Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros50Dossier Écritures, inscriptions, ...AntiquitéAnax Nicocles of Salamis in a new...

Dossier Écritures, inscriptions, pratiques linguistiques et activités éditoriales
Antiquité

Anax Nicocles of Salamis in a new inscription

Polina Christofi et Maria Kantirea
p. 217-232

Résumés

Au cours de fouilles récentes sur le site de Panagia (région de Protaras au sud-est de Chypre), menées par le Département des Antiquités de Chypre sous la direction de Polina Christofi, une stèle portant la dédicace d’un membre de la famille royale de Salamine a été trouvée en remploi dans une église paléochrétienne. Le commanditaire est un personnage inconnu dans la prosopographie de Chypre jusqu’à cette découverte: l’anax Nicoclès, fils du roi Pnytagoras et frère du roi Nicocréon. L’inscription, que nous datons d’entre 315 et 311 av. J.‑C., est consacrée à une divinité dont le nom a été martelé, mais nous lisons, sous réserve, celui d’Aphrodite Acraia. Nous localisons son sanctuaire sur la petite colline surplombant le promontoire Pèdalion et essayons d’analyser les enjeux politiques et idéologiques dans le cadre de la fin des royaumes de Chypre.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

The archaeological context: a short preliminary report

  • 1 The authors thank Artemis Karnava for an initial reading of the inscription and the squeeze (fig. 7(...)
  • 2 This paper should be considered as a first, preliminary report of the findings at Protaras-Panagia (...)

1The inscription that we publish here was found during bulldozing works conducted around the chapel of Panagia-Panagiotissa in 2019,1 about 7,2 km north-west of Cavo (Capo) Greco and 25 km south-east of Salamis (fig. 1). After the important discovery of the inscribed stele, a rescue excavation by the Department of Antiquities, led by Polina Christofi, was launched revealing a rich archaeological site dating to the Early Byzantine and Medieval periods.2

Figure 1 — Map showing the major sites mentioned in the paper.

Figure 1 — Map showing the major sites mentioned in the paper.

Miltiades Polydorou.

2The church of Panagia (Virgin) is in the locality of Protaras of the Paralimni municipality, in the district of Famagusta, and it is believed to have been erected in the 16th century. The church was built on a rocky plateau at the top of the hill overlooking a small promontory called Moutti tis Xistarias to the east, and it is situated in a hollow between two rivers. Next to the church is a natural spring, called Mana tou Nerou, which has provided water to the local community for centuries. Ruins of a Venetian aqueduct are still visible today in the plot adjacent to the church.

  • 3 Rautman 2014.

3The north and central aisles of a basilica dating from the 6th-7th century were discovered to the north of the existing church (fig. 2). The south aisle and the Holy Bema of this three-aisled tile-roofed basilica have been lost due to modern construction in the area. The surviving dimensions of the monument, including the narthex and the solea leading to a raised pulpit, are 9,5 meters in width and 16,60 meters in length. The existence of column bases in situ, as well as fragments of limestone columns still visible in the area, point to the fact that the three aisles were divided by colonnades. Judging from a vast number of marble and gypsum findings, some elements of the original church must have been decorated with opus sectile and gypsum moldings following the trends of the 6th-7th century.3

Figure 2 — Aerial view of the excavation.

Figure 2 — Aerial view of the excavation.

University of Cyprus.

  • 4 For parallels, see Bailey 1988, pp. 290‑291, Q2349-2353; Oziol 1977, pp. 279‑284 nos. 842‑871.
  • 5 For parallels, see Polis-Petrades (Papalexandrou, Caraher 2012, p. 271) and Kourion – Roman baths ( (...)

4Other auxiliary structures have also been found around the basilica. Due to their fragmentary state of preservation, an identification of their use was not possible. The stele was found close to the western wall of one of these structures which was located in front of the western entrance of the 16th century church. However, the area between the church and the “western wall” had been disturbed; the precise relationship of the latter with the base of the stele is currently unknown. It was freestanding, on a stone base coated with mortar that had been placed on a floor of stone and gypsum marble slabs (figs. 3‑4). Early Christian lamps4 and bronze wick holders5 were found in association with the stele, possibly pointing to the use of the stele for religious activities. Although beyond the scope of this paper, the contextual evidence with the relatively higher density of lamps around the stele, and the fact that only in this area within the site wick holders have been found, raises the hypothesis that some form of ritual activity was taking place outside the main church. This hypothesis, in conjunction with the study of hagiological sources, which is still in process, and the stele’s primary context as discussed below, could suggest that the stele in its Early Christian context was associated with the cult of a local saint or martyr.

Figure 3 — The floor on which the stele was discovered and surrounding structures.

Figure 3 — The floor on which the stele was discovered and surrounding structures.

Department of Antiquities, Polina Christofi.

Figure 4 — The stele in the archaeological context of its discovery.

Figure 4 — The stele in the archaeological context of its discovery.

Department of Antiquities, Polina Christofi.

The inscription

  • 6 This material originates most probably from quarries located in the wider area of south-east Cyprus (...)

5The stele is of soft white-creamy local limestone6 bearing an egg-and-dart moulding at the top and bottom, and a palm-and-lotus low relief cymation below the crown moulding. The upper right corner is missing. Height 1,05 m; length 0,34 m; width 0,28 m. The inscription is engraved just below the cymation, letters 1,1‑1,4 cm high; interl. 0,5‑0,9 cm. Figs. 5‑7.

[[ Ἀ [φ] ρ ο δ [ί τ η ι ] ]]
Ἀκραίαι ἀνέ̣[θηκεν]
ἄναξ Νικο[κλῆς]
βασιλέως Πνυτα[γόρου]

5

υἱὸς καὶ βασι[λέως]
Νικοκρέοντος ἀδελ̣[φός].

To [[Aphrodite]] Acraia; anax Nico[cles], son of the king Pnyta[goras] and brother of the king Nicocreon, consecrated (this monument).

Figure 5 — Nicocles’ stele.

Figure 5 — Nicocles’ stele.

Artemis Karnava.

Figure 6 — The inscription.

Figure 6 — The inscription.

Artemis Karnava.

Figure 7 — A squeeze of the inscription.

Figure 7 — A squeeze of the inscription.

Artemis Karnava.

  • 7 Digraph and, later, alphabetic legends appear on the coins of Salamis from Evagoras I (Markou 2011, (...)
  • 8 Respectively, I.Paphos 2; IG XV 2, 780; CEG 2, 812. Cf. indicative contemporary digraphic dedicatio (...)

6The inscription represents, to our knowledge, the first Greek alphabetic official document on stone produced by the royal family of Salamis.7 During the same period, at the end of the 4th century BC, the last king of Paphos, Nicocles, appears in at least three metric alphabetic inscriptions from Old Paphos and Ledra in Cyprus, and from Argos in Greece.8

Anax

7The dedication was set up by a person who is new to the the prosopography of Classical Cyprus: the anax Nicocles, who introduces himself as the son of the king Pnytagoras and the brother of the king Nicocreon. The latter’s reign dates the inscription between 332/331 and 311/310 BC.

  • 9 Isocrates, Euagoras 72 (translation based on Norlin 1966). For a critical approach to the foundatio (...)
  • 10 Harpocrationis Lexikon in decem oratores Atticos (ed. W. Dindorf, 1853, p. 32; translation of the a (...)

8Isocrates, in his oration Euagoras, praises the homonymous king and founder of the Teucrid dynasty of Salamis for “the greatest blessing: of his offspring he left no one who was addressed merely by a private title, but one was called king [a reference to Nicocles], others anaktes and anassai” (καὶ τὸ μέγιστον, ὅτι τῶν ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγονότων οὐδένα κατέλιπεν ἰδιωτικοῖς ὀνόμασιν προσαγορευόμενον, ἀλλὰ τὸν μὲν βασιλέα καλούμενον, τοὺς δʼ ἄνακτας, τὰς δʼ ἄνασσας).9 This comment about the use of the title ἄναξ and ἄνασσα (in the feminine) to denote the princes and princesses of the royal house is also repeated by the lexicographer (Valerius) Harpokration, who also preserves a quotation of the lost Κυπρίων Πολιτεία, a work that is generally attributed to Aristotle or to one of his students: ἄνακτες καὶ ἄνασσαι. Ἰσοκράτης Εὐαγόρα. ἔοικε δʼ ὁ ῥήτωρ ἔθους τινὸς ἐν Κύπρῳ μνημονεύειν. Ἀριστοτέλης γοῦν ἐν τῇ Κυπρίων πολιτείᾳ φησί· “καλοῦνται δὲ οἱ υἱοὶ μὲν καὶ ἀδελφοὶ τοῦ βασιλέως ἄνακτες, αἱ δὲ ἀδελφαὶ καὶ γυναῖκες ἄνασσαι” (“anaktes and anassai. Isocrates in his [oration] Euagoras. The orator was used to remind a traditional habitude in Cyprus. Also Aristotle, in his [work] Cypriot Constitution, says: ‘the sons and the brothers of the king are called anaktes, the sisters and the daughters anassai’”).10

  • 11 For the formation and the character of the Cypriote kingdoms, see Iacovou 2006.
  • 12 The title anax is also recorded in a 4th century BC syllabic inscription engraved on the base of a (...)
  • 13 Plutarch, Amatorius 766d.

9In our view, Isocrates’ emphasis on this Cypriot practice is nothing less than a reference to the constitutional law of the succession to the throne of Salamis determined by lineal descent and presupposing a blood relationship between the king and the anax.11 Otherwise it would be impossible to understand why an official and much trivial protocol, according to which the title of the “prince” and “princess” that was given to the male and female members of the royal house, would deserve the admiration of an Attic rhetor.12 An anecdote concerning a love story involving Nicocreon’s daughter Arsinoe might shed some light on this succession law. In the 39th chapter of his Metamorphoses (Arceophon), Antoninus Liberalis relates that the princess was turned to stone by Aphrodite because not only had she denied Arceophon’s love due to his Phoenician origin, driving him to commit suicide, but she provocatively watched the funeral of the unfortunate lover. At first sight, this tale, a short version of which is repeated by Plutarch,13 could be considered as an indication of the official attitudes towards Phoenicians in late Classical Salamis. In our view, it reveals the restrictions imposed on royal marriages by the law, according to which dynastic legitimacy was defined not only by a blood relationship between the king and the anaktes and anassai, but also by civil rights based upon the Greek origin of the members of the house. It is only a hypothesis to be confirmed.

  • 14 Athenaeus, 6.256a: ὧν οἱ μὲν Γεργίνοι συναμιγνύμενοι τοῖς κατὰ τὴν πόλιν ἔν τε τοῖς ἐργαστηρίοις κα (...)
  • 15 Athenaeus, 6.255f.

10The word anax was more than a royal title. A comment of Athenaeus, who took this information from the lost work Gergithios of Klearchos of Soloi, suggests that the anaktes were actively involved in the administration of the kingdom. They seem to have been at the head of some kind of royal “secret service” responsible for gathering information about people, provided by spies called Gerginoi and which was examined by the so‑called Promalagges14. This practice originated in Salamis before it spread all over Cyprus15.

The historical context and prosopography

  • 16 Spyridakis 1963; Gesche 1974; Stylianou 2000; Christodoulou 2009; Markou 2011 (especially for the n (...)

11The known details of the later history of the royal family of Salamis have been widely discussed especially by Spyridakis, Gesche, Stylianou, and more recently by Christodoulou, Markou and Körner.16 It will be helpful, however, to provide a survey of some noteworthy sources.

  • 17 Diodorus Siculus 16.42.7‑8
  • 18 Diodorus Siculus 16.42.3.
  • 19 Diodorus Siculus 16.46.1.
  • 20 Diodorus Siculus 16.46.2 (translation Sherman 1952).
  • 21 Isocrates dedicated three orations to Cyprus (Euagoras, Nicocles, To Nicocles), of which at least t (...)
  • 22 Diodorus Siculus 16.46.3.
  • 23 Arrian, Anabasis 2.20.6 and 22.2; Curtius 4.3.11. For the ideological context of the alliance betwe (...)
  • 24 Athenaeus 4.167c‑d (who took this information from Duris of Samos).
  • 25 Iacovou 2002, pp. 78‑79; Körner 2019, p. 335.
  • 26 Plutarch, Alexander 29.1‑2.

12Anax Nicocles’ father, the king Pnytagoras (351-332/331 BC), is known to have endured a siege of Salamis in 350-349 BC, conducted by the Athenian general Phocion and the previous king of Salamis, Euagoras II, both acting on behalf of Artaxerxes,17 while the other cities of Cyprus, which had joined the revolt of the Phoenicians,18 became subject once again to the Persians.19 The kinship between Pnytagoras and the previous king, Euagoras II, who had lost his throne for undetermined reasons, is not well known. Diodoros continues his report by stating that Euagoras II “was endeavouring to recover his ancestral rule over the Salaminians and through the help of the King of the Persians to be restored to his kingship” (ὁ δʼ Εὐαγόρας πατρῴαν ἀρχὴν τὴν Σαλαμινίων ἀνεκτᾶτο καὶ διὰ τοῦ βασιλέως τῶν Περσῶν τὴν κάθοδον εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν ἐποιεῖτο).20 Euagoras II’s claims to his “ancestral rule” (πατρῴαν ἀρχήν) were very probably based on a lineal descendance from Euagoras I, and, if so, his father must have been Nicocles, the well-known student of Isocrates.21 Despite his attitude towards Artaxerxes and his apparent defeat, Pnytagoras retained his kingdom (351-332 BC) “by making willing submission” to the Persians (ὁ δὲ Πνυταγόρας ἑκουσίως ὑποταγεὶς τοῖς Πέρσαις τὸ λοιπὸν ἀδεῶς ἐβασίλευε τῆς Σαλαμίνος).22 This renewal of his alliance with the Great King proved short-lasting, as the Salaminian ruler participated actively, together with other kings of Cyprus, in the siege of Tyre by Alexander the Great.23 After his victory, the Macedonian king compensated Pnytagoras for his fidelity by sending him many gifts while also granting him the city of Tamassos, according to Athenaeus.24 It is probable that this act of generosity simply satisfied previous claims (legitimate or not) that the crown of Salamis had on Tamassos25. Pnytagoras must have died soon afterwards and before the spring of 331 BC, as his son Nicocreon was already on the throne of Salamis when, along with Pasicrates of Soloi, he sponsored tragedies in Phoenicia during Alexander the Great’s celebrations for his victory over Egypt.26

  • 27 Arrian, Indica 18.8; Nicocles of Soloi, son of Pasicrates, also participated in the same adventure.
  • 28 Athenaeus 8.349e (Olson 2008). There is no need to accept the codex correction Βιοθέα to Ἀξιοθέα by (...)

13Apart from the future king Nicocreon and the anax Nicocles, Pnytagoras had a third son, whose name – Νιθάφων ὁ Πνυταγόρεω Σαλαμίνιος – is given by Arrian in his list of the Greeks who participated in the passage across the river Hydaspes in 326 BC.27 Biothea (Βιοθέα) was the name of a Nicocreon’s wife, according to Athenaeus.28

14Taking into account all this information, the stemma of the two last generations of the royal family of Salamis may be as follows:

  • 29 For the events, see Mehl 2000, pp. 631‑632.
  • 30 The king’s name Πυγμαλίων transmitted by Diodorus (19.79.4) is recorded as Pumayyaton (PMJTN) in Ph (...)
  • 31 Diodorus Siculus 19.79.4; cf. 19.59.1.
  • 32 Diodorus Siculus 19.79.5 (translation based on Geer 1954).
  • 33 For the still open question of the title strategos given to Nicocreon of Salamis, see Gesche 1974; (...)
  • 34 Bagnall 1976, pp. 41‑42.

15In the struggles of the Diadochoi following the death of Alexander the Great, especially in the war between Antigonos the One-Eyed and Ptolemy I, Nicocreon took the side of the latter, who was still the satrap of Egypt (315 BC).29 After that Ptolemy killed the Cypriot kings who had refused to obey him – Pygmalion (Pumayyaton) of Kition,30 Praxippos of Lapethos, who may or may not be the same person as the ruler of Keryneia,31 and Stasioikos of Marion – and abolished their kingdoms (312 BC). Then, “he appointed Nicocreon as general of Cyprus, giving him the cities and also the revenues of the kings who had lost their thrones” (τῆς μὲν Κύπρου κατέστησε στρατηγὸν Νικοκρέοντα, παραδοὺς τάς τε πόλεις καὶ τὰς προσόδους τῶν ἐκπεπτωκότων βασιλέων)32. Diodorus Siculus’ passage, especially the meaning of the title στρατηγός, with which Ptolemy rewarded the Salaminian king for his fidelity, raises many questions about the much-discussed new status of Nicocreon.33 It would be wrong to attribute to the title of στρατηγός of the end of the Classical period the meaning that the στρατηγὸς τῆς νήσου took later in the Ptolemaic provincial government and to expect from an author of an universal history, as Diodorus was, to use this title in a technical sense or with its full institutional meaning.34

  • 35 FGrH 239 F 17 (when the eponymous archon in Athens was Simonides).
  • 36 Diodorus Siculus 19.62.3‑4 (translation Geer 1947).
  • 37 Diodorus Siculus 20.21.1 (translation Geer 1954).
  • 38 Diodorus Siculus 20.47.3 and 52.5.

16We may, however, assume that Nicocreon’s strategia referred only to the generalship of the Cypriot army (not of Cyprus), given that, in his capacity as the most powerful ally of Ptolemy and with the latter’s support, for the last five or six years of his life (315-311/310 BC) he managed to control more than the half of the island’s cities and territory, and consequently their human and financial resources. The Marmor Parium confirms that it was after Nicocreon’s death that Ptolemy took over the rule of the island ([Ν]ικοκρέων ἐτελεύτησεν καὶ Πτολεμαῖος κυριεύει τῆς νήσου).35 On the other hand, it is true that, according to Diodorus Siculus, Ptolemy made his own brother Menelaos τῶν δὲ πάντων στρατηγόν as early as 315 BC. But a more careful reading of this passage in its historical and chronological context reveals another much-neglected aspect of Menelaos’ first strategia. “To the kings on Cyprus, to whom he (Ptolemy) had previously sent three thousand soldiers, he now dispatched a strong army, for he was anxious to force those who were opposing him to carry out his commands. Myrmidon the Athenian, therefore, was sent with ten thousand men, and Polycleitos with a hundred ships, while Menelaos, his own brother, was made commander of the whole force (τῶν δὲ πάντων στρατηγὸν Μενέλαον τὸν ἀδελφόν)”.36 It is quite clear that Menelaos did not become strategos of the Cypriot army, but the general commander of the foreign soldiers that Ptolemy sent to Cyprus to force the opposing local kings to submit to his orders. The second time that Diodorus refers to Menelaos as strategos is when Ptolemy, “on learning from certain persons that Nicocles, the king of Paphos, had secretly and privately formed an alliance with Antigonos, dispatched two of his friends, Argaeos and Callistrates, ordering them to slay Nicocles.... these two men, accordingly, after sailing to the island and obtaining soldiers from Menelaos the general (παρὰ Μενελάου τοῦ στρατηγοῦ στρατιώτας λαβόντες), surrounded the house of Nicocles, informed him of the king’s wishes and ordered him to take his own life”.37 The tragic fall of the Paphian dynasty is well known and dated generally after Nicocreon’s death. So, it was only then that Ptolemy’s brother became strategos of the island and he established himself in Salamis, that is in the military headquarters of his predecessor Nicocreon (ὁ δὲ τεταγμένος ὑπὸ Πτολεμαίου τῆς νήσου στρατηγὸς Μενέλαος... διέτριβεν ἐν Σαλαμῖνι and Μενέλαος ὁ ἐν τῇ Σαλαμῖνι στρατηγὸς), according to Diodorus’ last references to this strategia in his narration of the naval battle between Ptolemy I and Demetrios Poliorcetes, some years later, in 306 BC.38

Goddess and sanctuary

  • 39 Christodoulou 2009; Christodoulou 2014; Christodoulou 2019b.
  • 40 Hymn to Aphrodite 4. Christodoulou 2019a, pp. 162‑166; Christodoulou 2019b, pp. 272‑273.
  • 41 BMC Cyprus, under Salamis, nos. 64‑65, 76, 79, 85; Markou 2011, pp. 272‑273, 294; Papantoniou 2013.
  • 42 Monloup 1994.
  • 43 I.Salamine 41 and 42. See further Papantoniou, Morris 2019, pp. 154 and 156.

17In a thorough analysis, Christodoulou has recently examined the rise to the throne of Salamis of Euagoras I, the founder of the Teucrid dynasty, and the development of the royal ideology based, in particular, on the foundation myth of the city, which had been created as early as the 7th century BC.39 The same author reveals another less known or neglected aspect of this policy. In his attempt to unify the whole island under his rule, Euagoras I resorted to the figure of Kinyras, the legendary king of all Cyprus before the arrival of the Achaeans, who was traditionally related to the royal family of Paphos. In this pattern, Kinyras’ divine ancestor, Aphrodite, who, as early as the 9th or the 8th century BC in the Homeric Hymn to the goddess, was praised as “queen of well-built Salamis” (Σαλαμῖνος ἐυκτιμένης μεδέουσα) and protector deity of the town, played an important role in the Salaminian royal propaganda.40 Coins struck by (or attributed to) the kings Evagoras II, Pnytagoras and Nicocreon bear representations of Aphrodite, highlighting thus the role of the deity in the royal symbolism.41 The considerable number of Cypro-Archaic and Cypro-Classical female figurines found at different sites in Salamis implies the probable existence of more than one sanctuary dedicated to the Great Goddess of fertility within the ancient city.42 The continuous worship of the goddess can be confirmed by two 3rd century BC dedications found in Enkomi and at the site of Mersineri close to Trikomo, both within the Salaminian territory.43

  • 44 Mitford 1960a.

18The discovery of Nicocles’ inscription adds to our understanding of the display of royal piety within an ideological context. The name of the divinity to whom the anax’s dedication was addressed in the line 1 was erased, very probably by the early Christians, given the archaeological context in which the stele was found. Nevertheless, we are able to read three letters: at the very beginning an A and at the end of the line an O and then a Δ, assuming that in the line 1 the letters are spaced further apart. At the beginning of the line 2, the epithet ΑΚΡΑΙΑ seems almost certain: the first two letters ΑΚ and the last four AIA followed by the I of the dative case are quite visible. One can assume the Ρ because it leaves on the squeeze traces similar to those left by the same letter in the word Νικοκρέων (line 6). The restitution that we propose, though with some reservations, is thus Ἀφροδίτηι Ἀκραίαι. The epithet is attested epigraphically on a much later inscription from Palaephaphos preserving the oath of allegiance that the Cypriots swore to Tiberius in AD 15, soon after he became emperor: “by our own Aphrodite of the Headland”, according to Mitford’s translation. The goddess was the first of the ὅρκιοι θεοί ([νὴ τ]ὴν ἡμετέραν Ἀκραίαν Ἀφροδίτην).44

  • 45 Strabo 14.6.3, C682 (translation based on Jones 1929). See also Anonymi Stadiasmus, p. 503 (GGM I, (...)
  • 46 Mitford 1961, pp. 125‑127 no. 26 (SEG 20, 1964, 316).

19Aphrodite Acraia is known to have had a sanctuary on the top of the last mountain on the Karpas Peninsula according to Strabo: ἐκ δὲ τῆς Καρπασίας ὑπέρβασίς ἐστιν ἰσθμοῦ τριάκοντα σταδίων πρὸς τὰς νήσους τὰς Καρπασίας καὶ τὸ νότιον πέλαγος· εἶτ ’ ἄκρα καὶ ὄρος· ἡ δ ’ ἀκρώρεια καλεῖται Ὄλυμπος, ἔχουσα Ἀφροδίτης Ἀκραίας ναόν, ἄδυτον γυναιξὶ καὶ ἀόρατον (“and the passage from [the city of] Carpasia across the isthmus to the Carpasian Islands and the southern sea is thirty stadia [about 5,5 km]. Then there are a promontory and a mountain. The mountain peak is called Olympos and it has a temple of Aphrodite Acraea, which should not be entered or seen by women.”)45 The Geographer’s passage is confirmed by an inscription found in 1958 in Karpasia. It dates from the second half of the 2nd century AD and bears the clauses of a certain Emmidoros’ will, in which he left some landed familial property to “our own Aphrodite on the acra” (τῇ παρ᾽ ἡμῖν / Ἀφ̣[ροδίτῃ τῇ ἐπὶ τοῖς] ἄκροις, l. 11‑12); the goddess is also called Acraia in the same document ([τῆ]ς Ἀκρέας Ἀφροδίτης, l. 20).46

  • 47 Strabo 14.6.3, C682 (translation based on Jones 1929). Christodoulou 2019a, p. 161.

20Continuing with the description of the eastern coast of Cyprus, Strabo reports the existence of another sanctuary consecrated to Aphrodite in the most south-eastern part of the island: καὶ μετὰ ταύτας ἡ Σαλαμίς, ὅθεν ἦν Ἄριστος ὁ συγγραφεύς· εἶτʼ Ἀρσινόη πόλις καὶ λιμήν· εἶτ’ ἄλλος λιμὴν Λεύκολλα· εἶτ’ ἄκρα Πηδάλιον, ἧς ὑπέρκειται λόφος τραχύς, ὑψηλός, τραπεζοειδής, ἱερὸς Ἀφροδίτης, εἰς ὃν ἀπὸ Κλειδῶν στάδιοι ἑξακόσιοι ὀγδοήκοντα. εἶτα κολπώδης καὶ τραχὺς παράπλους ὁ πλείων εἰς Κίτιον (“and after these [the Carpasian Islands], there is Salamis, where Aristos the historian was born, then Arsinoe, a city and harbour, and then another harbour, Leucolla. Then there is a promontory, Pedalion, above which lies a hill that is rugged, high, trapezium-shaped, and sacred to Aphrodite, wither the distance from the Cleides [islands] is six hundred and eighty stadia. Then the coasting-voyage to Kition is for the most part sinuous and rough.”)47

  • 48 Sakellarios 1890, pp. 186‑187.
  • 49 Ohnefalsch-Richter 1891; Hadjisavvas 1997, pp. 24‑25.
  • 50 Cf. Satraki 2012, p. 357.

21Sakellarios identified the harbour called Leucolla with the present Konnoi Bay, near which took place the naval battle of 306 BC between Ptolemy I and Demetrios Poliorcetes, and the promontory Pedalion with what is today called Cavo (Capo) Greco.48 Max Ohnefalsch-Richter in a survey of the area in 1891 testifies the existence of a cult site on the ridge of a hill at Cavo Greco. He describes a richly decorated temenos, with fragments of real life statues and primitive walls.49 A small-scale research survey, conducted in the 1960’s in the area by the Cyprus Survey, established the existence of a site on the peak of the promontory, which constituted the south-eastern border of the city-state of Salamis.50

  • 51 SEG 17, 1960, 748; I.Paphos 337. The site gave a considerable number of Cypro-syllabic inscriptions (...)
  • 52 IG XV 2, 400.
  • 53 The symbolic use of spolia in the Early Christian basilica needs to be addressed in a separate pape (...)

22The epithet ἀκραῖος and, in the feminine, ἀκραία derives from the noun ἄκρα, which means “top” or “extreme” and is attested in two inscriptions from Cyprus: on a border cippus ([οὗτος] ὅρος ἄκρας), which was found in the archaic sanctuary at Rantidi (in the proximity of the Paphian sanctuary of the goddess at Kouklia)51, and in a late Classical – early Hellenistic sherd of Plain White ware from Idalion preserving a list of city gates, including the “gates to the acropolis” (πύλαι ἐς ἄκραν̣, l. 3).52 Ἀκραῖος / ἀκραία is therefore a common epithet given to divinities for denoting exactly the topographic location of their sanctuary on the summit of a hill, often the acropolis, or at the very tip of a peninsula. It is thus possible that Aphrodite Acraia was venerated also in the most south-eastern part of the island, although this epithet is not reported by Strabo. Her sanctuary was situated on the hill above the Pedalion promontory, about 7,2 km to the south-east of the locality of Panagia, where recent excavations brought to light the stele. As all the archaeological material found in conjunction with the stele dates entirely from the 6th-7th century AD, we can assume that the inscription was transported to be placed as a ritual object in one of the auxiliary buildings of the Early Christian basilica.53 It is in this context that the name of Aphrodite must have been chiselled off.

  • 54 Cesnola 1877, pp. 190‑192; see further Ulbrich 2013, p. 38.
  • 55 See above n. 41. For the sculptural iconography of this kind in Cyprus, see Rogge, Zachariou-Kaila (...)

23In 1877, Cesnola published an interesting discovery from nearby Leucolla: a limestone head with mural crown, as well as other fragments of stone sculptures.54 If the head is attributed to Aphrodite, as we believe it should, given that this type of iconography is attested on Salaminian coinage of the 4th century BC,55 then the goddess at Leucolla-Pedalion was more than a protector deity of sailors: she is the divine patron of the naval city itself. It is therefore possible that this goddess of political character was addressed by a member of the royal house of Salamis on the hill of Pedalion.

  • 56 Körner 2019, pp. 335‑336.

24Aphrodite’s Cypriot character, which was promoted by the kings of Salamis ever since Euagoras I in their attempts to dominate the whole island, finds another example in the dedication of the anax Nicocles, king Pnytagoras’ son. The appointment of his brother and last king of Salamis, Nicocreon, as στρατηγὸς τῆς Κύπρου offered the royal family the final opportunity to accomplish their ambitious plans to rule over all of Cyprus, but within a quite different political framework56. No other sanctuary than that of Kypris could provide, therefore, a more perfect environment for aspirations of dominance and royal self-presentation. The fact that the Cypriot goddess par excellence was addressed again in such a context and probably for the last time, between 315 and 311 BC, as we assume, is sound and needs no further explanation. The death of Nicocreon – Salaminian king and Ptolemaic strategos – and the abolition of the last kingdoms closed an epoch and preluded the establishment of the Hellenistic kingship in 306 BC.

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Abbreviations

BMC Cyprus: G. F. Hill, Catalogue of the Greek coins of Cyprus in the British Museum. London, 1904.

CEG 2: P. A. Hansen, Carmina epigraphica Graeca saeculorum IV a. Chr. n. Berlin & New York, 1989.

FGrH: F. Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. Berlin & Leiden, 1923-1958.

GGM I: C. Müller, Geographi Graeci Minores, I. Paris, 1855.

ICS: O. Masson, Les inscriptions chypriotes syllabiques. Recueil critique et commenté, 2nd ed. Paris, 1983.

IG XV 2: M. Kantirea, D. Summa (eds.), Inscriptiones Cypri alphabeticae. Fasciculus 1. Inscriptiones Cypri Orientalis: Citium, Pýla, Golgi, Tremithus, Idalium, Tamassus, Kafizin, Ledra. Berlin & Boston, 2020.

I.Paphos: J.‑B. Cayla, Les inscriptions de Paphos. La cité chypriote sous la domination lagide et à l’époque impériale. Lyon, 2018.

I.Salamine: J. Pouilloux, P. Roesch, J. Marcillet-Jaubert, Salamine de Chypre XIII. Testimonia Salaminia 2. Paris, 1987.

LSJ: H. G. Liddell, R. Scott, H. S. Jones. Greek-English Lexicon, 9th ed. Oxford, 1940.

SEG: Supplementum epigraphicum graecum. Leiden, 1923-.

Bibliographic references

Bagnall R. S. 1976. The administration of the Ptolemaic possessions outside Egypt. Leiden.

Bailey D. M. 1988. A catalogue of the lamps in the British Museum III. Roman provincial lamps. London.

Cesnola L. Palma di. 1877. Cyprus. Its ancient cities, tombs and temples. London.

Christodoulou P. 2009. “Nicocréon, le dernier roi de Salamine de Chypre. Discours idéologique et pouvoir politique”. CCEC 39, pp. 235‑258.

Christodoulou P. 2014. “Les mythes fondateurs des royaumes chypriotes. Le nostos de Teukros”. CCEC 44, pp. 191‑216.

Christodoulou P. 2019a. “Aphrodite and imperialistic politics in classical years: from Cimon to Evagoras I”. C. Dunn, E. Koulakiotis (eds.) Political religions in the Graeco-Roman world. Discourses, practices, and images. Cambridge, pp. 150‑179.

Christodoulou P. 2019b. “La refondation de Salamine de Chypre par Évagoras Ier (415‑374/3 av. J.‑C.)”. S. Rogge, C. Ioannou, T. Mavrogiannis (eds.) Salamis of Cyprus. History and archaeology from the earliest times to late antiquity. Münster, pp. 265‑288.

Christou D. 2013. Ανασκαφές Κουρίου 1975-1998, vol. I. Nicosia.

Dindorf W. 1853. Harpocrationis Lexicon in decem oratores Atticos. Harpocration, Valerius. Oxford.

Geer R. M. 1947. Diodorus of Sicily. The Library of History, Books XVIII-XIX.1‑65, Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge (MA).

Geer R. M. 1954. Diodorus of Sicily. The Library of History, Books XIX.66-110‑XX, Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge (MA).

Gesche H. 1974. “Nikokles von Paphos und Nikokreon von Salamis”. Chiron 4, pp. 103‑125.

Hadjisavvas S. 1997. Agia Napa: Excavations at Makronisos and the Archaeology of the Region. Nicosia.

Hermary A., Masson O. 1982. “Inscriptions d’Amathonte IV”. BCH 106, pp. 235‑244.

Hogarth D. G. 1889. Devia Cypria. Notes on an archaeological journey in Cyprus in 1888. London.

Iacovou M. 2002. “From ten to naught. Formation, consolidation and abolition of Cyprus’ Iron Age polities”. CCEC 32, pp. 73‑87.

Iacovou M. 2006. “From the Mycenean qa‑si‑re‑u to the Cypriote pa‑si‑le‑wo‑se: the basileus in the kingdoms of Cyprus”. S. Deger-Jalkotzy, I. Lemos (eds.) Ancient Greece from the Mycenaean palaces to the age of Homer. Edinburgh, pp. 315‑335.

Jones H. L. 1929. The Geography of Strabo, vol. VI, Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge (MA).

Karnava A. 2019. “Old inscriptions, new readings. A god for the Rantidi sanctuary in south-west Cyprus”. CCEC 49, pp. 19‑36.

Körner C. 2017. Die zyprischen Königtümer im Schatten der Großreiche des Vorderen Orients. Studien zu den zyprischen Monarchien vom 8. bis zum 4. Jh. v. Chr. Leuven, Paris & Bristol.

Körner C. 2019. “The Kings of Salamis in the Shadow of the Near Eastern Empires: A Relationship of «Suzerainty»”. S. Rogge, C. Ioannou, T. Mavrogiannis (eds.) Salamis of Cyprus. History and archaeology from the earliest times to late antiquity. Münster, pp. 327‑339.

Markou E. 2011. L’or des rois de Chypre. Numismatique et histoire à l’époque classique. Athens.

Mavrojannis T. 2014. “Il cenotafio di Nicocreon a Salamina di Cipro e la regalità di Demetrio Poliorcete”. L. Abbondanza, F. Coarelli, E. Lo Sardo (eds.) Apoteosi. Da uomini a dei: il Mausoleo di Adriano. Rome, pp. 79‑92.

Mehl A. 2000. “Ἑλληνιστικὴ Κύπρος”. T. Papadopoulos (ed.), Ἀρχαία Κύπρος, II. Nicosia, pp. 619‑761.

Michaelidou-Nikolaou I., Panayotou-Triantaphyllopoulou A. 1998. “L’inscription digraphe de
Salamine de Chypre (Test. Sal. 2, No 17). Nouvelle approche”. ZPE 121, pp. 95‑102.

Mitford T. B. 1960a. “A Cypriot oath of allegiance to Tiberius”. JRS 50, pp. 75‑79.

Mitford T. B. 1960b. “Unpublished syllabic inscriptions of the Cyprus Museum”. OpAth 3, pp. 177‑213.

Mitford T. B. 1961. “Further contributions to the epigraphy of Cyprus”. AJA 65, pp. 93‑151.

Monloup T. 1994. Salamine de Chypre XIV. Les terres cuites classiques. Un sanctuaire de la Grande Déesse. Paris.

Norlin G. 1966. Isocrates, vol. I, Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge (MA) & London.

Ohnefalsch-Richter M. 1891. “Ein heiliger Hügel der Aphrodite auf Cypern”. Berliner Philologische Wochenschrift 11, cols. 962‑963.

Olson S. D. 2008. Athenaeus, The learned banqueters, Book VIII‑X, 420e, Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge (MA) & London.

Oziol T. 1977. Salamine de Chypre VII. Les lampes du Musée de Chypre. Paris.

Papalexandrou A., Caraher W. 2012. “Arsinoe in Late Antiquity and the Middle Ages”. W. A. P Childs, J. S. Smith, J. M. Padgett (eds.), City of gold. The archaeology of Polis Chrysochous, Cyprus. Yale, pp. 267‑282.

Papantoniou G. 2013. “Cypriot autonomous polities at the crossroads of empire: the imprint of a transformed landscape in the Classical and Hellenistic periods”. BASOR 370, pp. 169‑205.

Papantoniou G., Morris C. E. 2019. “Kyprogenes Aphrodite: between political power and cultural identity”. K. Soueref, A. Gartziou-Tatti (eds.), Gods of peace and war in the myths of the Mediterranean people. Ioannina, pp. 147‑174.

Pilides D., Olivier J.‑P. 2008. “A Black Glazed Cup from the Hill of Agios Georgios, Lefkosia, belonging to a «wanax»”. RDAC, pp. 337‑352.

Rautman M. 2014. “The Troodos in twilight: a provincial landscape in the time of Justinian”. C. A. Stewart, T. W. Davis, A. W. Carr (eds.), Cyprus and the balance of empires: art and archaeology from Justinian I to the Coeur de Lion, ASOR Archaeological Reports 20. Boston, pp. 39‑56.

Roesch P. 1973. “Une inscription digraphe du ve s. av. J.‑C.”. Salamine de Chypre IV. Anthologie salaminienne. Paris, pp. 81‑84.

Rogge S., Zachariou-Kaila E. 2014. “Large and well fortified: a colossal female head with a mural crown in Berlin”. V. Karageorghis, E. Poyiadji-Richter, S. Rogge (eds.), Cypriote antiquities in Berlin in the focus of new research. Münster, pp. 193‑241.

Sakellarios A. 1890. Τὰ Κυπριακά, I. Athens.

Satraki A. 2012. Κύπριοι βασιλείς από τον Κοσμασο μέχρι το Νικοκρέοντα. Η πολιτειακή οργάνωση της αρχαίας Κύπρου από την Ύστερη Εποχή του Χαλκού μέχρι το τέλος της Κυπροκλασικής περιόδου με βάση τα αρχαιολογικά δεδομένα. Athens.

Sherman C. L. 1952. Diodorus of Sicily. The Library of History, Books XV.20-XVI.65, Loeb Classical Library. Cambridge (MA).

Spyridakis K. 1963. Κύπριοι βασιλεῖς τοῦ 4 αἰ. π.Χ. (411-311/10 π.Χ.). Nicosia.

Stylianou P. 2000. “Τὰ ἀρχαία βασίλεια (Η´ αἰών – 315 π.Χ.)”. T. Papadopoulos (ed.), Ἀρχαία Κύπρος, vol. II. Nicosia, pp. 465‑618.

Ulbrich A. 2013. “Hellenistic evidence from the sanctuary at Maroni-Vournes”. P. Scherrer, G. Koiner, A. Ulbrich (eds.), Hellenistic Cyprus and further studies in Antiquity. Graz, pp. 31‑61.

Haut de page

Notes

1 The authors thank Artemis Karnava for an initial reading of the inscription and the squeeze (fig. 7), Panos Christodoulou and the two anonymous readers of this paper for their useful remarks, as well as Chris Schabel and Euthymios Shaftacolas. The remaining errors are, of course, ours.

2 This paper should be considered as a first, preliminary report of the findings at Protaras-Panagia mainly focusing on the stele. Further research is still being conducted at the site and the findings are still under preservation, therefore a detailed description of the site and an exact dating of the finds will be addressed in a future paper.

3 Rautman 2014.

4 For parallels, see Bailey 1988, pp. 290‑291, Q2349-2353; Oziol 1977, pp. 279‑284 nos. 842‑871.

5 For parallels, see Polis-Petrades (Papalexandrou, Caraher 2012, p. 271) and Kourion – Roman baths (Christou 2013, p. 335 no. 740.

6 This material originates most probably from quarries located in the wider area of south-east Cyprus. The authors thank the geologist Miltiades Polydorou for his report after an optical examination of the stele.

7 Digraph and, later, alphabetic legends appear on the coins of Salamis from Evagoras I (Markou 2011, pp. 236‑240). – It is quite uncertain that an [Ε]ὐϝάγορ[ας ‑‑‑ Σαλ/αμίνιος [‑‑‑] on an inscription from Salamis should be identified with the homonymous king (Roesch 1973; cf. ICS, p. 418 no. 318d; I.Salamine 17; Michaelidou-Nikolaou, Panayotou-Triantaphyllopoulou 1998 [SEG 48, 1998, 1812]).

8 Respectively, I.Paphos 2; IG XV 2, 780; CEG 2, 812. Cf. indicative contemporary digraphic dedications by the Paphian dynasty (Mitford 1960b, pp. 200‑205 no. 17 [SEG 18, 1962, 586]; ICS, pp. 95‑96 no. 1 [SEG 20, 1964, 251]), by the Amathousian king Androcles (Hermary, Masson 1982 [SEG 32, 1982, 1318], this one preceeded by an Eteocypriot version; cf. ICS, p. 413 no. 196e.), and, a little earlier, by the king of Soloi, Stasicrates (ICS, pp. 218‑220 no. 212).

9 Isocrates, Euagoras 72 (translation based on Norlin 1966). For a critical approach to the foundation myth of Salamis and the cult of the Teucrids, see Christodoulou 2019b.

10 Harpocrationis Lexikon in decem oratores Atticos (ed. W. Dindorf, 1853, p. 32; translation of the authors).

11 For the formation and the character of the Cypriote kingdoms, see Iacovou 2006.

12 The title anax is also recorded in a 4th century BC syllabic inscription engraved on the base of a cup, which was found in Nicosia, locality Agios Georgios (wa‑na‑xe ti‑ma‑se e‑mi, “I am the prince Timas” or “I am the property of prince Timas”, according to Olivier [Pilides, Olivier 2008, pp. 339‑344]). The title anax translates the Phoenician ’dn in a bilingual – Phoenician and syllabic – dedication of a statue to Apollo Amyclos (Reshef Mikal) in Idalion by ὁ ϝάναξ (o‑wa‑na‑xe and in Phoenician ’dn) [Βααλρωμος], son of Αβδιμιλκων, dating from the 4th year of the reign of Milkyaton, king of Kition and Idalion, at the beginning of the 4th century BC (ICS 220). For other use of the word ἄναξ in the epic and classical literature (as epithet of gods, especially of Apollo, and as a title of the Homeric heroes, especially Agamemnon), see LSJ.

13 Plutarch, Amatorius 766d.

14 Athenaeus, 6.256a: ὧν οἱ μὲν Γεργίνοι συναμιγνύμενοι τοῖς κατὰ τὴν πόλιν ἔν τε τοῖς ἐργαστηρίοις καὶ ταῖς ἀγοραῖς ὠτακουστοῦσι κατασκόπων ἔχοντες τάξιν, ὅ,τι δʼ ἂν ἀκούσωσιν ἀναφέρουσιν ἑκάστης ἡμάρας πρὸς τοὺς καλουμένους ἄνακτας. οἱ δὲ Προμάλλαγες ζητοῦσιν ἂν τι ὑπὸ τῶν Γεργίνων προσαγγελθέντων ἄξιον εἶναι ζητήσεως δόξῃ ὄντες τινὲς ἐρευνηταί.

15 Athenaeus, 6.255f.

16 Spyridakis 1963; Gesche 1974; Stylianou 2000; Christodoulou 2009; Markou 2011 (especially for the numismatic evidence); Körner 2017.

17 Diodorus Siculus 16.42.7‑8

18 Diodorus Siculus 16.42.3.

19 Diodorus Siculus 16.46.1.

20 Diodorus Siculus 16.46.2 (translation Sherman 1952).

21 Isocrates dedicated three orations to Cyprus (Euagoras, Nicocles, To Nicocles), of which at least the last one was addressed to his student Nicocles.

22 Diodorus Siculus 16.46.3.

23 Arrian, Anabasis 2.20.6 and 22.2; Curtius 4.3.11. For the ideological context of the alliance between Alexander and Pnytagoras, see Christodoulou 2009.

24 Athenaeus 4.167c‑d (who took this information from Duris of Samos).

25 Iacovou 2002, pp. 78‑79; Körner 2019, p. 335.

26 Plutarch, Alexander 29.1‑2.

27 Arrian, Indica 18.8; Nicocles of Soloi, son of Pasicrates, also participated in the same adventure.

28 Athenaeus 8.349e (Olson 2008). There is no need to accept the codex correction Βιοθέα to Ἀξιοθέα by G. Kaibel (Teubner) et Ch. B. Gulick (Loeb); see Mehl 2000, pp. 634‑635, with an interesting note (n. 33) about a Phoenician influence on the structure of the Greek theophoric name Βιοθέα.

29 For the events, see Mehl 2000, pp. 631‑632.

30 The king’s name Πυγμαλίων transmitted by Diodorus (19.79.4) is recorded as Pumayyaton (PMJTN) in Phoenician sources (Markou 2011, pp. 145, 147).

31 Diodorus Siculus 19.79.4; cf. 19.59.1.

32 Diodorus Siculus 19.79.5 (translation based on Geer 1954).

33 For the still open question of the title strategos given to Nicocreon of Salamis, see Gesche 1974; Bagnall 1976, pp. 39‑42; Mehl 2000, pp. 631‑632; Mavrojannis 2014.

34 Bagnall 1976, pp. 41‑42.

35 FGrH 239 F 17 (when the eponymous archon in Athens was Simonides).

36 Diodorus Siculus 19.62.3‑4 (translation Geer 1947).

37 Diodorus Siculus 20.21.1 (translation Geer 1954).

38 Diodorus Siculus 20.47.3 and 52.5.

39 Christodoulou 2009; Christodoulou 2014; Christodoulou 2019b.

40 Hymn to Aphrodite 4. Christodoulou 2019a, pp. 162‑166; Christodoulou 2019b, pp. 272‑273.

41 BMC Cyprus, under Salamis, nos. 64‑65, 76, 79, 85; Markou 2011, pp. 272‑273, 294; Papantoniou 2013.

42 Monloup 1994.

43 I.Salamine 41 and 42. See further Papantoniou, Morris 2019, pp. 154 and 156.

44 Mitford 1960a.

45 Strabo 14.6.3, C682 (translation based on Jones 1929). See also Anonymi Stadiasmus, p. 503 (GGM I, ed. C. Müller): Ἀπὸ Φιλεοῦντος ἐπὶ τὰ ἄκρα [...] στάδιοι ξ´... Ἐπίκειται δὲ ἐπάνω ἱερὸν Ἀφροδίτης. For a description, see Hogarth 1889, pp. 83‑84.

46 Mitford 1961, pp. 125‑127 no. 26 (SEG 20, 1964, 316).

47 Strabo 14.6.3, C682 (translation based on Jones 1929). Christodoulou 2019a, p. 161.

48 Sakellarios 1890, pp. 186‑187.

49 Ohnefalsch-Richter 1891; Hadjisavvas 1997, pp. 24‑25.

50 Cf. Satraki 2012, p. 357.

51 SEG 17, 1960, 748; I.Paphos 337. The site gave a considerable number of Cypro-syllabic inscriptions (Karnava 2019).

52 IG XV 2, 400.

53 The symbolic use of spolia in the Early Christian basilica needs to be addressed in a separate paper.

54 Cesnola 1877, pp. 190‑192; see further Ulbrich 2013, p. 38.

55 See above n. 41. For the sculptural iconography of this kind in Cyprus, see Rogge, Zachariou-Kaila 2014.

56 Körner 2019, pp. 335‑336.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1 — Map showing the major sites mentioned in the paper.
Crédits Miltiades Polydorou.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/docannexe/image/508/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 676k
Titre Figure 2 — Aerial view of the excavation.
Crédits University of Cyprus.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/docannexe/image/508/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 679k
Titre Figure 3 — The floor on which the stele was discovered and surrounding structures.
Crédits Department of Antiquities, Polina Christofi.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/docannexe/image/508/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 612k
Titre Figure 4 — The stele in the archaeological context of its discovery.
Crédits Department of Antiquities, Polina Christofi.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/docannexe/image/508/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 583k
Titre Figure 5 — Nicocles’ stele.
Crédits Artemis Karnava.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/docannexe/image/508/img-5.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 340k
Titre Figure 6 — The inscription.
Crédits Artemis Karnava.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/docannexe/image/508/img-6.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 310k
Titre Figure 7 — A squeeze of the inscription.
Crédits Artemis Karnava.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/docannexe/image/508/img-7.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 471k
URL http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/docannexe/image/508/img-8.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 81k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Polina Christofi et Maria Kantirea, « Anax Nicocles of Salamis in a new inscription »Cahiers du Centre d’Études Chypriotes, 50 | 2020, 217-232.

Référence électronique

Polina Christofi et Maria Kantirea, « Anax Nicocles of Salamis in a new inscription »Cahiers du Centre d’Études Chypriotes [En ligne], 50 | 2020, mis en ligne le 01 mai 2022, consulté le 22 mai 2025. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/cchyp/508 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/cchyp.508

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-SA-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search