LATIN INSCRIPTIONS FROM ACHAIA 
AND THE CYCLADES
MARJETA ŠAŠEL-KOS 
Ljubljana
CIL III, w hich appeared at the tu rn of the 19th and 20th century, collected 
a good num ber of Latin inscriptions from Greece (which since 146 B. C. was 
officially called Achaia), and thus m ade possible the study of the im pact of 
the Latin elem ent in this Graeco-Roman province par excellence, and to a 
certain extent also its R om anisation* The only person who has dealt m ore 
extensively w ith this problem has been H. M ihäescu in a very recent series of 
articles, published in Revue des etudes sud-est européennes (from 9, 1971 on) 
and entitled: ’ La diffusion de la langue Latine dans le sud-est de l’ Europe'. 
His approach was m ainly confined to charting all the provenances of Latin 
inscriptions in this vast area, and thus to determ ine and better illum inate the 
boundary between the Greek and Latin speaking p art of the em pire. His w ork 
was, at least regarding Achaia, fairly superficial; moreover, he did not take 
into account the larger p a rt of the discoveries m ade after the publication of 
CIL III.
The Latin inscriptions which have come to light in Greece and been pub­
lished since M ommsen’s tim e, are about as num erous as those already at our 
disposal in CIL III.1 The m ajority come from places already known as strong­
ly Romanised centres, like the two Roman colonies Patrae (w ith Dyme) and 
C orinth; further, a great num ber of them have been found in Athens, Delphi 
and Delos. From the indices of CIL III an im pressive list can be com piled of 
sites yielding Latin inscriptions (although som etim es no m ore th an one or 
tw o) ; among these are Taenarum , Tegea, Clitor, Cynaetha, Epidaurus, Megara, 
E retria, Anthedon (in B oeotia), Lebadeia, Ptoion, Amphissa and Naupactus,2 
sites w here one w ould hardly expect to come upon any vestige of Latin at 
all. That the occurrence of Latin inscriptions in these cities was indeed iso­
lated, is confirm ed by the fact th at in this century no others have since been 
recovered from any of them . On the other hand Latin inscriptions occur in 
places w here they had not been known previously. The purpose of the article 
is confined to selecting these new sites and com m enting very briefly on the 
Latin inscriptions found there, mainly to draw attention to them , as some are

1 Latin inscriptions from Achaia and the Cyclades. — Latinski napisi iz Ahaje
in s Kikladov
published in rather inaccesible journals or in the publications w here one 
w ould not expect to look for them ; only a small num ber have been repro­
duced in L’ année épigraphique. Thus the picture given by CIL III and repeated 
by Mihäescu (who includes only a few additions) will be completed. The new 
sites are : in the Peloponnese, Aegium, Sicyon, Isthm ia and Cenchreiae on the 
C orinthian ager, and Gytheum ; in the rest of the province ( I exclude Thessaly, 
as do the editors of CIL III, because for m any centuries it was p art of Ma­
cedonia and therefore som ewhat m ore Latinised), Thespiae3 and Aegina; from 
the Cyclades, Andros, Syros and Tenos.
In Aegium a short b u t im portant inscription was found, dating from ca. 74
B. C. (shortly after the lex Plautia Papiria accorded Roman citizenship to the 
Italians ) :
Italicei I quei Aegei negotiantur | P. R utilium P. f. N udum \ q(uaestorem )I
This, the oldest Italian com m unity hitherto attested in the Peloponnese, was 
conveniently situated on the route from Rome via Brundisium to Athens, from 
whose port at Piraeus other eastern cities w ere easily accessible. This line of 
com m unication was still well used by the negotiatores in the 1st century B. C. 
— only tow ards the close of the Republic did their m igration from Italy to the 
E ast gradually cease. Sim ilar inscriptions attesting Republican negotiatores 
come from Delos,5 Ephesus6 and Argos ; the two from Argos are dated to the

years 69—67 B. C.7 Negotiatores from Delos are know n to have been installed 
on the island at least since the end of the 2nd century B. C., and after the 
decline of Delos they m ight have transferred th eir business to Argos.8 One 
connot estim ate how old was the establishm ent of the negotiatores a t Aegium 
b u t the fact th at they still nam ed themselves Italici, a title juridically no lon­
ger correct, doubtless points to a certain tradition.9
Since Aegium, which until 146 B. C. was the centre of the Achaean League, 
has always had a good h arb o u r of great com m ercial potential, the presence 
of the negotiatores is by no m eans astonishing. P. Rutilius Nudus, the quaestor 
whom they honoured, was doubtless the sam e person who had held a naval 
com m and under the consul M. Aurelius Cotta at the battle of Chalcedon (in 
74 or 73 B. C.) and m ight as such have been charged w ith a tem porary mission 
in the northern Peloponnese.1 0 The association perhaps hoped to have its ser­
vices engaged.
In Sicyon three Latin inscriptions were discovered during the excavations 
of the city. The first is a dedication by Sulla of a statue of Mars, on a base 
found south of the sanctuary of Artemis.
L. Cornelius L. f. Sulla im per(ator) Martei.1 1
Sulla’s inscription certainly dates from the tim e of his disastrous activity in 
Greece in 87—85 B. C., while he was engaged in the w ar against M ithradates ; 
and it is very appropriately dedicated to Mars. It was at the end of this period 
th at he assum ed the title of imperator. It seems th at Sicyon was forced to pay 
heavy taxes u nder Sulla.1 2
W ith its famous cultural past Sicyon was doubtless a popular place of call 
for num erous Romans who happened to be staying in Greece. M ark Antony’s 
first wife Fulvia died in the city.1 3 That at least a sm all Latin speaking com m u­
nity was actually resident in Sicyon,1 4 is testified by the two following in­
scriptions, likewise found during the excavations.
C. Iulio A ug(us)ti l(iberto) | Epagatho. Ithacus \ amicus.™
The inscription is A ugustan o r a little later. Epagathus was very probably 
charged w ith the m anagem ent of some im perial property believed to have 
existed at Sicyon,1 6 o r else he was established in Sicyon on his own business, 
either in commerce, tran sp o rt or agriculture.
The second is a tom bstone of an apparently rich family.
V (ivus) M. Calpetanus Co\rinthus sibi et Fulviae \ E utychidi uxori et
Cal\petanis Ianuario et Ma\gna liberis et M. Pacuio \ Euporo et libertis.1 1
The inscription probably dates from the 2nd century A. D. A distinguished 
senatorial family of Calpetani is known in the first century A. D .;1 8 it would 
be difficult, however, to say from w hich m em ber M. Calpetanus C orinthus — 
o r his ancestors — received the Rom an citizenship. He m ight equally have 
been a freedm an. Calpetanus is a very rare nom en gentile in the Rom an em­
pire, especially in the eastern provinces.1 9 The cognomen Corinthus is like­
wise not frequent.2 0
Excavations at Isth m ia and Cenchreiae after the publication of CIL III 
have yielded the first Latin inscriptions know n from these sites. Since both

sites were in the territo ry of the colony of Corinth, they have produced a 
greater percentage of Latin inscriptions than it is usual in Rom an Achaia. 
From Isthm ia a total of ten Latin texts is known,2 1 most of them very frag­
m entary. Of the only tw o which are preserved entirely one is a dedication 
from the base of a statue of Callicratea, priestess of Providentia Aug(usta) 
and Salus publica, the text alm ost identical to one already known from Co­
rinth,2 2 only the nam e of the dedicator differs — at Corinth the Corinthian 
tribe Agrippia, at Isthm ia the tribe Claudia. Im portant also is a dedication ex 
visu to Hercules, the only epigraphic testim ony for the worship of the hero 
a t Isthm ia and in Corinth.
Hercul\_i] | sacr(um ) | ex visu.2 3
It was perhaps set up by a traveller from the Latin speaking p art of the em­
pire, or by an inhabitant of colonial Corinth.
Of the two Latin tom bstones found at Cenchreiae, the eastern p o rt of Co­
rinth, the first is a huge but extremely fragm entary inscription, tentatively 
ascribed to L. Castricius Regulus, a II vir quinq. from Corinth.2 4 The other 
is the gravestone of a veteran of legio II Adiutrix.
D. M. f(ecit) I v(ivu s) M. Iulius M. f. \ A em (ilia \ tribu) Crispus \ veteranus \ 
leg(ionis) I I A diu(tricis) sibi et \ Iuliae Basilae \ coiugi sue lib\erisque 
suis I libertis liberte\sque suis F.? f(aciundum ) c{uravit).2 5
As the Aemilia was the tribus of Corinth, it is very probable th at M. Iulius 
Crispus retired to his native city. He is the only certainly attested veteran 
from Corinth. The inscription should probably be dated to the early 2nd cen­
tury A. D. (at the tu rn of the 1st and 2nd century the legion was stationed in 
Upper Moesia, later in Aquincum, Pannonia), but certainly not m uch earlier, 
as the legion was only raised by Vespasian, who recruited it from form er sai­
lors during the civil w ar in A. D. 69.2 6
In Gytheum a m arble statue-base w ith a bilingual dedication has been 
unearthed, set up by cives Romani to C. Iulius Eurycles.2 7
C. Iulium Lacharis f. Euruclem j cives Rom ani in Laconica \ qui habitant, 
negotiantur \ benefici ergo | Tatov Tciktov Aoyapouc | utòv Eùpuxkéa 'Pw fxsuoc ] cl ev 
za\q Tzokem "rij? | Aaxcvtxrjc :opaY |j.aTsuó|p.svei xcv autoiv euspysv^v.
The dedication n ot only attests the existence of a community of Roman 
citizens in Gytheum, an im portant com m ercial centre and S parta’s harbour 
( though an independent polis ) to which Romans had been attracted already in 
the age of the Republic,2 7 3 but also of sim ilar communities in other La­
conian cities. The existence of such a com m unity in Boiae (m odern Neapolis) 
has been confirmed by a recent epigraphic discovery in the m odern town.2 8
'A r.iAiq v .c /1 ot 'Pcoptatot | Tatov ’loóktov Eupuy./dj Aa^ajpou? ulov T o v aùxä? ow xvjpa | -/.ai
sÙ cp Y STSCV .
Boiae was one of the richest poleis of the Eleutherolacones ; the city’ s pros­
perity lay m ostly in iron m ining and quarrying on Mount Alike. It was not 
previously known who invested the capital necessary for the exploitation of

these natural reso u rces;2 9 it is not astonishing to find th at the capital was 
probably Italian. There are num erous dedications to the Spartan dynast C. Iu- 
lius Eurycles in Greece, and especially in Laconia,3 0 but it is interesting to note 
th at in both the inscriptions ju st m entioned he is honoured by cives Rom ani : 
at Gytheum by the la tte r only, and at Boiae by both the city and the 'Pwp.alci. 
Eurycles, him self greatly favoured by Augustus, encouraged in his tu rn the 
Rom ans who w ere resident in Laconia and whose benefactor he is affirm ed 
to have been.
No other organised Rom an com m unities are attested in Laconia3 1 b ut they 
are known in a few o th er cities in the Peloponnese under the em pire. Sim ilar 
com m unities are very often recorded in o th er eastern Greek cities especially 
during the 1st century B. C. It would perhaps be useful to list here other such 
groups at present attested in Achaia, as som e of them could not appear yet 
in H atzfeld’s study.3 2 At Pellene (in Achaia) a statue was set up by f, rSh\s to v 
IIe a a y ;v s o > v /.ai 'Pwp.atoi o '. /.a-ctxcòvTs?3 8 of th eir benefactor (t o v e x . w pcyóvfw v 
Eusp] ysTTjv) P. Caninius Agrippa, procurator of Achaia under Augustus, and 
doubtless the same as the homonymous I I vir quinq. of Corinth.3 4 It is note­
w orthy th at Augustus em ployed people whose ancestors w ere Greek, as were 
those of Caninius, to serve in the higher provincial adm inistration. At Elis 
the city and the resident Romans (rt t t ó à i; v j zwv ’Ha s k o v /ai 'Pwp.aloi ci Ivya- 
poövTEc),3 5 who had been installed there at least since the tim e of Cicero and 
had founded an association for land transport,3 6 honoured P. Alfius Prim us, a 
proconsular legate in Achaia, probably under Augustus.3 7 In the Peloponnese 
such com m unities also flourished during the early im perial period, a prospering 
not so usual in other E. M editerranean provinces.3 8 At Argos two inscriptions 
attest that Italians, and later Romans, were present in the city as an organised 
body since the republican period.3 9 At M antinea the city a n d 'Posatoi si ^payp.aTE- 
’ jó[X £voi Iv aula4 0 honoured a couple who had em bellished the local agora at 
th eir own expense. Rom an com m unities are fu rth er known to have been 
established at M egalopolis4 1 and at Messene ('Ptogaicut; t o v i; Iv auta /axotv.ouvxac)4 2 
w here they are likewise know n from several other inscriptions already under 
the Republic.4 3
In the im m ediate environs of Thespiae, at Kopai, a bilingual tom bstone 
was found.4 4
C. Varius | Stratullus | r.Oudpto? | 2xpdxuÀ|Xoi;
Varius is not an uncom m on nom en gentile am ong the Romans who resided 
in the Greek East.4 5 H is cognomen, however, indicates that he was a Greek who 
had acquired the Rom an citizenship, his ancestors having been either of a low 
origin, perhaps liberti, or else he belonged to a distinguished family whose 
sym pathies w ere on the side of the Romans. They had been established at 
Thespiae since the 1st century B. C.45a It is interesting th at this was the only 
o ther Roman com m unity, hitherto attested in the province of Achaia outside 
the Peloponnese u nder the principate. 'Posatoi o 't T C p a y 1 v .aT E u 3p.sv 01 !v ©simat? 
erected a statue of th eir local benefactor Polycratides, son of Anthemio, a 
m em ber of the outstanding family of Rom an Thespiae on whose descendants 
the Roman citizenship was bestow ed later in the Flavian era.4 6 M embers of

the senatorial family of the Statilii, too, had had connections w ith the city.4 7 
Thespiae and Tanagra were, according to Strabo, the m ost prospering Boeotian 
cities in the im perial period, a fact which was at least partly due to their pro- 
Rom an policy and confirm ed by the epigraphical and archeological evidence.4 8 
Thespiae had the advantage both of its harbour Creusae and its commercially 
favourable position on an im portant road across Boeotia, as well as of its two 
well known festivals M useia and Erotideia.
The m ajority of inscriptions in which Rom an communities are mentioned, 
if not all, are dated to the 1st century A. D. This m ust certainly be connected 
w ith the revival of Greece’s economy under the Augustan principate, a revival 
w hich lasted, on the whole, throughout the 1st and 2nd centuries A. D., and 
notably under the Antonines. Boeotia, C orinthia and Sicyonia, Achaia, Elis, 
Laconia and especially the Argolid have always been fertile rural districts. 
In the im m ediate neighbourhood of Gytheum a large num ber of Rom an villas 
have been noted.4 9 Arcadia was famous for its cattle and horse breeding, and 
its tim ber industry. To this the textile industry (mostly in Elis and Achaia) 
should be added, as well as m arble mining and the purple trade (in Laconia), 
and commerce.5 0
Latin inscriptions appear sporadically, as we have seen, in the neighbour­
hood of the Rom anised centres, usually along the im portant highways. 
Republican Italian negotiatores are epigraphically recorded (alm ost always 
on Latin or bilingual inscriptions),5 1 m ostly in the well known places, such 
as Aegium, Argos, Delos. The im perial Roman communities, on the o th er hand, 
can be found in m any prospering but small cities in the Peloponnese, but 
outside the latter only in Thespiae. Clearly the Romans had settled in econo­
mically flourishing areas. It is interesting to observe th at the language they 
used on the inscriptions is alm ost always only Greek. The patrons whom 
they honoured, som etim es doing so together w ith the city in w hich they 
w ere established, w ere m ostly m em bers of the local upper classes and 
representatives of the Rom an government. The latter were occasionally, as 
in the case of P. Caninius Agrippa, of Greek origin : that is, they w ere people 
w ith their roots in Greece, who could therefore be of m uch greater assistance 
to the Roman residents than the high officials present in Greece for only 
a brief term of office. It would be instructive to know at least the approxim ate 
period of duration of these communities, b u t the evidence is not conclusive. 
There is one clue however : all the relevant inscriptions come from the 1st 
century A. D., and a large num ber of these, moreover, from its first half. 
Did the communities continue at all into the 3rd century? As organised units 
surely they did not survive the beginning of general economic decline and 
increasing interchange of people from different parts of the em pire on the 
one hand, as well (especially after the constitutio Antoniniana), as the dim in­
ished im portance of one’s origin on the other. Assimilation w ith the local 
inhabitants ( shown already by the use of Greek in the inscriptions ) was thus 
inevitable.
On some of the islands Latin inscriptions have only been found after the 
publication of CIL III. Those from Syros had been published by Stephanos 
as early as 1875,5 2 but w ere overlooked by the editors of CIL III and therefore 
lost for scholarship until their later inclusion in IG X II 5.

A fragm entary m ensa ponderarla was recently found on Aegina, not far 
from the ruins of the sanctuary of Apollo. The Latin inscription it bears, 
the only one so far discovered on the island, is dated to the 1st century B. C.5 3
L.Cocceius L.f.L[e~\m(onia) Piso cur(ator) cor[p(oris)~\ O. / [ ------ ]
The provenance of the inscription is not entirely assured; although it was 
found in the tow n of Aegina it m ight possibly originate from Delos, where 
sim ilar societies are epigraphically very well docum ented. The transportation 
of the inscribed blocks and other antiquities from the island has already 
been noted.5 4 The association of w hich L. Cocceius Piso was the curator was 
possibly th at of olearii.5ä Aegina w ould have been certainly an extremely 
suitable place for the base of an Italian com m ercial society. It was still a 
living city even during the principate ;5 6 not only was the island fertile but 
also it possessed two good harbours and easy accessibility from b o th Athens 
and the Argolid. Having been bought by Attalos I., it belonged adm inistratively 
to Asia for a while.5 7 The com m ercial connections of the gens Cocceia with 
the Greek E ast are here recorded for the first time.
Two Latin inscriptions have been discovered on Andros. One is on a 
square m arble colum n from Gaurion, its poor Latin the result of its com­
position by a Greek w ith only a lim ited knowledge of th at language; it is 
dated by Sauciuc to the beginning of the period of Roman rule on Andros 
(end of 2nd century B. C.).5 8
DIOGENHS PISCINAM 
BETEREM NOBAM 
[F]H CIT TOT AN
It is unusual th at the text is not in Greek; the motive for use of the Latin 
can perhaps be explained by prestige reasons.
The other is an interesting inscription from Paleopolis, dated to a year 
betw een A. D. 198 and 209, m ost probably 202.5 9
Pro salute imp. Caesari (sic) | L. Septim i Severi et M. Aur. Antonini | Aug- 
g(ustorum ) et P. Sep tim i Gaetae Caesari (sic) | M. Aur. Rufinus evocatus 
Augg(ustorum ) nn(ostrorum ) \ sancto deo invicto speleum constituit cum 
I m il(itibus) pr(aetorianis) Fl(avio) Clarino, Ael(io) Messio, Aur. Iuliano.
It seems that M. Aurelius Rufinus is the sam e person as the homonymous 
praetorian from Bizye in Thrace, m entioned on an inscription from Rome,6 0 
although the nam e is frequent. After ending his campaign against the Parthians 
early in A. D. 202, Septim ius Severus may have stopped on Andros for a few 
days on his way back to Italy. It is not certain w hether the praetorian unit 
was detached to Andros to protect the h arbour for a longer time, or whether 
it only accom panied the em peror and his suite. M onuments of the M ithraic 
cult, which was especially popular under the Severi, are very rare in Achaia, 
being known only from Patrae, Eleusis, Athens and the Argolid.6 1 This in­
scription is the only evidence for the connection of the cult w ith Andros.
Four Latin inscriptions have been found on Syros. One bears only the 
tw o nam es — probably of casual travellers — together w ith a few Latin 
w ords (am ong m any m ore Greek graffiti), and is inscribed on the rocks of

the prom ontory in the small port Twv RappcLor/ situated on the island’s 
w estern coast.6 2
L.Vettius Mella | vac.lL .I.III 
Phi[l]eros | — i[a]el.
Uimper\_a\tor~\ v [-------] incerta.
Another is a fragm ent of a tom bstone :6 3
[------ ] Sabino [--------] | [--------faciend~\um cu[ravit-------- ] | [- - 2a]ßsivw [--] |
j [- - è-e] h .£ A v'} - o [- -]
The third inscription is m ore substantial, and is dated approxim ately to the 
beginning of the 2nd century A. D.6 4
Claudius Secundus viator \ tribunicius \ tem plum Isidis cum om ni ornatu \ 
sua pecunia \ -fecit.
The function of Claudius Secundus seems to have been th at of a messenger 
of a m em ber of the im perial family, or perhaps of the princeps him self, who 
possessed the tribunicia potestas,6 5 The same man, who was doubtless a freed- 
m an (such is the usual origin of the viatores), was probably honoured in an 
inscription from Ephesus.6 6 The cult of Isis was widespread all over the 
Greek world.6 7
The fourth inscription is a tom bstone of a Roman who had died on the 
island.
Dis manibus \ Mario Severo | Potiolano.6 8
The remaining three inscriptions, all bilingual, come from Tenos, and 
confirm the attachm ent of the island to the province of Asia, a fact which had 
earlier beeen disputed.6 9 The nam e of P. Servilius Isauricus, the proconsul 
of Asia in 46 B. C., is preserved on two identical bases, adorned w ith reliefs, 
w hich had both been restored by him.7 0 The third inscription m entions a 
hitherto unattested function of a praef(ectus) tesserar(iarum ) nav(ium ).7 1
C.Iulius Naso I pra ffectu s) tesserarfiarum ) in Asia nav(ium ) \
Ydloc ’Ic 6ai3c N (x|( 7 ( i)v ó k~\ twv t£c|capapiwv sv ’ Was | k 'Ww v .
It dates from the tim e of Caesar or Augustus. The naves tesserariae w ere pro­
bably at the disposal of governors and other Roman provincial officials for 
any official transport and dispatches, especially the transport of post.
Latin inscriptions thus appear in greater num ber than expected also on 
the islands, which all doubtless had good com m unications both w ith each 
o ther and w ith the m ainland, w hether Greece or Asia. In antiquity sea traffic 
w ith its many advantages played a far greater role than land transport.
* I am very grateful to A. Spawforth 
for his suggestions and critical remarks.
1 They will be perhaps republished 
as a separate volume in a few years 
time.
2 Th. Mommsen, CIL III, Suppi. IV 
Conspectus operis XLVI—XLVII.
3 It could be argued that CIL III 7301, 
its provenance given as Thebes, very 
likely originated from Thespiae, for

which cf. IG VII 1 . 1854 and J. Hatzfeld, 
Les trafiquants italiens dans l’ Orient hel- 
lénique, Bibi. Ec. Fr. Ath. et Rome 115 
(1919) 68—69; also L. Robert, Hellenica 2 
(1946) 8.
4 J. Bingen, BCH 78 (1954) 82—5, phot. 
83 fig. 3; D. v. Berchem, ’ Les Italiens 
d’ Argos. Un post-scriptum’, BCH 87 (1963) 
322—4; L’ année épigraphique (-AE) 1954. 
31. Degrassi, ILLR 370.
5 For the negotiatores see generally A . 
Wilson, Emigration from Italy in the 
Republican Age of Rome (New York 
1966). CIL I2 714; 830 and 831 probably 
2nd century B. C.; republished in Inscrip­
tions deDélos 1694; 1695—7; 1620; 1698.
6 CIL III 14195, 39: 1st century B. C.
7 CIL P 746; 747.
8 D. v. Berchem, 'Les Italiens d’ Argos 
et le déclin de Délos’, BCH 86 (1962) 312.
9 The same point is used by v. Ber­
chem for the Argive negotiatores, ibid. 
306.
1 0 Bingen, ibid. 85.
1 1 A. Orlandos, IIpxy.Tixà ’ Apx- 'E-catp. 
(1938) 121, phot. 2; P. Lemerle, BCH 62 
(1938) 459; AE 1939. 42. CIL P 2828; De- 
grassi ILLR 224.
4 2 Plin. n. h. 35.127; Lippold, RE 2 A 
(1923) 2543 s. v. Sikyon.
1 3 App. b. c. 5.55; Dio 48.28 — Xiphilin. 
58.13.14; Plut. Ant. 30.
1 4 For the connection of the Avianii 
with Sicyon see E. Rawson, PBSR 43 
(1975) 36 and n. 5.
1 5 A. Arvanitopoulos, Ilpcoratté ’ A px.. 
"Emip. (1908) 147 n. 5.
1 6 U. Kahrstedt, Das wirtschaftliche 
Gesicht Griechenlands in der Kaiser­
zeit, Diss. Bernenses I 7 (1954) 40—41; 
see also Hatzfeld, o. c. 74.
1 7 Said to be published in Ilpsorav.cć 
Apx- 'Eraip. but I failed to find the refe­
rence. Now at the museum, inv. n. 972.
4 8 PIR2 C 235, 236.
4 9 Cf. ILS, indexes.
2 0 P. A. Clement, in: Tribute to B.D. 
Meritt (1974) 37 n. 8; A. Spawforth, 
GRBS 15 (1974) 299.
2 4 To be published in a forthcoming 
article probably in Arheološki vestnik 29 
(1978). Cf. AE 1971. 440—2.
2 2 A. B. West, Corinth V ili 2.110.
2 3 O. Broneer, Hesperia 27 (1958) 23
n. 4, Pl. 9 e.
2 4 \v. Willson Cummer, Hesperia 40 
(1971) 220—3, Pl. 43, publishes only some 
of the total of 41 marble fragments be­
longing to this remarkable inscription 
from the Roman tomb at Cenchreiae.
2 5 S. I. Haritonidis. ’ ApxaioXoYiià) 
’Ecp=|ispl; (1952) 205—7, phot.; AE 1957. 
22.
2 6 E. Ritterling, RE 12.2 (1925) 1437 ff 
s. v. Legio.
2 7 S. B. Kougeas, 'EXXrjvota 1 (1928) 
8—16, phot. 2; E. Kornemann, ’ Neue Do­
kumente z. Lakon. Kaiserkult’, Ah h. d. 
Schlesischen Gesell, für vaterländische 
Cultur Geistewiss., R. I. Breslau (1929) 
5—6, Pl. 1; V. Ehrenberg, A. H. M. Jo­
nes, Documents illus. the reigns of Au­
gustus and Tiberius (19552 ) n. 350; SEG 
11.924; cf. A. Arvanitopoulos, Polemon 1 
(1929) 39.
2 7 4 4 Hatzfeld, o. c. 80 ff.
2 8 J.-P. Michaud, ’ Chronique’, BCH 95 
(1971) 888.
2 9 Kahrstedt, o. c. 212—3.
3 0 G. W. Bowersock, Augustus and the 
Greek World, Oxford (1965) 91—2.
3 4 They may also have been in some 
of the other cities of Roman Greece; for 
Sparta cf. IG V 1.741.
3 2 Hatzfeld, o. c. 148 ff.
3 3 A. Orlandos, npaxtttó ’ Apx. 'Etaip. 
(1931) 80, phot. 81; AE 1934. 163.
3 4 E. Groag, Die römischen Reichs­
beamten von Achaia bis auf Diokletian, 
Sehr, der Balkankommission, ant. Abt. 9 
(1939) 139—40.
3 5 Inschr. Olymp. 335.
3 8 Hatzfeld, o. c. 149.
3 7 Groag, o. c. 99.
3 8 Hatzfeld, o. c. 149.
3 9 IG IV 605, 606; Hatzfeld, o. c. 149.
4 9 IG V 2.268 — SEG 3.783; Hatzfeld,
o. c. 150.
4 4 Hatzfeld, o. c. 150.
4 2 SEG 23.207,1.7.
4 3 Cf. for example IG V 1.1434; cf. 
Hatzfeld, o. c. 79; also Kahrstedt, o. c. 
220.
4 4 T. G. Spyropoulos, ’ Apx. JsX x E o v 25 
(1970) B 1 228; J.-P. Michaud, ’ Chroni­
que’, BCH 96 (1972) 708.
4 5 Cf. Hatzfeld, o. c. (index) 406. For 
the cognomen cf. W. Pape, G. Benseler, 
Wörterbuch d. griechischen Eigennamen 
II (19593 ) 1447.
4 5 a IG VII 1862; Cic. ad Fam. 13.221.1; 
Hatzfeld, o. c. 68 ff.
4 8 P. Jamot, BCH 26 (1902) 297 n. 16; 
AE 1908. 55; for the date see C. P. Jones, 
’ A Leading Family of Roman Thespiae’, 
HSCP 74 (1970) 227; cf. also Hatzfeld, o. 
c. 68, who has dated the inscription to

the middle of the 1st century B. C. Cf. L. 
Robert, Bull. ép. 1971. 341.
4 7 Jamot, l. c. 291 n. 1; Jones, l. c. 227 
n. 6, where T. Statilius Taurus is honour­
ed by the member of the same Thespian 
family which was in turn honoured by 
the 'Pj)|iatoi ; CIL III 7301, where liberti 
of Statilii ar mentioned. Cf. n. 3.
4 8 Strab. 9,2.25 (403); Kahrstedt, o. c. 
78, 81.
4 9 See the map published by Kahr-' 
stedt, o. c.
5 0 J. A. O. Larsen, ’ Roman Greece’ in: 
An Economic Survey of Ancient Rome, 
voi. 4 (1959, ed. by T. Frank) 483 ff; 
Kahrstedt, o. c. 203 ff (for Laconia) 128 ff 
(Arcadia), 242 ff (Elis).
5 1 Inscr. Délos 1727 may be a possible 
exception, but the inscription is very 
fragmentary.
5 2 K. Stephanos ’ EraypaipaE -nj; vrjaou 
2ópsu (1875).
5 3 G. Manganare, Annuario Atene n. s. 
21/2 (1959/60) 427—8, phot. 3—4.
5 4 Manganare, ibid. 428 n. 5.
5 5 In comparison with the inscrip­
tions from Delos: Inscr. Délos 1712 — 
CIL III 14203,6.
5 6 Paus. 29.6; 30.11 ff.
5 7 D. Magie, Roman Rule in Asia 
Minor, Princeton (1950) 155, 744, 971.
5 8 T. Sauciuc, Andros — Untersuchun­
gen zur Gesch. u. Topographie der Insel, 
Sonderschr. d. OeAI 8 (1914) 145 n. 2; IG 
XII suppi. 290; D. Pashalis, 'H "A v S p o s 535 
n. Ili; T. Reinach, Rev. épigr. 2 (1914) 
343.
5 9 T. Sauciuc, Röm. Mitt. 25 (1910) 
263—272, phot.; Id., o. c. 94; AE 1911. 56;
U. Antonielli, Bull. comm. arch, commun. 
40 (1912) 243 ff; F. Cumont, Die Myste­
rien des Mithra (19334 ) 229; M. Durry, 
Les cohortes prétoriennes, Paris (1938)
342; IG XII suppi. 274; D. Pashalis, o. c. 
549 n. 153.
6 9 CIL VI 32640 1 . 25.
0 1 CIMRM (Vermaseren) 2346—2353.
6 2 IG XII 5.712 (3, 4, 45, 49); Stepha­
nos, o. c. 74 n. 3, 4; 83, n. 45, 49.
6 3 Stephanos, o. c. 61 n. 34; IG XII 
5.700.
6 4 IG XII 5. p. 191; Stephanos, o. c. 42
n. 11. Vidman, SIRIS 155.
6 5 C. Habicht, RE 8 A 2 (1958) 1929 
s. v. Viator; Secundus perhaps accompa­
nied Hadrian on his journeys: cf. for 
example IG XII 5.675.
6 6 CIL III 12254 (— 6078): Ti.Claudio \ 
Secundo | viatori tribunicfio) | accenso 
velato, licto/ri curiato, gerusia *h[o]/- 
noris causa sua | [pec{unia)\. Follows 
the Greek translation.
6 7 W. H. Roscher, Ausführliches Le­
xikon der griech. u. röm. Mythologie 2 
(1890—94) 382, where viator is wrongly 
attributed to Claudius Secundus as his 
cognomen-, see as last F. Dunand, Le 
culte d’ lsis dans le basin oriental de la 
Méditerrannée II, Etudes prélim. 26 
(1973).
6 8 Stephanos, o. c. 60 n. 33; IG XII 5.
p. 195 ad n. 700.
6 9 In general outline assigned to 
Achaia by J. Keil, The Greek provinces, 
CAH 14 (19542 ) 556; E. de Ruggiero, Diz. 
epigr. s. v. Achaia (1895) 26; further V. 
Chapot, La province rom. procons. 
d’ Asie, Paris (1904) 83 and n. 3; 319 n. 1 ; 
to Asia Hiller v. Gaertringen, JÖAI 4 
(1901) 167; Dittenberg, OGIS 2.463; Groag,
o. c. I ll—2.
7 0 P. Graindor, Musée Beige 10 (1906) 
339 n. 7; AE 1907.204; IG XII 5.917, phot.
7 1 O. Hirschfeld, JÖAI 5 (1902) 149—51; 
AE 1902, 165; IG X II 5.941.
LATINSKI NAPISI IZ AHAJE IN S KIKLADOV
Povzetek
Več zvezkov Korpusa Inscriptionum Latinarum III, ki so izšli na začetku tega 
stoletja, je prineslo razmeroma veliko število latinskih napisov iz Grčije, kar je 
šele prav omogočilo študij latinskega elementa v rimski provinci Ahaji in do 
neke meje tudi njene romanizacije. Edini, ki se je v zadnjem času delno dotaknil 
tega problema, je bil Mihäescu, vendar ni k problematiki rimske Grčije doprinesel 
ničesar novega, kajti kasnejšega gradiva, često raztresenega v precej nedostopnih 
grških revijah, večinoma ni upošteval. Od izida CIL III do danes je bilo objavljenih 
nekako prav toliko novih latinskih napisov, kolikor jih je uspelo zbrati izdaja­
teljem Korpusa. Mommsenov seznam najdišč latinskih napisov je nepričakovano 
obsežen, dasi so med kraji tudi taki, kjer sta bila najdena le eden ali dva. Kljub

temu pa jih je med novimi najdišči nekaj, kjer so bili prej znani le grški napisi — 
in prav te obravnava pričujoči sestavek. Gre v glavnem za kraje na Peloponezu: 
Aegium, Sicyon, Isthmus in Cenchreiae na korintskem teritoriju in Gytheum; sicer 
še Thespiae, Aegina, Andros in Syros.
V Aegiu so pred leti našli zanimiv napis iz 1. st. pr. Kr. (op. 3), ki so ga dali 
postaviti v mestu naseljeni italski trgovci v čast P. Rutilia Nuda (P. Rutilius Nudus), 
poveljnika rimske mornarice 1 . 74, ki mu je bila verjetno poverjena začasna vo­
jaška misija na severnem Peloponezu, pri kateri so si Italiki obetali dobiček. Po­
dobna trgovska združenja Italikov so dokumentirana tudi v Argosu, na Delosu in 
v Efezu (op. 4). Iz Sicyona so znani trije latinski napisi, od katerih je poleg Sullove 
dedikacije Marsu (op. 6) zlasti važen avgustejski napis vladarskega osvobojenca 
C. Iulia Epagatha (op. 9, C. Iulius Epagathus), ki je bil zelo verjetno zadolžen za 
imperialno lastnino, ki je v Sicyonu izpričana še iz drugih virov.
Med napisi z Isthma in iz Cenchreiae ni nobeden historično posebej ilustrativen, 
omembe vredno je le posvetilo Herkulu ex visu (op. 17) in nagrobnik veterana legije 
II. Adiutrix (op. 19). Pač pa je zelo zanimiv napis iz Gythea (Gytheum), ki so ga dali 
postaviti skupaj s kipom C. Iuliu Euryklu (C. Iulius Eurycles) cives Romani, ki 
prebivajo v Lakoniji (op. 21). Napis ni le dokaz za rimsko manjšino v Gytheu, naj­
večjem špartanskem pristanišču in pomembnem trgovskem centru, ampak tudi 
v drugih lakonskih mestih. To je potrdil pred kratkim objavljeni napis iz Boiae 
(Neapolis), ki ga je skupnost Rimljanov (‘ A r.ó/.:; -/.ai o E ■ P o jp .au u .) postavila v čast iste­
mu Euryklu (op. 22), zloglasnemu špartanskemu dinastu, ki je v času Avgusta vladal 
ne le nad špartansko polis, temveč je imel v finančni oblasti malodane celo Lako- 
nijo. Čeprav lahko pričakujemo podobne napise tudi v drugih mestecih južnega 
Peloponeza, ni naključje, da se je napis ohranil prav v Boiah, ki so bile v zvezi 
Eleutherolakonov (Eleutherolacones) ekonomsko najmočnejše, zahvaljujoč predvsem 
rudnikom železa in kamnolomom na gori Alike.
Podobnih skupnosti rimskih državljanov v Lakoniji ne poznamo več, pač pa 
vemo, da so bile v nekaterih drugih mestecih Ahaje. V Pellenah so polis in Rimjani 
postavili zahvalni napis (op. 25) P. Kaniniju Agripi (P. Caninius Agrippa), prokura­
torju Ahaje pod Avgustom. Na podobne napise naletimo v Elis (op. 28), Mantineji 
(op. 33), Megalopolisu (op. 34), Messenah (op. 35) in Argosu (op. 32), kjer se da 
lepo zasledovati kontinuiteta sprva italskega (za časa republike), kasneje, v impe­
rialnem obdobju, pa rimskega elementa. Iz ostale province so ’Posatoi o E rcpayiiax- 
suópsvci (tak je njihov običajni naziv), dalje evidentirani le še v Thespiah (op. 38). 
Da je mesto aktivno živelo celo v začetku principata, ko je cela Grčija, popolnoma 
izčrpana od državljanskih vojn, kazala nasplošno kaj žalosten obraz, priča Stra- 
bon (op. 39), ki jo omenja poleg Tanagre kot najpomembnejše beotsko mesto; 
njegovo poročilo pa potrjujeta tako epigrafska kot arheološka evidenca. Od tod 
izvira tudi dvojezični nagrobnik (op. 36).
Večino napisov, kjer se omenjajo skupnosti rimskih državljanov, če ne vse, 
je treba datirati v 1. st. po Kr. Njihov nastanek lahko povežemo z razmeroma 
močnim ekonomskim razcvetom v Grčiji, ki se je začel pod Avgustom, in se je 
ohranil več ali manj skozi obe stoletji po Kr. V naštetih primerih gre za centre 
rodovitnih področij, kjer je bila poleg poljedelstva razvita še tekstilna industrija 
(v Elis in pokrajini Ahaji); v Arkadiji živinoreja in gozdarstvo, v Lakoniji zna­
menito pridobivanje purpurnega barvila in kamnolomi marmorja, k vsemu je 
treba prišteti še kot važen vir dohodka zlasti trgovino. Kljub relativni ekonomski 
in politični nepomembnosti, gledano s stališča celega imperija, je provinca Ahaja 
nudila rimskim manjšinam dovolj dobro ekonomsko osnovo za njihov uspešen 
razvoj. Zanimivo je, da v teh krajih večinoma ni bilo najdenih latinskih napisov, 
kar se da verjetno razložiti le z razmeroma hitro asimilacijo z lokalnim, kulturno 
morda višje razvitim prebivalstvom. Kar zadeva življenjsko dobo obstoja teh 
skupnosti, razpoložljiva evidenca ne dopušča konkretnejših zaključkov, vendar vse 
kaže, da niso preživele splošne ekonomske krize 3. stoletja po Kr., pa tudi ne vse 
večjega mešanja prebivalstva iz raznih delov imperija in s tem združeno nara­
ščajočo nepomembnost posameznikovega etničnega in socialnega izvora.
Latinski napisi so bili v novejšem času odkriti tudi na nekaterih otokih, tako 
republikanski napis na kamenitem modelu za utežne mere (mensa ponderarla) na

Aegini (op. 43), ki po vsej verjetnosti omenja združenje trgovcev z oljem, ki je 
bilo doslej znano iz Ahaje le na Delosu. Dalje dva napisa z Androsa, od katerih 
je zlasti važen drugi (op. 49). Gre za posvetilo Mitri, ki ga je dal pro salute 
Sep timi j a Severa, Karakale in Gete postaviti skupaj s podzemnim svetiščem preto- 
rijanec M. Aurelius Rufinus. Morda se je Septimij Sever ustavil za krajši čas na 
otoku, ko se je vračal z zaključene kampanje proti Partom 1 . 202 v Italijo. S Syrosa 
so znani štirje latinski napisi (op. 52, 53, 54, 58), s Tenosa pa trije, vendar prav ti 
kažejo, da otok ni pripadal Ahaji, kar bi bilo sicer z geografskega stališča mnogo 
bolj razumljivo, in kar je bilo doslej precej ustaljeno mnenje, temveč provinci 
Aziji (op. 59).