GEI043
PDF
Translation:
During the archonship of Argilios, in the autumn pylaia, the naopoioi’s residual funds from the city of Delphi: 20 talents, 14 minas, 10 staters. After this we paid; having the all naopoioi ordered in writing to pay in silver, during the archonship of Heracleios, in the spring pylaia, the city of Delfi paid, during the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the month of Apellaios, as bouletai were Kallippos, Sakedallos, Aigylos son of Hieron, Aristagoras who resigned from his office as naopoios, Nikomachos son of Menekrates who became naopoios in his place, and epimenioi were Philolaos of Sparta, Amphares of Phocis: to Pasion for the ischègaon 10 minas, 7 staters, 9 obols; to the bronze worker Armodios for the clamps 6 minas, 15 staters. The city of Delphi gave another (amount), during the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the month of Heraios, in the autumn pylaia, when the naopoios was Nikomachos of Delphi and the bouletai were Kallippos, Sakedallos, Aigylos, to the contractors, because all the naopoioi have ordered it, being present these naopoioi: Nikomachos of Delphi, Nikoteles of Argos, Kleodoros of Argos, Xenotimos of Sikyon, Damophanes of Corinth: to Nikodamos for the wood for the winch 6 minas; to Pasion another (payment) for the same ischègaon 10 minas, 3 staters, 3 obols; to Nikodamos and Pasion for the quarrying work 34 minas, 26 staters; to Praxion and Aristandros, stone-transporters, 14 minas, 10 staters; to Kleinias for the pits 24 staters, 8 obols; to Aristion for the transport of stones 10 staters; to the cook 3 ½ obol. We presented our accounts to all the naopoioi and the total was 1 talent, 22 minas, 26 staters, 9 ½ obols.
After the calculation, in the presence of the bouletai, all the naopoioi ordered the city of Delphi to pay in silver for the works at Corinth and we immediately gave (an amount) to the naopoioi of 4 minas, this was given to Labotas and Damophanes of Corinth and to Xenotimos of Sikyon. In addition, we gave 10 minas to Labotas and Damophanes of Corinth and Xenotimos of Sikyon. Moreover, we sent Nikomachos to Corinth to give 4 minas to the naopoioi. Total of what the naopoioi of Corinth and one of Sikyon have received after the calculation: 18 minas.Expenditure of this (silver): to Chairolas for the winch 4 minas; for the transport of lead 4 drachmas, ½ obol; to Theogenes for the cutting stones for the winch 5 drachmas; to Agathon for the transport of these (stones) 7 drachmas; to Satyros for the weighing of lead 1 drachma; to Chairolas for the transport of twelve triglyphs 3 minas, 9 staters; to Xenon for the rope 3 minas, 22 staters; to Chairolas for the six epistyles 6 minas, 30 staters; for the storage of lead 10 obols; for two pinakes 4 obols.
During the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the spring pylaia, the naopoioi did not assemble; also during the archonship of Hierinos, in the autumn and spring pylaia, they did not meet; also during the archonship of Nikon, in the autumn pylaia the naopoioi did not even meet. During the archonship of Nikon, in the spring pylaia, the following naopoioi assembled: Hagesarchos of Delphi, Telokleas of Athens, Euormos and Nikeas of Locris, Theon of Megara, Astias of Epidaurus, Philolaos of Sparta, Kallimedes and Thrasydamos of Corinth, Epichares of the Phocis.
During the archonship of Nikon, in the spring pylaia, the city gave a first payment to the naopoioi in war, as the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Lyson, Machidas, Archemachidas, and the prostateuontes Telokleas of Athens and Astias of Epidaurus: 58 staters, 3 obols. This (sum) was given to the architect Xenodoros as his stipend.
The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as second payment, when the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Diocles, Heracleitos, Deinomachos, during the archonship of Autias, in the autumn pylaia, to the naopoioi, when the prostateuontes were Theon of Megara, Kydimos and Thrason of Athens, Xenotimos of Sikyon, Euormos of Locris: 27 minas, 25 staters.
From this (amount) was given to: Nikodamos for the winch in Kirrha and for the earth thrown up 3 minas, 32 staters, 7 ½ obols; Nikodamos the cost of the slingshot for the winch in Kirrha 51 staters, 4 obols; Onasimos for the transport of the stones by sea 21 minas, 25 staters; Chéris the travel expenses for the convocation of the guarantors from Heraea 14 staters; the grammateus 5 staters; the herald 3 drachmas; for the chest 5 ½ obols; for the pinakes 1 obol.
The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as third payment, when the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Kleon son of Timocrates, Pheidilas, Theocharis and Ornichidas, during the archonship of Autias, in the spring ( pylaia), to the naopoioi, as the prostateuontes were Nikiades of Athens, Dexis of Corinth and Thrason of Phocis, 12 minas, 6 staters, 3 obols; this (amount) was given to: Onasimos for the transport of the stones by sea as addition 11 minas, 15 staters; Nicodamos the cost of the pitch and for the pitching of the winch in Kirrha 10 staters, 3 obols; Chéris the travel expenses for the convocation of the guarantors from Heraea 16 staters.
The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as fourth payment, when the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Kleon, Kleinias and Dion, during the archonship of Theucharis, in the autumn pylaia, to the naopoioi, as the prostateuontes were Dexios of Corinth, Astias of Epidaurus, Polypeithes of Sparta: 2 minas, 8 staters, 1 drachma; this (amount) was given to: architect Xenodoros 2 minas, 5 staters; Kalliteles for the repair of the winch 3 staters, 1 drachma.
The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as fifth payment, when the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Kallagoras, Athanis and Menon, during the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring pylaia, to the naopoioi, as the prostateuontes were Agias of Sparta, Mnasikleos of Phlius, 3 minas; this was given to the architect Xenodoros. We presented our accounts to the naopoioi in war and the total in the five pylaiai was 46 minas, 28 staters.
Total of everything that the city of Delphi has given in silver to the naopoioi starting from the archonship of Argilios, in the spring pylaia, until the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring pylaia: 2 talents, 27 minas, 19 staters, 9 ½ obols. Commentary:
This inscription represents the first 70 lines of CID II 31, which, together with CID II 32, report the accounts of the payments made from the credit (opheilèma) that sometime after 373/2 BC the city of Delphi granted to the naopoioi to help meet the costs of rebuilding the temple of Apollo. The accounts of this special fund were originally inscribed about 60 years later on three huge stelai which were set up in a prominent place by the Treasury XXVI (the so-called Bouleuterion) to serve as a public record of the city’s philotimia and piety. Since this inscription begins in mediis rebus with the transactions of Argilios-autumn (358/7 BC) and since all entries concern the rebuilding, a first, lost stele is presumed to have detailed the entries from some year after 373/2 BC until 359/8 BC (Roux hypothesizes the existence of a fourth stele, see Roux 1979, 187).
For a long time, it was believed that the 6th century BC temple had been destroyed by the earthquake of 373 BC that destroyed the city of Helice. It is more likely that the main cause was a landslide due to heavy rains or the action of groundwater and to the kind of the soil on which the temple was built (Amandry, Hansen 2010, 121; Roux 1990, 329). According to the literary sources, the collapse of the temple occurred between 418 BC (Eur. Ion. 205-218) and 371 BC ( Xen. Hell. 6.4.2) and it may have occurred between 375 and 371 BC (Sánchez 2001, 125 n. 4). The rebuilding of the temple lasted, with some interruption due to the Sacred War, from 366 to 330 BC when the temple, though not finished, was consecrated. We can trace each stage of the reconstruction through the corpus of 139 accounts found in the sanctuary.
The Amphictyony chose a mixed-finance plan (Roux 1979, 137-142) to front the cost of rebuilding which Migeotte estimates to be between 320 and 400 talents (Migeotte 2014, 373-374). It is, therefore, possible to distinguish three types of loan corresponding to three different kinds of contributors:1. ὀφεíλημα (CID II 31-32): this is the long-term credit that the city of Delphi has made available to the naopoioi. It is a commitment by the inhabitants of Delphi to pay the invoices that the naopoioi submit to them up to a maximum amount that Bousquet has estimated as being around 40 talents (Bousquet 1989, 53);
2. ἐπαρχαί (CID II 1-30): these are the voluntary donations made by individuals and by cities and states (inside and outside the Amphictyony) asked by a panhellenic subscription to contribute to the rebuilding of the temple of Apollo;
3. ἐπικέφαλος ὀβολός (CID II 1-10): it is a levy of one obol per person on the states belonging to the Amphictyony. The ‘first obol’ was collected from spring 366 to spring 361 BC (the first to the eleventh pylaia in the numbered series) and a ‘second obol’ from spring 361 to autumn 356 BC (the eleventh to the twenty-second pylaia).
According to Roux (1979, 114, 142-143), the credit opened by the City of Delphi to the naopoioi (opheilèma) was managed by the Council; only the naopoioi could use these funds and exclusively for the rebuilding of the temple. On the other hand, the ordinary revenues (usable both for the ordinary expenses and for the rebuilding of the temple), the eparchai and the epikephalos obolos flowed into the Amphictyonic treasury which was jointly managed by the Amphictyonic Council and the prytanies of Delphi. Bousquet (1988, 112; id. 1989, 9; id. 1992, 24), followed by Sánchez (2001, 130), argues, instead, that the naopoioi managed a special fund (into which flowed the opheilèma, the eparchai and epikephalos obolos), separate from the fund of the Amphictyony, since the unit of account used in all contributions lists is the drachma which the naopoioi are the only ones to use in Delphi.
The very substantial credit made available by the city is managed on its behalf and under the control of the Council, but it is difficult to identify the administrators who compiled or published the three stelai. Their anonymity has provoked debate. The compilers cannot be the Council tout court (contra Roux 1979, 243-245), since the "we" is accompanied by two, or more normally three, members of Council. The compilers would not be the prytanies (contra Marchetti 1977, 160-164), since these appear only in Pleiston’s year (CID II 32, ll. 54ff; 318/7 BC at earliest) onwards, since they receive money from the Council, and since their competence lies with the sacred monies of Apollo, not the public monies of the city. According to Bousquet (1986, 273-283), the compilers should be the two city tamiai, since they are the only city officials who use the system talents-minas-staters-drachmas-obols (TMSDO mode; for the monetary standards in the accounts see SEG XXXVI 491, Bousquet 1986), although they are not attested as financial officials of the city until the end of the third century BC (Syll³ 579, l. 14). The "we" who compiled was clearly in some sense the city (Davies 1988, 6 n. 34).
This inscription attests that the Delphi Council supported, from the administrative point of view, the naopoioi and executed the disbursements in agreement with them. The naopoioi were literally the temple builders who collected and spent the funds for the rebuilding of the temple. They are not attested before the 360s and it is impossible to prove that their college did not already exist before the collapse of the temple, but the name of its members οἱ ναοποιοί ("those who are responsible for building the temple") suggests that it may have been an ad hoc creation after 373 BC rather than a standing body (Roux 1979, 95-98). The college was chaired by an office made up of two to five prostatai, whose composition changed at each pylaia (CID II 31, ll. 39, 43-44, 53, 60-61, 65, 81-82, 85, 95-96) and it included two or three argyrologoi, responsible for collecting founds. The accounts also mention a monthly committee (epimenioi) which ensured the continuation of the financial transactions between the pylaia (CID II 31, ll. 6-7, 90-94, 105). The naopoioi were appointed from among the constituent communities of the Amphictyony and held indefinitely repeatable office. Some naopoioi were well-known personalities, who exercised important duties in their city, therefore the members of this college were not drawn but elected, and they were chosen because of their fortune, which served as a guarantee for financial transactions (Roux 1979, 105-109; Bousquet 1992, 24). According to most of the scholars, the naopoioi were not only financial experts, but also technicians and engineers (Pouilloux 1962, 309; La Coste-Messelière 1974, 199-201; Bousquet 1992, 24; Lefèvre 1991, 590). On the other hand, Roux states that the naopoioi had no technical expertise and they would have been chosen on the basis of their social status and wealth, and their only task would have been to manage the funds for the rebuilding of the temple (Roux 1979, 111-120; id. 1989, 23; id. 1990, 328). However, it is important to highlight that they did not have the function of representing the twelve communities of the Amphictiony and that they did not exercise any political influence. The number and origins of the naopoioi varies over time, but these changes are generally due to reasons independent of political history. Firstly, the accounts mention only the naopoioi present at Delphi at the time of the financial transaction and they don’t take into consideration those who were on a mission outside the city (CID II 31, l. 11; Roux 1979, 110-111). Secondly, the origins of the naopoioi seem to have been determined by the kind of works carried out at Delphi. It was a way to avoid unnecessary travel and to use the personal contacts between the naopoioi and the entrepreneurs of their city, in order to obtain the best quality at the best price (CID II 31, ll. 19-25; Roux 1979, 109-110). The risks of fraud and collusion were reduced as all members of the college were responsible for the payment orders (CID II 31, ll. 2-3, 10-12, 17; Roux 1979, 105-110). The most important political events could have an impact on the composition of the college. For example, during the Third Sacred War only the naopoioi from pro-Phochians cities were encountered. The other cities were not excluded from the college, but they refrained from sending their naopoioi to Delphi as a security measure and as a protest against the Phochians (Sánchez 2001, 128-132).
The first 70 lines of CID II 31 allow us to follow the events of the Third Sacred War and each stage of the reconstruction of the temple of Apollo.
Before the sacred war (ll. 1-30).
The text records such specific information as the year and the pylaia in which the Delphians made disbursements, the exact sums paid, the names of those who received the funds and of those who witnessed the transactions, and the purpose of the disbursement (Buckler 1989, 151). The extant text begins ex abrupto with the indication of the remaining sum available to the naopoioi in the autumn pylaia during the archonship of Argilios (the Delphians recorded the balance of funds from the spring-pylaia of Argilios to the spring-pylaia of Theucharis): 20 talents, 14 minas, 10 staters (l. 2). Bousquet assumes that the original credit of the city to the naopoioi was 40 talents, of which little more than 20 remain in 358, and he estimates the income from the epikephalos obolos as being of the order of 40 talents: based on these sums, he argues that the works of the rebuilding needed 60 talents in the first nine years (under this analysis, the accounts of such expenses were inscribed on the lost slab; see Bousquet 1989, 53). The disbursements started again in Herakleios-spring when an official letter of the naopoioi asked the city to reopen the credit line. The transactions in silver are recorded in the aeginetic system (with the only exception that the mina is worth 70 drachmas and not 72; see Doyen 2014). The naopoioi ordered the city in writing (ἐπιστειλάντων, l. 2; κελευόντων, l. 10) to pay in silver the total expense which the city then gave to its contractors (τοῖς ἐργώναις, l. 10). Some bouletai and some of the naopoioi (including the naopoios of Delphi) witnessed these transactions (for the problem of the abdication of Aristagoras (l. 5), see Roux 1979, 109, Tréheux 1980, 523; the participle ἐπιμηνιεύοντος is followed by two names (ll. 6-7), see SEG 30 490, Tréheux 1980, 519-524).
The text (ll. 2-8) records one payment under both the spring-pylaia of the archonship of Herakleios and the month Apellaios of the archonship of Aristoxenos. Roux (1979, 177-178) has explained this double dating (cf. ll. 90 and 104) as the result of the discrepancy between the Delphian and Amphictyonic calendars. Since the eponymous archon of Delphi took office in the last month of the spring- pylaia, which was itself dated by the name of the preceding archon, the Delphians inscribed both the pylaia and the name of the Delphian archon under whom the payment was actually made. Thus, this payment was made in the last month of the spring-pylaia and in the first month of the Delphian civil year. During this period, the transactions are dated by the name of the eponymous archon of the pylaia and of the new eponymous archon of Delphi.
Despite the difficulties related to the war, the Delphian contractor Pasion had built the ischègaon, the terraced wall in poros north of the temple, and worked in the quarries of Corinth, where he extracted the poros blocks for the trabeation of the temple together with Nikodamos of Argos. Pasion received double pay for building the ischègaon: the first (10 minas 7 staters 9 obols) during the first month of the year (l. 7) and the second (10 minas 3 staters 3 obols) during the fourth month (l. 13). These two sums are 9/10 of a total of 22 minas and 20 staters, therefore Pasion’s pay was subject to the ‘one-tenth of guarantee’ even if the text lacks the traditional formula (τὸ ἐπιδέκατον ἀφελόντες) (see Bousquet 1984; Amandry, Hansen 2010, 474-494). At the beginning, the contractor receives 9/10 of the pay and the last part is retained as a guarantee, as an incentive to finish the work. This was paid only after checking the finished work (ἐδώκαμεν, τὸ ἐπιδέκατον ἀφελόντες) by the funds of the epidekaton (10% of the contractor’s pay). By these funds, the naopoioi withdrew the money to pay any fines against the contractor in case of fraud or delay or damages. If the contractor had refused to pay, his guarantors would have to intervene (cfr. ll. 48-49; ll. 56-57; Amandry, Hansen 2010, 474-494 and for guarantors in public works contracts, see Erdas 2010; id. 2018).
Two other major contractors were Praxion and Aristandros of Tegea. They are two λιθαγωγοί, namely those who rent their means of transport (wagons or boats) for the transport of heavy goods, in this case, the poros from the Corinthian quarries to the port of Lechaion. They did not list the details of the invoices and they got a flat fee. The naopoioi asked the city to give Praxion and Aristandros 14 minas and 10 staters (l. 15), which are a part of the 3 talents for the transport of forty beams for the peristasis of the temple. The 3 talents are 9/10 of a sum of 200 minas whose tenth (20 minas) will be paid after the peace during the archonship of Damoxenos (FD III 5 23, l. 38). The 3 talents for the transport of the beams are not the same 3 talents that the naopoioi have paid in advance to Praxion and Aristandros (l. 87) for the repair of the road (λιθαγωγία) during the archonship of Archon. In this case, since it was an advance and not a contract, the naopoioi did not retain ‘one-tenth of the guarantee’.
At the end of the fourth month, the city and the naopoioi stopped the disbursements, but immediately after, the naopoioi ordered the city of Delphi to pay in silver for the works at Corinth. As for all works outside Delphi, the city gave the amounts not directly to the contractors but τοῖς ναοποιοῖς (l. 21) to deliver the money to the recipients (ll. 19-30). Given the particular political situation, Delphi used extreme caution in making disbursements: Delphi presented the accounts to all the naopoioi and only after checking the accounts, the city, in the presence of the bouleutai, gave the sums required to the naopoioi (named by name) to pay the works at Corinth (ll. 19-30). At the end of 356 BC, Chairolas of Corinth and Nicodamos of Argos built the two winches (τὰ μαχανώματα) to load and unload ships: one at the port of Lechaion and the other at Kirrha. Chairolas dealt also with the transport of some architectural elements from the Corinthian quarries to the port of Lechaion. He earned 228 drachmas for twelve triglyph blocks and 480 drachmas for six epistyles (19 drachmas for a triglyph block and 80 drachmas for an epistyle). These amounts have been considered as total prices, but the order of magnitude leads Bommelaer to think that they are partial prices. According to the scholar, the reason for the difference between two prices may be explained either because the term ἐπιστύλιον would indicate two blocks (epistyle and interior epistyle) or because the percentage of the total price would not have been the same in the two cases (Bommelaer 2008, 245).
During the Sacred War (ll. 31-70).
During the archonship of Aristoxenos war was raging. In the spring-pylaia the naopoioi did not meet (l. 31), nor did they again until the spring-pylaia of Nikon’s archonship. The account specifically states that the funds were paid to ‘the naopoioi in the time of war’ (l. 37). The city of Delphi let the naopoioi use the credit, but it took precautions: the city recorded under a special heading the disbursements made to the ‘naopoioi in the time of war’ (τοῖς ναοποιοῖς τοῖς ἐν τῶι πολέμωι). The city gave the amounts in silver (all the transactions are numbered) not to the contractors, but to the naopoioi themselves in the presence of witnesses (the naopoios of Delphi, a delegation of bouletai, the naopoioi prostateuontes) and only during the sessions of the Amphictyones. The architect Xenodoros received part of his pay and his name appeared for the first time in this text (l. 40). The maritime transport between Lechaion and Kyrrha could resume under the direction of Onasimos, which received two disbursements (ll. 47 and 54) for the substantial sum of 2320 drachmas, probably for transporting the twelve triglyphs block and six epistyles from the port of Lechaion to Kirrha. Kheris was a herald who had to go twice on a mission to Hera to the guarantors of a defaulting worker.
The system of enumerating the disbursements (useful for future checks) is used until the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring-pylaia. At that time, the disbursements and the rebuilding of the temple stopped due to the war. The Delphians recorded the balance of funds from the spring-pylaia of Argilios (the last λογισμός) to the spring-pylaia of Theucharis, the latter being the last meeting of ‘the naopoioi in the time of war’ (ll. 68-70). The balance is 2 talents 27 minas 19 staters 9.5 obols. The expenses made amount to 10,329 drachmas and 3.5 obols and, therefore, the remaining credit available to the naopoioi is 74,670 drachmas and 2.5 obols. The naopoioi will find these funds untouched after the war in the autumn-pylaia of Damoxenos’ archonship (CID II 34).
This text was used as an argument for the theory whereby the Phochians plundered the temple of Apollo in 357/6 BC (for the question of the chronology of the Third Sacred War see Deltenre 2010). Pausanias (10.2.3) writes that this happened when Heraklides was prytane in Delphi and Agathokles was the Athenian archon, in the fourth year of the one hundred and fifth Olympiad (357 BC). According to Mommsen, the Heraklides mentioned by the periegete would be the archon Heracleios (l. 3; Bousquet 1989, 54). The name Herakleios is not the same as Herakleides, attested in Delphi, moreover, Pausanias mentions a prytane and not an archon. Because of these elements and others, Deltenre denies the reliability of Pausanias’ text. The scholar points out that the only objective element in the accounts relating to the beginning of the Third Sacred War is that the naopoioi did not meet during the spring-pylaia of Aristoxenos and, when they next met, they were called ‘the naopoioi in the time of war’. The most reasonable explanation is that the Phochians plundered the temple of Apollo after the autumn-pylaia of Aristoxenos.
Bommelaer, J.F. (1983), ‘La construction du temple classique de Delphes’, BCH 107, 191-215
Bommelaer, J.F. (2008), ‘Delphica 1. À nouveau les comptes de Delphes et la reconstitution du temple d’Apollon au IVe siècle av. J.-C.’, BCH 132, 221-255
Bousquet, J. (1984), ‘Les comptables de Delphes et le dixième de garantie’, in H. Walter (ed.), Hommages à Lucien Lerat, Paris, 135-143
Bousquet, J. (1986), ‘Les Unités Monétaires dans les Comptes de Delphes’, BCH 110, 273-283
Bousquet, J. (1988), ‘La reconstruction du temple d’Apollon à Delphes au IV e siècle avant Jésus-Christ’, in D. Knoepfler (ed.), Comptes et inventaires dans la cité grecque. Actes du colloque international d’épigraphie tenu à Neuchâtel du 23 au 26 septembre 1986 en l’honneur de Jacques Tréheux, Genève, 13-25
Bowden, H. (2003), ‘The functions of the Delphic Amphictyony before 346 B.C.E.’, Scripta classica Israelica. Yearbook of the Israel Society for the Promotion of Classical Studies 22, 67-83
Buckler, J. (1989), Philip II and the sacred war, Leiden.
Casson, S. (1916), ̔Les naopes de Delphes et la politique hellénique de 356 à 327 av. J.-C.’, BCH 40, 78-142
Cloché, P. (1920), ‘Les naopes de Delphes et la création du collège des tamiai’, BCH 44, 312-327
Doyen, C. (2014), ‘Pratiques comptables en Grèce hellénistique’, Comptabilités 6, 1-32
Erdas, D. (2010), ‘Il ricorso ai garanti solvibili nei documenti ateniesi di età classica’, in A. Magnetto, D. Erdas, C. Carusi (ed.), Nuove ricerche sulla legge granaria ateniese del 374/3 a. C., Pisa, 187-282
Erdas, D. (2018), ‘What laws applied to guarantors? Epigraphic evidence for legal procedure affecting personal security in Athens and beyond’, AnnPisa 10/2, 333-357
Feyel, C. (1998), ‘La structure d'un groupe socio-économique: les artisans dans les grands sanctuaires grecs du IVe siècle’, Topoi 8/2, 561-579
Feyel, C. (2003), ‘Des élites dans le monde du travail. Le cas des entrepreneurs à travers les comptes de construction des grands sanctuaires grecs’, in M. Cébeillac-Gervasoni, L. Lamoine (ed.), Les élites et leurs facettes. Les élites locales dans le monde hellénistique et romain, Rome, 293-305
Feyel, C. (2006), Les artisans dans les sanctuaires grecs aux époques classique et hellénistique: à travers la documentation financière en Grèce, BEFAR 318, Athènes-Paris
Keil, B. (1897), ̔Zur Verwerthung der Delphischen Rechnungsurkunden̕, Hermes 32, 399-420
La Coste-Messelière, P. (1974), ‘Les naopes à Delphes au ive siècle’, in G. Daux (ed.), Mélanges helléniques offerts à Georges Daux, Paris, 199-211
Laroche, D., Jacquemin A. (2010), ‘Constructions et reconstructions à Delphes au IVe s. av. J.-C.’, Dossiers d'Archéologie 342, 24-31
Lefèvre, F. (1991), ‘Remarques sur le calendrier des réunions de l'Amphictyonie pyléodelphique’, BCH 115, 579-594
Lefèvre, F. (2011), ‘Quoi de neuf sur l’Amphictionie?’, Pallas 87, 117-131
Marchetti, P. (1977), ‘À propos de l'archonte delphien de 344/3̕’, BCH Supp. 4, 67-89
Marchetti, P. (1979), ‘La construction du temple de Delphes et la date d’Aristônymos’, BCH 103, 151-163
Marchetti, P. (1998), ‘Note sur la date des archontes de Delphes de 346 à 336’, Topoi 8/1, 167-172
Marchetti, P. (2002), ‘En relisant les comptes de Delphes autour de l'archonte Palaois’, BCH 126, 59-72
Marchetti, P. (2011), ‘Quelques aspects trop souvent négligés des comptes de Delphes: de l’amphictionique nouveau aux couronnes d’Olympias’, Pallas 87, 133-150
Migeotte, L. (2014), Les finances des cités grecques: aux périodes classique et hellénistique, Paris
Pomtow, H. (1897), ‘Die neuen delphischen Tempelbau-Rechnungen’, Berl. Phil. W. 3, 92-96
Reinach, T. (1896), ̔Observation sur le système monétaire delphique du IVe siècle̕, BCH 20, 251-256
Reinach, T. (1897), ‘Bulletin épigraphique’, REG 10, 82-99
Roux, G. (1970), ̔Les prytanes de Delphes̕, BCH 94, 117-132
Roux, G. (1989), ‘Problèmes delphiques d'architecture et d'épigraphie’, RA, 23-64
Sordi, M. (1957), ‘La fondation du collège des naopes et le renouveau politique de l’Amphictionie au IVe siècle’, BCH 81, 38-75
Sordi, M. (2002), Scritti di storia greca, Milano Author: Giulia Vannucci Last update: May 2020 DOI: 10.25429/sns.it/lettere/GEI043
Delphi. The credit of the City to the naopoioi for the rebuilding of the temple of Apollo
ἐπὶ Ἀργιλίου ἄρχοντος, ὀπωρινᾶς πυλαίας, πὰρ τὰν πόλιν τῶν Δελφῶν λοιπὰ χρήματα τοῖς ναο-
ποιοῖς· τάλαντα ἴκατι, μναῖ δέκα τέτορες, στατῆρες δέκα· μετὰ τοῦτο ἀπεδώκαμες. ἐπιστει-
λάντων τῶν ναοποιῶν πάντων, τᾶι ἠρινᾶι πυλαίαι, ἐπὶ Ἡρακλείου ἄρχοντος, ἀργύριον διδόμ[εν],
ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, ἐπὶ Ἀριστοξένου ἄρχοντος, μηνὸς Ἀπελλαίου, βουλευόντων
5 Καλλίππου, Σακεδάλλου, Αἰγύλου τοῦ Ἱέρωνος, Ἀρισταγόρα μὲν ἀφισταμένου τᾶς ναοποιΐας,
Νικομάχου δὲ τοῦ Μενεκράτεος ναοποιέοντος, ἐπιμηνιεύοντος δὲ Φιλολάου Λακεδαιμονίου,
Ἀμφάρεος Φωκέος· Πασίωνι ἰσχεγάου μνᾶς δέκα, στατῆρας ἑπτά, ὀβολοὺς ἐννέα· Ἁρμοδίωι χαλκεῖ
δεσμῶν μνᾶς ἕξ, στατῆρας δέκα πέντε. ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, ἐπὶ Ἀριστοξένου
ἄρχοντος, μηνὸς Ἡραίου, ὀπωρινᾶι πυλαίαι, ναοποιέοντος Νικομάχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόντων
10 Καλλίππου, Σακεδάλλου, Αἰγύλου, τοῖς ἐργώναις, κελευόντων πάντων τῶν ναοποιῶν,
παρεόντων δὲ ναοποιῶν τῶνδε· Νικομάχου Δελφοῦ, Νικοτέλευς Ἀργείου, Κλεοδώρου Ἀργείου,
Ξενοτίμου Σικυωνίου, Δαμοφάνευς Κορινθίου· Νικοδάμωι ξύλων ποτὶ τὰ μαχανώματα μνᾶς ἕ̣ξ̣·
Πασίωνι ἄλλο τοῦ ἰσχεγάου τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἔργου, μνᾶς δέκα, στατῆρας τρεῖς, ὀβολοὺς τρεῖς·
Νικοδάμωι Πασίωνι λατομίας μνᾶς τριάκοντα τέτορας, στατῆρας ἴκατι ἕξ· Πραξίωνι
15 Ἀριστάνδρωι λιθαγωγοῖς μνᾶς δέκα τέτορας, στατῆρας δέκα· Κλεινίαι σκαπέτων στατῆρας
ἴκατι τέτορας, ὀβολοὺς ὀκτώ· Ἀριστίωνι λίθων ἀπαγωγᾶς στατῆρας δέκα· τῶι μαγίρωι
τρία ἡμιωβέλια. ταῦτα ἀπελογιξάμεθα ποτὶ πάντας τοὺς ναοποιοὺς καὶ ἐγένετο
κεφάλωμα τάλαντον, μναῖ ἴκατι δύο, στατῆρες ἴκατι ἕξ, ὀβολοὶ ἐννέα, ἡμιωβέλιον.
μετὰ τὸν λογισμόν, παρεόντων τῶν βουλευτᾶν, ἐπέταξαν τοὶ ναοποιοὶ πάντες τᾶι πόλι τῶν
20 Δελ[φ]ῶν ἀργύριον δόμεν ποτὶ τὰ ἔργα τὰ ἐγ Κορίνθωι, καὶ ἐδώκαμεν· τοῖς μὲν ναοποιοῖς εὐθὺς
μνᾶ[ς] τέτορας, τοῦτο δὲ ἐδόθη Λαβώται Δαμοφάνει Κορινθίοις, Ξενοτίμωι Σικυωνίωι.
ἄλλο ἐδώκαμεν Λαβώται Δαμοφάνει Κορινθίοις, Ξενοτίμωι Σικυωνίωι, μνᾶς δέκα.
ἄλλο Νικόμαχον ἀπεπέμψαμεν φέροντα εἰς Κόρινθον τοῖς ναοποιοῖς μνᾶς τέτορας.
κεφάλωμα τοῦ ἔλαβον μετὰ τὸν λογισμὸν οἱ Κορίνθιοι ναοποιοὶ καὶ ὁ Σικυώνιος μνᾶς
25 δέκα ὀκτώ.
[ἀπὸ] τούτου ἀνάλωμα· μαχανώματος Χαιρόλαι μνᾶς τέτορας· βολίμου εἰσφορᾶς δραχμαὶ τρεῖς,
[ἡ]μιωβέλιον· πὸτ τὸ μαχάνωμα λίθων τομᾶς Θεογένει δραχμαὶ πέντε· ἀγωγᾶς τούτων Ἀγάθωνι δραχμαὶ
ἑπτά· βολίμου στάσιος Σατύρωι δραχμά· τριγλύφων δυώδεκα ἀγωγᾶς Χαιρόλαι μναῖ τρεῖς,
στατῆρας ἐννέα· τοπείου Ξένωνι μναῖ τρεῖς, στατῆρες ἴκατι δύο· ἐπιστυλίων ἓξ Χαιρόλαι
30 μναῖ ἕξ, στατῆρες τριάκοντα· βολίμου συνθέσιος ὀβολοὶ δέκα· πινακίοιν ὀβολοὶ τέτορες.
ἐπὶ Ἀριστοξένου ἄρχοντος, πυλαίαι ἠρινᾶι, ναοποιοὶ οὐ συνῆλθον· οὐδὲ ἐπὶ Ἱερίνου ἄρχον-
τος, πυλαίαι ὀπωρινᾶι καὶ ἠρινᾶι, οὐ συνῆλθον· οὐδὲ ἐπὶ Νίκωνος ἄρχοντος, πυλαίαι ὀπωρινᾶι,
ναοποιοὶ οὐ συνῆλθον. ἐπὶ Νίκωνος ἄρχοντος, ἠρινᾶς πυλαίας, ναοποιοὶ συνῆλθον τοίδε·
Ἁγήσαρχος Δελφός, Τηλοκλέας Ἀθηναῖος, Εὔορμος Λοκρός, Νικέας Λοκρός, Θέων Μεγαρεύς,
35 Ἀστίας Ἐπιδαύριος, Φιλόλαος Λακεδαιμόνιος, Καλλιμήδης Κορίνθιος, Θρασύδαμος Κορίν-
θιος, Ἐπιχάρης Φωκεύς.
ἐπὶ Νίκωνος ἄρχοντος, ἠρινᾶς πυλαίας, ἁ πόλις ἔδωκε τοῖς ναοποιοῖς τοῖς ἐν τῶι πολέμωι,
πράταν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος Ἁγησάρχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόντων Λύσωνος, Μαχίδα, Ἀρχε[μ]αχίδα,
προστατευόντων Τηλοκλέος Ἀθηναίου, Ἀστία Ἐπιδαυρίου, στατῆρας πεντήκοντα ὀκτώ,
40 ὀβολοὺς τρεῖς. τοῦτο ἐδόθη τῶι ἀρχιτέκτονι Ξενοδώρωι πὸτ τὸν μισθόν.
ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, δευτέραν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος Ἁγησάρχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόν-
των Διοκλέος, Ἡρακλείτου, Δεινομάχου, ἐπὶ Αὐτία ἄρχοντος, τᾶς ὀπωρινᾶς πυλαίας,
τοῖς ναοποιοῖς, προστατευόντων Θέωνος Μεγαρεῦς, Κυδίμου Ἀθηναίου, Θράσωνος Ἀθηναίου,
Ξενοτίμου Σικυωνίου, Εὐόρμου Λοκροῦ, μνᾶς ἴκατι ἑπτά, στατῆρας ἴκατι πέντε.
45 τούτου ἐδόθη· Νικοδάμωι ποτὶ τὸ ἐγ Κίρραι μαχάνωμα καὶ τοῦ χώματος μναῖ τρεῖς, στατῆρες
τριάκοντα δύο, <ὀ>βο<λο>ὶ ἑπτά, ἡμιωβέλιον· Νικοδάμωι σφενδόνας τιμὰν ποτὶ τὸ ἐγ Κίρραι μαχάνω-
μα στατῆρες πεντήκοντα εἷς, ὀβολοὶ τέτορες· Ὀνασίμωι λιθαγωγῶι κατὰ θάλασσαν μναῖ ἴκα-
τι μία, στατῆρες ἴκατι πέντε· Χήρι ἐφόδιον καλευμένωι τοὺς Ἡρέα ἐγγύους στατῆρες δέκα
τέτορες· γραμματιστᾶι στατῆρες πέντε· κάρυκι δραχμαὶ τρεῖς· ζυγάστρου ὀβολοὶ πέντε,
50 ἡμιωβέλιον· πινακίων ὀβολός.
ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, τρίταν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος Ἁγησάρχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόντων
Κλέωνος τοῦ Τιμοκράτεος, Φειδίλα, Θεοχάριος, Ὀρνιχίδα, ἐπὶ Αὐτία ἄρχοντος, τᾶς ἠρινᾶς,
τοῖς ναοποιοῖς, προστατευόντων Νικιάδου Ἀθηναίου, Δέξιος Κορινθίου, Θράσωνος Φωκέος,
μνᾶς δέκα δύο, στατῆρας ἕξ, ὀβολοὺς τρεῖς· τούτου ἐδόθη· Ὀνασίμωι κατὰ θάλασσαν λιθαγωγῶι
55 ποτεθήκαμες πὸτ τὰν δόσιν μνᾶς δέκα μίαν, στατῆρας δέκα πέντε· Νικοδάμωι πίσσας τιμὰ καὶ
τὸ μαχάνωμα πισσῶσαι τὸ ἐγ Κίρραι στατῆρες δέκα, ὀβολοὶ τρεῖς· Χήρι ἐφόδιον καλευμένωι
τοὺς Ἡρέα ἐγγύους στατῆρες δέκα ἕξ.
ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, τετάρταν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος [Ἁ]γ[η]σάρ[χ]ου Δελφοῦ,
βουλευόντων Κλέωνος, Κλεινία, Δίωνος, ἐπὶ Θευχάριος ἄρχοντος, τᾶς ὀπωρινᾶς, τοῖς
60 ναοποιοῖς, προστατευόντων Δέξιος Κορινθίου, Ἀστία Ἐπιδαυρίου, Πολυπείθεος Λακεδαι-
μονίου μνᾶς δύο, στατῆρας ὀκτώ, δραχμάν· τούτου ἐδόθη· Ξενοδώρωι ἀρχιτέκτονι μναῖ δύο,
στατῆρες πέντε· Καλλιτέλει τοῦ μαχανώματος ἀκέσιος στατῆρες τρεῖς, δραχμά.
ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, πέμπταν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος Ἁγησάρχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόντων
Καλλαγόρα, Ἀθάνιος Μένωνος, ἐπὶ Θευχάριος ἄρχοντος, τᾶς ἠρινᾶς, τοῖς ναοποιοῖς,
65 προστατευόντων Ἀγία Λακεδαιμονίου, Μνασικλέος Φλειασίου, μνᾶς τρεῖς· τοῦτο ἐδόθη
τῶι ἀρχιτέκτονι Ξενοδώρωι. ταῦτα ἀπελογιξάμεθα τοῖς ναοποιοῖς τοῖς ἐν τῶι πολέμωι
καὶ ἐγένετο κεφάλωμα ἐν ταῖς πέντε πυλαίαις μναῖ τετρώκοντα ἕξ, στατῆρες ἴκατι ὀκτώ.
σύμπαντος κεφάλωμα οὗ ἀπέδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν τοῖς ναοποιοῖς ἀπὸ Ἀργιλίου ἄρχοντος,
τᾶς ἠρινᾶς πυλαίας, εἴς τε εἰς Θεύχαριν ἄρχοντα, εἰς τὰν ἠρινὰν πυλαίαν, ἀργυρίου τάλαντα
70 δύο, μνᾶς ἴκατι ἑπτά, στατῆρας δέκα ἐννέα, ὀβολοὺς ἐννέα, ἡμιωβέλιον.
ποιοῖς· τάλαντα ἴκατι, μναῖ δέκα τέτορες, στατῆρες δέκα· μετὰ τοῦτο ἀπεδώκαμες. ἐπιστει-
λάντων τῶν ναοποιῶν πάντων, τᾶι ἠρινᾶι πυλαίαι, ἐπὶ Ἡρακλείου ἄρχοντος, ἀργύριον διδόμ[εν],
ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, ἐπὶ Ἀριστοξένου ἄρχοντος, μηνὸς Ἀπελλαίου, βουλευόντων
5 Καλλίππου, Σακεδάλλου, Αἰγύλου τοῦ Ἱέρωνος, Ἀρισταγόρα μὲν ἀφισταμένου τᾶς ναοποιΐας,
Νικομάχου δὲ τοῦ Μενεκράτεος ναοποιέοντος, ἐπιμηνιεύοντος δὲ Φιλολάου Λακεδαιμονίου,
Ἀμφάρεος Φωκέος· Πασίωνι ἰσχεγάου μνᾶς δέκα, στατῆρας ἑπτά, ὀβολοὺς ἐννέα· Ἁρμοδίωι χαλκεῖ
δεσμῶν μνᾶς ἕξ, στατῆρας δέκα πέντε. ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, ἐπὶ Ἀριστοξένου
ἄρχοντος, μηνὸς Ἡραίου, ὀπωρινᾶι πυλαίαι, ναοποιέοντος Νικομάχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόντων
10 Καλλίππου, Σακεδάλλου, Αἰγύλου, τοῖς ἐργώναις, κελευόντων πάντων τῶν ναοποιῶν,
παρεόντων δὲ ναοποιῶν τῶνδε· Νικομάχου Δελφοῦ, Νικοτέλευς Ἀργείου, Κλεοδώρου Ἀργείου,
Ξενοτίμου Σικυωνίου, Δαμοφάνευς Κορινθίου· Νικοδάμωι ξύλων ποτὶ τὰ μαχανώματα μνᾶς ἕ̣ξ̣·
Πασίωνι ἄλλο τοῦ ἰσχεγάου τοῦ αὐτοῦ ἔργου, μνᾶς δέκα, στατῆρας τρεῖς, ὀβολοὺς τρεῖς·
Νικοδάμωι Πασίωνι λατομίας μνᾶς τριάκοντα τέτορας, στατῆρας ἴκατι ἕξ· Πραξίωνι
15 Ἀριστάνδρωι λιθαγωγοῖς μνᾶς δέκα τέτορας, στατῆρας δέκα· Κλεινίαι σκαπέτων στατῆρας
ἴκατι τέτορας, ὀβολοὺς ὀκτώ· Ἀριστίωνι λίθων ἀπαγωγᾶς στατῆρας δέκα· τῶι μαγίρωι
τρία ἡμιωβέλια. ταῦτα ἀπελογιξάμεθα ποτὶ πάντας τοὺς ναοποιοὺς καὶ ἐγένετο
κεφάλωμα τάλαντον, μναῖ ἴκατι δύο, στατῆρες ἴκατι ἕξ, ὀβολοὶ ἐννέα, ἡμιωβέλιον.
μετὰ τὸν λογισμόν, παρεόντων τῶν βουλευτᾶν, ἐπέταξαν τοὶ ναοποιοὶ πάντες τᾶι πόλι τῶν
20 Δελ[φ]ῶν ἀργύριον δόμεν ποτὶ τὰ ἔργα τὰ ἐγ Κορίνθωι, καὶ ἐδώκαμεν· τοῖς μὲν ναοποιοῖς εὐθὺς
μνᾶ[ς] τέτορας, τοῦτο δὲ ἐδόθη Λαβώται Δαμοφάνει Κορινθίοις, Ξενοτίμωι Σικυωνίωι.
ἄλλο ἐδώκαμεν Λαβώται Δαμοφάνει Κορινθίοις, Ξενοτίμωι Σικυωνίωι, μνᾶς δέκα.
ἄλλο Νικόμαχον ἀπεπέμψαμεν φέροντα εἰς Κόρινθον τοῖς ναοποιοῖς μνᾶς τέτορας.
κεφάλωμα τοῦ ἔλαβον μετὰ τὸν λογισμὸν οἱ Κορίνθιοι ναοποιοὶ καὶ ὁ Σικυώνιος μνᾶς
25 δέκα ὀκτώ.
[ἀπὸ] τούτου ἀνάλωμα· μαχανώματος Χαιρόλαι μνᾶς τέτορας· βολίμου εἰσφορᾶς δραχμαὶ τρεῖς,
[ἡ]μιωβέλιον· πὸτ τὸ μαχάνωμα λίθων τομᾶς Θεογένει δραχμαὶ πέντε· ἀγωγᾶς τούτων Ἀγάθωνι δραχμαὶ
ἑπτά· βολίμου στάσιος Σατύρωι δραχμά· τριγλύφων δυώδεκα ἀγωγᾶς Χαιρόλαι μναῖ τρεῖς,
στατῆρας ἐννέα· τοπείου Ξένωνι μναῖ τρεῖς, στατῆρες ἴκατι δύο· ἐπιστυλίων ἓξ Χαιρόλαι
30 μναῖ ἕξ, στατῆρες τριάκοντα· βολίμου συνθέσιος ὀβολοὶ δέκα· πινακίοιν ὀβολοὶ τέτορες.
ἐπὶ Ἀριστοξένου ἄρχοντος, πυλαίαι ἠρινᾶι, ναοποιοὶ οὐ συνῆλθον· οὐδὲ ἐπὶ Ἱερίνου ἄρχον-
τος, πυλαίαι ὀπωρινᾶι καὶ ἠρινᾶι, οὐ συνῆλθον· οὐδὲ ἐπὶ Νίκωνος ἄρχοντος, πυλαίαι ὀπωρινᾶι,
ναοποιοὶ οὐ συνῆλθον. ἐπὶ Νίκωνος ἄρχοντος, ἠρινᾶς πυλαίας, ναοποιοὶ συνῆλθον τοίδε·
Ἁγήσαρχος Δελφός, Τηλοκλέας Ἀθηναῖος, Εὔορμος Λοκρός, Νικέας Λοκρός, Θέων Μεγαρεύς,
35 Ἀστίας Ἐπιδαύριος, Φιλόλαος Λακεδαιμόνιος, Καλλιμήδης Κορίνθιος, Θρασύδαμος Κορίν-
θιος, Ἐπιχάρης Φωκεύς.
ἐπὶ Νίκωνος ἄρχοντος, ἠρινᾶς πυλαίας, ἁ πόλις ἔδωκε τοῖς ναοποιοῖς τοῖς ἐν τῶι πολέμωι,
πράταν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος Ἁγησάρχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόντων Λύσωνος, Μαχίδα, Ἀρχε[μ]αχίδα,
προστατευόντων Τηλοκλέος Ἀθηναίου, Ἀστία Ἐπιδαυρίου, στατῆρας πεντήκοντα ὀκτώ,
40 ὀβολοὺς τρεῖς. τοῦτο ἐδόθη τῶι ἀρχιτέκτονι Ξενοδώρωι πὸτ τὸν μισθόν.
ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, δευτέραν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος Ἁγησάρχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόν-
των Διοκλέος, Ἡρακλείτου, Δεινομάχου, ἐπὶ Αὐτία ἄρχοντος, τᾶς ὀπωρινᾶς πυλαίας,
τοῖς ναοποιοῖς, προστατευόντων Θέωνος Μεγαρεῦς, Κυδίμου Ἀθηναίου, Θράσωνος Ἀθηναίου,
Ξενοτίμου Σικυωνίου, Εὐόρμου Λοκροῦ, μνᾶς ἴκατι ἑπτά, στατῆρας ἴκατι πέντε.
45 τούτου ἐδόθη· Νικοδάμωι ποτὶ τὸ ἐγ Κίρραι μαχάνωμα καὶ τοῦ χώματος μναῖ τρεῖς, στατῆρες
τριάκοντα δύο, <ὀ>βο<λο>ὶ ἑπτά, ἡμιωβέλιον· Νικοδάμωι σφενδόνας τιμὰν ποτὶ τὸ ἐγ Κίρραι μαχάνω-
μα στατῆρες πεντήκοντα εἷς, ὀβολοὶ τέτορες· Ὀνασίμωι λιθαγωγῶι κατὰ θάλασσαν μναῖ ἴκα-
τι μία, στατῆρες ἴκατι πέντε· Χήρι ἐφόδιον καλευμένωι τοὺς Ἡρέα ἐγγύους στατῆρες δέκα
τέτορες· γραμματιστᾶι στατῆρες πέντε· κάρυκι δραχμαὶ τρεῖς· ζυγάστρου ὀβολοὶ πέντε,
50 ἡμιωβέλιον· πινακίων ὀβολός.
ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, τρίταν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος Ἁγησάρχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόντων
Κλέωνος τοῦ Τιμοκράτεος, Φειδίλα, Θεοχάριος, Ὀρνιχίδα, ἐπὶ Αὐτία ἄρχοντος, τᾶς ἠρινᾶς,
τοῖς ναοποιοῖς, προστατευόντων Νικιάδου Ἀθηναίου, Δέξιος Κορινθίου, Θράσωνος Φωκέος,
μνᾶς δέκα δύο, στατῆρας ἕξ, ὀβολοὺς τρεῖς· τούτου ἐδόθη· Ὀνασίμωι κατὰ θάλασσαν λιθαγωγῶι
55 ποτεθήκαμες πὸτ τὰν δόσιν μνᾶς δέκα μίαν, στατῆρας δέκα πέντε· Νικοδάμωι πίσσας τιμὰ καὶ
τὸ μαχάνωμα πισσῶσαι τὸ ἐγ Κίρραι στατῆρες δέκα, ὀβολοὶ τρεῖς· Χήρι ἐφόδιον καλευμένωι
τοὺς Ἡρέα ἐγγύους στατῆρες δέκα ἕξ.
ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, τετάρταν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος [Ἁ]γ[η]σάρ[χ]ου Δελφοῦ,
βουλευόντων Κλέωνος, Κλεινία, Δίωνος, ἐπὶ Θευχάριος ἄρχοντος, τᾶς ὀπωρινᾶς, τοῖς
60 ναοποιοῖς, προστατευόντων Δέξιος Κορινθίου, Ἀστία Ἐπιδαυρίου, Πολυπείθεος Λακεδαι-
μονίου μνᾶς δύο, στατῆρας ὀκτώ, δραχμάν· τούτου ἐδόθη· Ξενοδώρωι ἀρχιτέκτονι μναῖ δύο,
στατῆρες πέντε· Καλλιτέλει τοῦ μαχανώματος ἀκέσιος στατῆρες τρεῖς, δραχμά.
ἄλλο ἔδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν, πέμπταν δόσιν, ναοποιέοντος Ἁγησάρχου Δελφοῦ, βουλευόντων
Καλλαγόρα, Ἀθάνιος Μένωνος, ἐπὶ Θευχάριος ἄρχοντος, τᾶς ἠρινᾶς, τοῖς ναοποιοῖς,
65 προστατευόντων Ἀγία Λακεδαιμονίου, Μνασικλέος Φλειασίου, μνᾶς τρεῖς· τοῦτο ἐδόθη
τῶι ἀρχιτέκτονι Ξενοδώρωι. ταῦτα ἀπελογιξάμεθα τοῖς ναοποιοῖς τοῖς ἐν τῶι πολέμωι
καὶ ἐγένετο κεφάλωμα ἐν ταῖς πέντε πυλαίαις μναῖ τετρώκοντα ἕξ, στατῆρες ἴκατι ὀκτώ.
σύμπαντος κεφάλωμα οὗ ἀπέδωκε ἁ πόλις τῶν Δελφῶν τοῖς ναοποιοῖς ἀπὸ Ἀργιλίου ἄρχοντος,
τᾶς ἠρινᾶς πυλαίας, εἴς τε εἰς Θεύχαριν ἄρχοντα, εἰς τὰν ἠρινὰν πυλαίαν, ἀργυρίου τάλαντα
70 δύο, μνᾶς ἴκατι ἑπτά, στατῆρας δέκα ἐννέα, ὀβολοὺς ἐννέα, ἡμιωβέλιον.
During the archonship of Argilios, in the autumn pylaia, the naopoioi’s residual funds from the city of Delphi: 20 talents, 14 minas, 10 staters. After this we paid; having the all naopoioi ordered in writing to pay in silver, during the archonship of Heracleios, in the spring pylaia, the city of Delfi paid, during the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the month of Apellaios, as bouletai were Kallippos, Sakedallos, Aigylos son of Hieron, Aristagoras who resigned from his office as naopoios, Nikomachos son of Menekrates who became naopoios in his place, and epimenioi were Philolaos of Sparta, Amphares of Phocis: to Pasion for the ischègaon 10 minas, 7 staters, 9 obols; to the bronze worker Armodios for the clamps 6 minas, 15 staters. The city of Delphi gave another (amount), during the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the month of Heraios, in the autumn pylaia, when the naopoios was Nikomachos of Delphi and the bouletai were Kallippos, Sakedallos, Aigylos, to the contractors, because all the naopoioi have ordered it, being present these naopoioi: Nikomachos of Delphi, Nikoteles of Argos, Kleodoros of Argos, Xenotimos of Sikyon, Damophanes of Corinth: to Nikodamos for the wood for the winch 6 minas; to Pasion another (payment) for the same ischègaon 10 minas, 3 staters, 3 obols; to Nikodamos and Pasion for the quarrying work 34 minas, 26 staters; to Praxion and Aristandros, stone-transporters, 14 minas, 10 staters; to Kleinias for the pits 24 staters, 8 obols; to Aristion for the transport of stones 10 staters; to the cook 3 ½ obol. We presented our accounts to all the naopoioi and the total was 1 talent, 22 minas, 26 staters, 9 ½ obols.
After the calculation, in the presence of the bouletai, all the naopoioi ordered the city of Delphi to pay in silver for the works at Corinth and we immediately gave (an amount) to the naopoioi of 4 minas, this was given to Labotas and Damophanes of Corinth and to Xenotimos of Sikyon. In addition, we gave 10 minas to Labotas and Damophanes of Corinth and Xenotimos of Sikyon. Moreover, we sent Nikomachos to Corinth to give 4 minas to the naopoioi. Total of what the naopoioi of Corinth and one of Sikyon have received after the calculation: 18 minas.Expenditure of this (silver): to Chairolas for the winch 4 minas; for the transport of lead 4 drachmas, ½ obol; to Theogenes for the cutting stones for the winch 5 drachmas; to Agathon for the transport of these (stones) 7 drachmas; to Satyros for the weighing of lead 1 drachma; to Chairolas for the transport of twelve triglyphs 3 minas, 9 staters; to Xenon for the rope 3 minas, 22 staters; to Chairolas for the six epistyles 6 minas, 30 staters; for the storage of lead 10 obols; for two pinakes 4 obols.
During the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the spring pylaia, the naopoioi did not assemble; also during the archonship of Hierinos, in the autumn and spring pylaia, they did not meet; also during the archonship of Nikon, in the autumn pylaia the naopoioi did not even meet. During the archonship of Nikon, in the spring pylaia, the following naopoioi assembled: Hagesarchos of Delphi, Telokleas of Athens, Euormos and Nikeas of Locris, Theon of Megara, Astias of Epidaurus, Philolaos of Sparta, Kallimedes and Thrasydamos of Corinth, Epichares of the Phocis.
During the archonship of Nikon, in the spring pylaia, the city gave a first payment to the naopoioi in war, as the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Lyson, Machidas, Archemachidas, and the prostateuontes Telokleas of Athens and Astias of Epidaurus: 58 staters, 3 obols. This (sum) was given to the architect Xenodoros as his stipend.
The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as second payment, when the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Diocles, Heracleitos, Deinomachos, during the archonship of Autias, in the autumn pylaia, to the naopoioi, when the prostateuontes were Theon of Megara, Kydimos and Thrason of Athens, Xenotimos of Sikyon, Euormos of Locris: 27 minas, 25 staters.
From this (amount) was given to: Nikodamos for the winch in Kirrha and for the earth thrown up 3 minas, 32 staters, 7 ½ obols; Nikodamos the cost of the slingshot for the winch in Kirrha 51 staters, 4 obols; Onasimos for the transport of the stones by sea 21 minas, 25 staters; Chéris the travel expenses for the convocation of the guarantors from Heraea 14 staters; the grammateus 5 staters; the herald 3 drachmas; for the chest 5 ½ obols; for the pinakes 1 obol.
The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as third payment, when the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Kleon son of Timocrates, Pheidilas, Theocharis and Ornichidas, during the archonship of Autias, in the spring ( pylaia), to the naopoioi, as the prostateuontes were Nikiades of Athens, Dexis of Corinth and Thrason of Phocis, 12 minas, 6 staters, 3 obols; this (amount) was given to: Onasimos for the transport of the stones by sea as addition 11 minas, 15 staters; Nicodamos the cost of the pitch and for the pitching of the winch in Kirrha 10 staters, 3 obols; Chéris the travel expenses for the convocation of the guarantors from Heraea 16 staters.
The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as fourth payment, when the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Kleon, Kleinias and Dion, during the archonship of Theucharis, in the autumn pylaia, to the naopoioi, as the prostateuontes were Dexios of Corinth, Astias of Epidaurus, Polypeithes of Sparta: 2 minas, 8 staters, 1 drachma; this (amount) was given to: architect Xenodoros 2 minas, 5 staters; Kalliteles for the repair of the winch 3 staters, 1 drachma.
The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as fifth payment, when the naopoios of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the bouletai were Kallagoras, Athanis and Menon, during the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring pylaia, to the naopoioi, as the prostateuontes were Agias of Sparta, Mnasikleos of Phlius, 3 minas; this was given to the architect Xenodoros. We presented our accounts to the naopoioi in war and the total in the five pylaiai was 46 minas, 28 staters.
Total of everything that the city of Delphi has given in silver to the naopoioi starting from the archonship of Argilios, in the spring pylaia, until the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring pylaia: 2 talents, 27 minas, 19 staters, 9 ½ obols. Commentary:
This inscription represents the first 70 lines of CID II 31, which, together with CID II 32, report the accounts of the payments made from the credit (opheilèma) that sometime after 373/2 BC the city of Delphi granted to the naopoioi to help meet the costs of rebuilding the temple of Apollo. The accounts of this special fund were originally inscribed about 60 years later on three huge stelai which were set up in a prominent place by the Treasury XXVI (the so-called Bouleuterion) to serve as a public record of the city’s philotimia and piety. Since this inscription begins in mediis rebus with the transactions of Argilios-autumn (358/7 BC) and since all entries concern the rebuilding, a first, lost stele is presumed to have detailed the entries from some year after 373/2 BC until 359/8 BC (Roux hypothesizes the existence of a fourth stele, see Roux 1979, 187).
For a long time, it was believed that the 6th century BC temple had been destroyed by the earthquake of 373 BC that destroyed the city of Helice. It is more likely that the main cause was a landslide due to heavy rains or the action of groundwater and to the kind of the soil on which the temple was built (Amandry, Hansen 2010, 121; Roux 1990, 329). According to the literary sources, the collapse of the temple occurred between 418 BC (Eur. Ion. 205-218) and 371 BC ( Xen. Hell. 6.4.2) and it may have occurred between 375 and 371 BC (Sánchez 2001, 125 n. 4). The rebuilding of the temple lasted, with some interruption due to the Sacred War, from 366 to 330 BC when the temple, though not finished, was consecrated. We can trace each stage of the reconstruction through the corpus of 139 accounts found in the sanctuary.
The Amphictyony chose a mixed-finance plan (Roux 1979, 137-142) to front the cost of rebuilding which Migeotte estimates to be between 320 and 400 talents (Migeotte 2014, 373-374). It is, therefore, possible to distinguish three types of loan corresponding to three different kinds of contributors:1. ὀφεíλημα (CID II 31-32): this is the long-term credit that the city of Delphi has made available to the naopoioi. It is a commitment by the inhabitants of Delphi to pay the invoices that the naopoioi submit to them up to a maximum amount that Bousquet has estimated as being around 40 talents (Bousquet 1989, 53);
2. ἐπαρχαί (CID II 1-30): these are the voluntary donations made by individuals and by cities and states (inside and outside the Amphictyony) asked by a panhellenic subscription to contribute to the rebuilding of the temple of Apollo;
3. ἐπικέφαλος ὀβολός (CID II 1-10): it is a levy of one obol per person on the states belonging to the Amphictyony. The ‘first obol’ was collected from spring 366 to spring 361 BC (the first to the eleventh pylaia in the numbered series) and a ‘second obol’ from spring 361 to autumn 356 BC (the eleventh to the twenty-second pylaia).
According to Roux (1979, 114, 142-143), the credit opened by the City of Delphi to the naopoioi (opheilèma) was managed by the Council; only the naopoioi could use these funds and exclusively for the rebuilding of the temple. On the other hand, the ordinary revenues (usable both for the ordinary expenses and for the rebuilding of the temple), the eparchai and the epikephalos obolos flowed into the Amphictyonic treasury which was jointly managed by the Amphictyonic Council and the prytanies of Delphi. Bousquet (1988, 112; id. 1989, 9; id. 1992, 24), followed by Sánchez (2001, 130), argues, instead, that the naopoioi managed a special fund (into which flowed the opheilèma, the eparchai and epikephalos obolos), separate from the fund of the Amphictyony, since the unit of account used in all contributions lists is the drachma which the naopoioi are the only ones to use in Delphi.
The very substantial credit made available by the city is managed on its behalf and under the control of the Council, but it is difficult to identify the administrators who compiled or published the three stelai. Their anonymity has provoked debate. The compilers cannot be the Council tout court (contra Roux 1979, 243-245), since the "we" is accompanied by two, or more normally three, members of Council. The compilers would not be the prytanies (contra Marchetti 1977, 160-164), since these appear only in Pleiston’s year (CID II 32, ll. 54ff; 318/7 BC at earliest) onwards, since they receive money from the Council, and since their competence lies with the sacred monies of Apollo, not the public monies of the city. According to Bousquet (1986, 273-283), the compilers should be the two city tamiai, since they are the only city officials who use the system talents-minas-staters-drachmas-obols (TMSDO mode; for the monetary standards in the accounts see SEG XXXVI 491, Bousquet 1986), although they are not attested as financial officials of the city until the end of the third century BC (Syll³ 579, l. 14). The "we" who compiled was clearly in some sense the city (Davies 1988, 6 n. 34).
This inscription attests that the Delphi Council supported, from the administrative point of view, the naopoioi and executed the disbursements in agreement with them. The naopoioi were literally the temple builders who collected and spent the funds for the rebuilding of the temple. They are not attested before the 360s and it is impossible to prove that their college did not already exist before the collapse of the temple, but the name of its members οἱ ναοποιοί ("those who are responsible for building the temple") suggests that it may have been an ad hoc creation after 373 BC rather than a standing body (Roux 1979, 95-98). The college was chaired by an office made up of two to five prostatai, whose composition changed at each pylaia (CID II 31, ll. 39, 43-44, 53, 60-61, 65, 81-82, 85, 95-96) and it included two or three argyrologoi, responsible for collecting founds. The accounts also mention a monthly committee (epimenioi) which ensured the continuation of the financial transactions between the pylaia (CID II 31, ll. 6-7, 90-94, 105). The naopoioi were appointed from among the constituent communities of the Amphictyony and held indefinitely repeatable office. Some naopoioi were well-known personalities, who exercised important duties in their city, therefore the members of this college were not drawn but elected, and they were chosen because of their fortune, which served as a guarantee for financial transactions (Roux 1979, 105-109; Bousquet 1992, 24). According to most of the scholars, the naopoioi were not only financial experts, but also technicians and engineers (Pouilloux 1962, 309; La Coste-Messelière 1974, 199-201; Bousquet 1992, 24; Lefèvre 1991, 590). On the other hand, Roux states that the naopoioi had no technical expertise and they would have been chosen on the basis of their social status and wealth, and their only task would have been to manage the funds for the rebuilding of the temple (Roux 1979, 111-120; id. 1989, 23; id. 1990, 328). However, it is important to highlight that they did not have the function of representing the twelve communities of the Amphictiony and that they did not exercise any political influence. The number and origins of the naopoioi varies over time, but these changes are generally due to reasons independent of political history. Firstly, the accounts mention only the naopoioi present at Delphi at the time of the financial transaction and they don’t take into consideration those who were on a mission outside the city (CID II 31, l. 11; Roux 1979, 110-111). Secondly, the origins of the naopoioi seem to have been determined by the kind of works carried out at Delphi. It was a way to avoid unnecessary travel and to use the personal contacts between the naopoioi and the entrepreneurs of their city, in order to obtain the best quality at the best price (CID II 31, ll. 19-25; Roux 1979, 109-110). The risks of fraud and collusion were reduced as all members of the college were responsible for the payment orders (CID II 31, ll. 2-3, 10-12, 17; Roux 1979, 105-110). The most important political events could have an impact on the composition of the college. For example, during the Third Sacred War only the naopoioi from pro-Phochians cities were encountered. The other cities were not excluded from the college, but they refrained from sending their naopoioi to Delphi as a security measure and as a protest against the Phochians (Sánchez 2001, 128-132).
The first 70 lines of CID II 31 allow us to follow the events of the Third Sacred War and each stage of the reconstruction of the temple of Apollo.
Before the sacred war (ll. 1-30).
The text records such specific information as the year and the pylaia in which the Delphians made disbursements, the exact sums paid, the names of those who received the funds and of those who witnessed the transactions, and the purpose of the disbursement (Buckler 1989, 151). The extant text begins ex abrupto with the indication of the remaining sum available to the naopoioi in the autumn pylaia during the archonship of Argilios (the Delphians recorded the balance of funds from the spring-pylaia of Argilios to the spring-pylaia of Theucharis): 20 talents, 14 minas, 10 staters (l. 2). Bousquet assumes that the original credit of the city to the naopoioi was 40 talents, of which little more than 20 remain in 358, and he estimates the income from the epikephalos obolos as being of the order of 40 talents: based on these sums, he argues that the works of the rebuilding needed 60 talents in the first nine years (under this analysis, the accounts of such expenses were inscribed on the lost slab; see Bousquet 1989, 53). The disbursements started again in Herakleios-spring when an official letter of the naopoioi asked the city to reopen the credit line. The transactions in silver are recorded in the aeginetic system (with the only exception that the mina is worth 70 drachmas and not 72; see Doyen 2014). The naopoioi ordered the city in writing (ἐπιστειλάντων, l. 2; κελευόντων, l. 10) to pay in silver the total expense which the city then gave to its contractors (τοῖς ἐργώναις, l. 10). Some bouletai and some of the naopoioi (including the naopoios of Delphi) witnessed these transactions (for the problem of the abdication of Aristagoras (l. 5), see Roux 1979, 109, Tréheux 1980, 523; the participle ἐπιμηνιεύοντος is followed by two names (ll. 6-7), see SEG 30 490, Tréheux 1980, 519-524).
The text (ll. 2-8) records one payment under both the spring-pylaia of the archonship of Herakleios and the month Apellaios of the archonship of Aristoxenos. Roux (1979, 177-178) has explained this double dating (cf. ll. 90 and 104) as the result of the discrepancy between the Delphian and Amphictyonic calendars. Since the eponymous archon of Delphi took office in the last month of the spring- pylaia, which was itself dated by the name of the preceding archon, the Delphians inscribed both the pylaia and the name of the Delphian archon under whom the payment was actually made. Thus, this payment was made in the last month of the spring-pylaia and in the first month of the Delphian civil year. During this period, the transactions are dated by the name of the eponymous archon of the pylaia and of the new eponymous archon of Delphi.
Despite the difficulties related to the war, the Delphian contractor Pasion had built the ischègaon, the terraced wall in poros north of the temple, and worked in the quarries of Corinth, where he extracted the poros blocks for the trabeation of the temple together with Nikodamos of Argos. Pasion received double pay for building the ischègaon: the first (10 minas 7 staters 9 obols) during the first month of the year (l. 7) and the second (10 minas 3 staters 3 obols) during the fourth month (l. 13). These two sums are 9/10 of a total of 22 minas and 20 staters, therefore Pasion’s pay was subject to the ‘one-tenth of guarantee’ even if the text lacks the traditional formula (τὸ ἐπιδέκατον ἀφελόντες) (see Bousquet 1984; Amandry, Hansen 2010, 474-494). At the beginning, the contractor receives 9/10 of the pay and the last part is retained as a guarantee, as an incentive to finish the work. This was paid only after checking the finished work (ἐδώκαμεν, τὸ ἐπιδέκατον ἀφελόντες) by the funds of the epidekaton (10% of the contractor’s pay). By these funds, the naopoioi withdrew the money to pay any fines against the contractor in case of fraud or delay or damages. If the contractor had refused to pay, his guarantors would have to intervene (cfr. ll. 48-49; ll. 56-57; Amandry, Hansen 2010, 474-494 and for guarantors in public works contracts, see Erdas 2010; id. 2018).
Two other major contractors were Praxion and Aristandros of Tegea. They are two λιθαγωγοί, namely those who rent their means of transport (wagons or boats) for the transport of heavy goods, in this case, the poros from the Corinthian quarries to the port of Lechaion. They did not list the details of the invoices and they got a flat fee. The naopoioi asked the city to give Praxion and Aristandros 14 minas and 10 staters (l. 15), which are a part of the 3 talents for the transport of forty beams for the peristasis of the temple. The 3 talents are 9/10 of a sum of 200 minas whose tenth (20 minas) will be paid after the peace during the archonship of Damoxenos (FD III 5 23, l. 38). The 3 talents for the transport of the beams are not the same 3 talents that the naopoioi have paid in advance to Praxion and Aristandros (l. 87) for the repair of the road (λιθαγωγία) during the archonship of Archon. In this case, since it was an advance and not a contract, the naopoioi did not retain ‘one-tenth of the guarantee’.
At the end of the fourth month, the city and the naopoioi stopped the disbursements, but immediately after, the naopoioi ordered the city of Delphi to pay in silver for the works at Corinth. As for all works outside Delphi, the city gave the amounts not directly to the contractors but τοῖς ναοποιοῖς (l. 21) to deliver the money to the recipients (ll. 19-30). Given the particular political situation, Delphi used extreme caution in making disbursements: Delphi presented the accounts to all the naopoioi and only after checking the accounts, the city, in the presence of the bouleutai, gave the sums required to the naopoioi (named by name) to pay the works at Corinth (ll. 19-30). At the end of 356 BC, Chairolas of Corinth and Nicodamos of Argos built the two winches (τὰ μαχανώματα) to load and unload ships: one at the port of Lechaion and the other at Kirrha. Chairolas dealt also with the transport of some architectural elements from the Corinthian quarries to the port of Lechaion. He earned 228 drachmas for twelve triglyph blocks and 480 drachmas for six epistyles (19 drachmas for a triglyph block and 80 drachmas for an epistyle). These amounts have been considered as total prices, but the order of magnitude leads Bommelaer to think that they are partial prices. According to the scholar, the reason for the difference between two prices may be explained either because the term ἐπιστύλιον would indicate two blocks (epistyle and interior epistyle) or because the percentage of the total price would not have been the same in the two cases (Bommelaer 2008, 245).
During the Sacred War (ll. 31-70).
During the archonship of Aristoxenos war was raging. In the spring-pylaia the naopoioi did not meet (l. 31), nor did they again until the spring-pylaia of Nikon’s archonship. The account specifically states that the funds were paid to ‘the naopoioi in the time of war’ (l. 37). The city of Delphi let the naopoioi use the credit, but it took precautions: the city recorded under a special heading the disbursements made to the ‘naopoioi in the time of war’ (τοῖς ναοποιοῖς τοῖς ἐν τῶι πολέμωι). The city gave the amounts in silver (all the transactions are numbered) not to the contractors, but to the naopoioi themselves in the presence of witnesses (the naopoios of Delphi, a delegation of bouletai, the naopoioi prostateuontes) and only during the sessions of the Amphictyones. The architect Xenodoros received part of his pay and his name appeared for the first time in this text (l. 40). The maritime transport between Lechaion and Kyrrha could resume under the direction of Onasimos, which received two disbursements (ll. 47 and 54) for the substantial sum of 2320 drachmas, probably for transporting the twelve triglyphs block and six epistyles from the port of Lechaion to Kirrha. Kheris was a herald who had to go twice on a mission to Hera to the guarantors of a defaulting worker.
The system of enumerating the disbursements (useful for future checks) is used until the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring-pylaia. At that time, the disbursements and the rebuilding of the temple stopped due to the war. The Delphians recorded the balance of funds from the spring-pylaia of Argilios (the last λογισμός) to the spring-pylaia of Theucharis, the latter being the last meeting of ‘the naopoioi in the time of war’ (ll. 68-70). The balance is 2 talents 27 minas 19 staters 9.5 obols. The expenses made amount to 10,329 drachmas and 3.5 obols and, therefore, the remaining credit available to the naopoioi is 74,670 drachmas and 2.5 obols. The naopoioi will find these funds untouched after the war in the autumn-pylaia of Damoxenos’ archonship (CID II 34).
This text was used as an argument for the theory whereby the Phochians plundered the temple of Apollo in 357/6 BC (for the question of the chronology of the Third Sacred War see Deltenre 2010). Pausanias (10.2.3) writes that this happened when Heraklides was prytane in Delphi and Agathokles was the Athenian archon, in the fourth year of the one hundred and fifth Olympiad (357 BC). According to Mommsen, the Heraklides mentioned by the periegete would be the archon Heracleios (l. 3; Bousquet 1989, 54). The name Herakleios is not the same as Herakleides, attested in Delphi, moreover, Pausanias mentions a prytane and not an archon. Because of these elements and others, Deltenre denies the reliability of Pausanias’ text. The scholar points out that the only objective element in the accounts relating to the beginning of the Third Sacred War is that the naopoioi did not meet during the spring-pylaia of Aristoxenos and, when they next met, they were called ‘the naopoioi in the time of war’. The most reasonable explanation is that the Phochians plundered the temple of Apollo after the autumn-pylaia of Aristoxenos.
Bommelaer, J.F. (1983), ‘La construction du temple classique de Delphes’, BCH 107, 191-215
Bommelaer, J.F. (2008), ‘Delphica 1. À nouveau les comptes de Delphes et la reconstitution du temple d’Apollon au IVe siècle av. J.-C.’, BCH 132, 221-255
Bousquet, J. (1984), ‘Les comptables de Delphes et le dixième de garantie’, in H. Walter (ed.), Hommages à Lucien Lerat, Paris, 135-143
Bousquet, J. (1986), ‘Les Unités Monétaires dans les Comptes de Delphes’, BCH 110, 273-283
Bousquet, J. (1988), ‘La reconstruction du temple d’Apollon à Delphes au IV e siècle avant Jésus-Christ’, in D. Knoepfler (ed.), Comptes et inventaires dans la cité grecque. Actes du colloque international d’épigraphie tenu à Neuchâtel du 23 au 26 septembre 1986 en l’honneur de Jacques Tréheux, Genève, 13-25
Bowden, H. (2003), ‘The functions of the Delphic Amphictyony before 346 B.C.E.’, Scripta classica Israelica. Yearbook of the Israel Society for the Promotion of Classical Studies 22, 67-83
Buckler, J. (1989), Philip II and the sacred war, Leiden.
Casson, S. (1916), ̔Les naopes de Delphes et la politique hellénique de 356 à 327 av. J.-C.’, BCH 40, 78-142
Cloché, P. (1920), ‘Les naopes de Delphes et la création du collège des tamiai’, BCH 44, 312-327
Doyen, C. (2014), ‘Pratiques comptables en Grèce hellénistique’, Comptabilités 6, 1-32
Erdas, D. (2010), ‘Il ricorso ai garanti solvibili nei documenti ateniesi di età classica’, in A. Magnetto, D. Erdas, C. Carusi (ed.), Nuove ricerche sulla legge granaria ateniese del 374/3 a. C., Pisa, 187-282
Erdas, D. (2018), ‘What laws applied to guarantors? Epigraphic evidence for legal procedure affecting personal security in Athens and beyond’, AnnPisa 10/2, 333-357
Feyel, C. (1998), ‘La structure d'un groupe socio-économique: les artisans dans les grands sanctuaires grecs du IVe siècle’, Topoi 8/2, 561-579
Feyel, C. (2003), ‘Des élites dans le monde du travail. Le cas des entrepreneurs à travers les comptes de construction des grands sanctuaires grecs’, in M. Cébeillac-Gervasoni, L. Lamoine (ed.), Les élites et leurs facettes. Les élites locales dans le monde hellénistique et romain, Rome, 293-305
Feyel, C. (2006), Les artisans dans les sanctuaires grecs aux époques classique et hellénistique: à travers la documentation financière en Grèce, BEFAR 318, Athènes-Paris
Keil, B. (1897), ̔Zur Verwerthung der Delphischen Rechnungsurkunden̕, Hermes 32, 399-420
La Coste-Messelière, P. (1974), ‘Les naopes à Delphes au ive siècle’, in G. Daux (ed.), Mélanges helléniques offerts à Georges Daux, Paris, 199-211
Laroche, D., Jacquemin A. (2010), ‘Constructions et reconstructions à Delphes au IVe s. av. J.-C.’, Dossiers d'Archéologie 342, 24-31
Lefèvre, F. (1991), ‘Remarques sur le calendrier des réunions de l'Amphictyonie pyléodelphique’, BCH 115, 579-594
Lefèvre, F. (2011), ‘Quoi de neuf sur l’Amphictionie?’, Pallas 87, 117-131
Marchetti, P. (1977), ‘À propos de l'archonte delphien de 344/3̕’, BCH Supp. 4, 67-89
Marchetti, P. (1979), ‘La construction du temple de Delphes et la date d’Aristônymos’, BCH 103, 151-163
Marchetti, P. (1998), ‘Note sur la date des archontes de Delphes de 346 à 336’, Topoi 8/1, 167-172
Marchetti, P. (2002), ‘En relisant les comptes de Delphes autour de l'archonte Palaois’, BCH 126, 59-72
Marchetti, P. (2011), ‘Quelques aspects trop souvent négligés des comptes de Delphes: de l’amphictionique nouveau aux couronnes d’Olympias’, Pallas 87, 133-150
Migeotte, L. (2014), Les finances des cités grecques: aux périodes classique et hellénistique, Paris
Pomtow, H. (1897), ‘Die neuen delphischen Tempelbau-Rechnungen’, Berl. Phil. W. 3, 92-96
Reinach, T. (1896), ̔Observation sur le système monétaire delphique du IVe siècle̕, BCH 20, 251-256
Reinach, T. (1897), ‘Bulletin épigraphique’, REG 10, 82-99
Roux, G. (1970), ̔Les prytanes de Delphes̕, BCH 94, 117-132
Roux, G. (1989), ‘Problèmes delphiques d'architecture et d'épigraphie’, RA, 23-64
Sordi, M. (1957), ‘La fondation du collège des naopes et le renouveau politique de l’Amphictionie au IVe siècle’, BCH 81, 38-75
Sordi, M. (2002), Scritti di storia greca, Milano Author: Giulia Vannucci Last update: May 2020 DOI: 10.25429/sns.it/lettere/GEI043
TM Number:
813829
Author: Giulia Vannucci
Last Update: May 2020
DOI: 10.25429/sns.it/lettere/GEI043
1<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> 2<?oxygen RNGSchema="http://www.stoa.org/epidoc/schema/latest/tei-epidoc.rng" type="xml"?> 3<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:lang="en"> 4 <teiHeader> 5 <fileDesc> 6 <titleStmt> 7 <title>Delphi. The credit of the City to the <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> for the rebuilding of the temple of Apollo</title> 8 <editor>Donatella Erdas</editor> 9 <editor>Anna Magnetto</editor> 10 </titleStmt> 11 <publicationStmt> 12 <authority>Laboratory of Computer Sciences for Ancient Languages, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa</authority> 13 <idno type="filename">GEI043</idno> 14 <availability><p>for internal use only</p></availability> 15 </publicationStmt> 16 <sourceDesc> 17 <ab>Aimed for 18 <bibl xml:id="ErdMagCS"><author>D. Erdas</author>, <author>A. Magnetto</author>, 19 <title>Corpus delle iscrizioni economiche greche</title> in c.s.</bibl>; 20 this version born digital</ab> 21 <ab> 22 <msDesc> 23 <msIdentifier/> 24 <physDesc> 25 <objectDesc> 26 <supportDesc> 27 <support> 28 <p><objectType>slab</objectType> of 29 <material>Saint-Elie limestone</material> with white veins. The back side is rough-hewn, and the edges are roughly flattened. Dimensions: 30 <dimensions><height unit="metre"> 1.534</height><width unit="metre"> 0.884</width><depth unit="metre"> 0.21</depth></dimensions> 31 </p> 32 </support> 33 </supportDesc> 34 <layoutDesc> 35 <layout><foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">stoichedon</foreign>, but the initial letters of each paragraph are not always exactly below those of the previous paragraph; even in the same paragraph the intervals are sometimes very irregular. The last two or three words of each line are more narrow, depending on the available space to be filled. Empty lines have been left between paragraphs and one or two white spaces highlight the beginning of a sentence or the names. Only the face is inscribed</layout> 36 </layoutDesc> 37 </objectDesc> 38 <handDesc> 39 <handNote>Phokian alphabet. The letters have fourth-century forms: specifically, the Θ, O and Ω are slightly smaller than the other characters. The engraving is generally neat. Height <height atLeast="0.006" unit="metre"> 0.006</height>-<height atMost="0.007" unit="metre"> 0.007</height>; line spacing <height unit="metre"> 0.005</height></handNote> 40 </handDesc> 41 </physDesc> 42 <history> 43 <origin> 44 <ab><origPlace> 45 <placeName>Delphi</placeName> 46 </origPlace></ab> 47 <ab><origDate notBefore="-0358" notAfter="-0300" precision="low" cert="low">The lines 1-70 of <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">CID</foreign> II 31 record the transactions from the autumn-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Argilios (358/7 BC) until the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Theucharis (352/1 BC). The accounts of <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">CID</foreign> II 31 and <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">CID</foreign> II 32 were clearly planned and cut as a single job in or just after Maimalos’ year, 311/10 BC, or later (<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">CID</foreign> II 32, l. 100)</origDate></ab> 48 </origin> 49 <provenance> 50 <listEvent> 51 <event type="found"> 52 <p>found on 13 June 1893 in the Sanctuary of Apollo at <placeName>Delphi</placeName>, at the foot of the tufa building in the northeast the Athenian Treasure, near the Sacred Way and on the lowest level of the terrace that leads to the 53 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">hieron</foreign> of Gea</p> 54 </event> 55 <event type="observed"> 56 <p>Delphi, Archaeological Museum, inv. 550</p> 57 </event> 58 </listEvent> 59 </provenance> 60 </history> 61 </msDesc> 62 </ab> 63 </sourceDesc> 64 </fileDesc> 65 <encodingDesc> 66 <p>Marked-up according to the EpiDoc Guidelines and Schema, version 8</p> 67 <projectDesc> 68 <p>Sample for a Corpus of Greek Economical Inscriptions</p> 69 </projectDesc> 70 </encodingDesc> 71 <profileDesc> 72 <langUsage> 73 <language ident="grc">Ancient Greek</language> 74 <language ident="la">Latin</language> 75 <language ident="grc-Latn">Transliterated Greek</language> 76 <language ident="en">English</language> 77 <language ident="it">Italian</language> 78 <language ident="fr">French</language> 79 <language ident="de">German</language> 80 </langUsage> 81 <textClass> 82 <keywords scheme="subjects"> 83 <term>account</term> 84 <term>credit</term> 85 <term>Delphi</term> 86 <term>logismos</term> 87 <term>naopoioi</term> 88 <term>oiphelema</term> 89 <term>payment</term> 90 <term>temple of Apollo</term> 91 </keywords> 92 <keywords scheme="type"> 93 <term>building accounts</term> 94 </keywords> 95 <keywords scheme="context"> 96 <term>sanctuary</term> 97 </keywords> 98 </textClass> 99 </profileDesc> 100 </teiHeader> 101 <text> 102 <body> 103 <div type="bibliography" subtype="referenceEdition"> 104 <head>Reference edition</head> 105 <bibl>J. Bousquet, <title level="m">CID</title> II 31</bibl> 106 </div> 107 <div type="bibliography" subtype="editions"> 108 <head>Other editions</head> 109 <bibl>É. Bourguet 1896 (<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">editio princeps</foreign>; see <bibl>Reinach 1897, 89</bibl>);</bibl> 110 <bibl>J. Baunack, <title level="m">SGDI</title> II 2502 A;</bibl> 111 <bibl>C. Michel, <title level="m">Recueil</title> 591;</bibl> 112 <bibl>E. L. Hicks, G.F. Hill, <title level="m">GHI</title> 129 (only lines 1-33);</bibl> 113 <bibl>W. Dittenberger, <title level="m">Syll</title>² 140;</bibl> 114 <bibl>W. Dittenberger, <title level="m">Syll</title>³ 241;</bibl> 115 <bibl>E. Schwyzer, <title level="m">DGE</title> 326 (only lines 1-18);</bibl> 116 <bibl>É. Bourguet, <title level="m">FD</title> III 5 19;</bibl> 117 <bibl>A. Jacquemin, D. Mulliez, G. Rougemont, <title>Choix Delphes</title> 38 (Bousquet’s text)</bibl> 118 </div> 119 <div type="bibliography" subtype="illustrations"> 120 <head>Photographs</head> 121 <bibl>Bourguet 1896, pl. IV;</bibl> 122 <bibl>Bourguet 1932, pl. III;</bibl> 123 <bibl>Bousquet 1989, pl. IV-V</bibl> 124 </div> 125 <div type="bibliography" subtype="other"> 126 <head>Translations</head> 127 <bibl>Bousquet 1989 (French);</bibl> 128 <bibl>Jacquemin, Mulliez, Rougemont 2012 (French)</bibl> 129 </div> 130 <div type="bibliography" subtype="other"> 131 <head>Bibliography</head> 132 <bibl>Bourguet 1905;</bibl> 133 <bibl>Pouilloux 1962;</bibl> 134 <bibl>Roux 1966;</bibl> 135 <bibl><foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">id.</foreign> 1979;</bibl> 136 <bibl>Tréheux 1980;</bibl> 137 <bibl>Bousquet 1988;</bibl> 138 <bibl>Davies 1988;</bibl> 139 <bibl>Roux 1990;</bibl> 140 <bibl>Bousquet 1992;</bibl> 141 <bibl>Sánchez 2001;</bibl> 142 <bibl>Amandry, Hansen 2010;</bibl> 143 <bibl>Deltenre 2010</bibl> 144 </div> 145 146 <div type="edition" xml:lang="grc" xml:space="preserve"> 147 <ab> 148 <lb n="1"/> 149 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 150 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0267" type="private"> 151 <name nymRef="Ἀργίλιος"> 152 <w lemma="Ἀργίλιος">Ἀργιλίου</w> 153 </name> 154 </persName> 155 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 156 <w lemma="ὀπωρινός">ὀπωρινᾶς</w> 157 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίας</w>, 158 <w lemma="παρά">πὰρ</w> 159 <w lemma="ἡ">τὰν</w> 160 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλιν</w> 161 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 162 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"> 163 <w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφῶν</w> 164 </placeName> 165 <w lemma="λοιπός">λοιπὰ</w> 166 <rs type="economic"> 167 <w lemma="χρῆμα">χρήματα</w> 168 </rs> 169 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 170 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναο 171 <lb break="no" n="2"/>ποιοῖς</w>· 172 <rs type="economic"> 173 <w lemma="τάλαντον">τάλαντα</w> 174 </rs> 175 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w>, 176 <rs type="economic"> 177 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 178 </rs> 179 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 180 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορες</w>, 181 <rs type="economic"> 182 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 183 </rs> 184 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w>· 185 <w lemma="μετά">μετὰ</w> 186 <w lemma="οὗτος">τοῦτο</w> 187 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ἀποδίδωμι">ἀπεδώκαμες</w></rs>. 188 <w lemma="ἐπιστέλλω">ἐπιστει 189 <lb break="no" n="3"/>λάντων</w> 190 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 191 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιῶν</w> 192 <w lemma="πᾶς">πάντων</w>, 193 <w lemma="ἡ">τᾶι</w> 194 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινᾶι</w> 195 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίαι</w>, 196 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 197 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0268" type="private"> 198 <name nymRef="Ἡράκλειος"> 199 <w lemma="Ἡράκλειος">Ἡρακλείου</w> 200 </name> 201 </persName> 202 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 203 <rs type="economic"> 204 <w lemma="ἀργύριον">ἀργύριον</w> 205 </rs> 206 <w lemma="δίδωμι">διδόμ<supplied reason="lost">εν</supplied></w>, 207 <lb n="4"/> 208 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἔδωκε</w> 209 <w lemma="ἡ">ἁ</w> 210 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλις</w> 211 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 212 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφῶν</w></placeName>, 213 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 214 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0269" type="private"> 215 <name nymRef="Ἀριστόξενος"> 216 <w lemma="Ἀριστόξενος">Ἀριστοξένου</w> 217 </name> 218 </persName> 219 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 220 <w lemma="μήν">μηνὸς</w> 221 <w lemma="Ἀπελλαῖος">Ἀπελλαίου</w>, 222 <w lemma="βουλεύω">βουλευόντων</w> 223 <lb n="5"/> 224 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0270" type="private"><name nymRef="Κάλλιππος"><w lemma="Κάλλιππος">Καλλίππου</w></name></persName>, 225 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0271" type="private"><name nymRef="Σακέδαλλος"><w lemma="Σακέδαλλος">Σακεδάλλου</w></name></persName>, 226 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0272" type="private"><name nymRef="Αἰγύλος"><w lemma="Αἰγύλος">Αἰγύλου</w></name> <w lemma="ὁ">τοῦ</w> <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0273" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἱέρων"><w lemma="Ἱέρων">Ἱέρωνος</w></name></persName></persName>, 227 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0274" type="private"> 228 <name nymRef="Ἀρισταγόρας"> 229 <w lemma="Ἀρισταγόρας">Ἀρισταγόρα</w> 230 </name> 231 </persName> 232 <w lemma="μέν">μὲν</w> 233 <w lemma="ἀφίστημι">ἀφισταμένου</w> 234 <w lemma="ἡ">τᾶς</w> 235 <w lemma="ναοποιΐα">ναοποιΐας</w>, 236 <lb n="6"/> 237 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0275" type="private"> 238 <name nymRef="Νικόμαχος"> 239 <w lemma="Νικόμαχος">Νικομάχου</w> 240 </name> 241 <w lemma="δέ">δὲ</w> 242 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῦ</w> 243 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0276" type="private"> 244 <name nymRef="Μενεκράτης"> 245 <w lemma="Μενεκράτης">Μενεκράτεος</w> 246 </name> 247 </persName> 248 </persName> 249 <w lemma="ναοποιέω">ναοποιέοντος</w>, 250 <w lemma="ἐπιμηνιεύω">ἐπιμηνιεύοντος</w> 251 <w lemma="δέ">δὲ</w> 252 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0277" type="private"><name nymRef="Φιλόλαος"><w lemma="Φιλόλαος">Φιλολάου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0123"><w lemma="Λακεδαιμόνιος">Λακεδαιμονίου</w></placeName></persName>, 253 <lb n="7"/> 254 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0278" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἀμφάρης"><w lemma="Ἀμφάρης">Ἀμφάρεος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0124"><w lemma="Φωκεύς">Φωκέος</w></placeName></persName>· 255 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0279" type="private"> 256 <name nymRef="Πασίων"> 257 <w lemma="Πασίων">Πασίωνι</w> 258 </name> 259 </persName> 260 <w lemma="ἰσχέγαον">ἰσχεγάου</w> 261 <rs type="economic"> 262 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 263 </rs> 264 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w>, 265 <rs type="economic"> 266 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 267 </rs> 268 <w lemma="ἑπτά">ἑπτά</w>, 269 <rs type="economic"> 270 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὺς</w> 271 </rs> 272 <w lemma="ἐννέα">ἐννέα</w>· 273 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0280" type="private"> 274 <name nymRef="Ἁρμόδιος"> 275 <w lemma="Ἁρμόδιος">Ἁρμοδίωι</w> 276 </name> 277 </persName> 278 <w lemma="χαλκεύς">χαλκεῖ</w> 279 <lb n="8"/> 280 <w lemma="δεσμός">δεσμῶν</w> 281 <rs type="economic"> 282 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 283 </rs> 284 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἕξ</w>, 285 <rs type="economic"> 286 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 287 </rs> 288 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 289 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w>. 290 <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλο</w> 291 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἔδωκε</w> 292 <w lemma="ἡ">ἁ</w> 293 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλις</w> 294 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 295 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφῶν</w></placeName>, 296 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 297 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0269" type="private"> 298 <name nymRef="Ἀριστόξενος"> 299 <w lemma="Ἀριστόξενος">Ἀριστοξένου</w> 300 </name> 301 </persName> 302 <lb n="9"/> 303 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 304 <w lemma="μήν">μηνὸς</w> 305 <w lemma="Ἡραῖος">Ἡραίου</w>, 306 <w lemma="ὀπωρινός">ὀπωρινᾶι</w> 307 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίαι</w>, 308 <w lemma="ναοποιέω">ναοποιέοντος</w> 309 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0275" type="private"><name nymRef="Νικόμαχος"><w lemma="Νικόμαχος">Νικομάχου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφοῦ</w></placeName></persName>, 310 <w lemma="βουλεύω">βουλευόντων</w> 311 <lb n="10"/> 312 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0270" type="private"><name nymRef="Κάλλιππος"><w lemma="Κάλλιππος">Καλλίππου</w></name></persName>, 313 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0271" type="private"><name nymRef="Σακέδαλλος"><w lemma="Σακέδαλλος">Σακεδάλλου</w></name></persName>, 314 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0272" type="private"><name nymRef="Αἰγύλος"><w lemma="Αἰγύλος">Αἰγύλου</w></name></persName>, 315 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 316 <w lemma="ἐργώνης">ἐργώναις</w>, 317 <w lemma="κελεύω">κελευόντων</w> 318 <w lemma="πᾶς">πάντων</w> 319 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 320 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιῶν</w>, 321 <lb n="11"/> 322 <w lemma="πάρειμι">παρεόντων</w> 323 <w lemma="δέ">δὲ</w> 324 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιῶν</w> 325 <w lemma="ὅδε">τῶνδε</w>· 326 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0275" type="private"><name nymRef="Νικόμαχος"><w lemma="Νικόμαχος">Νικομάχου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφοῦ</w></placeName></persName>, 327 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0281" type="private"><name nymRef="Νικοτέλης"><w lemma="Νικοτέλης">Νικοτέλευς</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0125"><w lemma="Ἀργεῖος">Ἀργείου</w></placeName></persName>, 328 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0282" type="private"><name nymRef="Κλεόδωρος"><w lemma="Κλεόδωρος">Κλεοδώρου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0125"><w lemma="Ἀργεῖος">Ἀργείου</w></placeName></persName>, 329 <lb n="12"/> 330 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0283" type="private"><name nymRef="Ξενότιμος"><w lemma="Ξενότιμος">Ξενοτίμου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0126"><w lemma="Σικυώνιος">Σικυωνίου</w></placeName></persName>, 331 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0284" type="private"><name nymRef="Δαμοφάνης"><w lemma="Δαμοφάνης">Δαμοφάνευς</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"><w lemma="Κορίνθιος">Κορινθίου</w></placeName></persName>· 332 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0285" type="private"> 333 <name nymRef="Νικόδαμος"> 334 <w lemma="Νικόδαμος">Νικοδάμωι</w> 335 </name> 336 </persName> 337 <w lemma="ξύλον">ξύλων</w> 338 <w lemma="πρός">ποτὶ</w> 339 <w lemma="τό">τὰ</w> 340 <w lemma="μηχάνωμα">μαχανώματα</w> 341 <rs type="economic"> 342 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 343 </rs> 344 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἕ̣ξ̣</w>· 345 <lb n="13"/> 346 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0279" type="private"> 347 <name nymRef="Πασίων"> 348 <w lemma="Πασίων">Πασίωνι</w> 349 </name> 350 </persName> 351 <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλο</w> 352 <w lemma="τό">τοῦ</w> 353 <w lemma="ἰσχέγαον">ἰσχεγάου</w> 354 <w lemma="τό">τοῦ</w> 355 <w lemma="αὐτός">αὐτοῦ</w> 356 <w lemma="ἔργον">ἔργου</w>, 357 <rs type="economic"> 358 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 359 </rs> 360 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w>, 361 <rs type="economic"> 362 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 363 </rs> 364 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>, 365 <rs type="economic"> 366 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὺς</w> 367 </rs> 368 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>· 369 <lb n="14"/> 370 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0285" type="private"> 371 <name nymRef="Νικόδαμος"> 372 <w lemma="Νικόδαμος">Νικοδάμωι</w> 373 </name> 374 </persName> 375 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0279" type="private"> 376 <name nymRef="Πασίων"> 377 <w lemma="Πασίων">Πασίωνι</w> 378 </name> 379 </persName> 380 <w lemma="λατομία">λατομίας</w> 381 <rs type="economic"> 382 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 383 </rs> 384 <w lemma="τριάκοντα">τριάκοντα</w> 385 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορας</w>, 386 <rs type="economic"> 387 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 388 </rs> 389 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 390 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἕξ</w>· 391 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0286" type="private"> 392 <name nymRef="Πραξίων"> 393 <w lemma="Πραξίων">Πραξίωνι</w> 394 </name> 395 </persName> 396 <lb n="15"/> 397 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0287" type="private"> 398 <name nymRef="Ἀρίστανδρος"> 399 <w lemma="Ἀρίστανδρος">Ἀριστάνδρωι</w> 400 </name> 401 </persName> 402 <w lemma="λιθαγωγός">λιθαγωγοῖς</w> 403 <rs type="economic"> 404 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 405 </rs> 406 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 407 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορας</w>, 408 <rs type="economic"> 409 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 410 </rs> 411 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w>· 412 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0288" type="private"> 413 <name nymRef="Κλεινίας"> 414 <w lemma="Κλεινίας">Κλεινίαι</w> 415 </name> 416 </persName> 417 <w lemma="σκάπετος">σκαπέτων</w> 418 <rs type="economic"> 419 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 420 </rs> 421 <lb n="16"/> 422 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 423 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορας</w>, 424 <rs type="economic"> 425 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὺς</w> 426 </rs> 427 <w lemma="ὀκτώ">ὀκτώ</w>· 428 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0289" type="private"> 429 <name nymRef="Ἀριστίων"> 430 <w lemma="Ἀριστίων">Ἀριστίωνι</w> 431 </name> 432 </persName> 433 <w lemma="λίθος">λίθων</w> 434 <w lemma="ἀπαγωγή">ἀπαγωγᾶς</w> 435 <rs type="economic"> 436 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 437 </rs> 438 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w>· 439 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶι</w> 440 <w lemma="μάγειρος">μαγίρωι</w> 441 <lb n="17"/> 442 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρία</w> 443 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ἡμιωβέλιον">ἡμιωβέλια</w></rs>. 444 <w lemma="οὗτος">ταῦτα</w> 445 <rs type="economic"> 446 <w lemma="ἀπολογίζομαι">ἀπελογιξάμεθα</w> 447 </rs> 448 <w lemma="πρός">ποτὶ</w> 449 <w lemma="πᾶς">πάντας</w> 450 <w lemma="ὁ">τοὺς</w> 451 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοὺς</w> 452 <w lemma="καί">καὶ</w> 453 <w lemma="γίγνομαι">ἐγένετο</w> 454 <lb n="18"/> 455 <rs type="economic"> 456 <w lemma="κεφάλωμα">κεφάλωμα</w> 457 </rs> 458 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="τάλαντον">τάλαντον</w></rs>, 459 <rs type="economic"> 460 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 461 </rs> 462 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 463 <w lemma="δύο">δύο</w>, 464 <rs type="economic"> 465 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 466 </rs> 467 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 468 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἕξ</w>, 469 <rs type="economic"> 470 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὶ</w> 471 </rs> 472 <w lemma="ἐννέα">ἐννέα</w>, 473 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ἡμιωβέλιον">ἡμιωβέλιον</w></rs>. 474 <lb/> 475 <lb n="19"/> 476 <w lemma="μετά">μετὰ</w> 477 <w lemma="ὁ">τὸν</w> 478 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="λογισμός">λογισμόν</w></rs>, 479 <w lemma="πάρειμι">παρεόντων</w> 480 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 481 <w lemma="βουλευτής">βουλευτᾶν</w>, 482 <w lemma="ἐπιτάσσω">ἐπέταξαν</w> 483 <w lemma="ὁ">τοὶ</w> 484 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοὶ</w> 485 <w lemma="πᾶς">πάντες</w> 486 <w lemma="ἡ">τᾶι</w> 487 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλι</w> 488 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 489 <lb n="20"/> 490 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"> 491 <w lemma="Δελφός">Δελ<supplied reason="lost">φ</supplied>ῶν</w> 492 </placeName> 493 <rs type="economic"> 494 <w lemma="ἀργύριον">ἀργύριον</w> 495 </rs> 496 <w lemma="δίδωμι">δόμεν</w> 497 <w lemma="πρός">ποτὶ</w> 498 <w lemma="τό">τὰ</w> 499 <w lemma="ἔργον">ἔργα</w> 500 <w lemma="τό">τὰ</w> 501 <w lemma="ἐν">ἐγ</w> 502 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"><w lemma="Κόρινθος">Κορίνθωι</w></placeName>, 503 <w lemma="καί">καὶ</w> 504 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἐδώκαμεν</w>· 505 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 506 <w lemma="μέν">μὲν</w> 507 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w> 508 <w lemma="εὐθύς">εὐθὺς</w> 509 <lb n="21"/> 510 <rs type="economic"> 511 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶ<supplied reason="lost">ς</supplied></w> 512 </rs> 513 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορας</w>, 514 <w lemma="οὗτος">τοῦτο</w> 515 <w lemma="δέ">δὲ</w> 516 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἐδόθη</w> 517 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0290" type="private"> 518 <name nymRef="Λαβώτας"> 519 <w lemma="Λαβώτας">Λαβώται</w> 520 </name> 521 </persName> 522 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0284" type="private"><name nymRef="Δαμοφάνης"><w lemma="Δαμοφάνης">Δαμοφάνει</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"><w lemma="Κορίνθιος">Κορινθίοις</w></placeName></persName>, 523 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0283" type="private"><name nymRef="Ξενότιμος"><w lemma="Ξενότιμος">Ξενοτίμωι</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0126"><w lemma="Σικυώνιος">Σικυωνίωι</w></placeName></persName>. 524 <lb n="22"/> 525 <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλο</w> 526 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἐδώκαμεν</w> 527 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0290" type="private"> 528 <name nymRef="Λαβώτας"> 529 <w lemma="Λαβώτας">Λαβώται</w> 530 </name> 531 </persName> 532 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0284" type="private"><name nymRef="Δαμοφάνης"><w lemma="Δαμοφάνης">Δαμοφάνει</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"><w lemma="Κορίνθιος">Κορινθίοις</w></placeName></persName>, 533 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0283" type="private"><name nymRef="Ξενότιμος"><w lemma="Ξενότιμος">Ξενοτίμωι</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0126"><w lemma="Σικυώνιος">Σικυωνίωι</w></placeName></persName>, 534 <rs type="economic"> 535 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 536 </rs> 537 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w>. 538 <lb n="23"/> 539 <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλο</w> 540 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0275"> 541 <name nymRef="Νικόμαχος"> 542 <w lemma="Νικόμαχος">Νικόμαχον</w> 543 </name> 544 </persName> 545 <w lemma="ἀποπέμπω">ἀπεπέμψαμεν</w> 546 <w lemma="φέρω">φέροντα</w> 547 <w lemma="εἰς">εἰς</w> 548 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"> 549 <w lemma="Κόρινθος">Κόρινθον</w> 550 </placeName> 551 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 552 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w> 553 <rs type="economic"> 554 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 555 </rs> 556 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορας</w>. 557 <lb n="24"/> 558 <rs type="economic"> 559 <w lemma="κεφάλωμα">κεφάλωμα</w> 560 </rs> 561 <w lemma="τό">τοῦ</w> 562 <w lemma="λαμβάνω">ἔλαβον</w> 563 <w lemma="μετά">μετὰ</w> 564 <w lemma="ὁ">τὸν</w> 565 <rs type="economic"> 566 <w lemma="λογισμός">λογισμὸν</w> 567 </rs> 568 <w lemma="ὁ">οἱ</w> 569 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"> 570 <w lemma="Κορίνθιος">Κορίνθιοι</w> 571 </placeName> 572 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοὶ</w> 573 <w lemma="καί">καὶ</w> 574 <w lemma="ὁ">ὁ</w> 575 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0126"> 576 <w lemma="Σικυώνιος">Σικυώνιος</w> 577 </placeName> 578 <rs type="economic"> 579 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 580 </rs> 581 <lb n="25"/> 582 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 583 <w lemma="ὀκτώ">ὀκτώ</w>. 584 <lb n="26"/> 585 <w lemma="ἀπό"><supplied reason="lost">ἀπὸ</supplied></w> 586 <w lemma="οὗτος">τούτου</w> 587 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ἀνάλωμα">ἀνάλωμα</w></rs>· 588 <w lemma="μηχάνωμα">μαχανώματος</w> 589 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0291"> 590 <name nymRef="Χαιρόλας"> 591 <w lemma="Χαιρόλας">Χαιρόλαι</w> 592 </name> 593 </persName> 594 <rs type="economic"> 595 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 596 </rs> 597 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορας</w>· 598 <w lemma="μόλυβδος">βολίμου</w> 599 <w lemma="εἰσφορά">εἰσφορᾶς</w> 600 <rs type="economic"> 601 <w lemma="δραχμή">δραχμαὶ</w> 602 </rs> 603 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>, 604 <lb n="27"/> 605 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ἡμιωβέλιον"><supplied reason="lost">ἡ</supplied>μιωβέλιον</w></rs>· 606 <w lemma="πρός">πὸτ</w> 607 <w lemma="τό">τὸ</w> 608 <w lemma="μηχάνωμα">μαχάνωμα</w> 609 <w lemma="λίθος">λίθων</w> 610 <w lemma="τομή">τομᾶς</w> 611 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0292" type="private"> 612 <name nymRef="Θεογένης"> 613 <w lemma="Θεογένης">Θεογένει</w> 614 </name> 615 </persName> 616 <rs type="economic"> 617 <w lemma="δραχμή">δραχμαὶ</w> 618 </rs> 619 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w>· 620 <w lemma="ἀγωγή">ἀγωγᾶς</w> 621 <w lemma="οὗτος">τούτων</w> 622 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0293"> 623 <name nymRef="Ἀγάθων"> 624 <w lemma="Ἀγάθων">Ἀγάθωνι</w> 625 </name> 626 </persName> 627 <rs type="economic"> 628 <w lemma="δραχμή">δραχμαὶ</w> 629 </rs> 630 <lb n="28"/> 631 <w lemma="ἑπτά">ἑπτά</w>· 632 <w lemma="μόλυβδος">βολίμου</w> 633 <w lemma="στάσις">στάσιος</w> 634 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0294" type="private"> 635 <name nymRef="Σάτυρος"> 636 <w lemma="Σάτυρος">Σατύρωι</w> 637 </name> 638 </persName> 639 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="δραχμή">δραχμά</w></rs>· 640 <w lemma="τρίγλυφος">τριγλύφων</w> 641 <w lemma="δυώδεκα">δυώδεκα</w> 642 <w lemma="ἀγωγή">ἀγωγᾶς</w> 643 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0291" type="private"> 644 <name nymRef="Χαιρόλας"> 645 <w lemma="Χαιρόλας">Χαιρόλαι</w> 646 </name> 647 </persName> 648 <rs type="economic"> 649 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 650 </rs> 651 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>, 652 <lb n="29"/> 653 <rs type="economic"> 654 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 655 </rs> 656 <w lemma="ἐννέα">ἐννέα</w>· 657 <w lemma="τοπεῖον">τοπείου</w> 658 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0295" type="private"> 659 <name nymRef="Ξένων"> 660 <w lemma="Ξένων">Ξένωνι</w> 661 </name> 662 </persName> 663 <rs type="economic"> 664 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 665 </rs> 666 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>, 667 <rs type="economic"> 668 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 669 </rs> 670 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 671 <w lemma="δύο">δύο</w>· 672 <w lemma="ἐπιστύλιον">ἐπιστυλίων</w> 673 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἓξ</w> 674 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0291" type="private"> 675 <name nymRef="Χαιρόλας"> 676 <w lemma="Χαιρόλας">Χαιρόλαι</w> 677 </name> 678 </persName> 679 <lb n="30"/> 680 <rs type="economic"> 681 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 682 </rs> 683 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἕξ</w>, 684 <rs type="economic"> 685 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 686 </rs> 687 <w lemma="τριάκοντα">τριάκοντα</w>· 688 <w lemma="μόλυβδος">βολίμου</w> 689 <w lemma="σύνθεσις">συνθέσιος</w> 690 <rs type="economic"> 691 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὶ</w> 692 </rs> 693 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w>· 694 <w lemma="πινάκιον">πινακίοιν</w> 695 <rs type="economic"> 696 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὶ</w> 697 </rs> 698 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορες</w>. 699 <lb/> 700 <lb n="31"/> 701 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 702 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0269" type="private"> 703 <name nymRef="Ἀριστόξενος"> 704 <w lemma="Ἀριστόξενος">Ἀριστοξένου</w> 705 </name> 706 </persName> 707 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 708 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίαι</w> 709 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινᾶι</w>, 710 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοὶ</w> 711 <w lemma="οὐ">οὐ</w> 712 <w lemma="συνέρχομαι">συνῆλθον</w>· 713 <w lemma="οὐδέ">οὐδὲ</w> 714 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 715 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0296" type="private"> 716 <name nymRef="Ἱερῖνος"> 717 <w lemma="Ἱερῖνος">Ἱερίνου</w> 718 </name> 719 </persName> 720 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχον 721 <lb break="no" n="32"/>τος</w>, 722 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίαι</w> 723 <w lemma="ὀπωρινός">ὀπωρινᾶι</w> 724 <w lemma="καί">καὶ</w> 725 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινᾶι</w>, 726 <w lemma="οὐ">οὐ</w> 727 <w lemma="συνέρχομαι">συνῆλθον</w>· 728 <w lemma="οὐδέ">οὐδὲ</w> 729 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 730 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0297" type="private"> 731 <name nymRef="Νίκων"> 732 <w lemma="Νίκων">Νίκωνος</w> 733 </name> 734 </persName> 735 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 736 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίαι</w> 737 <w lemma="ὀπωρινός">ὀπωρινᾶι</w>, 738 <lb n="33"/> 739 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοὶ</w> 740 <w lemma="οὐ">οὐ</w> 741 <w lemma="συνέρχομαι">συνῆλθον</w>. 742 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 743 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0297" type="private"> 744 <name nymRef="Νίκων"> 745 <w lemma="Νίκων">Νίκωνος</w> 746 </name> 747 </persName> 748 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 749 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινᾶς</w> 750 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίας</w>, 751 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοὶ</w> 752 <w lemma="συνέρχομαι">συνῆλθον</w> 753 <w lemma="ὅδε">τοίδε</w>· 754 <lb n="34"/> 755 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0298" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἁγήσαρχος"><w lemma="Ἁγήσαρχος">Ἁγήσαρχος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφός</w></placeName></persName>, 756 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0299" type="private"><name nymRef="Τηλοκλῆς"><w lemma="Τηλοκλῆς">Τηλοκλέας</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0003"><w lemma="Ἀθηναῖος">Ἀθηναῖος</w></placeName></persName>, 757 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0300" type="private"><name nymRef="Εὔορμος"><w lemma="Εὔορμος">Εὔορμος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0128"><w lemma="Λοκρός">Λοκρός</w></placeName></persName>, 758 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0301" type="private"><name nymRef="Νικέας"><w lemma="Νικέας">Νικέας</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0128"><w lemma="Λοκρός">Λοκρός</w></placeName></persName>, 759 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0302" type="private"><name nymRef="Θέων"><w lemma="Θέων">Θέων</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0096"><w lemma="Μεγαρεύς">Μεγαρεύς</w></placeName></persName>, 760 <lb n="35"/> 761 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0303" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἀστίας"><w lemma="Ἀστίας">Ἀστίας</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0129"><w lemma="Ἐπιδαύριος">Ἐπιδαύριος</w></placeName></persName>, 762 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0277" type="private"><name nymRef="Φιλόλαος"><w lemma="Φιλόλαος">Φιλόλαος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0123"><w lemma="Λακεδαιμόνιος">Λακεδαιμόνιος</w></placeName></persName>, 763 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0304" type="private"><name nymRef="Καλλιμήδης"><w lemma="Καλλιμήδης">Καλλιμήδης</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"><w lemma="Κορίνθιος">Κορίνθιος</w></placeName></persName>, 764 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0305" type="private"><name nymRef="Θρασύδαμος"><w lemma="Θρασύδαμος">Θρασύδαμος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"><w lemma="Κορίνθιος">Κορίν 765 <lb break="no" n="36"/>θιος</w></placeName></persName>, 766 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0306" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἐπιχάρης"><w lemma="Ἐπιχάρης">Ἐπιχάρης</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0124"><w lemma="Φωκεύς">Φωκεύς</w></placeName></persName>. 767 <lb n="37"/> 768 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 769 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0297" type="private"> 770 <name nymRef="Νίκων"> 771 <w lemma="Νίκων">Νίκωνος</w> 772 </name> 773 </persName> 774 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 775 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινᾶς</w> 776 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίας</w>, 777 <w lemma="ἡ">ἁ</w> 778 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλις</w> 779 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἔδωκε</w> 780 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 781 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w> 782 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 783 <w lemma="ἐν">ἐν</w> 784 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶι</w> 785 <w lemma="πόλεμος">πολέμωι</w>, 786 <lb n="38"/> 787 <w lemma="πρῶτος">πράταν</w> 788 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="δόσις">δόσιν</w></rs>, 789 <w lemma="ναοποιέω">ναοποιέοντος</w> 790 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0298" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἁγήσαρχος"><w lemma="Ἁγήσαρχος">Ἁγησάρχου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφοῦ</w></placeName></persName>, 791 <w lemma="βουλεύω">βουλευόντων</w> 792 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0307" type="private"><name nymRef="Λύσων"><w lemma="Λύσων">Λύσωνος</w></name></persName>, 793 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0308" type="private"><name nymRef="Μαχίδας"><w lemma="Μαχίδας">Μαχίδα</w></name></persName>, 794 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0309" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἀρχεμαχίδας"><w lemma="Ἀρχεμαχίδας ">Ἀρχε<supplied reason="lost">μ</supplied>αχίδα</w></name></persName>, 795 <lb n="39"/> 796 <w lemma="προστατεύω">προστατευόντων</w> 797 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0299" type="private"><name nymRef="Τηλοκλῆς"><w lemma="Τηλοκλῆς">Τηλοκλέος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0003"><w lemma="Ἀθηναῖος">Ἀθηναίου</w></placeName></persName>, 798 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0303" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἀστίας"><w lemma="Ἀστίας">Ἀστία</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0129"><w lemma="Ἐπιδαύριος">Ἐπιδαυρίου</w></placeName></persName>, 799 <rs type="economic"> 800 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 801 </rs> 802 <w lemma="πεντήκοντα">πεντήκοντα</w> 803 <w lemma="ὀκτώ">ὀκτώ</w>, 804 <lb n="40"/> 805 <rs type="economic"> 806 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὺς</w> 807 </rs> 808 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>. 809 <w lemma="οὗτος">τοῦτο</w> 810 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἐδόθη</w> 811 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶι</w> 812 <w lemma="ἀρχιτέκτων">ἀρχιτέκτονι</w> 813 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0310" type="private"> 814 <name nymRef="Ξενόδωρος"> 815 <w lemma="Ξενόδωρος">Ξενοδώρωι</w> 816 </name> 817 </persName> 818 <w lemma="πρός">πὸτ</w> 819 <w lemma="ὁ">τὸν</w> 820 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="μισθός">μισθόν</w></rs>. 821 <lb n="41"/> 822 <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλο</w> 823 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἔδωκε</w> 824 <w lemma="ἡ">ἁ</w> 825 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλις</w> 826 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 827 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφῶν</w></placeName>, 828 <w lemma="δεύτερος">δευτέραν</w> 829 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="δόσις">δόσιν</w></rs>, 830 <w lemma="ναοποιέω">ναοποιέοντος</w> 831 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0298" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἁγήσαρχος"><w lemma="Ἁγήσαρχος">Ἁγησάρχου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφοῦ</w></placeName></persName>, 832 <w lemma="βουλεύω">βουλευόν 833 <lb break="no" n="42"/>των</w> 834 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0311" type="private"><name nymRef="Διοκλῆς"><w lemma="Διοκλῆς">Διοκλέος</w></name></persName>, 835 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0312" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἡράκλειτος"><w lemma="Ἡράκλειτος">Ἡρακλείτου</w></name></persName>, 836 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0313" type="private"><name nymRef="Δεινόμαχος"><w lemma="Δεινόμαχος">Δεινομάχου</w></name></persName>, 837 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 838 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0314" type="private"> 839 <name nymRef="Αὐτίας"> 840 <w lemma="Αὐτίας">Αὐτία</w> 841 </name> 842 </persName> 843 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 844 <w lemma="ἡ">τᾶς</w> 845 <w lemma="ὀπωρινός">ὀπωρινᾶς</w> 846 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίας</w>, 847 <lb n="43"/> 848 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 849 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w>, 850 <w lemma="προστατεύω">προστατευόντων</w> 851 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0302" type="private"><name nymRef="Θέων"><w lemma="Θέων">Θέωνος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0096"><w lemma="Μεγαρεύς">Μεγαρεῦς</w></placeName></persName>, 852 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0315" type="private"><name nymRef="Κύδιμος"><w lemma="Κύδιμος">Κυδίμου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0003"><w lemma="Ἀθηναῖος">Ἀθηναίου</w></placeName></persName>, 853 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0316" type="private"><name nymRef="Θράσων"><w lemma="Θράσων">Θράσωνος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0003"><w lemma="Ἀθηναῖος">Ἀθηναίου</w></placeName></persName>, 854 <lb n="44"/> 855 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0283" type="private"><name nymRef="Ξενότιμος"><w lemma="Ξενότιμος">Ξενοτίμου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0126"><w lemma="Σικυώνιος">Σικυωνίου</w></placeName></persName>, 856 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0300" type="private"><name nymRef="Εὔορμος"><w lemma="Εὔορμος">Εὐόρμου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0128"><w lemma="Λοκρός">Λοκροῦ</w></placeName></persName>, 857 <rs type="economic"> 858 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 859 </rs> 860 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 861 <w lemma="ἑπτά">ἑπτά</w>, 862 <rs type="economic"> 863 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 864 </rs> 865 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 866 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w>. 867 <lb n="45"/> 868 <w lemma="οὗτος">τούτου</w> 869 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἐδόθη</w>· 870 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0285" type="private"> 871 <name nymRef="Νικόδαμος"> 872 <w lemma="Νικόδαμος">Νικοδάμωι</w> 873 </name> 874 </persName> 875 <w lemma="πρός">ποτὶ</w> 876 <w lemma="τό">τὸ</w> 877 <w lemma="ἐν">ἐγ</w> 878 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0130"> 879 <w lemma="Κίρρα">Κίρραι</w> 880 </placeName> 881 <w lemma="μηχάνωμα">μαχάνωμα</w> 882 <w lemma="καί">καὶ</w> 883 <w lemma="τό">τοῦ</w> 884 <w lemma="χῶμα">χώματος</w> 885 <rs type="economic"> 886 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 887 </rs> 888 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>, 889 <rs type="economic"> 890 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 891 </rs> 892 <lb n="46"/> 893 <w lemma="τριάκοντα">τριάκοντα</w> 894 <w lemma="δύο">δύο</w>, 895 <rs type="economic"> 896 <w lemma="ὀβολός"><supplied reason="omitted">ὀ</supplied>βο<supplied reason="omitted">λο</supplied>ὶ</w> 897 </rs> 898 <w lemma="ἑπτά">ἑπτά</w>, 899 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ἡμιωβέλιον">ἡμιωβέλιον</w></rs>· 900 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0285" type="private"> 901 <name nymRef="Νικόδαμος"> 902 <w lemma="Νικόδαμος">Νικοδάμωι</w> 903 </name> 904 </persName> 905 <w lemma="σφενδόνη">σφενδόνας</w> 906 <rs type="economic"> 907 <w lemma="τιμή">τιμὰν</w> 908 </rs> 909 <w lemma="πρός">ποτὶ</w> 910 <w lemma="τό">τὸ</w> 911 <w lemma="ἐν">ἐγ</w> 912 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0130"> 913 <w lemma="Κίρρα">Κίρραι</w> 914 </placeName> 915 <w lemma="μηχάνωμα">μαχάνω 916 <lb break="no" n="47"/>μα</w> 917 <rs type="economic"> 918 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 919 </rs> 920 <w lemma="πεντήκοντα">πεντήκοντα</w> 921 <w lemma="εἷς">εἷς</w>, 922 <rs type="economic"> 923 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὶ</w> 924 </rs> 925 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορες</w>· 926 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0317" type="private"> 927 <name nymRef="Ὀνάσιμος"> 928 <w lemma="Ὀνάσιμος">Ὀνασίμωι</w> 929 </name> 930 </persName> 931 <w lemma="λιθαγωγός">λιθαγωγῶι</w> 932 <w lemma="κατά">κατὰ</w> 933 <w lemma="θάλασσα">θάλασσαν</w> 934 <rs type="economic"> 935 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 936 </rs> 937 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκα 938 <lb break="no" n="48"/>τι</w> 939 <w lemma="εἷς">μία</w>, 940 <rs type="economic"> 941 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 942 </rs> 943 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 944 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w>· 945 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0318" type="private"> 946 <name nymRef="Χῆρις"> 947 <w lemma="Χῆρις">Χήρι</w> 948 </name> 949 </persName> 950 <rs type="economic"> 951 <w lemma="ἐφόδιον">ἐφόδιον</w> 952 </rs> 953 <w lemma="καλέω">καλευμένωι</w> 954 <w lemma="ὁ">τοὺς</w> 955 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0131"> 956 <w lemma="Ἡραία">Ἡρέα</w> 957 </placeName> 958 <w lemma="ἔγγυος">ἐγγύους</w> 959 <rs type="economic"> 960 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 961 </rs> 962 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 963 <lb n="49"/> 964 <w lemma="τέσσαρες">τέτορες</w>· 965 <w lemma="γραμματιστής">γραμματιστᾶι</w> 966 <rs type="economic"> 967 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 968 </rs> 969 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w>· 970 <w lemma="κῆρυξ">κάρυκι</w> 971 <rs type="economic"> 972 <w lemma="δραχμή">δραχμαὶ</w> 973 </rs> 974 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>· 975 <w lemma="ζύγαστρον">ζυγάστρου</w> 976 <rs type="economic"> 977 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὶ</w> 978 </rs> 979 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w>, 980 <lb n="50"/> 981 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ἡμιωβέλιον">ἡμιωβέλιον</w></rs>· 982 <w lemma="πινάκιον">πινακίων</w> 983 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολός</w></rs>. 984 <lb n="51"/> 985 <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλο</w> 986 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἔδωκε</w> 987 <w lemma="ἡ">ἁ</w> 988 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλις</w> 989 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 990 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφῶν</w></placeName>, 991 <w lemma="τρίτος">τρίταν</w> 992 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="δόσις">δόσιν</w></rs>, 993 <w lemma="ναοποιέω">ναοποιέοντος</w> 994 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0298" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἁγήσαρχος"><w lemma="Ἁγήσαρχος">Ἁγησάρχου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφοῦ</w></placeName></persName>, 995 <w lemma="βουλεύω">βουλευόντων</w> 996 <lb n="52"/> 997 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0319" type="private"><name nymRef="Κλέων"><w lemma="Κλέων">Κλέωνος</w></name> <w lemma="ὁ">τοῦ</w> <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0320" type="private"><name nymRef="Τιμοκράτης"><w lemma="Τιμοκράτης">Τιμοκράτεος</w></name></persName></persName>, 998 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0321" type="private"><name nymRef="Φειδίλας"><w lemma="Φειδίλας">Φειδίλα</w></name></persName>, 999 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0322" type="private"><name nymRef="Θεόχαρις"><w lemma="Θεόχαρις">Θεοχάριος</w></name></persName>, 1000 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0323" type="private"><name nymRef="Ὀρνιχίδας"><w lemma="Ὀρνιχίδας">Ὀρνιχίδα</w></name></persName>, 1001 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 1002 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0314" type="private"> 1003 <name nymRef="Αὐτίας"> 1004 <w lemma="Αὐτίας">Αὐτία</w> 1005 </name> 1006 </persName> 1007 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 1008 <w lemma="ἡ">τᾶς</w> 1009 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινᾶς</w>, 1010 <lb n="53"/> 1011 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 1012 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w>, 1013 <w lemma="προστατεύω">προστατευόντων</w> 1014 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0324" type="private"><name nymRef="Νικιάδης"><w lemma="Νικιάδης">Νικιάδου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0003"><w lemma="Ἀθηναῖος">Ἀθηναίου</w></placeName></persName>, 1015 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0325" type="private"><name nymRef="Δέξις"><w lemma="Δέξις">Δέξιος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"><w lemma="Κορίνθιος">Κορινθίου</w></placeName></persName>, 1016 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0326" type="private"><name nymRef="Θράσων"><w lemma="Θράσων">Θράσωνος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0124"><w lemma="Φωκεύς">Φωκέος</w></placeName></persName>, 1017 <lb n="54"/> 1018 <rs type="economic"> 1019 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 1020 </rs> 1021 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 1022 <w lemma="δύο">δύο</w>, 1023 <rs type="economic"> 1024 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 1025 </rs> 1026 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἕξ</w>, 1027 <rs type="economic"> 1028 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὺς</w> 1029 </rs> 1030 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>· 1031 <w lemma="οὗτος">τούτου</w> 1032 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἐδόθη</w>· 1033 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0317" type="private"> 1034 <name nymRef="Ὀνάσιμος"> 1035 <w lemma="Ὀνάσιμος">Ὀνασίμωι</w> 1036 </name> 1037 </persName> 1038 <w lemma="κατά">κατὰ</w> 1039 <w lemma="θάλασσα">θάλασσαν</w> 1040 <w lemma="λιθαγωγός">λιθαγωγῶι</w> 1041 <lb n="55"/> 1042 <w lemma="προστίθημι">ποτεθήκαμες</w> 1043 <w lemma="πρός">πὸτ</w> 1044 <w lemma="ἡ">τὰν</w> 1045 <rs type="economic"> 1046 <w lemma="δόσις">δόσιν</w> 1047 </rs> 1048 <rs type="economic"> 1049 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 1050 </rs> 1051 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 1052 <w lemma="εἷς">μίαν</w>, 1053 <rs type="economic"> 1054 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 1055 </rs> 1056 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 1057 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w>· 1058 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0285" type="private"> 1059 <name nymRef="Νικόδαμος"> 1060 <w lemma="Νικόδαμος">Νικοδάμωι</w> 1061 </name> 1062 </persName> 1063 <w lemma="πίσσα">πίσσας</w> 1064 <rs type="economic"> 1065 <w lemma="τιμή">τιμὰ</w> 1066 </rs> 1067 <w lemma="καί">καὶ</w> 1068 <lb n="56"/> 1069 <w lemma="τό">τὸ</w> 1070 <w lemma="μηχάνωμα">μαχάνωμα</w> 1071 <w lemma="πισσόω">πισσῶσαι</w> 1072 <w lemma="τό">τὸ</w> 1073 <w lemma="ἐν">ἐγ</w> 1074 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0130"> 1075 <w lemma="Κίρρα">Κίρραι</w> 1076 </placeName> 1077 <rs type="economic"> 1078 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 1079 </rs> 1080 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w>, 1081 <rs type="economic"> 1082 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὶ</w> 1083 </rs> 1084 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>· 1085 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0318" type="private"> 1086 <name nymRef="Χῆρις"> 1087 <w lemma="Χῆρις">Χήρι</w> 1088 </name> 1089 </persName> 1090 <rs type="economic"> 1091 <w lemma="ἐφόδιον">ἐφόδιον</w> 1092 </rs> 1093 <w lemma="καλέω">καλευμένωι</w> 1094 <lb n="57"/> 1095 <w lemma="ὁ">τοὺς</w> 1096 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0131"> 1097 <w lemma="Ἡραία">Ἡρέα</w> 1098 </placeName> 1099 <w lemma="ἔγγυος">ἐγγύους</w> 1100 <rs type="economic"> 1101 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 1102 </rs> 1103 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 1104 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἕξ</w>. 1105 <lb n="58"/> 1106 <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλο</w> 1107 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἔδωκε</w> 1108 <w lemma="ἡ">ἁ</w> 1109 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλις</w> 1110 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 1111 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφῶν</w></placeName>, 1112 <w lemma="τέταρτος">τετάρταν</w> 1113 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="δόσις">δόσιν</w></rs>, 1114 <w lemma="ναοποιέω">ναοποιέοντος</w> 1115 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0298" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἁγήσαρχος"><w lemma="Ἁγήσαρχος"><supplied reason="lost">Ἁ</supplied>γ<supplied reason="lost">η</supplied>σάρ<supplied reason="lost">χ</supplied>ου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφοῦ</w></placeName></persName>, 1116 <lb n="59"/> 1117 <w lemma="βουλεύω">βουλευόντων</w> 1118 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0327" type="private"><name nymRef="Κλέων"><w lemma="Κλέων">Κλέωνος</w></name></persName>, 1119 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0328" type="private"><name nymRef="Κλεινίας"><w lemma="Κλεινίας">Κλεινία</w></name></persName>, 1120 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0329" type="private"><name nymRef="Δίων"><w lemma="Δίων">Δίωνος</w></name></persName>, 1121 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 1122 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0330" type="private"> 1123 <name nymRef="Θεύχαρις"> 1124 <w lemma="Θεύχαρις">Θευχάριος</w> 1125 </name> 1126 </persName> 1127 <w lemma="">ἄρχοντος</w>, 1128 <w lemma="ἡ">τᾶς</w> 1129 <w lemma="ὀπωρινός">ὀπωρινᾶς</w>, 1130 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 1131 <lb n="60"/> 1132 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w>, 1133 <w lemma="προστατεύω">προστατευόντων</w> 1134 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0325" type="private"><name nymRef="Δέξις"><w lemma="Δέξις">Δέξιος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0127"><w lemma="Κορίνθιος">Κορινθίου</w></placeName></persName>, 1135 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0303" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἀστίας"><w lemma="Ἀστίας">Ἀστία</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0129"><w lemma="Ἐπιδαύριος">Ἐπιδαυρίου</w></placeName></persName>, 1136 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0331" type="private"><name nymRef="Πολυπείθης"><w lemma="Πολυπείθης">Πολυπείθεος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0123"><w lemma="Λακεδαιμόνιος">Λακεδαι 1137 <lb break="no" n="61"/>μονίου</w></placeName></persName> 1138 <rs type="economic"> 1139 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 1140 </rs> 1141 <w lemma="δύο">δύο</w>, 1142 <rs type="economic"> 1143 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 1144 </rs> 1145 <w lemma="ὀκτώ">ὀκτώ</w>, 1146 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="δραχμή">δραχμάν</w></rs>· 1147 <w lemma="οὗτος">τούτου</w> 1148 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἐδόθη</w>· 1149 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0310" type="private"> 1150 <name nymRef="Ξενόδωρος"> 1151 <w lemma="Ξενόδωρος">Ξενοδώρωι</w> 1152 </name> 1153 </persName> 1154 <w lemma="ἀρχιτέκτων">ἀρχιτέκτονι</w> 1155 <rs type="economic"> 1156 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 1157 </rs> 1158 <w lemma="δύο">δύο</w>, 1159 <lb n="62"/> 1160 <rs type="economic"> 1161 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 1162 </rs> 1163 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w>· 1164 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0332" type="private"> 1165 <name nymRef="Καλλιτέλης"> 1166 <w lemma="Καλλιτέλης">Καλλιτέλει</w> 1167 </name> 1168 </persName> 1169 <w lemma="τό">τοῦ</w> 1170 <w lemma="μηχάνωμα">μαχανώματος</w> 1171 <w lemma="ἄκεσις">ἀκέσιος</w> 1172 <rs type="economic"> 1173 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 1174 </rs> 1175 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>, 1176 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="δραχμή">δραχμά</w></rs>. 1177 <lb n="63"/> 1178 <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλο</w> 1179 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἔδωκε</w> 1180 <w lemma="ἡ">ἁ</w> 1181 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλις</w> 1182 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 1183 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφῶν</w></placeName>, 1184 <w lemma="πέμπτος">πέμπταν</w> 1185 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="δόσις">δόσιν</w></rs>, 1186 <w lemma="ναοποιέω">ναοποιέοντος</w> 1187 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0298" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἁγήσαρχος"><w lemma="Ἁγήσαρχος">Ἁγησάρχου</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"><w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφοῦ</w></placeName></persName>, 1188 <w lemma="βουλεύω">βουλευόντων</w> 1189 <lb n="64"/> 1190 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0333" type="private"><name nymRef="Καλλαγόρας"><w lemma="Καλλαγόρας">Καλλαγόρα</w></name></persName>, 1191 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0334" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἄθανις"><w lemma="Ἄθανις">Ἀθάνιος</w></name> <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0335" type="private"><name nymRef="Μένων"><w lemma="Μένων">Μένωνος</w></name></persName></persName>, 1192 <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> 1193 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0330" type="private"> 1194 <name nymRef="Θεύχαρις"> 1195 <w lemma="Θεύχαρις">Θευχάριος</w> 1196 </name> 1197 </persName> 1198 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 1199 <w lemma="ἡ">τᾶς</w> 1200 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινᾶς</w>, 1201 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 1202 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w>, 1203 <lb n="65"/> 1204 <w lemma="προστατεύω">προστατευόντων</w> 1205 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0336" type="private"><name nymRef="Ἀγίας"><w lemma="Ἀγίας">Ἀγία</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0123"><w lemma="Λακεδαιμόνιος">Λακεδαιμονίου</w></placeName></persName>, 1206 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0337" type="private"><name nymRef="Μνασικλῆς"><w lemma="Μνασικλῆς">Μνασικλέος</w></name> <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0132"><w lemma="Φλειάσιος">Φλειασίου</w></placeName></persName>, 1207 <rs type="economic"> 1208 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 1209 </rs> 1210 <w lemma="τρεῖς">τρεῖς</w>· 1211 <w lemma="οὗτος">τοῦτο</w> 1212 <w lemma="δίδωμι">ἐδόθη</w> 1213 <lb n="66"/> 1214 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶι</w> 1215 <w lemma="ἀρχιτέκτων">ἀρχιτέκτονι</w> 1216 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0310" type="private"><name nymRef="Ξενόδωρος"><w lemma="Ξενόδωρος">Ξενοδώρωι</w></name></persName>. 1217 <w lemma="οὗτος">ταῦτα</w> 1218 <rs type="economic"> 1219 <w lemma="ἀπολογίζομαι">ἀπελογιξάμεθα</w> 1220 </rs> 1221 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 1222 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w> 1223 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 1224 <w lemma="ἐν">ἐν</w> 1225 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶι</w> 1226 <w lemma="πόλεμος">πολέμωι</w> 1227 <lb n="67"/> 1228 <w lemma="καί">καὶ</w> 1229 <w lemma="γίγνομαι">ἐγένετο</w> 1230 <rs type="economic"> 1231 <w lemma="κεφάλωμα">κεφάλωμα</w> 1232 </rs> 1233 <w lemma="ἐν">ἐν</w> 1234 <w lemma="ἡ">ταῖς</w> 1235 <w lemma="πέντε">πέντε</w> 1236 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίαις</w> 1237 <rs type="economic"> 1238 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μναῖ</w> 1239 </rs> 1240 <w lemma="τεσσαράκοντα">τετρώκοντα</w> 1241 <w lemma="ἕξ">ἕξ</w>, 1242 <rs type="economic"> 1243 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρες</w> 1244 </rs> 1245 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 1246 <w lemma="ὀκτώ">ὀκτώ</w>. 1247 <lb/> 1248 <lb n="68"/> 1249 <w lemma="σύμπας">σύμπαντος</w> 1250 <rs type="economic"> 1251 <w lemma="κεφάλωμα">κεφάλωμα</w> 1252 </rs> 1253 <w lemma="ὅς">οὗ</w> 1254 <rs type="economic"> 1255 <w lemma="ἀποδίδωμι">ἀπέδωκε</w> 1256 </rs> 1257 <w lemma="ἡ">ἁ</w> 1258 <w lemma="πόλις">πόλις</w> 1259 <w lemma="ὁ">τῶν</w> 1260 <placeName ref="GEIListPlace/#plc0122"> 1261 <w lemma="Δελφός">Δελφῶν</w> 1262 </placeName> 1263 <w lemma="ὁ">τοῖς</w> 1264 <w lemma="ναοποιός">ναοποιοῖς</w> 1265 <w lemma="ἀπό">ἀπὸ</w> 1266 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0267" type="private"> 1267 <name nymRef="Ἀργίλιος"> 1268 <w lemma="Ἀργίλιος">Ἀργιλίου</w> 1269 </name> 1270 </persName> 1271 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντος</w>, 1272 <lb n="69"/> 1273 <w lemma="ἡ">τᾶς</w> 1274 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινᾶς</w> 1275 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίας</w>, 1276 <w lemma="εἰς">εἴς</w> 1277 <w lemma="τε">τε</w> 1278 <w lemma="εἰς">εἰς</w> 1279 <persName ref="GEIListPers/#pvt0330" type="private"> 1280 <name nymRef="Θεύχαρις"> 1281 <w lemma="Θεύχαρις">Θεύχαριν</w> 1282 </name> 1283 </persName> 1284 <w lemma="ἄρχων">ἄρχοντα</w>, 1285 <w lemma="εἰς">εἰς</w> 1286 <w lemma="ἡ">τὰν</w> 1287 <w lemma="ἠρινός">ἠρινὰν</w> 1288 <w lemma="πυλαία">πυλαίαν</w>, 1289 <w lemma="ἀργύριον">ἀργυρίου</w> 1290 <rs type="economic"> 1291 <w lemma="τάλαντον">τάλαντα</w> 1292 </rs> 1293 <lb n="70"/> 1294 <w lemma="δύο">δύο</w>, 1295 <rs type="economic"> 1296 <w lemma="μνᾶ">μνᾶς</w> 1297 </rs> 1298 <w lemma="εἴκοσι">ἴκατι</w> 1299 <w lemma="ἑπτά">ἑπτά</w>, 1300 <rs type="economic"> 1301 <w lemma="στατήρ">στατῆρας</w> 1302 </rs> 1303 <w lemma="δέκα">δέκα</w> 1304 <w lemma="ἐννέα">ἐννέα</w>, 1305 <rs type="economic"> 1306 <w lemma="ὀβολός">ὀβολοὺς</w> 1307 </rs> 1308 <w lemma="ἐννέα">ἐννέα</w>, 1309 <rs type="economic"><w lemma="ἡμιωβέλιον">ἡμιωβέλιον</w></rs>. 1310 </ab> 1311 </div> 1312 1313 <div type="apparatus" xml:lang="la" xml:space="preserve"> 1314 <head>Apparatus criticus</head> 1315 <p> 1316 l. 2: 1317 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δέκα τέτορες</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Schwyzer, Bousquet : 1318 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δεκατέτορες</foreign> Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>², Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1319 1320 l. 3: 1321 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ἡρακλείου</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>², Bousquet : 1322 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ἡρακλείτου</foreign> Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³, Schwyzer. 1323 1324 ll. 5, 10: 1325 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Αἰγύλου</foreign> rest. Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³ : 1326 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Αργύλου</foreign> Bourguet apud <bibl><title level="m">BCH</title></bibl>, Baunack, Michel, Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>². 1327 1328 l. 7: 1329 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Ἀμφάρεος</foreign> rest. Bousquet : 1330 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Λαφάρεος</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³, Schwyzer. 1331 1332 l. 8: 1333 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δέκα πέντε</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Schwyzer, Bousquet : 1334 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δεκαπέντε</foreign> Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1335 1336 l. 12: 1337 <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἕ̣ξ̣</foreign> Bousquet : 1338 <foreign xml:lang="grc"><supplied reason="lost">ἕξ</supplied></foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³, Schwyzer. 1339 1340 l. 15: 1341 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δέκα τέτορας</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Schwyzer, Bousquet : 1342 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δεκατέτορας</foreign> Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1343 1344 l. 25: 1345 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δέκα ὀκτώ</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Bousquet : 1346 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δεκαόκτω</foreign> Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1347 1348 l. 29: 1349 <foreign xml:lang="grc">ΣΤΑΤΗΡΑΣ</foreign> lapis : 1350 <foreign xml:lang="grc">στατῆρας</foreign> Bousquet : 1351 <foreign xml:lang="grc">στατῆρες</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Hicks-Hill, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1352 1353 l. 43: 1354 <foreign xml:lang="grc">ΜΕΓΑΡΕΥΣ</foreign> lapis : 1355 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Μεγαρεῦς</foreign> Bousquet : 1356 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Μεγαρέος</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1357 1358 l. 46: 1359 <foreign xml:lang="grc">ΔΥΟΒΟΙ</foreign> lapis : 1360 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δύο <supplied reason="omitted">ὀ</supplied>βολ<supplied reason="omitted">οὶ</supplied></foreign> rest. Bourguet. 1361 1362 l. 48: 1363 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Χήρι</foreign> Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³, Bourguet apud <bibl><title level="m">FD</title> III 5 19</bibl>, Bousquet : 1364 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Χῆρι</foreign> Bourguet apud <bibl><title level="m">BCH</title></bibl>, Baunack, Michel. 1365 1366 l. 54: 1367 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δέκα δύο</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Bousquet : 1368 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δεκαδύο</foreign> Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1369 1370 l. 55: 1371 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δέκα πέντε</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack Michel, Bousquet : 1372 <foreign xml:lang="grc">δεκαπέντε</foreign> Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1373 1374 l. 56: 1375 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Χήρι</foreign> Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³, Bourguet apud <bibl><title level="m">FD</title> III 5 19</bibl>, Bousquet : 1376 <foreign xml:lang="grc">Χῆρι</foreign> Bourguet apud <bibl><title level="m">BCH</title></bibl>, Baunack, Michel. 1377 1378 l. 57: 1379 <foreign xml:lang="grc">στατῆρες</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack Michel, Bousquet : 1380 <foreign xml:lang="grc">στατῆρας</foreign> Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1381 1382 l. 69: 1383 <foreign xml:lang="grc">εἴς τε</foreign> Bourguet, Baunack, Michel, Bousquet : 1384 <foreign xml:lang="grc">εἴστε</foreign> Dittenberger apud <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>² et <bibl><title level="m">Syll</title></bibl>³. 1385 </p> 1386 </div> 1387 1388 <div type="translation" xml:lang="en" xml:space="preserve"> 1389 <head>Translation</head> 1390 <lb/> 1391 <p>During the archonship of Argilios, in the autumn 1392 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, the 1393 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign>’s residual funds from the city of Delphi: 20 talents, 14 minas, 10 staters. After this we paid; having the all 1394 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> ordered in writing to pay in silver, during the archonship of Heracleios, in the spring 1395 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, the city of Delfi paid, during the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the month of Apellaios, as 1396 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign> were Kallippos, Sakedallos, Aigylos son of Hieron, Aristagoras who resigned from his office as 1397 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign>, Nikomachos son of Menekrates who became 1398 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> in his place, and 1399 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">epimenioi</foreign> were Philolaos of Sparta, Amphares of Phocis: to Pasion for the 1400 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">ischègaon</foreign> 10 minas, 7 staters, 9 obols; to the bronze worker Armodios for the clamps 6 minas, 15 staters. The city of Delphi gave another (amount), during the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the month of Heraios, in the autumn 1401 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, when the 1402 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> was Nikomachos of Delphi and the 1403 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign> were Kallippos, Sakedallos, Aigylos, to the contractors, because all the 1404 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> have ordered it, being present these 1405 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign>: Nikomachos of Delphi, Nikoteles of Argos, Kleodoros of Argos, Xenotimos of Sikyon, Damophanes of Corinth: to Nikodamos for the wood for the winch 6 minas; to Pasion another (payment) for the same 1406 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">ischègaon</foreign> 10 minas, 3 staters, 3 obols; to Nikodamos and Pasion for the quarrying work 34 minas, 26 staters; to Praxion and Aristandros, stone-transporters, 14 minas, 10 staters; to Kleinias for the pits 24 staters, 8 obols; to Aristion for the transport of stones 10 staters; to the cook 3 ½ obol. We presented our accounts to all the 1407 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> and the total was 1 talent, 22 minas, 26 staters, 9 ½ obols. 1408 </p> 1409 <lb/> 1410 <lb/> 1411 <p>After the calculation, in the presence of the 1412 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign>, all the 1413 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> ordered the city of Delphi to pay in silver for the works at Corinth and we immediately gave (an amount) to the 1414 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> of 4 minas, this was given to Labotas and Damophanes of Corinth and to Xenotimos of Sikyon. In addition, we gave 10 minas to Labotas and Damophanes of Corinth and Xenotimos of Sikyon. Moreover, we sent Nikomachos to Corinth to give 4 minas to the 1415 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign>. Total of what the 1416 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> of Corinth and one of Sikyon have received after the calculation: 18 minas. 1417 <lb/>Expenditure of this (silver): to Chairolas for the winch 4 minas; for the transport of lead 4 drachmas, ½ obol; to Theogenes for the cutting stones for the winch 5 drachmas; to Agathon for the transport of these (stones) 7 drachmas; to Satyros for the weighing of lead 1 drachma; to Chairolas for the transport of twelve triglyphs 3 minas, 9 staters; to Xenon for the rope 3 minas, 22 staters; to Chairolas for the six epistyles 6 minas, 30 staters; for the storage of lead 10 obols; for two 1418 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pinakes</foreign> 4 obols. 1419 <lb/>During the archonship of Aristoxenos, in the spring 1420 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, the 1421 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> did not assemble; also during the archonship of Hierinos, in the autumn and spring 1422 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, they did not meet; also during the archonship of Nikon, in the autumn 1423 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> the 1424 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> did not even meet. During the archonship of Nikon, in the spring 1425 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, the following 1426 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> assembled: Hagesarchos of Delphi, Telokleas of Athens, Euormos and Nikeas of Locris, Theon of Megara, Astias of Epidaurus, Philolaos of Sparta, Kallimedes and Thrasydamos of Corinth, Epichares of the Phocis. 1427 <lb/>During the archonship of Nikon, in the spring 1428 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, the city gave a first payment to the 1429 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> in war, as the 1430 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the 1431 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign> were Lyson, Machidas, Archemachidas, and the 1432 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prostateuontes</foreign> Telokleas of Athens and Astias of Epidaurus: 58 staters, 3 obols. This (sum) was given to the architect Xenodoros as his stipend. 1433 <lb/>The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as second payment, when the 1434 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the 1435 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign> were Diocles, Heracleitos, Deinomachos, during the archonship of Autias, in the autumn 1436 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, to the 1437 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign>, when the 1438 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prostateuontes</foreign> were Theon of Megara, Kydimos and Thrason of Athens, Xenotimos of Sikyon, Euormos of Locris: 27 minas, 25 staters. 1439 <lb/>From this (amount) was given to: Nikodamos for the winch in Kirrha and for the earth thrown up 3 minas, 32 staters, 7 ½ obols; Nikodamos the cost of the slingshot for the winch in Kirrha 51 staters, 4 obols; Onasimos for the transport of the stones by sea 21 minas, 25 staters; Chéris the travel expenses for the convocation of the guarantors from Heraea 14 staters; the 1440 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">grammateus</foreign> 5 staters; the herald 3 drachmas; for the chest 5 ½ obols; for the 1441 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pinakes</foreign> 1 obol. 1442 <lb/>The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as third payment, when the 1443 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the 1444 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign> were Kleon son of Timocrates, Pheidilas, Theocharis and Ornichidas, during the archonship of Autias, in the spring ( 1445 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>), to the 1446 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign>, as the 1447 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prostateuontes</foreign> were Nikiades of Athens, Dexis of Corinth and Thrason of Phocis, 12 minas, 6 staters, 3 obols; this (amount) was given to: Onasimos for the transport of the stones by sea as addition 11 minas, 15 staters; Nicodamos the cost of the pitch and for the pitching of the winch in Kirrha 10 staters, 3 obols; Chéris the travel expenses for the convocation of the guarantors from Heraea 16 staters. 1448 <lb/>The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as fourth payment, when the 1449 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the 1450 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign> were Kleon, Kleinias and Dion, during the archonship of Theucharis, in the autumn 1451 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, to the 1452 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign>, as the 1453 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prostateuontes</foreign> were Dexios of Corinth, Astias of Epidaurus, Polypeithes of Sparta: 2 minas, 8 staters, 1 drachma; this (amount) was given to: architect Xenodoros 2 minas, 5 staters; Kalliteles for the repair of the winch 3 staters, 1 drachma. 1454 <lb/>The city of Delphi gave another (amount) as fifth payment, when the 1455 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> of Delphi was Hagesarchos and the 1456 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign> were Kallagoras, Athanis and Menon, during the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring 1457 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, to the 1458 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign>, as the 1459 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prostateuontes</foreign> were Agias of Sparta, Mnasikleos of Phlius, 3 minas; this was given to the architect Xenodoros. We presented our accounts to the 1460 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> in war and the total in the five 1461 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaiai</foreign> was 46 minas, 28 staters. 1462 </p> 1463 <lb/> 1464 <lb/> 1465 <p>Total of everything that the city of Delphi has given in silver to the 1466 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> starting from the archonship of Argilios, in the spring 1467 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, until the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring 1468 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>: 2 talents, 27 minas, 19 staters, 9 ½ obols. 1469 </p> 1470 </div> 1471 1472 <div type="commentary" xml:lang="en" xml:space="preserve"> 1473 <head>Commentary</head> 1474 <lb/> 1475 <p>This inscription represents the first 70 lines of 1476 <bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 31</bibl>, which, together with 1477 <bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 32</bibl>, report the accounts of the payments made from the credit (<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">opheilèma</foreign>) that sometime after 373/2 BC the city of Delphi granted to the 1478 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> to help meet the costs of rebuilding the temple of Apollo. The accounts of this special fund were originally inscribed about 60 years later on three huge 1479 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">stelai</foreign> which were set up in a prominent place by the Treasury XXVI (the so-called 1480 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">Bouleuterion</foreign>) to serve as a public record of the city’s 1481 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">philotimia</foreign> and piety. Since this inscription begins 1482 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">in mediis rebus</foreign> with the transactions of Argilios-autumn (358/7 BC) and since all entries concern the rebuilding, a first, lost 1483 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">stele</foreign> is presumed to have detailed the entries from some year after 373/2 BC until 359/8 BC (Roux hypothesizes the existence of a fourth 1484 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">stele</foreign>, see 1485 <bibl>Roux 1979, 187</bibl>). 1486 </p> 1487 1488 <lb/> 1489 <lb/> 1490 <p>For a long time, it was believed that the 6th century BC temple had been destroyed by the earthquake of 373 BC that destroyed the city of Helice. It is more likely that the main cause was a landslide due to heavy rains or the action of groundwater and to the kind of the soil on which the temple was built (<bibl>Amandry, Hansen 2010, 121</bibl>; 1491 <bibl>Roux 1990, 329</bibl>). According to the literary sources, the collapse of the temple occurred between 418 BC (<bibl>Eur. <title level="m">Ion.</title> 205-218</bibl>) and 371 BC ( 1492 <bibl>Xen. <title level="m">Hell.</title> 6.4.2</bibl>) and it may have occurred between 375 and 371 BC (<bibl>Sánchez 2001, 125 n. 4</bibl>). The rebuilding of the temple lasted, with some interruption due to the Sacred War, from 366 to 330 BC when the temple, though not finished, was consecrated. We can trace each stage of the reconstruction through the 1493 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">corpus</foreign> of 139 accounts found in the sanctuary. 1494 </p> 1495 1496 <lb/> 1497 <lb/> 1498 <p>The Amphictyony chose a mixed-finance plan (<bibl>Roux 1979, 137-142</bibl>) to front the cost of rebuilding which Migeotte estimates to be between 320 and 400 talents (<bibl>Migeotte 2014, 373-374</bibl>). It is, therefore, possible to distinguish three types of loan corresponding to three different kinds of contributors: 1499 <lb/>1. <foreign xml:lang="grc">ὀφεíλημα</foreign> (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 31-32</bibl>): this is the long-term credit that the city of Delphi has made available to the 1500 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign>. It is a commitment by the inhabitants of Delphi to pay the invoices that the 1501 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> submit to them up to a maximum amount that Bousquet has estimated as being around 40 talents (<bibl>Bousquet 1989, 53</bibl>); 1502 <lb/>2. <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐπαρχαί</foreign> (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 1-30</bibl>): these are the voluntary donations made by individuals and by cities and states (inside and outside the Amphictyony) asked by a panhellenic subscription to contribute to the rebuilding of the temple of Apollo; 1503 <lb/>3. <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐπικέφαλος ὀβολός</foreign> (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 1-10</bibl>): it is a levy of one obol per person on the states belonging to the Amphictyony. The ‘first obol’ was collected from spring 366 to spring 361 BC (the first to the eleventh 1504 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> in the numbered series) and a ‘second obol’ from spring 361 to autumn 356 BC (the eleventh to the twenty-second 1505 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>). 1506 </p> 1507 1508 <lb/> 1509 <lb/> 1510 <p>According to 1511 <bibl>Roux (1979, 114, 142-143)</bibl>, the credit opened by the City of Delphi to the 1512 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> (<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">opheilèma</foreign>) was managed by the Council; only the 1513 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> could use these funds and exclusively for the rebuilding of the temple. On the other hand, the ordinary revenues (usable both for the ordinary expenses and for the rebuilding of the temple), the 1514 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">eparchai</foreign> and the 1515 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">epikephalos obolos</foreign> flowed into the Amphictyonic treasury which was jointly managed by the Amphictyonic Council and the 1516 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prytanies</foreign> of Delphi. 1517 <bibl>Bousquet (1988, 112; <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">id.</foreign> 1989, 9; <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">id.</foreign> 1992, 24)</bibl>, followed by 1518 <bibl>Sánchez (2001, 130)</bibl>, argues, instead, that the 1519 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> managed a special fund (into which flowed the 1520 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">opheilèma</foreign>, the 1521 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">eparchai</foreign> and 1522 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">epikephalos obolos</foreign>), separate from the fund of the Amphictyony, since the unit of account used in all contributions lists is the drachma which the 1523 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> are the only ones to use in Delphi. 1524 </p> 1525 1526 <lb/> 1527 <lb/> 1528 <p>The very substantial credit made available by the city is managed on its behalf and under the control of the Council, but it is difficult to identify the administrators who compiled or published the three 1529 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">stelai</foreign>. Their anonymity has provoked debate. The compilers cannot be the Council 1530 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">tout court</foreign> (<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">contra</foreign> 1531 <bibl>Roux 1979, 243-245</bibl>), since the "we" is accompanied by two, or more normally three, members of Council. The compilers would not be the 1532 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prytanies</foreign> (<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">contra</foreign> 1533 <bibl>Marchetti 1977, 160-164</bibl>), since these appear only in Pleiston’s year (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 32, ll. 54ff</bibl>; 318/7 BC at earliest) onwards, since they receive money from the Council, and since their competence lies with the sacred monies of Apollo, not the public monies of the city. According to 1534 <bibl>Bousquet (1986, 273-283)</bibl>, the compilers should be the two city 1535 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">tamiai</foreign>, since they are the only city officials who use the system talents-minas-staters-drachmas-obols (TMSDO mode; for the monetary standards in the accounts see 1536 <bibl><title level="m">SEG</title> XXXVI 491</bibl>, 1537 <bibl>Bousquet 1986</bibl>), although they are not attested as financial officials of the city until the end of the third century BC (<bibl><title level="m">Syll</title>³ 579, l. 14</bibl>). The "we" who compiled was clearly in some sense the city (<bibl>Davies 1988, 6 n. 34</bibl>). 1538 </p> 1539 1540 <lb/> 1541 <lb/> 1542 <p>This inscription attests that the Delphi Council supported, from the administrative point of view, the 1543 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> and executed the disbursements in agreement with them. The 1544 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> were literally the temple builders who collected and spent the funds for the rebuilding of the temple. They are not attested before the 360s and it is impossible to prove that their college did not already exist before the collapse of the temple, but the name of its members 1545 <foreign xml:lang="grc">οἱ ναοποιοί</foreign> ("those who are responsible for building the temple") suggests that it may have been an 1546 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">ad hoc</foreign> creation after 373 BC rather than a standing body (<bibl>Roux 1979, 95-98</bibl>). The college was chaired by an office made up of two to five 1547 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prostatai</foreign>, whose composition changed at each 1548 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 31, ll. 39, 43-44, 53, 60-61, 65, 81-82, 85, 95-96</bibl>) and it included two or three 1549 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">argyrologoi</foreign>, responsible for collecting founds. The accounts also mention a monthly committee (<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">epimenioi</foreign>) which ensured the continuation of the financial transactions between the 1550 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 31, ll. 6-7, 90-94, 105</bibl>). The 1551 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> were appointed from among the constituent communities of the Amphictyony and held indefinitely repeatable office. Some 1552 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> were well-known personalities, who exercised important duties in their city, therefore the members of this college were not drawn but elected, and they were chosen because of their fortune, which served as a guarantee for financial transactions (<bibl>Roux 1979, 105-109</bibl>; 1553 <bibl>Bousquet 1992, 24</bibl>). According to most of the scholars, the 1554 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> were not only financial experts, but also technicians and engineers (<bibl>Pouilloux 1962, 309</bibl>; 1555 <bibl>La Coste-Messelière 1974, 199-201</bibl>; 1556 <bibl>Bousquet 1992, 24</bibl>; 1557 <bibl>Lefèvre 1991, 590</bibl>). On the other hand, Roux states that the 1558 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> had no technical expertise and they would have been chosen on the basis of their social status and wealth, and their only task would have been to manage the funds for the rebuilding of the temple (<bibl>Roux 1979, 111-120; <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">id.</foreign> 1989, 23; <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">id.</foreign> 1990, 328</bibl>). However, it is important to highlight that they did not have the function of representing the twelve communities of the Amphictiony and that they did not exercise any political influence. The number and origins of the 1559 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> varies over time, but these changes are generally due to reasons independent of political history. Firstly, the accounts mention only the 1560 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> present at Delphi at the time of the financial transaction and they don’t take into consideration those who were on a mission outside the city (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 31, l. 11</bibl>; 1561 <bibl>Roux 1979, 110-111</bibl>). Secondly, the origins of the naopoioi seem to have been determined by the kind of works carried out at Delphi. It was a way to avoid unnecessary travel and to use the personal contacts between the 1562 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> and the entrepreneurs of their city, in order to obtain the best quality at the best price (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 31, ll. 19-25</bibl>; 1563 <bibl>Roux 1979, 109-110</bibl>). The risks of fraud and collusion were reduced as all members of the college were responsible for the payment orders (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 31, ll. 2-3, 10-12, 17</bibl>; 1564 <bibl>Roux 1979, 105-110</bibl>). The most important political events could have an impact on the composition of the college. For example, during the Third Sacred War only the 1565 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> from pro-Phochians cities were encountered. The other cities were not excluded from the college, but they refrained from sending their 1566 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> to Delphi as a security measure and as a protest against the Phochians (<bibl>Sánchez 2001, 128-132</bibl>). 1567 </p> 1568 1569 <lb/> 1570 <lb/> 1571 <p>The first 70 lines of <bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 31</bibl> allow us to follow the events of the Third Sacred War and each stage of the reconstruction of the temple of Apollo. 1572 </p> 1573 1574 <lb/> 1575 <lb/> 1576 <p><foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">Before the sacred war (ll. 1-30)</foreign>. 1577 <lb/>The text records such specific information as the year and the 1578 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> in which the Delphians made disbursements, the exact sums paid, the names of those who received the funds and of those who witnessed the transactions, and the purpose of the disbursement (<bibl>Buckler 1989, 151</bibl>). The extant text begins 1579 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">ex abrupto</foreign> with the indication of the remaining sum available to the 1580 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> in the autumn 1581 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> during the archonship of Argilios (the Delphians recorded the balance of funds from the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Argilios to the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Theucharis): 20 talents, 14 minas, 10 staters (l. 2). Bousquet assumes that the original credit of the city to the 1582 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> was 40 talents, of which little more than 20 remain in 358, and he estimates the income from the 1583 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">epikephalos obolos</foreign> as being of the order of 40 talents: based on these sums, he argues that the works of the rebuilding needed 60 talents in the first nine years (under this analysis, the accounts of such expenses were inscribed on the lost slab; see 1584 <bibl>Bousquet 1989, 53</bibl>). The disbursements started again in Herakleios-spring when an official letter of the 1585 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> asked the city to reopen the credit line. The transactions in silver are recorded in the aeginetic system (with the only exception that the mina is worth 70 drachmas and not 72; see 1586 <bibl>Doyen 2014</bibl>). The 1587 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> ordered the city in writing (<foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐπιστειλάντων</foreign>, l. 2; 1588 <foreign xml:lang="grc">κελευόντων</foreign>, l. 10) to pay in silver the total expense which the city then gave to its contractors (<foreign xml:lang="grc">τοῖς ἐργώναις</foreign>, l. 10). Some 1589 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign> and some of the 1590 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> (including the 1591 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> of Delphi) witnessed these transactions (for the problem of the abdication of Aristagoras (l. 5), see 1592 <bibl>Roux 1979, 109</bibl>, 1593 <bibl>Tréheux 1980, 523</bibl>; the participle 1594 <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐπιμηνιεύοντος</foreign> is followed by two names (ll. 6-7), see SEG 30 490, 1595 <bibl>Tréheux 1980, 519-524</bibl>). 1596 <lb/>The text (ll. 2-8) records one payment under both the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of the archonship of Herakleios and the month Apellaios of the archonship of Aristoxenos. 1597 <bibl>Roux (1979, 177-178)</bibl> has explained this double dating (cf. ll. 90 and 104) as the result of the discrepancy between the Delphian and Amphictyonic calendars. Since the eponymous archon of Delphi took office in the last month of the spring- 1598 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>, which was itself dated by the name of the preceding archon, the Delphians inscribed both the 1599 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> and the name of the Delphian archon under whom the payment was actually made. Thus, this payment was made in the last month of the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> and in the first month of the Delphian civil year. During this period, the transactions are dated by the name of the eponymous archon of the 1600 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> and of the new eponymous archon of Delphi. 1601 </p> 1602 1603 <lb/> 1604 <lb/> 1605 <p>Despite the difficulties related to the war, the Delphian contractor Pasion had built the 1606 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">ischègaon</foreign>, the terraced wall in 1607 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">poros</foreign> north of the temple, and worked in the quarries of Corinth, where he extracted the 1608 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">poros</foreign> blocks for the trabeation of the temple together with Nikodamos of Argos. Pasion received double pay for building the 1609 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">ischègaon</foreign>: the first (10 minas 7 staters 9 obols) during the first month of the year (l. 7) and the second (10 minas 3 staters 3 obols) during the fourth month (l. 13). These two sums are 9/10 of a total of 22 minas and 20 staters, therefore Pasion’s pay was subject to the ‘one-tenth of guarantee’ even if the text lacks the traditional formula (<foreign xml:lang="grc">τὸ ἐπιδέκατον ἀφελόντες</foreign>) (see 1610 <bibl>Bousquet 1984</bibl>; 1611 <bibl>Amandry, Hansen 2010, 474-494</bibl>). At the beginning, the contractor receives 9/10 of the pay and the last part is retained as a guarantee, as an incentive to finish the work. This was paid only after checking the finished work (<foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐδώκαμεν, τὸ ἐπιδέκατον ἀφελόντες</foreign>) by the funds of the 1612 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">epidekaton</foreign> (10% of the contractor’s pay). By these funds, the 1613 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> withdrew the money to pay any fines against the contractor in case of fraud or delay or damages. If the contractor had refused to pay, his guarantors would have to intervene (cfr. ll. 48-49; ll. 56-57; 1614 <bibl>Amandry, Hansen 2010, 474-494</bibl> and for guarantors in public works contracts, see 1615 <bibl>Erdas 2010; <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">id.</foreign> 2018</bibl>). 1616 </p> 1617 1618 <lb/> 1619 <lb/> 1620 <p>Two other major contractors were Praxion and Aristandros of Tegea. They are two 1621 <foreign xml:lang="grc">λιθαγωγοί</foreign>, namely those who rent their means of transport (wagons or boats) for the transport of heavy goods, in this case, the 1622 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">poros</foreign> from the Corinthian quarries to the port of Lechaion. They did not list the details of the invoices and they got a flat fee. The 1623 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> asked the city to give Praxion and Aristandros 14 minas and 10 staters (l. 15), which are a part of the 3 talents for the transport of forty beams for the 1624 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">peristasis</foreign> of the temple. The 3 talents are 9/10 of a sum of 200 minas whose tenth (20 minas) will be paid after the peace during the archonship of Damoxenos (<bibl><title level="m">FD</title> III 5 23, l. 38</bibl>). The 3 talents for the transport of the beams are not the same 3 talents that the 1625 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> have paid in advance to Praxion and Aristandros (l. 87) for the repair of the road (<foreign xml:lang="grc">λιθαγωγία</foreign>) during the archonship of Archon. In this case, since it was an advance and not a contract, the 1626 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> did not retain ‘one-tenth of the guarantee’. 1627 </p> 1628 1629 <lb/> 1630 <lb/> 1631 <p>At the end of the fourth month, the city and the 1632 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> stopped the disbursements, but immediately after, the 1633 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> ordered the city of Delphi to pay in silver for the works at Corinth. As for all works outside Delphi, the city gave the amounts not directly to the contractors but 1634 <foreign xml:lang="grc">τοῖς ναοποιοῖς</foreign> (l. 21) to deliver the money to the recipients (ll. 19-30). Given the particular political situation, Delphi used extreme caution in making disbursements: Delphi presented the accounts to all the 1635 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> and only after checking the accounts, the city, in the presence of the 1636 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouleutai</foreign>, gave the sums required to the 1637 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> (named by name) to pay the works at Corinth (ll. 19-30). At the end of 356 BC, Chairolas of Corinth and Nicodamos of Argos built the two winches (<foreign xml:lang="grc">τὰ μαχανώματα</foreign>) to load and unload ships: one at the port of Lechaion and the other at Kirrha. Chairolas dealt also with the transport of some architectural elements from the Corinthian quarries to the port of Lechaion. He earned 228 drachmas for twelve triglyph blocks and 480 drachmas for six epistyles (19 drachmas for a triglyph block and 80 drachmas for an epistyle). These amounts have been considered as total prices, but the order of magnitude leads Bommelaer to think that they are partial prices. According to the scholar, the reason for the difference between two prices may be explained either because the term 1638 <foreign xml:lang="grc">ἐπιστύλιον</foreign> would indicate two blocks (epistyle and interior epistyle) or because the percentage of the total price would not have been the same in the two cases (<bibl>Bommelaer 2008, 245</bibl>). 1639 </p> 1640 1641 <lb/> 1642 <lb/> 1643 <p><foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">During the Sacred War (ll. 31-70)</foreign>. 1644 <lb/>During the archonship of Aristoxenos war was raging. In the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> the 1645 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> did not meet (l. 31), nor did they again until the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Nikon’s archonship. The account specifically states that the funds were paid to ‘the 1646 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> in the time of war’ (l. 37). The city of Delphi let the 1647 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> use the credit, but it took precautions: the city recorded under a special heading the disbursements made to the ‘<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> in the time of war’ (<foreign xml:lang="grc">τοῖς ναοποιοῖς τοῖς ἐν τῶι πολέμωι</foreign>). The city gave the amounts in silver (all the transactions are numbered) not to the contractors, but to the 1648 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> themselves in the presence of witnesses (the 1649 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoios</foreign> of Delphi, a delegation of 1650 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">bouletai</foreign>, the 1651 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi prostateuontes</foreign>) and only during the sessions of the Amphictyones. The architect Xenodoros received part of his pay and his name appeared for the first time in this text (l. 40). The maritime transport between Lechaion and Kyrrha could resume under the direction of Onasimos, which received two disbursements (ll. 47 and 54) for the substantial sum of 2320 drachmas, probably for transporting the twelve triglyphs block and six epistyles from the port of Lechaion to Kirrha. Kheris was a herald who had to go twice on a mission to Hera to the guarantors of a defaulting worker. 1652 <lb/>The system of enumerating the disbursements (useful for future checks) is used until the archonship of Theucharis, in the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign>. At that time, the disbursements and the rebuilding of the temple stopped due to the war. The Delphians recorded the balance of funds from the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Argilios (the last 1653 <foreign xml:lang="grc">λογισμός</foreign>) to the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Theucharis, the latter being the last meeting of ‘the 1654 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> in the time of war’ (ll. 68-70). The balance is 2 talents 27 minas 19 staters 9.5 obols. The expenses made amount to 10,329 drachmas and 3.5 obols and, therefore, the remaining credit available to the 1655 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> is 74,670 drachmas and 2.5 obols. The 1656 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> will find these funds untouched after the war in the autumn-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Damoxenos’ archonship (<bibl><title level="m">CID</title> II 34</bibl>). 1657 </p> 1658 1659 <lb/> 1660 <lb/> 1661 <p>This text was used as an argument for the theory whereby the Phochians plundered the temple of Apollo in 357/6 BC (for the question of the chronology of the Third Sacred War see 1662 <bibl>Deltenre 2010</bibl>). Pausanias (10.2.3) writes that this happened when Heraklides was 1663 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prytane</foreign> in Delphi and Agathokles was the Athenian 1664 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">archon</foreign>, in the fourth year of the one hundred and fifth Olympiad (357 BC). According to Mommsen, the Heraklides mentioned by the periegete would be the archon Heracleios (l. 3; 1665 <bibl>Bousquet 1989, 54</bibl>). The name Herakleios is not the same as Herakleides, attested in Delphi, moreover, Pausanias mentions a 1666 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">prytane</foreign> and not an 1667 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">archon</foreign>. Because of these elements and others, Deltenre denies the reliability of Pausanias’ text. The scholar points out that the only objective element in the accounts relating to the beginning of the Third Sacred War is that the 1668 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> did not meet during the spring-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Aristoxenos and, when they next met, they were called ‘the 1669 <foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">naopoioi</foreign> in the time of war’. The most reasonable explanation is that the Phochians plundered the temple of Apollo after the autumn-<foreign xml:lang="grc-Latn">pylaia</foreign> of Aristoxenos. 1670 </p> 1671 <lb/> 1672 <lb/> 1673 <lb/> 1674 <p>Bommelaer, J.F. (1983), ‘La construction du temple classique de Delphes’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 107, 191-215 1675 </p> 1676 <lb/> 1677 <p>Bommelaer, J.F. (2008), ‘Delphica 1. À nouveau les comptes de Delphes et la reconstitution du temple d’Apollon au IVe siècle av. J.-C.’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 132, 221-255 1678 </p> 1679 <lb/> 1680 <p>Bousquet, J. (1984), ‘Les comptables de Delphes et le dixième de garantie’, in H. Walter (ed.), <title level="m">Hommages à Lucien Lerat</title>, Paris, 135-143 1681 </p> 1682 <lb/> 1683 <p>Bousquet, J. (1986), ‘Les Unités Monétaires dans les Comptes de Delphes’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 110, 273-283 1684 </p> 1685 <lb/> 1686 <p>Bousquet, J. (1988), ‘La reconstruction du temple d’Apollon à Delphes au IV e siècle avant Jésus-Christ’, in D. Knoepfler (ed.), <title level="m">Comptes et inventaires dans la cité grecque. Actes du colloque international d’épigraphie tenu à Neuchâtel du 23 au 26 septembre 1986 en l’honneur de Jacques Tréheux</title>, Genève, 13-25 1687 </p> 1688 <lb/> 1689 <p>Bowden, H. (2003), ‘The functions of the Delphic Amphictyony before 346 B.C.E.’, <title level="j">Scripta classica Israelica. Yearbook of the Israel Society for the Promotion of Classical Studies</title> 22, 67-83 1690 </p> 1691 <lb/> 1692 <p>Buckler, J. (1989), <title level="m">Philip II and the sacred war</title>, Leiden. 1693 </p> 1694 <lb/> 1695 <p>Casson, S. (1916), ̔Les naopes de Delphes et la politique hellénique de 356 à 327 av. J.-C.’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 40, 78-142 1696 </p> 1697 <lb/> 1698 <p>Cloché, P. (1920), ‘Les naopes de Delphes et la création du collège des tamiai’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 44, 312-327 1699 </p> 1700 <lb/> 1701 <p>Doyen, C. (2014), ‘Pratiques comptables en Grèce hellénistique’, <title level="j">Comptabilités</title> 6, 1-32 1702 </p> 1703 <lb/> 1704 <p>Erdas, D. (2010), ‘Il ricorso ai garanti solvibili nei documenti ateniesi di età classica’, in A. Magnetto, D. Erdas, C. Carusi (ed.), <title level="m">Nuove ricerche sulla legge granaria ateniese del 374/3 a. C.</title>, Pisa, 187-282 1705 </p> 1706 <lb/> 1707 <p>Erdas, D. (2018), ‘What laws applied to guarantors? Epigraphic evidence for legal procedure affecting personal security in Athens and beyond’, <title level="j">AnnPisa</title> 10/2, 333-357 1708 </p> 1709 <lb/> 1710 <p>Feyel, C. (1998), ‘La structure d'un groupe socio-économique: les artisans dans les grands sanctuaires grecs du IVe siècle’, <title level="j">Topoi</title> 8/2, 561-579 1711 </p> 1712 <lb/> 1713 <p>Feyel, C. (2003), ‘Des élites dans le monde du travail. Le cas des entrepreneurs à travers les comptes de construction des grands sanctuaires grecs’, in M. Cébeillac-Gervasoni, L. Lamoine (ed.), <title level="m">Les élites et leurs facettes. Les élites locales dans le monde hellénistique et romain</title>, Rome, 293-305 1714 </p> 1715 <lb/> 1716 <p>Feyel, C. (2006), <title level="m">Les artisans dans les sanctuaires grecs aux époques classique et hellénistique: à travers la documentation financière en Grèce</title>, BEFAR 318, Athènes-Paris 1717 </p> 1718 <lb/> 1719 <p>Keil, B. (1897), ̔Zur Verwerthung der Delphischen Rechnungsurkunden̕, <title level="j">Hermes</title> 32, 399-420 1720 </p> 1721 <lb/> 1722 <p>La Coste-Messelière, P. (1974), ‘Les naopes à Delphes au ive siècle’, in G. Daux (ed.), <title level="m">Mélanges helléniques offerts à Georges Daux</title>, Paris, 199-211 1723 </p> 1724 <lb/> 1725 <p>Laroche, D., Jacquemin A. (2010), ‘Constructions et reconstructions à Delphes au IVe s. av. J.-C.’, <title level="j">Dossiers d'Archéologie</title> 342, 24-31 1726 </p> 1727 <lb/> 1728 <p>Lefèvre, F. (1991), ‘Remarques sur le calendrier des réunions de l'Amphictyonie pyléodelphique’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 115, 579-594 1729 </p> 1730 <lb/> 1731 <p>Lefèvre, F. (2011), ‘Quoi de neuf sur l’Amphictionie?’, <title level="j">Pallas</title> 87, 117-131 1732 </p> 1733 <lb/> 1734 <p>Marchetti, P. (1977), ‘À propos de l'archonte delphien de 344/3̕’, <title level="j">BCH Supp.</title> 4, 67-89 1735 </p> 1736 <lb/> 1737 <p>Marchetti, P. (1979), ‘La construction du temple de Delphes et la date d’Aristônymos’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 103, 151-163 1738 </p> 1739 <lb/> 1740 <p>Marchetti, P. (1998), ‘Note sur la date des archontes de Delphes de 346 à 336’, <title level="j">Topoi</title> 8/1, 167-172 1741 </p> 1742 <lb/> 1743 <p>Marchetti, P. (2002), ‘En relisant les comptes de Delphes autour de l'archonte Palaois’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 126, 59-72 1744 </p> 1745 <lb/> 1746 <p>Marchetti, P. (2011), ‘Quelques aspects trop souvent négligés des comptes de Delphes: de l’amphictionique nouveau aux couronnes d’Olympias’, <title level="j">Pallas</title> 87, 133-150 1747 </p> 1748 <lb/> 1749 <p>Migeotte, L. (2014), <title level="m">Les finances des cités grecques: aux périodes classique et hellénistique</title>, Paris 1750 </p> 1751 <lb/> 1752 <p>Pomtow, H. (1897), ‘Die neuen delphischen Tempelbau-Rechnungen’, <title level="j">Berl. Phil. W.</title> 3, 92-96 1753 </p> 1754 <lb/> 1755 <p>Reinach, T. (1896), ̔Observation sur le système monétaire delphique du IVe siècle̕, <title level="j">BCH</title> 20, 251-256 1756 </p> 1757 <lb/> 1758 <p>Reinach, T. (1897), ‘Bulletin épigraphique’, <title level="j">REG</title> 10, 82-99 1759 </p> 1760 <lb/> 1761 <p>Roux, G. (1970), ̔Les prytanes de Delphes̕, <title level="j">BCH</title> 94, 117-132 1762 </p> 1763 <lb/> 1764 <p>Roux, G. (1989), ‘Problèmes delphiques d'architecture et d'épigraphie’, <title level="j">RA</title>, 23-64 1765 </p> 1766 <lb/> 1767 <p>Sordi, M. (1957), ‘La fondation du collège des naopes et le renouveau politique de l’Amphictionie au IVe siècle’, <title level="j">BCH</title> 81, 38-75 1768 </p> 1769 <lb/> 1770 <p>Sordi, M. (2002), <title level="m">Scritti di storia greca</title>, Milano 1771 </p> 1772 1773 </div> 1774 1775 <div type="commentary" xml:lang="en"> 1776 <head>Author</head> 1777 <p> Giulia Vannucci</p> 1778 </div> 1779 <div type="commentary" xml:lang="en"> 1780 <head>Last update</head> 1781 <p>May 2020</p> 1782 </div> 1783 1784 <div type="commentary" xml:lang="en"> 1785 <head>DOI</head> 1786 <p>10.25429/sns.it/lettere/GEI043</p> 1787 </div> 1788 </body> 1789 </text> 1790</TEI>