Nota Bene - University of Chicago

�Αβε�ρκιος ω� δε γραφη�ναι), and then take the full extent of lines 18-22 as having been added by
his family (whom, we notice, are never mentioned in the text of the inscriptions we have) 67 or
others after his death at 72 (ε� βδομηκοστο� ν ε�τος και� δευ� τερον η�γον α� ληθω� ς), using his
personified voice to call down a curse against those who might violate “my tomb” (τυ� μβος ε� μου�).
The interpretation of v. 18 as a pivot seems worth further study. At any rate, Robert’s essential
suggestion -- that we likely do not have a single inscription but three, and that we should not
assume they all occupied the single, frontal face of the inscription -- seems well taken. Even if
one theory cannot be proven to the exclusion of others, our examination and interpretation of
the epitaph should proceed to try on various constellations of possibility of meaning and mutual
influence. Even Ramsay, the finder of the stones, thought the text was inscribed on 3 faces of
the stone. In my judgment, for all these considerations, the question deserves to be
reopened. 68
The most striking parallel to the phenomenon of multiple inscriptions is the famous
North African tomb monument of T. Flavius Secundus which we saw in Kasserine, which
contains several inscriptions in variant sizes of lettering, explicitly building upon one another as
living authorial voice passes into death and others “speak” for it. In this case the son adds 20
lines to mark symbolically the age of the original author (now interred within), who had
composed and had inscribed the lengthy Latin poem -- more than 4 times as many lines as our
Abercius -- while alive. 69 Although this monument would have dwarfed Abercius’ in size, it
Page 20
perhaps provides us with the same phenomenon of a monument erected during the life of the
main figure, but then also “growing” along and beyond him. Unlike Secundus père, we do not
------------------------------------
67 Nor in the vita Abercii, where he is presented only in the company of the “brothers and sisters” of the
Christian community. It is οι� παρο� ντες who burried his body in the tomb (§79 [55]).
68 “The stone on which the epitaph was engraved was a block of marble nearly square. One side was plain
except for a circular garland or crown in the middle, and a broad double band of moulding round the edge. The other
three sides were occupied by the inscription , which was engraved in a sunk panel surrounded by a broad band of
moulding” (Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia, 425; see n. XX below on the confusion involved here between the
bomos and the tymbos); followed by Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers, vol. 1, pt. 2, pp. 495-966 that “the epitaph was
engraved on three sides of a nearly square block of marble.” See also Abel, “Étude sur l’inscription d’Abercius,” 346
(who disputes Robert’s idea that the wreath side of the stone had engraving, but argues for several different faces
being inscribed).
69 For a description of the monument, and exegesis of it as a good illustration of “symbolic epigraphy,” see
Bodel, “Epigraphy and the ancient historian,” 39-40.