festival is unknown (Lys. 21.4 =
Cephisod. test. 2). Cf. IG II2 2325C.37; Davies
(1971) 592–3, no. D 7.
741. For the victory of Sophocles (285) in 410/9
BCE (with the set of plays that included Philoc­
tetes), see hyp. S. Ph. II.6–7 = DID C 17. For Sopho-
cles’ competitive record, see also 345, 393, 839;
IG II2 2325A.15.
818–19. Mette restores these lines [Πανδιονὶς
παίδων] / [Νικίας Κυδαθνηαιεὺς ἐχορήγει] on the
basis of IG II2 1138. But there are no grounds for
concluding that Nicias’ victory was at the Dio-
nysia of precisely 403/2 BCE; see Lewis (1955) 18
(SEG XVI 105); Amandry (1977) 171–5.
823–4. See 734–5.
839. For the posthumous victory of Sophocles
(285) in 402/1 BCE (with the set of plays that
included Oedipus at Colonus), see hyp. S. OC II.1–3
= DID C 23. For Sophocles’ competitive record,
see also 345, 393, 741; IG II2 2325A.15.
864. For Nicostratus (PAA 717820; O’Connor
#368; Stephanis #1861), see IG II2 2325H.8.
1004. Araros of the deme Cydathenaeon (PA
1575; PAA 160355) was one of at least three sons of
the comic poet Aristophanes; cf. IG II2 2325C.24.
Six titles and 21 unrevealing fragments of his plays
are preserved. According to the Suda (α 3737 =
test. 1.2–3), Araros first staged a comedy, sc. that
he had written himself, in Olympiad 376/2 BCE,
and he must have taken the prize in 388/7 BCE
with a play composed by his father, most likely
Cocalus (hyp. Ar. Pl. = Cocalus test. iii, cf. K–A
p. 34).
1006. Aristocrates (PAA 171550) is presumably
to be identified with both the Aristocrates of the
deme Phaleron (PA 1926; PAA 171540) who served
as a guarantor for Neaera ca. 370 BCE ([D.] 59.40)
and the Aristocrates son of Physcion of the deme
Phaleron (PAA 171545) who was honored by the
dêmos for his service as a priest sometime early in
the 4th century (IG II2 3454). Cf. Davies (1971) 60.
1007. Sophocles II son of Iophon or Ariston of the
deme Colonus (PA 12833; PAA 829210; TrGF 62)
was the grandson of Sophocles I (IG II2 2325A.15);
56 chapter one
he was also victorious in 376/5 BCE (1153). Only
one fragment of his plays survives.
1008. Cleandrus (PAA 574470; O’Connor #293;
Stephanis #1413) is said at D. 57.18 to have encoun-
tered an enslaved Athenian citizen on Leucas
sometime apparently in the final decade of the
5th century and to have arranged for his return
to Athens. He is most likely also the Cleandrus
(O’Connor #294) whose service as an actor on
Rhodes and elsewhere is recorded at IGUR 223.3,
5, in an entry that precedes one referring to the
early-/mid-4th-century tragic actor Thrasybou-
lus (IG II2 2325H.22). A man by the same name
(PAA 574472; O’Connor #292; Stephanis #1412)
was among Aeschylus’ actors; probably a father-
son pair.
1009. Theodotus (PA 6773; PAA 505120) is other-
wise attested only as the eponymous archon for
this year (e.g. D.S. 14.110.1).
1010–11. For “old tragedies” revived at the City
Dionysia, sc. as non-competitive events, cf. IG II2
2320 Col. II.3–4, 20–1, 34–5 (342/1–340/39 BCE);
Nervegna (2007) 15–21. How and why this item
was added to the festival calendar is unclear. But
the verb seems to assign responsibility to the
actors themselves, suggesting that this was their
independent contribution to the proceedings,
as presumably also when an “old” comedy was
introduced in 340/39 BCE (1565–6). See also SEG
XXVI 208 and IG II2 2324 introductory remarks
(on separate actors competitions perhaps used
to select principals for the revived plays at the
Dionysia).
1013. Euegetes of the deme Pallene (PA 5465;
PAA 430905; cf. Davies (1971) 190) is otherwise
unknown.
1015. Iasus of the deme Collytus (PA 7434; PAA
530510) is perhaps to be identified with the man
(PA 7423; PAA 530505) who worked as a sculptor
on the Erechtheum in 408/7 BCE (IG I3 476.178–9,
369)—in which case his business must have been
successful enough to raise him into the liturgical
class. Cf. Davies (1971) 242.
1138. For the initial victory of Anaxandrides
(PAA 126725), sc. at the City Dionysia, in 377/6
BCE, see the Marmor Parium FGrH 239 A 70 =
Anaxandr. test. 3. He certainly took the prize in
376/5 BCE (1150), and he appears in the Lenaea
victors list at IG II2 2325E.37.
1146–7. The second letter in the name of
Moschus’ deme has traditionally been read as
a gamma, allowing him to be identified with
Moschus of the deme Angele (PAA 659930), who
served as a syntrierarch in 365/4(?) BCE (IG II2
1609.117) and was most likely also a sole trier-
arch sometime before 357 BCE (IG II2 1611.415),
and allowing the tribe in 1146 to be restored as
Pandionis. Cf. Davies (1971) 395. If our reading of
the second letter of his demotic as a lambda is
correct, his deme will instead have been Alopeke
(Antio­chis), Halae Aexionides (Cecropis), Halae
Araphenides (Aigeis), or Halimous (Leontis).
1149. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 584, no. B 7.
1150. For the competitive career of Anaxan-
drides, cf. 1138; IG II2 2325E.37.
1152. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 584, no. B 6.
1153. Sophocles II was also victorious in 388/7
BCE (1007).
1155. Hippodamus (PA 7610; PAA 538015) is oth-
erwise attested only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. IGUR 218.6; D.S. 15.38.1).
1156–9. IG II2 3037 shows that [ - - - ]ωρος ᾿Οῆθεν
was the victorious chorêgos and Οἰνηίς the vic-
torious tribe for one of the dithyrambic com-
petitions this year. The unknown individual in
question is PA 6886; PAA *507175 (“name over-
restored”); cf. Davies (1971) 389 (on Melesias =
PA 9816).
1189. For the victory of the tragic poet Astydamas
II (PA 2650; PAA 223005; TrGF 60) in 373/2 BCE,
see Marmor Parium FGrH 239 A 71 = test. 3. For
Astydamas’ competitive career, cf. 1477, 1549,
1561; IG II2 2320 Col. II.5, 22; 2325A.44; 2325G.25.
His Hermes may have been revived in the 250s
BCE (SEG XXVI 208.13 = DID A 4a.13).
1290–1. For the victory of the tribe Erechtheus in
the men’s dithyramb in 364/3 BCE, with Menete-
les son of Menes of the deme Anagyrous (PA
10023; PAA 645890) as chorêgos, cf. IG II2 3038
(a choregic victory monument); Davies (1971) 390.
 the fasti: ig ii2 2318 57
1432–3. For the victory of the tribe Oeneis in
the boys’ dithyramb in 352/1 BCE, with Apol-
lodorus son of Pasion of the deme Acharnae
(PA 1411; PAA 142545) as chorêgos, cf. IG II2 3039
(a choregic victory monument). Apollodorus’
father Pasion (PA 11672; PAA 768150; d. 370/
69 BCE) was a manumitted slave who took over
his master’s bank and eventually grew enor-
mously wealthy. After Pasion’s death, Apollodo-
rus (b. 395/4 BCE) allegedly began to live in
extraordinary style, but he also undertook a large
number of expensive liturgies, including this one;
cf. D. 36.39; Davies (1971) 437–42.
1473. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 584, no. B 13.
1474. For the competitive career of Alexis of
Thurii (PA 549; PAA 120505), cf. IG II2 2325E.45
(at least two victories at the Lenaea); 2322.2
(second place most likely at the Lenaea in the
third quarter of the 4th century BCE). The vic-
tory in 348/7 BCE referred to here appears (on
the basis of the datable individuals and events
referred to in the preserved fragments of his
comedies) to have come near the beginning of
Alexis’ career; cf. Arnott (1996) 16–17.
1476. The Nicomachus in question is perhaps a
relative of his homonym PA 10944 = PAA 716490
(tamias of Athena in 385/4 BCE).
1477. For the competitive career of Astydamas
II, cf. 1189, 1549, 1561; IG II2 2320 Col. II.5, 22;
2325A.44; 2325G.25.
1478. Thettalus (PAA 513214 ~ 513215; O’Connor
#239; Stephanis #1200) also took the prize at the
City Dionysia in 341/0 BCE (IG II2 2320 Col. II.6,
11, etc.); cf. IG II2 2325H.31.
1479. Themistocles (PA 6650; PAA 502305) is
otherwise attested only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. D.S. 16.56.1).
1481. Dionys[ - - - ] of the tribe Erechtheus (PAA
335835) is otherwise unknown. Cf. Davies (1971)
159.
1536. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 579, no. A 61.
1538. Athenodorus (PAA 110960; O’Connor #13;
Stephanis #75; Berve i #30) was also victorious in
330/29 BCE (1705–6) and competed in 342/1 BCE,
when Neoptolemus took the prize (IG II2 2320
Col. II.8, 10). His name might perhaps be restored
in the Lenaea actors list at IG II2 2325H.37 (two
victories).
1539. Sosigenes (PA 13196; PAA 860580) is other-
wise attested only as the eponymous archon for
this year (e.g. D.S. 16.72.1).
1540–1. The name of the victorious tribe can be
restored from the deme affiliation of the chorê­
gos, and Reisch (comparing IG II2 3041, a choregic
victory monument) plausibly suggested that the
individual in question might be Euthydemus son
of Stratocles of the deme Diomeia (PA 5530; PAA
432280), who served as a trierarch in 348 BCE (D.
21.165); cf. Davies (1971) 495.
1543. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 579, no. A 74.
1545. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 578, no. A 46.
1549. For the victory of Astydamas II in 342/1
BCE, see IG II2 2320 Col. II.5. For Astydamas’
competitive career, cf. 1189, 1477, 1561; IG II2
2320 Col. II.22; 2325A.44; 2325H.25.
1550. For the victory of Neoptolemus of Scyrus
(PA 10647; PAA 706615; O’Connor #359; Stephanis
#1797) in 342/1 BCE, cf. IG II2 2320 Col. II.17.
1560. Arrheneides son of Charicles of the deme
Paeania (PA 2254; PAA 204050) served as a trier-
arch in 357 BCE (IG II2 1953.11) and made various
other financial contributions to the city in the
330s and 320s BCE; cf. Davies (1971) 68.
1561. For the competitive career of Astydamas
II, cf. 1189, 1477, 1549; IG II2 2320 Col. II.5, 22;
2325A.44; 2325H.25.
1562. For the victory of Thettalus in 341/0 BCE,
see IG II2 2320 Col. II.31. For his competitive
career, see 1478; IG II2 2325H.31.
1563. Theophrastus of the deme Halae (PA 7171;
PAA 512615) is otherwise attested only as the
eponymous archon for this year (e.g. IG II2 2320
Col. II.32; D.H. 16.77.1).
1564–5. For “old” comedies revived at the City
Dionysia, e.g. IG II2 2323a Col. I.5–6 (Anaxan-
drides’ Treasure, revived in 312/1 BCE); 2323.14–15
(Philemon’s Phocians, revived ca. 216/5 BCE),
171–2 (Menander’s Misogynist, revived ca. 198/7
58 chapter one
BCE); and cf. 1010–11; SEG XXVI 208 and IG II2
2324 introductory remarks (on separate actors
competitions perhaps used to select principals
for the revived plays at the Dionysia).
1626–7. For the victory of the tribe Acamantis
in the boys’ dithyramb in 335/4 BCE, with Lysi-
crates son of Lysitheides of the deme Cicynna
(PA 9461; PAA 615380) as chorêgos, see IG II2
3042 (a choregic victory monument). Lysicrates
also served as a trierarch in 325/4 BCE (IG II2
1629.45–6); much of the family’s wealth appears
to have come from mining. Cf. Davies (1971)
357.
1661. Nicetes (PA 10753; PAA 711080) is otherwise
attested only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. D.S. 17.40.1).
1663. Diophantus of the deme Halae Aexonides
(PA 4424; PAA 367240 = 367245) served as a syn-
trierarch in 349/8 BCE (IG II2 1620.35); cf. Davis
(1971) 166.
1665. Presumably to be identified with the One-
tor son of Philonides of the deme Melite (PA
11473; PAA 748125) who served repeatedly as a
trierarch or syntrierarch in the 350s–330s BCE;
cf. Davies (1971) 423–4.
1667. Diopeithes (PA 4313; PAA 363180) is
unidentified, and the name is common in the
city’s liturgical class in this period (e.g. PA 4317 =
PAA 363480; PA 4328 = PAA 363695; PA 4329 =
PAA 363715).
1668. Procleides (PAA 788650) appears in the
Lenaea victors list at IG II2 2325E.59 with one
victory (immediately before Menander, whose
initial victory at that festival came in 317/6 BCE),
but is otherwise unknown.
1670–1. PAA 963670; Davies (1971) 557.
1673. Nicostratus (PAA 717835; O’Connor #369;
Stephanis #1863) is almost certainly also to be
restored as the actor who presented the “old
tragedy” in 340/39 BCE (IG II2 2320 Col. II.34)
and perhaps in the Lenaea victors list at IG II2
2325H.42 (ca. 340 BCE) as well.
1674. Aristophanes (PA 2078; PAA 175430) is oth-
erwise attested only as eponymous archon for
this year (e.g. D.S. 17.49.1).
1676. Nicostratus (PAA 718355) must be the
wealthy Nicostratus son of Pythodorus of the
deme Acharnae (PA 11024; PAA 718335) but is oth-
erwise impossible to disentangle from the vari-
ous homonyms who belong to the same period;
cf. Davies (1971) 482.
1678. Archippus son of Phormio of the deme
Piraeus (PA 2561; PAA 214640) also served repeat-
edly as a trierarch or syntrierarch in the 330s
and 320s BCE. Phormio was originally a slave
belonging to Pasion (cf. 1432–3), whose bank he
leased for a number of years. When Pasion died,
Phormio (now a wealthy man) married Pasion’s
widow Archippe; Archippus was their son. See
Davies (1971) 435–7.
1680–1. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 579, no. A 68.
1697–8. The unknown individual in question is
Davies (1971) 579, no. A 62.
1699. Theophilus (PAA 511110) is probably to be
restored as the fourth-place poet at the City Dio-
nysia in 312/1 BCE at IG II2 2323a Col. I.15. Twelve
fragments and nine titles of his plays survive. See
in general Papachrysostomou (2008) 248–81.
1701–2. Theramenes of the deme Cephisia (PA
7233; PAA 513910) is probably to be identified
with the ephebic lampadêphoros of 333/2 BCE
(PAA 513920) and the man who was a prytanic
secretary of Athens’ Council in 320/19 BCE (PAA
513915). Cf. Davies (1971) 227.
1703. Of known poets, either Philocles (TGrF 61;
see IG II2 2325A.44) or Timocles (TGrF 86; see IG
II2 2320 Col. II.19) (both suggested by Wilhelm)
are possible.
1704–5. For the competitive career of Athe-
nodorus, cf. 1538; IG II2 2320 Col. II.8, 10, 15;
2325H.39.
1706. Cephisophon (PA 8404; PAA 569065) is
otherwise attested only as eponymous archon for
this year (e.g. D.S. 17.74.1).
1713. PAA 777480; Davies (1971) 461 (both read-
ing Πολυά[ρατος]).
1715. PAA 600060; Davies (1971) 339 (both read-
ing Λ).
 chapter two
The Didascaliae: IG II2 2319–23a, SEG XXVI 203
These fragments, known collectively as the Dida­
scaliae, appear to be part of a long inscription—
perhaps better conceived of as a set of four
inscriptions—that offered complete records
for performances in tragedy and comedy at the
City Dionysia and the Lenaea, including non-
competitive events. Preserved dateable portions
extend from 421/0 BCE (IG II2 2319 Col. III; trag-
edy at the Lenaea) to sometime in the 140s or 130s
BCE (IG II2 2323; comedy at the Dionysia). The
series of at least four hands in IG II2 2323 makes it
clear that these inscriptions—like IG II2 2318 and
2325—were updated from time to time.
The records for each year all begin with the
dating formula ἐπί + archon-name in the geni-
tive. For the Dionysia, notices of non-competitive
events (satyr plays and “old” tragedies, on the
one hand, and “old” comedies, on the other, with
authors’ names and titles, and actors’ names,
where appropriate) follow. Competitive results
are given next, with the first-place poet and his
title or titles listed first, along with his actor or
actors; followed by the second-place poet and his
title or titles and actor or actors; and so forth. The
final line gives the name of the victorious actor.
There is no mention of chorêgoi. Years in which
no competition was held receive the summary
notice ἐπὶ τοῦ δεῖνα οὐκ ἐγένετο.
The backs of a number of fragments of the
Didascaliae survive and are all rough-picked, show-
ing that they were not intended to be seen; the
original thickness of the stones, where preserved,
varies between 0.192 (IG II2 2323 fr. i+b+c/d) and
0.237 (IG II2 2323a). A wall with smooth interior
and exterior faces, produced by setting two such
blocks back to back with the rough faces inward,
will have had a minimum thickness of ca. 0.385,
but probably greater, to which must be added
some quantity of interior rubble fill. The archi-
trave blocks on the interior of which IG II2 2325
(the Victors Lists) is inscribed, were intended to
be seen from both sides, as the presence of mold-
ings and a dedicatory inscription on the exterior
make clear; the original thickness of the archi-
trave was 0.365–0.366 (frr. o´ and q respectively).
Reisch (1907) 303–5, argued that the blocks on
which the Didascaliae and the Victors Lists were
inscribed were all part of a single structure, and
his thesis has been widely accepted. But the
architrave blocks are too small to cover the walls
on which they are supposed to have rested, and
the Victors Lists must in fact belong to a differ-
ent monument (for the shape of which, see IG II2
2325 general introductory remarks).1
Some sense of the size of the wall or structure
on which the Didascaliae were inscribed can be
got from the dimensions of the blocks (which
can calculated by analysis of the preserved bor-
ders and connected columns of IG II2 2323) and
the approximate number of columns the com-
plete catalogue must have required. Fr. f of IG II2
2323 (which contains portions of Cols. I and II)
preserves a left-hand margin, which runs down
the middle of Col. I; fr. a (which contains part of
Col. III) preserves an upper margin; and fr. h
(which contains part of Col. VI) preserves an
upper and a right-hand margin. Frr. i + b + c/d
1 This objection, conclusive by itself, leaves aside the
additional question of whether the wall space available in
Reisch’s reconstruction would have been sufficient to con-
tain the Didascaliae if they were in any sense complete;
for an estimate of the space required, see below. Supposing
that only one face of the wall, e.g. the interior, was inscribed
still results in the rejection of Reisch’s theory: the problem
of insufficient space for the inscription is exacerbated, and
the blocks for the uninscribed face cannot have been sub-
stantially less thick than the extant inscribed examples
without the wall losing its structural integrity.
60 chapter two

contains upper portions of Cols. II–V, all of which
must have been inscribed across a single block
(hereafter “Block 1”); since fr. f contains part not
just of Col. II but of the right-hand side of Col. I,
this portion of Col. I must have been inscribed
on Block 1 as well. The right-hand margin on fr.
h can scarcely belong to a different block, and
Block 1 must thus have contained 5½ columns
of text. Of the six columns partially preserved on
Block 1, Col. III extends the lowest and contains
50 lines of text (almost entirely in Hand 3), which
represents the minimum height of the block.2 If
the Didascaliae were comprehensive—and we
have no reason to believe that they were not—
they would have occupied 70 columns of text or
more, even at 130 lines per column. This would
require a wall or set of walls equal in length to at
least twelve large blocks of the sort reconstructed
above, and at least three blocks high.
IG II2 presents the fragments of the Didascaliae
in an order seemingly chosen with typographical
considerations to the fore. We organize them
instead by festival and genre, in the same (in this
case largely arbitrary) order as within IG II2 2325:
tragedy at the Dionysia (IG II2 2320); comedy at
the Dionysia (IG II2 2323a; 2323); comedy at the
Lenaea (IG II2 2319 col. I; 2322; 2321); and tragedy
at the Lenaea (IG II2 2319 Cols. II–III; SEG XXVI
203).

2 This reconstruction is consistent with the placement

and dimensions of frr. g + e below. Frr. g + e contain por-
tions of Cols. III and IV; only the first half of the lines in
Col. IV are preserved. The lowest line preserved on frr. g
+ e is the 100th line on Col. III (still in Hand 3). While no
margins survive on frr. g + e, therefore, what is preserved
is consistent with the existence of another block (“Block
2”) the size of Block 1, below it and set plinthedon-style
three columns to its left, and containing 50 lines of text or
slightly more.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2320 61

IG II2 2320

The references in Col. II.3–4, 20–1 to performances (Item 8)4 title of victorious poet’s third play in
of “old” tragedies show that the festival in ques- dative, followed by ὑπε(κρίνετο) and name of
tion is the City Dionysia, where a performance actor who performed it in nominative;
of a revived play was added to the program in (Item 9) name of second-place poet, followed
387/6 BCE (IG II2 2318.1010–11). A single satyr play by notice δεύ(τερος) and title of second-place
is a standard part of the program at this point poet’s first play in dative;
(Col. II.18–19, 32–3). But the fact that the satyr (Item 10) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of actor
play is mentioned at the very beginning of the who performed second-place poet’s first play
entry, even before the reference to the “old” trag- in nominative;
edy (cf. IG II2 2323a Col. I.5–6), along with the (Item 11) title of second-place poet’s second play
absence of any indication of contest outcomes in in dative, followed by ὑπε(κρίνετο) and name
connection with these performances either here of actor who performed it in nominative;
or in the early 4th-century entries in the Dionysia (Item 12)5 title of second-place poet’s third play
records in IG II2 2318, suggests that this too was a in dative, followed by ὑπε(κρίνετο) and name
non-competitive exhibition event. See SEG XXVI of actor who performed it in nominative;
208 and IG II2 2324 introductory remarks. (Item 13) name of third-place poet, followed by
The entries are cast in a generally standard notice τρί(τος) and title of third-place poet’s
form, except that (1) in 342/1 BCE there are three first play in dative;
plays per poet, whereas in 341/0 BCE there are (Item 14) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of actor
two; and (2) individual words are occasionally who performed third-place poet’s first play in
found at the end of one line rather than at the nominative;
beginning of the next, and vice versa, to accom- (Item 15) title of third-place poet’s second play in
modate particularly long names and the like: dative, followed by ὑπε(κρίνετο) and name of
actor who performed it in nominative;
(Item 1) ἐπί + archon’s name in genitive, followed (Item 16)6 title of third-place poet’s third play in
by notice σάτυρι (“with a satyr play”); dative, followed by ὑπε(κρίνετο) and name of
(Item 2) name of poet presenting satyr play in actor who performed it in nominative; and
nominative, followed by play’s title in dative; (Item 17) ὑπο(κρίτης), followed by name of victo-
(Item 3) notice παλαιᾶι (“with an old [tragedy]”), rious actor and notice ἐνίκα.
followed by name of actor presenting play in
nominative; No explanation is offered for the difference in
(Item 4) title of “old tragedy” in dative, followed the number of tragedies per poet in 342/1 BCE
by poet’s name in genitive; vs. 341/0 BCE; perhaps some arrangements for
(Item 5) ποη(τής), followed by name of victorious the festival were fixed in this period, while the
poet; eponymous archon, or another festival official,
(Item 6) title of victorious poet’s first play in set others as he wished. In 341/0 BCE, one of
dative, followed by ὑπε(κρίνετο) and name of the poets competing for the prize also wrote the
actor who performed it3 in nominative;
(Item 7) title of victorious poet’s second play in
dative, followed by ὑπε(κρίνετο) and name of 4 Not included in the 341/0 BCE entry, where there are
only two plays per poet.
actor who performed it in nominative; 5 Not included in the 341/0 BCE entry, where there are
only two plays per poet.
6 Not included in the 341/0 BCE entry, where there are
3 I.e. who served as protagonist, as throughout. only two plays per poet.
62 chapter two
satyr play, but we know nothing about how he
was chosen.
In both 342/1 and 341/0 BCE, each actor per-
forms (i.e. serves as protagonist in) one play for
each of the three poets, and one actor also per-
forms (i.e. serves as protagonist in) an “old trag-
edy”. How the latter individual was selected is
again unclear, but there is no apparent connec-
tion to success in the previous year’s competition
either here (given that Thettalus took the actors
prize in 341/0, but Nicostratus performed the
“old tragedy” in 340/39) or in the records for the
comic competitions at the Dionysia, where an
“old” comedy similarly became part of the pro-
gram in 340/39 BCE, in IG II2 2323a. In 342/1 BCE,
the actors rotate through the poets’ offerings in
such a way that each actor performs first, second
and third in the three sets of tragedies. In 341/0,
on the other hand, Thettalus always performs the
first of the two plays, while Neoptolemus always
performs the second. Neither arrangement is
likely to be random, and the intent in both cases
must have been to produce some basic competi-
tive equity for poets, actors or both, with the pre-
cise sense of how that equity was to be attained
evolving from year to year (i.e. from archon to
archon).
Astydamas, the poet who took the prize in
342/1 BCE, is among the competitors in 341/0
BCE, while Athenodorus (the actor who took
the prize in 343/2 BCE) and Thettalus (the actor
who took the prize in 342/1 BCE) are among the
competitors in 342/1 and 341/0 BCE, respectively.
Whether this means that a place in both com-
petitions was routinely reserved at this point for
the previous year’s winner, or whether such reap-
pearances should be regarded as merely a further
indication of the general popularity and success
of these individuals, is impossible to say.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2320 63

10. IG II2 2320 frr. a + b (EM 8226 + 8227; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
64 chapter two

Technical Description face is brittle and flaking; the surface has appar-
ently degenerated over the past century, and
Fragments a + b. many letters previously visible are no longer so.
EM 8226 (a) + EM 8227 (b); south slope of the Editions: Kumanoudis (1877) 476–7; Köhler
Acropolis. (1878) 112–17; IG II 973; Syll. 1 407; Brinck (1886);
H 0.366; W 0.2111; T 0.119; LH 0.005–0.006. Syll.2 696; Michel (1900) no. 881; Wilhelm (1906a)
Gray “Hymettian” marble; right side preserved 38–41; IG II2 2320.1–34; Pickard-Cambridge (1988)
with crude anathyrosis similar to that on IG II2 108–9; Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 36–8; Mette (1977)
2323; other sides and back broken. The inscribed 90–2.

Col. I
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]κι
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]ς
[ - - - ]
20 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]αι
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
25 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]ι̣
[ - - - ]
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2320 65

Epigraphical Notes
26. Dotted iota: only the bottom tip of the verti-
cal survives.

Col. II
[ἐπὶ Σωσιγένους σάτυρι] (342/1)
[ - - - ]
[παλαι]ᾶ̣ ι ̣ Νε[οπτόλ ]
[Ἰφιγε]νείαι Εὐρ̣[ιπ]ί�δ̣ ου̣
5 [ποη] : Ἀστυδάμας
[Ἀχι]λλεῖ ὑπε : Θετταλός
5 Ἀθάμαντι ὑπε : Νεοπτόλ
[Ἀ]ν̣τιγόνηι ὑπε : Ἀθηνόδω
[Ε]ὐ�̣άρετος δ[εύ :] Τεύκρωι
10 [ὑπ]ε : Ἀθηνόδωρος
[Ἀχι]λλεῖ ὑ[πε] : Θ̣ ετταλός
10 [ . . . ]ε̣ι ὑπ[ε : Ν]εοπτόλεμος
[ ca. 7 ] τρί : Πελιάσιν
[ὑπε : Νεοπ]τ̣όλεμος
15 Ὀρέστηι [ὑπε : Ἀθην]ό[δωρος]
Αὔγηι ὑπε : Θ̣ εττα[λός]
15 ὑπο : Νεο[π]τόλ̣ εμος ἐνίκ
ἐπὶ Νικομάχου σάτυρι (341/0)
Τιμοκλῆς Λυ̣κούργωι
20 παλαιᾶι : Νεοπτόλεμο̣[ς]
Ὀρέστηι Εὐριπίδο
20 π̣ οη : Ἀστυδάμας
[Π]αρθενοπαίωι ὑπε : Θε[ττα]
[Λυ]κ̣ ά�̣ονι ὑπε : Νεοπτόλε[μος]
25 [ . . . . ]κλῆς δεύ : Φρίξωι
[ὑπε :] Θετταλός
25 [Οἰδί]ποδι̣ ὑπε : Νεοπτόλ[εμ]
[Εὐάρ]ετος τρί
[Ἀλκ]μ̣ έω̣ νι̣ ὑπε : Θεττα[λός]
30 [ . . . . . ]ηι : ὑπε : Νεοπτό[λε]
[ὑπο : Θε]τταλὸ�̣ς ἐνίκα
30 [ἐπὶ Θεο]φρά�̣ στου σατυ̣[ρι] (340/39)
[ ca. 8 ] Φορκίσ[ι]
[παλαιᾶι : 3–4 ]όστρ[ατος]
35 [ 7–8 Εὐ]ριπί[δου]
[ποη : ca. 7   ]ο[ - - - ]
66 chapter two
Epigraphical Notes
3. Dotted alpha: only the bottom tip of the right
diagonal survives. Dotted iota: only the bottom
tip survives.
4. Dotted rho: only the bottom half of the ver-
tical survives. Dotted iota: traces of the bottom
half of the vertical survive along the break. Dot-
ted upsilon: possible traces of the bottom of the
vertical survive.
8. Dotted nu: only the top part of the right verti-
cal is preserved.
9. Dotted upsilon: only the right diagonal survives.
11. Dotted theta: only the left side of the circle is
preserved.
12. Dotted epsilon: only the tip of the top hori-
zontal survives; gamma is also possible.
14. Dotted tau: only the right half of the horizon-
tal survives.
16. Dotted theta: only the lower right portion of
the circle survives.
17. Dotted lambda: only the apex survives.
19. Dotted upsilon: only the bottom of the verti-
cal survives.
20. Dotted omicron: only the left side of the cir-
cle is preserved.
22. Dotted pi: only the central part of the left
vertical is preserved.
24. Dotted kappa: only the top tip of the vertical
survives. Dotted alpha: only the tip of the apex
survives.
27. Dotted iota: only the top tip of the vertical
survives.
29. Dotted mu: the right vertical is preserved
along the break. Dotted omega: the top of the
circle is preserved along the break. Dotted
nu: only the upper part of the right vertical is
preserved.
31. Dotted omicron: only the bottom of the cir-
cle is visible along the edge of damage to the
surface.
32. Dotted alpha: only the diagonals survive.
Dotted upsilon: only the upper part of the left
diagonal survives.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
Col. I
15, 21 and 26 are most easily understood as pre-
serving the final letters of play-titles in the dative,
while 18 is most easily understood as preserving
the final letter of the name of a poet or actor.
Three of the four lines can be made to fit the
scheme for 342/1 and 341/0 BCE outlined above
in various ways on that hypothesis (e.g. 15 =
item 2, 18 = item 5, 21 = item 9 in a year of two
plays/poet; 15 = item 13, 18 = item 16 in a year of
three plays/poet, 21 = item 2; 18 = item 10, 21 =
item 13 in a year of three plays/poet, 26 = item
1). But all four lines cannot—although the fact
that the material is so badly preserved, on the
one hand, and the apparent flexibility of the
festival program in this period and of the distri-
bution of material between lines in the inscrip-
tion, together with frequent abbreviation, on the
other, mean that not much ought to be made of
this. In any case, the contests referred to in Col. I
probably occurred 7–8 years before those in
Col. II, i.e. in the early 340s BCE.
Col. II
1–17. Additional portions of the competitive
results at the City Dionysia in 342/1 BCE are pre-
served at IG II2 2318.1539–50 (supplemented on
the basis of this passage).
3, 7, 12, 14, 17, 20, 24, 27, 30. Neoptolemus of
Scyrus, who performed the “old tragedy” in both
342/1 and 341/0 BCE and took the actors prize in
342/1 BCE, is PA 10647; PAA 706615; O’Connor
#359; Stephanis #1797. He was victorious once at
the Lenaea (IG II2 2325H.30; ca. 370 BCE) and was
closely associated with Philip II of Macedon (D.
5.6–8; 19.12 with MacDowell ad loc., who identi-
fies him with the wealthy Neoptolemus son of
Anticles of the deme Melite [PA 10652; PAA
706660], 315; D.S. 16.92.3).
4, 21, 35. All three “old” tragedies from these years
were by Euripides, and both of those for which
we have titles (4, 21) are preserved. For Euripides’
popularity in the 4th century in particular, see
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2320 67
the references collected in Olson (2007) 178–9.
Whether the Iphigenia in Tauris or the Iphigenia
in Aulis is in question in 4, is unclear.
5, 22. Astydamas II, the victorious poet in both
342/1 and 341/0 BCE, is PA 2649; PAA 223005; TrGF
60. He took the prize at one festival or another 15
times (Suda α 4265 = test. 1.4), first at the City Dio-
nysia in 373/2 BCE (Marm. Par. FGrH 239 A 71 =
test. 3, hence the restoration at IG II2 2318.1189),
and again in 348/7 (IG II2 2318.1477). His name
can be restored in the list of poets victorious at
that festival at IG II2 2325A.44 (at least seven vic-
tories) and in the Lenaea list at IG II2 2325G.25
(at least six victories). Astydamas was a member
of a large, multi-generational theatrical family
that also included his great-grandfather Philocles
I (TrGF 24), his grandfather Morsimus (TrGF 29),
his great-uncle Aeschylus and Aeschylus’ sons
Euphorion II (TrGF 12) and Euaeon (TrGF 13), his
father Astydamas I (TrGF 59), his brother Philo-
cles II (TrGF 61; see 25), and doubtless the 3rd-
century tragic poet Astydamas III (TrGF 96) as
well. Only the titles of his tragedies of 342/1 BCE
(6–8) and 341/0 BCE (23–4) survive.
6, 11, 16, 23, 26, 29, 31. Thettalus, who acted
in both 342/1 and 341/0 BCE and was victorious
in the actors competition in 341/0 BCE, is PAA
513215; O’Connor #239; Berve i #371; Stephanis
#1200. He was also victorious in the actors com-
petition at the City Dionysia in 348/7 BCE (IG II2
2318.1478), when Astydamas II (5, 22) was the vic-
torious poet; cf. IG II2 2325H.38 (where his name
is perhaps to be restored in the Lenaea list). Thet-
talus was a favorite of Alexander the Great and
(along with Athenodorus; see 8, etc.) accompa-
nied him on his expedition to the East, where he
performed at a celebration in Phoenicia in honor
of the king’s return from Egypt in 331 BCE (Plu.
Alex. 29.1–3; Mor. 334d–e) and at the mass wed-
ding of Alexander and his companions to local
women in Susa in 324 BCE (Chares FGrH 125 F 4).
6, 11. Achilleus is best known as the tragic central
figure in the Iliad; that he was the title-character
for two plays this year attests to the enormous
popular appeal of his story. See in general Gantz
(1993) 576–635 passim, esp. 625–8; LIMC I.i.37–
300 passim.
7. Athamas was the father of Phrixus (see 25) and
Helle (by Nephele), but also the husband of Ino
and the father of Learchus and Melicertes; there
is no way to know what part of his immensely
complicated story was the subject of Astydamas’
tragedy. See in general [Apollod.] Bib. 1.9.1–2; Hyg.
fab. 1–5; Gantz (1993) 176–80; LIMC II.i.950–1.
8. For Oedipus’ daughter Antigone and the vari-
ous lost tragedies in which she was the central
character, see in general Gantz (1993) 519–22;
LIMC I.i.818–19.
8, 10, 15. Athenodorus, who acted only in 342/1
BCE, is PAA 110960; O’Connor #11; Stephanis #75;
Berve i #30. He was victorious in the actors com-
petition at the City Dionysia in 343/2 BCE (IG II2
2318.1538) and 330/29 BCE (IG II2 2318.1706–7),
and his name is perhaps to be restored in the
list of actors victorious at the Lenaea at IG II2
2325H.38 (two victories). Like Thettalus (6, etc.),
he accompanied Alexander on his expedition to
the East and performed in both Phoenicia (where
he was awarded the actors prize) and at the wed-
ding in Susa in 324 BCE (Plu. Alex. 29.1–3; Mor.
334d–e; Chares FGrH 125 F 4).
9, 28. Euaretus, who took second place in the
competition for tragic poets in 342/1 BCE and
third place in 341/0 BCE, is TrGF 85; PAA 426655.
Nothing else is known of him or his plays.
9. Teucer son of Telamon was the brother of the
Homeric hero Ajax of Salamis, and was banished
by his father after Ajax committed suicide at
Troy; cf. E. Hel. 91–104; Lyc. 450–67; Gantz (1993)
694–5; LIMC VIII.i.1195–6.
13. [Plu.] Mor. 839c–d (= test. 2.16–17) reports
that the competitive career of Aphareus (TrGF
73) extended from 369/8 to 342/1 BCE, and as
his name fits the lacuna here, he might easily be
restored as the third-place poet (thus Köhler).
For Aphareus’ competitive career, cf. IG II2
2325A.46 (two victories at the City Dionysia).
Nothing is preserved of the plays he staged at
the City Dionysia in 342/1 BCE except the titles.
The Peliades were the daughters of King Pelias of
68 chapter two
Iolcus, who were convinced by Medea to kill their
father, supposedly in order to restore his youth.
See [Apollod.] Bib. 1.9.10, 27; Hyg. fab. 24; Gantz
(1993) 367–8; LIMC VII.i.270–1.
15. For Agamemnon’s son Orestes and the vari-
ous tragedies in which he was a central figure,
see 21; Gantz (1993) 676–86, 690–4.
16. Auge, a daughter of King Aleus of Tegea, was
the mother of Telephus by Heracles. In some ver-
sions of the story, Aleus set Auge and her new-
born son adrift at sea, while in others Auge was
sent into exile and Telephus was exposed, but
the two were eventually reunited. See [Apol-
lod.] Bib. 2.7.4; 3.9.1; Paus. 8.4.9; D.S. 4.33.7–12;
Hyg. fab. 99–100; Gantz (1993) 428–31; LIMC
III.i.45–6.
18–31. Additional details of the prosopography
of the tragic competition at the City Dionysia in
341/0 BCE are preserved at IG II2 2318.1559–62.
18. Nicomachus (PA 10936 + add.; PAA 716135) is
attested elsewhere only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. D.S. 16.74.1).
19. Timocles, who is perhaps also to be restored
in 25 as the second-place tragic poet this year,
is PAA 887010; TrGF 86. His name might also be
restored in 33 and at IG II2 2318.1703 (the victo-
rious tragic poet at the City Dionysia in 330/29
BCE). Nothing except the titles is preserved of his
satyr play Lycurgus or of the tragedies mentioned
in 25, 27, whoever the author may have been. The
Thracian king Lycurgus attacked Dionysus and
his nurses, and was punished in various ways
depending on the source. See Il. 6.130–40; [Apol-
lod.] Bib. 3.5.1; Hyg. fab. 132; Gantz (1993) 113–14;
LIMC VI.1.309–10.
21. See 15.
23. Parthenopaeus, generally identified as the son
of Atalante and Meleager, was one of the Seven
against Thebes and was killed by the Theban
defender Periclymenus. See [Apollod.] Bib. 1.9.13;
Gantz (1993) 336–7, 515–17; LIMC VIII.i.942–3.
24. The Lycaon in question might be either
(1) the son of Priam captured and sold into cap-
tivity by Achilles, and then killed by him when
he returned to the war at Troy (Il. 21.34–135; LIMC
VI.i.297); or (2) the king of Arcadia who offered
human flesh to the gods and was punished for
his crime by Zeus (see Hes. fr. 163; Hyg. fab. 176;
Gantz (1993) 728–9).
25. The second-place poet in 341/0 BCE might
be either Timocles, who presented the satyr play
(see 18–19), or Philocles II (PA 14526; PAA 935490;
TrGF 61), the brother of Astydamas II, the victori-
ous poet (22). Nothing more is known of Philocles
II or of the plays referred to in 25–6, regardless of
who the author was. Phrixus, one of the sons of
Athamas (see 7), was due to be sacrificed (accord-
ing to some sources, due to the malevolence of
his stepmother Ino, according to others, volun-
tarily) to put an end to a famine, but escaped at
the last moment on a golden ram with his sister
Helle. See (in addition to the material cited in
7) Hes. fr. 68; Pi. P. 4.159–62; Pherecyd. FGrH 3
F 98–9; Gantz (1993) 176–80; LIMC VII.i.398–9.
27. For Oedipus of Thebes and the various trag-
edies in which he figured as a central figure, see
Gantz (1993) 490–506; LIMC VII.i.1–2; and cf. SEG
XXVI 208.23 (an undated revival of an Oedipus by
an unknown poet).
29. Alcmaeon was the son of the seer Amphiar-
aus, who ordered him to kill his mother Eriphyle
because she forced Amphiaraus to take part in the
expedition of the Seven against Thebes, despite
knowing that he would die there. Alcmaeon later
accompanied the sons of the other original Seven
in a second expedition against Thebes, sacked the
place, and killed Eriphyle. Her Furies then drove
him mad, and he wandered from city to city until
he was purified by the river-god Acheloos, who
gave him his daughter Callirhoe in marriage. See
Asclep. Trag. FGrH 12 F 29; [Apollod.] Bib. 3.6.2,
7.5; Paus. 8.24.7–10; Gantz (1993) 522–7.
32. Theophrastus of the deme Halae (PA 7171; PAA
512615) is attested elsewhere only as the epony-
mous archon for this year (e.g. IG II2 2318.1563;
D.S. 16.77.1).
33. Phorcys’ daughters, the subject of the satyr
play by an unknown poet in 340/39 BCE, are the
Graeae, who shared a single tooth and a single
eye (stolen by Perseus), and the Gorgons (whom
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2320 69

the Graeae protected from attack, hence Perseus’
need to neutralize them before he murdered
Medusa). See Hes. Th. 270–8; Pherecyd. FGrH
3 F 11; [A.] PV 792–7; Gantz (1993) 19–20; LIMC
IV.i.362–3.
34. The actor who presented the “old” tragedy in
340/39 BCE is almost certainly Nicostratus (PAA
717835; O’Connor #369; Stephanis #1863), who can
also be restored at IG II2 2318.1673 as victorious
in the actors competition at the City Dionysia in
332/1 BCE, and perhaps in the list of actors victo-
rious at the Lenaea at IG II2 2325H.42 (340s BCE).
The same name was borne by a famous late 5th-/
early 4th-century tragic actor (see IG II2 2318.864;
2325H.8), and the two men may be members of a
single, multi-generational theatrical family.
70 chapter two
IG II2 2323a
The reference to the performance of an “old” com-
edy in Col. I.5–6 suggests that the festival in ques-
tion is the City Dionysia, where a performance
of a revived play was added to the program in
340/39 BCE, according to IG II2 2318.1564–5. If
each annual entry in this section of the inscrip-
tion properly contained 13 lines, and each col-
umn contained roughly 108–132 lines (as IG II2
2323 certainly did), the partially preserved entry
in Col. II ought to date nine to ten years after the
entry for 312/1 BCE roughly opposite it in Col. I,
i.e. probably to 303/2 or 302/1 BCE.7
The entries are cast in a standard form:
(Item 1) ἐπί + archon’s name in genitive, followed
by notice παλαιᾶι (“with an old [comedy]”);
(Item 2) name of actor who presented the “old”
comedy in nominative, followed by title of play
in dative and poet’s name in genitive;
(Item 3) ποη(τής), followed by name of victorious
poet in nominative and of play in dative;
(Item 4) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of victo-
rious poet’s actor;
(Item 5) name of second-place poet, followed by
notice δεύ(τερος) and title of play in dative;
(Item 6) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of sec-
ond-place poet’s actor;
7 Nine years @ 13 lines = 117 lines; plus two additional
lines for the extra spaces used in the 312/1 BCE entry in Col.
I.9–10 (an unusually long name) and 13 (special notice) =
119 lines; plus one line to reflect the fact that the partially
preserved annual entry in Col. II.4–18 does not stand
exactly opposite the entry for 312/1 in Col. I.5–19 but one
line above it; = 120 lines. A ten-year gap (with the Col. II
(Item 7) name of third-place poet, followed by
notice τρί(τος) and title of play in dative;
(Item 8) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of third-
place poet’s actor;
(Item 9) name of fourth-place poet, followed by
notice τέ(τταρτος) and title of play in dative;
(Item 10) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of
fourth-place poet’s actor;
(Item 11) name of fifth-place poet, followed by
notice πέμ(πτος) and title of play in dative;
(Item 12) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of fifth-
place poet’s actor; and
(Item 13) ὑπο(κρίτης), followed by name of victo-
rious actor and notice ἐνίκα.
Two lines are used for item (5) in Col. I.9–10 (since
the name of the poet and the title of the play are
both very long); a special notice is included in
Col. I.13; and there appear to have been similar
unexpected features somewhere in Col. II.4–14.
Five poets compete with one play apiece.
Three actors compete, two of them performing
for two different poets, and the third presum-
ably performing in one original comedy and the
revival.
entry belonging to 302/1 BCE) would require approximately
133 lines in the column. All of this assumes that the unusual
features of the 312/1 and 303/2? BCE entries are atypical,
which may not be true. But the calculation ought not to be
out by more than one year for the date of the Col. II entry
in any case.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323a 71

11. IG II2 2323a (EM 8229; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
72 chapter two

Technical Description thickness original). The line ends of Col. I can

extend as far to the right as the outdented lines
EM 8229; south slope of the Acropolis. of Col. II.
H 0.269; W 0.182; T 0.237; LH 0.005–0.007. Editions: Wilhelm (1906a) 43–50 (= IG II “974c”);
Gray “Hymettian” marble; all sides broken but IG II2 2323a; Pickard-Cambridge (1988) 109–10;
original rough-picked back preserved (hence Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 40–2; Mette (1977) 114–16.

Col. I
35 [ὑπε : Ἀσκληπιόδ]ω̣ ρο[ς]
[Μένανδρος] πέμ : Ἡνιόχωι
[ὑπε : Κάλ]λ̣ ιππος πρεσβύτ
[ὑπο : Κάλλι]ππος νεώ : ἐνίκ
5 [ἐπὶ Πολέμ]ωνος παλαιᾶι (312/1)
40 [ ca. 6 ]Θ̣ ησαυρῶι Ἀναξαν
[ποη : Φιλι]ππίδης Μύστιδι
[ὑπε : Ἀσ]κ̣ ληπιόδωρος
[Νικόστ]ρατος δεύ
10 [ 4–5 ]οσκόπωι
45 [ὑπε : Κ]άλλιππος νεώτε
[Ἀμεινί]ας τρί : Ἀπολειπούσει
[οὗτος ἔ]φηβος ὢν ἐνεμή<θ>η
[ὑπε : Ἀσκ]ληπιόδωρος
15 [Θεόφιλο]ς τέ : Παγκρατιασ
50 [ὑπε : Κάλλιπ]π̣ ος
[ ca. 8 πέμ : Π]αιδίωι
[ὑπε : ca. 10 ]
[ὑπο : Ἀσκληπιόδωρο]ς ἐνίκ[α]
20 [ἐπὶ Σιμωνίδου παλαιᾶι] (311/0)

Epigraphical Notes 6. Dotted theta: only the right side of the circle
1. Dotted omega: an apparent trace of the right survives.
tail survives. 8. Dotted kappa: only the tip of the bottom diag-
3. Dotted lambda: only the bottom of the right onal is preserved.
diagonal survives. 13. The theta was inscribed with no center dot.
16. Dotted pi: only the horizontal survives.

Col. II
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
ἐ[πὶ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
. [ - - - ]
Ι̣[ - - - ]
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323a 73
Γ̣ [ - - - ]
Μ[ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]
. [ - - - ]
Φ[ - - - ]
Τ[ - - - ]
Στ̣[ - - - ]
15 ὑπ[ε - - - ]
Νι[κ - - - ]
ὑπ̣ [ε - - - ]
ὑ[πο - - - ]
[ἐπὶ - - - ]
20 [ - - - ]
Epigraphical Notes
6. An apparent vertical trace is visible along
the break; any letter that has a left vertical is
possible.
7. Dotted iota: only the vertical survives, and
while any letter that contains a left vertical is pos-
sible, the centering of the stroke suggests iota.
8. Dotted gamma: the letter is along the break,
and pi is also possible.
11. An apparent vertical trace is visible along the
break; any letter that has a left vertical is pos-
sible.
14. Στ̣[ράτων]: Wilhelm (1906a) 45, 50. Dotted
tau: only the apparent left tip of the horizontal
survives.
17. Dotted pi: only the upper left corner of the
letter survives.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
Column I
1, 8, 14, 19. Asclepiodorus, the actor for the
fourth-place poet in 313/2 BCE and for the first-
and third-place poets in 312/1 BCE, when he him-
self took the actors prize, is O’Connor #93 + 542a;
Stephanis #458; PAA 221705. His name appears in
the Lenaea victors list at IG II2 2325F.71 with five
victories, immediately below Callippus (sc. “the
Younger”, for whom see 4).
2. For Menander (PA 9875; PAA 641805), see IG II2
2325E.60 (poets victorious at the Lenaea) cf. 17.
Eight unrevealing fragments of his Charioteer, the
longest consisting of five partially corrupt iambic
trimeter lines, are preserved (frr. 155–62).
3. Callippus “the Elder”, Menander’s actor in
313/2 BCE, is O’Connor #275; Stephanis #1352;
PAA 559150. The obvious conclusion is that Cal-
lippus “the Elder” is related to Callippus “the
Younger” (see 4, 11). But he might be his younger
namesake’s uncle rather than his father, and it
is accordingly impossible to know which man is
Callippus son of Callias of the deme Sounium,
who was victorious in an actors competition
(festival uncertain but most likely the Lenaea,
given the absence of any reference to dithyram-
bic competitions) in 307/6 BCE (IG II2 3073.6; cf.
IG II2 2325F introductory remarks), or whether
there is any connection to one of the men named
Callias son of Callippus whose funerary stelae
are preserved at IG II2 11770–1 (= PAA 553890 and
553895; both mid-4th c. BCE). The comic actor
Callias from the next generation (IG II2 2325F.91;
victorious three times at the Lenaea) is perhaps
another member of the family, and the mid-5th-
century comic poet Callias (IG II2 2325C.17) may
be as well. A Callippus also competed on Delos as
a comic actor (κωμωιδός) in 268 BCE (O’Connor
#278; Stephanis #1349; PAA 559156; perhaps to
be identified with Callippus “the Younger”, or a
member of the family’s next generation). Either
Callippus “the Elder” or Callippus “the Younger”
might also be restored as Alexis’ actor at IG II2
2322.3 (undated).
74 chapter two
4, 11. Callippus “the Younger”, the actor for at
least one of the top-three placing poets in 313/2
BCE and himself the victor in the actor’s contest,
is O’Connor #276; Stephanis #1353; PAA 559152.
See 3 for his relationship to Callippus “the Elder”
and the associated prosopographical problems.
Callippus “the Younger” must be the Callippus
who appears in the Lenaea actors list at IG II2
2325F.70 (immediately above Asclepiodorus)
with four victories; if then, Callippus “the Elder”
took the prize at the Lenaea at some point in
his career, his name stood in the previous (lost)
­column.
5. Polemon (PA 11885; PAA 776565) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. D.S. 19.77.1).
6. Neither Asclepiodorus (who acted for the
first- and third-place poets in 312/1 BCE) nor Cal-
lipus (who acted for the second-place poet and
probably the fourth-place poet as well in the
same year) can be restored in the limited space
available. The “old” comedy must thus have been
performed by a third actor, whose name stood in
line 18 (actor for the fifth-place poet) as well. The
career of the comic poet Anaxandrides (in the
Lenaea victors’ list at IG II2 2325E.37, with three
victories) lasted from the 380s or early 370s BCE
into the 340s. Only one fragment of The Treasure
survives (fr. 18; praise of wealth appropriate to a
miser or the like).
7. Philippides, the victorious poet in 312/1 BCE, is
PAA 928970; this line = his test. 8. He was victori-
ous at least twice at the Lenaea (IG II2 2325E.64;
immediately before Nicostratus, for whom see
9–10) and died in the late 280s BCE. A revival of
his The Lover of Athens was performed at the City
Dionysia in 155/4 BCE (IG II2 2323.510). See Davies
(1971) 541–2. Nothing survives of The Female Initi­
ate except the title.
9–10. Nicostratus II, the second-place poet in
312/1 BCE, is PA 11038; PAA 717838. He was victo-
rious at least once at the Lenaea (IG II2 2325E.65;
immediately after Philippides, for whom see 7)
and staged—or acted in—a play on Delos in
280 BCE (test. 4), along with Philemon II and
Ameinias. His name is perhaps also to be restored
in Col. II.16 (fifth place). One of Aristophanes’
sons, a comic poet, may have been named Nico-
stratus (Nicostratus I; see IG II2 2325E.38), as was
a comic poet who took sixth place at the Dionysia
in 186/5 BCE (2323.279; Nicostratus III); perhaps
all three men belonged to the same family. No
fragments of Nicostratus II’s comedies survive,
and nothing else is known of the play referred to
here, the title of which is perhaps to be restored
[Θυνν]οσκόπωι.
12–13. Ameinias is PAA 123115. He was victorious
once at the Lenaea (IG II2 2325E.67; immediately
after Philippides, Nicostratus II and Calliades)
and staged (or acted in) a comedy on Delos in 280
BCE (IG XI.2 107 = test. 3), along with Philemon
II and Nicostratus II. No fragments of Ameinias’
comedies survive, and nothing else is known of
the play referred to here. The implication of line
13 is that poets were not normally allotted a cho-
rus before they completed the ephêbeia; cf. Ar.
Nu. 530–1 (the poet, speaking through his cho-
rus, claims to have been forced to “expose” his
first play, i.e. by turning it over to someone else
to produce, “because I was still a young girl and
was not permitted to raise it”). The notice is in
any case an unusual intrusion into an otherwise
dry catalogue of names and titles.
15. The comic poet Theophilus (PAA 511110) took
the prize at the City Dionysia in 330/29 BCE (IG
II2 2328.1700) and is known to have written
a Pancratiast (frr. 8–9; see Papachrysostomou
[2008] 268–72). Because he is the only late 4th-
century poet whose name fits the space and who
is known to have had a play with this title, the
restoration seems secure (thus Wilhelm [1906a]
45, 49).
16. Asclepiodorus’ name (cf. 8, 14, 19) is too long
to fit the space, and the third actor’s name is too
short (cf. line 6). Callippus (see 4, 11) is thus pre-
sumably to be restored here, the specification
“the Younger” having been omitted because it
had been given in 11 and Callippus “the Elder” did
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323a 75

not compete this year, eliminating any possibility Column II

of confusion.
17. Menander composed a Παιδίον (frr. 273–9),
and Webster (1952) 20, suggested that his name
might be restored here ([Μένανδρος πε : ]) cf. 2.
14–18 patently preserve the first few letters of
items 9–13 of a typical annual entry. If 4 is taken
to represent item 1 for that year, the entry occu-
pied 15 lines, making it two lines longer than
expected, like that for 312/1 BCE in Col. I.5–19.
14. = Strato Com. test. *2.
16. See Col. I.9–10.
76 chapter two
IG II2 2323
The preserved portions of this section of the
Didascaliae consist of 10 fragments (one unknown
in Kirchner’s time and therefore missing from
IG II2), which contain parts of what can be shown
to be six columns of text. For the cutters’ hands,
which help determine the relationship of the frag-
ments to one another, as well the overall length
of the columns, see below. A left-hand margin is
preserved on fr. f (running down the middle of
Col. I); a top margin is preserved on fr. a (at the
top of Col. III) and fr. h (at the top of Col. VI);
and a right-hand margin is preserved on fr. h (to
the right of Col. VI). Fr. f extends across Columns
I and II; fr. a extends across Columns II and III;
the joining frr. i + b + c/d extend across Columns
II, III, IV and V; and the joining frr. g + e extend
across Columns III and IV. Accordingly, while a
margin might theoretically have stood between
frr. c/d and fr. h, and thus between Columns V
and VI, there can be little doubt that these are all
fragments of a single large stone.
The contest in question is presumably the Dio-
nysia, given that revived comedies are attested
only there (IG II2 2318.1564–5; cf. IG II2 2323a
Introduction). The dates of the preserved entries
extend from 218/7 BCE to sometime in the mid-
140s to mid-130s BCE which, on the evidence
of IG II2 2325C–D, would appear to be near the
date of the end of the contests. The competitions
have now been moved to something approxi-
mating an every-other-year basis (on which see
more below). That the Dionysia was not cele-
brated in years when no contest was held seems
unlikely, given that a major religious event could
scarcely be canceled on a routine basis without
insulting the deity. οὐκ ἐγένετο in the entry for
e.g. 188/7 BCE thus presumably means only that
no contest for comedy was held at the Dionysia
that year, and that the program in this period
alternated between comedy and tragedy, but
always included plays of one sort or the other.
The change is perhaps to be connected with the
slight expansion in the program, from five poets
per contest in IG II2 2323a (313/2 and 312/1 BCE)
to six here, as a way of partially off-setting the
reduction in the number of opportunities to stage
a play that was a consequence of the move to the
new schedule. A reasonable further hypothesis is
that a similar change took place at the Lenaea,
which now featured whatever genre the Dionysia
did not.
Entries appear in one of two standard forms:
• a single line ἐπὶ τοῦ δεῖνα οὐκ ἐγένετο, for years
in which no contest was held
• 15 standard items, generally accorded one line
apiece, for years in which there was a contest:
(Item 1) ἐπὶ τοῦ δεῖνα παλαιᾶι
(Item 2) name of the actor who presented the
revived comedy in the nominative; title of the
play in the dative, and name of the author of
the play in the genitive;
(Item 3) ποη(τής), followed by the name of the
victorious poet in the nominative, and the title
of his play in the dative;
(Item 4) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by the name of
the actor in the victorious play;
(Item 5) name of the second-place poet in the
nominative, followed by the title of his play in
the dative;
(Item 6) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by the name of
the actor in the second-place play;
(Item 7) name of the third-place poet in the nom-
inative, followed by the title of his play in the
dative;
(Item 8) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by the name of
the actor in the third-place play;
(Item 9) name of the fourth-place poet in the
nominative, followed by the title of his play in
the dative;
(Item 10) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by the name of
the actor in the fourth-place play;
(Item 11) name of the fifth-place poet in the nom-
inative, followed by the title of his play in the
dative;
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 77

(Item 12) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by the name of be any five-year period that includes either four
the actor in the fifth-place play; contest-years or four years without a contest,
(Item 13) name of the sixth-place poet in the and these patterns can be treated as provisional
nominative, followed by the title of his play in norms for filling in gaps in the stone. At points
the dative; where fragments preserve archon-names more
(Item 14) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by the name of or less side-by-side in two or more columns (esp.
the actor in the sixth-place play; and frr. i + b + c/d in Cols. III–V, all in Hands 3 and 4),
(Item 15) ὑπο(κρίτης), followed by the name of the gap between columns is consistently about
the victorious actor. 13–14 years. Assuming a roughly on/off pattern of
contest-years, requiring an average of 8 lines per
On occasion a particularly long name or title year (i.e. 15 + 1 = 16 lines for every two years on
requires that two lines be used for a single entry. average, = an average of 8 lines/year), this ought
Fr. f, at the very end of the inscription, uses a to mean a column-length somewhat in excess of
more compact style, in which entries for contest- 100 lines, as in fact proves to be the case.
years are accorded only eight lines.
At least four hands are in evidence, three of
Summary Discussion of the Restoration
which Tracy identifies (implying a fourth):8
Fr. a (which preserves the upper margin of the
• Hand 1 = cutter of IG II2 1706 (active 229/8–ca.
stone), the new fragment of the inscription pub-
203 BCE): lines 11–26
lished by Matthaiou (just below that), and frr.
• Hand 2 = cutter of IG II2 913 (active 210/9–171/0
i + b + c/d (just below that), allow the first 50
BCE): lines 132–43
lines of Column III of IG II2 2323, containing por-
• Hand 3 = unfamiliar/school of cutter of IG II2
tions of the entries for 189/8 to 182/1 BCE, to be
9139: lines 144–409
fully restored. Additional sections of Column III
containing portions of the entries for 176/5 and
The remainder of the inscription (lines 410-end)
175/4 BCE are preserved on fr. g + e, and what we
is cut by a different hand or hands (Hand 4). The
know of the regular pattern of contest-years and
obvious comparison are the entries for 343/2 BCE
years in which no contest was held allows the
and subsequent years in IG II2 2318, and the peri-
gap between the two sets of entries to be closed,
odic updatings of the various lists that comprise
filling the first 101 lines of the column. Much of
IG II2 2325, all of which appear to represent a
Column IV, covering the years 170/69–161/0 BCE,
series of occasional additions to an existing text.
with a similar gap between frr. i + b + c/d and frr.
Although three years in a row without a con-
g + e, can be reconstructed in the same fashion.
test might conceivably be restored in 164/3, 163/2,
Two possibilities for the number of lines
and 162/1 BCE, there is otherwise no evidence
between the lowest preserved portion of Col-
here for more than two years in a row either with
umn III (175/4 BCE) and the highest preserved
or without a contest.10 Nor does there appear to
portion of Column IV (170/69 BCE) exist, so the
length of the columns cannot yet be determined.
 8 Tracy (1990). The number of lines missing between the lowest
 9 The cutter of IG II2 913 is himself active 210/9–170/69
BCE.
10 Ruck suggests at one point that the variation between
years with and without contests may have been organized there were and were not contests, as e.g. 189/8 (a contest-
on a bi-annual basis. But Athenian planning seems to have year) and 188/7 (no contest) and 187/6 (no contest) and
been distinctly annual, and were Ruck right, all odd-even 186/5 (a contest-year) are, but 157/6 (no contest) and 156/5
pairs of years would be divided between years in which (no contest) are not.
78 chapter two

preserved portion of Column IV (161/0 BCE) on respectively. The contents of Column I as well
fr. g + e and the highest preserved portion of can thus be approximately restored, fixing the
Column V (158/7 BCE) on fr. i + b + c/d, on the position of fr. f within the inscription.
other hand, can be calculated precisely, as can
the amount of space available for additional
Detailed Discussion of the Restoration
lines of text at the top of Column V. Column
IV can thus be completely restored, as can the
The process of restoring IG II2 2323 begins with fr.
upper portion of Column V. The fact that we now
a, which preserves the upper margin of the stone
know the length of Column IV also allows one
and thus has a fixed vertical position. The first
of the two possibilities for the length of the gap
three lines in the preserved portion of the sec-
between Column III and Column IV to be elimi-
ond column of fr. a (the overall Col. III) are the
nated, on the assumption that all columns in
final three items in a typical contest-year entry.
the inscription were of approximately the same
The three lines that follow are entries (all with
length; Columns III and IV can thus be restored
preserved archons’ names) for 188/7 (no contest),
as well.
187/6 (no contest), and 186/5 BCE (a contest-year,
The style of the contest-year entry at the top
with the first four items of the entry preserved).
of Column VI on fr. h is more compact than that
The top of Column III thus preserves the end of
employed elsewhere in the inscription, and we
the entry for 189/8 BCE, carrying over from the
have no way of knowing where in Column V this
bottom of the previous column (hereafter “Col.
change took place. The remainder of Column V
II”), where the balance of the entry must have
thus cannot be precisely reconstructed, and we
occupied 12 lines.
can say only that the final entry preserved in Col-
umn VI dates to sometime between 142/1 and the
Col. III
mid-130s BCE.
date contest? lines in entry running
Because the distance between fr. a and frr. i + b
in this column11 column-total
+ c/d has been established, the general structure
189/8 yes 3 3
of the first 50 lines of Column II can be restored,
188/7 no 1 4
although the badly battered entries it preserves
187/6 no 1 5
cannot yet be dated. The number of lines in Col-
186/5 yes 4 9
umn II contained can also be calculated, again on
[11] 20
the assumption that all columns in the inscrip-
tion were of approximately the same length. This
The top of the second column partially preserved
allows for a rough estimate that the lowest par-
in frr. i + b + c/d offers the final 12 items in a typi-
tially preserved entries in Column II belong to ca.
cal contest-year entry, followed by entries (with
199/8 and 198/7 BCE. Although no archon-names
preserved archons’ names) for 183/2 BCE (no
are preserved in this section of the inscription,
contest) and 182/1 (a contest-year, with portions
the relative length of two of them can be deter-
of the first 13 items preserved). The partially pre-
mined from what survives on the stone, show-
served entry at the top of this fragment is thus
ing that they belong to the years 199/8 and 198/7
for 184/3 BCE (a contest-year), and the obvious
BCE. All surviving entries in Column II can thus
assumption is that this material as well belongs
be dated and the contents of the remainder of
to Column III.
the column largely restored. Two mutually sup-
porting restorations in what remains of Column
I on fr. f reveal the length of a pair of archon-
names, which belong to 217/6 and 216/5 BCE 11 Square brackets represent lines to be restored.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 79
date contest? lines in entry in this column
184/3 yes [3]
12
183/2 no 1
182/1 yes 13
[2]
An additional fragment of IG II2 2323 published
by Matthaiou in 1988 fills much of the gap in Col-
umn III between fr. a and frr. i + b + c/d, and
allows the upper portion of the column to be
fully restored.
Col. III
date contest? lines in entry running
in this column column-total
189/8 yes 3 3
188/7 no 1 4
187/6 no 1 5
186/5 yes 4 9
[5] 14
6 20
185/4 no 1 21
184/3 yes 15 36
183/2 no 1 37
182/1 yes 13 50
[2] 52
Additional, badly battered portions of Column III
(the end of the entry for one contest-year, and
the beginning of another) are preserved in the
left-hand portion of frr. g + e, and comparison
with the remains of Column IV opposite them
allows the date of the Column III entries to be
calculated, and the length of the gap in Column
III between frr. i + b + c/d and frr. g + e to be
determined. The right-hand column on frr. g + e
(discussed in more detail below) contains archon-
names for the entries for 164/3, 163/2, 162/1, 161/0
BCE, while the portions of the entries for 183/2
and 182/1 BCE in Column III preserved in fr. c
stand more or less directly opposite entries for
169/8 and 168/7 (both fixed by archon-names)
in Column IV. The right-hand column on frr. g
+ e must accordingly be part of the lower por-
tion of Column IV, while the left-hand column
on frr. g + e must be part of the lower portion of
Col. III; and given that the gap between Columns
III and IV in fr. c is approximately 14 years, the
portion of Column III on frr. g + e must belong
to the early to mid-170s BCE. The archon’s name
in the partially preserved entry at the bottom
of Column III in frr. g + e (roughly opposite the
middle of the entry for 161/0 BCE in Column IV)
is extremely short, and Ruck proposed restoring
Sonicus (175/4 BCE).12 If Ruck’s conjecture is cor-
rect, Sonicus’ year and the one that preceded it
(175/4 and 176/5 BCE, respectively) were contest-
years, and the records for five years (181/0, 180/79,
179/8, 178/7, and 177/6 BCE) must be restored in
Column III in the lacuna between frr. i + b + c/d
and frr. g + e. Because 177/6 BCE preceded two
“yes”-years, it cannot have been a contest-year
and thus required only 1 line; and because 182/1
BCE was also a contest-year, the years 181/0–177/6
BCE must have included two “yes”-years and two
“no”-years (15 + 15 + 1 + 1 = 32 lines).13
33 lines (1 + 15 + 15 + 1 + 1) are therefore required
for the entries for the five missing years 181/0–
177/6 BCE in Column III. An additional 2 lines
are required to complete the partially preserved
entry for 182/1 BCE that stands at the bottom of
frr. i + b + c/d; and 2 more are needed to com-
plete the partially preserved entry for 176/5 BCE
that stands at the top of frr. g + e. The missing
portion of this section of the column thus appar-
ently contained 37 lines and is to be restored
approximately as follows:
12 Hippacus (176/5 BCE) might also be restored. But the
control exercised by the size of the lacuna containing
the bottom of Column III and the top of Column IV, on
the one hand, and the center of Column IV, on the other
hand (both discussed below), renders the difference of no
significance.
13 Restoring three “yes”-years and one “no”-year (15 + 15
+ 15 + 1 = 46 lines) inevitably requires a five-year period
with four contests, and can thus be ruled out as a possi-
bility, particularly since the same objection applies to the
possibility of a long (48-line vs. 34-line) lacuna covering the
matching gap in Col. IV (see below).
80 chapter two
Col. III
date contest? lines in entry running
in this column column-total
182/1 yes 13 50
[2] 52
181/0 yes [15] 67
180/79 no [1] 68
179/8 no [1] 69
178/7 yes [15] 84
177/6 no [1] 85
176/5 yes [2] 87
13 100
175/4 yes 1 101
This is not necessarily the full extent of the col-
umn, and it remains unclear how many additional
lines from the entry for 175/4 were included at
the bottom of Column III (as opposed to rolling
over onto the top of Column IV). That question
can be resolved via consideration of Column IV,
the preserved portions of which are again divided
between frr. i + b + c/d and frr. g + e, and then of
the limited remains of Column V as well.
Col. IV
frr. i + b + c/d
date contest? lines in entry
in this column
170/69 yes [2]
13
169/8 no 1
168/7 yes 12
[3]
frr. g + e
164/3 yes?14 [14]
1 III in fr. g + e (item 3 for what we take to be 176/5 BCE)
163/2 no 1
162/1 no 1
161/0 yes 2
14 164/3 is a problematic year. But the question ulti-
mately has no significance for the restoration of the inscrip-
tion as a whole.
The partially preserved entry for 168/7 BCE at the
bottom of frr. i + b + c/d must have continued
below for an additional 3 lines, while the partially
preserved entry for 164/3 BCE at the top of frr. g
+ e must have continued above for an additional
14 lines. The missing portion of Column IV here
must thus have contained 3 + 14 = 17 lines, plus
whatever space was needed for the lost entries
for 167/6, 166/5, and 165/4 BCE. Because 168/7 and
164/3 BCE were both contest-years, the missing
years 167/6, 166/5, and 165/4 must consist of two
“no”-years and one “yes”-year (1 + 1 + 15 = 17 lines),
so that the lacuna is a total of 34 lines.15
Col. IV
date contest? lines in entry
in this column
170/69 yes [2]
13
169/8 no 1
168/7 yes 12
[3]
167/6 no [1]
166/5 yes [15]
165/4 no [1]
15 Restoring one “no”-year and two “yes”-years (1 + 15 +
15 = 31 lines, for a total lacuna of 48 lines) inevitably pro-
duces a five-year period with four contests, and can thus be
ruled out as a possibility, particularly since the same objec-
tion applies to the possibility of a long (51-line vs. 37-line)
lacuna covering the matching gap in Col. III (see above).
These conclusions are confirmed by calculations of other
sorts. The final item preserved in Col. III in frr. i + b + c/d
(item 13 for 182/1 BCE) stands nearly opposite (one line
lower) the final item preserved in Col. IV there (item 12
for 168/7 BCE), while the top-most item preserved in Col.
stands nearly opposite (one line higher) the top-most item
preserved in Col. IV there (item 15 for 164/3 BCE). Although
the lacuna covers the same amount of stone in both cases,
the columns are in different hands: Col. III is in Hand 3,
while the majority of Col. IV is in Hand IV. According to
Ruck, lines in Hand 4 occupy an average of .0125 m., while
lines in Hand 3 occupy an average of 0.0116 m. The lacunae
are thus of almost exactly equal size: that in Col. III is 37 ×
.0116 m. = .4292 m., while that in Col. IV 34 × .0125 m. =
.425 m. For comments on Ruck’s measurements of the
hands, see n. 67 below.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 81
164/3 yes [14]
1 168/7 yes 12
163/2 no 1
162/1 no 1
161/0 yes 3
[12]
As for the overall length of the columns, the par-
tially preserved entry for 175/4 BCE at the bot-
tom of Column III requires an additional 14 lines,
while the partially preserved entry for 170/69 BCE
at the top of the preserved portion of Column IV
requires an additional 2 lines. Because 176/5 and
175/4 BCE were contest-years, there must have
been no contest in 174/3 (= 1 line). The three
remaining years (173/2, 172/1, and 171/0 BCE) must
accordingly include either two “yes”-years and
one “no”-year (15 + 15 + 1 = 31 lines) or one “yes”-
year and two “no”-years (15 + 1 + 1 = 17 lines). Thus
the lacuna must consist of either 14 + 1 + 31 + 2 =
48 lines, or 14 + 1 + 17 + 2 = 34 lines, although
how it is to be divided between Column III and
Column IV is as yet unclear.
date contest? lines in entry
175/4 yes [14]
174/3 no [1]
173/2 yes [15]
172/1 yes [15]
171/0 no [1]
170/69 yes [2]
13
169/8 no 1
168/7 yes 12
[3]
OR
date contest? lines in entry
175/4 yes [14]
174/3 no [1]
173/2 no [1]
172/1 yes [15]
171/0 no [1]
170/69 yes [2]
13
169/8 no 1
[3]
Likewise at the bottom of Column IV, the par-
tially preserved entry for 161/0 BCE requires an
additional 12 lines below, while at the top of the
Column V the partially preserved entry for 158/7
BCE requires an additional 10 lines. The missing
years 160/59 and 159/8 BCE must have included
one year with a contest (= 15 lines) and one with-
out a contest (= 1 line); so the lacuna consists of
12 + 15 + 1 + 10 = 38 lines.16
date contest? lines in entry
161/0 yes 3
[12]
160/59 yes [15]
159/8 no [1]
158/7 yes [10]
5
157/6 no 1
Because the size of the gap at the top of Col-
umn V can be calculated, these 38 lines can be
apportioned between Column IV and Column V.
This in turn allows the overall column-length in
the inscription to be calculated, making it pos-
sible to determine the as yet obscure length of
the matching lacuna at the bottom of Column III
and the top of Column IV.
Of the first 39 lines in Column III, three are in
Hand 2 (= .047 m.),17 while 36 are in Hand 3 (36
16 Restoring two “no”-years (producing a lacuna of 24
lines) produces a five-year period with no contests in four
years, and can thus be ruled out as a possibility.
17 Thus Ruck p. 34. The line measurements here and
below are Ruck’s and include both the height of the letters
and the interlinear spacing. Time constraints prevented us
from taking measurements as extensive and detailed as
Ruck’s, but checking confirmed the general accuracy of his
figures as averages. In any case, the calculations we give are
not meant to indicate the precise size of lacunae, but are
intended as approximate measurements designed to allow
comparison between lacunae that contained text cut by
different hands with different letter heights and spacing.
82 chapter two
@ .0116 m. = .4176 m.), = a total of .4646 m. Line
39 in Column III (the second item in the entry for
182/1 BCE; our line 300) stands directly opposite
item 4 for 168/7 BCE in Column IV (our line 414);
the latter must therefore also be .4646 m. down
the column. Item 4 for 168/7 BCE in Column IV
and the 17 lines preserved above it (all in Hand
4) = 18 lines @ .0125, i.e. .225 m., so that the miss-
ing portion of text at the top of Column IV must
have occupied .2396 m. We do not know where
Hand 3 ended and Hand 4 began, but in Hand 4
this distance = 19.168 lines, whereas in Hand 3 it =
20.65 lines. Roughly 19–21 lines are thus to be
restored at the top of Column IV, depending on
which hand began where.
The top of Column V must have been inscribed
entirely in Hand 4 (@ .0125 m./line). The entry for
157/6 BCE (= our line 508) is, on Ruck’s measure-
ment, .014 m. below the highest line preserved in
Column IV, which is itself (see above) .2396 m.
from the top of the column. The entry for 157/6
BCE must therefore stand .014 + .2396 = .2536 m.
below the top of Column V. This is equivalent to
20.288 lines in Hand 4; 5 of these lines are already
filled by the preserved portions of the entry for
158/7 BCE, leaving room for roughly 15 addi-
tional lines at the top of Column V, which can be
restored thus:
Col. V
date contest? lines in entry running
in this column column-total
160/59 yes [4] 4
159/8 no [1] 5
158/7 yes [10] 15
5 22
157/6 no 1 23
As noted above, the lacuna between the bottom
of the preserved portion of Column IV in frr. g + e
(161/0 BCE) and the top of the preserved portion
of Column V in frr. i + b + c/d (158/7 BCE) must
be 38 lines long. The remaining 23 lines in the
lacuna accordingly belong at the bottom of Col-
umn IV, which can be restored as follows (with
the gap at the top still to be filled, along with that
at the bottom of Col. III):
Col. IV
date contest? lines in entry
in this column
170/69 yes 13
169/8 no 1
168/7 yes 12
[3]
167/6 no [1]
166/5 yes [15]
165/4 no [1]
164/3 yes [14]
1
163/2 no 1
162/1 no 1
161/0 yes 3
[12]
160/59 yes [11]
This is a total of 89 lines, all in Hand 4 (@ .0125 m./
line), = 1.1125 m. The missing portion of Column
IV above contained 19–21 lines, depending on
where Hand 3 ended and Hand 4 began, and in
any case = .2396 m. The total length of Column IV
was thus 108–110 lines, and about 1.1125 + .2396 =
1.3521 m.
Column III must have been at least 101 lines
long (as restored to the bottom of frr. g + e = the
first item for 175/4 BCE = our line 362); 3 of these
lines are in Hand 2 (.047 m.), while the remaining
98 are in Hand 3 (@ .0116 m. = 1.1368 m.), = a total
of 1.1838 m., with the full length of the column
still to be determined. The length of the lacuna
between the bottom of the preserved portion of
Column III in frr. g + e and the top of preserved
portion of Column IV in frr. i + b + c/d might
be either 48 or 34 lines (above). If the missing
text was 48 lines long, it occupied a minimum
of .5586 m. (assuming that the smaller Hand 3
continued through the entry for 171/0 BCE) and
a maximum of .5874 m. (assuming that the larger
Hand 4 began immediately after the entry for
175/4 BCE). If the missing text was 34 lines long,
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 83
it occupied a minimum of .3962 m. (assuming
that the smaller Hand 3 continued through the
entry for 171/0 BCE) and a maximum of .4124 m.
(assuming that the larger Hand 4 began immedi-
ately after the entry for 175/4 BCE). 19–21 of these
lines belong at the top of Column IV, while the
remaining 29–31 or 15–17 (including 14 from the
entry for 175/4 BCE certainly in Hand 3) are to be
assigned to the bottom of Column III.
If the missing text was 48 lines long (i.e. .5586–
.5874 m.), and the portion of it to be assigned to
the top of Column IV is .2396 m., with the remain-
ing .3190–.3478 m. to be assigned to the top of
Column III, Column III must have been 1.1838 +
.3190/.3478 = 1.5028/1.5316 m. long. If the missing
text was 34 lines long (i.e. .3962/.4124 m.), and the
portion of it to be assigned to the top of Column
IV is .2396 m., with the remaining .1566/.1728 to be
assigned to the bottom of Col. III, Column III must
have been 1.1838 + .1566/.1728 = 1.3404/1.3566 m.
long. As argued above, Column IV occupied about
1.35 m.; and on the reasonable assumption that all
columns in the inscription were of roughly equal
length, the 34-line hypothesis is to be preferred.
Columns III and IV in their entirety can thus be
restored approximately as follows:
Col. III
date contest? lines in entry running
in this column column-total
189/8 yes 3 3
188/7 no 1 4
187/6 no 1 5
186/5 yes 4 9
[5] 14
6 20
185/4 no 1 21
184/3 yes 15 36
183/2 no 1 37
182/1 yes 13 50
[2] 52
181/0 yes [15] 67
180/79 no [1] 68
179/8 no [1] 69
178/7 yes [15] 84
177/6 no [1] 85
176/5 yes [2] 87
13 100
175/4 yes 1 101
[14] 115
174/3 no [1] 116
Col. IV
date contest? lines in entry running
in this column column-total
173/2 no [1] 1
172/1 yes [15] 16
171/0 no [1] 17
170/69 yes [2] 19
13 32
169/8 no 1 33
168/7 yes 12 45
[3] 48
167/6 no [1] 49
166/5 yes [15] 64
165/4 no [1] 65
164/3 yes [14] 79
1 80
163/2 no 1 81
162/1 no 1 82
161/0 yes 3 85
[12] 97
160/59 yes [11] 108
As for Column V and the partially preserved
entry, perhaps in a different hand and certainly
in a much more compact style (with 8 lines
seemingly used for a contest-year, and 1 line for
a year without a contest) at the top of Column
VI, Column V can be confidently restored only as
follows:
Col. V
date contest? lines in entry running
in this column column-total
160/59 yes [4] 4
159/8 no [1] 5
158/7 yes [10] 15
7 22
157/6 no 1 23
84 chapter two

156/5 no 1 24 last of these apparently being the entry for a

155/4 yes 14 38 year in which no contest was held. 10 + 5 + 9 =
[1] 39 24 lines, leaving 16 lines, which must represent
one full “yes”-year and one “no”-year. The top of
This leaves approximately 69 lines in Column V Column II can thus be provisionally restored (but
to be filled; 3 of these lines must be allotted to with no dates as yet determined) as follows:
the balance of the contest-year entry in the new,
compact style partially preserved at the top of Col. II
Column VI. If Column V was, with the exception date contest? lines in entry running
of these 3 lines, inscribed entirely in Hand 4 and in this column column-total
in the standard, non-compact style, there would ? yes 8 8
be room for a maximum of four “yes”-years (= 60 ? no 1 9
lines) and six “no”-years in the missing portion ? yes [15] 24
of the column, putting the partially preserved ? no [1] 25
entry for a contest-year at the top of Column ? yes [5] 30
VI in 144/3 BCE, and dating the two final entries 10 40
there (both “no”-years) to 143/2 and 142/1 BCE. If ? no 1 41
the compact style began earlier, the date of the ? yes 7 48
entries preserved at the top of Column VI might [8] 56
move down as late as the mid-130s BCE. How far
the catalogue continued after that is impossible As for the lower portion of Column II, Cols. III
to say. and IV each appear to have been approximately
We now turn to the other side of the inscrip- 1.35 m. long. Column III was presumably modeled
tion, and thus to Column II. The partially pre- roughly on Column II. If its length is divided by
served entries at the top of frr. i + b + c/d here the size of Hand 2 @.0102 m./line, the implication
ought to date somewhere in the early to mid-190s is that Column II contained 132–133 lines. The
BCE, given what we know of the contents and undated entries at the top of Column II require 56
organization of Cols. III, IV, and V. The notice ὑπε lines, while the remainder of the entry for 189/8
Κράτης in the 35th line of Column III (= our line BCE (3 lines of which are preserved at the top
296) stands directly opposite [ἐπὶ - - - ο]ὐ�̣κ ἐγένετο of Col. III) at the bottom of the column requires
(= our line 170) in the middle of fr. b in Column another 12 lines. A total of 68 lines in Column II
II. Three of the lines above ὑπε Κράτης in Column are thus already committed, leaving 132–133—
III are in Hand 2 and = .047 m., while the other 68 = ~64–65 lines to be filled. This can only
31 lines are in Hand 3 @ .0116 = .3596 m., for a represent 4 contest-years (= 60 lines) plus four
total of .4066 m. This must therefore also be the years or so without contests, meaning that the
amount of space above [ἐπὶ - - - ο]ὐ�̣κ ἐγένετο in partially preserved entry for a contest-year at
Column II, which is entirely inscribed in Hand 2 the bottom of frr. i + b + c/d (our line 171) with
@ .0102 m./line. .4066 m. divided by .0102 = room [ἐπὶ - - - ο]ὐ�̣κ ἐγένετο above it, should belong
for approximately 40 additional lines in Hand 2 to 198/7 BCE or so. The stone shows that the
in the upper portion of the column. archon’s name for that entry is first- or second-
10 lines are preserved above [ἐπὶ - - - ο]ὐ�̣κ declension and about two letters longer than the
ἐγένετο from the previous year’s entry (a contest- archon’s name for the previous year, in which no
year), and another 5 were needed above that contest was held. This rules out Charicles (196/5
to complete the entry. In addition, 9 lines are BCE; third-declension), who is probably too late
preserved in fr. a at the top of the stone, the anyway. [. .3. ι]ππος (perhaps 199/8 BCE) is pos-
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 85
sible, as are the archons from the two succeed-
ing years or, less likely, those from a year or two
before him. Certainty is impossible, given that
the archons from 202/1 to 197/6 BCE are largely
unknown.18 Column II can thus be reconstructed
approximately as follows:
Col. II
date contest? lines in entry running
in this column column-total
204/3 yes 8 8
203/2 no 1 9
202/1 yes [15] 24
201/0 no [1] 25
200/199 yes [5] 30
10 40
199/8 no 1 41
198/7 yes 7 48
[8] 56
197/6 no [1] 57
196/5 yes [15] 72
195/4 yes [15] 87
194/3 no [1] 88
193/2 yes [15] 103
192/1 no [1] 104
191/2 yes [15] 118
190/89 no [1] 120
189/8 yes [12] 13219
The mutually supporting restorations of Aris-
tocrates and Nicodemus in the sixth and ninth
lines, respectively, of Column I preserved in
fr. f fix the length of the names of the archons for
that year and the year before it, who are almost
certainly Hoplon (217/6 BCE)20 and Hagnias
18 See Habicht (1982) 177.
19 That the total number of lines in the column as recon- 213/2 no [1] 45
structed is one less than the anticipated minimum of 133
is irrelevant in calculations of this sort, and an extra line
might in any case have been used for an oversized entry
of some sort.
20 Against the restoration of Hoplon in this year, see
Aleshire (1988). But note that restorations elsewhere in
this fragment require that the name be 7–8 letters long in
the genitive, and that traces of the final sigma require that
(216/5 BCE). The first portion of the entry for 204/3
BCE partially preserved at the top of Column II
must have occupied 7 lines at the bottom of Col-
umn I. There were thus eleven annual entries
in Column I between those for 216/5 and 204/3
BCE; although both 216/5 and 204/3 BCE were
contest-years, the years between them might
have consisted of either five contest-years (= 75
lines) and six years in which no contest was
held (= 6 lines), or six contest-years (= 90 lines)
and five years in which no contest was held (= 5
lines). If there were only five contest-years dur-
ing this period, however, the portions of Column
II preserved in fr. f overlap with those preserved
in frr. i + b + c/d. There must accordingly have
been six contest-years between 216/5 and 204/3
BCE, and five years in which no contest was held;
and that conclusion in turn makes clear that fr.
f preserves, in addition to portions of the entries
for 218/7, 217/6, and 216/5 BCE in Column I, most
likely the initial portions of items 4–11 for either
203/2 or 202/1 BCE (depending on which of these
is taken to be a “yes”-year and which a “no”-year)
in Column II. Fr. f is thus to be placed above frr.
i + b + c/d in the restoration of the inscription as
a whole, and Column I can be restored approxi-
mately as follows:21
Col. I
date contest? lines in entry running
in this column column-total
218/7 yes [10] 10
2 12
217/6 no 1 13
216/5 yes 13 26
[2] 28
215/4 yes [15] 43
214/3 no [1] 44
it be third-declension, i.e. the same length and declension
as Hoplon.
21 Designation of contest-years between 216/5 and 204/3
BCE is largely arbitrary but does not affect the larger argu-
ment.
86 chapter two

212/1 yes [15] 60 205/4 yes [15] 123

211/10 no [1] 61
210/9 yes [15] 76
209/8 yes [15] 91
208/7 no [1] 92
207/6 yes [15] 107
206/5 no [1] 108
204/3 yes [7] 130
The three remaining lines of the entry for 218/7
BCE must have appeared at the bottom of the
preceding column. But beyond that we can say
nothing of the preceding sections.

12. IG II2 2323 fr. a (EM 8230; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 87

13. IG II2 2323 fr. f (EM 8237; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 88
chapter two

14. IG II2 2323 frr. g + e (EM 8236 + 8235; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 89

15. IG II2 2323 fr. h (EM 8239; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 90
chapter two

16. IG II2 2323 frr. i + b + c/d (EM 8238 + 8231 + 8232/8233/8234; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 91

17. SEG XXXVIII 162 (photo courtesy of A. P. Matthaiou)

92 chapter two

fr. a frr. c/d fr. h

fr. f

SEG XXXVIII 162

fr. i

fr. b

fr. g

fr. e

Fig. 2. Reconstruction of IG II2 2323 showing placement of individual fragments

 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 93

Text

Technical Description Broken on all sides; back not visible but seem-
ingly also broken away. The surface, especially of
All fragments are of gray “Hymettian” marble and fr. g, is brittle and flaking; faint guidelines are vis-
were found on the south slope of the Acropolis. ible above and below each line on fr. e. The two
For the assignment of the fragments to individual fragments are joined, and all measurements are
blocks, see the general introduction to the Didas­ made as if this were a single fragment.
caliae. Editions: fr. g: Koumanoudes (1877) 478; Köhler
Editions of the inscription as a whole (or of all (1878) 127; IG II 975g; Wilhelm (1906a) 80. fr. e:
fragments known at the time): IG II2 2323; Ruck Koumanoudes (1877) 478; Köhler (1878) 124–6;
(1967) (= SEG XXV 194); Pickard-Cambridge (1988) IG II 975e; Wilhelm (1906a) 74–6.
110–11; Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 42–53; Mette (1977)
118–34. Fragment h (lines 583–9 = 2323.246–52).
EM 8239.
Fragment a (lines 130–8, 262–70 = 2323.113–17, H 0.111; W 0.131; T 0.053; LH 0.006.
141–9). Top and right sides are preserved; the other sides
EM 8230. and back are broken. Top margin 0.021; right mar-
H 0.154; W 0.327; T 0.216; LH 0.005–0.006 (lines gin 0.024 minimum.
130–8, 262–4); 0.008–0.009 (lines 265–70). Editions: Koumanoudes (1877) 479; Köhler (1878)
Top preserved; seemingly a small section of the 128; IG II 975h; Wilhelm (1906a) 80–4.
back is original, establishing the original thick-
ness (if so, the back was rough-picked); both Fragments i + b + c/d (lines 160–77, 285–311, 397–
sides and bottom broken. Parts of two columns 422, 502–20 = 2323.127–243 [excluding 220–5]).
preserved; the ends of Column I can run as far to EM 8238 (i) + 8231 (b) + 8232/8233/8234 (c/d).22
the right as the outdented parts of Column II. H 0.486; H 0.927; T 0.192; LH 0.007.
Editions: Köhler (1878) 257–8; IG II 975a; Wilhelm Broken on all sides; back is rough picked and
(1906a) 69–71. seems likely to be original, but the weight of the
stone precludes examination of the back. The
Fragment f (lines 11–26, 142–9 = 2323.97–112, fragments are all joined and set together in plas-
118–25). ter; since accurate measurements of individual
EM 8237. fragments are therefore impossible, measure-
H 0.184; W 0.175; T 0.156; LH 0.004–0.005 (lines ments are made as if this were a single fragment.
11–26), 0.005–0.006 (lines 142–9). Guidelines are very visible in Columns I and IV,
Left side preserved (i.e. Col. I ran across two with faint traces in Columns II and III. There are
blocks) with anathyrosis which seems somewhat clear spaces between words throughout, although
crude but is identical to that on EM 8227; other the spacing between letters within words varies.
sides and back broken away. Editions: fr. i: Köhler (1878) 128–9; IG II 975i; Wil-
Editions: Koumanoudes (1877) 479; Köhler (1878) helm (1906a) 79–80. fr. b: Koumanoudes (1877)
126–7; IG II 975f; Wilhelm (1906a) 66–9. 477; Köhler (1878) 122–4; IG II 975b; Syll.1 408;

Fragments g + e (lines 349–62, 457–63 = 2323.176–

90, 220–5). 22 Frr. c and d are not properly fragment numbers, but
are an amalgam of fragment numbers and column num-
EM 8236 (g) + 8235 (e). bers: fr. c = EM 8234 + the left side of EM 8232, while fr. d =
H 0.233; W 0.659; T 0.198; LH 0.007. the right side of EM 8232 + EM 8233.
94 chapter two

Syll.2 697; Wilhelm (1906a) 72–4. frr. c/d: Kou-
manoudes (1877) facing 477; Köhler (1878) 118–22;
IG II 975c + d; Syll.1 409; Syll.2 698; Wilhelm
(1906a) 76–9. frr. b + c/d: Michel (1900) no. 882.
SEG XXXVIII 162 (lines 147 [end], 276–85).
H 0.163; W 0.38; T 0.14; LH 0.007.
Found in the Byzantine cistern in the Asklepie-
ion on the south slope of the Acropolis; all sides
and back are broken.
non vidimus: all details, including the text, are
taken from Matthaiou’s publication.
Editions: Matthaiou (1988).

Col. I
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
10/97 [ - - - ]
[ ca. 9 ]Ἐρ̣χιεῦ̣σι̣ν̣
[ ca. 9 ]μος
[ἐπὶ Ὅπλωνο]ς̣ οὐκ ἐγένετο 217/6
100 [ἐπὶ Ἁγνίου π]αλαιᾶι 216/5
15 [ ca. 9 ]Φωκεῦσι Φιλή
[ποη Ἀριστο]κράτης Ἀπε
[ ca. 8 ὑ]πε Νικόδημος
[ ca. 9 Ἀ]νεψιοῖς
105 [ὑπε Νικόδημ]ος
20 [ ca. 10–11 ]ς̣ Ἥραι
[ ca. 10–11 ]της
[ ca. 10 ]όρωι
[ ca. 11 ]ης
110 [ ca. 11 ]ωι
25 [ ca. 12 ]ης
112 [ ca. 13 ]οου[ - - - ]
[ actor ]
[ victorious actor ]

Ca. 95 lines missing (= 11 years, of which 5 had no production)

[ archon ] 203/2
[ details of revival
125 [ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 95

Col. II
130 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]σε
113 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
135/115 [ - - - ]ο
116 [ - - - ]ρειν
[ - - - ]
117 [ἐπὶ - - - οὐκ ἐγένε]το 202/1
[ἐπὶ - - - παλαιᾶι] 201/0
140 [ details of revival ]
[ poet and play ]
118 ὑ�̣π̣[ε - - - ]
Τιμόθε̣ [ος - - - ]
120 ὑπε Π[ - - - ]
145 Κλεο[ - - - ]
ὑπε [ - - - ]
Ὀλυ[ - - - ]ι̣
ὑπ[ε - - - ]
125 Γ[ - - - ]
150 [ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ victorious actor ]
[ archon ] 200/199
155 [ details of revival ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
160/136 [ - - - ]Προγαμοῦντι
[ - - - ]ων
[ - - - πρ]εσβύτερος τεθ[---]
[ - - - ]ήκει
140 [ - - - ό]μαχος
165 [ - - - ]ι
[ - - - ]
126 [ - - - ]εφή�̣ βο̣ις
[ - - - ]
127 [ - - - ] ἐνίκα
170 [ἐπὶ - - - ο]ὐ�̣κ ἐγένετο 199/8
[ἐπὶ - - - ο]υ παλαιᾶι 198/7
96 chapter two

130 [ - - - Μισογ]ύνει Μενάνδρου

[ - - - ]νης Ἀδελφαῖς
[ - - - ]κ̣ ο̣ς
175 [ - - - ] Δακτυλίωι
[ - - - ]ων
135 [ - - - ]αθην[ - - - ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
180 [ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
185 [ victorious actor ]

64 lines missing (= 8 years, of which 4 had no production)

250 [ archon ] 189/8
[ details of revival ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
255 [ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
260 [ poet and play ]
[ actor ]

Col. III
141 Τ̣ ι[̣ μ]ό�̣σ[τρ]α̣ τ̣ος Λυτρ̣[ - - - ]
ὑπε Δ̣ ιογείτων
ὑπο Κράτης ἐνίκα
265 ἐπὶ Συμμάχου οὐκ ἐγ[ένετο] 188/7
145 ἐπὶ Θεοξένου οὐκ ἐ�[̣ γένετο] 187/6
ἐπὶ Ζωπύρου [παλαιᾶι] 186/5
Ἐράτων Μεγ[̣ - - - ]
ποη Λαίν[ης - - - ]
270/149 ὑπε [ - - - ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 97

275 [ poet and play ]

ὑπε̣ [ - - - ]
Ἀριστ̣ο̣κ̣λ̣[ῆς - - - ]
ὑπε Ἑκα[ταῖος]
[Νι]κ̣ όστρατος [ - - - ]
280 [ὑπε] Πολύξεν̣ο̣ς̣
[ὑπο] Ἐ̣ ράτων ἐνίκα
[ἐπὶ Εὐπο]λ̣ έμου οὐκ ἐγένετο 185/4
[ἐπὶ Χαρικ]λ̣ έους παλαιᾶι 184/3
[ ca. 9 ]ς̣ Ἀποκλειο̣μένει Π̣ [οσειδίππου]
285 [ ca. 10 ] Ὁμωνύμοις
150 [ὑπε . ] . [ . ] . . [ - - - ]
[ . ]Κρίτων Ἐφεσίοις
ὑπε Σώφιλος
Παράμονος Ναυαγῶι
290 ὑπε Ὀνήσιμος
155 Τιμόστρατος Φιλοικείωι
ὑπε Καλλίστρατος
Σωγένης Φιλοδεσπότωι
ὑπε Ἑκαταῖος
295 Φιλήμων νεώ Μιλησίαι
160 ὑπε Κράτης
ὑπο Ὀνήσιμος ἐνίκ̣ [α]
ἐπὶ Ἑρμογένου οὐκ [ἐγέ]νετο 183/2
ἐπὶ Τιμησιάνα̣ [κτος π]αλαιᾶι 182/1
300 Φιλόστρατ[ος Ἀποκλε]ιομένει Ποσει
165 π̣ [οη ca. 12 ]κλήρωι
[ actor ]
[ - - - ]ν
[ actor ]
305 [ - - - ]αζομένοις
170 [ actor ]
[ - - - μ]ένοις
[ actor ]
[ - - - ]α̣ μένωι
310 [ actor ]
175 [ - - - ]γοις
[ actor ]
[ victorious actor ]

33 lines missing (= 5 years, 3 of which had no production)

[ archon ] 176/5
[ details of revival ]
176 π̣ οη[ - - - ]
98 chapter two

350 ὑπε Πο[λύξενος]

Ἰόλ[α]ο[ς - - - ]
ὑπε Φ[ - - - ]
180 Τι̣μο[ ca. 14 Εὐ]ε̣ργετοῦντι
[ ca. 20 ]
355 [ ca. 18 ε]ξα̣ πατῶντι
[ ca. 18 ]
[ ca. 16 ω]ν Συντρ̣[ ca. 5 ]
185 [ ca. 15 ]ης
[ ca. 14 ]Συναγῶ[ν]ι̣
360 [ ca. 12 ]ίδης
[ὑπο Πολύξ]ε̣νος ἐνί[κα]
[ἐπὶ 4–5 παλαι]ᾶι Προ[ - - - ] 175/4
190 [ details of revival ]
[ poet and play ]
365 [ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
370 [ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
375 [ actor ]
[ victorious actor ]
[ archon ] 174/3

Col. IV

17 lines missing (= 3 years, 2 of which had no production)

395 [ archon ] 170/69
191 [ details of revival ]
[ ca. 18 ]ρόπωι
[ - - - ]
[ ca. 14 Ἀν]ασωιζομέ
400/195 [ - - - ]
[ ca. 15 ]υμ̣ ένωι
[ ca. 11 ]ος
[ ca. 10 ] . Ἀγνοοῦντι
[ὑπε Κριτόδ]ημος
405/200 [ ca. 8 ]εμέσει
[ὑπε Σ]ώνικος
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 99

[Παρά]μονος Χορηγοῦντι
[ὑπ]ε Μόνιμος
[ὑπ]ο Κριτόδημος ἐνίκα
410/205 [ἐ]πὶ Εὐνίκου οὐκ ἐγένετο 169/8
ἐπὶ Ξενοκλέους παλαι[ᾶι] 168/7
Μόνιμος Φάσματι Μενά�̣ [νδρου]
ποη Παράμονος τεθνηκὼς [ . . . . ]ισ[ - - - ]
ὑπε Δάμων
415/210 Κρίτων Αἰτωλῶι
ὑπε Μόνιμος
Βίοττος Ποητεῖ
ὑπε Δάμων
Λάμπυτος [ - - - ]
420/215 ὑπε Κα[ - - - ]
Ἐπικρ̣[άτης - - - ]
217 ὑπ̣ [ε - - - ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
425/218 [ victorious actor ]

17 lines missing (= 3 years, 2 of which had no production)

[ archon ] 164/3
[ details of revival ]
445 [ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
450 [ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
455 [ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
220 [ὑπο] Εὐερ[ - - - ]
[ἐ]πὶ Ἐράστ[ου - - - ] 163/2
222 ἐπὶ Ποσει[δωνίου οὐκ ἐγένετο] 162/1
460 ⟦   ca. 6   ⟧[ - - - ]
223 ἐπὶ Ἀρισ[τόλα οὐκ ἐγένετο] 161/0
Ἡρακλ̣ [ - - - ]
225 πο[η - - - ]
[ actor ]
100 chapter two

465 [ poet and play ]

[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
470 [ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
475 [ victorious actor ]
[ archon ] 160/59
[ details of revival ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
480 [ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
485 [ actor ]
[ poet and play ]

Col. V
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
490 [ victorious actor ]
[ archon ] 159/8
[ archon ] 158/7
[ details of revival ]
[ poet and play ]
495 [ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
500 [ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
[  ca. 10 ]⟦ . . ⟧[ - - - ]
226 [ὑπε Καβε]ί�ρ̣ ιχος
⟦[Ἐπ]ιγέν̣ης Λυτρουμένωι⟧
505 ὑπε Καβείριχος
ὑπο Νικόλαος ἐνίκα
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 101

230 ἐπὶ Ἀνθεστηρίου οὐκ ἐγένε[το] 157/6

ἐπὶ Καλλιστράτου οὐκ ἐγένε[το] 156/5
ἐπὶ Μνησιθέου παλαιᾶι 155/4
510 Δάμων Φιλαθηναίωι Φιλιππίδ̣[ου]
πο Φιλοκλῆς Τραυματίαι
235 ὑπε Καλλικράτης
Χαιρίων Αὑτοῦ καταψευδομέ�[̣ νωι]
ὑπε Δάμων
515 Βίοττος Ἀγνοοῦντι
ὑπε Δάμων
240 Τιμόξενος Συνκρύπτον[τι]
ὑπε Καλλικράτης
Ἀγαθ̣οκλῆς Ὁμονοία[ι]
520/243 [ὑπε Νι]κ[ό]λ̣ αος
[ poet and play ]
[ actor ]
244 [ victorious actor ]

ca. 69 lines missing

Col. VI
246 [ - - - ]ε Λυσίμαχος
[ - - - ]άκοντα
585 [ - - - ] Σαλαμινίαις
[ - - - ]θίσιν
250 [ - - - Φ]ί�λ̣ ων ἐνίκα
[ - - - ο]ὐκ ἐγένετο
[ - - - οὐκ ἐγένε]το

indeterminate number of lines missing

Epigraphical Notes
11. The first epsilon is no longer on the stone, but
the damage where it should be looks like rela-
tively recent. Dotted rho, upsilon and iota: only
the bottoms of the vertical survive. Dotted nu:
only the bottom tip of the left vertical survives.
13. Dotted sigma: only the right tip of the bot-
tom horizontal is preserved.
20. Dotted sigma: the right tip of the bottom
horizontal is preserved, as is possibly the right
tip of the top horizontal.
132. Previous editors read an iota at the end of
this line. This supposed letter is simply dam-
age to the stone; the cut is too deep and too
short to be iota, in addition to slanting back to
the left.
142. Dotted upsilon: only the bottom tip of the
vertical survives. Dotted pi: only the bottom tip
of the left vertical survives.
143. Dotted epsilon: an apparent trace of the bot-
tom of the vertical is preserved.
167. Dotted eta: only the bottom of the verticals
survive. Dotted omicron: only the bottom of the
circle survives.
170. Dotted upsilon: a trace of the right diagonal
survives along the break.
102 chapter two
174. Dotted kappa: only the bottom tip of the
lower diagonal survives. Dotted omicron: only the
left side of the circle is preserved.
262. Both dotted taus and dotted rho: only the
bottom part of the verticals survives. Dotted
alpha: only the bottom of the right diagonal sur-
vives. Dotted omicron: only the bottom half of the
cut survives, and the center is completely gone.
263. Dotted delta: a trace of the bottom horizon-
tal survives.
266. Dotted epsilon: only the top horizontal and
the upper tip of the vertical survive.
268. Dotted gamma: the horizontal survives, as
conceivably does the upper tip of the vertical;
epsilon is possible, but the preserved stone pre-
cludes tau.
286. In the first and second dotted spaces, there
are the bottom parts of verticals; in the third dot-
ted space are the bottoms of two diagonals con-
sistent with alpha or lambda.
297. Dotted kappa: only the top of the vertical
survives.
299. Dotted alpha: only the apex survives.
301. Dotted pi: only the horizontal survives.
309. Dotted alpha: only the bottom of the right
diagonal survives.
349. Dotted pi: possible faint traces only. Eta: no
longer visible, but the stone may have flaked off
relatively recently.
353. The underlined letters are no longer visible
but may have flaked off relatively recently. Dot-
ted iota: only the top tip of the vertical survives.
Dotted epsilon: only the right part of the bottom
horizontal is preserved.
355. Dotted xi: only the right 2/3 of the bottom
horizontal survives.
357. Dotted rho: only the upper left tip of the let-
ter survives.
359. Dotted iota: possible faint traces only.
361. Dotted epsilon: only the right part of the top
horizontal survives.
401. Dotted mu: only the left vertical is pre-
served.
403. Dotted space: possibly the bottom part of
a diagonal in the lower right corner of the sto-
ichos.
412. Dotted alpha: only the bottom of the left
diagonal survives.
421. Dotted rho: only the top half of the letter
survives; beta is possible.
422. Dotted pi: only the tip of the upper left cor-
ner survives.
460. The erased text read Ἡ̣ρ̣[ακλ - - - ] (cf. line
462). Dotted eta: only the top tips of the verticals
are preserved. Dotted rho: there are faint traces
of part of the loop.
462. Dotted lambda: only the apex is preserved.
502. Only faint, indistinct traces survive.
503. Dotted iota: only the bottom tip of the verti-
cal survives.
504. Dotted nu: only the bottom tips of the ver-
ticals survive.
510. Dotted delta: only traces of the bottom hori-
zontal survive along the break.
513. Dotted epsilon: only the vertical survives.
519. Dotted theta: only the upper part of the cir-
cle is preserved.
520. Dotted lambda: only the top half of the let-
ter survives.
587. Dotted iota: only the upper tip of a vertical
survives along the break.
588. The underlined letters are no longer on the
stone, but the corner looks as if it was chipped
relatively recently.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
11–12. Ἐρ̣χιεῦ̣σι̣ν (“Men of the Deme Erchia”) must
be the title of the sixth-place play for this year,
and [ - - - ]μος must accordingly be the end of
the name of the actor for that play. The line that
should report the victor in the actors contest has
thus been omitted, presumably because [ - - - ]μος
took the prize and the repetition of his name con-
fused the stone-cutter. If the restoration in 16 is
correct, the poet’s name should be six letters long,
while the actor’s name should contain nine let-
ters; O’Connor suggested [Νικόδη]μος (cf. 17).
13–14. The mutually reinforcing restorations
[ποη Ἀριστο]κράτης in 16 and [ὑπε Νικόδημ]ος in
19 indicate that the archon’s name in 13 should
be seven letters long in the genitive, while the
archon’s name in 14 should be six letters long in
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 103
the genitive. The obvious candidates are Hoplon
(217/6 BCE) and Hagnias (216/5 BCE).
15. The Philemon whose comedy was revived
in 216/5 BCE might be either Philemon I (see
IG II2 2325E.61) or Philemon Junior (see IG II2
2325C.83); as many of the former’s titles are
known and a Phocians is not among them, Kassel–
Austin somewhat arbitrarily assign the play to
the latter (= his test. *4).
16. For Aristocrates (PAA 170915; the victorious
poet this year), cf. IG II2 2325C.100 (victorious at
least once at the City Dionysia, perhaps for the
first time with the play whose title is partially
preserved here and must have continued onto 17).
17. Nicodemus (PAA 714090; O’Connor #363;
Stephanis #1829) is almost certainly to be restored
in 19 and probably in 12 as well, but is other-
wise unknown. Perhaps the homonymous mid-
2nd-century comic poet (IG II2 2325E.135) is a
relative.
18. The second-place poet’s name must have
been only about six letters long.
19. The names of the other actors who per-
formed this year end in –ης (21, 23, 25, 27), and
Nicodemus can accordingly be restored here, as
the actor in the second- as well as the first-place
play (cf. 17). Three actors thus appear to have
performed two comedies apiece at this point in
the history of the festival.
20. For Hera, see LIMC IV.1.659–60.
21, 23, 25, 27. Two actors (O’Connor #550; Steph-
anis #2788, and O’Connor #513; Stephanis #2681),
who served as protagonists in the third- through
sixth-place plays, are in question here. But the
fact that their names are almost exactly the same
length and both end in –ης makes it impossible
to know who is who.
143. Timotheus II (PAA 885935) is perhaps to be
identified with the victorious poet Timo- at 353
(176/5 BCE) and/or with the –theus who appears
in the City Dionysia victors list at IG II2 2325C.94,
although no titles or fragments of comedies by
any individual named Timotheus are preserved.
144. PAA 760120; O’Connor #387; Stephanis
#1972.
145. PAA 576435. No titles or fragments of com-
edies by any individual whose name begins with
these letters are preserved.
147. PAA 742095.
149. No titles or fragments of the comedies
of any Greek playwright whose name begins a
gamma are preserved.
160. Προγαμῶν (“The Man who Lived with a
Woman before Marrying Her”) is also the title of
a play by Menander (frr. 311–12).
161. O’Connor #552; Stephanis #2796 (who ten-
tatively suggests that this may be the same man
as ]ων in 176). Perhaps to be restored Διογείτων
(cf. 263).
162–163. [ - - - ]ήκει in 163 must be the end of
a play-title. The need to distinguish the poet
from his son (competing at the same festival?)
and to note that he died before his comedy was
staged thus apparently required that two lines be
devoted to a single entry.
164. O’Connor #530; Stephanis #2715.
167. Ἔφηβοι (“Ephebes”) is the title of a play
by Ephippus (frr. 8–10), while Euphro wrote a
Συνέφηβοι (“Fellow-ephebes”; fr. 9), hence the
restoration of his name here by Wilhelm (1906a)
70; cf. Philemon’s ῎Εφηβος (frr. 28–9).
172. For Menander (PA 9875; PAA 641805), see
IG II2 2325E.60; cf. IG II2 2323a.2, 17. Ten frag-
ments of his Misogynist (frr. 236–45) are pre-
served. For another revival of a Menander play,
see 412 (The Phantom, in 168/7 BCE).
173. ᾿Αδελφαί (“Sisters”) is also the title of a play
by Antiphanes (fr. 13), while Alcaeus Comicus
wrote an ᾿Αδελφαὶ μοιχευόμεναι (fr. 1).
174. O’Connor #524; Stephanis #2707.
175. Δακτύλιος (“The Ring”) is also the title of plays
(doubtless in most cases recognition-dramas) by
Alexis (frr. 44–5), Amphis (fr. 12), Menander (frr.
97–101), Philemon (fr. 20) and Timocles (fr. 3)
176. Perhaps the same man as [ - - - ]ων in 161
(thus tentatively Stephanis). Ruck suggested
Διογείτων (cf. 263).
177. As Wilhelm (1906a) 71, saw, the title is most
likely a compound such Φιλαθήναιος (“The Man
Who Loved Athens”; attested for Alexis and
104 chapter two
Philippides) or Μισαθήναιος (“The Man Who
Hated Athens”).
262. Timostratus (PA 13824; PAA 889955) also
appears at 291 as one of the poets who partici-
pated in the festival in 184/3 BCE, and is perhaps
to be restored at 353 as well. He is most likely
to be identified with Timostratus of the deme
Phaleron, who contributed to a public undertak-
ing of some sort in 183/2 BCE (IG II2 2332.206).
No fragments of his Λυτρ[ - - - ] are preserved,
but we do have a handful of additional titles and
a few short fragments, the longest consisting of
two iambic trimeter lines.
263. Diogeiton (PAA 325600; O’Connor #; Steph-
anis #671) is otherwise unknown but might per-
haps be restored at 161 or 176.
264. Crates (PAA 584035; O’Connor #308; Steph-
anis #1489) also appears at 296 acting in the fes-
tival in 184/3 BCE.
265. Symmachus (PA 13032; PAA 850355) is
attested elsewhere only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. IG II2 892.1).
266. Theoxenus (PA 6983; PAA 509090) is
attested elsewhere only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. IG II2 1329.6).
267. Zopyrus (PA 6256; PAA 464020) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 896.2).
268, 281. Eraton (PAA 400410; O’Connor #175;
Stephanis #880) is otherwise unknown.
269. Laines (PAA 600657) appears in the City
Dionysia victors list at IG II2 2325C.101.
277. Aristocles (PAA 170025) is otherwise
unknown.
278. Hecataeus (PAA 384550; O’Connor #166;
Stephanis #824) also competed at the festival in
184/3 BCE (294).
279. Nicostratus III (PAA 717840) is otherwise
unknown; but see IG II2 2325E.65 (on the comic
poet Nicostratus II, perhaps a relative).
280. Polyxenus (PAA 780535) is probably to be
restored as the actor in the winning play as well
as the victor in the actors competition in 176/5
BCE (350, 361, where see n). Capps (1900c) 123,
identified him with a κωμῳδός, perhaps to be
restored as Polyxenus (O’Connor #410; cf. Stepha-
nis #2478), who participated in the Dionysia on
Delos in 170 BCE (IG XI.2 133.77).
281. For Eraton, see 268.
282. Eupolemus (PA 5920; PAA 442330) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 897.1).
283. Charicles (PA 15404; PAA 982990) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 785.1)
284. The same play was revived again in 182/1
BCE (300).
285. ῾Ομώνυμοι (“Men with the Same Name”)
is also the title of plays by Antiphanes (fr. 177)
and Dionysius Comicus (frr. 3–4); presumably a
drama of confused identities.
286. See 290.
287. Criton (PAA 585725), the traditional read-
ing of the name, also appears at 415 as the sec-
ond-place poet at the festival in 168/7 BCE. No
fragments of his Ephesians are preserved, but we
do have three other titles and three fragments,
the longest consisting of eight partially corrupt
iambic trimeter lines. There is clearly space for
one letter to the left of the kappa, but no known
Greek names end -κρίτων. In view of this and the
occurrence of Criton in 415, the best solution is
to assume that the missing letter space contained
not a letter but an indentation (perhaps a flaw in
the stone).
288. Sophilus (PAA 870965; O’Connor #459;
Stephanis #2375) is otherwise unknown.
289. Paramonus (PAA 765435) also appears in
407 as the sixth-place poet in 170/69 BCE, and in
413 as the victorious poet in 168/7 BCE (posthu-
mously). No other titles or fragments of his com-
edies are preserved.
290, 297. If Onesimus (PAA 746305; O’Connor
#385; Stephanis #1949; otherwise unknown) is
restored in 286 (thus Wilhelm), he acted in two
plays this year, whereas the other four actors per-
formed in only one apiece, and it thus seems bet-
ter to leave the line as we have given it.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 105
291. For Timostratus (PA 13824; PAA 889955),
see 262 (sixth place in 189/8 BCE). No fragments
of his Homebody are preserved.
292. Callistratus (PAA 561210; O’Connor #282;
Stephanis #1358) is otherwise unknown, although
his name might conceivably be restored at 420
(thus O’Connor).
293. Sogenes (PAA 854355) is otherwise
unknown.
294. Hecataeus (PAA 384550; O’Connor #166;
Stephanis #824) also competed at the festival in
186/5 BCE (278).
295. Philemon III (PA 14276; PAA 925900)
appears in the City Dionysia victors list at IG II2
2325C.102. No other titles or fragments of his
plays are preserved.
296. Crates (PAA 584035; O’Connor #308; Steph-
anis #1489) also appears at 264 as victorious in
189/8 BCE.
298. Hermogenes (PA 5121; PAA 420055) is
attested elsewhere only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. IG II2 1328.4, 8–9).
299. Timesianax (PA 13646; PAA 884730) is
attested elsewhere only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. IG II2 902.1).
300. Philostratus (PAA 942870; O’Connor #490;
Stephanis #2550) is otherwise unknown. Poseid-
ippus I (PAA 785245) appears in the City Dionysia
victors list at IG II2 2325C.80 with five victories.
Four brief book-fragments and one badly-dam-
aged papyrus scrap of The Girl who was Locked
Away (frr. 2–6) survive; the play had also been
restaged in 184/3 BCE (284).
350, 361. Given the unambiguous presence of
the actor Polyxenus (PAA 780535) in the entry
for 186/5 BCE (280), Wilhelm was certainly right
to suggest that these two entries (O’Connor #402
and 511, respectively; Stephanis #2108) be com-
bined to yield that name here as well.
351. Iolaus (PAA 535320) is otherwise unknown.
But the name is very rare in Athens, and PAA
suggests that he is perhaps to be identified with
the Iolaus of the deme Piraeus (PAA 535330) who
contributed money to a public undertaking of
some sort in 183/2 BCE (IG II2 2332.81).
352. O’Connor #469; Stephanis #2450 (where the
line-number reference to the inscription is in
error).
353. The poet in question might be Timostratus
(PA 13824; PAA 889955), for whom see 262, 291
(thus Capps); less likely Timotheus II (143) or
Timoxenus (518).
357. The title of the play is presumably Συντρόφοι
(attested for Alexis, Damoxenus, Posidippus, and
Diphilus) or (less likely) Συντρέχοντες (attested
for Alexis and Sophilus).
360. Stephanis #2693.
397. The title of the play is most likely Μονότροπος
(attested for Phrynichus Comicus and Anaxilas).
403. For the title, cf. 516.
404, 409. Critodemus (PAA 585505; O’Connor
#311; Stephanis #1508) is otherwise unknown.
406. Sonicus (PAA 857620; O’Connor #450;
Stephanis #2338) is otherwise unknown.
407, 413. For Paramonus (PAA 765435), see
289.
408, 412. Monimus (PAA 658750; O’Connor #347;
Stephanis #1740) is otherwise unknown.
410. Eunicus (PA 5848; PAA 439945) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 910.1).
411. Xenocles (PA 11208; PAA 731945) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 945.2).
412. Substantial papyrus fragments of about 100
lines of The Phantom of Menander (PAA 641805;
see IG II2 2325E.60; cf. IG II2 2323a.2, 17) are pre-
served. The play had already been revived at least
once, in 237/6 BCE (SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.10).
414, 418. Damon (PAA 301425; O’Connor #116;
Stephanis #582) was also one of the actors at the
festival in 155/4 BCE (511, 515, 517).
415. Criton (PAA 585725) apparently also appears
at 287 as the second-place poet at the festival
in 184/3 BCE. A single one-line fragment of The
Aetolian (fr. 1) is preserved.
417. Biottus (PAA 266120) also appears at 516 as
the third-place poet at the festival in 155/4 BCE,
once again with Damon as his actor. He is pre-
sumably to be identified with the man whose
106 chapter two
name appears in the City Dionysia victors list at
IG II2 2325E.134, two lines after Agathocles (cf.
519). No other titles or fragments of his plays are
preserved.
419. Lampytus (PAA 601655) is otherwise
unknown.
420. PAA 550530; O’Connor #265; Stephanis
#1310; perhaps to be identified with Cabeirichos
(505) or Callicrates (512, 518).
421. Epicrates II (PAA 393495) is otherwise
unknown, and there is no way to know if he was
related to the Middle Comic poet Epicrates of
Ambracia (PAA 394250).
457. Although Euergetes (PAA 430740) is the
eponymous archon for 164/3 BCE, there is no
other instance in the inscription of three non-
performance years in a row. We accordingly
restore the line as if this were the name of an
otherwise unknown victorious actor for that year
(O’Connor #191; Stephanis, following Mette, iden-
tifies him as the archon).
458. Erastus (PA 5030; PAA 400170) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. Agora XVI 295).
459. Poseidonius (PA 12135; PAA 785260) is oth-
erwise attested only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. IG II2 2864).
461. Aristolas (PA 1939; PAA 171945) is otherwise
attested only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 956.4).
462. PAA 484280; O’Connor #212; Stephanis
#1072.
503, 505. Cabeirichos (PAA 550690; O’Connor
#266; Stephanis #1312) is otherwise unknown
(although cf. 420).
504. Kassel–Austin follow Ruck in taking the
poet’s name to be Sosigenes. But no comic poet
by that name is attested elsewhere, and more
likely this is the Epigenes (PAA 391350; five
additional titles and eight fragments preserved)
vaguely described at Pollux 7.29 (= test. 2) as a
“New Comic” poet.
506, 520. Nicolaus (PAA 715685; O’Connor #365;
Stephanis #1845) is otherwise unknown, although
Wilhelm speculated that he might be identified
with the undated homonymous comic poet (PAA
715680; three fragments, one 45 lines long, pre-
served).
507. Anthesterius (PA 947; PAA 129790) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 957.2–3).
508. Callistratus (PA 8139; PAA 561215) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 1937.1).
509. Mnesitheus (PA 10285; PAA 656115) is
attested elsewhere only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. Agora XVI 297).
510, 514, 516. Damon (PAA 301425; O’Connor
#116; Stephanis #582) was also one of the actors
at the festival in 168/7 BCE (414, 418).
510. For Philippides (PA 14356; PAA 928970; late
4th/early 3rd century BCE), see IG II2 2323a Col.
I.7; 2325E.64. Kirchner suggested that he might
be the great-grandfather of the comic poet Philo-
cles who took the prize at the festival this year
(511; Davies [1971] 541–2, is dubious of the con-
nection); one might just as easily connect him
with the early 3rd-century comic actor by the
same name (IG II2 2325D.27; 2325F.80). A single
short fragment of The Man Who Loved Athens
(fr. 19) is preserved.
511. Philocles (PA 14548; PAA 935460) is other-
wise known only from a single incomplete line
of an unidentified play; but cf. 510.
512, 518. Callicrates (PAA 556420; O’Connor #272;
Stephanis #1334) is otherwise unknown (although
cf. 420).
513. Chairion (PAA 977870) is otherwise unknown,
although he is perhaps to be restored in the City
Dionysia victors list at IG II2 2325C.111.
515. Biottus (PAA 266120) also appears at 417 as
the third-place poet at the festival in 168/7 BCE,
once again with Damon (418) as his actor.
517. Timoxenus (PAA 889160) is otherwise
unknown, although he might perhaps be restored
at 353.
519. Agathocles (PAA 103105) is presumably to be
identified with the man whose name appears in
the City Dionysia victors list at IG II2 2325E.132,
two lines above Biottus (cf. 417, 515).
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2323 107

583. Lysimachus (PAA 615920; O’Connor #323;
Stephanis #1584) is otherwise unknown but is
perhaps to be identified with the actor(?) Lysi-
machus of the deme Phlyeus (PAA 616645 ~
616650; O’Connor 323; Stephanis #1584) whose
gravestone (IG II2 7691) dates to around the end
of the 2nd century BCE.
587. Philon (PAA 953920; O’Connor #493; Steph-
anis #2556) is otherwise unknown.
108 chapter two
IG II2 2319 Column I
IG II2 2319 is now lost and is known only from
Fourmont’s transcription, although Pittakys
claimed to have seen it near the “Gymnasium of
Hadrian.”23 The only text of independent value
is that of Wilhelm, who used Fourmont’s actual
transcription;24 subsequent texts, including our
own, are based on Wilhelm, while earlier editors
used an inferior copy of Fourmont’s notes. All
previous editors have assumed that Fourmont’s
copy represents two columns on the same stone,25
but there are compelling reasons to doubt that
this is true. Most importantly, Column I contains
a portion of the record for comedies performed
at the Lenaea ca. 285 BCE, while what has tradi-
tionally been referred to as Column II (our Col-
umn III) contains part of the record for tragedies
from the Lenaea ca. 420 BCE. This collocation
is incompatible with everything else we know
about the Didascaliae, and Fourmont’s transcrip-
tion itself provides further reasons for believing
that the material should be separated.
IG II2 2319, what we here designate as Column
I and Column III, are associated and treated as
belonging to the same part of the Didascaliae
because Col. I.7 ends Ἀριστόμα[ - - - ], while Col.
II.11 (M/O) (transcribed by Fourmont nearly oppo-
site Col. I.7) begins [ - - - ]χος. Although the only
plausible restoration for Col. I.7 is Ἀριστόμα[χος],
making the association seem natural, joining the
two columns is ruled out by two considerations,
even if one ignores the fact that Fourmont tran-
scribed the apparent beginning and ending of
the name separately. First, in Col. I.7, Fourmont
seems to state explicitly that the end of the
name is missing (‘ΑΡΙΣΤΟΜΑ defuit’), a claim
that is inexplicable if the stone in his judgment
contained the entire name. Second, if Col. I.7
and Col. II.11 (M/O) were connected to form the
23 Pittakys (1835) 114. We are grateful to Demetris Sour-
las for confirming that the stone is not to be found in the
storerooms at the Library of Hadrian.
24 Reproduced at Wilhelm (1906a) 51.
25 So also, most recently, Parker (2006).
name Ἀριστόμαχος, Col. I.326 and probably also
Col. I.10 would extend into the space occupied by
Col. II (M/O). Column I and Column III (M/O)
must accordingly be separated and recognized
as belonging to two different parts of the Didas­
caliae, and Col. II (M/O) must be added to the
text. Perhaps the fragments appeared together
in Fourmont’s notes because he recognized that
they belonged to the same series of inscriptions,
or because he saw them in close proximity to
each other. But the connection is no more sub-
stantial than that.
The absence of any reference at the beginning
of the entry for 285/4 BCE to a performance of an
“old” comedy suggests that the festival in ques-
tion is the Lenaea. See in general Capps (1900b).
The entries are cast in a standard form:
(Item 1) ἐπὶ + archon’s name in genitive, followed
by name of victorious poet in nominative;
(Item 2) title of victorious poet’s play in dative;
ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of victorious
poet’s actor in nominative;
(Item 3) name of second-place poet, followed by
δεύ(τερος) and title of play in dative;
(Item 4) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of sec-
ond-place poet’s actor in nominative;
(Item 5) name of third-place poet, followed by
τρί(τος) and title of play in dative;
(Item 6) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of third-
place poet’s actor;
(Item 7) name of fourth-place poet, followed by
τέ(ταρτος) and title of play in dative;
26 Col. I.3 might not quite overlap with Col. II if, as Parker
(2006) 60, asserts, Fourmont read only Ἀνασωιζο, and the
small miniscule μεν written above three scribbled-out let-
ters at the end of the word is meant to indicate his partial
resolution of the abbreviation rather than a correction of
whatever he had previously transcribed. The introduction
of Ἀνασωιζομέν in the IG text is not quite as inexplicable as
Parker seems to think; this is simply Wilhelm’s interpreta-
tion (correct in our opinion) of Fourmont’s transcription,
whence Kirchner’s text as well as all subsequent editions.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2319 column i 109
(Item 8) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of fourth-
place poet’s actor;
(Item 9) name of fifth-place poet, followed by
πέ(μπτος) and title of play in dative;
(Item 10) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of fifth-
place poet’s actor; and
Col. I
54 [ - - - : τε : - ]α̣ στιδι
55 [ὑπε Ἀριστόμ]αχος
[ ca. 8? ]η̣ ς : πεμ : Ἀνασωιζομέν( - )
[ὑπε : Ἀντ]ιφάνης
5 [ὑπο : Ἱερ]ώνυμος ἐνίκα
[ἐπὶ Δι]οτίμου Σίμυλος 285/4
60 [ 3–4 ]σίαι : ὑπε Ἀριστόμα[χος]
Διόδωρος : δεύ : Νεκρῶι
ὑπε : Ἀριστόμαχος
10 Διόδωρος τρί Μαινομένωι
ὑπε Κηφίσιος
65 [Φο]ινικ[ίδ]ης τε : Ποητεῖ
[ὑπε ca. 8? ]ης
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
1. Parker (2006) is rightly critical of Mette’s [Προ]-
αστίδι. But his own defense of Capps’ [Μύ]στιδι is
unconvincing; the best suggestion is Wilhelm’s
Ἀσ<π>ίδι (or a compound thereof). Confusion
between pi and tau in early modern transcrip-
tions is common; for an example from Fourmont,
see IG II2 3106.1 (cited by Parker [2006] 59 n. 31,
although without drawing the connection).
2, 7, 9. Aristomachus, the actor for the fourth-
place poet in 286/5 BCE, and for the first- and
second- place poets in 285/4 BCE, is PAA 172535
(where the details of his competitive record are
confused); O’Connor #66; Stephanis #355. His
name appears in the Lenaea list at IG II2 2325F.77
(three victories), immediately after Hieronymus
(see 5), and is probably to be restored in the City
Dionysia list at IG II2 2325D.21.
3. The three possible restorations for the poet’s
name, all suggested by Capps (1900b) 84, are
Phoenicides (see 12), Calliades (for whom see IG
II2 2325E.66), or Phillipides (for whom see IG II2
2325E.64).
(Item 11) ὑπο(κρίτης), followed by name of victo-
rious actor and notice ἐνίκα.
Five poets compete, with two plays apiece, along
with at least three actors (and probably no more
than that).
4, 13. Antiphanes, the actor for the fifth-place
poet in 286/5 BCE and perhaps for the fourth-
place poet in 285/4 BCE, is PAA 137152; O’Connor
#35; Stephanis #220.
5. Hieronymus, the victorious actor in 286/5
BCE (when he must have acted in at least one
of the top-three-placing comedies), is PA 7554a;
PAA 533955; O’Connor #254; Stephanis #1263.
His name appears in the Lenaea list at IG II2
2325F.76, immediately before Aristomachus (see
2, 7), with four victories, and in a list of partici-
pants in the dramatic performance at the Apol-
lonia festival on Delos in 280 BCE (IG XI.2 107.19).
Wilhelm (1906a) 59–60, identified him, probably
correctly, with the Hieronymus whose gravestone
was found in the Ceramicus (IG II2 11710; cf. SEG
XLI 223).
6. Diotimus, the eponymous archon for 285/4
BCE, is PA 4373; PAA 365460. Simylus (PAA
821960), the victorious comic poet, is otherwise
undated; only a single word from his Megarian
Woman (perhaps revived in 186/5 BCE; cf. IG II2
2323.267–8) and a dubious two-and-a-half line
110 chapter two
fragment of an unidentified play survive. Boeckh’s
restoration [Ἐφε]σίαι for the play in question
here (7) is as good a guess as any and may well
be right.
8, 10. The Diodorus who was both the second-
and third-place poet in 285/4 BCE is almost
certainly Diodorus son of Dion of Sinope and
eventually of the Attic deme Semachidae (PA
3959; PAA 331110; O’Connor #141; Stephanis #696),
the—most likely younger—brother of the comic
poet Diphilus (IG II2 10321 = Diph. test. 3; for the
grant of Athenian citizenship, which Diphilus
seems not to have shared, see M. J. Osborne, Nat­
uralization in Athens [Brussels, 1983] vol. 3 p. 87
[T93]). The prosopography of the 285/4 BCE per-
formances is complicated by the existence of a
Diodorus of Athens (PAA 329620; O’Connor #140;
Stephanis #694) who performed as a κωμωιδός on
Delos in 284 BCE at a festival in which Diodorus
of Sinope also participated (IG XI.2 105.21; PAA’s
suggestion that the two men might be identified
garbles the evidence of the inscription). Were two
different poets with the same name in question
here, however, one might expect an attempt to
disambiguate them (as with Callippus “the Elder”
and Callippus “the Younger” at IG II2 2323a.3–4),
and more likely Diodorus was allowed—for rea-
sons to which we no longer have access—to
stage two plays at a single festival.27 The name
27 Intriguingly, Diphilus is also said to have written a
Madman (fr. 55); perhaps the play was actually by him
but Diodorus staged it, e.g. because Diphilus—who might
easily have been in his late 50s by now, if his first victory
came in the mid-310s BCE, and who we know died before
his brother—had recently passed away, leaving the text of
the comedy behind. Or perhaps Diodorus is simply a cut-
ter’s error, Diphilus having been intended.
-odorus appears in the list of comic poets victo-
rious at the Lenaea at IG II2 2325E.93 (one vic-
tory; = Diod. test. *3), almost exactly two full
columns after Diphilus (IG II2 2325E.63; initial
victory 313/2 BCE or earlier) and thus probably
around 260 BCE or so; but [Θε]όδωρος might be
restored there instead. Three fragments—only
two of them assigned specifically to Diodorus of
Sinope, but one 42 lines long—of Diodorus’ com-
edies survive, along with three other titles. Noth-
ing further is known of either The Corpse or The
Madman.
11. Cephisius, the actor for Diodorus’ second
play, which took third place, is O’Connor #287;
Stephanis #1392; PAA 567210. He is almost cer-
tainly to be identified with Cephisius of Histiaea
(PAA 567212, which mistakenly identifies him as
a tragic actor), who performed as a κωμωιδός on
Delos in 282 and 279 BCE (IG XI.2 106.17; 108.21).
12. Phoenicides of Megara, who might be
restored as the fifth-place poet in 286/5 BCE
(3) is PAA 962350. His name is almost certainly
to be restored in the City Dionysia list at IG II2
2325C.85 (two victories, the first probably in the
mid-270s BCE or so, a decade later than the con-
test referred to here).
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2322 111

IG II2 2322

The reference to a competition for comic actors
probably sometime in the third quarter of the 4th
century BCE (cf. 2, 4) suggests that this is a frag-
ment of the Lenaea records, since no such compe-
tition was in place at the City Dionysia until after
329/8 BCE (cf. IG II2 2325D introductory remarks).
Earlier editors read δ̣ε[̣ ύ(τερος) after Alexis’ name
in 2, but the traces have vanished from the stone
since then. In any case, the absence of the notice
ποη(τής) in 2 makes it probable that the poets
whose names have been preserved took second
or third place and lower. The information in
4–6 is presented in an unusually compact man-
ner, with the notice ὑπε(κρίνετο) having appar-
ently been placed the end of 4, so that the actor
Theophilus’ name stands at the beginning of 5.
Another poet’s name and the notice τέ(ταρτος)
or πέμ(πτος) thus presumably occupied the rest
of 5, and the name at the beginning of 6 must be
a play-title.

18. IG II2 2322 (EM 312; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
112 chapter two
Technical Description
EM 312.
H 0.063; W 0.097; T 0.034; LH 0.006–0.007 (ο 0.005;
φ 0.009).
91 [ . . ]ι̣λ̣[ - - - ]
Ἄλεξις [ - - - ]
ὑπε : Καλλ[- - - ]
Ἡρακλεί[δης - - - ]
5/95 Θεόφιλο̣[ς - - - ]
Ν̣ [α]υ̣σι[κάαι - - - ]
Epigraphical Notes
1. Dotted iota: only the bottom of the vertical is
preserved; it is possible that this stroke is instead
the right vertical of a letter, in which case there is
only one missing letter to the left. Dotted lambda:
only the bottom of the left diagonal is preserved;
alpha is equally possible.
3. The underlined lambda is clearly visible in
Wilhelm’s photograph of a squeeze (Wilhelm
[1906a] 41); the chip missing at the right side
of the fragment is thus modern damage that
occurred sometime in the last century.
5. Dotted omicron: a possible trace of the upper
left part of the circle survives along the break.
6. Dotted nu: only the top part of the right verti-
cal survives. Dotted upsilon: only the upper tip of
the right diagonal is preserved.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
2. Alexis of Thurii (PA 549 + add.; PAA 120505)
seems to have had an extraordinarily long career,
lasting from the 350s to the 270s BCE. His name
is preserved in the Lenaea victors list at IG II2
2325E.45 (at least two but no more than four vic-
tories), as well as in the Fasti as the victorious
comic poet at the City Dionysia in 348/7 BCE (IG
II2 2318.1474). See in general Arnott (1996) 11–18,
esp. 15–17.
3. Call[ - - - ] is PAA 551910; O’Connor #268;
Stephanis #1320. The obvious candidates for res-
Gray “Hymettian” marble; broken on all sides and
back. There is a vacat ca. 0.03 wide between the
left edge of the stone and the surviving text.
Editions: IG II 974b; Wilhelm (1906a) 41–3; IG II2
2322; Pickard-Cambridge (1988) 109; Mette (1977)
112 (lines 4–10).
toration are Callistratus (PAA 561115; O’Connor
#280; Stephanis #1356; in the list of Lenaea vic-
tors at IG II2 2325F.37); Callippus “the Elder” (see
IG II2 2323a Col. I.3); and Callippus “the Younger”
(see IG II2 2323a Col. I.4).
4. The comic poet Heracleides (PAA 484760, but
with confused dates) is known only from this
inscription and a single fragment of an unidenti-
fied play dating probably to the late 350s BCE,
suggesting that the contest results recorded here
belong earlier rather than later in Alexis’ career
(cf. 2, 6; compatible with the restoration of Cal-
listratus in 3).
5. Heracleides’ actor Theophilus is O’Connor
#236. A man by the same name (PAA 511110) was
the victorious comic poet at the City Dionysia in
330/29 BCE (IG II2 2318.1699) and is most likely
referred to in IG II2 2323a Col. I.15 (fourth place in
312/1 BCE); Stephanis and PAA take him to be the
individual referred to here, probably incorrectly.
6. Nausicaa was the daughter of King Alcinous of
the island of Scheria, whom Odysseus visited at
the very end of his wanderings. The comic poet
Eubulus (active in the middle of the 4th century
BCE; see IG II2 2325E.39) wrote a Nausicaa, and
Wilhelm accordingly restored his name in the
second half of 5. If correct, this would be another
reason for putting the contest results recorded
here early in Alexis’ career (cf. 2, 4).
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2321 113

IG II2 2321

2–6 are the conclusion of one year’s entry, 7–8
the beginning of the next. The letters in 2 must
be the end of a title (e.g. Ποιηταῖς) of a play—
probably a comedy—by a poet whose name has
been lost; the sigma at the beginning of the pre-
served portion of 4 must be the last letter of the
name of the actor in the play that placed next-to-
last that year;28 Ἀριστοφ[ - - - ] in 4 must be the
beginning of the name of the poet who placed
lowest, and must accordingly have been followed
by πέμ(πτος) vel sim.; and [ - - - ]αντοπρεσ[ - - - ]
in 5 is almost certainly part of the title of his
play, and must have been followed by the notice
ὑπε(κρίνετο) and the name of the actor (which
perhaps rolled over to the beginning of 6). The
information is presented in an unusually com-
pact manner reminiscent of IG II2 2322 (Lenaea,
third quarter of the 4th century BCE?). If the poet
in question in 4 is Aristophon, who belongs ca.
350 BCE, the reference to a competition for comic
actors in 6 suggests that the fragment refers to
the Lenaea, since no such competition was in
place at the City Dionysia until after 329/8 BCE
(cf. IG II2 2325D introductory remarks).

19. IG II2 2321 (EM 8228; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

28 Koerte took Ἀριστοφ[ - - - ] to be the remains of a title,

Ἀριστοφ[ῶντι]. But in that case the sigma that precedes it
would have to represent the poet’s name, which is regularly
followed immediately not by the title of the play but by an
indication of the place taken (e.g. τέ(ταρτος)).
114 chapter two
Technical Description
EM 8228.
H 0.115; W 0.032; T 0.088; LH 0.005–0.007.
Gray “Hymettian” marble; all sides and back
broken.
Editions: Köhler (1878) 117–18; IG II 974; Wilhelm
(1906a) 84–6; IG II2 2321; Pickard-Cambridge
(1988) 109; Mette (1977) 148.
[ - - - ]
85 [ - - - ]ι̣ηταις[ - - - ]
[ - - - ] vacat
[ - - - ] . ς : Ἀριστοφ[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]αντοπρεσ[ - - - ]
[ὑπο - - - ἐ]νίκα
90 [ἐπὶ - - - ο]υ̣
[ - - - ]οθ̣[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
Epigraphical Notes
2. Dotted iota: only the bottom of the vertical is east side of the lower Strymon River, see Olson
preserved.
4. The dotted space contains the bottom of a
vertical; either iota or the right vertical of eta is
possible.
7. Dotted upsilon: only the right diagonal sur-
vives.
8. Dotted theta: only the upper left portion of
the circle survives along the break.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
4. The poet’s name might be either Aristophanes
(thus K–A, following Reisch) or Aristophon
(probably to be restored immediately after Alexis
in the Lenaea victors’ list at IG II2 2325E.46). The
resemblance of the organization of the informa-
tion to that in IG II2 2322 (see introductory n.)
argues for the latter possibility.
5. Reisch, comparing Ar. Ach. 156–72, suggested
that the title might be restored Odomantopres­
beis (“Ambassadors to the Odomantoi”; the singu-
lar would do just as well). For the Odomantoi,
an autonomous Thracian tribe who lived on the
on Ar. Ach. 156.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2319 columns ii–iii 115

IG II2 2319 Columns II–III

Each poet presents two tragedies, both performed (Item 4) name of second-place poet, followed by
by the same actor; no “old” tragedies are revived. notice δεύ(τερος);
The festival in question is thus presumably the (Item 5) titles of second-place poet’s plays in
Lenaea, making this part of the same catalogue dative;
as SEG XXVI 203 (by which time the contest had (Item 6) ὑπε(κρίνετο) followed by name of
been expanded to three poets per year). second-place poet’s actor; and
The entries are cast in a standard form: (Item 7) ὑπο(κρίτης) followed by name of victori-
ous actor and notice ἐνίκα.
(Item 1) ἐπί + archon’s name in genitive, presum-
ably followed by name of victorious poet (cf. For the lack of any relationship between the
SEG XXVI 203); material preserved here and that in IG II2 2319
(Item 2) titles of victorious poet’s plays in dative; Col. I, see the introductory remarks there.
(Item 3) ὑπε(κρίνετο), followed by name of victo-
rious poet’s actor;

Col. II
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]χος
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. III
67 Ειρ[ - - - ]
ὑπε [ - - - ]
ὑπο [ - - - ]
70 ἐπὶ ᾿Α[στυφίλου - - - ] (420/19)
5 ᾿Αγα[μέμνωνι - - - ]
ὑπε [ - - - ]
116 chapter two

῾Ηρα[ - - - δεύ :]
Θησῆ[ι - - - ]
75 ὑπ[ε - - - ]
10 ὑπο [ - - - ἐνίκα]
ἐπὶ ᾿Αρχ[ίου - - - ] (419/8)
Τυροῖ ΤΙ[ - - - ]
ὑπε : Λυσικράτ[ης]
80 Καλλίστρατος [δεύ]
15 ᾿Αμφιλόχωι ᾿Ιξίο[νι]
ὑπε : Καλλιππί[δης]
[ὑπ]ο : Καλλιππίδ[ης] ἐνίκα
[ἐπὶ ᾿Α]ντιφ[ῶ]ντος Σ[ - - - ] (418/7)

Prosopographical Notes and Comments 10. The name of the victorious tragic actor must
Col. II have appeared somewhere in IG II2 2325H.4–7.
11. = IG II2 2319.60 (represented there as the final 11. Archias (PA 2445; PAA 212200) is attested
three letters of Col. I.7, from which it should in elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
fact be disassociated). year (e.g. D.S. 12.78.1). For Sophocles as a possibil-
ity for the victorious poet, see 12.
Col. III 12. Tyro slept with Poseidon (Od. 11.235–59) and
1. Most likely the first three letters of the title of exposed the children, who were adopted by a
a play by the second-place poet in 421/20 BCE. herdsman and given the names Pelias and Neleus.
4. Astyphilus of Cydantidae (PA 2661; PAA Eventually Tyro fell into the power of the boys’
223380) is attested elsewhere only as the epony- stepmother, who abused her; when her sons at
mous archon for this year (e.g. D.S. 12.77.1). Ion last discovered her true identity (and thus their
of Chios (PAA 543185; TrGF 19) is known to have own), they took vengeance for her. See [Apollod.]
composed an Agamemnon (frr. 1–5) and was still Bib. 1.9.8; Gantz (1993) 172–3; LIMC VIII.1.153–4.
active in 428 BCE, when he took third place at Sophocles produced two plays entitled Tyro (frr.
the City Dionysia behind Euripides and Iophon 648–69a; undated), and depending on how Four-
(hyp. E. Hipp. = test. 5). Ar. Pax 832–7 (421 BCE) mont’s enigmatic ΤΙ is interpreted, the title of the
= test. 2a would seem to suggest that Ion was second play might be Tereus (frr. 581–95b; before
dead by the end of the decade. But the point 414 BCE) or Triptolemus (frr. 596–617a; undated).
of the passage is not entirely clear, and the wit See also 18.
might depend instead on the fact that Ion was 13. Lysicrates is PAA 615220; O’Connor #321;
not yet deceased, meaning that his name might Stephanis #1580.
be restored here as the victorious poet. 14. Callistratus (PAA 561080, but not to be iden-
5. For Agamemnon and the various tragedies in tified with Aristophanes’ producer29 by the same
which he played a leading role, see Gantz (1993) name [PAA 561075], since crossing the generic
584–7, 664–76; LIMC I.1.256–7. lines between tragedy and comedy was unheard
7. Hera[cleides?] is PAA 483895; TrGF 37. Noth- of in this period; TrGF 38) is otherwise obscure.
ing else is known of him (or whoever ought to be
restored in his place).
8. For the Athenian hero Theseus and the vari- 29 Here and elsewhere, we use the term “producer” to
refer to a man who took over the practical management
ous tragedies in which he played a leading role, of the staging of a play from the poet; see in general IG II2
see Gantz (1993) 262–70, 276–98; LIMC VII.1.922. 2325C introductory n.
 the didascaliae: ig ii2 2319 columns ii–iii 117
15. Amphilochus was a son of Amphiaraus (one
of the Seven against Thebes) and thus the brother
of Alcmaeon and himself one of the Epigoni;
[Apollod.] Bib. 3.7.5 reports that he was some-
times said to have assisted Alcmaeon in killing
their mother Eriphyle, who betrayed Amphiar-
aus. But Amphilochus (or another figure by the
same name) was also involved in a dispute with
a son of Apollo, the seer Mopsus, which led to
the death of both men and seems a more sub-
stantial subject for a tragedy and a better match
for an Ixion. See Str. 14.675–6; Gantz (1993) 522–5,
527–8; LIMC I.1.713–14. Ixion, the king of Thes-
saly, attempted to rape Hera and was punished
by being pinned to an eternally rotating, burning
wheel; see Pi. P. 2.21–41; Pherecyd. FGrH 3 F 51;
D.S. 4.69.3–5; [Apollod.] Epit. 1.20; Gantz (1993)
718–21; LIMC V.1.857–8; and cf. SEG XXVI 208 fr.
B.6 (an undated revival of an Ixion).
16–17. Callippides is PAA 558950; O’Connor
#274; Stephanis #1348. One of the most promi-
nent tragic actors of his day, he was victorious
five times at the Lenaea (IG II2 2325H.7) and was
active until early in the 4th century; Sophocles
is supposed to have died (in 406 BCE) when he
choked on a grape Callippides sent him as a pres-
ent (test. 1.55–8).
18. Antiphon of Scambonidae (PA 1277; PAA
138630) is attested elsewhere only as the epony-
mous archon for this year (e.g. IG I3 84.3). The
victorious poet might be Sophocles (who most
likely took the prize twice at the Lenaea; see
IG II2 2325A.15; and cf. 12 above). But Sthenelus
(TrGF 32) and Spintharus (TrGF 40) were also
active in this period, and there may have been
other tragic poets whose name began with sigma
of whom we know nothing (cf. on Hera[cleides?]
in 7, and on Callistratus in 14).
118 chapter two

SEG XXVI 203 (= Hesperia 40 [1971] 302–5, No. 8)

Each poet presents two plays, both performed by (Item 8) titles of third-place poet’s plays in
the same actor, and the beginning of the entry dative;
for 364/3 BCE contains no reference to a perfor- (Item 9) ὑπε(κρίνετο) followed by name of third-
mance of an “old” tragedy. The festival in ques- place poet’s actor; and
tion is therefore most likely the Lenaea, making (Item 10) ὑποκρίτης followed by name of victori-
this part of the same catalogue as IG II2 2319 ous actor, followed by notice ἐνίκα (cf. IG II2
Cols. II–III. There, however, only two playwrights 2319 Col. III.17).
compete in both 420/19 and 419/18, whereas the
contest in 364/3 BCE (the results of which are Each column of IG II2 2323 contained 108–132
recorded here in Col. II) featured three, as appar- lines, depending on the size of the hand. If we
ently did the contest referred in the upper por- assume that the column-height is approximately
tion of Col. I. the same here, the entries in Column I ought to
The entries are cast in a standard form: belong roughly twelve years earlier, in the mid-
370s BCE. Were the column-length an exact mul-
(Item 1) ἐπί + archon’s name in genitive; name of tiple of ten, the archon name in Col. I.12 would sit
victorious poet; precisely opposite an archon name in Column II.
(Item 2) titles of victorious poet’s plays in dative; Since the archon names in Col. II are located in
(Item 3) ὑπε(κρίνετο) followed by name of victori- lines 7 and 17, the number of lines in each column
ous poet’s actor; must instead (assuming no other disruptions)
(Item 4) name of second-place poet followed by have been some multiple of ten, plus five. The
notice δεύ(τερος); number of lines per column is thus most likely
(Item 5) titles of second-place poet’s plays in either 115 or 125, putting the contest-record that
dative; begins at Col. I.12 in 376/5 or 375/4 BCE.
(Item 6) ὑπε(κρίνετο) followed by name of sec- The results for 364/3 BCE include explicit indi-
ond-place poet’s actor; cations of the rankings (Col. II.10, 13), and Col. I.8
(Item 7) name of third-place poet followed by seemingly does as well, allowing a similar indica-
notice τρί(τος); tion to be restored in Col. II.3 for 365/4 BCE.
 the didascaliae: seg xxvi 203 (= hesperia 40 [1971] 302–5, no. 8) 119

20. SEG XXVI 203 (Agora I-7151; photo courtesy of the Agora Excavations, American School of Classical Studies at ­Athens)

Technical Description Gray “Hymettian” marble; broken on all sides and

back; chipping along left side appears to be rela-
Agora I-7151. tively recent.
H 0.182; W 0.220; T 0.102; LH 0.005–0.007 (ο, θ Editions: Camp (1971); Mette (1977) 146–7; Pickard-
0.004). Cambridge (1988) 359–60.

Col. I
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - τρ]ί
[ - - - ]ις
120 chapter two

10 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ἐπὶ - - Καρκί?]νος
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]στηι
[ - - - ]ία[ς]

Col. II
[....].[ - - - ]
[ὑπε :] Ἡφαι[στίων]
[Νι]κ̣ όμαχος [τρί]
Ἀμυμώνηι Τ[ - - - ]
5 ὑπε vacat
ὑπο : Ἡφαιστίω[ν]
ἐπὶ Τιμοκράτο̣υ[ς - - - ] (364/3)
Οἰνοπίωνι Ἑκρ̣[ - - - ]
ὑπε : Ἄρηξις
10 Θεοδωρίδης δεύ :
Μηδείαι Φαέθοντ[ι]
ὑπε : Ἀνδροσθέ[νης]
Κλεαίνετος τ[ρί]
Ὑψιπύληι Φ[ - - - ]
15 ὑπε : Ἵππαρ[χος]
ὑπο : Ἄρηξ[ις]
ἐπὶ Χαρι̣κ̣[λείδου - - - ] (363/2)

Epigraphical Notes Prosopographical Notes and Comments

Col. II
1. The dotted space contains the bottom tip of
a vertical.
3. Dotted kappa: the bottom tip of the vertical is
preserved; there is the possible tip of the lower
diagonal.
7. Dotted omicron: center is completely gouged
out; theta is possible.
8. Dotted rho: only the bottom of the vertical sur-
vives.
14. Psi is corrected from an originally cut chi.
17. Dotted iota and dotted kappa: only the tops
of the verticals survive.
Col. I
16 is certainly the final letters of a title in the
dative, and 12 must therefore preserve the end of
the name of the victorious poet, most likely Carci-
nus II (TrGF 70 T 2), who took the prize eleven
times at the City Dionysia (IG II2 2325A.43), first
sometime in the 380s–370s BCE. 9 must accord-
ingly be the final letters of another set of titles in
the dative, from the previous year; and 8 can be
restored [τρ]ί (cf. Col. II.13). 17 must be an actor’s
name ending in -ίας and is most naturally associ-
ated with IG II2 2325H.28 ᾿Αμεινίας (tragic actors
victorious at the Lenaea; four lines before Arexis
and Hephaestion).
 the didascaliae: seg xxvi 203 (= hesperia 40 [1971] 302–5, no. 8) 121
Col. II
2, 6. Hephaestion (the victorious actor in 365/4
BCE) is PAA 489345; Stephanis #1123. The pres-
ence of his name here provides a firm date for
IG II2 2325H.33, and the fact that he was victori-
ous only once at the Lenaea then allows Arexis
(whose victory in 364/3 BCE must have been his
second) to be restored at IG II2 2325H.32 (thus
Camp in the editio princeps).
3. Nicomachus (the third-place poet in 365/4
BCE) is PA 10932; PAA 716200 ~ 716205; TrGF 36.
According to the Suda (ν 397 = test. 1), he “para-
doxically” defeated both Euripides and Theognis
(TrGF 28), which presumably means simultane-
ously and thus at the City Dionysia, and may well
also suggest that he was strikingly young at the
time. At any rate, Nicomachus must have begun
to stage plays sometime before Euripides’ death
in 407/6 BCE, putting the performance referred
to here very late in his career. Perhaps there
were instead two tragic poets who shared a name;
the mid-fifth-century tragic actor Nicomachus
(IG II2 2325B.3) might then be another mem-
ber of the family from a previous generation. In
any case, no fragments of his (or their) plays are
preserved.
4. For Amymone (a daughter of Danaus, and the
mother of the villain Nauplius by Poseidon, who
saved her from a satyr but then raped her him-
self ), the subject of Nicomachus’ first tragedy,
see [Apollod.] Bib. 2.1.5; Hyg. fab. 169, 169a; Gantz
(1993) 207–8; LIMC I.1.742–3.
7. Timocrates (PA 13749; PAA 887640) is attested
elsewhere only as the eponymous archon for this
year (e.g. IG II2 1436.20). The victorious poet’s
name originally stood in the second half of the
line.
8. For Oenopion, a son of Dionysus and Ariadne
who blinded Orion after Orion raped his daughter
Merope, see Hes. fr. 148a; [Apollod.] Bib. 1.4.3;
Gantz (1993) 116, 269; LIMC VIIIl.1.920–1.
9, 16. Arexis, who acted for the victorious poet
and himself took the actors prize in 364/3 BCE
(contrast 365/4 BCE, when the set of plays in
which Hephaestion performed took third place
but he nonetheless took the actor’s prize) is PAA
161580; Stephanis #297. The reference to his vic-
tory here allows his name to be restored at IG II2
2325H.32 (O’Connor #545; see 2, 6 on Hephaes-
tion).
10. Theodorides, the second-place poet in 364/3
BCE, is TrGF 78a; PAA 505805. No fragments of
his plays are preserved.
11. Medea (for whom, see Gantz [1993]) 358–73;
LIMC VI.1.386–7) was Helios’ granddaughter,
while Phaethon (for whom, see Diggle [1970]
3–32; Gantz [1993] 31–4; LIMC VII.1.350) was his
son, and both made use of his sun-chariot; per-
haps this theme tied the two tragedies together.
12. Androsthenes, Theodorides’ actor, is PAA
128985; O’Connor #30; Stephanis #182. He was
victorious once at the Lenaea in 369/8 BCE or
earlier (IG II2 2325H.29).
13. Cleaenetus, the third-place poet in 364/3
BCE, is PAA 574340; TrGF 84. Two brief fragments
of his plays are preserved, and he is mentioned
by Aeschines (1.98 = test. 2) and Alexis (fr. 268.5,
where see Arnott’s n., = test. 1).
14. Hypsipyle was the queen of Lemnos when
Jason and the Argonauts arrived there, but was
later sold into slavery and played a peripheral
part in the expedition of the Seven against The-
bes; cf. [Apollod.] Bib. 1.9.17; 3.6.4; Hyg. fab. 15; 74;
Bond (1963) 147–9; Gantz (1993) 345–6, 511; LIMC
VIII.1.645–7.
15. Hipparchus of the deme Athmone, Cleaene-
tus’ actor, is PA 7599; PAA 537695; O’Connor #256;
Stephanis #1278. He was victorious six times at
the Lenaea, first ca. 380 BCE (IG II2 2325H.27).
According to [D.] 59.26–8, he and the (dramatic?)
poet Xenocleides (PAA 731760; Stephanis #1901;
fl. 370s–340s BCE) were among Neaera’s lovers
when she lived in Corinth in the mid-370s BCE.
17. Charicleides (PA 15395; PAA 982750) is
attested elsewhere only as the eponymous archon
for this year (e.g. IG II2 109a.1).
 Chapter Three
Actors Competitions: SEG XXVI 208 (= Hesperia 7 [1938] 116–18, no. 22) and IG II2 2324
Both these texts appear to report the results
of contests in which the only competitors are
actors, in the case of SEG XXVI 208 certainly
with revived plays. According to [Plu.] Vitae X
Orat. 841f, Lycurgus (prominent in Athenian pol-
itics from at least 338 to 307/6 BCE, and deeply
interested in the dramatic festivals) εἰσήνεγκε δὲ
καὶ νόμους, τὸν μὲν περὶ τῶν κωμῳδῶν, ἀγῶνα τοῖς
Χύτροις ἐπιτελεῖν ἐφάμιλλον ἐν τῷ θεάτρῳ καὶ τὸν
νικήσαντα εἰς ἄστυ καταλέγεσθαι πρότερον οὐκ ἐξόν,
ἀναλαμβάνων τὸν ἀγῶνα ἐκλελοιπότα (“introduced
various laws, one of which concerned the comic
actors, that they were to give a competitive per-
formance in the Theater during the Chutroi fes-
tival, and that the winner was to be added to the
list for the City Dionysia, which had previously
not been allowed, thus reviving this event, which
had been abandoned”).1 But whatever we make
of the supposed performances at the Chutroi and
their significance for the actors at the Dionysia,2
the contests referred to in these fragments are
not restricted to comedy and in fact include a
category (satyr drama) that represents not a new
set of contestants but an unexpected second
event for tragic actors. Individual revived trag-
edies and comedies were added to the program
1 The passage is discussed by Rohde (1883) 276–7, and
O’Connor (1908) 54–5 (arguing that an official list was kept
of actors eligible to compete as protagonists at the great
city festivals, and that taking the prize in the actors com-
petition at the Chutroi represented an alternative way to
have one’s name added to it). For the actors list for tragedy,
cf. Suda ν 170 νεμήσεις ὑποκριτῶν· οἱ ποιηταῖ ἐλάμβανον τρεῖς
ὑποκριτὰς κλήρῳ νεμηθέντας ὑποκρινομένους τὰ δράματα, ὧν
ὁ νικήσας εἰς τοὐπιὸν ἄκριτος παραλαμβάνεται (“allotment
of actors: The poets used to get three actors, who were
awarded to them by lot and who acted in the plays. The
victorious actor was passed on to the next year without any
further examination”).
2 For dramatic performances at the Chutroi, cf. also Hip-
polochus of Macedon ap. Athen. 4.129d, 130d; D.L. 3.56.
at the Dionysia in 387/6 (IG II2 2318.1010–11) and
in 340/39 BCE (IG II2 2318.1564–5), respectively,
apparently as exhibition events and with no indi-
cation of how the plays or the actors who put
them on were chosen. An exhibition satyr play
is part of the program in 341/0 BCE (IG II2 2320),
and while it appears to have been written by one
of the poets who staged a set of tragedies that
year, it is not difficult to believe that the event
was eventually converted into another revival.
The most likely conclusion would thus appear to
be that, by the late 3rd century at least, a qualify-
ing event for actors in each of the three dramatic
genres was held early every year, with the winner
in each genre allowed to put on the play he had
chosen at the Dionysia, and that SEG XXVI 208
and perhaps IG II2 2324 as well are fragments of
the records of those preliminary competitions.3
3 Some scholars, most recently Summa (2008), have
understood these fragments as presenting results from a
putative contest of old plays at the Dionysia. The starting
point for this interpretation are a number of Athenian hon-
orary decrees dating to the very end of the 4th century BCE
and later (e.g. SEG XXVIII 60.93–4; see Pickard-Cambridge
(1988) 82 n. 2, for additional examples), which record that
the relevant honors are to be announced during the Diony-
sia. References in these decrees to a contest of new trage-
dies, before which the honors will be announced, have been
taken to imply the existence of a contest of old tragedies
as well. The earliest such references, however, are not to
a contest of new tragedies, but to τραγωιδῶν τῶι ἀγῶνι τῶι
καινῶι (“the new contest of the tragedians”). In the late 3rd
century BCE, the formula changes to a reference to “new
tragedies” (with no mention of a contest), which need
mean nothing more than the point after the revival of a
satyr play and a tragedy but before the production of new
tragedies. Regardless of how the references in the decrees
are understood, interpreting SEG XXVI 208 as results of
contests of revivals at the Dionysia means that the revival
contests included not only tragedies, but also comedies and
satyr plays, the latter of which seem already to have become
restricted to an exhibition event by the mid-4th century
BCE. The inclusion of all three genres requires that at least
124 chapter three

one full day was added to the Dionysia, an expansion to the
festival for which we have no other evidence. More tellingly,
the official records for comedy at the Dionysia use precisely
the same formula both before (IG II2 2323a) and after (IG
II2 2323) the contest of revivals was supposedly introduced.
The demonstrable absence of any trace of such a contest in
the official records, despite the inclusion of the exhibition
of old plays, seriously undermines the hypothesis. Finally,
Summa’s conclusion that IG II2 2319–23a were inscribed as
part of her suggested expansion of the festival is based on
the erroneous assumption that the inscriptions were part of
the same structure on which IG II2 2325 was inscribed.
 actors competitions: seg xxvi 208 125
SEG XXVI 208 (= Hesperia 7 [1938] 116–18, no. 22)
The entries appear to be cast in a largely stan-
dard form:
(Item 1) ἐπί + archon’s name in genitive + notice
ἄρχον(τος);
(Item 2) notice ἀγωνοθέτης + agonothete’s name
in nominative;
(Item 3) notice παλαιᾶι κωμωιδίαι (“with an old
comedy”);
(Item 4) name of victorious comic actor, followed
by notice ἐνίκα, title of victorious actor’s play
in dative, and poet’s name in genitive;
(Item 5) name of second-place comic actor, fol-
lowed by notice δεύ(τερος), title of second-
place actor’s play in dative, and poet’s name
in genitive;
(Item 6) name of third-place comic actor, followed
by notice τρί(τος), title of third-place actor’s play
in dative, and poet’s name in genitive;
(Item 7) notice σατύροις παλαιοῖς (“with old satyr
plays”);
(Item 8) name of victorious satyric actor, fol-
lowed by notice ἐνίκα and title of victorious
actor’s play in dative;
(Item 9) name of second-place satyric actor, fol-
lowed by notice δεύ(τερος) and title of second-
place actor’s play in dative;
(Item 10) name of third-place satyric actor, fol-
lowed by notice τρί(τος) and title of third-place
actor’s play in dative;
(Item 11) notice παλαιᾶι τραγωιδίαι (“with an old
tragedy”);
(Item 12) name of victorious tragic actor, followed
by notice ἐνίκα, title of victorious actor’s play
in dative, and poet’s name in genitive;
(Item 13) name of second-place tragic actor, fol-
lowed by notice δεύ(τερος) and in one case title
of second-place actor’s play in dative; and
(Item 14) name of third-place tragic actor, fol-
lowed by notice τρί(τος) and in one case title
of third-place actor’s play in dative.
Technical Description
Both fragments are of gray “Hymettian” marble
and were found in the excavations of the Athe-
nian Agora. Βoth are broken on all sides and back,
and the relationship between them is unclear.
Editions: Meritt (1938) 116–18; Pickard-Cam-
bridge (1988) 123–4; Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 75–8;
Mette (1977) 149–52; Summa (2008).
Fragment A.
Agora I-2972; found in a Late Roman context in
Section Η (north of the Temple of Ares) of the
Agora Excavations, 8 June 1935.
H 0.22; W 0.225; T 0.07; LH 0.003–0.004.
Epigraphical Notes
1. Dotted sigma: only a trace of the bottom hori-
zontal is preserved.
6. Dotted alpha: a possible trace of the left diag-
onal is preserved.
8. [Μισα]νθρώποις Capps; [Φιλα]νθρώποις Koerte.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
1–3. Fragmentary remains of the results of
the competition for tragic actors in 238/7 BCE
(although see 4 for the date). For the second- and
third-place actors, neither the title nor the author
of the play performed is given, suggesting that
the relevant information was somehow provided
above (e.g. because all three plays were part of a
trilogy by a a single poet?); cf. fr. B.3–7.
3. Almost certainly to be restored ᾿Αριστόδημος
(PAA 168587 add.; Stephanis #331), although the
man in question is otherwise unknown.
4. Alcibiades (PA 591; PAA 121485) is otherwise
attested only as the eponymous archon for 237/6
BCE (e.g. IG II2 776.16; thus Osborne [2009] 93;
Meritt placed him in 255/4 BCE).
5. The agonothete—an elected magistrate charged
with bearing the expense of the competition—
Nicocles (PAA 714835) is otherwise unknown.
126 chapter three

Fr. A

[ ca. 12 ]ς̣
[ ca. 8 ]δ[εύτ]ε
[Ἀριστ]όδημος τρί
[ἐπὶ Ἀλ]κιβιάδου ἄρχον 237/6
5 [ἀγων]οθέτης Νικοκλῆς
[παλ]α̣ ιᾶι κωμωιδίαι
[Καλ]λίας ἐνίκα
[ . . . α]νθρώποις Διφί
[Διοσκ]ουρίδης δεύ
10 [Φάσμ]ατι Μενάνδρ
[ ca. 7 ] τρί Πτωκε͂ Φιλ
[σατύροι]ς παλαιοῖς
[ ca. 8 ]ς ἐνίκ Ἑρμεῖ
[ ca. 9 ] δεύ Ἄτλαν[τι]
15 [ ca. 8 τρί] Μαθη[ -  -  - ]
[παλαιᾶι τρα]γ[ωιδίαι]

21. SEG XXVI 208 fr. a (Agora I-2972; photo courtesy of the Agora Excavations, American School of Classical Studies at
Athens)
 actors competitions: seg xxvi 208 127
6–11. Results of the competition for comic
actors.
7. Callias (PAA 553680; O’Connor #269; Stepha-
nis #1323) also appears in the list of tragic actors
victorious at the Lenaea at IG II2 2325F.91 with
three victories, the first probably in the mid-260s
BCE or so.
8. No fragments or testimonia to Diphilus’ play
(regardless of how the title is restored) survive.
For Diphilus and his career, see IG II2 2325E.63.
9. Dioscurides (PAA 364250; Stephanis #773) is
otherwise unknown, although he might be an
ancestor of the homonymous comic poet who
took the prize once at the Lenaea ca. 180 BCE (IG
II2 2325E.115).
10. Several substantial papyrus fragments of
Menander’s Phantom (revived again in 168/7 BCE;
see IG II2 2323.412) survive.
11. Four short fragments of The Beggar-Girl (frr.
70–3), alternatively known as The Girl from ­Rhodes,
of Philemon I (for whom, see IG II2 2325E.61)
­survive.
12–15. Results of the competition for satyric
actors. There appear to be insufficient room for
the poet’s name in any of the entries, which is
perhaps to be connected with the fact that the
notice in 12 reads not “with an old satyr play” but
“with old satyr plays”, as if these were generic,
interchangeable texts.
13. A single four-line fragment of a Hermes by
Astydamas II? (TrGF 60 F 3; cf. IG II2 2318.1189)
survives and is perhaps the play in question.
14. Atlas fetched the golden apples of the Hes-
perides for Heracles, and was then tricked by
him into giving up the apples and again taking
over the task of supporting the sky (see Gantz
[1993] 410–13), which seems a likely topic for a
satyr-play.
15. The obvious restoration is Μαθηταῖς (thus
Meritt), in which case the eponymous pupils are
presumably satyrs who do an amusingly bad job
of learning whatever it is they are taught.
Fragment B.
Agora I-982; found in a 3rd-century CE well in
Section Θ (northeast of the civic offices) of the
Agora Excavations, 14 June 1933.
H 0.09; W 0.097; T 0.037; LH 0.003–0.004.
Epigraphical Notes
1. Dotted lambda: only the lower part of the left
diagonal is preserved.
3. Dotted alpha: only the bottom tip of the right
diagonal is preserved.
7. Dotted delta: only the diagonals are preserved.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
1–2. Fragmentary remains of the second- and
third-place results in the competition for satyric
actors. Meritt restored the name of the tragic
poet Menecrates (PAA 643650; TrGF 35 T 2?; see
IG II2 2318.585) in 2, although no poets’ names are
given in the results for this portion of the compe-
tition in fr. A.13–15.
3–7. Fragmentary remains of the results in the
competition for tragic actors. It is unclear whether
the poet’s name was given for the second- and
third-place results. If it was omitted, perhaps all
three plays were by Sophocles. Cf. fr. A.1–3.
5. For Sophocles (PA 12834; PAA 829200), see IG
II2 2325A.15.
6. For Ixion, see IG II2 2319 Col. III.14–15 (a trag-
edy by that name by the otherwise obscure Cal-
listratus performed in 420/19 BCE).
7. If the line is correctly restored, the actor’s name
(which must have been followed by the notice τρι)
was only 4–5 letters long. For tragedies involving
Oedipus of Thebes, see IG II2 2320 Col. II.27 (a
second-place finish with an Oedipus at the Diony-
sia in 341/0 BCE by a poet named -ocles).
128 chapter three

Fr. B

[ ca. 11–12 ]φυλ̣ [ -  -  - ]

[ ca. 10–11 ]εκρ
[παλαιᾶι τρ]α̣ γωιδίαι
[ ca. 6–7 ἐ]νίκα
5 [ ca. 7–8 Σ]οφο
[ ca. 8–9 δ]εύ Ἰξί[ονι -  -  - ]
[ ca. 7–8 Οἰ]δ̣ίπ[οδι -  -  - ]

22. SEG XXVI 208 fr. b (Agora I-982; photo courtesy of the Agora Excavations, American School of Classical Studies at
Athens)
 actors competitions: ig ii2 2324 129

IG II2 2324

Although IG II2 2324 is inscribed on marble simi- This is thus a fragment of a separate set of records
lar to that used for the Didascaliae, the individual inscribed on an unidentified wall or structure.
letters are about twice as large, and the surviving Editions (of both fragments): Wilhelm (1906a)
portions of the entries refer exclusively to actors. 86–8; IG II2 2324; Mette (1977) 135.

23. IG II2 2324 fr. a (EM 8240; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
130 chapter three

24. IG II2 2324 fr. b (EM 8241; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 actors competitions: ig ii2 2324 131

fr. a. Gray “Hymettian” marble; back with original

EM 8240. rough-picked surface is preserved; all sides bro-
H 0.16; W 0.253; T 0.108 (original); LH 0.012–0.016 ken.
(ο 0.011). Editions: Köhler (1878) 129; IG II 976.

ὑπ̣ [ε - - - ]
ὑπε Σ[ - - - ]
ὑπε Σα[ - - - ]
ὑποκρι[τὴς -   -   - ἐνίκα]

Epigraphical Notes Prosopographical Notes and Comments

1. Dotted pi: only the bottom tip of the left verti- 2. PAA 810047 add.; O’Connor #425; Stephanis
cal is preserved. #2202.
3. PAA 810885 add.; O’Connor #426; Stephanis
fr. b. #2205.
EM 8241.
H 0.189; W 0.156; T 0.108 (original); LH 0.011–
0.014.
Gray “Hymettian” marble; back with original
rough-picked surface is preserved; all sides bro-
ken; inscribed face brittle and flaking, particu-
larly in the upper part of the fragment.
Editions: IG II 1315.

[  -    -    -  ]
[        - - -     ]ι̣[ - - - ]
[      - - -    ]υρ[ - - - ]
[   - - -   ] . ερα[ - - - ]
5 [ -  -  - ]ωσμιασ[ - - - ]
[ -  -  - ]ς ἐνίκα
[ -  -  - ] vacat
[ -  -  - ]τύονι
[  -    -    -  ]

Epigraphical Notes and thus the date of the next competition, while
2. Dotted iota: only the bottom part of the verti- 2–5 are presumably parts of titles (each originally
cal survives. preceded by ὑπε + the actors name). In contrast
4. In the dotted space, there is a trace of the bot-to SEG XXVI 208, there appears to be no space in
tom part of a vertical. the rubric for the name of the agonothete.
8. The preserved letters must be the end of the
Prosopographical Notes and Comments title of a play—presumably the one with which
2–7. 6 is the final portion of the final item in an the victorious actor took the prize—in the dative;
annual entry (identifying the victorious actor). Wilhelm suggested [᾿Αμφικ]τύονι.
7 must accordingly have given the archon’s name
 Chapter Four
The Victors Lists: IG II2 2325A–H
The inscriptions conventionally referred to as
the Victors Lists (IG II2 2325, divided here into
eight separate parts, which we label A–H) are
preserved on 43 fragments of a set of architrave
blocks of white “Pentelic” marble.1 Köhler (1878)
241 reported that most of the fragments known
to him had been found on the south slope of the
Acropolis, a circumstance that has generally been
taken to suggest that the building to which the
blocks belonged stood in the sacred precinct of
Dionysus. There can in any case be no question
of any connection with the wall or structure on
which IG II2 2318 was inscribed, which dates to
the mid-340s BCE or earlier and probably stood
somewhere on the Acropolis.2 39 fragments of
the Victors Lists were known in Kirchner’s time
and are included in the version of the text that
1 Of the 43 fragments, one (SEG XLVIII 183) was once
seen and copied, but no longer exists. Fundamental treat-
ments of the material include Wilhelm (1906a) 89–166;
Capps (1899) and (1900b); Reisch (1907). Also important,
and generally more accessible, are O’Connor (1908) 45–66;
Pickard-Cambridge (1988) 112–20 (omitting some of the
more badly damaged sections of the lists); Ghiron-Bistagne
(1976) 53–62 (with particular attention to victorious actors);
Mette (1977) 159–88. For convenience’s sake, we follow the
standard convention of using Wilhelm’s designations for
the stones (see [1906a] 99), which run from a to z, and
then again from a´ to o´, but with j and j´ excluded (hence
presumably the miscount “41” in Pickard-Cambridge [1988]
116), with the order of the letters reflecting Wilhelm’s self-
consciously eccentric division of the material (considerably
improved since then; see below): a–b = tragic poets vic-
torious at the Dionysia; c = tragic poets victorious at the
Lenaea; d–h = comic poets victorious at the Dionysia; i–o =
comic poets victorious at the Lenaea; p–q = tragic actors
victorious at the Dionysia; r–w = tragic actors victorious at
the Lenaea; x–c´ = victorious comic actors, not differenti-
ated by festival; d´–o´ = unassigned.
2 For Reisch’s theory that the Didascaliae (IG II2 2319–
23a, etc.) were inscribed on the walls of the buildings whose
architrave blocks displayed the Victors Lists, see below.
appears in IG II2; two additional fragments were
published by Peppas-Delmousou in 1977. Our
reconstruction also incorporates SEG XLVIII 183,
which has not previously been associated with
this monument.
What must be the exterior face of fr. q of IG II2
2325 preserves the badly battered remains of a
commemorative agonistic inscription (IG II2 3080)
for a year in which Deinon of Aegina (Stephanis
#590, where the inscription is mistakenly cited
as “IG II2 308”) served as the pipe-player for the
victorious tribe in the boys’ dithyramb, sc. at the
City Dionysia.3 Deinon is known to have com-
peted in a festival in Delphi in either 260/59 or
256/5 BCE (SGDI 2563.28 = Nachtergael, Galates
no. 7.28), and Reisch (1907) 303 argued that the
structure on which IG II2 2325 and 3080 appeared
should in addition be associated with IG II2
2853 (also white “Pentelic” marble and from the
south slope of the Acropolis), in which an ago-
nothete announces a dedication to Dionysus in
the archonship of Anaxicrates (279/8 BCE).4 The
latter date is compatible with what we know of
the history of IG II2 2325, the original portions
of which seem to break off around 280 BCE; see
below.
The blocks on which IG II2 2325 appeared were
inscribed with eight separate lists, offering the
names of the poets and actors who took the prize
at the City Dionysia and Lenaea, in the order in
which these men achieved their first victory at
3 IG II2 3080 a.3–5 [᾿Ακαμ]αντὶς π[αίδων ἐνίκα] / [Δ]είνων
Αἰγινή[της ηὔλει] / Κλεάριτος ᾿Αρκὰς [ἐδίδασκε].
4 IG II2 2853 [ὁ δεῖνα - - - δ]ώρου Φρεά[ρ]ριος [Διονύ]σωι
ἀ[ν]έθηκεν / [ - - - καὶ ἀγω]νοθέτης [γενόμενος· ’Αναξ]ικράτης
ἦρχεν. Summa (2003), esp. 299–302, argues for a connection
with the pride resulting from a general revival in Athens’
political fortunes in the 280s BCE.
134 chapter four

the festival in question, and with the individual’s
name followed by his lifetime-total number of
victories at that festival. The headings of the lists
of tragic actors victorious at both contests (IG II2
2325B.1 and H.1) and of comic poets victorious
at the Lenaea (IG II2 2325C.1–2) are preserved,
and suggest that the material was divided in the
first instance by festival, with the name of the
festival omitted after the first mention of it, and
that poets were listed before actors within each
festival-genre group.5 The original stone-cutter,
at least, presented the material in columns of
17 lines apiece, with a few lines occasionally left
blank at the foot of a column (e.g., in the list of
comic poets victorious at the Lenaea at IG II2
2325C.33–4). Although many columns have been
lost completely, the number that are missing can
generally be determined; the overall total appears
to have been around 60. Kirchner numbered the
columns (both preserved and restored) of each
section independently but maintained continu-
ous line-numbers throughout, while excluding
vacats and lost columns and lines from his count
even when the precise number of such columns
or lines could be known. The result is a text that
is both difficult to understand and incapable
of accommodating new fragments when they
appear, as has happened in the last generation
and may happen again. We accordingly pres- • The first hand ends at IG II2 2325C.83 and F.83,
ent these instead as eight separate inscriptions,
each with its own set of line-numbers. We have
nonetheless retained the order of the sections
proposed by Reisch (1907) 301–2, and followed,
in his own way, by Kirchner in IG II2:
• tragic poets victorious at the City Dionysia
(2325A; remains of four columns, one restored,
with two to three columns lost at the end)
• tragic actors victorious at the City Dionysia
(2325B; remains of four columns, one restored,
with approximately four columns lost at the • The second hand ends at IG II2 2325F.95 (line
end)
5 Thus Wilhelm (1906a) 96.
• comic poets victorious at the City Dionysia
(2325C; remains of seven columns, one restored,
probably representing the full extent of the
catalogue)
• comic actors victorious at the City Dionysia
(2325D; remains of four columns, one restored,
with most likely one column lost at the end)
• comic poets victorious at the Lenaea (2325E;
remains of eight columns, probably represent-
ing the full extent of the catalogue)
• comic actors victorious at the Lenaea (2325F;
remains of seven columns, three restored,
probably representing the full extent of the
catalogue)
• tragic poets victorious at the Lenaea (2325G;
remains of three columns, one restored, with
three to four columns lost at the end)
• tragic actors victorious at the Lenaea (2325H;
remains of eight columns, probably represent-
ing the full extent of the catalogue)
The surviving portions of three of the eight lists
(IG II2 2325A, B and G) preserve material that
dates exclusively to 300 BCE or earlier and is
entirely in the hand of the original stone-cutter.
The remaining lists feature additions by other
hands, consistent with a series of updatings:
and a new hand begins in both cases in the
next line. This must represent the end of the
original lists, inscribed most likely in 279/8 BCE
(see above) but in any case, on the prosopo-
graphical evidence, sometime in the 280s–270s
BCE or so, and the beginning of the first set
of updatings. The original hand also breaks
off at points compatible with this date within
missing portions of the lists in IG II2 2325D
(between lines 30 and 43), E (between lines 67
and 86) and H (between lines 75 and 94).
96 is lost), and a third hand appears at IG II2
2325F.97; the prosopographical evidence sug-
gests that the entries at this point date to the
260s­–250s BCE or so. This date is compatible
with changes of hand within missing portions
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325a–h 135
of the lists in IG II2 2325.C (between lines 85
and 93), E (between lines 100 and 103) and
H (between lines 101 and 115), and perhaps
in IG II2 2325D as well (between lines 51 and
60, although lines 60–8 are so fragmentary
that no firm conclusions can be drawn in
this case).
• The preserved portions of only two lists, IG
II2 2325C and E, continue past the 190s–180s
BCE or so. The third hand breaks off at IG II2
2325F.114 (mid-180s BCE?); there are no entries
in the fourth hand. The third hand breaks off
at IG II2 2325C.102 (ca. 180s BCE), and a fourth
hand appears at IG II2 2325C.111 (ca. 150s BCE).
The third hand similarly breaks off at IG II2
2325E.118 (ca. 190s BCE), and a fourth hand
appears at IG II2 2325E.128 (ca. 170s BCE).
• The final entries in both IG II2 2325C and E
probably date to the 150s–140s BCE or so.
Like both the Fasti and the Didascaliae, therefore,
the Victors Lists must have been updated period-
ically, in this case first in the 260s–250s BCE or so
(adding names of new victors since the original
inscription, and presumably updating life-time
totals for men who already appeared in the list,
where necessary); then again in the 180s–170 BCE
or so; and finally—perhaps for the last time—in
the 140s BCE or so, which is also the point at
which the fragments of the Didascaliae break off,
and which may accordingly represent the end of
the competitions.
The Restoration
1. The Lists
Enough information is preserved about at least
one person mentioned in each individual frag-
ment or set of joined fragments of IG II2 2325 to
allow the vast majority to be assigned to one of damas I (TrGF 59) rather than Astydamas II, the man listed
four basic categories:
• Tragic poets: fragments a, b, e´ + c
• Tragic actors: fragments d´, f ´, p, q, r + s + t +
u+v+w
• Comic poets: fragments d + e, f + g, SEG XLVIII
183, h + n´, i + k + l + n, m, k´ + l´ + o + MDAI(A)
92 (1977) 229–38 (SEG XXVI 207)
• Comic actors: fragments b´ + c´, i´, m´, x, y +
z + a´ + MDAI(A) 92 (1977) 238–43 (SEG XXVI
207)
Only fragments g´ and h´ cannot be placed
securely. Overlapping names or approximate
periods of coverage within these categories fur-
ther allow all but a few of the fragments, thus
parsed, to be securely assigned to either the
City Dionysia or the Lenaea lists; the few frag-
ments (excluding frr. g´ and h´) that cannot be
assigned to a particular festival on this basis can
be securely placed through the reconstruction of
the structure.
• The initial victories by tragic poets recorded
in fr. a belong to the first half of the 5th cen-
tury BCE, a period for which we have no other
evidence for competitions in tragedy at the
Lenaea. In addition, Aeschylus and Polyphras-
mon (TrGF 7) appear in an order that matches
that for the victories in 473/2 and 472/1 BCE
recorded at IG II2 2318.6, 17. Fr. a must accord-
ingly be part of the City Dionysia victors’ list.
Astydamas II (TrGF 60; victorious at the City
Dionysia in 373/2 BCE, according to IG II2
2318.1189) seems to be included in both fr. b
and frr. e´ + c, so one of these fragments must
belong with fr. a as part of the City Dionysia
list, while the other must be part of the Lenaea
list.6 Because the bottoms of both fr. a and b fea-
ture very shallow anathyrosis smoothed with a
claw chisel (not a universal feature of the frag-
ments), the simplest conclusion is that these
6 Were the Astydamas who appears in fr. e´ + c Asty-
above him might be Menecrates (TrGF 35), and both fr. b
and frr. e´ + c might belong to the City Dionysia list. But
frr. e´ + c preserve portions of another column to the left
of the one that includes Astydamas’ name, which moves
fr. b much too far to the right for this restoration to be
possible.
136 chapter four
two fragments belong to the City Dionysia list,
while frr. e´ + c are part of the Lenaea list.
• Frr. p and r + s + t + u + v + w both preserve
the heading ὑποκριτῶν τραγικῶν, and the sixth
through eighth names on fr. p appear in the
same order also on frr. r + s + t + u + v + w
but are there the beginning of the list. Hera-
cleides, whose name comes first in the list on
fr. p but can have been no higher than sixth on
frr. r + s + t + u + v + w, was victorious at the
City Dionysia in 448/7 BCE (IG II2 2318.286),
where we know that the actors competition
began sometime between 451/0 and 448/7
BCE. Fr. p must therefore represent the begin-
ning of the City Dionysia list, while frr. r + s +
t + u + v + w must represent the beginning of
the list for the Lenaea, where the competition
apparently began a decade or so later. Fr. f ´,
on the one hand, and frr. d´ and v (the latter
from the Lenaea list), on the other, include a • The preserved portions of IG II2 2318, which
number of the same names, and fr. d´ must
accordingly be another section of the Lenaea
list and fr. f ´ must be another section of the
Dionysia list. The lists on frr. q and o´ might
in theory belong to either festival, but recon-
struction of the structure on which the lists are
inscribed allows these fragments to be placed
in the Lenaea list (see below).
• Many of the names of comic poets in the sec-
ond and third columns of frr. d + e also appear
in the first column of frr. i + k + l + n, which
preserves a portion of the heading and thus
represents the beginning of that list. The com-
petitions whose results are recorded in frr.
d + e must accordingly have begun at least a
generation or two before those referred to in
frr. i + k + l + n, suggesting that frr. d + e refer MDAI(A) 92 (1977) 238–43 as well must belong
to the City Dionysia (where, we know from
IG II2 2318, there were already competitions
in comedy in the late 470s BCE), while frr. i +
k + l + n refer to the Lenaea. This is confirmed
by the heading, which can be restored to refer
to “(victories) at the Lenaea”. Fr. m preserves
the right-hand portion of the third column of
frr. i + k + l + n (both margins are preserved),
and must be another part of the Lenaea records.
Frr. f + g mention Nicophon and Theopompus,
who are plausibly restored within a few lines
of one another in the second column of frr. i +
k + l + n (Lenaea); frr. f + g must therefore be
part of the City Dionysia records, and belong
at the top of the second and third columns,
whose lower portions are preserved on frr.
d + e. Frr. h + n´ mention Philemon and Apol-
lodorus, who appear in the opposite order on
fr. m (Lenaea, extending down to the mid-280s
BCE or so); frr. h + n´ must accordingly be part
of the City Dionysia records and represent the
results for most of the third and second cen-
turies BCE. Much of the same period appears
to be covered by frr. k´ + l´ + o + MDAI(A) 92
(1977) 229–38, which must then be the final
portion of the Lenaea list.
break off at 329/8 BCE, make no mention of a
competition for comic actors at the City Dio-
nysia, although one was certainly in place by
313/2 BCE (IG II2 2323a Col. I.4). Frr. i´ and x,
which refer to men known from other sources
to have been active in the first half of the
fourth century BCE, must therefore be part of
the Lenaea list. The initial victories recorded
at the top of the first column in frr. y + z + a´ +
MDAI(A) 92 (1977) 238–43 probably belong to
the 310s BCE or so; since the column lacks a
header, there must have been least one more
column in the list to the left of it, containing 17
names (or a header and 16 names), almost cer-
tainly putting the first name in the lost column
before 328/7 BCE, meaning that frr. y + z + a´ +
to the Lenaea list. As for the remaining frag-
ments, many of the names of victorious comic
actors preserved on frr. b´ + c´ also appear in
the first column of frr. y + z + a´ + MDAI(A) 92
(1977) 238–43, the second and third columns
of which appear to cover the first three-quar-
ters or so of the 3rd century BCE. Frr. b´ + c
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325a–h 137
must accordingly refer to the City Dionysia, as
must fr. m´, which lists initial victories in the
mid- to late-200s BCE and thus once overlaps
with the Lenaea list on frr. y + z + a´ + MDAI(A)
92 (1977) 238–43.
Because competitors appear at most once in each
of the two relevant sections of IG II2 2325, in the
order in which they were victorious for the first
time at one festival or the other, the lists offer
relative rather than absolute dates for the vic-
tories they record, telling us who was victorious
for the first time at a particular festival before
whom, but not when the initial victories or any
of those that followed occurred. On occasion we
know from another source that a particular indi-
vidual took the prize at a particular festival in a
particular year, e.g. that the comic poet Magnes
was victorious at the City Dionysia in 473/2 BCE
(IG II2 2318.3). In most cases, however, this gives
us only the latest possible date for the victory in
question, which might be the individual’s second
or third (etc.); the exception is for men known
to have been victorious only once, like the tragic
poets Euetes and Nothippus at the City Diony-
sia in IG II2 2325A.12, 14. Nor does the fact that
one name follows immediately after another in
a list tell us much else about the specifics of the
careers of the individuals in question. If Poet A
(with three victories) and Poet B (with two vic-
tories), for example, appear in that order in a list,
Poet A might conceivably have taken the prize in
Year 1, Poet B in Year 2. But it is at least as likely
that in Year 2 Poet A or another previous winner
was victorious again, and so again in Year 3, and
that Poet B took the prize for the first time only
in Year 4 or even later. When we have a fixed
date to coordinate with an entry in IG II2 2325,
therefore, we can generally work forward and
backward from it only in an approximate fashion:
the amount of time between each entry in the
catalogue must represent at least one year’s com-
petition but will generally represent more, given
that individual poets were victorious as many as
18 times (Sophocles at the City Dionysia, IG II2
2325A.15). So too in terms of career trajectories:
Poets A and B as described above might both
have been near the beginning of their careers
when they won for the first time. But it might
be the case instead that Poet B had already had
a long if undistinguished career before he took
the prize for the first time, after which he only
won only once more several decades later, while
Poet A was precociously brilliant, took three vic-
tories in four years, and died young. A substantial
amount of information about individual careers,
and ultimately about the larger history of the
festivals, can nonetheless be extracted from the
catalogues, as the introductions and line-by-line
commentaries on the individual lists make clear.
2. The Structure
On the basis of a mysterious 120-degree cutting in
the face of fr. o´ and the inconsistent treatment of
the preserved undersides of some of the blocks,
Reisch (1907) 303–5, argued that the architrave
on the interior face of which IG II2 2325 was
inscribed belonged to a hexagonal building that
perhaps featured one or more open sides or win-
dows. As was briefly noted in the general intro-
ductory remarks to IG II2 2319–23, etc., Reisch
further suggested that the architrave blocks on
which IG II2 2325 and 3080 are preserved and the
walls on which the Didascaliae were inscribed
were all part of the same structure. On his recon-
struction, the block over the main entrance to
the structure (“block 1”) featured the list of tragic
poets victorious at the Dionysia. Moving clock-
wise around the interior of the structure, block 2
featured the list of tragic actors victorious at the
Dionysia; block 3 featured the list of comic poets
victorious at the Dionysia; block 4 (directly oppo-
site the main entrance) featured the list of comic
actors victorious at the Dionysia; block 5 featured
the lists of comic poets and comic actors (in that
order) victorious at the Lenaea; and block 6 fea-
tured the lists of tragic poets and tragic actors
138 chapter four
(in that order) victorious at the Lenaea. The wall
beneath block 2 featured the Didascaliae for the
tragic performances at the City Dionysia (par-
tially preserved as IG II2 2320), which perhaps
ran over onto the wall beneath block 3, if that
wall merely included a window and was not left
entirely open; the wall beneath block 4 featured
the Didascaliae for the comic performances
at the Dionysia (partially preserved as IG II2
2323a; 2323), perhaps running over onto the wall
beneath block 5, if that wall too merely included
a window and was not left entirely open; and the
wall beneath block 6 featured the Didascaliae for
the comic and tragic performances at the Diony-
sia (partially preserved as IG II2 2319 Col. I; 2322;
2321, and as IG II2 2319 Cols. II–III; SEG XXVI 203,
respectively), in that order.7 The inscriptions on
the architrave blocks and the walls thus worked
together to produce a single, coherent, self-rein-
forcing account of the history of the dramatic
competitions in Athens.8
As was argued in the general introductory
remarks to IG II2 2319–23a, etc., the walls on
which the Didascaliae were inscribed were in fact
much too thick to have stood below the archi-
trave blocks that preserve the Victors Lists, and
the two sets of inscriptions must accordingly be
disassociated. The shape of the building on the
interior face of whose architrave blocks IG II2 2325
was inscribed, on the other hand, still requires
consideration. The discussion that follows—in
which we conclude that the structure (like most
Athenian buildings) was rectilinear—depends
on two main assumptions: that the Victors Lists
were organized in a fashion that kept festivals
and presumably genres together, as the titles at
IG II2 2325 B.1, E.1–2 and H.1 indicate; and that
7 Illustration at Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 27, with three
walls left open rather than with windows in the walls the end of a lateral wall; Cols. V–VIII continued
below architrave blocks 3 and 5.
8 Reisch’s basic theory has been widely accepted, even
if not always in every detail (e.g., Pickard-Cambridge [1988]
107, imagines the building to have been square). For a dif- that contained the catalogue was inscribed with
ferent suggestion, see Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 242–3.
fragments of stones with physical features that
distinguish them somehow should be associated
with one another in any attempt to reconstruct
the monument as a whole.
The commemorative inscription IG II2 3080,
part of the left-hand portion of which is preserved
on the outer side of the fragmentary architrave
block that also preserves much of the second
half of the list of tragic actors victorious at the
Lenaea (fr. q), presumably stood directly over
the door that allowed access into the structure.
The list of tragic actors victorious at the Lenaea
was thus inscribed on the architrave above one’s
head and to one’s left as one entered the struc-
ture. Fr. q has a flat top and—like fr. o´, which
contains another portion of the final section of
the same list—a finely smoothed bottom, as if
it was intended to be seen from below. The top
of frr. e + c, which contains part of Cols. II–III of
the list of tragic poets victorious at the Lenaea, is
preserved and is also flat. The obvious conclusion
is that this list was located on the architrave over
the same transverse wall, to the right of the door
as one entered the building.
Unlike fr. q and frr. e + c, many of the other
fragments of IG II2 2325 whose original tops
are preserved display deep cuttings apparently
intended to accomodate beams or the like; these
are most easily understood as coming from achi-
trave blocks at the top of lateral walls. Frr. m and
i + k + l + n, which contain portions of Cols. I–III
and Cols. III–IV, respectively, of the list of comic
poets victorious at the Lenaea, come from two
separate blocks which joined in the middle of
Col. III and which have identical cuttings of this
sort. Frr. k´ + l´ + o + p´ (all part of a single block),
on the other hand, which contain portions of
Cols. V–VIII of the same list, have flat tops like
those on fr. q and frr. e + c. This must accordingly
represent a corner: Cols. I–IV were inscribed at
the catalogue on the transverse wall that abutted
it; and the fact that the second of the three blocks
only half of Col. III and Col. IV makes it clear that
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325a–h 139
much of it was unavailable to the stone-cutter
where the third block butted up against it. Since
the architrave blocks on the transverse wall over
the door seem to have been inscribed with the
lists of tragic poets and tragic actors victorious at
the Lenaea (see above), that wall is not available
for this list, and Cols. V–VIII of the list of comic
poets victorious at the Lenaea must accordingly
have been inscribed on the left-hand architrave
block of the transverse wall at the opposite end
of the building.
Frr. y + z + a´ + q´, which contain portions of
Cols. V–VII of the list of comic actors victorious
at the Lenaea, have cuttings identical to those on
frr. m and i + k + l + n, and are thus presumably
from the same wall. As the right-hand portion of
that section of the architrave was occupied by
the first portion of the list of comic poets victo-
rious at the Lenaea, the list of comic actors vic-
torious at the Lenaea must have been inscribed
on its left hand portion, between the list of tragic
actors victorious at the Lenaea (on the transverse
wall to its left) and the list of comic actors vic-
torious at the Lenaea (to its right on the same
lateral wall).
The transverse wall over the door and the lat-
eral wall to its left as one entered the building
were thus inscribed with (in order, now reading
clockwise around the room from the right-hand
corner as one entered the room) the lists of: tragic
poets victorious at the Lenaea; tragic actors vic-
torious at the Lenaea; comic actors victorious at
the Lenaea; and comic poets victorious at the
Lenaea. The list of comic poets victorious at the
Lenaea has a two-line heading giving festival, cat-
egory and genre, whereas the list of tragic actors
victorious at the Lenaea has a one-line heading
giving only category and genre. (The other two
headings are lost.) The Lenaea catalogues thus
properly “began” with the comic poets and were
to be read counterclockwise, with the festival
designated only once.
As for the architrave blocks over the wall on
most of the other two sides of the room, fr. p,
which contains portions of Cols. I–II of the list
of tragic actors victorious at the Dionysia, has a
cutting on top that resembles those on the pre-
viously reconstructed lateral wall but that is of
different dimensions. It must therefore be part of
the second lateral wall, and because it has only
a simple one-line heading giving only category
and genre, it must be the second rather than the
first part in the Dionysia section (since the first
part must have included a notice of the festival as
well). The first part (again moving counterclock-
wise) of the Dionysia section must accordingly
have been the list of tragic poets victorious at
the Dionysia, and the third and fourth parts must
have been the lists of comic actors and comic
poets victorious at the Dionysia. If this order is
correct (see fig. 3), one could look at any two
adjacent walls and see either all the lists for one
festival9 or all the lists for one genre;10 only one
element changed from one list to the next;11 and
it was impossible to read in the wrong direction.12
We offer no specific explanation for the still
mysterious 120-degree cutting on fr. o´, but note
that (1) the cutting does not extend all the way
through the stone, but is merely a deep notch cut
into it, suggesting that it should not be treated
as evidence for the larger architectural shape of
the building; (2) it may accordingly be associated
with subsequent reuse of the stone, or may repre-
sent an attempt to repair damage of some sort.
9 Reading counterclockwise, at the Lenaea: comic poets,
comic actors, tragic actors and tragic poets; at the Dionysia:
tragic poets, tragic actors, comic actors and comic poets.
10 Reading counterclockwise, comedy: actors at the Dio-
nysia, poets at the Dionysia, poets at the Lenaea and actors
at the Lenaea; tragedy: actors at the Lenaea, poets at the
Lenaea, poets at the Dionysia, and actors at the Dionysia.
11  E.g. comic actors at the Lenaea followed by tragic
actors at the Lenaea; tragic actors at the Lenaea followed
by tragic poets at the Lenaea; tragic poets at the Lenaea
followed by tragic poets at the Dionysia; etc.
12 Sc. since if one moved clockwise from either the list
of comic poets victorious at the Lenaea or the list of tragic
poets victorious at the Dionysia, one would encounter
another list of the same sort (victorious comic poets or
victorious tragic poets, respectively), making it clear that a
different festival was in question.
140 chapter four

LENAEA COMEDY

COMIC ACTORS COMIC POETS

LENAEA F LENAEA E

TRAGIC ACTORS COMIC POETS

LENAEA H DIONYSIA C
IG II2 3080
(EXTERIOR)

DOORWAY

TRAGIC POETS COMIC ACTORS

LENAEA G DIONYSIA D

TRAGIC POETS TRAGIC ACTORS

DIONYSIA A DIONYSIA B

TRAGEDY DIONYSIA

Fig. 3. IG II2 2325A–H: Organization of lists and relative placement along architrave

Editions of the inscription as a whole (or of all

fragments known at the time or of a representa-
tive sample):13 Syll.1 425; Syll.2 723; Michel (1900)
no. 885; IG II2 2325; Pickard-Cambridge (1988)
112–16; Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 53–62; Mette
(1977) 159–88.

13 For earlier editions of individual fragments, as well as

the edition of Wilhelm (1906a), in which the fragments are
treated individually, see below under the various sections.
For Wilhelm’s discussion of the monument and inscription
as a whole, see Wilhelm (1906a) 89–99.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325a 141
IG II2 2325A (= 2325.1–20):
Tragic Poets Victorious at the City Dionysia
Although the date of the origin of the tragic
competitions at the City Dionysia is unknown,
the Marmor Parium (FGrH 239 A 46) reports that
competitions in the men’s dithyramb began in
509/8 BCE (archonship of Lysagoras), and trag-
edy was certainly first performed sometime after
that. The Marmor Parium (FGrH 239 A 50 = A.
test. 54a) also reports that Aeschylus’ first victory
(11) came in 485/4 BCE, in the archonship of Philo-
crates. What is preserved in Col. I must accord-
ingly be the beginning of the list, and a heading
matching that for comic poets victorious at the
Lenaea in IG II2 2325E.1–2, ought to be restored,
leaving room above Aeschylus for the names of
eight poets (3–10). Even if those men were all
victorious only once before Aeschylus took the
prize for the first time, meaning that there was a
new winner every year for nine years in a row—
an extremely unlikely hypothesis—the contests
must have begun no later than eight years before
485/4 BCE, i.e. in 493/2 BCE. On the assumption
that there were in fact a number of early repeat
winners, the date for the first competitions can
easily be pushed back into the last decade of the
6th century, precisely where we would expect it;
see IG II2 2325C introductory remarks, on the ori-
gins of the Dionysia comic competitions shortly
after this.
As for the poets whose names appear below
Aeschylus in Col. I, Euetes (12) must have taken
the prize in 484/3 BCE—the year after Aeschy-
lus’ first victory—or later (his sole victory); Poly-
phrasmon (13) must have taken the prize for the
first time sometime between 483/2—two years
after Aeschylus’ initial victory—and 472/1 BCE,
when he is listed as victorious at IG II2 2318.17;
and Nothippus (14) must have taken the prize
in 482/1 BCE (the year after Euetes’ victory) or
later. That Nothippus’ victory in fact belongs to
the late 470s BCE is suggested by the Marmor
Parium (FGrH 239 A 56 = S. test. 33), which puts
the first victory of Sophocles (15), who comes
immediately after Nothippus in the list, in 469/8
BCE. Aeschylus and his slightly older contempo-
raries, including Choerilus and Phrynichus, thus
appear to have dominated the scene from at least
the 480s until the late 470s BCE, when a series of
new poets took the prize. See in general 3–10.
Enough is known from other sources about the
poets listed in the middle of Col. III to put their
initial victories in the mid-370s BCE at the ear-
liest, meaning that the gap between Sophocles’
first victory (15) and Astydamas’ (44) is close to
100 years, and that a lost Col. II must be inserted
into the inscription. At least 17 of the victories in
this period belong to Sophocles, including those
in 448/7 BCE (IG II2 2318.285), 443/2 BCE (with
the set of plays that included Antigone: see IG II2
2318.345), 439/8 BCE (see IG II2 2318.393), 410/9
BCE (with the set of plays that included Philoc-
tetes: see IG II2 2318.741) and 402/1 BCE (post-
humously, with the set of plays that included
Oedipus at Colonus: see IG II2 2318.839). Even so,
28 other poets (16–42) were also victorious for the
first time during these years, including (in addi-
tion to Carcinus II, who appears just above Asty-
damas in the list [43], and many others whose
names have been lost):
• Euripides I (PAA 444550; TrGF 16), the uncle of
the far more famous Euripides II (for whom,
see below), who took the prize twice (test. 1);
• Carcinus I son of Xenotimus of the deme Thori-
cus (PAA 564125; TrGF 21), victorious in 447/6
BCE (IG II2 2318.297);
• Aristarchus II of Tegea (PAA 164515 add; TrGF
14), a contemporary of Euripides II who took
the prize twice (test. 1);
• Sophocles’ son Iophon (PA 7584; PAA 537405;
TrGF 22), victorious in 436/5 BCE (IG II2
2318.429);
• Euripides II son of Mnesarchides of the deme
Phlyeus (PA 5953; PAA 444585), victorious in
442/1 and 429/8 BCE (with the set of plays
142 chapter four

25. IG II2 2325 fr. a (EM 8188; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325a 143
26. IG II2 2325 fr. b (EM 8191; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
that included Hippolytus), and perhaps several
other times as well (see IG II2 2318.357);
• Aeschylus’ son Euphorion (PA 6079; PAA
450260; TrGF 12), who took the prize in 432/1
BCE, defeating both Sophocles and Euripides
(see IG II2 2318.477), and three other times
(festival unknown; test. 1);
• Menecrates (PAA 643650; TrGF 35), victorious
in 423/2 BCE (IG II2 2318.585);
• Sophocles II son of Iophon or Ariston of the
deme Colonus (PA 12833; PAA 829210; TrGF
62), the grandson of Sophocles I (15), victori-
ous in 388/7 BCE (IG II2 2318.1007) and 376/5
BCE (IG II2 2318.1153), and probably on other
occasions as well;
• and perhaps Ion (TrGF 19; cf. IG II2 2319
Col. III.4), a contemporary of Sophocles, Euripi­
des, and Aristophanes who is said to have been
victorious at least once, although the festival is
not specified (test. 3); Achaeus I (TrGF 20), who
took the prize once, although the festival is not
specified (test. 1); and/or Nicomachus I (TrGF
36), a contemporary of Euripides and Theog-
nis (TrGF 28) who was victorious at least once
over both of them, although the festival is not
specified (test. 1).
If the distance between Sophocles (15) and Asty-
damas (44) is about 100 years, the individuals
whose names appeared in this section of the
list must have averaged three to four victories
apiece. 20 lines separate the notice of Carcinus
II’s initial victory (43) from that of the first of the
poets whose names are partially preserved at the
bottom of Col. IV (64–8). If we assume, in the
absence of specific evidence to the contrary, that
144 chapter four

the poets in this period averaged about as many
victories apiece as those above them between
Sophocles and Astydamas, the names at the bot-
tom of Col. IV must belong at the very end of the
4th century BCE or the beginning of the 3rd, a
period about which we are, in this regard at least,
otherwise ill-informed. IG II2 2323 shows that the
City Dionysia contests continued, certainly for
comedy but presumably for tragedy as well, until
at least the mid-140s BCE, although they seem
to have moved to an every-other-year schedule
sometime late in the 3rd century. 2–3 additional
columns must accordingly have been lost at the
end of this list.
Technical Description
All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble.
Fragment a (lines 11‒17).
EM 8188; south slope of the Acropolis.
H 0.139; W 0.207; T 0.112; LH 0.010‒0.011 (φ 0.016;
ο 0.008).
The bottom is preserved and has very shallow
anathyrosis smoothed with a claw chisel; all
other sides and the back are broken.
Editions: Koumanoudes (1878a) 82–3; Köhler
(1878) 217; IG II 977a; Wilhelm (1906a) 100–3.
Fragment b (lines 42‒9, 64‒8).
EM 8191; area of the Propylaea.
H 0.217; W 0.338; T 0.258 (0.285 with moulding);
LH 0.010 (φ 0.014; ο 0.006).
The bottom is preserved and has very shallow
anathyrosis smoothed with a claw chisel; all other
sides are broken. The back is partially preserved,
including, near the top of the face, the remnants
of a large concave moulding that is presumably
part of the original finish of the block’s exterior
side. There is very little margin at the bottom.
Editions: Köhler (1880) 324; IG II 977b; Wilhelm
(1906a) 100, 103–4.

Col. I
[ἀστικαὶ ποητῶν]
[τραγικῶν]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]
1 [Αἰ]σχύλ̣ [ος - - - ] (485/4)
[Εὐ]έτης Ι
[Πο]λυφράσμ[ων - - - ] (483/2‒472/1)
[Νόθ]ιππος Ι (late 470s?)
15/5 [Σοφο]κλῆς ΔΠΙΙΙ[ - ] (469/8)
[Μέσα]τος ΙΙ̣
7 [Ἀριστ]ία̣ ς [ - - - ]
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325a 145

Col. II
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
20 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
25 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
30 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. III
35 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
40 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
8 [  6–7 ]ασ[ - - - ]
[Καρκί]νος ΔΙ (386/5‒374/3)
10 [Ἀστ]υδάμας Π[Ι]Ι[ - ] (373/2)
45 [Θεο]δέκτας ΠΙΙ
[Ἀφα]ρ̣εύς ΙΙ (369/8‒342/1)
[ . . . . ω]ν Ι
[ 7–8 ]
15 [ ca. 10 ]ΙΙ
50 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. IV
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
55 [ - - - ]
146 chapter four
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
60 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
16 Α . [ - - - ]
65 Φρ . [ - - - ]
Ομ[ - - - ]
Δι̣[ - - - ]
20 Ξ̣ [ - - - ]
2–3 columns lost
Epigraphical Notes
11. Dotted lambda: only the bottom of the left
diagonal is preserved; alpha is possible.
16. Dotted iota: the vertical is discernible along
the break; although doubtful, the possibility
exists that this vertical may simply be accidental
damage.
17. Dotted alpha: only the apex is preserved;
delta or lambda is possible.
46. Dotted rho: only the top of the letter is pre-
served; beta is just possible.
64. Following the alpha is the bottom tip of a
vertical; the possibilities are numerous.
65. Following the rho there seems to be a trace
that may be the tip of the left diagonal of an
upsilon.
67. Dotted iota: only the top tip of the vertical is
preserved; eta is equally possible.
68. Dotted xi: only the left part of the top hori-
zontal is preserved; tau also seems possible.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
1.–2. The heading is restored on the basis of IG
II2 2325E.1–2, on the assumption that tragedy, as
the older genre, was listed first in the Dionysia
records. But the possibility remains that the ini-
tial entry read simply [τραγικῶν], with the indica-
tion of festival given at the beginning of the list of
comic poets in IG II2 2325C (where see 1) instead.
In that case, there would be room for one more
early victorious tragic poet here, and for one less
early victorious comic poet there.
3.–10. Among the lost names in this section of
the list must be Choerilus (PAA 990605; TrGF 2),
who according to the Suda (= test. 1) was victori-
ous 13 times; Phrynichus the father of Polyphras-
mon (PAA 965290; TrGF 3; see 13), who according
to the Suda (= test. 1) was first victorious in Olym-
piad 511/08 BCE, but was certainly active by 494
BCE when his historical tragedy The Sack of Mile-
tus shocked and horrified his Athenian audience
(Hdt. 6.21.2 = test. 2), and took the prize in 477/6
BCE, with Themistocles (PA 6669; PAA 502610) as
his chorêgos (Plu. Them. 5.5 = test. 4); and Prati-
nas (PAA 787357 add.; TrGF 4), a contemporary
of Aeschylus and Choerilus who according to the
Suda (= test. 1) took the prize only once.
11. Aeschylus son of Euphorion of the deme
Eleusis (PA 442; PAA 116140) was first victorious
in 485/4 (Marmor Parium FGrH 239 A 50 = test.
54a). According to the anonymous Life (test. 1.51;
cf. test. 2.7), he took the prize a total of 13 times
before his death in 456/5 BCE; most of these
victories must have been at the Dionysia. Cf.
IG II2 2318.6 (victorious with the set of plays that
included Persians in 473/2 BCE), 161 (victorious
with the Oresteia trilogy in 459/8 BCE). The set of
plays that included Seven Against Thebes took the
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325a 147
prize in 468/7 BCE (test. 58a–b), as did the Sup-
pliants trilogy probably sometime in the mid- to
late 460s BCE (test. 70). Aeschylus’ sons Eupho-
rion (TrGF 12) and Euaion (TrGF 13) were also
tragic poets, as were a number of descendants of
his sister, including Astydamas II (44).
12. Euetes (PAA 430855 ~ 430860; TrGF 6) is
otherwise known only from an entry in the Suda
(ε 2766 = test. 1 [unless this refers to the equally
obscure comic poet of the same name]), which
identifies him as a contemporary of the Sicilian
comic poet Epicharmus ( fl. ca. 490–460) and of
the obscure Athenian comic poets Euxenides
(PAA 440895) and Myl(l)os (PAA 661790). If the
entry in the Suda does refer to the comic poet,
the restoration of the name here may be incor-
rect (cf. TrGF I2 p. 345). But the only other known
Athenian name that fits is Hicetes (attested twice
in the late 6th century and once in the early 5th,
always as a kalos-name, as well as once in the
mid-4th).
13. Polyphrasmon (PA 12097; PAA 782020; TrGF
7) was the son of the tragic poet Phrynichus
(TrGF 3; see introductory remarks and 3–10); he
was named after his grandfather (PAA 782015).
The initial victory referred to here belongs no
earlier than 483/2 BCE (two years after Aeschylus’
initial victory; cf. 11) and might have come as late
as 472/1 BCE, when Polyphrasmon appears as the
victorious tragic poet at IG II2 2318.17. He placed
third in 468/7 BCE, when Aeschylus took the prize
(test. 3 = A. test. 58a–b; cf. 11) and Aristias (cf. 17)
took second with a set of plays composed by his
father Pratinas (presumably deceased by then).
No fragments of Polyphrasmon’s plays survive.
14. Nothippus’ (PAA 720940; TrGF 8) initial vic-
tory might have come as early as 482/1 BCE (three
years after Aeschylus’ initial victory; cf. 11) but
can date no later than 470/69 BCE, since Sopho-
cles, whose name appears immediately after
his in the catalogue, took the prize for the first
time in 469/8 BCE (15). If the name is restored
correctly—and despite occasional doubts (e.g.
Snell on TrGF 26 T 1), no plausible alternatives
have been put forward—this might be the same
man as the otherwise unknown gluttonous tragic
playwright Nothippus (TrGF 26) who, according
to Ath. 8.344c–d, was mentioned by the comic
poets Hermippus (cf. IG II2 2325C.23) in Fates (fr.
46.3–4; perhaps 430 BCE) and Telecleides (cf. IG
II2 2325E.4) in Hesiods (fr. 17); more likely this is
a homonymous father-son or uncle-nephew pair.
The name is rare (only three other Athenian
examples, all epigraphically attested, are known).
No fragments of the plays of either Nothippus
survive.
15. According to the Marmor Parium (FGrH 239
A 56 = S. test. 33), Sophocles son of Sophilos of the
deme Colonus (PA 12834; PAA 829200) took the
prize for the first time in 469/8 BCE; Aeschylus
(11) was among the other contestants that year
(Plu. Cim. 8.7 = A. test. 57 = S. test. 36). Diodorus
Siculus 13.103.4 (= test. 85) reports that Sophocles
was victorious 18 times; the anonymous Lives give
slightly larger totals (20 according to test. 1.33, cit-
ing Carystius fr. 18, FHG iv.359; 24 according to
test. 2.10), presumably taking Lenaea victories
(cf. IG II2 2319 Col. III.12, 18) into account as
well. The number ΔΠΙΙΙ preserved on the stone is
therefore almost certainly complete, despite the
existence of room for another Ι after the break.
We otherwise know only that Sophocles was vic-
torious in 448/7 BCE (IG II2 2318.285), 443/2 BCE
(with the set of plays that included Antigone;
see IG II2 2318.345), 439/8 BCE (defeating Eurip-
ides, who offered the set of plays that included
Alcestis; see IG II2 2318.393), 410/9 BCE (with the
set of plays that included Philoctetes; see IG II2
2318.741), and 402/1 BCE (posthumously, with the
set of plays that included Oedipus at Colonus; see
IG II2 2318.836), and that he failed to take the
prize in 460/59 (behind Aeschylus) and 432/1 BCE
(behind Aeschylus’ son Euphorion). For a revival
of one of his tragedies at an undated actors con-
test, see SEG XXVI 208 fr. B.5. Sophocles’ son
Iophon (TrGF 22; cf. IG II2 2318.429) was also a
tragic poet.
16. Mesatus (PAA 647540; TrGF 11) is otherwise
known only to have taken third place behind
Aeschylus (with the set of plays that included
148 chapter four
Suppliant Maidens) and Sophocles sometime
probably in the mid- to late-460s BCE (test. 2); no
fragments of his plays have been preserved. The
victory referred to here can date no earlier than
468/7 BCE (see 15) and may well belong several
years later. Given the close chronological con-
nection of the poets in POxy. 2256 fr. 3 (= A. test.
70 [not repeated as an individual test. for S.]),
the restoration by Capps (1899) 401 n. 1, is almost
certainly correct, despite occasional doubts (e.g.
Wilhelm [1906a] 102‒3).
17. Aristias (PAA 165865; TrGF 9) was the son
of the tragic poet Pratinas (for whom, see 3–10),
with a set of whose plays he took second place
in 468/7 BCE, behind Aeschylus (11) with the
tetralogy that included Seven Against Thebes, but
ahead of Polyphrasmon (13) with his Lycurgean
tetralogy (POxy. 2256 fr. 2 = Aristias test. 3). Five
titles of Aristias’ own plays survive, as do eight
fragments (the longest of them two lines). The
victory referred to here can date no earlier than
467/6 BCE (see 15) and most likely belongs sev-
eral years after that. The restoration of the name,
generally accepted since Köhler, seems certain,
given the one fixed point of Aristias’ career and
the lack of suitable alternatives.
18–41. For some of the lost names in this sec-
tion, see introductory remarks.
35–41. Snell suggests placing frr. hˊ + gˊ (in that
order) at the top of this column; see below on
IG II2 2325G.21 and 2325 frr. inc.
42. If [ - - - ]άμας in IG II2 2325G.25 (tragic poets
victorious at the Lenaea) is restored [Ἀστυδ]άμας
(see 44), the otherwise obscure [ 6–7 ]ας[ - - - ]
referred to here (TrGF 66) is perhaps to be iden-
tified with [ - - - ]ας at IG II2 2325G.22 (TrGF 65;
victorious once at the Lenaea).
43‒6. The restorations of the names are due to
Köhler and are all generally accepted.
43. Carcinus II son of Xenocles of the deme
Thoricus (PAA 564130; TrGF 70) was a member
of a prominent theatrical family: his grandfa-
ther Carcinus I (TrGF 21; see IG II2 2318.297) and
his father Xenocles I (TrGF 33) were both tragic
poets, and his uncles are said to have danced in
his grandfather’s plays. That he was quoted by
Lysias (fr. 235 Carey) suggests that he was active
by 380 BCE at the very latest. But the date of the
initial victory referred to here can otherwise be
determined only by reference to the fact that it
must have come after the victory of Sophocles II
(TrGF 62) at the City Dionysia in 388/7 BCE (IG
II2 2318.1007) and before what the Marmor Par-
ium identifies as Astydamas II’s initial victory (sc.
at the City Dionysia) in 373/2 BCE (44). For the
family, see in general Davies (1971) 283–5. Carci-
nus II is perhaps to be restored as a victor at the
Lenaea in the mid-370s BCE at SEG XXVI 203 Col.
I.12. Nine titles and 18 fragments (the longest ten
iambic trimeters) survive.
44. Astydamas II (PA 2649; PAA 223005; TrGF
60) was a descendant of Aeschylus’ sister and
thus a member of a large, multi-generational
dramatic family (see 11); his father Astydamas I
(TrGF 59), grandfather Morsimus (TrGF 29) and
great-grandfather Philocles I (TrGF 24) were also
tragic poets, as was his brother Philocles II (TrGF
61). The Marmor Parium (FGrH 239 A 71) places
Astydamas’ first victory (sc. at the City Dionysia)
in 373/2 BCE, which is broadly consistent with
the dates we have for Carcinus II (43), Theodec-
tas (45) and Aphareus (46). The Suda (α 4264 =
test. 1.3–5) claims that Astydamas II was victori-
ous a total of 15 times. The competitive record
partially preserved here shows that at least seven
and at most nine of these victories were at the
City Dionysia, including those in 348/7, 342/1 and
341/0 BCE recorded at IG II2 2318.1477; 2320 Col.
II.5; 2318.1651, respectively. Astydamas must thus
have taken the prize between six and eight times
at the other festival, and his name is almost cer-
tainly to be restored in the Lenaea list at IG II2
2325G.25 [ - - - ]άμας. Numerous titles and frag-
ments of his plays, including substantial papyrus
remains of his Hector, survive.
45. According to the Suda (θ 138 = test. 1), Theo-
dectas son of Aristandros of Phaselis (PAA 504645;
TrGF 72) was a student of Plato (d. 347 BCE) and
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325a 149
Isocrates (d. 338) and gave a funeral oration for
Mausolus in 353 BCE. The Suda also reports that
he died at age 41, and the initial victory referred to
here can thus scarcely have come before the late
370s BCE, consistent with the dates we have for
Astydamas II (44) and Aphareus (46). Nine titles
and and 18 fragments (along with two dubia) of
his plays are preserved.
46. Aphareus (PAA 242100; TrGF 73) was adopted
by the orator Isocrates (436–338 BCE) when the
latter was already an old man. According to
[Plu.] Mor. 839c (= test. 2.16–19), Aphareus was
active in the tragic competitions between 369/8
BCE (consistent with his position in the list here
sometime in the 360s) and 342/1 BCE, and took
the prize twice at the Lenaea. See Davies (1971)
247. No titles or fragments of his plays survive;
but see IG II2 2320 Col. I.13.
47. TrGF 74. For a defence of Snell’s tentative res-
toration [Ἀμύμω]ν (TrGF 123), see Wilson (1997).
64. TrGF 107. Perhaps to be restored Αἰ�[̣ αντίδης]
(Wilhelm [1906a] 104) (TrGF 102, a member of the
Alexandrian tragic Pleiad; cf. 66).
65. TrGF 108. Perhaps to be restored Φρύ�̣[νιχος]
(Snell 1966 [already Φρ[υν- - - ] Köhler]) = Phryni-
chus II (TrGF 212; undated).
66. TrGF 109. Perhaps to be restored ῞Ομ[ηρος]
(Köhler) = Homerus of Byzantium (TrGF 98;
another member of the tragic Pleiad [cf. 64]),
in which case one might also possibly restore
Δι[ονυσιάδης] (Wilhelm [1906a] 104) = TrGF 105
(also a member of the Pleiad) in 67.
67. TrGF 110; but see 66.
68. TrGF 111. Perhaps to be restored Ξ[ενοκράτης]
(Wilhelm [1906a] 104) = TrGF 122, 3rd century.
150 chapter four

IG II2 2325B (= 2325.21–38):

Tragic Actors Victorious at the City Dionysia

We know from IG II2 2318 that the tragic actors
competition at the City Dionysia began some-
time between 451/0 and 448/7 BCE, around the
time when comedies were first performed at the
Lenaea. In the much better-preserved list of tragic
actors victorious at the Lenaea (IG II2 2325H),
individuals appear to average only two victories
apiece. If, in the absence of specific evidence to
the contrary, we assume that the same was true
at the City Dionysia, and also that Aeschylus (65),
Gorgosthenes (67) and Epameinon (68) belong
to the 320s–300s BCE, as seems likely from their
positions in the Lenaea list (IG II2 2325H.60, 71,
73 with nn.), there should be 65–70 actors above
Gorgosthenes in this list. An entire column (= Col.
III) must thus be missing, and the partially pre-
served names in the middle of Col. II must date
to ca. 400–390 BCE. IG II2 2323 shows that the
City Dionysia contests continued (certainly for
comedy, but presumably for tragedy as well) until
at least the mid-140s BCE, although they seem
to have moved to an every-other-year schedule
sometime late in the 3rd century. Approximately
4 additional columns must accordingly have been
lost at the end of this list.

27. IG II2 2325 fr. p (EM 8214; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325b 151

28. IG II2 2325 fr. f ´ (EM 8207; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

Technical Description Editions: Kirchhoff (1888) 316, no. 12; IG II 977e';

All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble.
Fragment p (lines 1–11, 22–7).
EM 8214; Acropolis.
H 0.259; W 0.427; T 0.251 (excluding moulding);
LH 0.010 (ο 0.007).
The top is partially preserved, including a roughly
smoothed strip along the inscribed face; the other
sides are broken. The back is partially preserved,
including moulding.
Wilhelm (1906a) 137–40.
Fragment f ´ (lines 65–8).
EM 8207; south slope of the Acropolis.
H 0.069; W 0.203; T 0.045; LH 0.010 (ο, θ 0.007).
The bottom is preserved and has a very finely
smoothed surface; all other sides and back are
broken.
Editions: Koumanoudes (1878b) 291–2; Köhler
(1880) 324–5; IG II 977t; Wilhelm (1906a) 159.

Col. I
21 ὑποκριτῶν τρ̣[αγικῶν]
Ἡρακλείδ̣[ης - - - ] (451/0‒448/7)
Νικόμαχο[ς - - - ]
Μυν̣νίσ[κ]ο[ς - - - ]
5/25 Σαώνδας[ - - - ]
Ἄνδρ̣ω̣ν̣ ΙΙ
[Χ]αι[ρ]έ[σ]τ[ρ]ατος̣ Ι̣[ - ]
[Μεν]ε̣[κ]ρά[τ]η̣ [ς Ι]ΙΙ
29 [Λεπ]τί[νης - - - ]
152 chapter four

10 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]ΙΙΙ
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. II
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
20 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
30 Νι[ - - - ]
Θε̣[ - - - ]
[ . . ]σ[ - - - ]
25 Ἀθη[νο - - - ]
Ἀρι[ - - - ]
35 Ι̣[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
30 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. III
35 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
40 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
45 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325b 153

50 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. IV
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
55 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
60 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
65/35bis [Αἰσχ]ύ�̣λ̣[ος - - - ]
[Πλ]εισθένης Ι
[Γο]ργοσθένης Ι⟦I⟧
38 [Ἐπα]μείνων ΙΙ
Approximately 4 columns lost

Epigraphical Notes
1. Dotted rho: only the upper left corner is pre-
served; beta is possible. Rest. Köhler.
2. Dotted delta: only the bottom tip of the left
diagonal is preserved; alpha and lambda are pos-
sible, chi less so.
4. Dotted nu: traces of the right vertical are all
that survive.
6. Dotted rho: the vertical is preserved, as are
possible traces of the loop; beta is possible. Dot-
ted omega: only the top part of the circle sur-
vives. Dotted nu: traces of the left vertical are all
that survive.
7. Dotted sigma: only the right portion of the
upper horizontal is preserved; possibilities include
gamma and tau. Dotted Ι: an apparent trace of
the bottom part of the vertical is preserved.
8‒9. Rest. Wilhelm.
8. Dotted epsilon: the top horizontal and traces
of the vertical are preserved; gamma is also pos-
sible. Dotted eta: only the upper portions of the
verticals are preserved.
22. Νε̣[οπτόλεμος] Capps (1899) 403; Νί[κανδρος]
O’Connor.
23. Dotted epsilon: traces of the bottom hori-
zontal are preserved; possibilities include sigma.
Θε[όδωρος] or Θε[τταλός] Capps (1899) 403.
25. Ἀθη[νόδωρος] Köhler.
26. Ἀρι[στόδημος] Capps (1899) 403.
27. Dotted iota: only the bottom portion of a
vertical is preserved; possibilities include tau and
upsilon.
65. Dotted upsilon: only the bottom of the ver-
tical is preserved; possibilities include iota and
tau. Dotted lambda: only the bottom tips of the
diagonal are preserved; alpha is possible, chi less
so. Rest. Capps (1899) 402 n. 2.
66. Rest. Wilhelm (1906a) 159.
67. No traces of rho are visible, although the chip
at the edge may be relatively recent. Within the
154 chapter four
erasure iota is clearly visible but seems to be the
erased letter rather than a correction of another
letter. Rest. Reisch (1907) 306.
68. No trace of the alpha is preserved, but the
break is such that only a letter of that shape is
possible. Rest. Capps (1899) 402 n. 2.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
2. Heracleides (PAA 484720; O’Connor #214;
Stephanis #1074) appears at IG II2 2318.286 as the
victor in the City Dionysia tragic actors contest
in 448/7 BCE. He might perhaps be restored at
IG II2 2325H.7.
3. Nicomachus (PAA 716190; O’Connor #366;
Stephanis #1850) is otherwise known only from a
scholion on Ar. Ra. 1506 (which merely describes
him as a tragic actor); but cf. SEG XXVI 203
Col. II.3–4.
4. Mynniscus (PAA 661940; O’Connor #351;
Stephanis #1757) must be Mynniscus of Chalcis,
who acted for Aeschylus (d. 456/5 BCE; = A. test.
1.57–8). He might also be identified with the Myn-
niscus who was the victorious actor at the City
Dionysia in 423/2 BCE (IG II2 2318.586), the Myn-
niscus of Chalkis mentioned at Pl. Com. fr. 175.2
(final quarter of the 5th c.; see Pirrotta [2009]
ad loc.), and/or the tragic actor Mynniscus who
according to [Arist.] Poet. 1461b34–5 expressed
contempt for his successor Callippides (for
whom, see IG II2 2325H.7). More likely a father-
son or grandfather-grandson pair is in question.
See also IG II2 2325H.6, where the name might be
restored in the list of tragic actors victorious at
the Lenaea sometime in the 420s or so.
5. Saondas (PAA 813985; O’Connor #434; Stepha-
nis #2244) is otherwise unknown.
6. Andron (PAA 129135; O’Connor #31; Stephanis
#185) is otherwise unknown.
7. Chaerestratus (PAA 974470; O’Connor #502;
Stephanis #2591)—whose position sixth in this
list dates his initial victory to 446/5 BCE at the
very earliest, although it probably belongs a
decade or so later—appears at IG II2 2325H.2
as the first winner in the actors competition at
the Lenaea, with a single victory, and is followed
there (if the restorations are correct) in order
by Menecrates (IG II2 2325H.3; cf. 8) and Lep-
tines (IG II2 2325H.4; cf. 9). Although this may be
coincidence, it is tempting to conclude that the
tragic actors competition at the Lenaea began
somewhat later than it did at the City Dionysia
and thus featured what may have been an emerg-
ing new generation of actors.
8. Menecrates (PAA 643655; O’Connor #329;
Stephanis #1651) is almost certainly to be restored
also at IG II2 2325H.3 as the second name in the
list of tragic actors victorious at the Lenaea; cf.
7. He might also be the otherwise obscure tragic
poet (PAA 643650; TrGF 35) victorious at the City
Dionysia in 423/2 BCE (IG II2 2318.585), or a mem-
ber of his family; and cf. IG II2 2325G.25.
9. Leptines (PAA 603410; O’Connor #314, 511a;
Stephanis #1537) is probably to be restored also
at IG II2 2325H.4 as the third name in the list of
tragic actors victorious at the Lenaea; cf. 7.
22.–27. There are 12 missing lines, and thus at
least 12 and more likely about 24 years between
these entries and the final name preserved in
Col. I, suggesting that the initial victories recorded
here date to the late 400s BCE or so.
22. O’Connor #357. Probably to be identified
with Nicostratus (PAA 717820; O’Connor #368;
Stephanis #1861), who may appear in the Lenaea
victors list in the mid-410s or so (IG II2 2325H.8)
and is perhaps to be restored as having taken the
prize in the actors contest in 400/399 BCE (IG II2
2318.864). The obscure Nicandrus (O’Connor
#362; Stephanis #1809) is also possible. Neoptol-
emus of Scyros (PA 10647; PAA 706615; O’Connor
#359; Stephanis #1797; see IG II2 2325H.30) is at
least a generation too late, and restoration of his
name here is explicitly—and correctly—rejected
by O’Connor (1908) 120, against Capps (1899) 403,
and Wilhelm (1906a) 138.
23. PAA 501290; O’Connor #226. Perhaps to be
identified with Theodorus (PAA 506155; O’Connor
#230; Stephanis #1157) from the Lenaea list (IG II2
2325H.26).
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325b 155
24. O’Connor #89 (reading [Ἀ]σ[ - - - ] with
Wilhelm [the square brackets are erroneously
reversed in O’Connor]); Stephanis #844 (reading
Ἐπ[ - - - ] with Mette).
25. PAA 108400; O’Connor #11. Much too early
to be identified with Athenodorus (PAA 110960;
O’Connor #13; Stephanis #75), who was victori-
ous at the Dionysia in 343/2 (IG II2 2318.1538) and
330/29 BCE (IG II2 2318.1704–5), and who com-
peted there also in 342/1 (IG II2 2320.8, 10, 15).
26. PAA 162495; O’Connor #54; Stephanis #298
(1). Perhaps to be identified with Aristodemus
of Metapontum from the Lenaea list (IG II2
2325H.23). Stephanis identifies the individual
referred to here with Ari[ - - - ] at IG II2 2325H.48,
but the latter belongs several generations later.
27. PAA 700050; Stephanis #1766 (1) (both read-
ing Ν̣ [ - - - ]). Perhaps to be identified with Hip-
parchus (PA 7599; PAA 537695; O’Connor #256;
Stephanis #1278) from the Lenaea list (IG II2
2325H.27) or with the Ischandrus (PAA 542555;
O’Connor #264; Stephanis #1303) referred to at D.
19.10 as an associate of Aristodemus (cf. 26) and
as Aeschines’ “deuteragonist”.
28–64. IG II2 2419 (4th century BCE), although
seemingly not part of this inscription, presents
what appears to be a list of tragic actors victo-
rious at the Dionysia (thus Snell [1966] 12ff.):
Tol[m-] (PAA 892880; Stephanis #2432), Euc[-]
(PAA 434135; O’Connor #165; Stephanis #953; cf.
IG II2 2325H.39), Poly[-] (O’Connor #401; Steph-
anis #2087; cf. IG II2 2325H.41), Archia[s] (PAA
212145; O’Connor #87; Stephanis #439; cf. IG II2
2325H.43), Peithid[emus] (PAA 770870; Stephanis
#2034), Oneto[r] (PAA 747950; Stephanis #1951),
Philetu[s] (O’Connor #474; Stephanis #2491; cf. IG
II2 2325H.46), Epicrates (PAA 393505; Stephanis
#860) and Mnesitheu[s] (PAA 656130; O’Connor
#341; Stephanis #1723; cf. IGUR 224.2). These
names presumably belong somewhere in this
large lacuna, most likely at the bottom of Col. III
or the top of Col. IV. For the possibility that fr. hˊ
might form the top of Col. III, see below on 2325
incerta. For discussion, see also Ghiron–Bistagne
68–72.
65. Aeschylus (PAA 115980; O’Connor #16; Steph-
anis #93) is restored here from IG II2 2325H.71,
where he appears two lines above Epameinon
(cf. 68) in the Lenaea list.
66. Pleisthenes (PAA 775180; O’Connor #400;
Stephanis #2069) is said by Zenobius (Ath. 1.61
p. 355 Miller) to have played Ajax in a play by Carci-
nus II (TrGF 70 F 1a; fl. 380s/370s BCE; see IG II2
2325A.43). But this was presumably a revival.
67. Gorgosthenes (PAA 281205; O’Connor #109;
Stephanis #561) is probably to be restored also
in the Lenaea list at IG II2 2325H.60 (310s BCE?).
Apelles ( fl. second half of the 4th century BCE) is
supposed to have painted him (Plin. Nat. 35.93),
which helps determine a rough date for the por-
tion of both lists in which he appears.
68. Epameinon (PAA 389825; O’Connor #169;
Stephanis #848) can be restored also in the
Lenaea list at IG II2 2325H.73.
156 chapter four
IG II2 2325C (= 2325.39‒87bis):
Comic Poets Victorious at the City Dionysia
Anon. περὶ κωμωιδίας III.18 (p. 8 Koster = Magnes
test. 3.5) reports that Magnes was victorious a
total of 11 times (cf. Ar. Eq. 521). This is an unusu-
ally large number of victories, which must all have
been at the City Dionysia, since there were no
Lenaea contests in most of the first half of the 5th
century (see below); Magnes’ name can accord-
ingly be restored in 8, in the middle of Col. I, and
his initial victory dated to 473/2 BCE or earlier
on the basis of IG II2 2318.3. We know from IG
II2 2318.158 that Euphronius was victorious at the
City Dionysia in 459/8 BCE, and his name can
accordingly be restored with a fair degree of con-
fidence four lines below Magnes’, in 12; the fact
that the entry specifies that Euphronius had only
one victory allows this entry to be dated precisely.
So too, we know from IG II2 2318.294 that Cal-
lias was victorious at the City Dionysia in 447/6
BCE, and from IGUR 216.1–6 (see Appendix) that
this victory probably came near the beginning
of his career, since the other preserved dates for
his plays are all from the late 440s and 430s BCE.
All of this suggests that Callias’ name is to be
restored at the bottom of Col. I, with two victo-
ries, the first at least five years after Euphronius
(since the names of four other poets intervene)
and probably more. IG II2 2318.426 shows that
Hermippus’ initial victory at the festival (23, in
the middle of Col. II) must come no later than
436/5 BCE; this tends to confirm Dobree’s con-
jecture putting Pherecrates’ first victory (22, just
above Hermippus) in 438/7 BCE. Because there
were originally three poets (whose names have
been lost) between Pherecrates and Teleclides
at the top of Col. II, Teleclides’ first victory must
have come at least four years before Pherecrates’,
i.e. in 442/1 BCE or earlier. This fits neatly with
the date of 447/6 BCE or earlier established for
Callias at the bottom of Col. I.
Much of the chronological structure of the
preserved portion of Col. I and the top of Col. II
can thus be recovered, and this in turn allows
an approximate date for the first competition of
comic poets at the City Dionysia to be calculated.
The Marmor Parium (FGrH 239 A 46) reports that
competitions in the men’s dithyramb began (sc. at
the Dionysia) in 510/8 BCE (archonship of Lysago-
ras). The competitions for tragic poets seem to
have begun shortly after that (see IG II2 2325A
introductory remarks), and Aristotle reports that
comedy received official state support in the form
of a chorus “somewhat later” than tragedy did
(Po. 1449b1–2). Col. I of IG II2 2325C must accord-
ingly represent the remains of the beginning of
the list of victorious comic poets, and if a one-
line heading (1) is restored, there is room for six
names (2–7) above Magnes (8). If Magnes’ first
victory (8) came in 473/2 BCE (see above) and
none of the playwrights who preceded him in the
list took the prize a second time before he was
first victorious—i.e. if there was a new winner
every year for the first seven years of the com-
petition, which seems exceedingly unlikely—the
competition might have begun as late as 479/8
BCE. But the Suda reports that Chionides staged
a comedy (διδάσκειν, doubtless referring to a vic-
tory, as in IG II2 2318 passim) “eight years before
the Persian Wars”, which is on inclusive reckon-
ing 487/6 BCE.14 The Fasti certainly had at least
one more column and probably two to the left of
what is now conventionally called Col. I, which
gave the results of the competitions at the City
Dionysia before 473/2 BCE. If there were two
additional columns of 140 lines apiece, with com-
petitions initially only in dithyramb and tragedy,
the space can be filled on the assumptions that
(a) the record began in 502/1 BCE (which might
then be the year in which the choregic system
was instituted), and (b) comedy was added to the
program in 487/6 BCE.15 Be all that as it may, the
14 This has become the standard handbook date, but on
these grounds alone.
15 I.e. 15 years with contests in dithyramb and tragedy
only @ 8 lines/year = 120 lines; plus 14 years with contests in
comedy as well @ 11 lines/year = 154 lines; plus 6 lines to fill
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325c 157
preserved portion of Col. I of IG II2 2325C shows
that the Suda’s date for the origin of the comic
competition must be approximately correct.
As for the middle of Col. II, no serious doubt
is possible about the restoration of Φερ[εκράτης]
(22), ῞Ερμ[ιππος] (23) and Εὔ[πολις] (25). Eupolis,
an almost exact contemporary of Aristophanes,
began competing in 430/29 BCE (anon. de Com.
III.33, p. 9 Koster = test. 2.6) and was certainly
victorious in 422/1 BCE, defeating Aristophanes’
Peace (hyp. III Ar. Pax = test. 13c). The name
above his, in 24 (423/2 BCE or earlier), is most
naturally restored ᾿Αρι[στοφάνης] (thus Kaibel);
since Aristophanes’ first comedy, Daitalês (“Ban-
queters”) took second place at an unspecified fes-
tival in 428/7 BCE (Dait. test. iv–vi) and Clouds
(City Dionysia 424/3) also failed to take the
prize, and since we know of no other City Dio-
nysia performances this early in Aristophanes’
career,16 the victory in question would seem to
have been with Babylonians (City Dionysia 427/6
BCE).17 But other evidence that Babylonians took
the prize is lacking, and Aristophanes is known
to have presented the play (like Daitalês, Acha-
rnians, Birds and Lysistrata) διὰ Καλλιστράτου
(“with Callistratus as producer”). Wilhelm there-
fore restored ᾿Αρι[στομένης] (who according to
IG II2 2325E.5 took the prize twice at the Lenaea,
with his first victory coming around 440 ΒCΕ),
allowing Eupolis’ first victory to be pushed back
as far as his initial appearance at the festival in
430/29 BCE, thus reducing the otherwise surpris-
out the entry for 473/2 BCE partially preserved in col. I in
fr. a; = 280 lines or two columns (thus Capps [1903] 25–9).
But other restorations are possible, and the lack of frag-
ments from this section of the Fasti and the uncertainty
about the exact number of lines in the columns makes
extensive treatment of the matter pointless.
16 Acharnians, Knights and Wasps were all Lenaea plays.
17 Gilula (1989) 336, rejects the assignment of Baby-
lonians to the City Dionysia at ΣREΓ Ar. Ach. 378 on the
ground that this might be an inference from Ach. 502–5. But
even if it is, 502–5 could not be clearer: unlike Acharnians,
“last year’s comedy”—i.e. Babylonians—was staged not at
the Lenaea but at a different festival, which a large number
of non-Athenians attended (cf. Ar. Pax 45–6 with Olson ad
loc.) and which must therefore be the City Dionysia.
ing gap between Hermippus’ first victory at the
City Dionysia (23; 436/5 BCE or earlier) and that
of the poet whose name follows his in the list. Wil-
helm (1906a) 110–15, then restored Κα[λλίστρατος]
in the line below Eupolis, and four lines below
that Φιλ[ωνίδης] (another of Aristophanes’ pro-
ducers, for Wasps, Amphiaraos and Frogs). If
this interpretation is correct, Aristophanes did
not appear in IG II2 2325C at all, unless he won
a victory in his own name very late in his career
(recorded somewhere in the lost Col. III).
Wilhelm’s reconstruction (revived by Gilula in
1989)18 ought probably to be rejected for a number
of reasons.19 The implied audience for IG II2 2325,
first of all, would seem to be more interested in a
summary accounting of the accomplishments of
great figures from Athens’ literary and dramatic
past than in pedestrian or technical questions
such as which wealthy man paid for the produc-
tion of the plays20 or—even less significant—
whose name the plays were staged under. The
heading of the list of comic victors at the Lenaea
(IG II2 2325E.1–2), at any rate, certainly refers to
“poets” with no reference to “producers”. The use
of theatrical producers, moreover, appears to
have been unexceptional by the final quarter of
the 5th century: Eupolis produced Autolycus διὰ
18 Gilula fails to respond to the decisive objections
of Oellacher and Geissler (see next note) to Wilhelm’s
hypothesis, and offers no positive reason for restoring Aris-
tomenes rather than Aristophanes in the City Dionysia vic-
tors list except that (pp. 337–8) Suda α 3922 (= Aristomen.
test. 1) dates Aristomenes to Olympiad 432/28 BCE and
Capps—whose authority Gilula pointedly rejects in all
other matters—in one of his articles followed Wilhelm in
insisting that all such references must be to initial victo-
ries at the City Dionysia (Capps [1907] 186). There is in fact
no evidence that Aristomenes was ever victorious at the
City Dionysia, and even if he was, no reason why his name
should displace Aristophanes’ rather than being placed
higher up in Col. II of the victors list. Cf. the verdict of
Lewis (1978) 184: “it is folly to seek an alternative restora-
tion to ᾿Αρι[στοφάνης]”.
19 See Oellacher (1916) 101–18; Geissler (1925) 1–12.
20 A point already made by Pickard-Cambridge (1988)
85 n. 9, and repeated at Lewis (1978) 184; contrast the more
comprehensive and “official” records in IG II2 2318, which
include the names of chorêgoi.
158 chapter four
Δημοστράτου in 421/20 BCE (Ath. 5.216d = test. 15);
Plato Comicus apparently used producers a num-
ber of times at the beginning of his career (test.
7); and Anaxandrides seems to have used one at
least once near the end of his (IGUR 218.9 = test.
*5.9). Despite all that, there is no certain instance
of a man not known to have been a poet appear-
ing in the Victors Lists. Perhaps most importantly,
[Plu.] Mor. 839c reports that Aphareus (TrGF 73
T 2.18–19) was twice victorious at the City Dio-
nysia using Dionysius as his producer and twice
victorious at the Lenaea δι᾿ ἑτέρων. But at IG II2
2325A.46, [᾿Αφα]ρεύς is recorded as having been
awarded the prize twice in the tragic competi-
tions at the Dionysia, with his first victory occur-
ring sometime in the 360s BCE, leaving no doubt
that the poet’s name was the one given in the
lists.
Aristophanes thus almost certainly belongs in
line 24 of Col. II, in 427/6 BCE, between Hermip-
pus and Eupolis, while lines 26 and 30 are prob-
ably to be restored Κά[νθαρος] and Φιλ[ύλλιος]
or Φιλ[όνικος], respectively. Cratinus—who had
taken the prize for the first time at the City Dio-
nysia already in 450/49 BCE at the latest, and
whose name therefore appears much earlier in
the list, in 14—was victorious again there, for
the sixth and final time, in 424/3 BCE (hyp. II.2
Ar. Nu. = test. 7c), as either Hermippus or Can-
tharus was in 423/2 BCE (IG II2 2318.582). Eupolis’
first victory at the City Dionysia (25), if it did not
come in 422/1 BCE with Flatterers, must therefore
belong to 426/5 or 425/4 BCE. Aristophanes, in
any case, took the prize before Eupolis did, and
his success will have been all the sweeter and
more striking because, the catalogue of City Dio-
nysia victors now makes clear, no new poet had
been ranked first at the festival since Hermippus
almost a decade earlier.21
The initial victories of the men whose names
appear in lines 35–43 at the top of Col. III date
21 Indeed, the later one pushes Aristophanes’ initial vic- Cratinus (14), whereas in the Lenaea list he is 15
tory, the more striking it will have been.
to the very end of the 5th century BCE and the
beginning of the 4th; the absence of Araros, vic-
torious in 388/7 BCE with his father Aristophanes’
Cocalus (cf. IG II2 2318.1004), strongly suggests
that they all belong before that. Poseidippus in
line 80 of Col. V first competed in 291/0 BCE or
later; several individuals who appear immediately
below him were active in the 280s BCE; and the
change of hand in line 84 probably dates all the
initial victories recorded in lines 83 and above
to 279/8 BCE or earlier (see IG II2 2325 general
introductory remarks). One complete column
(our Col. IV) is thus almost certainly missing in
this section of the inscription.
As for the final portions of the list, IG II2 2323
shows that the City Dionysia contests continued
for comedy until at least the mid-140s BCE, but
on an irregular every-other-year basis beginning
sometime in the 210s at the latest but certainly
after 328/7 BCE (cf. IG II2 2318.1706). This change
must have compressed the entries in the victors
lists that followed considerably, since there were
now only five victories per decade rather than
ten. That the irregular alternate-year schedule
was adopted in the mid-200s BCE is suggested
by the exceptionally large number of years that
appear to be covered by Col. VI, given that Aris-
tocrates’ initial victory in 100 belongs in ca. 210
BCE or earlier (IG II2 2323.16), while Laines, who
follows Aristocrates in 101, was still active in 186/5
BCE (IG II2 2323.269). The badly battered Col. VII
may thus represent the conclusion of the list, in
which case Χα[ - - - ] in 111 is perhaps Χα[ιρίων]
(according to IG II2 2323.513, active in 155/4 BCE).
Cf. IG II2 2325D introductory remarks.
SEG XLVIII 183 must belong close to the top
of Col. III, just beneath frr. f + g. Apollophanes
(40) and Xenophon (43) bear the same relation
to one another as they do in the Lenaea list
(IG II2 2325E.23, 26 respectively), and placing
the fragment where we have puts Apollophanes
15 lines below Hermippus (23, ignoring the two
vacats at the bottom of Col. II) and 25 lines below
lines below Hermippus (IG II2 2325E.8) and 17

the victors lists: ig ii2 2325c
159

29. IG II2 2325 frr. d + e (EM 8195 + 8196; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
160 chapter four

30. IG II2 2325 frr. f + g (EM 8197 + 8198; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

the victors lists: ig ii2 2325c
161

31. IG II2 2325 frr. h + n´ (EM 8213 + 8190; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
162 chapter four

lines below Cratinus (IG II2 2325E.6). Although Editions: fr. g: Köhler (1878) 244; IG II 977k.
the fragment could perhaps stand one line higher frr. f + g: Wilhelm (1906a) 106–7, 115–17.
(reading [ . . . ]ι[ ca. 5? ]ΙΙ in 38) or several lines
lower,22 this must be approximately its correct SEG XLVIII 183 (ca. lines 39–43).
position. Lost; known only from the transcription of Pit-
takys, who saw the inscription on the Acropolis.
Pittakys’ majuscule transcription escaped notice
Technical Description
until appearing as ARMA 3, no. 230, whose edi-
tors tentatively—although surely correctly—
All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble.
identified it as a list of victorious comic poets,
but did not associate it with IG II2 2325.
Fragments d + e (lines 5–17, 22–34).
Editions: Pittakys (1835) 299; ARMA 3, no. 230.
EM 8195 + 8196; south slope of the Acropolis.
H 0.278; W 0.614; T 0.175; LH 0.011‒0.012.
Fragments h + n´ (lines 80‒5, 93‒102, 111‒16).
The bottom is preserved and has been smoothed
EM 8213 + 8190; south slope of the Acropolis.
with a claw chisel (a narrow strip abutting the
H 0.214; W 0.501; T 0.162; LH 0.010‒0.011 (in the
inscribed face has been smoothed completely).
lower part of the middle column, i.e. lines 234‒8,
The left edge is seemingly original but is rough-
LH can be as much as 0.012‒0.013).
picked only. The top, right and back are broken.
The two fragments seem to be non-joining,
There is no margin at the bottom.
although the fact that they are encased in plas-
Editions: fr. d: Koumanoudes (1878a) 83–4; Köhler
ter prohibits certainty. The bottom is preserved
(1878) 244; IG II 977i. frr. d + e: Wilhelm (1906a)
and is very finely smoothed, possibly with a claw
106–15.
chisel; all other sides and back are broken. The
inscribed face is smoothed with a claw chisel in
Fragments f + g (lines 18‒19, 35‒8).
places. The columns are not precisely aligned.
EM 8197 + 8198; south slope of the Acropolis.
The letters in the middle column (lines 93‒102)
H 0.101; W 0.209; T 0.068 (excluding moulding);
seem somewhat crudely cut, while those in the
LH 0.010 (ο, θ 0.007).
right-hand column (lines 111‒16) are more care-
The top, roughly smoothed but now very worn,
fully cut but tend to be rather thick.
is preserved; all other sides and back are broken.
Editions: fr. h: Wilhelm (1906a) 117–22. fr. n´:
Along the top of the inscribed face is a moulding
Koumanoudes (1878a) 82; Köhler (1878) 250; IG II
(H 0.023) now largely broken away.
977c´; Wilhelm (1906a) 165–6.

22 If this fragment is placed a few lines lower, it is pos-

sible that Araros appeared just above it, down-dating the
initial victories listed here to after 388/7 BCE.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325c 163

Col. I
39–40 [ποητῶν κωμικῶν]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5/41 [ ca. 9–10 ]Ι̣Ι
42 [ ca. 9–10 ]ς Ι
[ - - - ]
[Μάγνη]ς̣ ΔΙ (473/2 or earlier)
45 [ 5–6 ]α̣ς Ι[ . ]
10 [ . . . . . . ]νης Ι
[ . . . . . . ]ς Ι
[Εὐφρόν]ιος Ι (459/8)
[Ἐκφαν]τίδης ΙΙΙΙ
50 [Κρατῖ]νος ΠΙ
15 [Διο]πείθης ΙΙ
[Κρά]της ΙΙΙ
[Καλλία]ς ΙΙ (454/3–447/6)

Col. II
[Τηλεκλεί]δης ΙΙΙ
55 [ ca. 9–10 ]ς Ι
20 [ ca. 10–11 ]
[ - - - ]
56 Φερ[εκράτης - - - ] (438/7)
Ἕρμ[ιππος - - - ] (436/5?)
Ἀρι[στοφάνης - - - ] (427/6)
25 Εὔπ̣ [ολις ΙΙΙΙ] (426/5–425/4)
60 Κά[νθαρος - - - ] (425/4–423/2)
Φρύ[νιχος - - - ]
Ἀμ[ειψίας - - - ] (421/0–415/4)
Πλά�̣ [των - - - ]
30 Φιλ[ -  -  - ]
65 Λύκ[ις - - - ]
66 Λεύ[κων - - - ]
vacat
vacat

Col. III
35/67 Νικοφῶν̣[ - - - ]
Θεόπομπ[ος - - - ]
Κ̣ [η]φισό[δωρος - - - ]
70 [ . . . ]ι[ - - - ]
[ ca. 9? ]ΙΙ
164 chapter four

40 Ἀπολλοφάνης [ - - - ]
Λυσίας Ι
Θεοχάρης ΙΙΙ
Ξενοφῶν Ι (389/8 or earlier)
[ - - - ]
45 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
50 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. IV
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
55 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
60 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
65 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. V
[ - - - ]
70 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
75 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325c 165

80/71 [Πο]σεί�δ̣ ιππ̣ο̣ς ⟦Π⟧ (291/0 or later)

Σατυρίων Ι
[Ἀ]πολλόδωρος ΙΙ
[Φιλ]ήμων ⟦ΠΙ⟧
75 [Δαμ]όξενος Ι
85/76 [Φοινικ]ίδης ΙΙ

Col. VI
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
90 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
77 [ ca. 7 ]ο̣ς Ι̣
[ . . . . ]θ̣εος Ι
95 [Ποσεί]διππος ΙΙ
80 [ 4–5 ]υ̣κ[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
81 Νίκαρχος Ι
Νικόμαχος Ι
100 Ἀριστοκράτης [ - - - ]
Λαίνης ΙΙΙ
85 Φιλήμω[ν - - - ]

Col. VII
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
105 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
110 [ - - - ]
86 Χα[ - - - ]
87 Δη̣ [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
115/86bis Πο[ - - - ]
87bis Οὐ�̣[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
166 chapter four
Epigraphical Notes
5. Dotted iota: only the bottom tip of the verti-
cal survives; aside from other possibilities, nu (i.e.
the last letter of the poet’s name) is just barely
possible.
8. Dotted sigma: only the right part of the top
horizontal is preserved.
9. Dotted alpha: traces of both diagonals are
preserved. In the gap at the end of the line, there
is just enough room for an iota if the restoration
were thought to be warranted.
17. The break is such that [ - - - ο]ς seems the
most likely restoration.
25. Dotted pi: the right vertical is missing; gamma
is possible.
29. Dotted alpha: only the bottom portion of the
left diagonal is preserved; lambda is possible.
33‒4. The vacats seem to be in an erasure. In
what would be the second letter space in 33, there
seems to be a faint chi, although these traces may
merely be scratches on the surface of the stone.
In what would be the first letter space in 34, there
seem to be traces of a vertical that is centered
enough that iota is the most likely possibility.
35. Dotted nu: only the bottom portion of the
left vertical is preserved.
37. Dotted kappa: the top half of the vertical is
preserved, and there may perhaps be a trace of
the beginning of the upper diagonal preserved
along the break.
80. Dotted iota: only the bottom tip of the verti-
cal is preserved. Dotted pi: only the left vertical is
preserved. Dotted omicron: only the bottom part
of the circle is preserved; theta is possible. The
erasure in which Π is cut is large enough to have
originally contained ΙΙΙΙ (cf. line 219).
83. ΠΙ is cut in an erasure that originally con-
tained ΙΙΙΙ.
93. Dotted omicron: there is a trace of the bot-
tom of the circle along the break. Dotted iota:
only the bottom portion of the vertical survives;
pi is possible.
94. Dotted theta: only the right portion of the
circle is preserved; omicron is possible, omega
less so.
96. Dotted upsilon: only the end of the right
diagonal is preserved; kappa or chi is possible.
112. Dotted eta: only the top tip of the left verti-
cal is preserved.
116. Dotted upsilon: there is an apparent faint
trace of the left diagonal; chi is possible.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
8. Magnes (PA 9651; PAA 630950) is described by
anon. de Com. III.11–12, 18, pp. 7–8 Koster (= test.
3.4–6) as one of the most important “Old Comic”
poets, with eleven victories, hence the restora-
tion of his name here. He appears at IG II2 2318.3
as the victorious comic poet at the City Dionysia
in 473/2 BCE (not necessarily for the first time).
Nine titles, many of them only conjectures based
on the colorful description of his career at Ar.
Eq. 522–3, where Aristophanes treats him as a
pioneer in the comic genre, and eight short frag-
ments of his plays survive.
12. The otherwise obscure Euphronius (PA 6106;
PAA 451045) is known to have been victorious at
the City Dionysia in 459/8 BCE (IG II2 2318.158),
and his name can accordingly be restored with
considerable confidence here.
13. Ecphantides (PA 4654; PAA 384735) is oth-
erwise undated, although an anonymous com-
mentator on Aristotle (= test. 4) misleadingly
describes him as “the oldest of the Old Comic
poets”. Cratinus (14) mocks him in fr. 502, sup-
posedly for having his plays ghost-written by a
slave named Choerilus (thus Hsch. ε 1439 = test.
6), which means little more than that Cratinus
and Ecphantides were theatrical rivals (cf. Cratin.
fr. 361.1). Two titles and six unrevealing fragments
of Ecphantides’ plays survive. For one of his vic-
tories (recorded, however, long after the fact), see
IG II2 3091.1–2.
14. Cratinus son of Callimedes (PA 8755; PAA
584385) is said by the Suda (κ 2344 = test. 1) to
have been victorious a total of nine times. Since
we know from IG II2 2325E.6 that he took the
prize three times at the Lenaea, he is certainly
to be restored here with six victories at the City
Dionysia. His Storm-tossed took second at the
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325c 167
Lenaea in 426/5 BCE behind Aristophanes’ Acha-
rnians (test. 7a), and his Satyrs took second at
the Lenaea in 425/4 BCE behind Aristophanes’
Knights (test. 7b). But Cratinus took the prize—
most likely for the final time—with his Wineflask
at the City Dionysia in 424/3 BCE, defeating Aris-
tophanes’ ill-received Clouds (test. 7c). 29 titles
and 514 fragments of Cratinus’ plays survive. See
in general Bakola (2010).
15. Diopeithes (PAA 363125) is otherwise
unknown, but the restoration, made by Capps
(1899) 396 n. 1, seems certain, since this is the only
name that fits the space and is not exceedingly
rare. Conceivably this Diopeithes is an ancestor
of Menander son of Diopeithes (for whom see
2325E.60).
16. Crates (PA 8739; PAA 583995; O’Connor #307;
Stephanis #1490) is said to have begun his career
as an actor for Cratinus (14) and only later to have
become a poet (anon. de Com. III.26–7, 29–30 p.
8 Koster = test. 2.5–6, 8–9; Σ Ar. Eq. 537a = test.
3). Aristotle (Po. 1449b7–9 = test. 5) describes him
as the first Attic poet to have abandoned simple
invective (the ἰαμβικὴ ἰδέα) in favor of connected
plots, while Aristophanes at Eq. 537–40 (= test.
6) includes him among the pioneers of the genre
along with Magnes (8) and Cratinus. Ten titles
and 60 fragments of Crates’ plays survive. See
Bonanno (1972).
17. Callias son of Lysimachus (PA 7829; PAA
553915) was victorious at the City Dionysia in
447/6 BCE (IG II2 2318.294); since the other dates
for his plays preserved in IGUR 216.1–6 (= test.
4; see Appendix) are all from the late 440s and
430s BCE, this was probably near the beginning
of his career. Although Callias might be placed
in 11 (above Euphronius, with an initial victory
in 460/59 BCE or earlier), this seems implausibly
early, given what we know of his career, while
placing him in 20 or 21 (below Telecleides and
above Pherecrates) would mean that there were
almost no new victorious poets not just in the
430s BCE but in the 440s as well. Callias is thus
almost certainly to be restored here, at the bot-
tom of Col. I, with his initial victory coming no
earlier than 454/3 BCE. Eight titles and 40 frag-
ments of his plays survive. See Imperio, in Belar-
dinelli (1998) 189–254.
18. Telecleides (PA 13558; PAA 881310) also
appears in the Lenaea list at IG II2 2325E.4.
19. Perhaps to be restored [Ξενόφιλο]ς; cf. IG II2
2325E.3.
21. Perhaps to be restored [Λύσιππος Ι - - - ]; cf.
Appendix on IGUR 216.7–8.
22. Pherecrates (PA 14195; PAA 920230; O’Connor
#473; Stephanis #2469) was first victorious, sc.
at the City Dionysia, in 438/7 BCE, according to
anon. de Com. III.29, p. 8 Koster (= test. 2.6) as
emended by Dobree (ἐπὶ Θεοδώρου: ἐπὶ θεάτρου
MSS); the same source reports that he began his
career as an actor, like Crates (16). He seems to
have continued to stage plays until the mid-410s
(fr. 64 with K–A on ᾿Ιπνὸς ἢ Παννυχίς). Pherecrates
also appears in the Lenaea victors list at IG II2
2325E.7, immediately before Hermippus (cf. 23).
The name is extremely rare, and he is perhaps to
be identified with the man (PAA 920240) whose
death as a battle casualty in 412/1 BCE is recorded
at IG I 3 1192.150 = Agora XVII 22.150; cf. Olson
(2010). 18 titles and 288 fragments of Pherecrates’
plays survive.
23. Hermippus son of Lysis (PA 5112; PAA 404205)
was victorious at the City Dionysia in 436/5 BCE
(IG II2 2318.426), presumably for the first time
unless he also took the prize the previous year.
His career must have continued until at least 420
BCE, since his Female Bread-sellers (frr. 7–12) ridi-
cules the demagogue Hyperbolus (PA 13910; PAA
902050; d. 411 BCE). Hermippus also appears in
the Lenaea Victors List at IG II2 2325E.8, imme-
diately after Pherecrates (cf. 22). His brother
Myrtilus (IG II2 2325E.10) was also a comic poet.
Ten titles and 94 fragments of Hermippus’ plays
survive.
24. Aristophanes son of Philippus of the deme
Cydathenaeon (PA 2090; PAA 175685) was born
most likely in the mid-440s BCE. The initial vic-
tory at the City Dionysia recorded here was almost
certainly with his Babylonians in 427/6 BCE; see
introductory remarks. He was first victorious at
168 chapter four
the Lenaea with Acharnians in 426/5 BCE, and his
name must thus have stood immediately below
that of Eupolis (IG II2 2325E.11; cf. 25) in that
list. Aristophanes’ sons Ararus (IG II2 2318.1004),
Philippus (IG II2 2325E.35) and Philetaerus(?)
were all comic poets.
25. Eupolis son of Sosipolis (PA 5936; PAA 442535)
was first victorious at the City Dionysia sometime
in the mid-420s BCE after Aristophanes’ initial
triumph there in 427/6; see introductory remarks.
His name also appears in the Lenaea victors list at
IG II2 2325E.11, four lines below Pherecrates (22),
three lines below Hermippus (23), and two lines
below Phrynichus (27), and directly above Aris-
tophanes (cf. introductory remarks; 24). Accord-
ing to the Suda (ε 3657 = test. 1.2–3), Eupolis took
the prize a total of seven times; as IG II2 2325E.11
records that he was victorious three times at the
Lenaea, his other four triumphs must have been
at the Dionysia. Eupolis’ competitive record ends
sometime in the mid- to late 410s BCE, and the
Suda (ε 3657 = test. 1.3) reports that he died “ship-
wrecked in the Hellespont during the war against
the Spartans.” As the name is relatively rare, he
is probably to be identified with the war-casu-
alty (PAA 442520) of 412/1 BCE (IG I3 1190.52).23
17 titles and 494 fragments of his plays are pre-
served. See in general Storey (2003).
26. Cantharus (PA 8247; PAA 563810) appears to
have taken the prize at the City Dionysia in 423/2
BCE (IG II2 2318.582; perhaps the initial victory
referred to here), and his name can accordingly
be restored with some confidence here. Five titles
and 13 unrevealing fragments of Cantharus’ plays
are preserved.
23 The editors of IG I3 remain unconvinced of the iden-
tification of the poet and the man in the casualty list:
“dubium est an hic Eupolim poetam habeamus, quem ad
Hellespontum pugnantem occidisse ‘Suidas’ refert; nomen
vulgare fuit et alii alia de Eupolidis morte rettulerunt.”
But while LGPN records 18 other occurrences of the name,
only two of these are possibly contemporary with the poet.
For the various accounts of Eupolis’ death, see Nesselrath
(2000) 234–5.
27. Phrynichus son of Eunomides (PA 15006; PAA
965270) also appears in the Lenaea victors list at
IG II2 2325E.9, immediately below Pherecrates
(cf. 22) and Hermippus (cf. 23). The Suda (φ 763
= test. 1.2), dates his first play to Olympiad 436/2
BCE, and elsewhere (π 1708 = test. 4) describes
him as a contemporary of Aristophanes (24),
who mentions him disparagingly at Nu. 554 and
Ra. 14, and of Plato Comicus (29). Phrynichus’
career continued until at least 405 BCE, when
his Muses took second place at the City Dionysia
(test. 7b) behind Aristophanes’ Frogs. Ten titles
and 93 fragments of his plays survive. See in gen-
eral Harvey (2000) 91–134.
28. Ameipsias (PA 708; PAA 123630) was com-
peting at the City Dionysia already in 424/3 BCE
(test. 5a), when Cratinus (14) placed first, almost
certainly for the last time. Ameipsias took the
prize himself in 415/4 BCE with Comasts (possi-
bly the initial victory referred to here), defeating
Aristophanes’ Birds (test. 5b; IG II2 2318.678). His
name is perhaps to be restored also in the Lenaea
list at IG II2 2325E.24, although his initial victory
at that festival must then have come relatively
late in his career. Seven titles and 39 fragments
of his plays survive. See Totaro, in Belardinelli
(1998) 133–94.
29. Plato Comicus (PA 11845; PAA 774805) must
have been staging plays—although not neces-
sarily under his own name—already in the mid-
420s BCE, since he claims (fr. 115) to have been
the first to “wage war on Cleon” (d. 422), i.e. even
before the production of Aristophanes’ Knights in
425/4 BCE. Τhe Suda (π 1708 = test. 1.1–3) calls
him a contemporary of Aristophanes, Phrynichus,
Eupolis and Pherecrates, and prosopographical
references (e.g. frr. 65; 189.4; 201) suggest that
his career extended into the early 380s BCE. See
Pirrotta (2009) 39–41. Hartwig (2010) suggests that
Plato’s earliest plays may have been staged under
Cantharus’ (26) name. 31 titles and 301 fragments
of Plato’s comedies survive.
30. Philyllius (PA 14796; PAA 953155) and Philoni-
cus (PAA 940390) appear immediately adjacent to
one another in the Lenaea list at IG II2 2325E.27–8,
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325c 169
and either might accordingly be restored here.
The even more obscure Philonides (PA 14904;
PAA 957415) is also a possibility.
31. Lycis (PAA 610530) is otherwise known only
from a passing reference at Ar. Ra. 14 (406/5 BCE),
in company with Phrynichus (27) and Ameipsias
(28).
32. Leuco (PA 9065; PAA 604885) placed third
(test. 3a) at the Lenaea in 423/2 BCE behind Phi-
lonides (with Envoys) and Aristophanes (with
Wasps), and third again (test. 3b) at the Diony-
sia in 422/1 BCE behind Eupolis (with Phratry-
members) and Aristophanes (with Peace). Three
titles and seven fragments of his plays survive.
35. Nicophon son of Theron (PA 11077; PAA
719255) also appears in the Lenaea list at IG II2
2325E.22, two lines below Theopompus (cf. 36).
The Suda (ν 406 = test. 1) calls him a contempo-
rary of Aristophanes, but we otherwise know only
that his Adonis was staged at the same festival as
Nicochares’ Laconians (cf. IG II2 2325E.25) and
Aristophanes’ Wealth in 389/8 BCE. Six titles and
30 mostly unrevealing fragments of Nicophon’s
plays survive. See Pellegrino (2006).
36. Theopompus son of Theodectes or Theodo-
rus (PA 7010; PAA 509465) also appears in the
Lenaea list at IG II2 2325E.20, two lines above
Nicophon (cf. 35).
37. Cephisodorus (PAA 568010) took the prize
in 403/2 BCE (Lys. 21.4 as emended by Clinton =
test. 2), although the festival is not specified and
the victory in question may thus not be the one
referred to here. Four titles and 14 unrevealing
fragments of his plays survive.
40. For the largely obscure Apollophanes (PA
1461; PAA 143850), see IG II2 2325E.23.
41. Lysias (PAA 613758 add.) is otherwise
unknown.
42. Theochares (PAA 512803 add.) is otherwise
unknown.
43. For the largely obscure Xenophon (PAA
734030), see IG II2 2325E.26.
80. Poseidippus son of Cyniscus of Cassandrea
(PAA 785245) is said by the Suda (π 2111 = test. 1)
to have staged his first comedy two years after the
death of Menander, i.e. in 291/0 BCE. His plays
were repeatedly revived in the 180s BCE (IG II2
2323.284, 300). 18 titles and 45 fragments of his
plays survive. Cf. 95.
81. Satyrion (PAA 812770) is otherwise unknown.
82. Apollodorus must be Apollodorus of Carys-
tus (PA 1383; PAA 141955), who, according to the
Suda (α 3404 = test. *7), was victorious a total of
five times, meaning that his other three victories
came at the Lenaea, the victors list for which is
lost for this period. 32 fragments and 12 titles
of Apollodorus of Carystus’ plays are preserved;
two of his plays served as models for the Roman
comic playwright Terence.
83. Philemon Junior (PA 14278; PAA 925895)
was the son of the Philemon whose name comes
immediately after Menander’s in the Lenaea list
(IG II2 2325E.61; late 310s BCE), and was probably
a relative of Philemon III (102; active in the 180s
BCE). Kassel–Austin identify Philemon Junior
with the man who participated in a dramatic
festival on Delos in 280 BCE (IG XI.2 107.25 =
test. 3). But this seems too early for him to have
established himself sufficiently as a professional,
especially given that the two other playwrights
who appeared at the festival were Ameinias and
Nicostratus, who belong a generation earlier (cf.
IG II2 2325E.65, 67), and most likely the poet who
staged a play on Delos was Philemon I. Cf. IG II2
2323.15. Philemon Junior is otherwise known only
from three fragments of his plays (none accom-
panied by a title), although other fragments and
titles are perhaps preserved among those attrib-
uted only to “Philemon” and assigned by K–A to
his father.
84. Damoxenus (PA 3125; PAA 301265) is other-
wise known only from two titles and three frag-
ments (one 68 lines long) of his plays preserved
in Athenaeus (also the source of Suda δ 50 =
test. 1).
85. Phoenicides of Megara (PAA 962350) com-
peted at the Lenaea in 285/4 BCE and perhaps in
286/5 as well (IG II2 2319 Col. I.3, 12). Five titles
and five fragments (one 21 lines long) of his plays
are preserved.
170 chapter four
94. Perhaps to be restored [Τιμό]θεος (cf. IG II2
2323.143).
95. Poseidippus II (PAA 784970) is otherwise
unknown, although it is tempting to think that
he must be a descendant of Poseidippus I (80).
98. Nicarchus (PAA 709890) is otherwise unknown.
99. Nicomachus (PAA 716195) is otherwise
unknown.
100. Aristocrates (PAA 170915) is probably to be
restored at IG II2 2323.16 as the victorious comic
poet at the City Dionysia in 216/5 BCE, in which
case Laines’ victory there in 186/5 BCE (IG II2
2323.269; see 101 below) is unlikely to be his first.
No other information about him survives.
101. Laines (PAA 600657) was victorious at the
City Dionysia in 186/5 BCE (IG II2 2323.269), most
likely not for the first time (see 100). No titles or
fragments of his plays survive. But the name is
very rare, and Kirchner suggested that he might be
identified with the [Λ]αίνης of the deme Deceleia
(PAA 600660) who contributed to a public sub-
scription in 183/2 BCE (IG II2 2332.16).
102. Philemon III (“Philemon the Younger”;
PA 14276; PAA 925900) is most likely another
descendant of the homonymous New Comic poet
(IG II2 2325E.61; cf. 83 above). According to IG II2
2323.295, he staged The Girl from Miletus at the
City Dionysia in 184/3 BCE; no other titles or frag-
ments of his plays survive.
111. PAA 977870; perhaps to be restored Χα[ιρίων],
one of the poets who staged a play at the City
Dionysia in 155/4 BCE (IG II2 2323.513).
112. PAA 303995.
115. PAA 775895.
116. PAA 740060.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325d 171

IG II2 2325D (= 2325.88‒115):

Comic Actors Victorious at the City Dionysia

Although no entry in this list can be given a fixed
date, Col. II was inscribed by the original stone-
cutter, putting all these initial victories most likely
before 279/8 BCE but certainly sometime in the
280s–270s or earlier, while Col. III was inscribed
by the first appender, putting the initial victories
recorded there in the 260s–250s BCE and ear-
lier; cf. IG II2 2325 general introductory remarks.
Beyond this, we know only that Aristomachus (if
correctly restored in 21) competed at the Lenaea
in the mid-280s BCE (IG II2 2319 Col. I.2, 7) and
was repeatedly victorious there, for the first time
probably in 290 or so (IG II2 2325F.77); that some
of the other men whose names appear in Col. II
were active elsewhere in the 280s–260s BCE; and
that a number of individuals who appear in
Col. III were active elsewhere in the 250s BCE.
As for the origins of the competition, the pre-
served portions of IG II2 2318, which break off at
329/8 BCE, make no mention of a comic actors
contest at the City Dionysia, but one was in place
by 313/2 BCE (IG II2 2323a Col. I.4). There is thus
almost certainly only one column (~ 25 years)
missing before the partially preserved Col. II.
At some point before the mid-210s BCE, the
comic competitions at the City Dionysia moved
to an irregular every-other-year schedule (IG II2
2323 introductory remarks), producing only half
as many victories and thus presumably roughly
only half as many victors. The evidence of IG II2
2325C (where see introductory remarks) suggests
that this change took place in the mid-200s BCE,
shortly after the time represented by the surviv-
ing portion of Col. III of this list.
The 12 men whose competitive records are
preserved took the prize at the Dionysia a total of
19 times, = 1.58 victories apiece. If we assume, in
the absence of any specific evidence to the con-
trary, that this rate remained more or less con-
stant throughout the history of the competition,
and that the change to an irregular every-other-
year schedule took place around the time of the
initial victories once recorded at the top of Col.
IV, so that after this each line in the list repre-
sents approximately three years of competitions
(~ 1.58 victories per name, but with competitions
now only every two years), the initial victories
recorded at the bottom of Col. IV perhaps date
to the early 190s BCE or so. None of this is more
than guesswork. But it is in any case unlikely that
there was much more than one additional col-
umn of names (now lost) after Col. IV.
172 chapter four

32. IG II2 2325 frr. b´ + c´ (EM 8208a + 8208; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325d 173

33. IG II2 2325 fr. m´ (EM 8189; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
174 chapter four

Technical Description Fragment m´ (lines 43‒51, 60‒8).

EM 8189; Acropolis (“trouvé en 1838 à l’est du
All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble. temple d’Erechthée”, Rangabé [1855] 1000).
H 0.193; W 0.182; T 0.060; LH 0.010‒0.012.
Fragments b´ + c´ (lines 21‒30). The bottom is preserved and has a shallow anath-
EM 8208a + 8208; Acropolis (fr. b´ ) and south yrosis; all other sides and the back are broken.
slope of the Acropolis (fr. c´ ). Faint guidelines are visible above and below lines
H 0.192; W 0.245; T 0.133; LH 0.010 (ο 0.007). 48–9. The columns are not precisely aligned.
All sides and back are broken. Editions: Pittakys (1853) no. 1810 (= Rangabé
Editions: fr. b´: Köhler (1878) 248 (mistakenly [1855] no. 2341); Rangabé (1855) no. 1294; Kou-
joined with fr. v, which belongs to IG II2 2325H); manoudes (1878a) 85; Köhler (1878) 249–50; IG II
IG II 977f ´. fr. c´: Koumanoudes (1878a) 82; IG II 977a´; Wilhelm (1906a) 164–5.
977w. frr. b´ + c´: Wilhelm 1906a) 155–6.

Col. I
[ὑποκριτῶν κωμικῶν]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. II
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
20 [ - - - ]
88 [Ἀριστόμ]α̣χ[ος - - - ]
[Δη]μ̣ έας Ι
90 [Ἐχ]ένικος Ι
[Δ]έρκετος Ι
25 Ἀριστίων Ι
Φιλωνίδης [ - - - ]
Φιλοκλ̣ ῆ̣[ς - - - ]
95 Καλλίστρ̣[ατος - - - ]
Ἐμμενίδ̣[ης - - - ]
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325d 175

30/97 Πολυκ[λῆς - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. III
35 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
40 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
98 [ 6–7 ]ι̣[ - - - ]
[Φιλοκ]ύδης ΙΙΙ
45/100 [ 4–5]ης Ι
[ 4–5]ωρ ΙΙΙ
[ 4–5]ν Ι
[Κηφι]σόδωρος ΙΙ
[Ἀρισ]τομένης ΙΙ
50/105 [Διον]ύ�̣σιος Ι
106 [ . . . . . ]ν ΙΙ

Col. IV
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
55 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
60/107 Α[ - - - ]
Σ[ - - - ]
Δ[ - - - ]
110 Β[ - - - ]
Α[ - - - ]
65 Κα̣ [ - - - ]
Δι[ - - - ]
Σω[ - - - ]
115 Δ[ - - - ]
1 column missing
176 chapter four
Epigraphical Notes
21. Dotted alpha: only the bottom portion of the
right diagonal is preserved; lambda is possible,
kappa or chi less so.
22. Dotted mu: only the bottom tip of the right
vertical is preserved.
25. After Ι there appears to be the top of another
vertical (hence the usual reading ΙΙ); this contin-
ues the line of a small fissure above, however,
and is thus almost certainly damage to the stone
rather than the remains of a letter.
27. Dotted lambda: only the apex is preserved.
Dotted eta: only the tops of the verticals are
preserved.
28. Dotted rho: only the loop is preserved; beta
is possible.
29. Dotted delta: only the apex is preserved.
43. Dotted iota: only the bottom portion of the
vertical is preserved.
50. Dotted upsilon: only the end of the right
diagonal is preserved; kappa or chi is possible.
65. Dotted alpha: only the bottom portion of the left
diagonal is preserved; lambda is equally possible.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
21. Aristomachus (PAA 172535; O’Connor #66;
Stephanis #355) appears in the Lenaea list at IG II2
2325F.77, one line above Dercetus (24), and was
still active at that festival in the mid-280s BCE
(IG II2 2319 Col. I.2, 9).
22. Demeas (PAA 306610; Stephanis #605) is
perhaps to be identified with the Demeas son
of Anaxicrates (PA 3312; PAA 306665; O’Connor
#124; Stephanis #607) who competed at the Sote-
ria festival in Delphi in 258/7 or 254/3 BCE (SGDI
2565.64 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 9.64).
23. Echenicus (PAA 453285; O’Connor #204;
Stephanis #1012) is otherwise unknown, but the
restoration is certain, since this is the only known
name that fits the space.
24. Dercetus (PAA 303888; O’Connor #121; Steph-
anis #601) also appears in the Lenaea list at IG II2
2325F.78, one line below Aristomachus (cf. 21),
two lines above Philocles (cf. 27), four lines above
Emmenides (cf. 29), and six lines above Philo-
nides (cf. 26).
25. Aristion (PAA 166350; O’Connor #61; Stepha-
nis #324) is probably to be identified with the man
by the same name who participated in a dramatic
festival in Delphi around 265 BCE (F.Delphes III
1.478 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 2.37).
26. Philonides (PAA 956835; O’Connor #495;
Stephanis #2567) also appears in the Lenaea list
at IG II2 2325F.84, seven lines below Aristoma-
chus (cf. 21), six lines below Dercetus (cf. 24),
four lines below Philocles (cf. 27), and two lines
below Emmenides (cf. 29). He is presumably to
be identified with the man by the same name
(PAA 956840) who participated at a festival in
Delos in 263 BCE (IG XI.2 113.25), and perhaps
also with Philonides son of Aristomachus of
Zacynthus, who is described as the priest (sc. of
Dionysus in the cult of the τεχνῖται) in connection
with a series of dramatic festivals at Delphi in
the 250s BCE (SGDI 2563.2–3 = Nachtergael, Galates
no. 7.2–3; SGDI 2564.1–2 = Nachtergael, Galates
no. 8.1–2; SGDI 2565.1–2 = Nachtergael, Galates no.
9.1–2; SGDI 2566.1–2 = Nachtergael, Galates no.
10.1–2).
27. Philocles (PAA 935350; O’Connor #484; Steph-
anis #2519) also appears in the Lenaea list at IG II2
2325F.80, three lines below Aristomachus (cf. 21),
two lines below Dercetus (cf. 24), two lines above
Emmenides (cf. 29), and four lines above Philo-
nides (cf. 26). See also IG II2 2323.510.
28. Callistratus (PAA 561190; O’Connor #281;
Stephanis #1357) is otherwise unknown.
29. Emmenides (PAA 387550; O’Connor #168;
Stephanis #837) also appears in the Lenaea list
at IG II2 2325F.82, five lines below Aristomachus
(cf. 21), four lines below Dercetus (cf. 24), two
lines below Philocles (cf. 27), and two lines above
Philonides (cf. 26). See also IG II2 2325E.128.
30. Polycles (PAA 779025; O’Connor #406; Steph-
anis #2088) is perhaps also to be restored in the
Lenaea list at IG II2 2325F.86.
43. O’Connor #542; Stephanis #2991 (both read-
ing [ - - - ]ρ[ - - - ]).
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325d 177
44. Philocydes (PAA 938935; O’Connor #526;
Stephanis #2534) was restored here by Wilhelm
(1906a) 164–5, on the basis of the probable iden-
tification with the Philocydes son of Philagrus
(O’Connor #486) who competed at two festivals
in Delphi in the mid-250s BCE (SGDI 2564.67 =
Nachtergael, Galates no. 8.67; 2565.69 = Nachter-
gael, Galates no. 9.69). Cf. 50.
45. O’Connor #514; Stephanis #2680.
46. PAA 431340 (“name overrestored”); O’Connor
#554. Wilhelm (1906a) 164 (followed by Stephanis
#947), unconvincingly suggested [Εὐήν]ωρ.
47. O’Connor #532; Stephanis #2724.
48. Cephisodorus (PAA 568775; O’Connor #549;
Stephanis #1394) is probably to be identified
with the Cephisodorus son of Callias of Boeotia
(O’Connor #288; Stephanis #1398) who partici-
pated in a series of dramatic festivals at Delphi
as a comic didaskalos and dancer in the 250s BCE
(SGDI 2563.56 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 7.56;
2564.65 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 8.65; 2566.76 =
Nachtergael, Galates no. 10.76).
49. Aristomenes (PAA 173070; O’Connor #67;
Stephanis #360) is otherwise unknown.
50. Dionysius (PAA 339725; O’Connor #150;
Stephanis #714) is perhaps to be identified with
the Dionysius son of Philocydes (PAA 339730;
O’Connor #149; Stephanis #750; cf. 44) who served
as a comic didaskalos at a festival in Delphi some-
time in the mid-250s BCE (GDI 2565.71 = Nachter-
gael, Galates no. 9.71).
51. O’Connor #531; Stephanis #2725.
60. PAA 100095; O’Connor #1; Stephanis #3.
61. PAA 810100; O’Connor #424; Stephanis
#2202.
62. PAA 300065; O’Connor #110; Stephanis #564.
63. PAA 267100; O’Connor #104; Stephanis #526
(all reading Βο[ - - - ]).
64. PAA 100090; O’Connor #2; Stephanis #4.
65. PAA 570610; O’Connor #291; Stephanis #1409
(all reading Κλ[ - - - ]).
66, 68. Cf. IG II2 2325F.114 Δι[ - - - ] (from approx-
imately the same period).
66. PAA 322850; O’Connor #111a; Stephanis #661.
67. PAA 854055; O’Connor #447; Stephanis #2325.
68. PAA 300060; O’Connor #111; Stephanis #565.
178 chapter four
IG II2 2325E (= 2325.116‒89):
Comic Poets Victorious at the Lenaea
Aristophanes, whose name is not preserved in the
Victors List for this festival but was most likely
the next in Col. I, took the prize at the Lenaea
in 426/5 BCE with Acharnians and in 425/4 BCE
with Knights (thus the hypotheses to the plays).
The initial victory at the Lenaea by Eupolis
recorded in 11 must therefore have occurred
between 430/29 BCE (his first appearance in the
competitions, according to anon. de Com. III.33,
p. 9 Koster = test. 2.6) and 427/6 (the year before
Acharnians). Eight poets credited with a total of
20 victories appear above Eupolis (lines 3–10). If
his first victory was in 430/29 BCE (as early as is
possible), and if all 20 of the victories credited
to the poets whose names precede his occurred
before that, the contest could have begun as early
as 450/49 BCE. If, on the other hand, Eupolis’ first
victory came in 427/6 BCE (as late as is possible),
and none of the poets who precede him on the
list took the prize a second time until after his
first triumph, the contest might have begun as
late as 435/4 BCE.
Putting the date for the beginning of the
Lenaea competitions as late as possible is prob-
lematic, given that 426/5 and 425/4 BCE belong
to Aristophanes (above), and that Cratinus must
on this hypothesis be given two of the three dates
between 424/3 and 422/1 BCE, since he seems to
have been dead or retired by the end of the 420s.
This in turn requires that at least three of Tele-
cleides’ four additional victories (4) be assigned
to the 410s BCE, a period in which we have no
other reason to believe that he was active, and
similar ripple effects then extend down the
list. The five unknown poets whose names fol-
lowed Eupolis and Aristophanes (12–17) might
conceivably all have taken the prize only once,
and the second victories of Metagenes (19) and
Theopompus (20), as well as the second, third
and fourth victories of Polyzelus (21), might all
have occurred only after the initial victories of
Amipsias (24) and Philyllius (27). But even so—
and the construction as a whole has at this point
become wildly improbable—Amipsias, who was
first triumphant at the City Dionysia in 415/4 BCE
(IG II2 2325C.28) or perhaps a few years earlier,
is unlikely, on the late-dating of the Lenaea list,
to have taken the prize there before the mid-
390s BCE, while Philyllius, who ought probably
to be restored two lines after Amipsias in the
City Dionysia list, at IG II2 2325C.30, is unlikely
to have been victorious at the Lenaea before the
late 390s BCE. Far more likely, therefore, most
of the additional Lenaea victories of the poets
in lines 3–11 belong to the years before Aristo-
phanes’ initial triumph, putting the origin of the
competition probably in the late 440s BCE.24
As for the names in Columns III and IV, the
Fasti preserve dates for City Dionysia victories by
Anaxandrides (37) in 376/5 BCE (IG II2 2318.1150),
Alexis (45) in 348/7 BCE (IG II2 2318.1474) and
Procleides (59) in 332/1 BCE (IG II2 2318.1668),
while the Didascaliae record that Menander
(60)—whose name is restored on the basis of the
title ῾Ηνίοχος—took fifth place there in 313/2 BCE
(IG II2 2323a Col. I.2), and that Philippides (64),
Nicostratus (65) and Ameinias (67) competed in
312/1 BCE, with Philippides taking the prize (IG II2
2323a Col. I.7, 9, 12). The City Dionysia list for this
period is almost entirely lost. But the names of all
these poets appear in the same order in Columns
III–IV of the Lenaea list, which otherwise lacks
any fixed dates except that:
• Menander’s initial victory (60) came in 317/6 BCE,
with the Dyscolus (test. 50).
• Ameinias’ initial victory (67) belongs before
285/4 BCE, since IG II2 2319 Col. I.6 reports that
Simylus was victorious that year at the Lenaea,
24 See Rusten (2006) and Biles (2009), whose careful
discussions of the evidence for the dates of Phrynichus in
particular nonetheless ultimately have no substantial effect
on the calculations of the date.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325e 179
and his name is not preserved in the list. The
initial victory recorded in 69, at the top of Col. V,
must thus date to 284/3 BCE at the latest.
• All these entries were produced by the original
stone-cutter, putting them most likely before
279/8 BCE, but certainly in that general period
or earlier.
50 victories are attributed to 31 poets who follow
Menander (60) on the list, for an average of 1.61
victories apiece. The competitive records of an
additional 41 poets (including those in Col. V, of
which only a single trace is preserved), each of
whom must have taken the prize at least once,
have been lost. If we assume, in the absence of
any specific evidence to the contrary, that poets
whose competitive records are not preserved
were on average about as successful as those
whose records survive, these 41 additional names
ought to represent about 66 more victories, for a
total of 116 post-Menander victories, putting the
final man on the list, Nicodemus (135), around
200 BCE. That calculation, however, appears to
be out by 40–50 years, given that Agathocles
(132) and Biottus (134), who appear just above
25 52 victories (20 attributed to 11 individual poets, plus
32 attributed to 21 men whose competitive records are lost
@ 1.6 victories/poet), with those 52 victories now repre-
senting 104 years of competitions.
Nicodemus at the bottom of Col. VIII, are both
known to have competed at the City Dionysia in
155/4 BCE (IG II2 2323.515, 519).
30 victories are attributed to 20 poets who fol-
low Menander in Columns IV–VI. Columns IV–VI
also presented the competitive records (now lost)
of another 20 men who, at 1.61 victories apiece
(see above), represent an additional 32 victories,
for a total of approximately 62 post-Menander
victories in Columns IV–VI, putting the final
entry in Col. VI ca. 255 BCE. The preserved por-
tion of Col. VI is in the hand of the second stone-
cutter, who seems to have updated the lists in the
260s–250s BCE, ruling out the possibility that a
lost column ought to be inserted between Col-
umns IV and V, and suggesting that the problem
noted above most likely begins in Col. VII. We
know that the City Dionysia moved to an every-
other-year schedule most likely in the middle
of the 3rd century BCE. If the same was true of
the Lenaea, Columns VII–VIII represent about
twice as many years as one might otherwise have
thought,25 bringing the final entries in Col. VIII to
exactly where we would on other grounds expect
them to be, ca. 150 BCE.
 180
chapter four

34. IG II2 2325 frr. i + k + l + n and 2325 fr. m (EM 8193 and 8194; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

the victors lists: ig ii2 2325e
181

35. IG II2 2325 frr. k´ + l´ + o + SEG XXVI 207 (fr. p´) (EM 8202 + 8200 + 13273; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
182 chapter four

Technical Description A moulding originally ran along the top of the

inscribed face but is now completely gone. The
All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble. preserved left side abuts the preserved right side
of frr. i + k + l + n, which contain the first half of
Fragments i + k + l + n (lines 1‒11, 18‒29, 35‒46 lines 35‒46.
[first half of lines only]). Editions: Pittakys (1842) no. 732 (= Rangabé [1855]
EM 8193 (the fragments were already joined before no. 1288); Koumanoudes (1861) 331–2; Kouman-
the inventory number was assigned, hence there is oudes (1878a) 85; IG II 977g; for Köhler (1878) and
only one number); south slope of the Acropolis. Wilhelm (1906a), see above on frr. i + k + l + n.
H ca. 0.310 (inscribed face 0.215); W 0.581; T ca.
0.215; LH 0.010‒0.011. Fragments k´ + l´ + o + SEG XXVI 207 (= MDAI(A)
The right side is preserved and along the front 92 [1977] 229‒38,26 lines 83, 86‒119, 128‒36).
has a finely smoothed band of anathyrosis; the EM 8202 (k´ + l´) + 8200 + 13273; south slope of
left, bottom and back are broken. The top is pre- the Acropolis (EM 8202 + 8200); Acropolis? (EM
served; along the inscribed face, the top is roughly 13273).
smoothed to a depth of ca. 0.07, after which the H 0.349; W 0.883; T 0.178; LH 0.010‒0.012.
surface rises ca. 0.06 higher before breaking off. The bottom is preserved and is very finely
Along the top of the inscribed face is a partially smoothed; the left and right sides and the back
preserved moulding (H 0.022). The preserved are broken. The top is preserved and is roughly
right side abuts the preserved left side of fr. m, smoothed with a shallow anathyrosis. A mould-
which contains the second half of lines 35‒51. ing (H 0.022), largely intact although damaged
Editions: fr. i: Koumanoudes (1878a) 80; IG II along the top, runs along the top of the inscribed
977d. fr. k: Koumanoudes (1878a) 82; IG II 977e. face. The inscribed face is finely smoothed with
frr. i + k: Köhler (1878) 242–3. fr. l: Koumanoudes a claw chisel. Guidelines are preserved above and
(1878a) 80; Köhler (1878) 244–6 (frr. l + m); IG II below line 135.
977f. fr. n: Pittakys (1853) no. 1807; Köhler (1878) Editions: fr. k´: IG II 977q. fr. l´: IG II 977r. frr.
246; IG II 977h. frr. i + k + l + n + m: Wilhelm k´ + l´: Koumanoudes (1878a) 83; Köhler (1878)
(1906a) 122–34. 251–2; Wilhelm (1906a) 161–4 (with tentative join
to fr. o). fr. o: Koumanoudes (1878a) 84; Köhler
Fragment m (lines 35‒51 [second half of lines (1878) 252; IG II 977m; Wilhelm (1906a) 134–6,
only], 53‒67). 163. frr. k´ + l´ + o + EM 13273: Peppas-Delmousou
EM 8194; south slope of the Acropolis (“trouvé (1977) 229–38 (SEG XXVI 207).
au Pirée”, Rangabé [1855] 818, almost certainly in
error).
H 0.367 (inscribed face 0.324); W 0.266; T 0.212;
LH 0.010. 26 Peppas-Delmousou (1977) designated this fragment
The left side is preserved and along the front has as fr. p´ and EM 13247 (see below on IG II2 2325F) as fr.
a finely smoothed band of anathyrosis; the right q´ (erroneously labeled as frr. P and q, respectively, at SEG
XXVI 207) in a continuation of the scheme in Wilhelm
side and back are broken. The bottom is appar- (1906a), for which see the general remarks above on IG II2
ently original but is not visible in the stone’s 2325A–H. Since Wilhelm’s fragment numbers only make
present location. The top is preserved; along the sense in terms of his ordering of the fragments, and since
inscribed face, the top is roughly smoothed to his arrangement has been considerably disrupted by sub-
sequent advances, there is little reason to perpetuate his
a depth of ca. 0.070‒0.075, after which the sur- system by continuing to add to it, especially when such
face rises ca. 0.020 higher before breaking off. additions do not conform to his divisions.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325e 183

Col. I
116 [Ληναικ]α̣[ὶ πο]η̣τῶν
[κωμικ]ῶν
[Ξ]ενόφιλος Ι
Τ̣ ηλεκλείδης Π
5/120 Ἀριστομένης ΙΙ
Κρατῖνος ΙΙΙ
Φερεκράτης ΙΙ
Ἕρμιππος ΙΙΙΙ
Φρύνιχος ΙΙ
10/125 Μυρτίλος Ι
126 [Εὔ]πολις ΙΙΙ (430/29–427/6)
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. II
127 Πο[λίοχος] Ι
Με[ταγέν]<η>ς ΙΙ
20 Θεό[πομπ]ος ΙΙ
130 Πολ[ύζηλο]ς ΙΙΙΙ
Νικοφ[ῶν - - - ]
Ἀπολ̣ [λοφάνη]ς Ι
Ἀμ̣[ειψίας - - - ]
25 Νι̣[ - - - ]
135 Ξε̣ν[ο]φ̣ ῶν Ι
Φιλύλλιος Ι
Φιλόνικος Ι
[ ca. 8 ]ς Ι
30/139 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. III
35/140 Φίλιπ̣ [πος] ΙΙ
Χόρηγ̣[ος Ι]
Ἀναξα[νδρί]δης ΙΙΙ
184 chapter four

Φιλέτα[ιρο]ς ΙΙ
Εὔβουλος ΠΙ
40/145 Ἔφιππος Ι
[Ἀ]ντιφάνη̣ [ς] ΠΙΙΙ
[Μ]νησίμα̣ [χος] Ι
Ναυσ̣[ικράτ]ης ΙΙΙ
Εὐφάνη̣ [ς - - - ]
45/150 Ἄλεξις ΙΙ[ - ]
151 [Ἀρ]ι̣στ[οφῶν - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
50 [ - - - ]
152 [ ca. 8 ]ρος Ι

Col. IV
[ - - - ]
153 Δι[ονύσι]ος Ι
Κλέα̣ [ρχ]ος Ι[Ι]Ι
55/155 Ἀθηνο̣κλῆς [ - - - ]
Πύρ[ρος] Ι
Ἀλκ̣ [ήν]ωρ Ι
Τιμοκλῆς Ι
Προκλείδης Ι
60/160 Μ[έν]ανδρος Ι[ - - - ] (317/6?)
Φι̣λ̣ήμων ΙΙΙ
Ἀπολλόδωρο[ς - - - ]
Δίφιλος ΙΙΙ
Φιλιππίδης ΙΙ[ - - - ]
65/165 Νικό[σ]τ̣ρατος [ - - - ]
Καλλιάδης Ι
167 Ἀμεινί[α]ς Ι (before 285/4)
[ - - - ]

Col. V
[ - - - ]
70 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
75 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325e 185

[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
80 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
168 [ - - - ]ς ΙΙ
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
85 [ - - - ]

Col. VI
Εὐ<θ>υκράτης ΙΙ
Ἄροπος ΙΙ
Ἐτεαγ<ό>ρας Ι
Πολύκλειτος Ι
90 Φιλίσκος Ι
Νεάνθης ΙΙ
[2–3]λεύς Ι
[ . . ]όδωρος Ι
[ 3–4 ]κλείδης Ι
95 [ 3–4 σ]τ̣ρατος [1–2]
169 [ 5–6 ]η[ς] Ι
170 [ . . ]όδωρο̣ς Ι
Εὐμήδη[ς] ΙΙ
Πανδαί[τ]ης Ι
100/173 Μενεσ[θ]εύς Ι
vacat
vacat

Col. VII
Πυθόδ[ωρος - - - ]
Ἐρατο[ - - - ]
105 Καλλ[ - - - ]
Ἀρχίδ[ - - - ]
Σωκ[ - - - ]
Φιλομ[ - - - ]
Νικι[ - - - ]
110 Δεξι[κράτης]
174 Π̣ [ο]λυ[ - - - ]
175 Θεμισ[ - - - ]
Θεω[ - - - ]
Θεοδ[ - - - ]
115 Διοσκο[υρίδη]ς Ι
Εὐβου[λίδης] Ι
180 Θεόδω[ρος - - - ]
186 chapter four

181 [ . ]νησι̣[ . . . . . . ] . ΙΙΙ

vacat

Col. VIII
120 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
125 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
182 [᾿Εμμ]ενί�δ̣ ης Ι
[Ἀρ]ί�σ̣ των ΙΙΙ
130 Νούιος ΙΙΙ
185 Διονύσιος ΙΙ
Ἀγαθοκλῆς Ι
Ἀ⟦ρχικλῆς⟧ ΙΙ
Βίοττος Ι
135/189 Νικόδημος ΙΙ
vacat

Epigraphical Notes 42. Dotted alpha: only the apex is preserved.

1. Dotted alpha: only the bottom portion of the
right diagonal is preserved. Dotted eta: only the
bottom portions of the verticals are preserved.
4. Dotted tau: only the bottom portion of the
vertical is preserved.
19. <η>: the horizontal was never cut.
23. Dotted lambda: only the apex is preserved.
24. Dotted mu: only the bottom tip of the left
diagonal is preserved.
25. Dotted iota: only the top tip of the vertical
is preserved.
26. Dotted epsilon: only the bottom horizontal is
preserved; zeta or xi is possible. Dotted phi: only
the bottom portion of the vertical survives.
35. Dotted pi: only the left vertical is preserved.
36. Dotted gamma: only the bottom tip of the
vertical is preserved.
41. Dotted eta: only the upper portion of the left
vertical is preserved; the space available for the
letter suggests that it was originally cut across
both this block and fr. m, the neighboring block
to the right.
43. Dotted sigma: there are possible traces of the
lower left corner of the letter.
44. Dotted eta: possible traces of the bottoms of
the verticals survive.
46. Dotted iota: only the top tip of the vertical
is preserved.
51. The portion of the stone where these let-
ters were previously read is now broken away,
although the letters are at least partially legible
in Wilhelm’s photograph.
54. Dotted alpha: only the bottom tips of the
diagonals are preserved; lambda or perhaps chi
is possible.
55. Dotted omicron: only traces of the bottom
part of the circle are preserved.
57. Dotted kappa: only traces of the vertical are
preserved.
61. Dotted iota: only a trace of the upper part of
the vertical is preserved. Dotted lambda: only the
lower part of the left diagonal is preserved.
65. Dotted tau: traces of the horizontal are pre-
served.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325e 187
86. The space for the theta was left uninscribed.
88. The space for the omicron was left uninscribed.
95. Dotted tau: the horizontal is preserved, while
traces of the vertical might just be visible among
the surface damage; gamma seems possible.
97. Dotted omicron: only the lower left portion
of the circle is preserved.
98. The second eta is corrected from an origi-
nally cut omicron.
101–2. The double vacat perhaps marks the end
of one stone-cutter’s portion of the list.
118. Dotted iota: only the bottom portion of the
vertical is preserved. The dotted space contains
traces of a vertical, perhaps the right vertical of
nu (i.e. the end of the poet’s name) rather than
an indication of an additional victory.
128. Dotted iota: only the bottom portion of the
vertical is preserved.
129. Dotted iota: the bottom tip of the vertical
is preserved.
133. ρχικλῆς is cut within a deep erasure extend-
ing one additional letter space to the right; no
traces of the original text are discernible, but it
presumably repeated the previous line.
135. Guidelines are preserved above and below
this line.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
3. Xenophilus (PAA 733830) is perhaps to be
restored in the City Dionysia list at IG II2 2325C.19,
directly below Telecleides (4), whom he also fol-
lows in one of the Roman fragments (IGUR 215.10;
see Appendix). No titles or fragments of Xenophi-
lus’ plays survive.
4.  Telecleides (PA 13558; PAA 881310) is almost
certainly to be restored in the City Dionysia list
at IG II2 2325C.18. Portions of his competitive
record are preserved at IGUR 215.1–8 (see Appen-
dix), where he appears before Xenophilus (cf. 3).
Five titles (and a few letters of several others) and
73 mostly insubstantial fragments of Telecleides’
plays survive.
5.  Aristomenes (PA 1992; PAA 173065) is described
by the Suda (α 3922 = test. 1) as a member of
the second generation of Old Comic poets, who
belonged to the Peloponnesian War period, fur-
ther specified as Olympiad 432/28 BCE. He took
third place at the Lenaea in 425/4 BCE (test. 4a),
and is also said to have competed against Aristo-
phanes’ Wealth in 389/8 BCE (test. 4b). Portions
of his competitive record are perhaps preserved
at IGUR 216.10–14, where the performance-dates
range from 440/39 to 391/0 BCE; see Appendix.
Five titles and 16 unrevealing fragments of Aris-
tomenes’ comedies survive.
6.  Cratinus son of Callimedes (PA 8755; PAA
584385) also appears in the City Dionysia list at
IG II2 2325C.14.
7.  Pherecrates (PA 14195; PAA 920230; O’Connor
#473; Stephanis #2469) also appears in the City
Dionysia list at IG II2 2325C.22, immediately
before Hermippus (cf. 8).
8.  Hermippus (PA 5112; PAA 404205) was victo-
rious at the City Dionysia in 436/5 BCE (IG II2
2318.426), and his name is also preserved in that
list, at IG II2 2325C.23, once again immediately
after Pherecrates (cf. 7).
9.  Phrynichus (PA 15006; PAA 965270) also
appears at IG II2 2325C.27 in the City Dionysia
list, five lines below Pherecrates (cf. 7) and four
lines below Hermippus (cf. 8).
10.  Myrtilus son of Lysis (PA 10497; PAA 662745)
was the brother of Hermippus, who appears two
lines above him in this list (8). Two titles and five
fragments of Myrtilus’ plays survive.
11.  Eupolis (PA 5936; PAA 442535) also appears
in the City Dionysia list at IG II2 2325C.25, three
lines below Pherecrates (cf. 7), two lines below
Hermippus (cf. 8), two lines above Phrynichus
(cf. 9), and immediately after Aristophanes,
whose name must have come immediately after
his in the Lenaea list (cf. introductory remarks).
18.  Poliochus (PAA 776925) is perhaps to be
identified with the defendant in Lysias 18.13 (PAA
776930; ca. 395 BCE). Only one title and two frag-
ments of his plays survive.
19.  Metagenes (PA 10087; PAA 647680) refers in
fr. 10 to the betrayal of Naupactus to the Spartans
in 400 BCE (D.S. 14.34.2) and in fr. 14 to the tragic
poet Acestor ( fl. 420s–400s BCE). Four titles and
188 chapter four
twenty fragments of his plays survive. See Pel-
lagrino, in Belardinelli (1998) 291–339.
20.  Theopompus (PA 7010; PAA 509465) also
appears in the City Dionysia list at IG II2 2325C.36,
one line below Nicophon (22). 20 titles and 108
fragments of his plays survive.
21.  Polyzelus (PAA 778395) is otherwise known
only from an entry in the Suda (π 1961 = test. 1)
that offers little more than the titles of five of his
plays, and from 13 unrevealing fragments.
22.  Nicophon (PA 11077; PAA 719255) also appears
in the City Dionysia list at IG II2 2325C.35, one
line above Theopompus (20).
23.  Apollophanes (PA 1461; PAA 143850) is oth-
erwise known only from an entry in the Diony-
sia list (IG II2 2325C.40); an entry in the Suda
(α 3409 = test. 1) that offers little more than five
titles (cf. POxy. 2659 fr. 1 col. i 5 = test. 2); and 10
unrevealing fragments of his plays.
24.  Most likely to be restored ᾿Αμ[ειψίας] (PA 708;
PAA 123630), as also at IG II2 2325C.28, although
his initial victory at the Lenaea must then have
come relatively late in his career.
25.  Perhaps to be restored Νι̣[κοχάρης] (thus
Bergk), i.e. Nicochares the son of Philonides
(cf. IG II2 2325C.30) of the deme Cydathenaeon
(PA 11083; PAA 719405), who is called a contem-
porary of Aristophanes by the Suda (ν 407 =
test. 1), and whose Laconians was staged at the
same festival as Nicophon’s Adonis (cf. IG II2
2325C.35) and Aristophanes’ Wealth in 389/8 BCE.
The Lenaea victory recorded here might then be
the one also known from SEG XXXII 239 = test. 3
(“fin. saec. Va”). Nicochares’ plays are otherwise
known only from nine titles and 28 unrevealing
fragments.
26.  Xenophon (PAA 734030) is otherwise known
only from an entry in the Dionysia list (IG II2
2325C.43; one victory) and a passing reference at
D.L. 2.59.
27.  Philyllius (PAA 953155) is described at Suda
δ 1155 (= test. 2) as a contemporary of Diocles
and Sannyrion—neither of whom is any better
dated than Philyllius himself. He is perhaps to be
restored in the City Dionysia list at IG II2 2325C.30
(late 5th century). Ten titles and 33 fragments of
Philyllius’ plays survive.
28.  Philonicus (PAA 940390) is otherwise
unknown (although cf. Suda φ 392 = test. *1); like
Philyllius (27), he is a candidate for restoration at
IG II2 2325C.30.
29.  Geissler (1925) 12, suggested restoring Strat-
tis (for whom, see Orth [2009]), whose plays are
dated on prosopographical grounds to ca. 410–
380 BCE. Theochares (IG II2 2325C.42) and Dem-
etrius I (called an Old Comic poet at D.L. 5.85 =
test. 1) are both also possible.
35.  Philippus must be Philippus the son of Aris-
tophanes of the deme Cydathenaeon (PA 14400;
PAA 930110 ~ 930115), who according to ΣAreth.
Pl. Ap. 19c (= test. 3) competed against Eubulus
(39). His brother Ararus—who is also supposed
to have been responsible for staging their father
Aristophanes’ Wealth in 389/8—was victorious at
the City Dionysia in 388/7 BCE (IG II2 2318.1004),
while his other brother (?) Philetaerus appears
three lines below him in the Lenaea catalogue
here (38). Four titles and three fragments of
Philippus’ plays survive.
36.  Choregus (PAA 990985) is otherwise
unknown.
37.  According to the Marmor Parium, Anaxan-
drides (PAA 126725) was victorious for the first
time at the City Dionysia in 377/6 BCE (FGrH 239
A 70 = Anaxandr. test. 3), and he certainly took
the prize there in 376/5 BCE (IG II2 2318.1150 with
1137), which must have been early in his career,
given that the performance years preserved for
him in IGUR 218.1–14 (for which, see Appendix)
range from 376/5 (when he seems to have placed
third at the Lenaea) to 353/2 BCE. According to
the Suda (α 1982 = test. 1), Anaxandrides took the
prize a total of 10 times; since only three victories
are mentioned here, the other seven must have
been at the Dionysia. His Treasure was revived
in 312/1 BCE (IG II2 2323a Col. I.6). 41 titles and
82 fragments (including two dubia) of Anaxan-
drides’ plays survive.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325e 189
38.  Philetaerus (PA 14253; PAA 924630) is gener-
ally said to have been one of Aristophanes’ sons
(cf. 35), although some sources call the third son
Nicostratus (cf. IG II2 2323a Col. I.9–10). Phile-
taerus ridicules the orator Hyperides ( fl. 363/2–
322 BCE) in fr. 2. Thirteen titles and 20 fragments
of his plays survive. See in general Papachryso­
stomou (2008) 221–47.
39.  Eubulus son of Euphranor of the deme Cet-
tus (PA 5359; PAA 428365) is dated by the Suda
(ε 3386 = test. 1) to Olympiad 376/2 BCE and
said to be “on the border between Middle and
Old Comedy”; according to Harpocration (Ε 153
Keaney = p. 139.11–12 Dindorf = test. 2), the orator
Hyperides ( fl. 363/2–322 BCE) mentioned him. 58
titles and 150 fragments of Eubulus’ plays survive.
See in general Hunter (1983).
40.  Ephippus (PA 6160; PAA 452960) is called
a “Middle Comic” poet by the Suda (ε 3929 =
test. 1). Twelve titles and 28 fragments (all from
Athenaeus, and many of them substantial) of his
plays survive, and portions of his competitive
record may be preserved at IGUR 218.15–18 (see
Appendix).
41.  Antiphanes the son of Stephanus or Demo-
phanes (PA 1219; PAA 137260) is called a “Middle
Comic” poet by anon. de Com. III.45–8, p. 10 Koster
(= test. 2), and is said to have begun to stage plays
in Olympiad 388/4 BCE. According to the Suda
(α 2735 = test. 1.4), he took the prize a total of 13
times; since eight victories are recorded here, the
other five must have been at the City Dionysia.
138 titles and 327 fragments of Antiphanes’ plays
survive.
42.  Mnesimachus (PAA 657070) is called a “Mid-
dle Comic” poet by Athenaeus and (drawing on
him) the Suda (test. 1–2), and his Philip appears to
have been directed against Philip II of Macedon
(reigned 358–336 BCE). Seven titles and 11 frag-
ments of Mnesimachus’ plays are preserved. See
in general Papachrysostomou (2008) 183–220.
43.  Nausicrates (PAA 701722 ~ 701725) is dated
by the mention of him at Aeschin. 1.98 (where
the manuscripts are divided between ποιητῇ and
ὑποκριτῇ), 100 (= test. *3) in 345 BCE. He has been
identified (e.g. by Wilhelm [1906a] 127) with the
comic actor who was victorious at the Lenaea
around the same time (IG II2 2325F.49), although
the name is not uncommon in 4th-century Ath-
ens, and these might in any case be relatives
rather than the same man. Two titles and three
fragments of Nausicrates’ plays are preserved.
44.  Euphanes (PAA 449095) is otherwise known
from two titles and two fragments of his com-
edies. His name may be preserved in IGUR 221.5
(test. *2), where it comes just before that of the
(otherwise undated) comic poet Antidotus.
45.  Alexis of Thurii (PA 549; PAA 120505) was
victorious at the City Dionysia in 348/7 BCE
(IG II2 2318.1474), which appears (on the basis of
the individuals and events referred to in the pre-
served fragments of his comedies) to have been
near the beginning of his career; cf. Arnott (1996)
10; IG II2 2322.2 (second place or worse, probably
at the Lenaea in the 340s BCE or so). 137 titles
and 342 fragments of Alexis’ plays are preserved.
See in general Arnott (1996).
46.  Aristophon (PAA 176015) is otherwise known
only from eight titles and 15 fragments (the lon-
gest about ten lines) of his plays, although he is
perhaps to be restored at IG II2 2321.4 (undated).
See in general Papachrysostomou (2008) 101–49.
53.  Dionysius (PAA 337450) is otherwise known
only from ten fragments (one 43 lines long) and
four titles. See in general Papachrysostomou
(2008) 150–82.
54.  Clearchus (PAA 574860) is otherwise known
only from three titles and five short fragments
(the longest five lines) preserved in Athenaeus.
55.  Athenocles (PAA 111952) is otherwise
unknown.
56.  The restoration Πυρ[ρήν] (PAA 796185; oth-
erwise unknown) is now sanctioned by the
authority not just of Kirchner in IG II2, but of
Kassel–Austin as well. (Wilhelm [1906a] 129, in
fact proposed Πυρ[ήν].) But the name is attested
only once, in a 4th-c. BCE building inscription
from Epidaurus, and the odds are overwhelm-
190 chapter four
ing that what ought to be read is Πύρ[ρος]. Less
likely, but still possible, is Πύρ[ρων] (already sug-
gested by Köhler) or Πύρ[ων].
57.  Alcenor (PAA 121377) is otherwise unknown.
58.  Timocles (PA 13726; PAA 887000) refers in
fr. 4 to a number of individuals bribed by Har-
palus in 324 BCE, and appears to be a younger
contemporary of Alexis (45; e.g. Alex. fr. 77,
cf. Timocl. fr. 15). 27 titles and 42 fragments of
his plays survive.
59.  Procleides (PAA 788650) was victorious at
the City Dionysia in 332/1 BCE (IG II2 2318.1668),
but is otherwise unknown.
60.  Menander son of Diopeithes of the deme
Cephisea (PA 9875; PAA 641805) took the prize
for the first time at the Lenaea in 317/6 BCE,
with the Dyscolus (test. 50). The Marmor Parium
(FGrH 239 B 14 = test. 48) puts his first victory
(sc. at the City Dionysia) in 316/5 BCE, and his
Chariot­eer took fifth there in 313/2 (IG II2 2323a
Col. 1.2; cf. Col. 1.17). Menander died in 292/1 BCE,
aged 52 (anon. de Com. III.60, p. 10 Koster = test.
3.8). Gellius (17.4.4 = test. 46), citing Apollodorus
FGrH 244 F 43, reports that he took the prize a
total of “only” eight times. For revivals of plays
by Menander, see SEG XXVI.208 fr. A.10; IG II2
2323.171–2, 412.
61.  Philemon son of Damon of Syracuse (PA
14277; PAA 925890; “Philemon I”) is said by the
Marmor Parium (FGrH 239 B 7 = test. 13) to have
been victorious for the first time (sc. at the City
Dionysia) in 328/7 BCE. He is repeatedly said to
have lived into his nineties (test. 1.4; 4–6), and the
Philemon who participated in a dramatic festival
on Delos in 280 BCE (IG XI.2 107.25) along with
Nicostratus (65) and Ameinias (67) seems more
likely to be him than his son Philemon Junior
(IG II2 2325C.83), to whom Kassel–Austin assign
the testimonium. Philemon III (IG II2 2323.15;
2325C.102) is probably another of his descen-
dants. 61 titles and 198 fragments of Philemon I’s
plays survive.
62.  Apollodorus is Apollodorus of Gela (PA 1383;
PAA 143440), whom the Suda (α 3405 = test. 1) calls
a contemporary of Menander (60). Eight titles and
five fragments of Apollodorus of Gela’s plays sur-
vive, although some of those assigned in antiquity
simply to “Apollodorus” (“Carystius an Gelous
incertum”) doubtless belong to him as well.
63.  Diphilus son of Dion of Sinope (PAA 369380)
was the brother of the comic poet Diodorus, who
seems to have taken both second and third place
at the Lenaea in 285/4 BCE (IG II2 2319 Col. 1.8,
10). 59 titles and 135 fragments of Diphilus’ plays
survive. For a revival of one of his comedies in
237/6 BCE, see SEG XXVI.208 fr. A.8.
64.  Philippides son of Philocles of the deme
Cephale (PA 14356 D; PAA 928970) took the prize
at the City Dionysia in 312/1 BCE with The Initiate
(IG II2 2323a Col. I.7), and was active in Athenian
politics until the late 280s BCE (test. 2–3). He
might also be restored as the fifth-place poet at
the Lenaea in 286/5 (IG II2 2319 Col. I.3). 16 titles
and 41 fragments of Philippides’ plays survive.
65.  Nicostratus II (PA 11038; PAA 717838) took
second place at the City Dionysia in 312/1 BCE
(IG II2 2323a Col. I.9–10) and was still active in
280 BCE, when he participated in a dramatic
festival on Delos along with Philemon (61) and
Ameinias (67) (IG XI.2 107.25 = test. 3). Perhaps
the comic poets Nicostratus I (early 4th century)
and Nicostratus III (IG II2 2323.279; mid-180s BCE)
were other members of the family.
66.  Calliades (PAA 553000) is otherwise unknown,
unless he is to be restored as the fifth-place poet
at the Lenaea in 286/5 (IG II2 2319 Col. I.3).
67.  Ameinias (PAA 123115) took third place at the
City Dionysia in 312/1 BCE, apparently as a very
young man (IG II2 2323a Col. I.12–13), and was
still active in 280 BCE, when he participated in a
dramatic festival on Delos along with Philemon
(61) and Nicostratus (65) (IG XI.2 107.25 = test. 3).
86.  Euthycrates (PAA 433040) is otherwise
unknown.
87.  Aropus (PAA 203810) is otherwise unknown.
88.  Eteagoras (PAA 423985) is otherwise unknown.
89.  Polycleitus (PAA 778770) is otherwise unknown.
90.  Philiscus II (PAA 930645) is otherwise
unknown. Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 230, 232,
identifies him with the undated comic poet
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325e 191
(PAA 930640; Kassel–Austin’s Philiscus I), seven
of whose titles are preserved at Suda φ 357. But
the majority of those plays are divine-birth come-
dies of a sort typical of the early 4th century BCE
(cf. Nesselrath [1995]), and the two men ought
probably to be distinguished.
91.  Neanthes (PAA 703040) is otherwise
unknown. Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 232, iden-
tifies him with the 3rd-century BCE historian
Neanthes of Cyzicus (FGrH 84). But nothing sug-
gests that that Neanthes also wrote comedies.
More plausibly, she suggests on the basis of Hsch.
ν 179 that a dramatic poet of this name wrote an
Orestes.
92.  PAA 707345; otherwise unknown. Peppas-
Delmousou (1977) 232–3, restores [Νη]λεύς and
identifies the poet with the man who served
as an executor of the estate of the philosopher
Theophrastus (d. ca. 288/7 BCE). But there is no
reason to believe that that Neleus wrote come-
dies, and other restorations of the name are pos-
sible in any case.
93.  Either [Δι]όδωρος (cf. IG II2 2319 Col. I.8, 10)
or [Θε]όδωρος (PAA 506064; otherwise unknown)
is possible. Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 233, argues
that the space available on the stone is more com-
patible with the latter, although the restoration
amounts to explaining obscurum per obscurius.
Cf. 97, where the same options for restoration
are available.
94.  Charicleides (PAA 982800) is perhaps to be
restored. He is otherwise known only from a
single three-verse fragment of his Necklace pre-
served at Ath. 7.325d that addresses the tri-form
goddess Hecate.
97.  See 93.
98.  Eumedes (PAA 439315) is otherwise known
only from a single, short, badly damaged frag-
ment from his Murder Victim preserved at Ath.
15.699f.
99.  Pandaetes (PAA 763600) is otherwise
unknown.
100.  Menestheus (PAA 644965) is otherwise
unknown.
103.  Pythodorus (PAA 794070) is otherwise
unknown.
104.  PAA 400330. Over-restored ᾿Ερατο[σθένης]
by Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 234–5, who identi-
fies him with the poet and scholar Eratosthenes
of Cyrene (ca. 285–194 BCE), who was head of the
Library in Alexandria after Apollonius Rhodius,
but is not known to have written comedies.
105.  Callimachus of Cyrene (fl. 280s–240s BCE)
is said at Suda κ 227 (test. 1) to have written com-
edies, hence the—arguably overconfident—res-
toration of his name here by Peppas-Delmousou
(1977) 235.
106.  PAA 211955. Over-restored ᾿Αρχίδ[ικος] by
Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 236.
107.  PAA 855075.
108.  PAA 939520. Over-restored Φιλόμ[ηλος] by
Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 236.
109.  PAA 711775. Over-restored Νικί[ας] by
Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 236, and tentatively
identified by her with a Milesian physician and
friend of Theocritus of Chios who composed epi-
grams but is nowhere associated with Athens or
comic poetry.
110.  Dexicrates (PA 3225; PAA 303545) is other-
wise known only from a brief entry at Suda δ 228
(= test. 1) that draws directly on Ath. 3.123f, who
quotes a two-line fragment from his Self-Deceivers,
and from a glancing mention in the grammarian
Herodian (= fr. 2).
111.  PAA 777205.
112.  PAA 502165.
113.  PAA 513415; over-restored Θέω[ν] by Wil-
helm (1906a) 163 (followed by Kassel–Austin).
Αlthough this is the most likely name (243 exam-
ples in LGPN I-V.A), Θέω[ρος] (46 examples) or
other less common names are also possible.
114.  PAA 504555. Presumably to be restored
either Θεόδ[ωρος] (ca. 1100 examples in LGPN
I–V.A) or θεόδ[οτος] (ca. 500 examples).
115.  Dioscurides (PAA 364220) is otherwise
unknown, although he might be a descendant
of the homonymous comic actor (PAA 364250;
Stephanis #773) mentioned at SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.9
192 chapter four
(237/6 BCE); thus Meritt, although his misdating
of SEG XXVI 208 two decades too early may mean
that his calculations are off by a generation.
116.  Euboulides (PAA 427720) is otherwise
unknown.
117.  Theodorus (PAA 506065) is otherwise
unknown.
118.  PAA 745890 (reading [᾿Ο]νησι[ - - - ]).
120–7. The absence from Col. VII of the names
of any of the comic poets known from IG II2 2323
to have competed at the City Dionysia in the
180s BCE, and in particular Timostratus and Para-
monos, suggests that the records for those years
appeared here, in the missing upper portion of
Col. VIII.
128.  Emmenides (PAA 387545) is perhaps a
descendant of the 3rd-century BCE comic actor
by the same name (IG II2 2325D.29; 2325F.82);
thus Wilhelm (1906a) 134.
129.  Ariston (PAA 200150) is presumably to be
identified with the comic poet Ariston of Pha-
lerum (PA 2179 S; PAA 201440) the son of Timo-
stratus, who competed in a dramatic festival on
Samos in the middle of the 2nd century BCE (IG
XII.6 173.10 = Ariston test. 1) and whose father must
in turn be the man who staged The Homebody at
the City Dionysia in 184/3 BCE (IG II2 2323.291).
Ariston’s son Poses and his grandson Ariston II
were also comic poets. No titles or fragments of
the comedies of Ariston I are preserved.
130.  Nouius (PAA 721180) is otherwise unknown.
131.  Dionysius III (PAA 337450) is otherwise
unknown.
132.  Agathocles (PAA 103105) is presumably to
be identified with the man whose Like-minded-
ness was staged at the City Dionysia in 155/4 BCE
(IG II2 2323.519), at the same festival as Biottus’
Ignoramus (IG II2 2323.515; cf. 134)
133.  Archicles (PAA 213185) is otherwise unknown.
134.  Biottus (PAA 266120) is presumably to be
identified with the man whose Poet was staged at
the City Dionysia in 168/7 BCE (IG II2 2323.417) and
whose Ignoramus was staged there in 155/4 BCE
(IG II2 2323.515), at the same festival as Agatho-
cles’ Like-mindedness (IG II2 2323.519; cf. 132).
135.  Nicodemus (PAA 714095) is otherwise
unknown.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325f 193
IG II2 2325F (= 2325.190–234):
Comic Actors Victorious at the Lenaea
Fr. i´ is from the top of the column but has no
heading. There must thus have been at least one
additional column to the left (our Col. II) record-
ing victories from an earlier period. Beyond this,
we know about the origins of the competition
only that comedies were first performed at the
Lenaea most likely in the early 440s BCE (see
IG II2 2325C introductory remarks), and that a
contest for comic actors was in place by the mid-
300s (cf. IG II2 2321–2 with 2322 introductory
remarks).
Callippus “the Younger”, who appears near
the top of the first column preserved on fr. y + z
+ a´ + SEG XXVI 207 (70), was first victorious at
the City Dionysia in 313/2 BCE or earlier (IG II2
2323a Col. I.4), while Asclepiodorus, who appears
just below him (71), was first victorious at the
City Dionysia in 312/1 BCE or earlier (IG II2 2323a
Col. I.19). Both men were extremely successful at
the Lenaea, taking the prize four and five times,
respectively, and the City Dionysia victories whose
dates we happen fortuitously to know may not be
their first. The gap between Callippus and Ascle-
piodorus, on the one hand, and the men whose
names are preserved at the bottom of a column
on fr. x, a number of whom appear to have been
professionally well-established by the 340s BCE,
on the other, is nonetheless large enough that
an additional lost column (our Col. IV) must be
restored at that point in the text.
As for absolute dates, Hieronymus (76) was
victorious at the Lenaea in 286/5 BCE (IG II2 2319
Col. I.5), although not necessarily for the first time,
since he took the prize at the festival four times
over the course of his life. The hand of the original
stonecutter breaks off at line 83, which may be
precisely 279/8 BCE (see IG II2 2325 general intro-
ductory remarks); if so, Hieronymus’ initial victory,
recorded seven lines earlier, is most likely earlier
than 286/5 BCE, unless for these eight years no
previous victor took the prize again. The 35 indi-
viduals whose competitive records are preserved
in IG II2 2325F took the prize at the Lenaea a total
of 66 times, = 1.88 times apiece. If we assume, in the
absence of any specific evidence to the contrary,
that actors whose competitive records are not
preserved were on average about as successful as
those whose records survive, every individual col-
umn of 17 names ought thus to represent records
for about 32 years.27 This puts the initial victory of
Hieronymus at the festival around 292/1 BCE, and
the initial victories of Callippus “the Younger” and
Asclepiodorus around 303/2 and 301/0, respec-
tively, slightly later than we might otherwise have
expected. Because these are averages, however,
they can be expected to work better when spread
over larger sections of text, and the more signifi-
cant point is that if we continue to count back-
ward, multiplying the number of lines of text by
1.88, the entry at the top of the lost Col. IV ought
to date to ca. 338/7 BCE (which fits with the fact
that the men mentioned at the bottom of Col. III
are all known to have been prominent elsewhere
in the 340s BCE and after); Satyrus’ initial victory
recorded in line 35 at the top of Col. III ought to
date to ca. 369/8 BCE; and the entry at the top of
the lost column to the left of that one ought to
date to ca. 401/0. One additional column would
thus carry the list back to ca. 433/2 BCE, about
the time the tragic actors contest was also estab-
lished at the Lenaea (cf. IG II2 2325H introductory
remarks).
If we calculate on the same basis in the other
direction, the change from the second hand to
the third at lines 95–6 falls more or less exactly
where we expect it, ca. 256/5 BCE. This must also
be about the point at which the Lenaea moved
to an every-other-year schedule (cf. IG II2 2325E
introductory remarks), so that every line here-
after represents records for approximately 3.76
27 Col. V, which is particularly well preserved, assigns a
total of 28 victories to 15 men. The two individuals whose
records are not preserved (lines 79–80) had a minimum of
two victories, and more likely at least four, for a total of
about 30–32, and perhaps a few more, for the column.
194 chapter four

36. IG II2 2325 fr. i´ (EM 8199; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

the victors lists: ig ii2 2325f
195

37. IG II2 2325 fr. x (EM 8204; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 196
chapter four

38. IG II2 2325 frr. y + z + a´ + SEG XXVI 207 (fr. q´) (EM 8205 + 8205a + 249 + 13247; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325f 197

(rather than 1.88) years. Philocrates’ initial vic-
tory recorded at the top of Col. VII in line 103
ought thus to date to ca. 226/5 BCE, putting the
initial victory of the actor whose name is partially
preserved at the bottom of the short Col. VII in
line 114 ca. 185/4 BCE. Another matching short
column would bring the catalogue down to about
the mid-140s BCE.
Technical Description
All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble.
Fragment i´ (lines 35‒7).
EM 8199.
H 0.116; W 0.129; T 0.050; LH 0.010.
The top is preserved and has a roughly smoothed
anathyrosis, with a band finely smoothed with a
claw chisel running along the inscribed face; all
other sides and the back are broken. A moulding
(H 0.023), with the complete profile preserved,
runs along the top of the inscribed face.
Editions: Koumanoudes (1878a) 81; Köhler (1878)
248; IG II 977l; Wilhelm (1906a) 161.
Fragment x (lines 46–51).
EM 8204.
H 0.132; W 0.299; T 0.067; LH 0.010 (φ 0.014).
The bottom is preserved and is roughly smoothed,
with a band along the inscribed edge finely
smoothed with a claw chisel; all other sides and
the back are broken. The inscribed face is badly
damaged, and pieces of the surface have flaked
away.
Editions: Koumanoudes (1878a) 84; Köhler (1878)
246–7; IG II 977p; Wilhelm (1906a) 150–1.
Fragments y + z + a´ + SEG XXVI 207 (= MDAI(A)
92 (1977) 238‒43) (lines 69‒105, 112‒19).
EM 8205 + 8205a + 249 + 13247; south slope of
the Acropolis (EM 8205 + 8205a + 249); Acropo-
lis? (EM 13247).
H 0.435 (inscribed face 0.324); W 0.812; T 0.232;
LH 0.009‒0.011 (but some variation even beyond
these measurements).
The top is preserved and is roughly smoothed to
a depth of ca. 0.080, after which it rises at least
0.075 before breaking off; the vertical face of the
rise is very roughly picked. The bottom is appar-
ently also original but is invisible in the stone’s
present position; the left and right sides and the
back are broken. A moulding (H 0.022), largely
intact but with some damage along its top, runs
along the top of the inscribed face. The inscribed
face is finely smoothed with a claw chisel. The
second and third columns (lines 86‒102 and
103‒5, 112‒14) are cut by different hands.
Editions: fr. y: IG II 977u. fr. z: IG II 977v. frr. y +
z: Koumanoudes (1878a) 81; Köhler (1878) 243–4.
frr. y + z + a´: Wilhelm (1906a) 151–5. frr. y + z +
a´ + EM 13247: Peppas-Delmousou (1977) 238–43
(SEG XXVI 207).

Col. I
[ὑποκριτῶν κωμικῶν]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
198 chapter four

[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. II
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
20 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
25 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
30 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. III
35/190 [Σάτ]υρος ΠΙ[ - - - ]
[Φι]λ̣ ήμων ΙΙ
192 [Κα]λλίστρατ[ος - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
40 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
45 [ - - - ]
193 [ . . . ]κων ΙΙΙΙ
Παρμέν̣ων Ι
195 Λύκων ΙΙ
Ν[α]υσικ[ράτης - - - ]
50 [Ἀ]μ̣ φιχ[άρης - - - ]
198 [ . . ]ρ̣[ - - - ]
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325f 199

Col. IV
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
55 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
60 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
65 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. V
199 Ἀρισταγόρας Ι
70/200 Κάλλιππος ΙΙΙΙ
Ἀσκληπιόδωρος Π
[Π]ολύευκτος Ι
[Π]υρραλεύς Ι
Μ̣οσχίων ΙΙ
75/205 [Δη]μ̣ [ο]φ̣[ῶ]ν Ι
[Ἱ]ερώνυμος ΙΙΙΙ 286/5 or earlier
[Ἀ]ριστόμαχος ΙΙΙ
[Δέρ]κετος Ι[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
80/210 Φιλοκ[λῆς - - - ]
Ἀριστοκράτης Ι
Ἐμμενίδης Ι
Αὐτόλυκος Ι
Φιλωνίδης Ι
85/215 Σωκράτης Ι

Col. VI
Πολυ̣[ - - - ]
Λυκίσ[κος - - - ]
Σωσικλῆ̣ [ς - - - ]
Πολύζηλο[ς - - - ]
200 chapter four

90/220 Πυθάρατος Ι
Καλλίας ΙΙΙ
Μενεκλ̣ ῆς̣ Ι
Δ[ημ]ή�̣ [τρι]ος ΙΙ
Πιτθεύς Ι
95/225 Ἡρα[κ]λείδ̣η̣ς ΙΙ
[ - - - ]
226 [ ca. 8 ]ρος ΙΙ
[ . . . . . ]Ι
Ι̣[ . . . . ]ς ΙΙ
100 Δ[ . . . ]κράτης Ι
230 Φιλ[ο]στέφανος Ι
231 Ἑρμόφαντος Ι

Col. VII
[Φι]λ̣ οκράτης Ι
[ . . . . ]τ[ . . . ]ν̣η̣ς ΙΙ
105 [ . . . . . ]άνης ΙΙ
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
110 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
232 Φι[λ - - - ]
Φερ[ - - - ]
234 Δι[ - - - ]
115 vacat
vacat
vacat
vacat
vacat
1 short column missing at the end?

Epigraphical Notes
36. Dotted lambda: only the bottom portion of
the right diagonal is preserved.
47.  The underlined letters are no longer visible,
but the surface may well have flaked off rela-
tively recently. Dotted nu: only the left vertical is
preserved.
48.  The underlined letter is no longer visible,
but the surface may well have flaked off relatively
recently.
50.  Dotted mu: the bottom half of the right verti-
cal is preserved along the break.
51.  Dotted rho: only the top quarter of the letter
is preserved; beta is possible.
74.  Dotted mu: only the bottom tip of the right
diagonal is preserved.
75.  Dotted mu: only the upper left corner of the
letter is preserved. Dotted phi: both tips of the
vertical are preserved, but the center of the letter
is gone; iota is possible.
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325f 201
86.  Dotted upsilon: only the vertical is preserved.
88.  Dotted eta: only the bottom of the left verti-
cal is preserved.
92.  Dotted lambda: only the bottom tip of the
right diagonal is preserved. Dotted sigma: the
bottom horizontal is preserved along the break.
93.  Dotted eta: only the bottom of the left verti-
cal and the all of the right vertical are preserved;
two iotas are possible.
95.  Dotted delta: only the diagonals are pre-
served; lambda is possible. Dotted eta: only the
tops of the verticals are preserved.
99.  Dotted iota: only the bottom portion of the
vertical is preserved.
103.  Dotted lambda: only the bottom of the right
diagonal is preserved.
104.  Dotted nu: only the verticals are preserved.
Dotted eta: only the top portion of the right verti-
cal is preserved.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
35.  Satyrus (PAA 812965) is probably to be identi-
fied with the Satyrus (PAA 813890; O’Connor #429;
Stephanis #2235) who performed before Philip II
of Macedon in 347 BCE (D. 19.193; D.S. 16.55) and
who is supposed to have been a contemporary
of Demosthenes (384–322 BCE) and of the tragic
actor Theodorus (IG II2 2325H.26; cf. 36).
36.  Philemon (PAA 925295; O’Connor #477;
Stephanis #2485) performed in two plays by
Anaxandrides ( fl. 370s–350s BCE; see IG II2
2325E.37), according to Arist. Rh. 1413b25–9; is
said at Aeschin. 1.115 (345 BCE) to have arranged
a loan for Timarchus; and was mentioned along
with the tragic actor Theodorus (IG II2 2325H.26;
cf. 35 above) on a choregic monument on Thasos
(IG XII Suppl. 400.5; cf. SEG XXIX 767 for the
date).
37.  Callistratus (PAA 561115; O’Connor #280;
Stephanis #1356) is otherwise unknown; but
cf. IG II2 2322.3.
46.  O’Connor #527; Stephanis #2708. Stephanis
suggests [Γλαύ]κων (= Stephanis #552; undated
and obscure), although this seems slightly too
long for the available space; better possibilities
include [Γλύ]κων, [Ἡρά]κων and [Λεύ]κων.
47.  Parmenon (PAA 767255; O’Connor #393;
Stephanis #2012) is referred to at Aeschin. 1.157
(345 BCE) as performing at a recent Rural Diony-
sia festival in Collytus.
48.  Lycon (PAA 611915; O’Connor #319; Stephanis
#1567; Berve i #478) performed for Alexander the
Great at Tyre in 331 BCE (Plu. Alex. 29.6; [Plu.]
Mor. 334e) and again at the mass wedding of
Alexander and his companions to native women
in Susa in 324 BCE (Chares FGrH 125 F 4; cf. 51).
49.  Nausicrates (PAA 701720; O’Connor #355;
Stephanis #1773) has been dubiously identified
with the comic poet of the same name (PAA
701722 ~ 701725; see IG II2 2325E.43) mentioned
at Aeschin. 1.98, 100 (345 BCE).
50.  Amphichares (PAA 126220; O’Connor #27;
Stephanis #169) is otherwise unknown.
51.  O’Connor #498; Stephanis #2579, both of
whom accept Wankel’s [Φο]ρ[μίων] (PAA 962860
“over-restored”; Berve i #811), another of the actors
who performed at the mass wedding of Alexan-
der and his companions to native women in Susa
in 324 BCE (Chares FGrH 125 F 4; cf. 48).
69.  Aristagoras (PAA 163310; O’Connor #56;
Stephanis #305) was very tentatively (“it may not
be mere chance”) restored by Capps (1899) 404 n.
3 at IG II2 2325 fr. incert. sed. g'.1, assigning that
fragment to IG II2 2325D.
70.  IG II2 2323a Col. I.3–4 shows that both a Cal-
lippus “the Elder” and a Callippus “the Younger”—
most likely a father-son or uncle-nephew
pair—were active as tragic actors in 313/2 BCE,
when Callippus “the Younger” took the prize at
the City Dionysia. The approximate date of the
entry (see introductory remarks above), together
with the absence of another Callippus below, sug-
gest that the individual in question here is Callip-
pus “the Younger” (PAA 559155; O’Connor #276;
Stephanis #1353, cf. 1350). If Callipus “the Elder”
(PAA 559150; Stephanis #1352, cf. 1350)—perhaps
referred to also at IG II2 2322.3—appeared in the
Lenaea list, his name must have stood above, in
202 chapter four
the lost Col. IV. Which Callippus was intended to
act in the cancelled performance of Menander’s
Imbrioi in 302/1 BCE (POxy. 1235 col. iii 111–12 =
Imbrioi test. 1) is impossible to say; but the man
who participated in a dramatic festival on Delos
in 268 BCE (IG XI.2 110.33) must be Callippus “the
Younger” or another, even more junior member
of the family.
71.  Asclepiodorus (PAA 221705; O’Connor #93,
542a; Stephanis #458) acted at the City Diony-
sias in 313/2 and 312/1 BCE (IG II2 2323a Col. I.1,
8) and was most likely victorious there in 312/1
(IG II2 2323a Col. I.19); he was dubiously restored
by Capps (1899) 404 n. 3, at fr. incert. sed. g'.3,
assigning the fragment to IG II2 2325D.
72.  Polyeuctus (PAA 778075; O’Connor #404,
546a; Stephanis #2094) was dubiously restored
by Capps (1899) 404 n. 3, at fr. incert. sed. g'.2,
assigning the fragment to IG II2 2325D.
73.  Pyrrhaleus (PAA 796125; O’Connor #419;
Stephanis #2183) is otherwise unknown.
74.  Moschion (PAA 659145; O’Connor #349;
Stephanis #1742) is perhaps to be identified with
the Moschion son of Eubulus of Gargara who was
a comic didaskalos in Delphi in the mid-250s BCE
(SGDI 2565.61 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 9.61; thus
Capps (1900b) 80).
75.  Demophon (PAA 321652; O’Connor #135;
Stephanis #659) is otherwise unknown.
76.  Hieronymus (PAA 533955; O’Connor #254;
Stephanis #1263) was victorious—not necessar-
ily for the first time—at the Lenaea in 286/5 BCE
(IG II2 2319 Col. I.5), in a contest in which Aristo­
machus (77) also competed (IG II2 2319 Col. I.2).
He is presumably also to be identified with the
man who appeared as a κωμῳδός on Delos in
280 BCE (IG XI.2 107.19).
77.  Aristomachus (PAA 172535; O’Connor #66;
Stephanis #355) competed at the Lenaea in
286/5 BCE (IG II2 2319 Col. I.2), when Hierony-
mus (76) was victorious (IG II2 2319 Col. I.5),
and again in 285/4 (IG II2 2319 Col. I.7, 9), and is
probably to be restored in the City Dionysia list
at IG II2 2325D.21.
78.  Dercetus (PAA 303888; O’Connor #121; Steph-
anis #601) also appears in the City Dionysia list at
IG II2 2325D.24, three lines below Aristomachus
(77), three lines above Philocles (80), and five
lines above Emmenides (82).
80.  Philocles (PAA 935350; O’Connor #484;
Stephanis #2519) also appears in the City Diony-
sia list at IG II2 2325D.27, three lines below Der-
cetus (78) and two lines above Emmenides (82).
See also IG II2 2323.511.
81.  Aristocrates (PAA 170910; O’Connor #63;
Stephanis #344) is otherwise unknown.
82.  Emmenides (PAA 387550; O’Connor #168;
Stephanis #837) also appears in the City Diony-
sia list at IG II2 2325D.29, three lines below Philo-
nides (84) and two lines below Philocles (80). See
also IG II2 2325E.128.
83.  Autolycus (PAA 239845) is probably to be
identified with the Autolycus son of Aston of
Aetolia (O’Connor #101; Stephanis #489; Grainger
p. 127) who participated in dramatic competitions
in Delphi in 271 and 270 BCE (SGDI 2564.66 =
Nachtergael, Galates no. 8.66; 2565.68 = Nachter-
gael, Galates no. 9.68; thus Capps [1900b] 81).
84.  Philonides (PAA 956835; O’Connor #495;
Stephanis #2567) also appears in the City Diony-
sia list at IG II2 2325D.26, two lines after Derce-
tus (78), one line before Philocles (80), and three
lines before Emmenides (82), and is probably to
be identified with the man who participated in
a dramatic festival on Delos in 263 BCE (IG XI.2
113.25; thus Capps [1900b] 81).
85.  Socrates (PAA 855840; O’Connor #449; Steph-
anis #2330) is otherwise unknown.
86.  PAA 779025; O’Connor #406; Stepha-
nis #2088. Perhaps to be identified with the
Πολυκ[λῆς] (Stephanis #2098) who appears in the
City Dionysia list at IG II2 2325D.30 immediately
below Emmenides (82), and/or with the Polycles
(Stephanis #2100) who took part in a dramatic
competition on Delos in 280 BCE (IG XI.2 107.19;
thus Capps [1900b] 81).
87.  Lyciscus (PAA 610820; O’Connor #317; Steph-
anis #1561) is presumably to be identified with
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325f 203
the Lyciscus son of Lycus of Cephalla who par-
ticipated in two dramatic competitions at Delphi
in the mid-250s BCE (SGDI 2564.61 = Nachtergael,
Galates, no. 8.61; 2566.68 = Nachtergael, Galates,
no. 10.68) (thus Capps (1900b) 81).
88.  Sosicles (PAA 861635; O’Connor #452; Steph-
anis #2347) is otherwise unknown.
89.  Polyzelus (PAA 778405; O’Connor #405;
Stephanis #2096) is otherwise unknown.
90.  Pytharatus (PAA 793140; O’Connor #418;
Stephanis #2168) is otherwise unknown.
91.  Callias (PAA 553680; O’Connor #269; Stepha-
nis #1323) also appears as the victor in an actors
competition in 237/6 BCE (SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.7).
Despite Capps (1900b) 81, the Callias son of Cal-
lippus (PA 7827; PAA 553890) whose name is
preserved in a funerary inscription at IG II2 11770
seems to belong a century or so earlier. For pos-
sible family connections with other comic poets
and actors named Callias or Callippus, see IG II2
2323a Col. I.3.
92.  Menecles (PAA 643150; O’Connor #328;
Stephanis #1649) is presumably to be identified
with the man who participated in dramatic festi-
vals on Delos in 265/4 BCE (IG XI.2 107.19; 112.15,
17; thus Capps [1900b] 82).
93.  Demetrius (PAA 308265; O’Connor #126;
Stephanis #612) is otherwise unknown.
94.  Pittheus (PAA 774370; O’Connor #399a;
Stephanis #2064) is otherwise unknown.
95.  Heracleides (PAA 484750 ~ 484755; O’Connor
#215; Stephanis #1075) is presumably to be identi-
fied with the man who participated in a dramatic
festival at Delphi around 265 BCE (F.Delphes III.1.
478.32), and perhaps also with the Heracleides
son of Lycus of Ambracia (Stephanis #1085) who
was a comic dancer at a festival there sometime
in the mid-250s BCE (SGDI 2565.79 = Nachtergael,
Galates no. 9.79; 2566.75 = Nachtergael, Galates
no. 10.75).
97.  O’Connor #543; Stephanis #2766.
98.  Stephanis #2996.
99.  O’Connor #548; Stephanis #1244. O’Connor’s
Ἡ[γησία]ς (O’Connor #209; Stephanis #1055;
cf. Delcroix and Giannattasio Andria [1997] 127–
9, 136–47) seems slightly too long for the avail-
able space.
100.  PAA 316440; O’Connor #119, 133; Stephanis
#648; otherwise unknown. Wilhelm suggested
either Δ[ημο]κράτης or Δ[εξι]κράτης, both of
which are plausible.
101.  Philostephanus is PAA 942320; O’Connor
#489; Stephanis #2549. Wilhelm suggested that
he might be identified with the obscure comic
poet of the same name (PAA 942325).
102.  Hermophantus (PAA 421955; O’Connor #181;
Stephanis #908) is presumably to be identified
with the man who acted in a dramatic festival
on Samos in the mid-240s BCE (IG XII.6(1) 176.5),
and perhaps also with the individual described
at Jason FGrH 632 F 1 as performing Homer’s
poetry—clearly in a deliberately amusing fash-
ion—at Alexandria; cf. Delcroix and Giannatta-
sio Andria (1997) 123–7.
103.  Philocrates (PAA 937060; Stephanis #2525)
is otherwise unknown.
104.  Stephanis #372, who follows Peppas-Del-
mousou (1977) 240, in restoring [᾿Αρισ]τ[οφά]-
ν[η]ς but seems to reject her identification of the
individual in question as the Aristophanes of Soli
(O’Connor #71; Stephanis #373) who participated
in a dramatic festival on Delos in 279 BCE (IG
XI.2 108.21).
105.  Stephanis #220, who follows Peppas-Del-
mousou (1977) 240, in restoring [᾿Αντιφ]άνης and
suggests that the individual in question be identi-
fied with the actor who performed at the Lenaea
in 286/5 and perhaps also 285/4 BCE (IG II2 2319
Col. I.4, 13), although this seems a generation
or so too early for entries at this point in the
catalogue.
112.  PAA 921230; O’Connor #475; Stephanis
#2477.
113.  PAA 918350; O’Connor #472; Stephanis
#2468. Probably Φερ[ε - - - ].
114.  PAA 304805; O’Connor #123; Stephanis #603
(all reading Δη̣ [μ - - - ]). Cf. IG II2 2325D.66, 68
(from approximately the same period).
204 chapter four

IG II2 2325G (= 2325.235–46):

Tragic Poets Victorious at the Lenaea

The list of tragic actors victorious at the Lenaea
begins probably in the mid- to late 430s BCE (see
IG II2 2325H introductory remarks). Whether the
competition for tragic poets was instituted ear-
lier, perhaps at the same time as the competition
for comic poets, in the early to mid-440s BCE (see
IG II2 2325E introductory remarks), is unclear.
Astydamas II (25, if correctly restored) belongs
to the 370s–340s BCE, and his initial victory was
more likely earlier rather than later in that period,
given that he took the prize at least six times at
this festival (cf. IG II2 2325A.44). Tragic poets at
the City Dionysia in roughly the same period
averaged three to four victories apiece (cf. IG II2
2325A introductory remarks). If we assume, in the
absence of any specific evidence to the contrary,
that the same was true at the Lenaea, only one lost
column (containing the heading ποητῶν τραγικῶν
and 16 names) should be restored before the par-
tially preserved column that contains lines 20–6,
allowing room for 23 victors before Astydamas.
There is room for nine names below Asty-
damas in Col. II. If we again assume that these
poets averaged three to four victories apiece, the
initial—and in three cases sole—victories of the
otherwise obscure Achaeus II (35), Philinus (36),
Asclepiades (37), Caerius (38) and [ . . ]mostratus
(39) belong to the 330s–320s BCE or so.
IG II2 2325H leaves no doubt that tragedies
continued to be performed at the Lenaea well
into the 2nd century BCE. Three to four columns
must thus be missing from the end of the list.

39. IG II2 2325 frr. e´ + c (EM 8196a + 8192; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325g 205

Technical Description The top is preserved and has been roughly

All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble.
Fragments e´ + c (lines 20–6, 35–9).
EM 8196a + 8192.
H 0.209; W 0.356; T 0.158; LH 0.010–0.011.
smoothed with a claw chisel; the left side is also
preserved and has been completely and finely
finished. The right side and back are broken.
Along the top front face are traces of a moulding
(H 0.023), now almost completely broken away.
Editions: fr. e´: Wilhelm (1906a) 158. fr. c: Köhler
(1878) 250; IG II 977c; Wilhelm (1906a) 105.

Col. I
[ποητῶν τραγικῶν]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. II
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
20/235 [ . . . . . . ]η̣ ς ΙΙ
[Ἀπολλόδωρ]ος Π
[ . . . . . ]α̣ ς Ι
[ . . . . . ]δης Ι
[ . . . . κ]ράτης Ι
25/240 [Ἀστυδ]άμας [ΠΙ - - - ]
241 [ . . . . . ] . η̣ [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
30 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
206 chapter four

[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. III
35/242 Ἀχ[α]ι̣ό�̣ς Ι
Φιλ[ῖ]νος Ι
Ἀσκλ̣ ηπιάδης [ - - - ]
245 Καίριος Ι
246 [ . . ]μόστρατ[ος - - - ]
40 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
45 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
50 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
3–4 columns lost

Epigraphical Notes [Πολυχάρ]ης (TrGF 54). Both names seem slightly

20. Dotted eta: only the right vertical istoo long for the space available, and any restora-
preserved. tion amounts to little more than a guess.
22. Dotted alpha: only the bottom tip of the
21. Apollodorus (PAA 143740; TrGF 64), reason-
right diagonal is preserved; lambda and chi are
ably restored here by Reisch (1912) 339, is oth-
also possible. erwise undated, although the Suda (α 3406 =
26. Dotted space: only the upper right portion
test. 1) records the titles of six of his tragedies.
of a circle is preserved; theta, omicron and omega
Snell implausibly suggests that the same name be
are possible, as are beta and rho. Dotted eta: only
restored at fr. incert. gˊ.3 [ - - - ]ρος ΠΙ[ - - - ],
the upper parts of the verticals are preserved; nu
and that frr. gˊ and hˊ both be placed at the top
or pi might be possible. of IG II2 2325A Col. III (early 4th c.).
35. Dotted iota: only the upper part of the ver-
22. TrGF 65. Perhaps to be identified with IG II2
tical is preserved; tau might be possible. Dotted
2325A.42 [ 6–7 ]ας (TrGF 66; first victorious at the
omicron: only a trace of the upper part of the
City Dionysia in the 380s or 370s BCE), if 25 refers
circle remains along the break. to Astydamas II.
37. Dotted lambda: only the bottom tips of the
23. TrGF 67; but cf. 25.
diagonals are preserved; alpha is also possible.
24. TrGF 68; but cf. 25.
25. The reference to Astydamas II (PA 2649;
Prosopographical Notes and Comments PAA 223005; TrGF 60) places this section of the
20. TrGF 63. Hoffmann suggests restoring Lenaea catalogue in the early to mid-4th cen-
[Πατροκλ]ῆς (TrGF 57), and Snell proposes tury BCE; cf. IG II2 2325A.44. Astydamas I (TrGF
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325g 207
59), the father of Astydamas II, was also a tragic
playwright, and if the reference were to him, this
would presumably be part of Col. I, and 23 might
be restored [Εὐριπί]δης (with only one victory!)
and 24 [Μενεκ]ράτης (TrGF 35; cf. IG II2 2325B.8).
But the absence from this section of the list of
other names such as Sophocles and Agathon
strongly suggests that if either Astydamas is in
question here, it is Astydamas II.
26. TrGF 69 (reading [ . . . . . ]δ̣η[ς]).
35. Achaeus II (PAA 250415; TrGF 79) is other-
wise known only from a brief entry in the Suda
(α 4682 = test. 1) that credits him with 10 trag-
edies (although cf. IG II2 2363.15 = CAT B 1.15, a
late Hellenistic catalogue of tragedies and related
material in a library in Piraeus, which might refer
to this Achaeus rather than to his 5th-century
namesake Achaeus I [TrGF 20]).
36. PAA 927640; TrGF 80. Otherwise unknown.
37. PAA 217415 ~ 217635; TrGF 81. Otherwise known
only from IG II2 2363.16 = CAT B 1.16 (see 35).
38. PAA 550935; TrGF 82. Otherwise unknown.
39. TrGF 83. Otherwise unknown. The name
is uniformly restored [Τι]μόστρατος, although
[Δη]μόστρατος is approximately 2.5 times more
common among Athenians. If the poet was not an
Athenian, there are other possibilities as well.
208 chapter four

IG II2 2325H (= 2325.247–318):

Tragic Actors Victorious at the Lenaea

The overlap between the first three names in this
list and the sixth through eighth names in the
City Dionysia list (IG II2 2325B.7–9 with 7) sug-
gests that the actors contest began 10–15 years
later at the Lenaea than it did at the City Dio-
nysia, sometime in the 430s BCE or so; cf. IG II2
2325F introductory remarks (for a similar date
for the comic actors contest at the Lenaea). The
Lenaea list includes 55 victorious actors before
Gorgosthenes in line 60. The competitive records
of 26 of these men are preserved and assign them
a total of 52 victories, for an average of 2 victo-
ries apiece. If we assume, in the absence of any
specific evidence to the contrary, that the other
29 individuals in the list were successful at about
the same rate (= a total of 58 additional victo-
ries), there are 110 years or so between Chaere-
stratus’ victory in the first contest at the festival
and Gorgosthenes’, which must then date to
the 320s BCE, which fits with the—admittedly
limited—other information we have about him
(cf. IG II2 2325B.67).
The records at the top of Col. II should thus
date to ca. 400 BCE, and those at the top of
Col. III to ca. 365 BCE. These rough calculations
are confirmed by the firm date of 365/4 BCE for
Hephaestion’s sole victory recorded in 33. The
records at the top of Col. III must thus in fact
date to ca. 360 BCE; those at the top of Col. IV
to ca. 332 BCE (since Col. III has three vacats at
the bottom); and those at the top of Col. V to ca.
302 BCE (since Col. IV has two vacats at the bot-
tom). The top of Col. VI—in which the hand of
the second stonecutter, taking over where the
original stone-cutter left off in 279/8? BCE, is
first visible—is lost, as is the bottom of Col. V.
But the entries at the top of Col. VI must date to
ca. 262 BCE, meaning that the second stonecut-
ter took over somewhere in the lost lower por-
tion of Col. V. Assuming that the Lenaea moved
to an every-other-year schedule sometime in
the middle of the 3rd century BCE, the entries
at the top of Col. VII date to ca. 207 BCE, and
the records carry through to the 140s BCE or so.
But these are all only rough estimates, and the
presence of a few exceptionally successful actors
could throw the calculations out by a decade or
more at any point.

the victors lists: ig ii2 2325h
209

40. IG II2 2325 frr. r + s + t + u + v + w (EM 8203; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
210 chapter four

41. IG II2 2325 fr. dˊ (EM 8206; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

the victors lists: ig ii2 2325h
211

42. IG II2 2325 fr. q (EM 8210 + 8211; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 212
chapter four

43. IG II2 2325 fr. o´ (EM 8201; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325h 213
Technical Description
All fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble.
Fragments r + s + t + u + v + w (lines 1–68).
EM 8203 (the fragments were already joined
before the inventory number was assigned,
hence there is only one number); south slope of
the Acropolis, except fr. v found in area of the
Library of Hadrian (so Rangabé [1855] 803).
H 0.345; W 1.034; T 0.248 (excluding moulding);
LH 0.009–0.011 (ο, θ 0.007–0.008). The fragments
are joined and set in plaster; all measurements
are as if this were a single fragment.
The top (frr. r + s + t) is preserved and is moderately
finely smoothed; the cuttings for a staple clamp to
join frr. r + s are seemingly modern (the clamp is
no longer there). The right side (frr. v + w) is pre-
served and is finely smoothed; the bottom (frr. t +
w) seems to be original but is not now visible. The
left side and back are broken away. Running along
the top of the front face is a moulding (H 0.023)
that is worn but largely preserved.
Editions: fr. t: Koumanoudes (1878a) 83; Köhler
(1878) 249; IG II 977o. fr. u: Köhler (1878) 249;
IG II 977z. fr. v: Pittakys (1839) no. 313; Rang-
abé (1855) no. 1264; Koumanoudes (1878a) 85–6;
Köhler (1878) 248–9 (mistakenly joined with fr. b´,
which belongs to IG II2 2325D); IG II 977x. fr. w:
Koumanoudes (1878a) 84; Köhler (1878) 249; IG II
977b´. frr. r + s + t + u + v + w: Wilhelm (1906a)
143–6.
Fragment d´ (lines 69–75).
EM 8206; south slope of the Acropolis.
H 0.149; W 0.263; T 0.128 (excluding moulding);
LH 0.010–0.011.
The top is preserved, and along the front of the
top is a band that is smoothed, although not
finely, for anathyrosis; all other sides and the
back are broken away. Along the top of the front
is a moulding (H 0.022) that is now almost com-
pletely broken away. For a one-line lacuna some-
times erroneously introduced at the top of this
block, see the epigraphical note on line 69.
Editions: Koumanoudes (1878a) 81; Köhler (1878)
247–8; IG II 977s; Wilhelm (1906a) 156–8.
Fragment q (lines 77, 94–101, 115–19).
EM 8210 + 8211; south slope of the Acropolis.
H 0.191; W 0.831; T 0.366 (from upper fascia on
reverse); LH 0.008–0.012.
The bottom is preserved and is smoothly fin-
ished; both ends and the top are broken away.
The “back” is preserved and has the remains of
two fasciae and the text of IG II2 3080.
Editions: Koumanoudes (1878a) 82; Köhler (1878)
250–1; IG II 977d´; Wilhelm (1906a) 140–3.
Fragment o´ (lines 103, 120–1).
EM 8201; south slope of the Acropolis.
H 0.173; W 0.680 (inscribed face 0.466); T 0.416
(original) (0.365 excluding mouldings); LH 0.008–
0.010.
The top is preserved and is roughly smoothed
with a claw chisel; on the top are two small
(ca. 0.019 × 0.045), finely cut, rectangular cuttings
parallel to the face. The back is preserved and is
finely smoothed but uninscribed; a moulding (H
0.057) runs along the top of this face. Both ends
and the bottom are broken. A moulding (H 0.020)
runs along the top of the front face. At the right
end of the front face is a cutting (ca. 0.075 deep).
The left side of the cutting is at an oblique angle
(ca. 120 degrees); the right side is broken away.
The first 0.02–0.03 of the left side of the cutting
is finely smoothed, while the remaining 0.06 is
smoothed with a claw chisel; the back of the cut-
ting is rough-picked with a point. The reason for
this cutting, and what was meant to slot into it, is
obscure. Whatever its purpose, the angle is only
the side of the cutting, not the side of the block
as a whole, and thus offers no evidence that this
block formed part of a hexagonal structure.
Editions: Koumanoudes (1878a) 81; Köhler (1878)
252–3; IG II 977n; Wilhelm (1906a) 166.
214 chapter four

Col. I
247 ὑποκριτῶν τραγικῶν
Χαιρέσ[τ]ρατος Ι
[Μενεκρ]ά�̣ της Ι
250 [Λεπτί]ν̣ης ΙΙΙ
5 [ ca. 8 ]
251 [ 6–7 ]ο̣ς ΙΙ
[Καλλιππί]δ̣ης Π
253 [ 7–8 ]τος ΙΙ
[ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]

Col. II
254 Χαρίδημο[ς - - - ]
255 Φίλιππος [ - - - ]
20 Φύτιος ΙΙ
Εὐπόλεμο[ς - - - ]
Θρασύβου[λος] Ι
Ἀριστόδ̣[ημος] ΙΙ
260 Μίρων ΙΙ
25 [Κλ]ε̣οδ̣ ̣ά�̣μ̣α̣ς Ι
Θεόδωρος ΙΙΙΙ
Ἵππαρχος ΠΙ
Ἀ̣ μεινίας Ι
265 [Ἀ]ν̣δροσθένης Ι
30 [Νεο]πτόλεμος Ι
[ . . . . ]λλος ΙΙ
[Ἄρηξι]ς ΙΙ
[Ἡφαισ]τ̣ίων Ι    (365/4)
270 [ 5–6 ]ά�̣δης Ι

Col. III
35 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
271 [ ca. 9–10 ]ς ΙΙ
[ ca. 7–8 ]ς ΙΙ
Εὐ�̣[ ca. 5 ]ς Ι
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325h 215

40 Ἀρ[ιστοφ]ῶν Ι
275 Πο[ -  -  - ]
Ν̣ [ -  -  - ]
Ἀρχίας [ - - - ]
Πραξία[ς - - - ]
45 Ἱερομν[ήμων] ΙΙΙΙ
280 Φιλ[ - - - ]
Νικ[ - - - ]
282 Ἀρι[ - - - ]
vacat
50 vacat
vacat

Col. IV
[ - - - ]
283 Β[ - - - ]
Βα̣ κχ[ - - - ]
55/285 Στεμφ̣[ύλιος - ]
Ξένων Ι
Χαρίας [ - - - ]
Ἀντιμέ[νης - - - ]
Τεισίλα[ς - - - ]
60/290 Γορ̣[γοσθένης - - - ]
Νίκων ΙΙ[ - - - ]
Ἀριστόν[ικος - - - ]
Πύρριχος [ - - - ]
Ἀγήτωρ Ι
65/295 Θηραμέν[ης - - - ]
296 Κλεῖτος [ - - - ]
vacat
vacat

Col. V
297 Τ̣ [ - - - ]
70 Κλεό�̣δ[ - - - ]
Αἰσχύλ[ος - - - ]
300 Ἀρίμνη[στος - - - ]
Ἐπαμε[ίνων - - - ]
Ἐροτ[ίων - - - ]
75/303 [Ἀ]ρ̣ισ[τ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]Ι
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
216 chapter four

80 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
85 [ - - - ]

Col. VI
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
90 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
304 Ἡράκλ̣ [ειτος - - - ]
95/305 Ἀλέξανδ[ρος - - - ]
Καλλικλῆς ΙΙΙ
⟦Ε̣ ὑρήμων Ι⟧
[Ἰσο]κράτης Ι
[ 3–4 ]υν̣ος ΙΙ
100/310 [ 5–6 ]ος Ι
311 [ 6–7 ]ος Ι
[ - - - ]

Col. VII
[ - - - ]ΙΙ
[ - - - ]
105 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
110 [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]
115/312 Π<ά>μφιλο[ς - - - ]
Σωσίθεος ΙΙ
Πολύκριτος Ι
315 Ναύσων Ι
Ἀρίστων Ι
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325h 217
Col. VIII
120 ⟦Ἔχετος ΙΙΙΙ⟧
318 Ἐ̣ πίνικος ΙΙΙΙ
vacat
Epigraphical Notes
3. Dotted alpha: only a faint trace of the right
diagonal is preserved.
4. Dotted nu: only the right vertical is preserved.
6. Dotted omicron: only a faint trace of the right
side of the circle is preserved.
7. Rest. Reisch. Dotted delta: only a faint trace of
the right diagonal is preserved.
8. IG reads ΙΙΙ in error.
23. Dotted delta: a trace of the right diagonal is
possibly preserved along the break.
25. Dotted epsilon: only the right half of the top
horizontal is preserved. Dotted omicron: only a
possible faint trace of the top of the circle is pre-
served. Dotted delta: only the apex is preserved.
Dotted alpha (1): only the apex is preserved. Dot-
ted mu: only the bottom tip of the rightmost
stroke is preserved. Dotted alpha (2): only the
lower tip of the right diagonal is preserved.
28.  Dotted alpha: only the right diagonal is
preserved.
29.  Dotted nu: only the upper half of the right
vertical is preserved.
31.  Reading an alpha for the first lambda (mak-
ing [Θεττ]αλός the obvious restoration) in IG II2
seems to have been an error on the part of Kirch-
ner, since Wilhelm (1906a) 144, was explicit about
what is on the stone; the error was noted and cor-
rected by Camp (1971) 306 n. 18.
33.  Dotted tau: only the right end of the horizon-
tal is preserved.
34.  Dotted alpha: only the right diagonal is
preserved.
39.  Dotted upsilon: only the bottom of the verti-
cal is preserved; the cut is centered such that iota
and tau are the only other possibilities.
42.  Dotted nu: only a possible trace of the diago-
nal is preserved.
54.  Dotted alpha: the center of the letter is
chipped away; delta or lambda is possible.
55.  Dotted phi: only the bottom tip of the ver-
tical is clearly preserved, although a faint trace
of the lower left part of the circle may possibly
survive along the break.
60.  Dotted rho: only the bottom part of the ver-
tical is preserved.
69.  Dotted tau: only the vertical is preserved;
traces of the left part of the horizontal may pos-
sibly be preserved, but these are more probably
the result of damage than an intentional cut. The
spacing of the letter is such that iota is the only
other possibility. Above this line, Kirchner, fol-
lowed by Mette (who claimed to have examined
the stone) and others, reported a one-line lacuna.
While the stone is broken away to a height of
approximately one line directly above this col-
umn, immediately to the left are the remains
of the moulding that runs across the top of all
blocks; this moulding clearly originally extended
across the entire width of the block, meaning
that the space above this column was filled by
the moulding, not another line of text.
70.  Dotted omicron: only the bottom portion of
the circle is preserved.
75.  Dotted rho: only the top of the loop is pre-
served; beta is also possible.
94.  Dotted lambda: only the bottom tip of the
left diagonal is preserved.
97.  The original, erased text read [Ἰ]σοκράτης Ι
(= line 98), i.e. the text meant for this line was
at first mistakenly omitted, but the error was
noticed almost immediately and corrected. Dot-
ted epsilon: only the right end of the top horizon-
tal is preserved.
99.  Dotted nu: only the verticals are preserved.
115.  The crossbar of the alpha was mistakenly
omitted.
218 chapter four

120.  Only indeterminate vertical traces of the of the City Dionysia list and belongs more or less
erased text remain near the beginning of the directly under IG II2 2325B.22–7; cf. IG II2 2325
erasure. fr. incert. sed. hˊ.1. But the fact that his record
121.  Dotted epsilon: a possible trace of the top in the Roman fragments begins with the Lenaea
horizontal is preserved. suggests that he had no City Dionysia victories,
and thus counts against the restoration.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments 23.  Aristodemus of Metapontum (PAA 168590;
2.  For Chaerestratus (PAA 974470; O’Connor O’Connor #62; Stephanis #332) was one of the
#502; Stephanis #2591), see IG II2 2325B.7. most famous actors of the early to mid-4th cen-
3.  For Menecrates (PAA 643655; O’Connor #329; tury BCE, but is best known today for his involve-
Stephanis #1651), see IG II2 2325B.8. ment in various Athenian embassies to Philip II
4.  For Leptines (PAA 603410; O’Connor #314 = of Macedon in the 340s BCE (D. 19.12 with Mac-
511a; Stephanis #1537), see IG II2 2325B.9. Dowell ad loc.; Aeschin. 2.17–19) and for the fact
6.  O’Connor #534. Perhaps to be restored that Aeschines was at some point a member of
[Μυννίσκ]ος (cf. IG II2 2325B.4; thus Wilhelm) his troupe (D. 19.246). His name might be restored
or [Κλέανδρ]ος (O’Connor #292; Stephanis #1412; in the City Dionysia victors list at IG II2 2325B.26
thus O’Connor). (ca. 390 BCE), and perhaps also at IGUR 229.9.
7.  Callippides (PAA 558950; O’Connor #274; 24.  Miron (PAA 654230; O’Connor #340; Stepha-
Stephanis #1348; thus Reisch) was the victorious nis #1710) is otherwise unknown.
tragic actor at the Lenaea in 419/8 BCE (IG II2 25.  Cleodamas (PAA 576645; O’Connor #298;
2319 Col. III.16–17), although [῾Ηρακλεί]δης (thus Stephanis #1437) might also be restored at
Wilhelm; cf. IG II2 2325B.2) would also fit the fr. incert. sed. hˊ.4, along with Thrasybulus (cf. 22),
stone. See Braund (2000). as part of the City Dionysia list. Cf. IG II2 2325
8.  Perhaps to be restored [Νικόστρα]τος (PAA incert. sed. fr. hˊ.4.
717820; O’Connor #368; Stephanis #1861; thus 26.  Theodorus (PAA 506155; O’Connor #230;
Wilhelm), who is elsewhere attested as active Stephanis #1157) was, along with Aristodemus
near the end of the 5th century (IG II2 2318.864; (23), one of the most famous actors of his time
2325B.22). See also 42, 47 (perhaps a homony- (e.g. SEG XXXIV 174.4 [a choregic victory monu-
mous member of the family). ment from Thoricus]; D. 19.246 with MacDowell
18.  Charidemus (PAA 981910; O’Connor #506; ad loc.; Arist. Rh. 1404b22–4; Plu. Mor. 348e). He
Stephanis #2606) is otherwise unknown. also appeared together with the comic actor Phi-
19.  Philippus (PAA 929160; O’Connor #479; lemon (for whom, see IG II2 2325F.36 with note)
Stephanis #2499) is otherwise unknown. on a choregic monument on Thasos (IG XII Suppl.
20.  Phytius (PAA 967175; O’Connor #501; Stepha- 400.3; cf. SEG XXIX 767 for the date). His name
nis #2589) is otherwise unknown. is perhaps to be restored at IG II2 2325B.23 (ca.
21.  Eupolemus (PAA 442320; O’Connor #196; 400 BCE) in the City Dionysia list. See Duncan
Stephanis #977) is otherwise unknown. Pace (2005) 55–79, esp. 59–63.
Stephanis, followed by PAA, [ - - - ]ολεμον at 27.  Hipparchus of the deme Athmone (PA 7599;
IGUR 230.4 is a play-title (and thus in the accusa- PAA 537695; O’Connor #256; Stephanis #1278)
tive) rather than an actor’s name (which would appears at IG II2 2319 Col. III.15 as an actor in the
require a nominative). third-place tragedy at the Lenaea in 364/3 BCE, in
22.  Thrasybulus (PAA 516810; O’Connor #243–4; a contest in which Arexis (32) and Androsthenes
Stephanis #1227) is also described as victorious at (29) also competed. He is perhaps to be restored
the Lenaea at IGUR 223.10. If his name is restored at IG II2 2325B.27.
in fr. incert. sed. hˊ.1, that fragment must be part
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325h 219
28.  Ameinias (PAA 123110; O’Connor #25; Stepha-
nis #150) is perhaps to be restored at SEG XXVI 203
Col. I.17 (an actor in a tragedy at the Lenaea prob-
ably in the mid-370s BCE); otherwise unknown.
29.  Androsthenes (PAA 128985; O’Connor #30;
Stephanis #182) acted in the second-place tragedy
at the Lenaea in 364/3 BCE (IG II2 2319 Col. III.12),
in a contest in which Hipparchus (27) and Arexis
(32) also competed.
30.  Neoptolemus of Scyros (PA 10647; PAA
706615; O’Connor #359; Stephanis #1797) also
took the tragic actors prize at the City Dionysia
at least once, in 342/1 BCE (IG II2 2320 Col. II.3, 7
(etc.).
31.  Either this is an otherwise unknown actor, or
the stonecutter intended to write Θέτταλος but
omitted the crossbar on the alpha (for the error,
cf. 115 with epigraphical n.). As Thettalus (PAA
513214 ~ 513215; O’Connor #239; Stephanis #1200;
victorious at the City Dionysia at least once, in
341/0 BCE [IG II2 2320 Col. II.5, 10, etc.]) could
easily be placed in 35 or 36 at the top of Col. III,
or restored in 38, where he would just fit, there is
no point in positing an error by the cutter simply
to insert him here.
32.  For Arexis (PAA 161580; Stephanis #297), see
33; SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.9, 16.
33.  SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.2, 6 attests that Heph­
aestion (PAA 489345; Stephanis #1123) took the
actors prize at the Lenaea in 365/4 BCE, which
must be the initial (and sole) victory referred
to here. Arexis was victorious at the Lenaea in
364/3 BCE (IG II2 2320 Col. II.16). As his name
does not follow Hephaestion’s in 34, however, that
cannot have been his first victory at the festival,
and he must accordingly be restored instead in
32. His victory in 364/3 BCE was thus his second
(of two) at the Lenaea.
34.  O’Connor #508; Stephanis #2654. Wilhelm
suggested [Φιλωτ]άδης, which is merely a shot in
the dark.
37.  O’Connor #535; Stephanis #2740. Perhaps to
be restored [᾿Αθηνόδωρο]ς (cf. IG II2 2318.1538;
2320 Col. II.8, 10).
38.  O’Connor #546; Stephanis #2769. Perhaps to
be restored [Θέτταλο]ς (cf. IG II2 2320.6, 11, etc.;
and see 31 above).
39.  PAA 380100; O’Connor #165; Stephanis #953.
The initial letters of the same name may be pre-
served at IG II2 2419.3; see IG II2 2325B.28–64.
40.  Aristophon (PAA 176020; O’Connor #72;
Stephanis #374) is otherwise unknown.
41.  PAA 777200; O’Connor #401; Stephanis #2087.
The initial letters of the same name may be pre-
served at IG II2 2419.4; see IG II2 2325B.28–64.
Mette (followed by PAA) restored Thrasybulus
and Cleodamas in fr. incert. sed. hˊ.1, 4, which
must then be part of the City Dionysia list for
the 390s BCE or so, and identified the indi-
vidual referred to here (ca. 345 BCE) with the
Πολυ[ - - - ] mentioned in the second line there,
which implies an exceptionally long career with
an initial victory at the Lenaea coming only very
late.
42.  O’Connor #354; Stephanis #1766 (2). Perhaps
to be restored Ν[ικόστρατος]; cf. 8, 47; IG II2 2320
Col. II.34.
43.  The early career of Archias of Thurii (PAA
212800; O’Connor #87; Stephanis #439) as a tragic
actor is referred to also at Plu. Dem. 28.3; 29.2.
In the late 320s BCE, Archias acted as an agent
of Antipater and was responsible for the deaths
of Demosthenes, Hyperides and other leaders of
Athens’ anti-Macedonian faction (Plu. Dem. 28–9;
[Plu.] Mor. 849b). The initial letters of the same
name may be preserved at IG II2 2419.5; see IG II2
2325B.28–64.
44.  Praxias (PAA 786655; O’Connor #413; Stepha-
nis #2135) is otherwise unknown.
45.  Hieromnemon (PAA 532660; O’Connor #251;
Stephanis #1260) might be the Hieromnemon
son of Euanorides of the deme Cydathenaeon
mentioned in an agonothete’s dedication from
307/6 BCE (IG II2 3073.4). But the name is heavily
restored there and the dedication is a full genera-
tion later than the initial victory referred to here,
making it more likely that this is (if anything) a
grandfather-grandson pair.
220 chapter four
46.  O’Connor #474. Stephanis #2491 (followed by
PAA 926440) identifies the individual referred to
here with the Φίλητο[ς] in a catalogue of names
at IG II2 2419.8; see IG II2 2325B.28–64.
47.  PAA 707870; O’Connor #361; Stephanis #1802.
Most likely to be identified with Nicostratus
(PAA 717835; O’Connor #369; Stephanis #1863),
who is attested at IG II2 2318.1673; 2320 Col. II.34
as active in the 340s and 330s BCE; cf. 42 for an
alternative place for Nicostratus.
48.  PAA 161725; O’Connor #52; Stephanis #298
(2). Stephanis identifies this man with ᾿Αρι[ - - - ]
at IG II2 2325B.26, but the latter belongs several
generations earlier.
53.  PAA 380110; O’Connor #164; Stephanis #814
(all reading Ε[ - - - ]).
54.  PAA 260510; O’Connor #103; Stephanis #509.
55.  Stemphylius (PAA 833250; O’Connor #443;
Stephanis #2298) is otherwise unknown, although
a scholiast to Aeschin. 2.15 reports that Aristo-
demus (23) was nicknamed Stemphylius, and
Wilhelm (1906a) 188–9, on that basis implausi-
bly suggested that this Stemphylius might be his
descendant. The name is not otherwise attested.
56.  Xenon (PAA 734690; O’Connor #382; Stepha-
nis #1916) is otherwise unknown.
57.  Charias (PAA 980630; O’Connor #504; Steph-
anis #2601) is otherwise unknown.
58.  Antimenes (PAA 134505; O’Connor #33;
Stephanis #207) is otherwise unknown.
59.  Teisilas (PAA 878465; O’Connor #461; Steph-
anis #2386) is otherwise unknown.
60.  For Gorgosthenes (PAA 281205; O’Connor
#109; Stephanis #561), see IG II2 2325B.67.
61.  Nico (PAA 719750; O’Connor #375; Stephanis
#1874) is otherwise unknown.
62.  Aristonicus (PAA 173945; O’Connor #70;
Stephanis #365) is otherwise unknown.
63.  Pyrrhichus (PAA 796415; O’Connor #420;
Stephanis #2184) is otherwise unknown.
64.  Agetor (PAA 106395; O’Connor #9; Stephanis
#38) is otherwise unknown.
65.  Theramenes (PAA 513885; O’Connor #241;
Stephanis #1217) is otherwise unknown.
66.  Cleitus (PAA 576000; O’Connor #296; Steph-
anis #1430) is otherwise unknown.
69.  PAA 875030; O’Connor #460; Stephanis #2380.
70.  PAA 576700; O’Connor #299; Stephanis #1438.
Plausibly restored as Κλεόδ[ωρος] by O’Connor
(1908) 112, on the basis of IG XI.2 108.19, which
reports that a man by that name (PAA 576698)
appeared as a τραγῳδός in a dramatic festival on
Delos in 279 BCE.
71.  Aeschylus (PAA 115980; O’Connor #16; Steph-
anis #93) is probably to be restored also at IG II2
2325B.65, where he appears three lines above
Epameinon (cf. 73) and two lines above Gorgos-
thenes (cf. 60).
72.  Arimnestos (PAA 162105; O’Connor #53;
Stephanis #302) is otherwise unknown.
73.  Epameinon (PAA 389825; O’Connor #169;
Stephanis #848) is restored here on the basis of
IG II2 2325B.68, where he appears in the list of
tragic actors victorious at the City Dionysia three
lines below Aeschylus (cf. 71) and one line below
Gorgosthenes (cf. 60).
74.  Erotion (PAA 422570; O’Connor #184; Steph-
anis #912) is otherwise unknown.
75.  PAA 162595; O’Connor #55; Stephanis #303.
Probably to be identified with the Aristarchus
(O’Connor #57; Stephanis #309) who partici-
pated in a dramatic festival on Delos in 280 BCE
(IG XI.2 107.22).
94.  PAA 486497; O’Connor #213; Stephanis #1089.
Perhaps to be identified with Heracleitus son
of Dion of Argos (PAA 486495; O’Connor #218;
Stephanis #1094), who participated in a pair of
festivals at Delphi in the early to mid-250s BCE
(SGDI 2563.39 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 7.39;
2566.51 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 10.51).
95.  Most likely to be identified with Alexandrus
the son of Demetrius (PAA 118070; O’Connor #20;
Stephanis #112), who competed in dramatic fes-
tivals on Delos around 264 BCE (IG XI.2 112.18–
19) and in Delphi in 257/6 or 253/2 BCE (SGDI
2566.50 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 10.50).
96.  Callicles (PAA 555940; O’Connor #270; Steph-
anis #1331) was identified by Wilhelm (1906a)
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325h 221
140, with Callicles son of Nicostratus of Boeotia
(Stephanis #1332), who competed in a dramatic
festival on Delos in 236 BCE (IG XI.2 120.46).
97.  Heuremo (PAA 444495; O’Connor #197;
Stephanis #980) is otherwise unknown.
98.  Isocrates (PAA 542070; O’Connor #262;
Stephanis #1302) is otherwise unknown.
99.  O’Connor #551; Stephanis #2791.
100.  O’Connor #536; Stephanis #2743. O’Connor
suggests restoring [᾿Αρκεσίλα]ος, i.e. Arcesilaus
son of Hiero of Corinth (O’Connor #79; Stepha-
nis #400), who participated as a tragic didaskalos
in a festival in Delphi in the mid-250s BCE (SGDI
2565.56 = Nachtergael, Galates no. 9.56), but the
available space seems much too short for that
name.
101.  O’Connor #525; Stephanis #2744. O’Connor
suggests restoring [Κλεόνικ]ος, i.e. Cleonicus son
of Cleocrates of Rhodes (O’Connor #302; Stepha-
nis #1449), a τραγῳδός honored in a mid-3rd-cen-
tury BCE inscription from Oropus (IG VII 275 [=
I.Oropos 179]) and in F.Delphes III 3.382.
115.  Pamphilus (PAA 762065; O’Connor #390;
Stephanis #1983) is otherwise unknown.
116.  Sositheus (PAA 861440; O’Connor #451;
Stephanis #2345) is honored by the actors’ guild
(the τεχνῖται) in a late 3rd-century BCE inscrip-
tion (IG II2 1320) that describes him as a τραγῳδός
and a ἱεροποιός, sc. of their professional cult of
Dionysus.
117.  Polycritus (PAA 779810; O’Connor #408;
Stephanis #2103) is otherwise unknown.
118.  Nauson (PAA 702630; O’Connor #356; Steph-
anis #1775) is otherwise unknown.
119.  Aristo (PAA 200145; O’Connor #77; Stepha-
nis #378) is otherwise unknown.
120.  Echetus (PAA 453357; O’Connor #205;
Stephanis #1013) is otherwise unknown.
121.  Epinicus (PAA 398043; O’Connor #171; Steph-
anis #872) is otherwise unknown.
222 chapter four

IG II2 2325 Incerta (= 2325.319–25)

44. IG II2 2325 fr. g' (EM 8199a; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)

45. IG II2 2325 fr. h' (EM 8209; photo courtesy of the Epigraphical Museum, Athens)
 the victors lists: ig ii2 2325 incerta 223
Technical Description
Both fragments are of white “Pentelic” marble.
[ - - - ]
319 [ - - - ]ας Ι
320 [ - - - ]ς ΙΙΙΙ
321 [ - - - ]ρ̣ος ΠΙ[ - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
Epigraphical Notes
4. Dotted rho: the bottom half of the letter is
missing; beta is possible.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
The restorations Aristagoras, Callippus and
Asclepiodorus in 2–4, respectively, proposed
very tentatively by Capps (1899) 404 n. 3, pushed
for more seriously by O’Connor (1908) 60 and in
his appendix, and accepted by Ghiron-Bistagne,
Mette and Stephanis (who oddly seems to accept
lines 2 and 4, but not line 3), create a trio of
comic actors in the same sequence as at IG II2
2325F.69–71 (victors at the Lenaea), placing the
fragment somewhere in the missing Col. I of
IG II2 2325D (victors at the City Dionysia). We
know from IG II2 2323a Col. I.4, 19 that Callippus
“the Younger” was victorious at the Dionysia in
313/12 BCE and that Asclepiodorus was victori-
ous there in 312/11, neither man necessarily for
the first time. Both Callippus and Asclepiodorus
were highly successful in the competitions at
the Lenaea, with four and five lifetime victories,
respectively, making it a reasonable assumption
that they fared well at the Dionysia as well. But
Asclepiodorus’ name seems at least one letter
too long for the space available in the stone, and
no other name from the matching section of the
Lenaea list can be used to fill the gap.
The fragment seems to have been cut by Hand 1,
placing it prior to ca. 279 BCE regardless of how it
is restored or to which list it is assigned.
Fragment gˊ (= 2325.319–21).
EM 8199a; south slope of the Acropolis.
H 0.087; W 0.110; T 0.066; LH 0.010 (ο 0.007).
All sides and the back are broken.
Editions: IG II 977gˊ; Wilhelm (1906a) 160.
2. O’Connor #508a (cf. #56; Stephanis #305);
restored as [Ἀρισταγόρ]ας (cf. IG II2 2325F.69)
by Capps (1899) 404 n. 3, but see introductory
remarks above.
3. O’Connor #546a (cf. #276; Stephanis #1353
[cf. #1350, although in neither place does Stepha-
nis note this fragment]); restored [Κάλλιππο]ς
(i.e. “the Younger”; cf. IG II2 2325F.70) by Capps
(1899) 404 n. 3, but see introductory remarks
above.
4. O’Connor #542a (cf. #93; Stephanis #458);
restored [Ἀσκληπιόδω]ρος (cf. IG II2 2325F.71)
by Capps (1899) 404 n. 3, but see introductory
remarks above.
Fragment hˊ (= 2325.322–5).
EM 8209; south slope of the Acropolis.
H 0.017; W 0.011; T 0.043 (excluding moulding);
LH 0.010 (ο 0.007).
The top is preserved and is roughly smoothed;
a band along the front of the top is worn in a
slight downward slope. All other sides and the
back are broken away. A moulding (H 0.023) runs
along the top of the front, preserving a complete
profile.
Editions: Koumanoudes (1878b) 291–2; Köhler
(1880) 324–5; IG II 977y; Wilhelm (1906a) 160–1.
224 chapter four
322 Θρασ[ - - - ]
Πολυ[ - - - ]
Ἀλκ̣ [ - - - ]
325 Κλ̣ ε[̣  - - - ]
5 [ - - - ]
Epigraphical Notes
3. Dotted kappa: only the upper part of the verti-
cal is preserved.
4. Dotted lambda: only the apex is preserved;
alpha and delta are also possible. Dotted epsilon:
only the tip of the upper left corner is preserved;
gamma is also possible.
Prosopographical Notes and Comments
In his discussion of this fragment, Wilhelm
(1906a) 160–1, briefly outlined three ways of
restoring it, although without providing details
of how it might fit into the larger inscription in
any of these cases:
(1) Restore the late 4th-century comic poets
Ἀλ[κήνωρ] (cf. IG II2 2325C.57) in 3, and Κλ[έαρχος]
(cf. IG II2 2325C.54) in 4; this necessitates placing
the fragment at the top of Col. IV of IG II2 2325E
(victors at the Dionysia).
(2) Restore the early 4th-century tragic actors
Θρασ[ύβουλος] (cf. IG II2 2325H.22) in 1, and either
Κλ[εοδάμας] (cf. IG II2 2325H.25) or Κλ[έανδρος]
(cf. IG II2 2318.1008) in 4; this necessitates placing
the fragment at the top of Col. III in IG II2 2325B
(victors at the Dionysia) (thus Ghiron-Bistagne).
(3) On the basis of IGUR 223 + 229, restore the
tragic actors Θρασ[ύβουλος] in 1, Ἀλ[κίμαχος] in
line 3, and Κλ[έανδρος] in 4; unless one accepts the
identification of Thrasybulus and Cleander with
their early 4th-century homonyms (as does, e.g.
Stephanis; see also Snell [1966] 19–21), all three
men are undated and otherwise unknown. If the
identification is accepted, the fragment must be
placed as in (2) above; if not, it can be placed at
the top of any available column in either IG II2
2325B or 2325H. O’Connor follows Bethe’s identi-
fication of the tragic poet Sophocles mentioned at
IGUR 223.7 as TrGF 147 (but see Snell [1966] 20 n.
6), assigning these actors to the 1st century BCE.
If this is correct, their restoration here would be
ruled out, since the Victors Lists do not otherwise
appear to run that late.
Mette placed the fragment as dictated in (2)
above but without restoring the names, removing
the only rationale for placing it there. Stephanis
accepted the first two restorations (but appar-
ently not the third) in (3) above, together with
the identification of Thrasybulus with his hom-
onym and thus Mette’s placement of the frag-
ment; rejection of the restoration of Cleander
and the identification of him with his homonym
is not fatal to the argument, but does remove a
key piece of corroborating evidence. Wilhelm,
followed by Kirchner in IG II2, saw little basis
for choosing among these options—which may
indeed not be the only ones—and so rightly
left the fragment unplaced and the individuals
referred to unidentified, even as to profession.
The fragment seems to have been cut by Hand
1, placing it prior to ca. 279 BCE regardless of how
it is restored or to which list it is assigned.
1. Wilhelm (1906a) 160, suggests Θρασ[ύβουλος]
(tragic actor: O’Connor #243, 244; Stephanis #1227
[accepting this restoration]).
2. Stephanis #2087 (tragic actor; accepting this
fragment where Mette placed it).
3. Wilhelm (1906a) 160, suggests Ἀλ[κήνωρ]
(comic poet) or Ἀλ[κίμαχος] (tragic actor:
O’Connor #24; Stephanis #139 [accepting this res-
toration]).
4. Wilhelm (1906a) 160, suggests Κλ[εοδάμας]
(tragic actor: O’Connor #298; Stephanis #1437),
Κλ[έανδρος] (tragic actor: O’Connor #293, 294;
Stephanis #1413), or Κλ[έαρχος] (comic poet).
 Appendix

The Roman Fragments (IGUR 216, 215, 218)1

IGUR 216, 215 and 218 (= IG XIV 1097, 1098a and tival were listed together in chronological order
1098),2 generally referred to as the “Roman frag- by the eponymous archon’s name and title of the
ments”, are badly damaged portions of a large play, if known (otherwise simply “with a com-
inscription that gave the agonistic history of the edy,” as in IGUR 216.2–3). These notices were fol-
Athenian comic poets and that perhaps deco- lowed by a list of finishes at the other festival (if
rated the walls of one of the imperial libraries any), organized and described in the same man-
in Rome (thus Koerte). Poets seem to have been ner. To save space, the name of the festival was
listed in the order in which they first competed, omitted when it was the same as for the preced-
regardless of the festival at which they appeared ing entry; thus at IGUR 216.6, the festival at which
or how they placed. Whether IGUR 216 or 215 Callias took fifth place in the archonship of Anti-
(both of which deal with poets who date roughly ochides (435/4 BCE) was left unspecified, because
to the 440s BCE) came first in the inscription is it was the same as the festival at which he took
impossible to say, although putting 216 ahead fourth a number of times beginning in 438/7 BCE
of 215 modestly increases the chronological dif- (1097.4–6). Whether City Dionysia results were
ficulties with Lysippus’ career. Another similar always given first, if there were any, is unclear.
inscription (IGUR 223–9) offered the agonistic Notices are occasionally offered as to whether a
history of tragic actors in Athens, on Rhodes, and play was preserved (IGUR 216.9; 215.7)4 or was a
perhaps elsewhere as well. revised version of one staged earlier (IGUR 216.12,
Entries in the inscription began with the poet’s as emended) or was produced by someone other
name, followed by lists of all his first-place fin- than the poet (IGUR 218.9), and the presence of
ishes (if any); then all his second-place finishes such material at unpredictable intervals compli-
(if any); then all his third-place finishes (if any); cates the task of restoring the missing sections of
and so forth.3 If a poet failed ever to place at a the fragments considerably.
particular rank, the fact was noted (IGUR 215.9, Because the Roman fragments are so badly
11). Within rank-categories, the finishes at one fes- damaged, the number of letters—and thus the
number of notices consisting of ἐπί followed by
the archon’s name in the genitive and the title
1 We offer the texts that follow as a supplement to of the play in the dative—in each line is difficult
the information about the chronology of the comic poets to determine. Petersen, the first scholar to rec-
gleaned from the inscriptions presented above. We have
examined none of these inscriptions (where they still exist) ognize the nature and thus the full significance
and we accordingly make no claims of any independence of the inscription, restored lines of 28–32 letters
for our texts. in IGUR 216 and 218, allowing for only about one
2 Moretti (1968) identifies several other small fragments notice per line;5 Koerte (who was able to take
of the inscription, which show little more than that its con-
tents were even more diverse than might otherwise appear
to be the case. IGUR 221.5 perhaps contains a reference to
Euphanes’ Pan of Coals ([Εὐφά]νης Πυρ[αύνῳ] Moretti; cf. 4 More likely a reference to the situation in the Library
IG II2 2325 E.44; Euphanes fr. 2 Εὐφάνης ἐν Πυραύνῳ). of Alexandria, from which the information contained in
3 For more extended descriptions and analyses of the these inscriptions may well be drawn via one of Callima-
structure of the document, see Capps (1906) 203–7; Dittmer chus’ Πίνακες (cf. frr. 454–6 Pfeiffer), than in Rome.
(1923) 6–10; Ghiron-Bistagne (1976) 63–8. 5 Petersen (1885) 181.
226 appendix

IGUR 215 into account as well) followed him in
this respect.6 Capps argued that lines as short
as this produce serious anomalies in the records
of Lysippus (IGUR 216.7–14) and Anaxandrides
(IGUR 218) in particular, and he proposed instead
an average length of 50–54 letters, allowing for
approximately two notices/line.7 Dittmer added
further criticism of the 28–32-letter hypothesis,
but pointed out that Capps’ somewhat longer line
allowed only eleven letters for the archon’s name
and the title of a play in IGUR 216.9 (on Capps’
reconstruction referring to a competition in ca.
440 BCE, when none of the archons’ names in the
genitive require less than seven letters). Dittmer
therefore suggested a line of 72–76 letters, allow-
ing for approximately three notices/line.8

IGUR 216 (= IG XIV 1097)

[ - - - ἐ]πὶ Ἀντιοχίδου (435/4) Κύ[κλωψι(ν)? - - - ]
[ - - - ]ς κωμωδίαι Δ ἐν ἄ[στει - - - ]
[ - - - κω]μωιδίαι ἐπὶ Τιμοκλέ[ους (441/0) - - - ]
[ - - - ἐ]πὶ Θεοδώρου (438/7) Σατύροις [- - - ]
5 [ - - - Ὑπέ]ροις σιδηροῖς ἐπὶ Πυ[θοδώρου (432/1) - - - ]
[ - - - Βατράχ]οις Ε ἐπὶ Ἀντιοχίδου[ (435/4) - - - ]
[ - - - Λ]ύσιππος ἐνίκα μὲν [- - - ]
[ - - - ἐπὶ Θεοπόμπου (411/10) or Γλαυκίπ]που (410/9) Καταχήναις[- - - ]
[ - - - Βάκχ]αις αὗται μόναι σώι[ζονται - - - ]
10 [ - - - ἐ]πὶ Διοφάντου (395/4) Διονύ[σωι - - - ]
[ - - - ἐν ἄσ]τει ἐπὶ Νικοτέλου[ς (391/0) - - - ]
[ - - - ἀναδίδαξ]ε ἐπὶ Λυσιμάχου[(436/5) - - - ]
[ - - - ἐν ἄστε]ι ἐπὶ Μορχίδου[(440/39) - - - ]
[ - - - ἐπὶ - - - ο]υς Κολεοφόροις[- - - ]

The name of the poet whose fourth- and fifth- career extended at the very least from 441/0 (3)
place finishes are catalogued in 1–6, and whose to 432/1 BCE (5), is not preserved. But he staged
a play in 435/4 BCE entitled Κυ[ - - - ] (1), which
probably represents Κύκλωψ or Κύκλωπες; and
6 Koerte (1905) 425–47. the only comic playwright from this period
7 Capps (1906) 207–12. We know from a combination of known to have composed a Cyclops or Cyclopes
information preserved in the Suda (= test. 1) and the Lenaea
Victors List (IG II2 2325E.37) that Anaxandrides wrote 65 is Callias, who took the prize twice at the City
plays and was victorious seven times at the City Dionysia Dionysia (IG II2 2325C.17), with one victory com-
and three times at the Lenaea. On Koerte’s restoration of ing in 447/6 (IG II2 2318.294), and who also wrote
IGUR 218, he must in addition have taken third nine times,
fourth one time, and fifth four times, leaving him with 41
a Frogs (hence the largely arbitrary restoration
seconds. Capps’ line of 50–54 letters gives Anaxandrides a of 6).9 Callias does not appear in the preserved
seemingly more balanced record of ten firsts, 29 seconds,
six thirds, 11 fourths, and nine fifths; a 72–76-letter line con-
verts this to 10 firsts, 17 seconds, 9 thirds, 16 fourths, and 13 8 Dittmer (1923) 11–21.
fifths (Capps [1906] 211–12; Dittmer [1923] 11–13, 17–18). This 9 Thus Capps (1906) 212–13. Ecphantides, Cratinus and
is not a decisive objection, since there is no reason why Phrynichus all wrote plays entitled Satyrs (4). But Ecphan-
any individual poet should have placed first, second, third, tides and Cratinus were active already in the 450s BCE,
fourth and fifth more or less exactly the same number of much too early for the poet whose career is in question
times, as if this were merely a matter of flipping coins. here (pace Wilson [1973] 126–7, who appears not to under-
But Capps’ hypothesis receives support from problems of stand how the inscription is organized), while Phrynichus
another sort in the career of Lysippus; see below. is several decades too late. There is no other evidence that
 the roman fragments (igur 216, 215, 218) 227
portion of the Lenaea Victors List, but he must
have competed there, given that he is credited
with two comedies in 435/4 BCE (1, 6), and thus
with a play at each festival.
If the notice in 5 of a fourth-place finish in
432/1 BCE was followed in the missing final por-
tion of 5 and the beginning of 6 by notices of
more fourths after that—put another way, if the
play with which Callias took fourth in 432/1 BCE
was not [Βάτραχ]οι—and if these notices referred
to additional Dionysia rather than Lenaea plays,
Callias’ career may have continued into the early
420s BCE or later.10 On the most straightforward
interpretation of what remains of the text, he
took third and fifth at the festivals in 435/4 BCE,
and on Dittmer’s 72–76-letter line in particular
(which requires additional finishes at or near the
bottom of the rankings to fill up the lines) his
record from 440 BCE on is a dismal one.
Line 7 represents the beginning of the agonistic
record of the largely obscure Lysippus (ten short
fragments and three titles preserved), whose first
play was almost certainly staged in the 440s BCE,
since his results were given immediately after
those of Callias, who was active by 447/6 BCE at
the latest (see above). Lysippus’ career continued
until at least 411/10 or 410/9 BCE, depending on
Callias wrote a Satyrs (4) or an Iron Pestles (?; thus Bergk
for the inscription’s [ - - - ]ροις σιδηροῖς), and if both titles
can be assigned to him on the basis of IGUR 216, all three
could conceivably be given to someone else. But this is to
manufacture difficulties by explaining obscurum per obscu-
rius, and we know so few of Callias’ titles that there is no
problem with giving him two more. [Βατράχ]οις is Capps’
conjecture and is drawn from the list of Callias’ titles at Suda
κ 213 (= test. 1); no fragments of the play are preserved.
10 The catalogue of fourth-place finishes begins with a
reference to the City Dionysia (2), which makes it clear
that the catalogue of third-place finishes ended with the
Lenaea. But whether all the poet’s fourths were at the
Dionysia (meaning that no notice of the festival’s name
was needed at the beginning of his catalogue of fifths, if
it included one or more City Dionysia finishes) or he also
had some Lenaea fourths (in which case the Lenaea must
have been the only festival at which he took fifth, since his
catalogue of fifths began there), is unclear.
whether Theopompus or Glaucippus is restored
as the eponymous archon in 8. If all the entries
in the second half of IGUR 216 refer to him—not
necessarily the case, as the discussion that follows
is intended to make clear—he was still active in
391/0 BCE, in the archonship of Nicoteles (11).
If every line in the Roman inscription con-
tained only 28–32 letters, the victory referred to
in IGUR 216.7 must have been with Καταχῆναι in
411/10 or 410/9 BCE, since there is no room for
another first-place notice in the missing portions
of 7–8. Both the City Dionysia and the Lenaea lists
appear to be preserved for the final years of the
5th century (IG II2 2325C.29–43 and 2325E.18–28,
respectively), and neither has room for Lysippus
at that point. Capps therefore proposed a longer
line in IGUR 216 to accommodate mention in 7–8
of an additional, earlier poet, and suggested that
Lysippus’ name might be restored in the City
Dionysia list at IG II2 2325C.21, directly above
Pherecrates, putting his first victory in 439/8 or
earlier.11
Capps was also uncomfortable with the notion
that Lysippus’ career might have extended for
half a century or more, and he accordingly pro-
posed that IGUR 216.10–14 might instead be a
portion of the agonistic record of Aristomenes,
whose first victory came at the Lenaea (where he
took the prize twice), most likely in the early 430s
BCE (IG II2 2325E.5), and who was still competing
ca. 388 BCE, when he staged a play at the same
festival as Aristophanes’ Wealth (hyp. IV Ar. Pl. =
Aristomen. test. 4b).12 In support of this thesis,
Capps argued that Κολεοφόροι (“Scabbard-bear-
ers”) in 14 refers to the play staged by Aristomenes
11  Capps (1906) 209–11; (1907) 187, 194–7.
12 Capps (1906) 214–17. Capps’ incredulity was due in
part to his recognition that Lysippus must have been listed
in the Roman inscription before Aristomenes (whose ini-
tial victory at the Lenaea he put ca. 445 BCE), since oth-
erwise Aristomenes would have to come before Callias,
pushing the beginning of his career back to the early 440s
BCE at the latest. Putting Aristomenes in the late 440s or
very early 430s BCE resolves this problem, reducing the
pressure to reassign IGUR 216.10–14.
228 appendix

at the Lenaea in 425/4 BCE (in the archonship of
Stratocles, matching the third-declension archon
name [ - - - ο]υς), which the MSS of the second
hypothesis to Aristophanes’ Knights call Ὑλοφόροι
(“Wood-bearers”) or Ὀλοφόροι (corrupt). Dittmer
accepted Capps’ arguments and, by restoring an
even longer line, concluded that Aristomenes
must have been victorious not just twice at the
Lenaea but at least once at the Dionysia as well.13
Τhe hypothesis to Knights does not obviously
require emendation; Lysippus’ career as Capps
reconstructs it (only four plays, spread out over
as many decades, but at least two of them firsts)
makes no better sense than the interpretation
of the evidence he rejects; and his arguments
can easily be turned back on themselves, for if
Aristomenes’ career lasted about 50 years, Lysip-
pus’ might easily as well. It nonetheless remains
impossible to know which poet’s career is referred
to in 10–14.

IGUR 215 (= IG XIV 1098a)

[ - - - ἐπὶ] Ἐπα[μείνονος (429/8) - - - ]
[ - - - ]Συμπ[- - - ]
[ - - - ἐ]πὶ Εὐδ[- - - ]
[ - - - ]αι Λήναια[- - - ]
5 [ - - - Στ]έρρους ἀν[εδίδαξε - - - ]
[ - - - ]τέταρτος [- - - ]
[ - - - Ἡσ]ίοδοις σώιω[ι - - - ]
[ -  -  - Στρατ]ιώταις [- - - ]
[ - - - ἐπὶ δὲ τὴν νίκ]ην καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ τ[ρίτα οὐκ ἦλθε - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]Ξενόφιλος[- - - ]
[ -  -  - ἐπὶ τὰ τ]ρίτα καὶ ἐπὶ τὰ[ τέταρτα οὐκ ἦλθε - - - ]

As Koerte saw, the titles [Στ]έρροι (5) and [Ἡσ]- never named as one of Aristophanes’ rivals in the
ίοδοι (7) identify the poet referred to in the initial second half of the decade suggests that he had
portion of this fragment as Telecleides, who was died or retired by then.15
victorious at the City Dionysia probably in the late Unlike Telecleides, the poet whose brief and
440s BCE and twice thereafter (IG II2 2325B.18), unexceptional career is partially described in 9
and who similarly took the prize for the first of was never victorious, and this must be someone
five times at the Lenaea in the late 440s BCE or so else, whose name was given in a lost portion of 7
(IG II2 2325E.4).14 If Moretti’s [ἐπὶ] Ἐπα[μείνονος] or 8. He probably took second once and (depend-
in 1 is right, Telecleides’ career continued into ing on how long a line is restored) perhaps fifth
the early 420s BCE, although the fact that he is once as well.
Xenophilus (10) was victorious in the first
competition for comic poets at the Lenaea in the
mid-440s BCE (IG II2 2325E.3), just before Tele-
13 Dittmer (1923) 19–21. Aristomenes’ name could in fact
be restored near the top of the second column of the City cleides. This was his only victory at the Lenaea,
Dionysia list at IG II2 2325B.19, directly below Telecleides. and regardless of whether one assumes a line of
14 A play entitled Συμπ[ - - - ] (2) is not attributed 50–54 or 72–76, there does not appear to be room
elsewhere to Telecleides, but we have so few of his titles
that this is not a problem. The play whose title is partially
preserved in 8 might be [Στρατ]ιώται or [Νησ]ιώται (both
suggested by Koerte) or [Σικελ]ιώται (Geissler), and might 15 No archon’s name for this period fits [ἐ]πὶ Εὐδ[ - - - ]
belong to either Telecleides or the poet whose career was in 3. Koerte suggested that the reading must be a stone-
described in the rest of 8–9. cutter’s error for [ἐ]πὶ Εὐθυδ[ήμου] (432/1 BCE).
 the roman fragments (igur 216, 215, 218) 229

in the missing portion of 9–10 for notices of both Xenophilus was another relatively minor figure,
a victory at the City Dionysia and a second-place although more distinguished than the man whose
finish or the lack thereof. It thus seems clear that name preceded his.

IGUR 218 (= IG XIV 1098)

[ - - - ]ἐπὶ Χίωνος (365/4) Μαι[ - - - ]
[ - - - ]ς Διονύσου γοναῖ[ς - - - ]
[ - - - ]Ἀμπρακιώτιδι Γ ἐν [ἄστει - - - ]
[ - - - Λυσισ]τράτου (369/8) Ἐρεχθεῖ ἐ[πὶ - - - ]
5 [ - - - Ἡρακ]λεῖ ἐπὶ Χαρισάνδρο[υ (376/5) - - - ]
[ - - - ἐπὶ Ἱπ]ποδάμαντος (375/4) Ἰοῖ ἐ[πὶ - - - ]
[ - - - ]Ὀδυσσεῖ ἐπὶ Κηφισοδ[ότου (358/7) - - - ]
[ - - - ]ἐπὶ Ἀπολλοδώρου (350/49) Ἀγ[ροίκοις - - - ]
[ - - - διὰ Ἀνα]ξίππου Λήναια ἐπ[ὶ - - - ]
10 [ - - - ]οίωι ἐπὶ Ναυσιγένου[ς (368/7) - - - ]
[ - - - Ε ]ἐν ἄστει ἐπὶ Χίωνος[ (365/4) - - - ]
[ - - - ]τει ἐπὶ Ἀγαθοκλέου[ς (357/6) - - - ]
[ - - - ]ἐπὶ Θουδήμου (353/2) Ἀ [ - - - ]
[ - - - ]ου Ἀντέρωτι ἐ[πὶ - - - ]
15 [ - - - ἐ]νίκα Λήναι[α ἐπὶ - - - ]
[ - - - ]Γ ἐν ἄστ[ει ἐπὶ - - - ]
[ - - - ]ι ἐπ[ὶ - - - ]
[ - - - ]Ἀρ[ - - - ]

Lines 1–14 preserve what the titles of the plays
and the dates make clear is part of Anaxan-
drides’ competitive record (thus first Boeckh).
The archon-names date the plays (all second
place and lower) from 376/5 (5) to 350/49 BCE
(8), suggesting that the victory at the City Diony-
sia—where Anaxandrides took first seven times
(IG II2 2325E.37)—in 376/5 BCE recorded at IG II2
2318.1150 came early in his career.
The relatively minor figure whose record is
partially preserved in 15–18 and who was most
likely victorious no more than once at the Lenaea
is unidentified. Wilhelm (followed by Dittmer)
suggested that this might be Ephippus, whose
sole triumph at the festival came at least three
years after Anaxandrides’ first and most likely
more, since two other poets stand between them
in the Victors List (IG II2 2325E.37, 40). Capps
(1906) 220, proposed instead Philetaerus (IG II2
2325E.38) or Philippus (IG II2 2325E.35), both of
whom, however, had two victories and are thus
more difficult to accommodate in the limited
space available.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
Aleshire, S. B. 1988. “The Athenian Archon Hoplon.” Hes-
peria 57: 253–5.
Amandry, P. 1977. “Trépieds d’Athènes. II. Thargélies.” BCH
101: 165–202.
Arnott, W. G. (ed.). 1996. Alexis: The Fragments. Cambridge
Classical Texts and Commentaries 31. Cambridge and
New York.
Bakola, E. 2010. Cratinus and the Art of Comedy. Oxford.
Belardinelli, A. M. et al. (eds.). 1998. Tessere. Frammenti
della commedia greca: studi e commenti. Bari.
Bergk, Theodor. 1879. “Verzeichniss der Siege dramatischer
Dichter in Athen.” RhM 34: 292–333.
Biles, Z. P. 2009. “The Date of Phrynichus’ Lenaian Vic-
tory in IG II2 2325: A Reply to J. Rusten (ZPE 157 [2006]
22–6).” ZPE 170: 17–20.
Bonanno, M. G. 1972. Studi su Crate comico. Padua.
Bond, G. W. (ed.). 1963. Euripides: Hypsipyle. Oxford.
Braund, David. 2000. “Strattis’ Kallippides: The Pompous
Actor from Scythia?” In David Harvey and John Wilkins
(eds.), The Rivals of Aristophanes: Studies in Athenian Old
Comedy, pp. 151–8. London.
Brinck, A. 1886. “Inscriptiones graecae ad choregiam perti-
nentes.” Dissertationes philologicae halenses 6: 73–274.
Camp, John McK., II. 1971. “Greek Inscriptions: Tragedies
Presented at the Lenaia of 364/3 B.C.” Hesperia 40: 302–
7.
Capps, Edward. 1899. “The Catalogues of Victors at the Dio-
nysia and Lenaea, CIA. II 977.” AJP 20: 388–405.
——. 1900a. “Chronological Studies in the Greek Tragic
and Comic Poets.” AJP 21: 38–61.
——. 1900b. “The Dating of Some Didascalic Inscriptions.”
AJA 4: 74–91.
——. 1900c. “Studies in Greek Agonistic Inscriptions.”
TAPA 31: 112–37.
——. 1903. The Introduction of Comedy into the City Diony-
sia. Decennial Publications of the University of Chicago.
Chicago.
——. 1906. “The Roman Fragments of Athenian Comic
Didascaliae.” CP 1: 201–20.
——. 1907. “Epigraphical Problems in the History of Attic
Comedy.” AJP 28: 179–99.
——. 1943. “Greek Inscriptions: A New Fragment of the
List of Victors at the City Dionysia.” Hesperia 12: 1–11.
Davies, J. K. 1971. Athenian Propertied Families 600–300 B.C.
Oxford.
Delcroix, K. and R. Giannattasio Andria. 1997. “Herodotus
Recited in the Alexandrian Theatre? A Puzzling Page on
Hellenistic Performance (Athen. XIV 620D).” AncSoc 28:
121–47.
Develin, R. 1989. Athenian Officials, 684–321 B.C. Cambridge,
New York and Melbourne.
Diggle, J. (ed.). 1970. Euripides: Phaethon. Cambridge Classi-
cal Texts and Commentaries 12. Cambridge.
Dittmer, W. A. 1923. The Fragments of Athenian Comic
Didascaliae Found in Rome. Leiden.
Duncan, A. 2005. “Gendered Interpretations: Two Fourth-
Century Performances of Sophocles’ Electra.” Helios 32:
55–79.
Gantz, Timothy. 1993. Early Greek Myth. 2 vols. Baltimore
and London.
Geissler, P. 1925. Chronologie der altattischen Komödie. Phi-
lologische Untersuchungen 30. Berlin.
Ghiron-Bistagne, Paulette. 1976. Recherches sur les Acteurs
dan la Grèce antique. Paris.
Gilula, D. 1989. “A Case for Aristomenes (IG II2 2325).” CQ
NS 39: 332–8.
Habicht, Christian. 1982. Studien zur Geschichte Athens in
hellenistischer Zeit. Hypomnemata 75. Göttingen.
Hartwig, A. 2010. “The Date of the Rhabdouchoi and the
Early Career of Plato Comicus.” ZPE 174: 19–31.
Harvey, David. “Phrynichus and his Muses.” In David Har-
vey and John Wilkins (eds.), The Rivals of Aristophanes
(Swansea, 2000) 91–134.
Hunter, R. (ed.) 1983. Eubulus: The Fragments. Cambridge
Classical Texts and Commentaries 24. Cambridge.
Kirchhoff, A. 1887. “Inschriften von der Akropolis zu Athen
aus der Zeit nach dem Jahre des Archon Eukleides.”
SBAkBerlin. Pp. 1059–74, 1185–1205.
——. 1888. “Inschriften von der Akropolis zu Athen aus
der Zeit nach dem Jahre des Archon Eukleides.” SBAk-
Berlin. Pp. 313–27.
Koerte, Alfred. 1905. “Inschriftliches zur Geschichte der
Attischen Komödie.” RhM 60: 425–47.
Köhler, U. 1878. “Documente zur Geschichte des athenis-
chen Theaters.” MDAI(A) 3: 104–34, 229–58.
——. 1880. “Die von Herrn Bohn auf der Akropolis gefun-
denen Inschriften.” MDAIA(A) 5: 317–30.
Koumanoudes, Stephanos A. 1861. “Ἐπιγραφαὶ Ἑλληνικαὶ
ἀνέκδοτοι.” Philistor 1: 324–32.
——. 1877. “Ἐπιγραφαὶ ἐκ τοῦ Ἀσκληπιείου καὶ τῶν πέριξ
τόπων.” Athenaion 6: 474–91.
——. 1878a. “Ἐπιγραφαὶ ἐκ τοῦ Ἀσκληπιείου καὶ τῶν πέριξ
τόπων.” Athenaion 7: 74–97.
——. 1878b. “Ἐπιγραφαὶ Θεσπιῶν καὶ Ἀθηνῶν.” Athenaion
7: 281–92.
Lambert, S. 2008. “Polis and theatre in Lykourgan Athens:
the honorific decrees.” In A. Matthaiou and I. Polinskaya
(eds.), Μικρὸς Ἱερομνήμων. Μελέτες εἰς μνήμην Michael H.
Jameson, pp. 53–85. Athens.
Leo, F. 1878. “Ein Sieg des Magnes.” RhM 33: 139–45.
Lewis, D. 1955. “Notes on Attic Inscriptions (II).” ABSA 50:
1–36.
232 bibliography
——. 1978. Review of Ghiron-Bistagne (1976). JHS 98:
184–5.
Lipsius, J. H. 1887. “Nachtrag zu den Bemerkungen über die
dramatische Choregie.” BerVerhLeipzig 39: 278–82.
Matthaiou, Angelos P. 1988. “Νέο θραῦσμα τῆς IG II2 2323.”
Horos 6: 13–18.
Meritt, Benjamin D. 1938. “Greek Inscriptions.” Hesperia 7:
77–160.
Mette, H. J. Urkunden dramatischer Aufführungen in Griech-
enland. Texte und Kommentare 8. Berlin and New
York.
Michel, C. 1900. Recueil d’inscriptions grecques. Paris.
Moretti, L. 1968. Inscriptiones Graecae Urbis Romae. Rome.
Nachtergael, Georges. 1975. Les Galates en Grèce et les
Sôtéria de Delphes: Recherches d’histoire et d’épigraphie
hellénistiques. Académie Royale de Belgique, Mémoires
de la Classe des Lettres, 2e serie, Tome XVIII, Fasc. 1.
Brussels.
Nervegna, S. 2007. “Staging Scenes or Plays? Theatrical
Revivals of ‘Old’ Greek Drama in Antiquity.” ZPE 162:
14–42.
Nesselrath, Heinz-Günther. 1995. “Myth, Parody, and
Comic Plots: The Birth of Gods and Middle Comedy.” In
Gregory W. Dobrov (ed.), Beyond Aristophanes: Transi-
tion and Diversity in Greek Comedy, pp. 1–27. American
Classical Studies 38. Atlanta.
——. 2000. “Eupolis and the Periodization of Athenian
Comedy.” In David Harvey and John Wilkins (eds.), The
Rivals of Aristophanes: Studies in Athenian Old Comedy,
pp. 233–46. London.
O’Connor, John Bartholomew. 1908. Chapters in the History
of Actors and Acting in Ancient Greece. Chicago.
Oellacher, Hans. 1916. “Zur Chronologie der altattischen
Komödie.” WS 38: 81–157.
Olson, S. Douglas (ed.). 2007. Broken Laughter: Select Frag-
ments of Greek Comedy. Oxford.
——. 2010. “The Comic Poet Pherecrates, a War-casualty
of the Late 410s BC.” JHS 130: 49–50.
Orth, Christian (ed.). 2009. Strattis. Die Fragmente: ein Kom-
mentar. Studia Comica. Berlin.
Osborne, M. J. 2009. “The Archons of Athens 300/299–
228/7.” ZPE 171: 83–99.
Papachrysostomou, Athina. 2008. Six Comic Poets: A Com-
mentary on Selected Fragments of Middle Comedy. Drama
NS 4. Tübingen.
Parker, H. 2006. “A Fragment of the Athenian Dramatic
Didascaliae for the Lenaia Re-examined (IG II/III2 2319).”
ZPE 158: 55–60.
Pellegrino, M. 2006. “I frammenti di Nicofonte.” AFLB 49:
43–97.
Peppas-Delmousou, Dina. 1977. “Zur den Urkunden drama-
tischer Aufführungen.” MDAI(A) 92: 229–43.
Petersen, E. 1885. “Scaenica.” WS 7: 175–89.
Pickard-Cambridge, Arthur. 1988. The Dramatic Festivals of
Athens2. Second edition (1968) revised with a new sup-
plement (1988) by John Gould and D. M. Lewis. Oxford.
Pirrotta, Serena (ed.). 2009. Plato Comicus. Die fragmen-
tarischen Komödien: ein Kommentar. Studia Comica.
Berlin.
Pittakis, K. 1835. L’ancienne Athènes, ou la description des
antiquités d’Athènes et de ses environs. Athens.
——. 1839. ArchEph. Pp. 272–95.
——. 1842. ArchEph. Pp. 471–502.
——. 1853. ArchEph. Pp. 989–1084.
Rangabé, A. R. 1855. Antiquités helléniques ou répertoire
d’inscriptions et d’autres antiquités découvertes depuis
l’affranchissement de la Grèce, vol. 2. Athens.
Reisch, Emil. 1907. “Urkunden dramatischer Aufführungen
in Athen.” Zeitschrift für die österreichischen Gymnasien
58: 289–315.
——. 1912. “Zu den Listen der Tragodiensieger.” WS 34:
332–41.
Rohde, Erwin. 1883. “Scenica.” RhM 38: 251–92.
Ruck, C. A. P. 1967. IG II2 2323: The List of the Victors in Com-
edies at the Dionysia. Leiden.
Rusten, J. 2006. “The Four ‘New Lenaean Victors’ of 428–5
B.C. (and the Date of the First Lenaean Comedy) Recon-
sidered.” ZPE 157: 22–6.
Schenkl, H. 1907. “Zu den attischen Bühnenurkunden.”
BPW 27, cols. 445–8.
Sickinger, James. 1999. Public Records and Archives in Clas-
sical Athens. Chapel Hill.
Storey, I. C. 2003. Eupolis. Poet of Old Comedy. Oxford.
Summa, Daniela. 2003. “Le Didascalie e il teatro postclas-
sico”. In Antonio Martina (ed.), Teatro greco postclas-
sico e teatro latino: Teorie e prassi drammatica. Attii del
Convegno Internazionale Roma, 16–18 ottobre 2001, pp.
293–303. Rome.
——. 2008. “Un concours de drames ‘anciens’ à Athènes.”
REG 121: 479–96.
Tracy, Stephen V. 1990. Attic Letter Cutters of 229 to 86 B.C.
Berkeley and Los Angeles.
Webster, T. B. L. 1952. “Chronological Notes on Middle
Comedy.” CQ ns 2: 13–26.
Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Ulrich von. 1906. Review of Wil-
helm (1906a). GGA: 611–34 (= Kleine Schriften V.1 [Berlin,
1937] 376–401).
Wilhelm, Adolf. 1906a. Urkunden dramatischer Aufführun-
gen in Athen. Vienna.
——. 1906b. “Mitteilung über eine Inschrift aus Athen.”
AnzWien 43: 77–82.
Wilson, Allan M. 1973. “Not Callias, but Ecphantides? An
Alternative Interpretation of I. G. xiv. 1097.” CR NS 23:
126–7.
Wilson, Peter J. 1997. “Amymon of Sikyon: A First Victory
in Athens and a First Tragic Khoregic Dedication in the
City? (SEG 23, 103B).” ZPE 118: 174–8.
——. 2000. The Athenian Institution of the Khoregia: The
Chorus, the City and the Stage. Cambridge.
 INDICES
I. Poets, Actors, Chorêgoi, and Producers*
Α̣[ - - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.1715
Α[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.60
Α[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.64
Α . [- - - ] (tragic poet), 2325A.64
Ἀγαθ̣οκλῆς (comic poet), 2323.519; 2325E.132
Ἀγήτωρ (tragic actor), 2325H.64
Ἀθη[νο - - - ] (tragic actor), 2325B.25
Ἀθηνόδωρος (tragic actor), 2318.1538, 1705; 2320 Col. II.8,
10, 15
Ἀθηνο̣κλῆς (comic poet), 2325E.55
Αἰσχύλ[ος], (tragic actor), 2325B.65; 2325H.71
Αἰσχύλος I (tragic poet), 2318.6, 161; 2325A.11
Ἀλέξανδ[ρος] (tragic actor), 2325H.95
Ἄλεξις (comic poet), 2318.1474; 2322.2; 2325E.45
Ἀλκ̣ [ - - - ] (actor or poet; genre unknown), 2325 inc.
fr. h΄.3
Ἀλκ̣ [ήν]ωρ (comic poet), 2325E.57
Ἀμεινίας (comic poet), 2323a Col. I.12; 2325E.67
Ἀ̣ μεινίας (tragic actor), 2325H.28
Ἀμ[ειψίας] (comic poet), 2325C.28; 2325E.24
[Ἀ]μ̣ φιχ[άρης] (comic actor), 2325F.50
Ἀναξανδρίδης (comic poet), 2318.1150; 2323a Col. I.6;
2325E.37
[᾿Ανά]ξιππος (producer), IGUR 218.9
Ἀνδ[- - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.293
Ἀνδροσθένης (tragic actor), SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.12;
2325H.29
Ἄνδρ̣ω̣ν (tragic actor), 2325B.6
Ἀντιμέ[νης] (tragic actor), 2325H.58
[Ἀντ]ιφάνης (comic actor), 2319 Col. I.4, 13
[Ἀ]ντιφάνη̣ [ς] (comic poet), 2325E.41
[Ἀ]πολλόδωρος of Carystus (comic poet), 2325C.82
Ἀπολλόδωρος of Gela (comic poet), 2325E.62
[Ἀπολλόδωρ]ος (tragic poet), 2325G.21
Ἀπολλοφάνης (comic poet), 2325C.40; 2325E.23
[Ἀρα]ρώς (comic poet), 2318.1004
Ἄρηξις (tragic actor), 2319 Col. II.9, 16; 2325H.32
Ἀρι[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325B.26
Ἀρι[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.48
Ἀρίμνη[στος] (tragic actor), 2325H.72
[Ἀ]ρ̣ισ[τ - - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.75
Ἀρισταγόρας (comic actor), 2325F.69
Ἀρίσταρχος Δεκε (chorêgos), 2318.589
[Ἀριστ]ία̣ ς (tragic poet), 2325A.17
* Only names partially or fully preserved in the inscriptions are indexed; fully restored names have been excluded
even when the restoration seems certain. When individual names appears more than once in the inscriptions, they are
generally indexed under the most fully preserved form.
Ἀριστίων (comic actor), 2325D.25
[Ἀριστ]όδημος (tragic actor), SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.3
Ἀριστόδ̣[ημος] (tragic actor), 2325H.23
Ἀριστ̣ο̣κ̣λ̣[ῆς] (comic poet), 2323.277
Ἀριστοκράτης (comic actor), 2325F.81
Ἀριστοκράτης (comic poet), 2323.16; 2325C.100
Ἀρισ[τ]οκράτη̣ ς Φαληρ (chorêgos), 2318.1006
Ἀριστόμαχος (comic actor), 2319 Col. I.2, 7, 9; 2325D.21;
2325F.77
Ἀριστομένης (comic poet), 2325E.5
[Ἀρισ]τομένης (comic actor), 2325D.49
Ἀριστόν[ικος] (tragic actor), 2325H.62
Ἀριστοφ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2321.4
Ἀρι[στοφάνης] (comic poet), 2325C.24
[Ἀρ]ι ̣στ[οφῶν] (comic poet), 2325E.46
Ἀρ[ιστοφ]ῶν (tragic actor), 2325H.40
[Ἀρ]ί�στων
̣ (comic poet), 2325E.129
Ἀρίστων (tragic actor), 2325H.119
Ἄροπος (comic poet), 2325E.87
Ἀ̣ ρρενείδης Παι[α]νι (chorêgos), 2318.1560
Ἀρχίας (tragic actor), 2325H.43
Ἀρχίδ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.106
Ἀ[[ρχικλῆς]] (comic poet), 2325E.133
Ἄρ̣χ̣ιπ̣ ̣ [π]ος Πειραιε[ύς] (chorêgos), 2318.1678
Ἀσκλ̣ ηπιάδης (tragic poet), 2325G.37
Ἀσκληπιόδωρος (comic actor), 2323a Col. I.1, 8, 14, 19;
2325F.71
Ἀστυδάμας (tragic poet), 2318.1477, 1561; 2320 Col. II.5, 22;
2325A.44; 2325G.25
Αὐτόλυκος (comic actor), 2325F.83
[Ἀφα]ρ̣εύς (tragic poet), 2325A.46
Ἀχ[α]ι̣ό�̣ς (tragic poet), 2325G.35
Β[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.63
Β[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.53
Βα̣ κχ[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.54
Βίοττος (comic poet), 2323.417, 515; 2325E.134
Βίω[ν] (chorêgos), 2318.291
Γ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2323.149
Γοργοσθένης (tragic actor), 2325B.67; 2325H.60
Δ[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.62
Δ[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.68
234 i. poets, actors, chorêgoi, and producers
Δ[ . . . ]κράτης (comic actor), 2325F.100
[Δαμ]όξενος (comic poet), 2325C.84
Δάμων (comic actor), 2323.414, 418, 510, 514, 516
Δεινόστρατος (chorêgos), 2318.166
Δεξι[κράτης] (comic poet), 2325E.110
[Δ]έρκετος (comic actor), 2325D.24; 2325F.78
Δη̣ [ - - - ] (comic poet), 2325C.112
[Δη]μ̣ έας (comic actor), 2325D.22
Δ[ημ]ή�̣ [τρι]ος (comic actor), 2325F.93
Δημόδοκος (chorêgos), 2318.153
Δημο̣σθένης (chorêgos), 2318.591
[Δη]μ̣ [ο]φ̣ [ῶ]ν (comic actor), 2325F.75
Δι[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.66
Δι[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325F.114
Δι ̣[ - - - ] (tragic poet), 2325A.67
Δ̣ ιογείτων (comic actor), 2323.263
Διόδωρος (comic poet), 2319 Col. I.8, 10
Δ[ι]ονυ̣σι[- - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.1481
[Διον]ύ�̣σιος (comic actor), 2325D.50
Δι[ονύσι]ος (comic poet), 2325E.53
Διονύσιος III (comic poet), 2325E.131
[Διο]πείθης (comic poet), 2325C.15
Διοπεί[θης] (chorêgos), 2318.1667
[Διοσκ]ουρίδης (comic actor), SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.9
Διοσκο[υρίδη]ς (comic poet), 2325E.115
Διόφαντ̣[ος ῾Αλιεύς] (chorêgos), 2318.1663
Δίφιλος (comic poet), SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.8; 2325E.63
Ἑκαταῖος (comic actor), 2323.278, 294
[Ἐκφαν]τίδης (comic poet), 2325C.13
Ἐμμενίδ̣[ης] (comic actor), 2325D.29; 2325F.82
[᾿Εμμ]ενί�δ̣ ης (comic poet), 2325E.128
Ἐπαμείνων (tragic actor), 2325B.68; 2325H.73
[Ἐπ]ιγέν̣ης (comic poet), 2323.504
Ἐπικρ̣[άτης] (comic poet), 2323.421
Ἐ̣ πίνικος (tragic actor), 2325H.121
Ἐρατο[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.104
Ἐράτων (comic actor), 2323.268, 281
Ἕρμιππος (comic poet), 2318.426; 2325C.23; 2325E.8
Ἑρμόφαντος (comic actor), 2325F.102
Ἐροτ[ίων] (tragic actor), 2325H.74
Ἐτεαγ<ό>ρας (comic poet), 2325E.88
Εὐ�̣[ ca. 5 ]ς (tragic actor), 2325H.39
[Ε]ὐ�̣άρετος (tragic poet), 2320 Col. II.9, 28
Εὐβου[λίδης] (comic poet), 2325E.116
Εὔβουλος (comic poet), 2325E.39
Εὐερ[- - - ] (comic actor), 2323.457
[Εὐ]έτης (tragic poet), 2325A.12
Εὐηγέτης Παλλη (chorêgos), 2318.1013
Εὐ<θ>υκράτης (comic poet), 2325E.86
Εὐκτήμων Ἐλευ (chorêgos), 2318.155
Εὐμήδη[ς] (comic poet), 2325E.98
Εὐπόλεμο[ς] (tragic actor), 2325H.21
Εὔπολις (comic poet), 2325C.25; 2325E.11
[[Ε̣ ὑρήμων]] (tragic actor), 2325H.97
Εὐρ̣ιπί�δ̣ ης I (tragic poet), 2320 Col. II.4, 21, 35
Εὐρυκλείδης (chorêgos), 2318.157
Εὐφάνη̣ [ς] (comic poet), 2325E.44
Εὐφρόνιος (comic poet), 2318.158; 2325C.12
Ἔφιππος (comic poet), 2325E.40
[Ἐχ]ένικος]] (comic actor), 2325D.23
[[Ἔχετος]] (tragic actor), 2325H.120
῾Ηρα[- - - ] (tragic poet), 2319 Col. III.7
Ἡρακλ̣ [ - - - ] (comic actor), 2323.462
Ἡρακλεί[δ - - - ] (comic poet), 2322.4
Ἡρα[κ]λείδ̣η̣ς (comic actor), 2325F.95
Ἡρακλείδης (tragic actor), 2318.286; 2325B.2
Ἡράκλ̣ [ειτος] (tragic actor), 2325H.94
Ἡφαιστίων (tragic actor), SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.2, 6;
2325H.33
Θαι̣[ - - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.146
Θαλ̣[ - - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.296
Θε̣[ - - - ] (tragic actor), 2325B.23
Θεμισ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.112
Θεοδ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.114
[Θεο]δέκτας (tragic poet), 2325A.45
Θεόδω[ρος] (comic poet), 2325E.117
Θεόδωρος (tragic actor), 2325H.26
Θεοδωρίδης (tragic poet), SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.10
Θεόπομπος (comic poet), 2325C.36; 2325E.20
Θεόφιλο̣[ - - - ] (comic actor), 2322.5
Θεόφιλος (comic poet), 2318.1699; 2323a Col. I.15
Θεοχάρης (comic poet), 2325C.42
Θετταλός (tragic actor), 2318.1478, 1562; 2320 Col. II.6, 11,
16, 23, 26, 29, 31
Θεω[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.113
Θηραμέν[ης] (tragic actor), 2325H.65
[Θ]ηραμένης Κηφισι (chorêgos), 2318.1701
Θρασ[- - - ] (actor or poet; genre unknown), 2325 inc.
fr. h΄.1
Θρασύβου[λος] (tragic actor), 2325H.22
Ι̣[ - - - ] (tragic actor), 2325B.27
Ι̣[ . . . . ]ς (comic actor), 2325F.99
Ἴασος Κολλυ (chorêgos), 2318.1015
Ἱερομν[ήμων] (tragic actor), 2325H.45
[Ἱ]ερώνυμος (comic actor), 2319 Col. I.5; 2325F.76
Ἰόλ[α]ο[ς] (comic poet), 2323.351
Ἰοφῶν (tragic poet), 2318.429
Ἵππαρχος (tragic actor), SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.15; 2325H.27
Ἰσοκράτης (chorêgos), 2318.425
[Ἰσο]κράτης (tragic actor), 2325H.98
Κα̣ [ - - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.65
Κα[- - - ] (comic actor), 2323.420
Καβείριχος (comic actor), 2323.503, 505
Καίριος (tragic poet), 2325G.38
Καλλ[ - - - ] (comic actor), 2322.3
Καλλ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.105
Καλλιάδης (comic poet), 2325E.66
Καλλίας (comic actor), SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.7; 2325F.91
Καλ[λίας] (comic poet), 2318.294; 2325C.17
 i. poets, actors, chorêgoi, and producers 235
Καλλικλῆς (tragic actor), 2325H.96
Καλλικράτης (comic actor), 2323.512, 518
Καλλιππί[δης] (tragic actor), 2319 Col. III.16, 17; 2325H.7
[Κάλ]λ̣ ιππος πρεσβύτ (comic actor), 2323a Col. I.3
Κάλλιππος νεώτε (comic actor), 2323a Col. I.4, 11, 16;
2325F.70
Καλλίστρ̣[ατος] (comic actor), 2325D.28
[Κα]λλίστρατ[ος] (comic actor), 2325F.37
Καλλίστρατος (comic actor), 2323.292
Καλλίστρατος (tragic poet), 2319 Col. III.14
Κάνθαρος (comic poet), 2318.582; 2325C.26
Κα[ρκίνος] I (tragic poet), 2318.297
[Καρκί]νος II (tragic poet), 2325A.43; SEG XXVI 203
Col. I.12
Κηφίσιος (comic actor), 2319 Col. I.11
Κ̣ [η]φισό[δωρος] (comic poet), 2325C.37
[Κηφι]σόδωρος (comic actor), 2325D.48
Κλ̣ ε[̣ - - - ] (actor or poet; genre unknown), 2325 inc.
fr. h΄.4
Κλεαίνετος (tragic poet), SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.13
Κλεαίνετ[ος Κυδαθη] (chorêgos), 2318.144
Κλέανδρο[ς] (tragic actor), 2318.1008
Κλέα̣ [ρχ]ος (comic poet), 2325E.54
Κλεῖτος (tragic actor), 2325H.66
Κλεο[- - - ] (comic poet), 2323.145
Κλεό�̣δ[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.70
[Κλ]ε̣ο̣δ̣ά�̣μ̣α̣ς (tragic actor), 2325H.25
Κράτης (comic actor), 2323.264, 296
[Κρά]της (comic poet), 2325C.16
Κρατῖνος (comic poet), 2325C.14; 2325E.6
Κριτόδημος (comic actor), 2323.404, 409
Κρίτων (comic poet), 2323.287, 415
Λαίνης (comic poet), 2323.269; 2325C.101
Λάμπυτος (comic poet), 2323.419
Λεπτίνης (tragic actor), 2325B.9; 2325H.4
Λεύ[κων] (comic poet), 2325C.32
Λύκ[ις] (comic poet), 2325C.31
Λυκίσ[κος] (comic actor), 2325F.87
Λύκων (comic actor), 2325F.48
Λυσίας (comic poet), 2325C.41
Λυσικράτ[ης] (tragic actor), 2319 Col. III.13
Λυσίμαχος (comic actor), 2323.583
[Λ]ύσιππος (comic poet), IGUR 216.7
Μάγνης (comic poet), 2318.3; 2325C.8
Μένανδρος (comic poet), 2323.172, 412; SEG XXVI 208
fr. A.10; 2325E.60
Μενεκλ̣ ῆς (comic actor), 2325F.92
[Με]νεκράτης (tragic poet), 2318.585
Μενεκρά�̣ της (tragic actor), 2325B.8; 2325H.3
Μενεσ[θ]εύς (comic poet), 2325E.100
[Μέσα]τος (tragic poet), IG II2 2325A.16
Με[ταγέν]<η>ς (comic poet), 2325E.19
Μίρων (tragic actor), 2325H.24
[Μ]νησίμα̣ [χος] (comic poet), 2325E.42
Μόνιμος (comic actor), 2323.408, 412, 416
Μ̣οσχίων (comic actor), 2325F.74
[Μό]σ̣ χος Ἀλ̣[ - - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.1147
Μυννίσκος (tragic actor), 2318.586; 2325B.4
Μυρτίλος (comic poet), 2325E.10
Ν̣ [ - - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.42
Ν[α]υσικ[ράτης] (comic actor), 2325F.49
Ναυσ̣[ικράτ]ης (comic poet), 2325E.43
Ναύσων (tragic actor), 2325H.118
Νεάνθης (comic poet), 2325E.91
Νεοπτόλεμος (tragic actor), 2320 Col. II.3, 7, 12, 14, 17, 20,
24, 27, 30; 2325H.30
Νι̣[ - - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.25
Νι[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325B.22
Νι[κ - - - ] (comic poet), 2323a Col. II.16
Νικ[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.47
Νίκαρχος (comic poet), 2325C.98
Νικι[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.109
Νικόδημος (comic actor), 2323.17, 19
Νικόδημος (comic poet), 2325E.135
Νικοκλῆς (agonothete), SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.5
Νικόλαος (comic actor), 2323.506, 520
Νικόμαχος (comic poet), 2325C.99
Νικόμαχο[ς] (tragic actor), 2325B.3
[Νι]κ̣ όμαχος (tragic poet), SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.3
Ν̣ [ι]κόμαχος Ἀχα[ρν] (chorêgos), 2318.1476
Νικό[σ]τ̣ρατος II (comic poet), 2323a Col. I.9; 2325E.65
[Νι]κ̣ όστρατος III (comic poet), 2323.279
[Νικόστρ]α̣ τος (tragic actor), 2318.864
Ν̣ ι̣[κ]ό�̣σ̣τ̣[ρατος] (tragic actor), 2318.1673
Ν̣ ι̣κ̣ό�̣[στρα]τ̣ος Ἀ̣ [χ]αρν (chorêgos), 2318.1676
Νικοφῶν (comic poet), 2325C.35; 2325E.22
Νίκων (tragic actor), 2325H.61
Νίκων Α[ (chorêgos), 2318.428
[Νόθ]ιππος (tragic poet), 2325A.14
Νούιος (comic poet), 2325E.130
Ξ̣ [ - - - ] (tragic poet), 2325A.68
[Ξ]ενοκλείδης (chorêgos), 2318.2
Ξενοκλῆς Ἀφιδνα (chorêgos), 2318.160
Ξενόφιλος (comic poet), 2325E.3; IGUR 215.10
Ξενοφῶν (comic poet), 2325C.43; 2325E.26
Ξένων (tragic actor), 2325H.56
Ὀλυ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2323.147
Ομ[- - - ] (tragic poet), 2325A.66
Ὀνήσιμος (comic actor), 2323.290, 297
Ὀνή�̣ τωρ Μ[ελιτεύς] (chorêgos), 2318.1665
Οὐ�̣[ - - - ] (comic poet), 2325C.116
Π[- - - ] (comic actor), 2323.144
Π<ά>μφιλο[ς] (tragic actor), 2325H.115
Πανδαί[τ]ης (comic poet), 2325E.99
Παράμονος (comic poet), 2323.289, 407, 413
Παρμέν̣ων (comic actor), 2325F.47
Περικλ̣ ῆς Χολαρ (chorêgos), 2318.5
Πιτθεύς (comic actor), 2325F.94
236 i. poets, actors, chorêgoi, and producers
Πλά�̣ [των] (comic poet), 2325C.29
[Πλ]εισθένης (tragic actor), 2325B.66
Πο[- - - ] (comic actor), 2323.350
Πο[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325C.115
Πο[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.41
Πο[λίοχος] (comic poet), 2325E.18
Πολυ[- - - ] (actor or poet; genre unknown), 2325 inc.
fr. h΄.2
Πολυ̣[ - - - ] (comic actor), 2325F.86
Π̣ [ο]λυ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.111
Πολυα[- - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.1713
[Π]ολύευκτος (comic actor), 2325F.72
Πολύζηλο[ς] (comic actor), 2325F.89
Πολ[ύζηλο]ς (comic poet), 2325E.21
Πολύκλειτος (comic poet), 2325E.89
Πολυκ[λῆς] (comic actor), 2325D.30
Πολύκριτος (tragic actor), 2325H.117
Πολύξεν̣ο̣ς (comic actor), 2323.280
Πολυφράσμων (tragic poet), 2318.17; 2325A.13
[Πο]σεί�̣διππ̣ο̣ς I (comic poet), 2323.284, 300; 2325C.80
[Ποσεί]διππος II (comic poet), 2325C.95
Πραξία[ς] (tragic actor), 2325H.44
Προκλείδης (comic poet), 2318.1668; 2325E.59
Πυθάρατος (comic actor), 2325F.90
Πυθόδ[ωρος] (comic poet), 2325E.103
[Π]υρραλεύς (comic actor), 2325F.73
Πύρριχος (tragic actor), 2325H.63
Πύρ[ρος] (comic poet), 2325E.56
Σ[- - - ] (actor; genre unknown), 2324 fr. a.2
Σ[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.61
Σα[- - - ] (actor; genre unknown), 2324 fr. a.3
Σατυρίων (comic poet), 2325C.81
[Σάτ]υρος (comic actor), 2325F.35
Σαώνδας (tragic actor), 2325B.5
Σίμυλος (comic poet), 2319 Col. I.6
Σοφοκλῆς I (tragic poet), 2318.285; SEG XXVI 208 fr. B.5;
2325A.15
Σοφοκλῆς ΙΙ (tragic poet), 2318.1007, 1153
Στ̣[ - - - ] (comic poet), 2323a Col. II.14
Στεμφ[ύλιος] (tragic actor), 2325H.55
Σω[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325D.67
Σωγένης (comic poet), 2323.293
Σωκ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.107
Σωκράτης (comic actor), 2325F.85
[Σ]ώνικος (comic actor), 2323.406
Σωσίθεος (tragic actor), 2325H.116
Σωσικλῆ̣ [ς] (comic actor), 2325F.88
Σώφιλος (comic actor), 2323.288
Τ̣ [ - - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.69
Τεισίλα[ς] (tragic actor), 2325H.59
Τηλεκλείδης (comic poet), 2325C.18; 2325E.4
Τι̣μο[- - - ] (comic poet), 2323.353
Τιμόθε̣[ος] I (comic poet), 2323.143
Τιμοκλῆς (comic poet), 2325E.58
Τιμοκλῆς (tragic poet), 2320 Col. II.19
Τιμόξενος (comic poet), 2323.517
Τιμόστρατος (comic poet), 2323.262, 291
Φ[- - - ] (comic actor), 2323.352
Φερ[- - - ] (comic actor), 2325F.113
Φερεκράτης (comic poet), 2325C.22; 2325E.7
Φι[λ - - - ] (comic actor), 2325F.112
Φιλ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325C.30
Φιλ[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325H.46
Φιλέτα[ιρο]ς (comic poet), 2325E.38
[Φι]λ̣ ήμων (comic actor), 2325F.36
Φιλήμων I (comic poet), 2323.15; SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.11;
2325E.61
[Φιλ]ήμων II (comic poet), 2325C.83
Φιλήμων III (comic poet), 2323.295; 2325C.102
Φιλ[ῖ]νος (tragic poet), 2325G.36
Φιλιππίδης (comic poet), 2323a Col. I.7; 2325E.64
Φίλιπ̣ [πος] (comic poet), 2325E.35
Φίλιππος (tragic actor), 2325H.19
Φιλίσκος (comic poet), 2325E.90
Φιλοκλ̣ ῆ̣[ς] (comic actor), 2325D.27; 2325F.80
Φιλοκλῆς (comic poet), 2323.512
[Φι]λ̣ οκράτης (comic actor), 2325F.103
[Φιλοκ]ύδης (comic actor), 2325D.44
Φιλομ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325E.108
Φιλόνικος (comic poet), 2325E.28
Φιλ[ο]στέφανος (comic actor), 2325F.101
Φιλόστρατ[ος (comic actor), 2323.300
Φιλύλλιος (comic poet), 2325E.27
[Φ]ί�λ̣ ων (comic actor), 2323.587
Φιλωνίδης (comic actor), 2325D.26; 2325F.84
Φοινικίδης (comic poet), 2319 Col. I.3, 12; 2325C.85
Φρ̣[ - - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.1670
Φρ . [- - - ] (tragic poet), IG II2 2325A.65
Φρύνιχος (comic poet), 2325C.27; 2325E.9
Φύτιος (tragic actor), 2325H.20
Χα[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325C.111
Χαιρέσ[τ]ρατος (tragic actor), 2325B.7; 2325H.2
Χαιρίων (comic poet), 2323.513
Χαρίας (tragic actor), 2325H.57
Χαρίας Ἀγρυλῆ (chorêgos), 2318.164
Χαρίδημο[ς] (tragic actor), 2325H.18
Χόρηγ ̣[ος] (comic poet), 2325E.36
[ 5–6 ]ά�̣ δης (tragic actor), 2325H.34
[ . . . . . ]άνης (comic actor), 2325F.105
[ - - - ]ας (comic actor?), 2325 inc. fr. g΄.2
[ 5–6 ]α̣ς (comic poet), 2325C.9
[ . . . . . ]α̣ ς (tragic poet), 2325G.22
[ . . . ]γένης Γ̣ [αργ] (chorêgos), 2318.1152
[ 3–4 ]γνητο[ς] (chorêgos), 2318.1149
[ . . . . . ]δης (tragic poet), 2325G.23
[ - - - ]ε̣νος (comic actor), 2323.361
[ . . . . . ] . η̣ [ - - - ] (tragic poet), 2325G.26
[ . . . ]ης (comic actor), 2323.358
[ 4–5 ]ης (comic actor), 2325D.45
 i. poets, actors, chorêgoi, and producers 237
[ ca. 9 ]ης (comic actor), 2323.23
[ ca. 9 ]ης (comic actor), 2323.25
[ 5–6 ]η[ς] (comic poet), 2325E.96
[ . . . . . . ]η̣ ς (tragic poet), 2325G.20
[ . . . . ]θ̣εος (comic poet), 2325C.94
[ . . . ]ι[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325C.38
[ . . . ]ία[ς] (tragic actor), SEG XXVI 203 Col. I.17
[ . . . ]ίδης (comic actor), 2323.360
[ . . . ]ι̣λ[- - - ] (chorêgos), 2318.1473
[ 3–4 ]κλείδης (comic poet), 2325E.94
[ . . . . ]κ̣ λῆς (tragic poet), 2318.1703
[ . . . . ]κλῆς (tragic poet), 2320 Col. II.25
[ . . . ]κ̣ ο̣ς (comic actor), 2323.174
[ . . . . κ]ράτης (tragic poet), 2325G.24
[ . . . ]κων (comic actor), 2325F.46
[2–3]λεύς (comic poet), 2325E.92
[ . . . . ]λλος (tragic actor), 2325H.31
[ ca. 6 ]μος (comic actor), 2323.12
[ . . ]μόστρατ[ος] (tragic poet), 2325G.38
[ . . . . . ]ν (comic actor), 2325D.51
[ 4–5 ]ν (comic actor), 2325D.47
[ . . . .]νης (comic poet), 2323.173
[ . . . . . . ]νης (comic poet), 2325C.10
[ . ]νησι̣[ . . . . . . ] (comic poet), 2325E.118
[ ca. 7 ]ο[- - - ] (tragic poet), 2320 Col. II.36
[ . . ]όδωρος (comic poet), 2325E.93
[ . . ]όδωρο̣ς (comic poet), 2325E.97
[ - - - ό]μαχος (comic actor), 2323.164
[ ca. 8 ]ος (comic actor), 2323.402
[ ca. 7 ]ο̣ς (comic poet), 2325C.93
[  6–7 ]ο̣ς (tragic actor), 2325H.6
[ 5–6 ]ος (tragic actor), 2325H.100
[  6–7 ]ος (tragic actor), 2325H.101
[  ca. 7 ]ο[ς] Κηφισ[ι] (chorêgos), 2318.1680
[ 3–4 ]όστρ[ατος] (tragic actor), 2320 Col. II.34
[ - - - πρ]εσβύτερος (comic poet), 2323.162
[ . . ]ρ̣[ - - - ] (comic actor), 2325F.51
[ - - - ]ρ̣ος (comic actor?), 2325 inc. fr. g΄.4
[ ca. 8 ]ρος (comic actor), 2325F.97
[ ca. 8 ]ρος (comic poet), 2325E.51
[ . . ]σ[- - - ] (tragic actor), 2325B.24
[ - - - ]ς (actor; genre unknown), 2324 fr. b.6
[ - - - ]ς (comic actor?), 2325 inc. fr. g΄.3
[ - - - ]ς (comic poet), 2325E.82
[ . . . . . . ]ς (comic poet), 2325C.11
[  ca. 8 ]ς (comic poet), 2325E.29
[ ca. 9–10 ]ς (comic poet), 2325C.6
[ ca. 9–10 ]ς (comic poet), 2325C.19
[ ca. 7–8 ]ς (tragic actor), 2325H.38
[  ca. 9–10 ]ς (tragic actor), 2325H.37
[ . . . . . . ]ς̣ Παια[νιεύς] (chorêgos), 2318.581
[ 3–4 σ]τ̣ρατος (comic poet), 2325E.95
[ . . . . ]τ[ . . . ]ν̣η̣ς (comic actor), 2325F.104
[  ca. 7–8 ]της (comic actor), 2323.21
[  7–8 ]τος (tragic actor), 2325H.8
[ 4–5 ]υ̣κ[- - - ] (comic poet), 2325C.96
[ 3–4 ]υν̣ος (tragic actor), 2325H.99
[ - - - ]ων (comic actor), 2323.161
[ - - - ]ων (comic actor), 2323.176
[ - - - ω]ν (comic poet), 2323.357
[ . . . . ω]ν (tragic poet), 2325A.47
[ . . . ω]ν Παιανιεύ�̣[ς] (chorêgos), 2318.584
[ . . ω]ν̣ Λαμπτρ (chorêgos), 2318.284
[ 4–5 ]ωρ (comic actor), 2325D.46
[ - - - ]ε (chorêgos), 2318.869
[ ca. 9 Δι]ομε[ύς] (chorêgos), 2318.1542
[ ca. 11–12 Εὐ]ω̣ νυ̣ (chorêgos), 2318.1545
[ 5–6 ἐκ Κερ]α̣ μ (chorêgos), 2318.1536
[ . . . . . . ἐ]κ Κερ[αμέων] (chorêgos), 2318.1697
[ 5–6 ἐκ Κοί]λ̣ ης (chorêgos), 2318.1543
238 ii. athenian archons

II. Athenian Archons**

Ἅβρωνος, 2318.162 Λυσιμάχου, IGUR 216.12

᾿Αγαθοκλέου[ς], IGUR 218.12 [Λυσισ]τράτου, IGUR 218.4
Ἀλκαίου, 2318.587
[Ἀλ]κιβιάδου, SEG XXVI 208 fr. A.4 Μνησιθέου, 2323.509
[᾿Ανα]ξίππου, IGUR 218.9 Μορχίδου, IGUR 216.13
Ἀνθεστηρίου, 2323.507
᾿Αντιοχίδου, IGUR 216.1, 6 Ναυσιγένου[ς], IGUR 218.10
[᾿Α]ντιφ[ῶ]ντος, 2319 Col. III.18 Ν̣ ι[κήτου], 2318.1661
᾿Απολλοδώρου, IGUR 218.8 Νικομάχου, 2320 Col. II.18
[Ἀριστοκράτου]ς, 2318.865 Νικοτέλου[ς], IGUR 216.11
Ἀρισ[τόλα], 2323.461
Ἀρ̣ι[̣ στο]φάνους, 2318.1674 Ξενοκλέους, 2323.411
᾿Αρχ[ίου], 2319 Col. III.11
᾿Α[στυφίλου], 2319 Col. III.4 [Ὅπλωνο]ς, 2323.13

[Γλαυκίπ]που, IGUR 216.8 [Πολέμ]ωνος, 2323a Col. I.5

Ποσει[δωνίου], 2323.459
[Δι]οτίμου, 2319 Col. I.6 [Πραξιέργο]υ, 2318.18
Διοφάντου, IGUR 216.10 Πυ[θοδώρου], IGUR 216.5

᾿Επα[μείνονος], IGUR 215.1 Συμμάχου, 2323.265

Ἐράστ[ου], 2323.458 [Σωσιγένο]υς, 2318.1539
Ἑρμογένου, 2323.298
Εὐδ[ - - - ], IGUR 215.3 Τιμησιάνα̣ [κτος], 2323.299
Εὐνίκου, 2323.410 Τιμοκλέ[ους], IGUR 216.3
[Εὐπο]λ̣ έμου, 2323.282 Τιμοκράτο̣υ[ς], SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.7

Θεμιστοκ̣ [λέους], 2318.1479 Χαρι̣κ̣[λείδου], SEG XXVI 203 Col. II.17

Θεοδότου, 2318.1009 [Χαρικ]λ̣ έους, 2323.283
Θεοδώρου, IGUR 216.4 Χαρισάνδρο[υ], IGUR 218.5
Θεοξένου, 2323.266 Χίωνος, IGUR 218.1, 11
Θεοπόμπου, IGUR 216.8
Θεοφράστου, 2318.1563; 2320 Col. II.32 [Φιλο]κ̣ λέους, 2318.151
Θουδήμου, IGUR 218.13
[ - - - ο]υ̣, 2321.7
Ἱπποδάμαντος, 2318.1155; IGUR 218.6

Καλλιστράτου, 2323.508
Κηφισοδ[ότου], IGUR 218.7
Κηφισοφῶντος, 2318.1706

** Only archons whose names are fully or partially preserved in the inscriptions are included. Those who are fully
restored, even when the restoration is certain, are excluded.