Ari Saastamoinen, Some Observations on the Authorship of Building Insciptions

Y

manaLe ricche zze dell' Nnca.

Risorse, produzioni, scambi

Atti del xvr convegno di studioSevilla, 14-17 dicembre zoo6

A cura diJuliän Gonzllez, PaoIa Ruggeri,

Cinzia Vismara e Raimondo Zrcca

Estratto

Carocci editore

Ari Saastamoinen

Some Observations on the Authorshipof Building Insciptions

Irrt oJ..,"tio'

Though ancient sources do not provide a gteat deal of informationon häw Romans manufactured their inscriptions, dte persistent

work of many great scholars that has continued for about a cen-

tury and haEi fias enabled us to reconstruct the gener-al course ofthe inscription-producing process'. The greatest step forward was

taken by -Ma[;

who dåmonstrated that this process- consisted ofthree pärts: r) the drafting of the text to be inscribed; z) the otdi-

natioi or transfer of thati.*t ottto the stone surface; l) the actual

carvinga. Subsequent criticism has shown, however, that Mallon's

* Ari Saastamoinen, Institutum classicum, Universitas Helsingiensis, Helsinki,prof. olli salomies and Prof. Mika Kaiava kindly read a draft of this artide and

supplied me with a number of useful suggestions. I v/ant to express my acknowledge-

ments to Margot Stout Vhiting for correcting my English.

r. one early but interesting article is E. Le Br.aNr, Sar les grauetrs fus insnip-

tions antiqaes, <Revue de I'art chr6tien>, 1859, pp. rz-38.

z. G. C. Stnnn, I/ Iapicida romaxo. Intrc&aione allEigrdit htina,Bologna ry66,'tsan e:<cellent introduction to reconstructed inscription-m proc€ss€s and 19 the

dwelopment of theories concerning that reconstruction. For a brief but valuable sum-

mary, see L. Krppre, Understanding Roman lnscriptiozs, london r99r, pp. rz-6'

3. For wo inscriptions showing the signs of. the oränatio, see J. Manon, Uaa

insctiption latine incotzplötement grartöe, <<Libyco, 3, 1955, p. 16o (also published in

J. Merrou, De löcritare. Rectteil |ätudes publiäes de r9j7 a rg8t, Paris 1982, p'

248) and especially A. Buoxopaxn, lJx caso di 'ordinatio' graffita in ana isc,rizioxe fa-neraria atestina (SappLIt, 5j), <,Epigraphico, 5o, 1988, pp. 22634. This latter in-

scription (,4E, ry81,6or) is extremely valuable as it shows that the ordinatio could

have been done directly on the stone by means of visual estimate and by correcting

tentative sketching. k ibid., 234, For African examples of unfinished inscriptions,

see C/L vur, 8266; CILvut, t6o96 and examples listed in CILvtrt, index, p' 355.

a. J. Mar.I-oN, Paliograpbie romaine, (Scripturae. Monumenta et studia, 3), Ma-

drid 1952, p. 5;E; see also Io., Une inscription, cit', p' 16o.

L'Africa norriltnd xw, Seailh zoo6, Roma zoo8, pp. 2t7-252.

48 Ari Saastamoinen

theory - basically sound as it is - can not be generalised to coverall possible manufacturing processest. More importandy, perhaps,there are many questions that still remain open.

Here I will focus on the first stage in the genesis of inscrip-tions, the drafting of the text to be carved, because it seems to beveiled by a particularly thick fog of uncertainties. It is revealingthat we do not possess any certain example of a dtaft6 that hasbeen postulated to have been used - either always 7 or at least inmore ambitious casess - as a basis of the carved texte. As for the

5. SusrNr, Il kpicifu, cit., pp. 25,6r,69, has jusdy remarked that these stages aremerely theoretical ones, i.e., they describe the logical stages in these processes whilethe actual order may have been different. For instance, it seems credible that most fu-nerary monuments had received a preliminary preparation before the draft was made.See ibid,, p. 49. For important further criticism, see S. PeNcrrne, La genesi dei docu-menti epigrafici secondo Mallon. A proposito di ana nuoua isriione netica, <<RAL>),

ser. 8, 22, 1967, pp. roo-8, esp. pp. roo-t (this artiple is now published with biblio-graphical addenda as Dalla ninuta all'incisione. (Jna nuoua iscri:tione netica dallAgroPontino, in S. PaNcrena, Epigraft, Epigrafia, Epigafisti. Soitti uari editi e inediti(t956-zoo) con note conplenentari e indici, (Vetera, 16), tr, Roma zoo6, pp. r8o9-r5).For a simplified schema omitting the ordinatio, see J. N. Aoarvrs, Bilingualism and tbeLatin Language, Cambridge zoo1, pp.84-93.

6. \We do not know the ancient name for this phenomenon. Mallon used theterms <<minute>> or <<brouillon>> (SusrNr, Il lapicida, cit., p. r7). I. Dr SlEraNo MaN-ZELLA suggested, in Mestiere di epigrafista. Guida alla scbedatura dcl mateiale epigrafi-co lapideo, (Vetera, r), Roma ry87, p.r2r, on the basis of two inscriptions (CIL x,ry86; CIL x, 8zj9), that the ancient term for minuta epigraphica covJd, be forma. Inmy view, the word rather refers there to the layout of the inscription and thus I de-cided to use the word "draft" in this article.

7. MauoN, Paläographie, cit., p. 58: <A la genöse, il y a un papyrus ou unparchemin ou une tablette de cire portant le texte €crit en 6criture commune etcourante>); Dr SrtiraNo MaNzer,la, Mestiere, cit., p. rzr,

8. G. C. Svstrsr, Epigrafia tortafla, (Guide allo studio della civiltä romana, ro.r),Roma 1982, p. 7r; E. Meven, Einfilbrung in die kteiniscbe Epigraphik, Darmstadt7973, p. 20.

9. SusrNr, Il lapicidn, cit., p. 9, states categorically that the first stage in the epi-graphic production <<non ha lasciato alcuna traccio>; ct. lo, Epigrafia, cit., p. 7r.However, Dr SreEaNo Mauznua, Mestiere, cit., p. rzz, mentions two potential ca-ses: one is an opistographic marble slab (published by S. h.rurr, <Epigraphica>, 46,1984, pp. 49-q = AE, ry85,7o) where in aerso there is a graffito sketch of the textcawed in recto and the other is a graffito on a brick (CIL tn, 7639, + t2544) thatwas used as a model for a srone inscription (published by I. Russu, Une äpitaphe ro-maine en deux exemplaires, n Akten des vr. Internationalen Kongresses fib Griechiscbeund Lateinische Epigrapbik Miincben r9zz, (Yestigia. r7), Miinchen ry73, pp. 486-7= AE, rg74, 1,4il. To these examples one might add one papyrusr P.Oxy. z95o (cf,y1:lp1r., Understanding, cit., pp. rz-t) which could be a draft for a dedication to thecmpcrors Diocletian and Maxiinian.

Sone Obseraations on the Authorsbip of BuiWing Insciptions 239

wording of this presumed draft, Cagnat proved a long time ago

that stonecutters must have had at their disposal phrase books ormanuals that were widely used to formulate simpler inscriptions'o.Susini went even further by stating that funerary inscriptions wereoften completely composed by the workers of a given fficina andthe role of the customer was confined to giving basic facts to bepresented according to common epigraphic conventions". Whileone has litde reason to doubt that such manuals were indeedwidely employed to create stereotyped funerary inscriptions ",there is also ample evidence for the opposite: many peoplebrought with them a copy of the text to be carved - composed bythemselves, or perhaps personally ordered from poets'3.

ro. R. Cacr.rat, Sur les nanuels professionnels des graaeurs /inscriptions ro-

naines, <RFh>>, 13, 1889, pp. jr-65i cf. R Cacr.rar,Insciptiones, D-J, 3, Paris r9oo,p. ,32i A. HuaNnn, Exetnpk scipturae epigrapbicae Latinae a Caesais dictatoris morte

ad aetatem Iustiniani, Berolini 1885, p. xxvll: <<eos, qui verba titulorum composuer-

unt, constat formulis certis usos esse, quae fortasse collectae extiterunb>. For very hy-

pothetical early medieval handbooks, see M. HaNolrv, Deatb, Society and Cubure:

Inscriptions and Epitapbs in Gaul and Spain, AD joo-75o (BAR Int. Ser., rr35), Ox-ford zoo3, p. 26, which includes further references.

rr. SusrNr, Il lapicida, cit., p.66. Cf. Mrven, Eiffihrung, cit., p. zo.

rz. They are not preserved as such, but we do have circumstantial evidence. Forinstance, we have a Christian funerary inscription from Hippo (AE, ry3r, rrz) thatrcads Hic corpus iacet puei noninandi. It is clear that the illiterate stonecutter was fol-lowing a copy that reproduced a model from such a manual without paying attention

to necessary individual details (already noted by MauoN, Paläograpbie, cit., p, 5a).For another example, see llAlg. z,7z8z: lannos to/tl uix(it) a(nnos) CX. There are

also many identical or almost identical verses that are repeated in different corners ofthe Empire. Cf. R. InsLaNo, Epigrapby, in M. FIsNrrc (ed.), z4 Handbook of RomanArt. A Suruey of tbeVisual Arx of tbe Ronan'Vorld, London 1983, p.zzr. One ex-

ample of such verses: CIL vr, 2489 QlS, zoz8, Rome): arxr quod uolui semper bene /pauper boneste fraadaui / nullunt quod iuuat ossa lileai CIL n, z8y (IIS, 2257,

Burnum): uixsi quad (l) potui sen/per bene pauper honeste / ffiaudaui nullun: nunc

iuuat / [os]sa nea.13. In Latin literature (for Greek literature, see, e.g., Prur,, Sull.,38, 6), there

are several passages that refer to the fact that a person wrote his or her own epitaph

or at least ordered its exact wording. See, for instance, Ctc., Tusc., r, 34; Crc., Cato,

73; Pernou., 7r,7-t2iPrrN,, epist.,9, 19, ri Var. Max., 5, 3, zbi for a poet compos-

ing a verse epitaph for his relative, see SrooN., epist., j, rz, 4-6 (the poem is also

published in CIL xrn, z35z); see also SIooN., epist.,2,8, z-3;7, t7, t-2;4, rx,6-7.Then there are, of course, coundess references in funerary inscriptions ttremselves tothe fact that they were written while the commemorated person was still alive (se az'-

uus, etc.), but these do usually not imply that this person worded the text. Cf. DISlsrANo MANzprr.A, Mestiere, cit., pp. rzz-4.

24o Ari Saastamoinen

Thus, the situation is clear: the stereotyped, formulaic majorityof funerary inscriptions were worded by the lapicidae while the rel-atively few original and innovative epitaphs were created outsideworkshops by various persons: by customers, poets, etc. Neverthe-less, funerary inscriptions do not only form the bulk of Latin stoneinscriptions 14, but their production process also differed so muchfrom that of other inscription types of more public character thatthe question of the authorship needs to be reconsidered'J.

In this article, my pulpose is to discuss the authorship of pri-vately funded buiiding inscriptions. I must warn the reader at theoutset that, due to the indirect nature of the evidence, my consid-erations are mostly based on logical reasoning and as such they arebound to remain as hypotheses that can hopefully be proved ordisproved one day. Nevertheless, ancient sources being so meagre,the only way to say something about the possible authorship ofbuilding inscriptions is to deduce it from the building inscriptionsthemselves taken into account en masse'6. In order to use a rea-

14. According to R P. Sauen, B. D. Snaw, Tombstones and Roman Family Re-lations in tbe Pincipate: Ciuilians, Soldiers and Slaues, (IS>>, 74, 1984, p. rz4, about

7t per cent of all Latin inscriptions are funerary. Cf, Susrr.rr, Il lapicida, cit., p. rz<<testi funerari [...J nell'epigrafia romana la quasi totalitä dei documenti disponibili siinquadra in tale categorio>. It is conceivable that the need to produce a great quanti-ty of funerary inscriptions led to strearnlining the production process in a way thatwas not necessary in the case of other, more expensive inscription types.

15, The main difference between funerary inscriptions and, Iet us say, buildinginscriptions, is that the former are, generally speaking, much more stereotypic. Oneof the best preserved Roman sites in the whole of North Africa, Thugga, might serveas an example. The structure of numerous building inscriptions preserved therevaries gready (see A, Saasrarr,rorNnu, Oz the Local Characteristics of Latin Buildinglnsctiptions in Roman North Afica, n L'Afica rotnana xvr, pp. r92r-7, esp. p. r9z3),while the funerary inscriptions are monotonous in the exrreme: the r.617 publishedfunerary inscriptions almost always follow the same simple pauern. See M. KnaNous-sr, L. MaunrN (6.ås.), Mourir å Dougga. Recaeil des inscriptions funäraires, (Ausonius,M6moires, 8), Bordeaux-Tunis zooz, p. @. It is certain that these two inscriptiontypes u/ere produced by distinct processes: Thuggan funerary titali were a result ofthe heavy use of one fixed model, while building inscriptions were not.

16. It is important to note that nothing can be gained by analysing privatebuilding inscriptions recording building activities of the same person: there are sim-ply too few examples to allow any conclusions. For two sets of texts mentioning thesame builders, see CII vrr, 26518; CIL vtn, 26464; AE, ry69-7o, 6So; AE, ry69-7o,649 (carved at Thugga by the first century freedmen M(arcus) Licinius Tyrannus andLicinia Prisca) anå AE, ry68, 595; AE, ry68,596 (carved at Mustis during the secondcentury by M(arcus) Comelius Laetus), Especially in this latter ser, rhere are signifi-

Some Obseruations on tbe Authorship of Building Insciptions 24r

sonably limited sample, I have confined my analysis to North Afri-can mateiral'7.

Direct references to the authorship of inscriptionsin ancient sources

In Latin literature, there are some references to building inscrip-tions, but, to the best of my knowledge, none of these referencesunequivocally name the person or persons who composed the draftof the inscription'8. The building inscriptions themselves seem - atfirst glance - to be a slighdy more informative source as there aretwo North African buiiding inscriptions that record the name of a

sctiptor. The older one reads: Scripsit Satur Celeris ftiliui 'e and themore modern one: T(itus) Fl(auias) [--]atus scripsi[t]2o. Though

cant differences between the two texts and the former is much longer than the latter,but what can we make of it? Our local aristocrat used a different composer? Variedhis own style? It is completely impossible to say. As for provincial governors, there isone significandy larger group of inscriptions, viz, that where Publilias Caeionius Cae-

cina Albinus (PLRE, t, Albinus, 8) appears as a builder (AE, ryo9, zzz luncertain];AE, ry87, to6z; AE, 1987, roSz CIL vtl, zz4z; CIL vrn, 2656 luncertain]; CIL vtn,r8zz9; Il,Alg., z, 54r luncertan]; Il,Alg., z, 618 luncertain]; ILAIS., z, 7876; ILAlg.,2, 7877; ILAlg., z, 7878), as a dedicator (AE, ryry-Å, 58; Il,Alg., z, 379; CIL vtn,2388 = IIS, >t>i and in an adverbial construction (CIL vrrr, 4767). Because one ofthese texts (AE, ry87, ro8z) has a starting phrase that is not found in the rest, C.

Lr,eerrev, Les citös de lAfique romaine au Bas-Empire, t, Pans ry79, p. ro4, thoughtthat it, unlike the others, was composed by a local grarunaticus.

ry. That material consists of about one thousand Nonh African Latin buildinginscriptions (minor fragments are excluded) that I have collected and that fit the def-inition of a prose building inscription as defined by me in A. SaasrarraorNrN, On tbeProblem of Recognising African Building lnsctiptions, <<Arctos>>, xxxvr, 2oo2, pp. 82-t.

18. There are no passages related to African building insciptions, but the follow-ing two deserve to be mentioned nonetheless. Pt-rN., nat., 33, 19: Flauius [...] aedicalam

aeream fecit in Graecostasi [...] inciditqae in tabelk aerea factan eam aedem CCIIII annispost Capitoliflam dcdicatan; Grrr,., ro, t, z (for more on this and PuN., epist., 3, 6, 5,

.see below). For a very thorough collection of literary references to inscriptions, see A,Srew, Rönische Inschriften in der antiken Uteratur, Prug ryy (for building inscriptions,se€ pp.4-r2; fi-il. A usefirl collection is also inJ. E. SaNovs, Latin Epigrapby. An in-troduction to tbe study of Latin inscriptions, Cambridge ry27, pp. 3-rg.

ry. ILPB, 3rS (= IlS,939t). Gales, first century AD.zo. CIL vtn, 21665. Albulae, AD 299. For more African examples of scriptores

in other inscription types, see AE, ry4o, ryt s[culpsit] et sci[psit] and examples lis-tedin CIL vnI, index, p. 155. For scriptores elsewhere in the Roman world, see Hor.Nra, Exempla, cit., p, xxvr and ILl, 7675-768r.

242 Ari Saastamoinen

Lepelley thought that in the latter example <de r6dacteur de l'in-scription a jug€ bon de donner son nom; il s'agissait d'un secr6tairemunicipal (scriba ou exceptor), non du lapicide>" I tend to thinkthat the verb scribere refers to a stonecarver in both texts. Thisseems likely because both these inscriptions include elements thatare typical of either Punic or Libyan building inscriptions but notof Latin ones (mentioning several groups of people participating inthe building process, for instance) and recording the stonemasonsfits that tradition". Be that as it may'3, it is obvious that notmuch can be gained just by reading the sources, whether Etenryor epigraphic. In the next section, we shall see how scholars havedealt with the problem of the authorship.

Authors suggested å ""rli", scholarship

The people who dra{ted building inscriptions presumably formed a

heterogeneous group. Accordingly, scholars have regarded personsof quite different status as executors of this task. Gast, who mainlyanalysed Republican building inscriptions found in Italy, suggestedthat publicly funded building projects were commemorated by in-scriptions based on notes written by magistrates who supervisedthe given project'4. Pobjoy, who likewise studied building inscrip-

zr. Lrrer-rrv, Les citds, cit., rr, Paris r98r, p. t2r.zz. For an example of a bilingual Punico-Libyan building inscription, see KAI,

roo; RIL, r. The beginning of the Punic part can be translated as follows: <Themonument of Ateban, son of Iepmatath, son of Palu. Stonemasons: AbariS son ofAbdaötart; Zumar, son of Ateban, son of Iepmatath, son of Palu; Mangi, son of Var-sacanr>. Cf. the translation in the commentary of ILPB,3I9: <<le lapicide: Satur, filsde Celen>.

4. The term sciptor and others that refer to writing have been notoriously diffi-cult to interpret in epigraphic contexts. HueNnn, Exetnph, cit., p. xxvr, already notedthat <in his autem omnibus, ut dixi, non prorsus cernrm est, num scribendi vocabulo revera significetur opificium lapidariil>. Cf. I. Carau-LrlmxtaNr, Sriptor titulorurn, inEAA, vu, p. rz3: verbs like stibere, insctiberc refer either to a stonecaryer or to the ac-

tivity of a client. The following funerary inscription, however, seems to contain an un-equivocal reference to the writing of the drafi CIL vtn, 954 (=IIS, 8l'44); haec cum

scriberern kcrinis atrunentan tenperaui. Cf. also ILAlg., r, rz85 (=11i, 93t3), a verse

inscription referring to building activities and mentioning the versifier.24. K. Gasr, Die zensoriscben Baubericbte bei Liuius und die römischen Baain*

chriften, Diss. Göttingen ry65, p. rz9: <<Bauinschriften und Bauberichte stammen ge-

mcinsam aus dem amtlichen Bereich; sie haben einen gemeinsamen Ursprung im Akt

Sorne Obsentations on the Authorship of Building lnsctiptions 243

tions in Republican Italy, thought that those magistrates themselvescomposed the text in question".

One can suppose a fortiori26 that when it was a private personwho paid for a building project of public utility, he also oftencomposed the text advertising his benefaction'7. It was certainly inhis interests to pay attention as to how his financial sacrifices - of-ten considerablä sacrifices - were advertised to the public's. Howclose this attention might sometimes have been is revealed by thestory in Gellius where Pompey is meditating on the correct word-ing for the building inscription to be fixed on his theatre at Rome.Because Pompey was not quite sure whether one should say consultertium or tertio, after consulting the most learned men in the city,he decided to follow Cicero's advice and to have it carved in anabbteviated form'e. The presumption that a private builder could,at least sometimes; compose the text all by himself gets some sup-poft from inscriptions themselves since there are some so originallyformulated texts that they must have been worded by the ratherignorant benefactor himself 3o.

der schrifdichen Fixierung einer Amtshandlung>>; p. 8o: <Öer Annahme ihrer Her'kunft aus amdichen Aufzeichnungen oder eines gemeinsamen Ursprungs mit ihnen

steht also zumindest nichts im \Wege>.

25. M. Pos.yov, Building inscriptions in Republican ltaly: euergetism, responsibility,

and cioic uirtue, tn A. E. CoorBv (ed.), The Epigraphic landscape of Roman ltab, (BICS

supplement, 73), London 2ooo, pp. 77-92, esp. p. 79: <ri(hen the building is completed,

the officials have an inscription carved on the structure itself or on a plaque attached

to it, recording what they have donen. See also below in this section.

26. Cf. Ponyov, Building insciptions, cit., pp. 89-9o.

27. CacNar, Inscriptiones, cit., p. 532., thought that educated private persons

composed their inscriptions by themselves or consulted learned men. Cf. T. Koruu,Thåmes de la propagande inpöriale å traoers les inscriptions africaines du Bas-Enpire

rcmain, <BCTH>, n.s., r9B, r98j, p. 258, on the Late Antique building inscriptions

in Africa: <Il s'agit [...] des textes €rig6s dans les villes par les soins des magistrats

municipaux ou des riches €vergötes>>.

zs. Building inscriptions were a highly valued medium. For more on this, see

W. Ecx, Senatorial Self-Representation: Deaelopments in the Augustan Period, n F.

Mntan, E. Sr,car- (eås.), Caesar Augustus. Seuen Aspects, Oxford 1984, pp. r3r-2;SaasreuorNeN, On tbe Problem of Recognising, cit., pp. 8r-u.

29, Gnrt., to, T,7.

3o. See, e.g., the strikingly original ILAlg., r, rgt+: Vic[t]to[i(a)e] Reg[in(e)e

nlumi[ni H]adianfi] '[Jlpius Namphatno / qui tenplum iussit fieri ipse est sacerdos

qu[i] / CXKII annis uinum non bibit. Filia(n) habuit Hezi/ua(n) qui (!) ui annoram

anip(i)ebatur. Dom[i]n(a)e / Victoriae Herculi Aug(usto) sau(un). It is extremely un-

usual to mention details related to personal life. On top of it, all these details -


Originality alone, however, is no proof that the text was wor-ded by a private euergetes. On the contrary, it has been suggestedthat when a text is both original and showing some literary preten-sions, it was quite possibly composed by a local teacher of gram-mar and literaturel'. One can find examples of the tituli of thistype especially in Late Antiquity, when the rules regulating thediction of building inscriptions were significandy relaxedl'.

The last alternative mentioned by scholars is that the local ordodecuionurn could have either composed the text recording a pri-vate benefaction or specified its wording33. This seems unusual,however. \7e do have Italian honorary inscriptions where thewording is fixed by the locd. ordo3a, but there are few references

to privately funded building inscriptions being worded by the local

grossly exaggerated abstinence from wine-drinking and sorrow over daughter's pre-

mature death - are having at least as prominent a place as the reference to the build-ing activity itself which was almost always mentioned in the main clause. Finally, toend the inscription by repeating the dedication to gods is also unique.

3r. See Lnenr-lnv, Les citös, cit., I, p. ro4, on AE, ry87, roEz: <<Ce texte a 6te

[,..J compos6 sur place par un letr€, vraisemblablement un grammairien de Mascu-

la>. See above, note 16. Cf. also how Cacruar, Insciptiones, cit., p. 532, comments

on CIL v:nr, 2rt-213i <<Ce n'est pas, sans doute, le colon de Cillium, auteur du tom-beau, qui a compos6 lui-m€me le poåme en cent dix vers [...] il a dd Ie demander å

quelque grammairien du voisinage, 6löve des rhEteurs de Carthage ou de Cirtu. See

also G. C. Prcano, La ciuilisation de tAfique rcmaine, (Civilisations d'hier et au-jourd'hui), Paris 1959, p. 1oz: <la plupart des petits poömes qui se lisent sur les tom-beaux et sur certains monuments ont 6t6 compos6s par le grammairien du lieu, quitrouvait lä le moyen d'accroire ses maigres gains>>.

32. See, for example, lRTip, 467; IRTrip, 468; CIL vm, 18328. For a short de-

sciption of this change in Late Antique building inscriptions, see A. SaasrauotNeN,

Sone Remarks on tbe Deuelopnzent of tbe Style of Roman Building Insoiptions in tbe

Roman Noih Africa, n L'Afica totnana xilI, p. 1689.

33. See G. FacaN, Tbe Reliability of Roman Rebuilding Inscriptions, <<PBSR>>, 64,

1996, p.9r: <<The commemorative inscription was a vital element in the social contract

of euergetism. Since it was often set up by the beneficiaries (that is, the local commu-

nity), it represented the means by which the social prestige eamed by the benefactor forthe act of benefaction was publicly recognizeö, Though Fagan does aol say expressly

that the local ordo composed the draft, it is natural to suppose that he meant this activ-

ity to be induded in general process of "setting up" the inscription. See also LrrErrnv,Les citös, cit., rr, p. r1r.

34. AE, ry76, r44 (Herculaneun): placere decurionibus statuam equestren ei poniquam celebenimo hco ex pecunia publica insctibique: M(arco) Nonio M(arci) f(ilio) Me-

n(enia tribu) Balbo pr(aetori) proco(n)s(uli) pattono uniuersus ordo populi Herculanies-

sis (l) ob neita eius. Cf. also CIL x, ry86.

I

I

\

J

Some Obsentations on the Autborsbip of Building Inscriptions 245

senatest. Moreover, Pobjoy thought that even publicly funded pro-jects were commemorated by building inscriptions u/orded by su-pervising officials and wrote:

A local senate could of course dictate what was to be inscribed on a publicbuilding, just as it could if it wished pass decrees which ordered their ownpublication [...]. But the building inscriptions [...] give no indication thatthey are formally sanctioned documents, and it is far more likely that theofficials had the choice whether to put such an inscription on the buildingor not, and also had the choice of how to word it35.

These three, i.e., private benefactors themselves, locd. grarnnaticiand local senates are then the bodies that have been presented inmodern scholarship as potential writers of the drafts of privatelyfunded building inscriptions. In the next section, we shall see ifconsidering the essentiai features of the bulk of building inscri-ptions could cast any light on the authorship question.

4Epigraphic clues

Many scholars have thought that the epigraphic products that are

carved on stone can be roughly divided into two groups. Thegroups are of very uneven size: the overwhelmingly larger one in-cludes stereotyped, mass-produced funerary inscriptions the word-ing of which was done in fficina while the remaining much small-er group contains more ambitious and more original texts thatwere drafted outside the workshop3T. Th's undoubtedly correct

35. There is, however, at least one possible exception. Cf. Il,Alg., t, zroS: noui[s]

ab splendido ordin[e] decrctis titulis ded[icauit]. See Leenr-mv, Les citös, cit., n, p. r3r.

36. Porlov, Buildinginsctiptions, cit., p.9o. Cf. R K. Snrnr, Tåe MunicipalDe-crees of the Ronan VZest, (Arethusa Monographs, z), Buffalo ry7o, p. 79; for thepublication of municipal decrees, see ibid., pp. 83-4.

37. See, for instance, CacNar, Sur les manuelr, cit., p.5r: <<quand il s'agissait

d'actes publics, de monuments plus ou moins officiels, la r6daction appartenait n€ces-

sairement, soit aux magistrats comp6t6nts, soit ä des interm6diares autoris6s [...]. Maisrien semblable ne pouvait se produire pour les texts moins solennels, notamment pourles ex uoto ou les epitaphes; ceux-ci 6taient 6videmment r6diges, soit par les int6ress€s

seuls, soit par le lapicide ou avec son concours>>; SustNt, Il lapicida, cit., p. 66: <Allabottega e non alla minuta io credo che fosse lasciata spesso la scelta delle abbreviazioni

L..1, a meno che non si trattasse di un testo pubblico di tale imponanza da indurre l'es-

tensore della minuta ad usare con competenza certe sigle piri note alle discipline diplo-matiche che alle officine epigrafiche>; cf. MerrEn, Einfilbrang, cit., p. zo.


picture can be nuanced, however. In fact, between these twogroups there is an iirtermediary one which includes inscriptionsthat are probably individually composed but still quire stereotypedand formuiaic.

In addition to more or less original texts there are many build-ing inscriptions, especially during the Principate, thar use fixedphrases and restricted vocabulary (Fagan appositely termed it<<quasi-technical jargon>>38) and observe rigid structural patterns3e.Let us compare three simple third century building inscriptions.The first one is from Muzuc:

Merdurio) Aug(usto) sac(rum). / Pro salutelml Impp(eratorum) / Caes-s(arurn) L(ucD Septimi Se/aeri Pertinacis / [Au]g(usti) Arabici Adia/benici p(atris) p(atriae) et Imp(eratoris) Ca[es(aris)] / M(arcD AureliAnton[i]/ni Aug(usti) C(aius) Iulius Glau/cus aedem ttt---lPNMll /sua p(ecunia) f(ecit)+".

The second one was found in Thala:

Caelesti Aug(ustae) / sacrurn / P(ublius) Gemi[ni]us / Martialis /anno flam(oni) / sui porticum / columnatam cu[rn] / gradib(us) VIId(e) s(uo) [f(ecit)] / curante L(ucio) Fl(auio) Saluian[6]a'.

The third example comes f.rom Larnbaesis:

Pro salute d(ornini) n(ostri) A[[[ureliani]ll / inuicti Aug(usti) / Aure-l(ius) Longinianus (centurio) leg(ionis) / III Aug(ustae) princ(eps) le-g(ionis) s(upra) s(criptae) / ternplum Inuicti aere / suo a solo fecita'.

All these texts basically observe the same pattern: the dedicationto the gods andlor the honorific expression towards the emperoropens the text. It is followed by the name and tides of the privatebuilder, a description of the monument, mention of the costs andcharactenzation of the building process. The use of this pattern isnot confined to these three examples: one can find it at least in

38. G. Facar.r, Gifts of C,ynnasia: A Test Case for Reading Quasi-tecbnical Jar-gon in Latin lnscriptions, <ZPE>, r24, tggg, pp. 2$-7r,

39. Cf. Gasr, Die zensoriscben Bauberichte, cit., p. 79: <<Diese Formelhaftigkeitist hier bei den Bauinschriften [...] so stark ausgeprägt wie bei keiner anderen In-schriftengattunp>.

4o. CIL vtn, r2o94 (Muzuc, AD r98-zrr).4r. CIL vu, z3u 8o (Tbala, thbd century AD).42. CIL vnt, 2676 (l,ambaesis, AD z7o-275\.

Some Obseruations on the Autborship of Building Insciptions 247

five other third century building inscriptions that originare fromwidely separated locations43 and a further search reveals moregroups of geographically scattered building inscriptions, each ofwhich employs one common pattern44. This observation is consis-tent with results obtained when I examined African building in-scriptions in order to find out how uniform their style was. It be-came apparent that many building inscriptions followed the samegeneral province-wide trends that developed over timear.

On the other hand, though their wording is conventional (all,for example, seem to use the same predicate, fecit) it is by nomeans identical. For instance, all of them employ a differentphrase to refer to building costs. The text from Lambaesis is theonly one to emphasize that the building process was carried outfrom the foundations (a solo). Only the inscription from Thala re-fers to the curator of the work and it also qualifies the object bythe adjective columnatu.r that does not appear in the other two ex-amples or in the African material as a whole46.

\7hat conclusions, if any, can be drawn from these features?

43. From Proconsularis: ILTun, 652 (Gens Baccbuiana, AD z.6o-z6r); CIL vn114465 (Souq El Tleta, AD r98-zo9); CILvn, yr (Tbak, AD 286-29). From Maure-tania Caesariensis: CIL vnr, 8995 (Rusuccuru, AD uo9-zrr); CIL vtrt, 2o747 (Auzia,AD 45); CIL vnt, z.oz:-r (Satafis, third century AD; the builder is a soldier).

44. Five further groups, each datable within the same century: group r (j cases):

ILPB, z, 7 (Ca*hage, z7 BC-AD xl; UL vtrr, 2j844 (Abitina, AD y-y); ILPB, z4o(Bulla Regia, |D yt>\ AE, ry69-7o, 65o (Tbugga, AD +r-:+); IRTip, 3a7 (Lepcis

Magna, AD 9z); cf. CIL vtn, z6z4x (Uchi Maius, AD 96-98); group 2 (, cases): IR-Tip, 269 (Lepcis Magna, AD 3536); CIL vm, 26475 (Thugga. AD 36-4r); ILAlg, z,

>so (Cirta, AD 4z-4); IRTrip, 273 (Lepcis Magna, AD +z-+); AE, ry69-7o, 649(Thugga, AD 54; Iargely based on restorations); group 3 (6 cases): AE, ry&,7r (Tbu-burbo Maius, AD rr7-r38); CIL vrn, r@68 (Aubuua, AD 138-16r); ILTun, 246(Pberadi Maius, AD 138-16r); ILAfr, 5zr (Tbugga, AD 138-16r); ILAlg,2,76+8 (Cui-cul, second century AD); C/L wn, r416t (Uccuk, second century AD); group 4 (4 ca-ses): IAMar, kt., strypl., 8fi (Sak, AD rro-r3o); CIL vr:;, 842 (Tbuburbo Maius, ADrt7-r38); AE, ry97, r663a (Thugga. AD rr7-r38); Il,Alg,2,4712 (Thibilis, second,century AD); group 5 (4 cases): AE, ry57,82 (Laveran, AD zo9-zrr); CILvtl, 1469o(Thuburnica, ltD ztr-2ry); CIL vm, 26459 (Thugga, AD zzz-235; CIL vnt, 2646o isgemella); CIL vrrr, 9oz6 (Auzia, AD z4r); cf. AE, ry9r, 16zo = AfrRon 7, r55 (Bu-Ngem, AD zo5-236): the builder is a centurio ordinarias.

45. See SaastauorNeN, On tbe Local Cbaracteistics, cit., pp. -.9-'7-2-..

46. One can find attestations outside Africa, though: AE, ry3o, rzo (Sepino, Ita-ly): [tribuna]l colunnatum, Cf. CIL tx, 2449 (= /Ll, 5524), a shorrer version of thesame text: tibunal columnatunt. For the collection of African material, see note rZabove.


First, it is obvious that even the most stereotyped building inscrip-tions were not drafted by the method that was commonly used inthe wording of funerary inscriptions, i.e., by filling in the blanks ofa template or form with the information provided by the custom-er47. Second, it seems unlikely to me that stonecutters would haveoften composed the drafts for building inscriptions as they didcompose many funerary inscriptions, i.e., by putting the basic factsoffered by private euergetai into the suitable epigraphic form.

If kpicidae alone decided the wording, the result would havebeen as monotonous as funerary inscriptions even if no templateswere in use. Though there are, as I stated above, many inscriptionsthat follow similar patterns, there are always subde differences inthe vocabulary $ in the word order. (except in gemelke, ofcourse).

On the other hand, however, there is no denying that manybuilding inscriptions are monotonous and stereotyped and form a

rather uniform mass. \ilas it so because there were generally ac-

cepted rules on how to compose building inscriptions and mostprivate benefactors were aware of these rules and composed theirinscriptions accordingly? This is entirely possible. To take a mod-ern parallel, death announcements are quite formal and stereo-typed in Finnish newspapers. Practically everyone knows how sucha notice should properly be written though few of us have re-ceived instructions on the strict rules reguiating this genre. On theother hand, if someone needs advice on their wording, it can beobtained from the editorial staff of the given newspaper who alsoensure the propriety of the announcement.

To return to ancient building inscriptions, I think that the sit-uation must have resembled that existing in the composition ofmodem death announcements. Undoubtedly, mmy customers hada dtak ready when they came to the stonemason's shop; but it is

reasonable to suppose that some wanted assistance. For such a

customer, there was help at hand in the officina: he or she mighthave been given a manual to help to word the draft or a seasonedordinator could have made suggestions based on his own experi-ence48. If manuals existed, they must have listed many variants out

47. See note rj above.

4a. Cf. Aoavs, Bilingualism, cit., p. 85, who emphasises the importance of co-operation between the client and the stonecutter.

Sotne Obseruations on tbe Authorsbip of Building Insoiptions 249

of which the composer of the inscription selected what pleasedhim or her. It is obvious that if this kind of consultation did takeplace, it tended to favour the stereotypicality and uniformity inbuilding inscriptions: the customers' natural propensity towards in-dividualism and innovation was restficted to a certain extent bythe stonecutters' inclination to follow traditional forms, formulaeand expressions. \7hen one thinks how uniform building inscrip-tions are, it seems difficult not to accept that this uniformity waspartly due to kpicidae who upheld the tradition of producingbuilding inscriptions.

\7hile it is impossible to say how much restrictive influencestonecutters might have had, the contribution of a customer to thegeneral development of style is easier to characterise: it was due tothe wishes of the customer that even most monotonous buildinginscriptions show individual traits; it was also exacdy these wishesand needs of a customer that carried forward the development ofthe inscriptional styleae. To take just one example: the appearance,the gradual growth in numbers and the eventual disappearance ofexpressions related to building promises and their redeeming dur-ing the second and third centuries AD reflect the demands of themunicipal nobles who first tried to use them to strengthen theirpropaganda in the tightening competition for status and municipalposts and then left these details out as the competition ceasedto.

Perhaps we can go further. It does not seem impossible to methat the personnel of a given fficina could have sketched some ofthe most stereotyped building inscriptions, or, at least, some of themost stereotyped parts of the inscriptions by themselves. Imperialtituiature especially comes to mind. Because it was an essentialpart of most building inscriptions but had a litde value as personalpropaganda, it must have been viewed by many euergetai as a tedi-ous formality. 'Why would have they taken the mouble to tinkerwith long titulatures - they were sometimes over 5o words long'

49. Cf. SusINr,Il lapicida, cit., pp. 69-7o: <<volontå del committente [...] rappre-senta il vero motore dell'evoluzione della semantica epigrafica (ma bisogna aggiungere

che tale sviluppo poteva essere promosso anche dall'inventiva o dalla cultura di unartigiano di bottega)>.

5o. See SaasrelrowrN, On the Local Cbaracteristics, cit., pp. tgrT-2t.5r. For long imperial titulatures in privately funded building inscriptions, see,

e.g.,CILvrrr,23ro7 (:twords); ILAlg,43q9(6o words; relatedtollAlg, r,3o4o);CIL vrrt, rzoo6 (74 words).

25o Ari Saastamoinen

- if they could have leave it to rhe personnel of the workshop toexecute?

In this connection, it is perhaps useful to look how nonchalandyPliny the Younger asked his agent Annius Severus to select a statuebase and to get it carved and erected in a temple at Comun: iubebasinz fieri, ex quo uoles rnarmore, quae flolnen neum bonoresque ca-piat, si hos quoque putabis addendoss'. One has to remember, howev-er, that the context is somewhat differents3 here: the project is a mi-nor one and Pliny (cos. suff. AD roo) was a major figure in hishometown, not a municipal noble who is trying to use his gift towin elections or to obtain other concrete political godsta. It is alsopossible that this letter might have been revised for publicationts.

It must be observed, however, that the idea of co-operationbetween the client and the staff of the workshop presupposes tharsome workers in an fficina had a higher level of education thanhas often been thought. As I noted above, many eminent scholarshave maintained that anything above the level of a standard funer-ary inscription was beyond the powers of a stonecutters6. I thinkthat there must have been a person or persons among the person-nel of a workshop who were up to the task. Someone in the ffici-na must have been able to read and write - whether the owner ofthe shop, or the ordinator, or someone else is not important - and

5:. PrrN., epist., 3, 6, 5.

53. Note that the famous inscription that records Pliny's benefactions and testa-mentary donations for building activities and for foundations (CIL v, 5z6z = IlS,z9z7; d. also quite fragmentary CIL xt, 5z7z = AE, rgg9, 6n) does describe his ca-reer in great detail. According to W. Ecr, Die grosse Pliniusinschift aus Comum:Funktion und Monament, n Varia epigraphica. Aui del Colloquio Internazionale diEpiglafia Bertinoro, 8-to giugno zooo,Faenza 2oor, pp. z3z-4,Plny most likely draf-ted the text by himself; his intention was to leave a permanent memory of his bene-factions for his patria Comum like Augustus did on a greater scale in his res gestae.

For a list of inscriptions related to Pliny the Younger, see PIR', P 49o.54, For a brief but accurate analysis of the political motives for benefactions,

see P. GalNssy, R. Saurn, The Roman Ernpire. Economy, Society and Culture, Lon-don 1987, p. 33. Surely many private benefactors paid far more attention to the wayin which their benefactions were recorded for the contemporary public and posteritythan Pliny did here.

jj. See A. N. SHenwrN-rJ0nrrn, Tbe Letters of Pliny. A histotical and social con-nentary, Oxford ry66, p. zz6: <<The absence of practical details of size is a sure signof the revision of a business letter for publication>. Similady, A. \X/. varv Bursr.r,Note on Pliny, epp. il. 6, tx. 19, <CR>>, 9, r9or, pp. 446-7.

56. See note 3Z above.

Some Obseraations on the Autborship of Bailding Insctiptions 25r

to sketch a stereotyped building inscription with help of a manualdoes not need much beyond that57.

In addition to being literate and informed on the standardphraseology, the composer of a basic building inscription neededonly to know how personal names were recorded according toestablished onomastic conventions and how the constantly evolvingtitulatures of the ruling emperors (an essential part of most build-ing inscriptions) were presented. Tens of thousands of funeraryinscriptions attest that onomastic conventions were common know-ledge among lapicidae; as for the latter, there must have been anofficial bulletin of some sort publicly available (for instance, at thecuria) whete one could check what were the current titles of theruling emperor. It is worth stfessing that that source was necessaryto both a private person (when he wanted to compose the text allby himselfl and a forcman of the workshop (when he participatedin the composition of an inscription) rs.

Thus, it is not necessary to believe that the customer always ca-me to the stonemason's shop with a teady draft. An alternativeprocedure might have been as follows: a customer came to theshop, and, if his wishes were not clear, discussed some individualphrases or possibly consulted a manual. After giving the essentialinformation about the building project, he either mentioned keyphrases and the points he wanted to emphasize5e or wrote or dic-tated the core part of the text. After this phase, the personnel pro-

57. Let us remember that Latin inscriptions, including those the wording ofwhich was certainly composed in workshops, are remarkably fauldess. See HUrr.ren,Exetnpla, cit., p. xur: <Apparet igitur artem lapidariorum Romanorum [...J diuqueconservatam constantia mirabili: tam pauca ea sunt quae indicavi vitia a lapidariiscommissa in tanta inscriptionum multitudine nobis servato>.

58. Prof. Mika Kajava called my atrenrion to the idea that it is possible that thewording of the draft was checked by a representative of the local senate if the textwas to be carved on a building in agro publico or if the project had otherwise a pub-lic character; moreover, the central government might have shown interest in the wayin which the imperial titulature was exhibited. I think that both suggestions are quiteplausible. However, they are difficult to veri6' since, as far as I know, there are noreferences in ancient sources to such activities.

59. One example of such preferences. It seems obvious that private builders ofthe second and third centuries AD were keener to emphasize financial aspects oftheir benefactions than the communities did as the building inscriptions they set uprecord more frequently exact building costs (see A. SaasreuorNnN, Some StylisticalCriteria for the Dating of Roman Building Insuiptions in North Afica, in L'Aftica ro-nana xlv, p. 1346).


duced a preliminary draft complete with dl technical niceties andshowed it to the customer. If he accepted it, the actual carvingprocess could start.

Cot"i.r.ior*

Because the ancient sources do not describe epigraphic productionprocesses in detail, and because the specific historical circumstan-ces under which each inscription was carved always elude us, it isimpossible to state with confidence who worded any given buitd-ing inscription. Nonetheless, something can be deduced from theinscriptions themselves. It is obvious that the circumstances underwhich building inscriptions were produced varied gready from onecase to another. Previous scholars have suggested that a privatebuilding inscription could have been worded by the builder him-self, by a local grammarian or by the local senate. These sugge-stions are entirely credible, but I think that another alternativecould be added. The formality and rigid stereotypicaliry of manybuilding inscriptions on the one hand and the subde but omnipre-sent individud traits on the other, point to a conclusion that thewording of the draft of many standard building inscriptions was a

result of collaboration between the customer and the personnel ofthe workshop.

Ari Saastamoinen, Some Observations on the Authorship of Building Insciptions

Documents