the attic stelai - The American School of Classical Studies at Athens

THE ATTIC STELAI 321
It has been argued, however, that Pollux knew and used Krateros' Tfqt-drwov
crvvaycoy?5, a work which offered texts of a large number of Athenian inscriptions,
mostly from the fifth and fourth centuries, with full commentaries.6 Once, indeed,
Krateros is explicitly cited (VIII, 126); the word nautodikai is under discussion, and
Pollux adds to his very brief definition the statement: " If one may trust Krateros,
who collected the Psephismata, those who are unwilling to open proceedings are called
hubristodikai-this word was current in Sicily." It happens that Harpokration (s.v.
vacvro&Kat) has preserved a fragment of the very Krateros commentary to which Pollux
must refer, and the first thing one notices is that Pollux, in defining his major
heading (nautodikai), has made use of none of the many details which Krateros provided.
It is thus more probable that the exotic term hubristodikai comes from a predecessor
in the lexicographic tradition than that Pollux himself found it in the
Psephismatat. This leaves us in some doubt as to the origin of his reference to Sicilian
usage; it may belong to Krateros, or it may have been added by Pollux's lexicographer.7
A second passage in which a reference to Krateros may exist is VII, 15. Here
Pollux is discussing buying and selling, and he says, " In the Attic psephismcata which
grant privileges to foreigners, one can find Etvat aVcLTO OcKEtav cvrcrtv." The troublesome
thing here is that it is not possible to find such a phrase among surviving inscriptions.
For some reason the word cWv7)o-ts has been restored in C.I.G., 3597b, an inscription
from Ilium, but actually it occurs only in this chapter of the Onomasticon. The
formula to which Pollux seems to refer uses the word E7KT'1c0tS with the genitive, as in
I.G., 112, 360, line 20: Etvat 8-aViroZ KaU
y7lS
Kat OLKLacl EYKTrqcV.8 It seems likely that
Pollux's hapax sprang from an erroneous reading, and that his use of OtKEi'av is also
a mistake.9 He has taken the word in good faith as a derivative of dovE'opat, but if the
"This may, incidentally, be the first collection of its kind and would in that case be the genuine
predecessor of Krateros' Psephismata" (F.G.H., III B, Supp. I, p. 228). Krateros' fuller collection
was made only a decade or so later, and was given considerable use during the first five centuries
after Christ, as is proved by the list of works in which fragments have been found (see F.G.H., III
B, 342; P. Krech, De Crateri *rqcrpoa'Twv cwaywyf, diss. Greifswald, 1938, pp. 94 ff.). Polemon's
publications of dedicatory inscriptions and antiquarian curiosities were made in the first decades
of the second century B.C. and were used by Athenaeus (VI, 234 f; X, 436 d; 442 e; XI, 472 b;
486 d; XIII, 587 c); the collection of Menetor, llEpt ava6rqAa'TWV, was probably similar, although we
cannot be sure that it contained Attic texts (Athenaeus, VIII, 594 d; F.H.G., IV, p. 452). Other
ancient epigraphers who worked with non-Attic inscriptions are listed by B6ckh in the preface to
C.I.G., I.
6 Plutarch, Arist., 26, 1-2. See Krech, op. cit., passim and Jacoby, R.E., s.v. Krateros.
7Krech, op. cit., p. 22, takes these words too as a part of the Krateros commentary, and then
must argue that this is not evidence of the inclusion of non-Attic texts in the Psephismata.
8 The same formula appears in I.G., II2, 8, line 17; 351, line 29; 505, line 53; 554, line 30.
With slight variations it is used in I.G., II2, 237, line 25; 884, line 5, and I.G., I2, 110, line 30.
See also R.E., V, 2584, and A. Billheimer, Naturalization in Athenian Law and Practice, Princeton
diss., 1922, pp. 21-22.
9 Dittenberger in his index lists only four uses of OiKElOs, none of which suggests this context.