CGRN 244

Date :

ca. 340-330 BC

Justification: context (around 335 BC according to the analysis of Forrest, p. 179-181).

Provenance

Chios . Found in a modern house in the city; now in the Chios Museum (inv. no. 119).

Support

Nearly complete stele of blue marble, only slightly damaged at the top and the sides. According to Haussoullier (p. 50), only the first line of the text has been lost.

Height: 84.5 cm
Width: 43.3 cm
Depth: 12.6 cm

Layout

Stoichedon 28.

Letters: 1.4 cm high.

Bibliography

Edition here based on Graf 1985: 478-479, I.Chios 3. We adopt another possible reading of line 2.

Cf. also: Haussoullier 1879; SIG³ 987; Sokolowski LSCG 118; CDE 4; Rhodes - Osborne GHI 87.

Further bibliography: Dunst 1958: 177-178; Forrest 1960; Jones 1987; Brulé 1998; Jones 2016; Malouchou - Matthaiou 2020.

Text

[......^{1 line}......]
[πρ]εσβύτ[..........¹⁹......... Κλ]-
[υ]τίδαις ἐ[ν τῶι ἱερῶ]ι (?) τεμένει [τῶν Κ]-
[λ]υτιδῶν [ο]ἶκον τεμένιον ἱερὸν οἰ[κ]-
[ο]δομήσασθαι καὶ τὰ ἱερὰ τὰ κοινὰ [ἐ]-
5[κ] τῶν ἰδιωτικῶν οἰκιῶν εἰς τὸν κο[ι]-
[ν]ὸν οἶκον ἐνεγκεῖν· θυσαμένοις ἐ[κ]-
[α]λλιέρησεν οἰκοδομήσασθαι καὶ [τ]-
[ὰ] ἱερὰ τὰ κ[οι]νὰ ἐ[κ] τῶν ἰδιωτικῶν ο[ἰ]-
[κ]ιῶν εἰς τὸν [κοιν]ὸν οἶκον ἐνεγκε[ῖ]-
10[ν]. ἐπὶ πρυτάνεω[ς Φο]ίνι[κο]ς Πλυντη[ρ]-
[ι]ῶνος τετράδι, [ἔγνωσαν Κ]λυτίδαι [θ]-
[ύ]σασθαι περὶ τῶν ἱερ[ῶν] τ[ῶν] Κλυτι[δ]-
[ῶ]ν τῶν ἐν ταῖς ἰδιωτικαῖ[ς ο]ἰκίαι[ς]
[ὄ]ντων, πότερον δεῖ α[ὀ]τὰ [εἰς] τὸν οἶ[κ]-
15[ο]ν ὃν Κλυ[τ]ίδαι κατὰ μα[ντεί]αν ὠικ[ο]-
[δ]ομήσαντο φέρεσθαι τῆι ἡμέραι ἧ[ι]
[γί]νεται ἡ θυσία, τὸν δὲ ἄλλον χρόν[ο]-
[ν] παρὰ τοῖς ἰδιώται[ς] φυλάσσεσθα[ι]
[κ]αθάπερ καὶ πρότερον, ἢ διὰ παντὸς [α]-
20[ὀτ]ὰ κεῖσθαι ἐν τῶι οἴκωι· θυσαμέν[ο]-
[ι]ς ἐκαλλιέρησεν διὰ παντὸς τὰ ἱε[ρ]-
[ὰ] κεῖσθαι ἐν τῶι οἴκωι. ἐπὶ πρυτάν[ε]-
[ω]ς Κλεοκύδους, Ποσιδεῶνος τετάρ[τ]-
[ηι] ἐξ εἰκάδος, ἔγνωσαν Κλυτίδαι τ[ῷ]
25[ἱ]ερῶι οἴκωι τῶι Κλυτιδῶν, ἐν ὧι τὰ [π]-
[α]τρῶια ἱερὰ κάθηται, καὶ τῶι χώρω[ι]
[τῶ]ι πρὸς τῶι οἴκωι χρῆσθαι Κλυτί[δ]-
[α]ς κοινῆι, φατρίαν δὲ μηδὲ ἰδιώτη[ν]
[μ]ηθένα τῶι οἴκωι τούτωι χρῆσθαι [μ]-
30[η]δὲ ἄλλωι δοῦναι χρήσασθαι μηθε[ν]-
[ί]· ὃς δ’ ἂν παρὰ τάοτα ἢ ἀοτὸς χρήσητ[α]-
[ι] τῶι οἴκωι ἢ ἑτέρωι δῶι χρήσασθα[ι],
[ἀ]ποδότω καθ’ ἑκάστην χρῆσιν ἢ δόσ[ι]-
[ν Κ]λυτίδαις χιλίας δραχμὰς ἱερὰ[ς]
35[το]ῦ Διὸς τοῦ Πατρώιου καὶ ταῖς ἐκ [τ]-
[ῶν] νόμων ἀραῖς ἔνοχος ἔστω, τοὺς δ’ [ἐ]-
[πι]μελητὰς τὰς γενομένας γνώμας [π]-
[ερὶ] τοῦ οἴκου καὶ τῶν ἱερῶν καὶ τὰ[ς]
[ἅμ]α μαντείας ἀναγράψαντας εἰς σ[τ]-
40[ήλ]ην λιθίνην στῆσαι παρὰ τὴν εἴσ[ο]-
[δο]ν τοῦ οἴκου. ^vacat

Translation

[...] elder [...] for the Klytidai to erect in [the sacred (?)] precinct of the Klytidai a sacred house belonging to the precinct and to transfer the common sacred objects (5) from the private households into the common house. To those who made it, the sacrifice gave favourable omens for erecting (the building) and transferring the common sacred objects from the private households into the common house.

(10) In the prytany of Phoinix, on the 4th of Plynterion, the Klytidai [resolved] to offer a sacrifice concerning the sacred objects of the Klytidai kept in the private households, in order to find out whether they should, on the day when the sacrifice takes place, be carried to the house (15) which the Klytidai have erected according to the divine response, and, as previously, be safeguarded by the private individuals the rest of the time, or whether these (objects) should (20) remain for all time in the house. The sacrifice gave to those who made it favourable omens for these (objects) remaining for all time in the house.

In the prytany of Kleokydes, on the 24th (or: 27th) of Posideon, the Klytidai decided that (25) the Klytidai are to use in common the sacred house of the Klytidai, in which the ancestral sacred objects are placed, as well as the land situated near this building; that no phatria or any private individual is to use this house (30); not to grant it to anyone else to use. Whoever, contrary to these prescriptions, either himself uses the house or grants it to another to use, let him pay to the Klytidai for each use or grant thereof 1000 drachmae sacred (35) to Zeus Patroios, and let him be liable to the curses prescribed by the laws. The epimeletai should record on a stone stele the decisions taken about the house and the sacred objects and the accompanying divine responses (40), and erect it next to the entrance of the building.

Traduction

[…] ancien […] pour les Klytidai de construire dans l’enceinte [sacrée (?)] des Klytidai une maison sacrée appartenant à l’enceinte et de transférer les objets sacrés collectifs (5) des maisonnées particulières dans la maison commune. À ceux qui le réalisèrent, le sacrifice donna d'heureux présages pour construire (la maison) et transférer les objets sacrés collectifs des maisonnées particulières à la maison commune.

(10) Sous la prytanie de Phoinix, le 4 Plynterion, les Klytidai [ont décidé] d’offrir un sacrifice à propos des objets sacrés conservés dans les maisonnées particulières, pour savoir s’il fallait, le jour où l’on procède au sacrifice, les porter dans la maison (15) que les Klytidai ont construite en accord avec la réponse divine, et les conserver le reste du temps chez les particuliers, comme avant, ou s’il fallait qu’ils (20) restent continuellement dans la maison. Le sacrifice donna à ceux qui le réalisèrent d’heureux présages pour que les objets sacrés restent continuellement dans la maison.

Sous la prytanie de Kleokydès, le 24 (ou: 27) Posideon, les Klytidai ont décidé que (25) les Klytidai auraient en commun l’usage de la maison sacrée des Klytidai, dans laquelle sont déposés les objets sacrés ancestraux, ainsi que le terrain attenant à la maison, et qu’aucune phatria, ni aucun particulier n’utiliserait ce bâtiment, (30) et qu’ils n'en concéderaient l'usage à personne d’autre; celui qui, en violation de ces prescriptions, utiliserait lui-même la maison ou en concéderait l'usage à un autre, qu’il verse aux Klytidai pour chaque usage ou pour chaque autorisation donnée la somme de 1000 drachmes consacrées (35) à Zeus Patroios, et qu’il tombe sous le coup des imprécations prescrites par les lois; que les épimélètes, après avoir fait graver sur une stèle de pierre les décisions prises à propos de la maison et des objets sacrés, et les réponses divines qui les accompagnent, (40) l’érigent à l’entrée de la maison.

Commentary

The stone records three successive decisions of a sub-civic group on the island of Chios called the Klytidai, or "descendants of Klytios". The name of the Klytidai refers to a famous family of seers from Elis (Hdt. 9.33, with a crux; Paus. 6.17; Philostr. VA 5.25). Whatever the actual origin of the Klytidai of Chios, the sacrificial consultation of the gods to which the inscription provides evidence that some of them practised divination. The Klytidai are known to have owned substantial lands in the northeastern part of the island, where the temenos mentioned here was probably located (see Graf, p. 34-35). The dossier of regulations is concerned with the opportunity for the group to build and use a common building within their precinct. Two successive sacrifices are offered in order to know if the god or gods (undetermined) are in favour of different aspects of this project. The first sacrificial offering (lines 1-10) concerns the building of an oikos in their temenos and the transfer of the sacred objects of the group kept by particular families in their households into the new building. The divine response is positive. With a second sacrificial offering (lines 10-22), the group asks whether the sacred objects are to be kept in the new house on a one-time basis (the day of the sacrifice), or continuously. The divine answer seems to have suggested that the objects should remain permanently in the common house. Without mentioning a further sacrificial consultation, the third decision (lines 22-36) defines who is authorised to use the new house and the land next to it. The final part of the text (lines 36-41) concerns the fine payable to Zeus Patroios by those who fail to comply with the prescriptions and the curses they incur. It also refers to the inscribing of the dossier and the placement of the inscription.

The document has been subject to a social and political reading, inspired by Aristotle’s analysis of Cleisthenes’ transformation of the political landscape at Athens (Pol. 1319b). According to these views, the decision of the Klytidai was supposed to be the sign of a reform aimed at diminishing the importance of ancestral groups within a democratic city (e.g. Jones 1987: 192-194; Le Guen-Pollet, p. 28). However, the available evidence does not give any clue in that direction and the exact status of the group itself remains unclear (see below, lines 28-30). Moreover, even while kept in particular households, the sacred objects of the group were probably used collectively during “the sacrifice” (ἡ θυσία, line 17, probably the annual festival of the group), but taken back afterwards by specific families. The decision of the Klytidai does not therefore imply the transfer of a religious practice from the “private” to the “public” sphere, nor is it the sign of a democratic practice replacing an aristocratic one. What the text does allow us to grasp is the depositing of the hiera “at the centre” of the group, even if the background of the decision escapes us (cf. Rhodes - Osborne, p. 439; Brulé). For a partly analogous construction of collective space and the placement of communal sacred objects within it, compare the dossier of regulations of the family of Diomedon on the island of Kos, CGRN 170, especially lines 56-59, 70-131, with Commentary.

Lines 1-2: Since the two other decisions of the Klytidai start with a dated reference to the prytanis and the calendar month (lines 10-11 and 22-24), it might be possible that this was also the case in the first missing line (see Layout). The dating formula employed by the Klytidai is attested in records of civic decisions on the island (CGRN 170, lines 1-3); this could therefore be an official reference to the civic dating formula. Alternatively, the prytaneis could have belonged to the group itself. If that is right, the group would then have had its own prytaneis, in addition to other officials such as archons (see below, lines 36-37). Overall, however, the space is limited and the preserved formulation does not readily match that of the other enactments of the Klytidai in the document. The mention of someone or something "older" or "oldest" in the first extant line also does not correspond and is intriguing. It could potentially point to a different sort of official of the group, perhaps an elder or eldest member who acted as priest (compare the seniority assumed by the tribal elder for a sacrifice in CGRN 141, Lindos, with Commentary). But it is especially the dative Κλυτίδαις which does not match the later expression, ἔγνωσαν Κλυτίδαι (lines 10-11 and 22-24). Instead, the dative might suggest that it belongs to the phrasing of the question that will be addressed through sacrificial divination in lines 6-10 (one might think of an oracular, deliberative formula like [εἰ λῶιον καὶ ἄμεινόν ἐστι (τοῖς)] Κλυτίδαις κτλ.). In a similar context of matters related to cult and cult buildings, one would have expected consultation in an oracular sanctuary (e.g. CGRN 24, Athens, lines 3-4, 10; CGRN 104, Halikarnassos, lines 1-11, 15, 49; CGRN 227, Anaphe). However, in the present case, the group manifestly has the necessary competence to obtain divine answers through the process of sacrificial divination.

Line 3: The adjective τεμένιος is very rare. The expression οἶκος τεμένιος ἱερός closely associates the sacred building to the precinct.

Lines 4-6: The opposition that starts here between what is “private” (or “individual”) and what is “common” runs through the whole document. The contrast between αἱ ἰδιωτικαὶ οἰκίαι where the sacred objects were kept until this time, and ὁ κοινὸς οἶκος, the place to house them in the future, is generally seen as setting “private houses” and “a common house” (or collective building) against each other. However, οἰκία and οἶκος are not exact synonyms and the first goes beyond a material meaning in referring also to the family that lives there (hence the translation chosen here of “household” in English and “maisonnée” in French). In the present context, the word could be closer to “family” (cf. Brulé, p. 391-392, who refers to “lineages”). This would explain why the members of the group plan to keep their common objects in a common building, rather than leaving them assigned to individual families, given all the risks posed by matters of transmission and inheritance. According to Forrest (p. 179), the ἱερά were not considered “common” to the Klytidai before this decision. Yet the use of the ἱερά in the common sacrifice of the Klytidai (see lines 16-17), as well as their patrimonial and ancestral dimension (see lines 25-26), suggest that they already had a collective dimension when they were housed by individual families.

Lines 6-10: The first sacrifice has provided an indication in favour of the construction of a house or building and the transfer of the sacred objects. The verb καλλιερεῖν in lines 6-7 (as well as below, line 21) is normally a global reference to a sacrifice performed under good auspices (see e.g. CGRN 145, Kos, line 22; CGRN 156, Mykonos, line 20; CGRN 232, Argos, line 25). In the present case, the repeated mention of a μαντεία (lines 15 and 39) clearly implies and emphasises the divinatory aspect of the sacrificial ritual. Though often taking a human subject, the verb appears to be used with τὰ ἱερά as the implied subject, a formulation that is paralleled elsewhere (cf. e.g. Hdt. 7.134: καλλιερῆσαι θυομένοισι οὐκ ἐδύνατο, scil. τὰ ἱρά). We do not know exactly which method or methods of sacrificial divination were practiced by the Klytidai. For the divine signs associated with the burning of the divine portions on a sacrificial altar (a form of empyromancy), see Aesch. Pr. 484-499; extispicy, for instance, is another possibility.

Lines 10-22: For the dating formula, see above on lines 1-2. The second sacrifice performed in the month of Plynterion (April/May) suggests that there must have been some contention within the group about whether the κοινὰ ἱερά should be temporarily (namely during “the sacrifice”—ἡ θυσία—of line 17) or permanently housed in the common house. Perhaps the families who had previously treasured these objects resisted and interpreted the first divinatory advice (i.e. μαντεία, line 15) differently. The symbolic capital linked to the possession of these cult-objects must have been important. It was therefore necessary to question again the deity (or deities) who finally decided in favour of the permanent transfer of the cult-objects to the common house.

Lines 22-27: For the dating formula, see above on lines 1-2. The third step in the process does not mention a divine consultation or divination. Perhaps it did not seem to require one, since the decision here involves regulating access to the building and the adjoining land. The leasing of sacred land to third parties is a well-attested practice (see IG II² 2499; cf. Jones 2016) but the decision taken by the Klytidai is to limit the use of the house and land not only to their own group, but also to a collective involvement of their members.

Lines 28-30: φατρίαν has been considered a mistake (Sokolowski writes φρατρίαν without any comment; also Forrest, p. 179) but the form is attested elsewhere (see LSJ s.v. φράτρα II.3). Most commentators of the inscription have considered that the term refers to a phratry (e.g. Haussoullier, Graf, Le Guen-Pollet, Rhodes - Osborne). Against this background, it has been debated whether the phrase means that the use of the common house and land was granted to the phratry but not to an individual (Graf, p. 37), or that it should be allowed neither to the phratry nor to an individual (Rhodes - Osborne, p. 437). In the first option, the next interpretative step was to identify the Klytidai with “the phratry” (despite the absence of any article and the specific spelling of the word). The second option implied that the Klytidai were not a phratry. This has opened a seemingly never-ending debate about the status of this group: genos, phratry, tribe (Graf, p. 35-36 and Brulé, n. 58). With Brulé (p. 393-398), one could suppose that a phatria in Chios was a subdivision of a larger group, such as the Klytidai, whatever generic name the city gave them. For example, the group of the Labyadai of Delphi, whose generic name is not known either, is made up of patriai (CID I 9, Face A, line 25). In Miletos at the end of the 5th century BC, five imbricated levels of individual identity are attested: phylai, demoi, patriai, phratriai, and oikoi (Jones 1987: 320-325). It remains uncertain to which of these levels the Klytidai belonged, though they certainly included the ἰδιωτικαὶ οἰκίαι of the present text and may have encompassed the phatriai which are also mentioned.

Lines 33-35: The money of the fine is sacred to Zeus Patroios, who was certainly an important deity for the group (a dedication to the same god comes from the region of the island where the sanctuary is presumed to have been located: see Dunst; Dionysus and Apollo are also attested: Graf, p. 35). An interesting parallel can be made with the famous Delphic inscription issued by the sub-civic group of the Labyadai and referring to a sacrifice to Zeus Patroios and Apollo “during the Boukatia” (CGRN 82, Face D, lines 45-49). The oath of the tagoi, chief-magistrates of the group, must be sworn “by Zeus Patroios” (Face A, lines 13-15), and a collective oath of the group to vote fairly “according to the laws of the Delphians” is sworn “by Apollo, Poseidon Phratrios and Zeus Patroios” (CID I 9, Face B, lines 12-17). The cult-objects of the Klytidai are also said to be πατρῶια in lines 25-26, affirming their ancestral character in addition to the quality of κοινά that was used in the first part of the text (lines 4 and 8).

Lines 36-37: The Klytidai possess epimeletai and refer to νόμοι (probably their own, as again in the case of Labyadai, CID I 9, Face A, lines 2-3). From an earlier 4th-century lease of land by the Klytidai, it is also known that they possessed an archon and perhaps hieropoioi (Malouchou - Matthaiou, p. 399-400: Face A, lines 7-8; Face B, lines 7 and 54-55). Compare also the ἀρχεύων of the tribe Elpanoridai at Halasarna, in Kos, and the reference to a hieros nomos of the group: CGRN 145 (Kos), lines 1 and 34-36. On curses as forms of sanctions in ritual norms, see CGRN 191 (Philadelphia), lines 43-44, and IC III iv 9 (Itanos), line 81.

Publication

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike International License 4.0 .

All citation, reuse or distribution of this work must contain somewhere a link back to the DOI (https://doi.org/10.54510/CGRN244), as well as the year of consultation (see “Home” for details on how to cite or click “Export Citation” to create a reference for this specific file).

Authors

Jan-Mathieu Carbon
Vinciane Pirenne-Delforge

How To Cite

Brief citation of the Greek text : CGRN 244, lines x-x.

Reference to the file as a critical study of the inscription : Jan-Mathieu Carbon et Vinciane Pirenne-Delforge, "CGRN 244: Dossier of regulations of the Klytidai in Chios", in Collection of Greek Ritual Norms (CGRN), 2017-, consulted on April 19, 2024. URL: http://cgrn.ulg.ac.be/file/244/; DOI: https://doi.org/10.54510/CGRN244.

Full citation of the CGRN in a list of abbreviations or a bibliography is the following : Jan-Mathieu Carbon, Saskia Peels-Matthey, Vinciane Pirenne-Delforge, Collection of Greek Ritual Norms (CGRN), 2017-, consulted on April 19, 2024. URL: http://cgrn.ulg.ac.be; DOI: https://doi.org/10.54510/CGRN0.

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xml:id="CGRN_244" xml:lang="en">
<teiHeader>
	<fileDesc>
		<titleStmt>
			<title><idno type="filename">CGRN 244</idno>: <rs type="textType" key="dossier of regulations">Dossier of regulations</rs> of the Klytidai in Chios </title>
			<author>Jan-Mathieu Carbon</author>
			<author>Vinciane Pirenne-Delforge</author>
		</titleStmt>
		<publicationStmt>
			<authority>Collection of Greek Ritual Norms, Collège de France - University of Liège.</authority>
			<availability>
				<p>Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike International License <ref target="http://creativecommons.org/" type="external">4.0</ref>.</p><p>All citation, reuse or distribution of this work must contain somewhere a link back to the DOI (<idno type="DOI">https://doi.org/10.54510/CGRN244</idno>), as well as the year of consultation (see “Home” for details on how to cite or click “Export Citation” to create a reference for this specific file).</p></availability>
		</publicationStmt>
		<sourceDesc>
			<msDesc>
				<msIdentifier>
					<repository>n/a</repository>
				</msIdentifier>
				<physDesc>
					<objectDesc>
						<supportDesc>
							<support>							
<p>Nearly complete <rs type="objectType">stele</rs> of blue marble, only slightly damaged at the top and the sides. According to Haussoullier (p. 50), only the first line of the text has been lost.</p>
					<p><dimensions>
						<height unit="cm">84.5</height>
						<width unit="cm">43.3</width>
						<depth unit="cm">12.6</depth>
							</dimensions></p>
					</support>
					</supportDesc>
							<layoutDesc>
								<layout>						
								<p>Stoichedon 28.</p>

					<p>Letters: <height unit="cm">1.4</height>.</p>
						</layout>
						</layoutDesc>
						</objectDesc>
					</physDesc>
					<history>
						<origin>
						<p><origDate notBefore="-0340" notAfter="-0330">ca. 340-330 BC</origDate>
							</p>
							<p><desc>Justification: context (around 335 BC according to the analysis of Forrest, p. 179-181).</desc></p>
						</origin>
						<provenance>
		<p><placeName type="ancientFindspot" key="Chios" n="Aegean_Islands"><ref target="https://pleiades.stoa.org/places/550497" type="external">Chios</ref>. Found in a modern house in the city; now in the Chios Museum (inv. no. 119).</placeName>
							</p>
						</provenance>
					</history>
				</msDesc>
			</sourceDesc>
		</fileDesc>
		<encodingDesc>
			<p>Encoded for EpiDoc schema 8.17 on 01-05-2021 by V. Pirenne-Delforge.</p>
		</encodingDesc>
		<profileDesc>
			<langUsage>
				<language ident="eng">English</language>
				<language ident="grc">Ancient Greek</language>
				<language ident="lat">Latin</language>
				<language ident="fre">French</language>
				<language ident="ger">German</language>
				<language ident="gre">Modern Greek</language>
				<language ident="ita">Italian</language>
			</langUsage>
			<textClass/>
		</profileDesc>
		<revisionDesc>
			<change>Revised by XX in 20XX.</change>
		</revisionDesc>
	</teiHeader>
	<facsimile>
		<graphic url="x">
			<desc/>
		</graphic>
	</facsimile>
	<text>
		<body>
			<div type="bibliography">
				<head>Bibliography</head>
				
<p>Edition here based on <bibl type="author_date" n="Graf_1985">Graf 1985</bibl>: 478-479, I.Chios 3. We adopt another possible reading of line 2.</p>
				
<p>Cf. also: <bibl type="author_date" n="Haussoullier_1879">Haussoullier 1879</bibl>;
	<bibl type="abbr" n="SIG³">SIG³</bibl> 987;
	Sokolowski <bibl type="abbr" n="LSCG">LSCG</bibl> 118;
	<bibl type="abbr" n="CDE">CDE</bibl> 4;
	Rhodes - Osborne <bibl type="abbr" n="GHI">GHI</bibl> 87.</p>

<p>Further bibliography: 
	<bibl type="author_date" n="Dunst_1958">Dunst 1958</bibl>: 177-178; 
	<bibl type="author_date" n="Forrest_1960">Forrest 1960</bibl>; 
	<bibl type="author_date" n="Jones_1987">Jones 1987</bibl>;
	<bibl type="author_date" n="Brulé_1998">Brulé 1998</bibl>;
	<bibl type="author_date" n="Jones_2016">Jones 2016</bibl>;
	<bibl type="author_date" n="Malouchou - Matthaiou_2020">Malouchou - Matthaiou 2020</bibl>.</p>
			</div>
			
			<div type="edition">
				<head>Text</head>
				
				<ab>
<lb/><gap reason="lost" extent="1" unit="line"/>

<lb xml:id="line_1" n="1"/><w lemma="πρέσβυς"><supplied reason="lost">πρ</supplied>εσβύ<unclear>τ</unclear></w><gap reason="lost" quantity="19" unit="character"/> <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι"><supplied reason="lost">Κλ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_2" n="2" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">υ</supplied>τίδαις</w></name> <w lemma="ἐν">ἐ<supplied reason="lost">ν</supplied></w> <supplied reason="lost">τῶι</supplied> <name type="genericOffering"><w lemma="ἱερός"><supplied reason="lost">ἱερῶ</supplied>ι</w></name> (?) <name type="structure"><w lemma="τέμενος">τεμένει</w></name> <supplied reason="lost">τῶν</supplied> <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι"><supplied reason="lost">Κ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_3" n="3" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">λ</supplied>υτιδῶν</w></name>  <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος"><supplied reason="lost">ο</supplied>ἶκον</w></name> <w lemma="τεμένιος">τεμένιον</w> <name type="structure"><w lemma="ἱερός">ἱερὸν</w></name> <w lemma="οἰκοδομέω">οἰ<supplied reason="lost">κ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_4" n="4" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ο</supplied>δομήσασθαι</w> καὶ τὰ <name type="object"><w lemma="ἱερός">ἱερὰ</w></name> τὰ <w lemma="κοινός">κοινὰ</w> <w lemma="ἐκ"><supplied reason="lost">ἐ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_5" n="5" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">κ</supplied></w> τῶν <w lemma="ἰδιωτικός">ἰδιωτικῶν</w> <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἰκία">οἰκιῶν</w></name> <w lemma="εἰς">εἰς</w> τὸν <w lemma="κοινός">κο<supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_6" n="6" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ν</supplied>ὸν</w> <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἶκον</w></name> <w lemma="φέρω">ἐνεγκεῖν</w>· <name type="sacrifice"><w lemma="θύω">θυσαμένοις</w></name> <name type="sacrifice"><w lemma="καλλιερέω">ἐ<supplied reason="lost">κ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_7" n="7" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">α</supplied>λλιέρησεν</w></name> <w lemma="οἰκοδομέω">οἰκοδομήσασθαι</w> καὶ <supplied reason="lost">τ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_8" n="8" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ὰ</supplied> <name type="object"><w lemma="ἱερός">ἱερὰ</w></name> τὰ <w lemma="κοινός">κ<supplied reason="lost">οι</supplied>νὰ</w> <w lemma="ἐκ">ἐ<supplied reason="lost">κ</supplied></w> τῶν <w lemma="ἰδιωτικός">ἰδιωτικῶν</w> <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἰκία">ο<supplied reason="lost">ἰ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_9" n="9" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">κ</supplied>ιῶν</w></name> <w lemma="εἰς">εἰς</w> τὸν <w lemma="κοινός"><supplied reason="lost">κοιν</supplied>ὸν</w> <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἶκον</w></name> <w lemma="φέρω">ἐνεγκε<supplied reason="lost">ῖ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_10" n="10" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ν</supplied></w>. <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> <name type="title"><w lemma="πρύτανις">πρυτάνεω<supplied reason="lost">ς</supplied></w></name> <supplied reason="lost">Φο</supplied>ίνι<supplied reason="lost">κο</supplied>ς <name type="month"><w lemma="Πλυντηριών">Πλυντη<supplied reason="lost">ρ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_11" n="11" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied>ῶνος</w></name> <w lemma="τετράς">τετράδι</w>, <w lemma="γιγνώσκω"><supplied reason="lost">ἔγνωσαν</supplied></w> <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι"><supplied reason="lost">Κ</supplied>λυτίδαι</w></name> <name type="sacrifice"><w lemma="θύω"><supplied reason="lost">θ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_12" n="12" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ύ</supplied>σασθαι</w></name> <w lemma="περί">περὶ</w> τῶν <name type="object"><w lemma="ἱερός">ἱερ<supplied reason="lost">ῶν</supplied></w></name> τ<supplied reason="lost">ῶν</supplied> <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι">Κλυτι<supplied reason="lost">δ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_13" n="13" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ῶ</supplied>ν</w></name> τῶν <w lemma="ἐν">ἐν</w> ταῖς <w lemma="ἰδιωτικός">ἰδιωτικαῖ<supplied reason="lost">ς</supplied></w> <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἰκία"><supplied reason="lost">ο</supplied>ἰκίαι<supplied reason="lost">ς</supplied></w></name>

<lb xml:id="line_14" n="14"/><w lemma="εἰμί"><supplied reason="lost">ὄ</supplied>ντων</w>, <w lemma="πότερος">πότερον</w> <w lemma="δεῖ">δεῖ</w> <w lemma="αὐτός">α<supplied reason="lost">ὀ</supplied>τὰ</w> <w lemma="εἰς"><supplied reason="lost">εἰς</supplied></w> τὸν <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἶ<supplied reason="lost">κ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_15" n="15" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ο</supplied>ν</w></name> <w lemma="ὅς">ὃν</w> <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι">Κλυ<supplied reason="lost">τ</supplied>ίδαι</w></name> <w lemma="κατά">κατὰ</w> <name type="oracle"><w lemma="μαντεία">μα<supplied reason="lost">ντεί</supplied>αν</w></name> <w lemma="οἰκοδομέω">ὠικ<supplied reason="lost">ο</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_16" n="16" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">δ</supplied>ομήσαντο</w> <w lemma="φέρω">φέρεσθαι</w> τῆι <w lemma="ἡμέρα">ἡμέραι</w> <w lemma="ὅς">ἧ<supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied></w>

<lb xml:id="line_17" n="17"/><w lemma="γίγνομαι"><supplied reason="lost">γί</supplied>νεται</w> ἡ <name type="sacrifice"><w lemma="θυσία">θυσία</w></name>, τὸν δὲ <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλον</w> <w lemma="χρόνος">χρόν<supplied reason="lost">ο</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_18" n="18" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ν</supplied></w> <w lemma="παρά">παρὰ</w> τοῖς <w lemma="ἰδιώτης">ἰδιώται<supplied reason="lost">ς</supplied></w> <w lemma="φυλάσσω">φυλάσσεσθα<supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied></w>

<lb xml:id="line_19" n="19"/><w lemma="καθάπερ"><supplied reason="lost">κ</supplied>αθάπερ</w> καὶ <w lemma="πρότερος">πρότερον</w>, ἢ <w lemma="διά">διὰ</w> <w lemma="πᾶς">παντὸς</w> <w lemma="αὐτός"><supplied reason="lost">α</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_20" n="20" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ὀτ</supplied>ὰ</w> <w lemma="κεῖμαι">κεῖσθαι</w> <w lemma="ἐν">ἐν</w> τῶι <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἴκωι</w></name>· <name type="sacrifice"><w lemma="θύω">θυσαμέν<supplied reason="lost">ο</supplied>

 <lb xml:id="line_21" n="21" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied>ς</w></name> <name type="sacrifice"><w lemma="καλλιερέω">ἐκαλλιέρησεν</w></name> <w lemma="διά">διὰ</w> <w lemma="πᾶς">παντὸς</w> τὰ <name type="object"><w lemma="ἱερός">ἱε<supplied reason="lost">ρ</supplied>

 <lb xml:id="line_22" n="22" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ὰ</supplied></w></name> <w lemma="κεῖμαι">κεῖσθαι</w> <w lemma="ἐν">ἐν</w> τῶι <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἴκωι</w></name>. <w lemma="ἐπί">ἐπὶ</w> <name type="title"><w lemma="πρύτανις">πρυτάν<supplied reason="lost">ε</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_23" n="23" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ω</supplied>ς</w></name> Κλεοκύδους, <name type="month"><w lemma="Ποσιδηϊών">Ποσιδεῶνος</w></name> <w lemma="τέταρτος">τετάρ<supplied reason="lost">τ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_24" n="24" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ηι</supplied></w> <w lemma="ἐκ">ἐξ</w> <w lemma="εἰκάς">εἰκάδος</w>, <w lemma="γιγνώσκω">ἔγνωσαν</w> <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι">Κλυτίδαι</w></name> τ<supplied reason="lost">ῷ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_25" n="25"/><supplied reason="lost">ἱ</supplied>ερῶι <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἴκωι</w></name> τῶι <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι">Κλυτιδῶν</w></name>,  <w lemma="ἐν">ἐν</w> <w lemma="ὅς">ὧι</w> τὰ <name type="authority"><w lemma="πατρῷος"><supplied reason="lost">π</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_26" n="26" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">α</supplied>τρῶια</w></name> <name type="object"><w lemma="ἱερός">ἱερὰ</w></name> <w lemma="κάθημαι">κάθηται</w>, καὶ τῶι <w lemma="χῶρος">χώρω<supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied></w>

<lb xml:id="line_27" n="27"/><supplied reason="lost">τῶ</supplied>ι <w lemma="πρός">πρὸς</w> τῶι <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἴκωι</w></name> <w lemma="χράω">χρῆσθαι</w> <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι">Κλυτί<supplied reason="lost">δ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_28" n="28" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">α</supplied>ς</w></name> <w lemma="κοινός">κοινῆι</w>, <name type="group"><w lemma="φράτρα">φατρίαν</w></name> δὲ <w lemma="μηδέ">μηδὲ</w> <w lemma="ἰδιώτης">ἰδιώτη<supplied reason="lost">ν</supplied></w>

<lb xml:id="line_29" n="29"/><w lemma="μηθείς"><supplied reason="lost">μ</supplied>ηθένα</w> τῶι <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἴκωι</w></name> <w lemma="οὗτος">τούτωι</w> <w lemma="χράω">χρῆσθαι</w> <w lemma="μηδέ"><supplied reason="lost">μ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_30" n="30" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">η</supplied>δὲ</w> <w lemma="ἄλλος">ἄλλωι</w> <w lemma="δίδωμι">δοῦναι</w> <w lemma="χράω">χρήσασθαι</w> <w lemma="μηθείς">μηθε<supplied reason="lost">ν</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_31" n="31" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ί</supplied></w>· <w lemma="ὅς">ὃς</w> δ’ <w lemma="ἄν">ἂν</w> <w lemma="παρά">παρὰ</w> <w lemma="αὐτός">τάοτα</w> ἢ <w lemma="αὐτός">ἀοτὸς</w> <w lemma="χράω">χρήσητ<supplied reason="lost">α</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_32" n="32" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied></w> τῶι <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἴκωι</w></name> ἢ <w lemma="ἕτερος">ἑτέρωι</w> <w lemma="δίδωμι">δῶι</w> <w lemma="χράω">χρήσασθα<supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied></w>,

<lb xml:id="line_33" n="33"/><w lemma="ἀποδίδωμι"><supplied reason="lost">ἀ</supplied>ποδότω</w> <w lemma="κατά">καθ’</w> <w lemma="ἕκαστος">ἑκάστην</w> <w lemma="χρῆσις">χρῆσιν</w> ἢ <w lemma="δόσις">δόσ<supplied reason="lost">ι</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_34" n="34" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ν</supplied></w> <name type="group"><w lemma="Κλυτίδαι"><supplied reason="lost">Κ</supplied>λυτίδαις</w></name> <w lemma="χιλιάς">χιλίας</w> <w lemma="δραχμή">δραχμὰς</w> <w lemma="ἱερός">ἱερὰ<supplied reason="lost">ς</supplied></w>

<lb xml:id="line_35" n="35"/><supplied reason="lost">το</supplied>ῦ <name type="deity" key="Zeus"><w lemma="Ζεύς">Διὸς</w></name> τοῦ <name type="epithet" key="Patroios"><w lemma="πατρῷος">Πατρώιου</w></name> καὶ ταῖς <w lemma="ἐκ">ἐκ</w> <supplied reason="lost">τ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_36" n="36" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ῶν</supplied> <name type="authority"><w lemma="νόμος">νόμων</w></name> <name type="invocation"><w lemma="ἀρά">ἀραῖς</w></name> <name type="punishment"><w lemma="ἔνοχος">ἔνοχος</w></name> <w lemma="εἰμί">ἔστω</w>, τοὺς δ’ <name type="title"><w lemma="ἐπιμελητής"><supplied reason="lost">ἐ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_37" n="37" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">πι</supplied>μελητὰς</w></name> τὰς <w lemma="γίγνομαι">γενομένας</w> <w lemma="γνώμη">γνώμας</w> <w lemma="περί"><supplied reason="lost">π</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_38" n="38" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ερὶ</supplied></w> τοῦ <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἴκου</w></name> καὶ τῶν <name type="object"><w lemma="ἱερός">ἱερῶν</w></name> καὶ τὰ<supplied reason="lost">ς</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_39" n="39"/><w lemma="ἅμα"><supplied reason="lost">ἅμ</supplied><unclear>α</unclear></w> <name type="oracle"><w lemma="μαντεία">μαντείας</w></name> <w lemma="ἀναγράφω">ἀναγράψαντας</w> <w lemma="εἰς">εἰς</w> <w lemma="στήλη">σ<supplied reason="lost">τ</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_40" n="40" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">ήλ</supplied>ην</w> <w lemma="λίθινος">λιθίνην</w> <w lemma="ἵστημι">στῆσαι</w> <w lemma="παρά">παρὰ</w> τὴν <w lemma="εἴσοδος">εἴσ<supplied reason="lost">ο</supplied>

<lb xml:id="line_41" n="41" break="no"/><supplied reason="lost">δο</supplied>ν</w> τοῦ <name type="structure"><w lemma="οἶκος">οἴκου</w></name>. <space extent="unknown" unit="character"/>

				</ab>
			</div>
			
			<div type="translation" xml:lang="eng">
				<head>Translation</head>
				
<p>[...] elder [...] for the Klytidai to erect in [the sacred (?)] precinct of the Klytidai a sacred house belonging to the precinct and to transfer the common sacred objects (5) from the private households into the common house. To those who made it, the sacrifice gave favourable omens for erecting (the building) and transferring the common sacred objects from the private households into the common house. </p>

<p>(10) In the prytany of Phoinix, on the 4th of Plynterion, the Klytidai [resolved] to offer a sacrifice concerning the sacred objects of the Klytidai kept in the private households, in order to find out whether they should, on the day when the sacrifice takes place, be carried to the house (15) which the Klytidai have erected according to the divine response, and, as previously, be safeguarded by the private individuals the rest of the time, or whether these (objects) should (20) remain for all time in the house. The sacrifice gave to those who made it favourable omens for these (objects) remaining for all time in the house. </p>
				
<p>In the prytany of Kleokydes, on the 24th (or: 27th) of Posideon, the Klytidai decided that (25) the Klytidai are to use in common the sacred house of the Klytidai, in which the ancestral sacred objects are placed, as well as the land situated near this building; that no <foreign>phatria</foreign> or any private individual is to use this house (30); not to grant it to anyone else to use. Whoever, contrary to these prescriptions, either himself uses the house or grants it to another to use, let him pay to the Klytidai for each use or grant thereof 1000 drachmae sacred (35) to Zeus Patroios, and let him be liable to the curses prescribed by the laws. The <foreign>epimeletai</foreign> should record on a stone stele the decisions taken about the house and the sacred objects and the accompanying divine responses (40), and erect it next to the entrance of the building.</p>
				
			</div>
			
			<div type="translation" xml:lang="fre">
				<head>Traduction </head>

<p>[…] ancien […] pour les Klytidai de construire dans l’enceinte [sacrée (?)] des Klytidai une maison sacrée appartenant à l’enceinte et de transférer les objets sacrés collectifs (5) des maisonnées particulières dans la maison commune. À ceux qui le réalisèrent, le sacrifice donna d'heureux présages pour construire (la maison) et transférer les objets sacrés collectifs des maisonnées particulières à la maison commune. </p>

<p>(10) Sous la prytanie de Phoinix, le 4 Plynterion, les Klytidai [ont décidé] d’offrir un sacrifice à propos des objets sacrés conservés dans les maisonnées particulières, pour savoir s’il fallait, le jour où l’on procède au sacrifice, les porter dans la maison (15) que les Klytidai ont construite en accord avec la réponse divine, et les conserver le reste du temps chez les particuliers, comme avant, ou s’il fallait qu’ils (20) restent continuellement dans la maison. Le sacrifice donna à ceux qui le réalisèrent d’heureux présages pour que les objets sacrés restent continuellement dans la maison. </p>

<p>Sous la prytanie de Kleokydès, le 24 (ou: 27) Posideon, les Klytidai ont décidé que (25) les Klytidai auraient en commun l’usage de la maison sacrée des Klytidai, dans laquelle sont déposés les objets sacrés ancestraux, ainsi que le terrain attenant à la maison, et qu’aucune <foreign>phatria</foreign>, ni aucun particulier n’utiliserait ce bâtiment, (30) et qu’ils n'en concéderaient l'usage à personne d’autre; celui qui, en violation de ces prescriptions, utiliserait lui-même la maison ou en concéderait l'usage à un autre, qu’il verse aux Klytidai pour chaque usage ou pour chaque autorisation donnée la somme de 1000 drachmes consacrées (35) à Zeus Patroios, et qu’il tombe sous le coup des imprécations prescrites par les lois; que les épimélètes, après avoir fait graver sur une stèle de pierre les décisions prises à propos de la maison et des objets sacrés, et les réponses divines qui les accompagnent, (40) l’érigent à l’entrée de la maison.</p>

			</div>
			
			<div type="commentary">
				<head>Commentary</head>
				
<p>The stone records three successive decisions of a sub-civic group on the island of Chios called the Klytidai, or "descendants of Klytios". The name of the Klytidai refers to a famous family of seers from Elis (Hdt. 9.33, with a <foreign>crux</foreign>; Paus. 6.17; Philostr. <title>VA</title> 5.25). Whatever the actual origin of the Klytidai of Chios, the sacrificial consultation of the gods to which the inscription provides evidence that some of them practised divination. The Klytidai are known to have owned substantial lands in the northeastern part of the island, where the <foreign>temenos</foreign> mentioned here was probably located (see Graf, p. 34-35). The dossier of regulations is concerned with the opportunity for the group to build and use a common building within their precinct. Two successive sacrifices are offered in order to know if the god or gods (undetermined) are in favour of different aspects of this project. The first sacrificial offering (lines 1-10) concerns the building of an <foreign>oikos</foreign> in their <foreign>temenos</foreign> and the transfer of the sacred objects of the group kept by particular families in their households into the new building. The divine response is positive. With a second sacrificial offering (lines 10-22), the group asks whether the sacred objects are to be kept in the new house on a one-time basis (the day of the sacrifice), or continuously. The divine answer seems to have suggested that the objects should remain permanently in the common house. Without mentioning a further sacrificial consultation, the third decision (lines 22-36) defines who is authorised to use the new house and the land next to it. The final part of the text (lines 36-41) concerns the fine payable to Zeus Patroios by those who fail to comply with the prescriptions and the curses they incur. It also refers to the inscribing of the dossier and the placement of the inscription.</p>
				
<p>The document has been subject to a social and political reading, inspired by Aristotle’s analysis of Cleisthenes’ transformation of the political landscape at Athens (<title>Pol.</title> 1319b). According to these views, the decision of the Klytidai was supposed to be the sign of a reform aimed at diminishing the importance of ancestral groups within a democratic city (e.g. Jones 1987: 192-194; Le Guen-Pollet, p. 28). However, the available evidence does not give any clue in that direction and the exact status of the group itself remains unclear (see below, lines 28-30). Moreover, even while kept in particular households, the sacred objects of the group were probably used collectively during “the sacrifice” (ἡ θυσία, line 17, probably the annual festival of the group), but taken back afterwards by specific families. The decision of the Klytidai does not therefore imply the transfer of a religious practice from the “private” to the “public” sphere, nor is it the sign of a democratic practice replacing an aristocratic one. What the text does allow us to grasp is the depositing of the <foreign>hiera</foreign> “at the centre” of the group, even if the background of the decision escapes us (cf. Rhodes - Osborne, p. 439; Brulé). For a partly analogous construction of collective space and the placement of communal sacred objects within it, compare the dossier of regulations of the family of Diomedon on the island of Kos, <ref target="CGRN_170">CGRN 170</ref>, especially lines 56-59, 70-131, with Commentary.</p>

<p>Lines 1-2: Since the two other decisions of the Klytidai start with a dated reference to the <foreign>prytanis</foreign> and the calendar month (lines 10-11 and 22-24), it might be possible that this was also the case in the first missing line (see Layout). The dating formula employed by the Klytidai is attested in records of civic decisions on the island (<ref target="CGRN_170">CGRN 170</ref>, lines 1-3); this could therefore be an official reference to the civic dating formula. Alternatively, the <foreign>prytaneis</foreign> could have belonged to the group itself. If that is right, the group would then have had its own <foreign>prytaneis</foreign>, in addition to other officials such as archons (see below, lines 36-37). Overall, however, the space is limited and the preserved formulation does not readily match that of the other enactments of the Klytidai in the document. The mention of someone or something "older" or "oldest" in the first extant line also does not correspond and is intriguing. It could potentially point to a different sort of official of the group, perhaps an elder or eldest member who acted as priest (compare the seniority assumed by the tribal elder for a sacrifice in <ref target="CGRN_141">CGRN 141</ref>, Lindos, with Commentary). But it is especially the dative Κλυτίδαις which does not match the later expression, ἔγνωσαν Κλυτίδαι (lines 10-11 and 22-24). Instead, the dative might suggest that it belongs to the phrasing of the question that will be addressed through sacrificial divination in lines 6-10 (one might think of an oracular, deliberative formula like [εἰ λῶιον καὶ ἄμεινόν ἐστι (τοῖς)] Κλυτίδαις κτλ.). In a similar context of matters related to cult and cult buildings, one would have expected consultation in an oracular sanctuary (e.g. <ref target="CGRN_24">CGRN 24</ref>, Athens, lines 3-4, 10; <ref target="CGRN_104">CGRN 104</ref>, Halikarnassos, lines 1-11, 15, 49; <ref target="CGRN_227">CGRN 227</ref>, Anaphe). However, in the present case, the group manifestly has the necessary competence to obtain divine answers through the process of sacrificial divination.</p>
				
<p>Line 3: The adjective τεμένιος is very rare. The expression οἶκος τεμένιος ἱερός closely associates the sacred building to the precinct. </p>
					
<p>Lines 4-6: The opposition that starts here between what is “private” (or “individual”) and what is “common” runs through the whole document. The contrast between αἱ ἰδιωτικαὶ οἰκίαι where the sacred objects were kept until this time, and ὁ κοινὸς οἶκος, the place to house them in the future, is generally seen as setting “private houses” and “a common house” (or collective building) against each other. However, οἰκία and οἶκος are not exact synonyms and the first goes beyond a material meaning in referring also to the family that lives there (hence the translation chosen here of “household” in English and “maisonnée” in French). In the present context, the word could be closer to “family” (cf. Brulé, p. 391-392, who refers to “lineages”). This would explain why the members of the group plan to keep their common objects in a common building, rather than leaving them assigned to individual families, given all the risks posed by matters of transmission and inheritance. According to Forrest (p. 179), the ἱερά were not considered “common” to the Klytidai before this decision. Yet the use of the ἱερά in the common sacrifice of the Klytidai (see lines 16-17), as well as their patrimonial and ancestral dimension (see lines 25-26), suggest that they already had a collective dimension when they were housed by individual families.</p>
					
<p>Lines 6-10: The first sacrifice has provided an indication in favour of the construction of a house or building and the transfer of the sacred objects. The verb καλλιερεῖν in lines 6-7 (as well as below, line 21) is normally a global reference to a sacrifice performed under good auspices (see e.g. <ref target="CGRN_145">CGRN 145</ref>, Kos, line 22; <ref target="CGRN_156">CGRN 156</ref>, Mykonos, line 20; <ref target="CGRN_232">CGRN 232</ref>, Argos, line 25). In the present case, the repeated mention of a μαντεία (lines 15 and 39) clearly implies and emphasises the divinatory aspect of the sacrificial ritual. Though often taking a human subject, the verb appears to be used with τὰ ἱερά as the implied subject, a formulation that is paralleled elsewhere (cf. e.g. Hdt. 7.134: καλλιερῆσαι θυομένοισι οὐκ ἐδύνατο, scil. τὰ ἱρά). We do not know exactly which method or methods of sacrificial divination were practiced by the Klytidai. For the divine signs associated with the burning of the divine portions on a sacrificial altar (a form of empyromancy), see Aesch. <title>Pr.</title> 484-499; extispicy, for instance, is another possibility.</p>
						
<p>Lines 10-22: For the dating formula, see above on lines 1-2. The second sacrifice performed in the month of Plynterion (April/May) suggests that there must have been some contention within the group about whether the κοινὰ ἱερά should be temporarily (namely during “the sacrifice”—ἡ θυσία—of line 17) or permanently housed in the common house. Perhaps the families who had previously treasured these objects resisted and interpreted the first divinatory advice (i.e. μαντεία, line 15) differently. The symbolic capital linked to the possession of these cult-objects must have been important. It was therefore necessary to question again the deity (or deities) who finally decided in favour of the permanent transfer of the cult-objects to the common house. </p>
						
<p>Lines 22-27: For the dating formula, see above on lines 1-2. The third step in the process does not mention a divine consultation or divination. Perhaps it did not seem to require one, since the decision here involves regulating access to the building and the adjoining land. The leasing of sacred land to third parties is a well-attested practice (see <bibl type="abbr" n="IG II²">IG II²</bibl> 2499; cf. Jones 2016) but the decision taken by the Klytidai is to limit the use of the house and land not only to their own group, but also to a collective involvement of their members. </p>
						
<p>Lines 28-30: φατρίαν has been considered a mistake (Sokolowski writes φρατρίαν without any comment; also Forrest, p. 179) but the form is attested elsewhere (see <bibl type="abbr" n="LSJ">LSJ</bibl> s.v. φράτρα II.3). Most commentators of the inscription have considered that the term refers to a phratry (e.g. Haussoullier, Graf, Le Guen-Pollet, Rhodes - Osborne). Against this background, it has been debated whether the phrase means that the use of the common house and land was granted to the phratry but not to an individual (Graf, p. 37), or that it should be allowed neither to the phratry nor to an individual (Rhodes - Osborne, p. 437). In the first option, the next interpretative step was to identify the Klytidai with “the phratry” (despite the absence of any article and the specific spelling of the word). The second option implied that the Klytidai were not a phratry. This has opened a seemingly never-ending debate about the status of this group: <foreign>genos</foreign>, phratry, tribe (Graf, p. 35-36 and Brulé, n. 58). With Brulé (p. 393-398), one could suppose that a <foreign>phatria</foreign> in Chios was a subdivision of a larger group, such as the Klytidai, whatever generic name the city gave them. For example, the group of the Labyadai of Delphi, whose generic name is not known either, is made up of <foreign>patriai</foreign> (<bibl type="abbr" n="CID I">CID I</bibl> 9, Face A, line 25). In Miletos at the end of the 5th century BC, five imbricated levels of individual identity are attested: <foreign>phylai</foreign>, <foreign>demoi</foreign>, <foreign>patriai</foreign>, <foreign>phratriai</foreign>, and <foreign>oikoi</foreign> (Jones 1987: 320-325). It remains uncertain to which of these levels the Klytidai belonged, though they certainly included the ἰδιωτικαὶ οἰκίαι of the present text and may have encompassed the <foreign>phatriai</foreign> which are also mentioned.</p>
						
<p>Lines 33-35: The money of the fine is sacred to Zeus Patroios, who was certainly an important deity for the group (a dedication to the same god comes from the region of the island where the sanctuary is presumed to have been located: see Dunst; Dionysus and Apollo are also attested: Graf, p. 35). An interesting parallel can be made with the famous Delphic inscription issued by the sub-civic group of the Labyadai and referring to a sacrifice to Zeus Patroios and Apollo “during the Boukatia” (<ref target="CGRN_82">CGRN 82</ref>, Face D, lines 45-49). The oath of the <foreign>tagoi</foreign>, chief-magistrates of the group, must be sworn “by Zeus Patroios” (Face A, lines 13-15), and a collective oath of the group to vote fairly “according to the laws of the Delphians” is sworn “by Apollo, Poseidon Phratrios and Zeus Patroios” (<bibl type="abbr" n="CID I">CID I</bibl> 9, Face B, lines 12-17). The cult-objects of the Klytidai are also said to be πατρῶια in lines 25-26, affirming their ancestral character in addition to the quality of κοινά that was used in the first part of the text (lines 4 and 8). </p>
						
<p>Lines 36-37: The Klytidai possess <foreign>epimeletai</foreign> and refer to νόμοι (probably their own, as again in the case of Labyadai, <bibl type="abbr" n="CID I">CID I</bibl> 9, Face A, lines 2-3). From an earlier 4th-century lease of land by the Klytidai, it is also known that they possessed an archon and perhaps <foreign>hieropoioi</foreign> (Malouchou - Matthaiou, p. 399-400: Face A, lines 7-8; Face B, lines 7 and 54-55). Compare also the ἀρχεύων of the tribe Elpanoridai at Halasarna, in Kos, and the reference to a <foreign>hieros nomos</foreign> of the group: <ref target="CGRN_145">CGRN 145</ref> (Kos), lines 1 and 34-36. On curses as forms of sanctions in ritual norms, see <ref target="CGRN_191">CGRN 191</ref> (Philadelphia), lines 43-44, and <bibl type="abbr" n="IC III">IC III</bibl> iv 9 (Itanos), line 81.</p>		
			</div>
		</body>
	</text>
</TEI>