I. The Aiakidai as Ritual Allies
The Beginning of the “Herald-less War”
The Nature of the Aiakidai
The Delphic Oracle and the Foundation of the Temenos of Aiakos at Athens
οικησ[α]ι Θο[λο]ς̣ δ̣(ε) οπου δει̣[ ̣] ̣ ̣ ̣πρυτα
νεου αφ ̣ ̣ ̣ε̣[ ̣] τ̣ω̣ Αιακ̣ω̣ δικ(ην) α(να)γραφοντα
He restores these lines as follows:
οἰκῆσ[α]ι· Θό[λο]ς δ(ὲ) ὅπου δεῖ[πνα] πρυτα–
νε(ί)ου ἀφ[αιρ]ε[τά], τῷ Αίακῷ δίκ(ην) ἀ(να)γράφοντα.
Aiakeion and the Tholos: where they say Aiakos
dwelled; (The) Tholos is where the exclusive meals
are served to the prytaneis, dedicated to justifying Aiakos.
One immediately notes not only the kinship of this gloss with those preserved in other lexica like Hesychius and the Lexica Segueriana, but also that the papyrus offers a more complete exemplar (n. 00 above). The approach to the text by Oikonomides is idiosyncratic. The translations of the terms ἀφαιρετά and ἀναγράφοντα are highly implausible.  Stroud has raised objections to several syntactical points too.  Highly improbable is Oikonomides’ historical reconstruction, which sees the late archaic building (Building F)—usually envisaged as a sixth–century governmental complex—underlying the Tholos as the home and burial plot of the aristocratic family of a historical Eurysakes, a lineage which had already died out in the late sixth century.  Herodotus appears to describe a late archaic foundation still standing during his time at Athens (whether the peribolos adjoining Kollytos or not); hence not the famous Tholos itself. Our previous discussion establishes the foundation of the Aiakeion as a mechanism for the appropriation of that hero both to assist his invocation in battle and an ensuing epiphany on the battlefield and to vitiate the military use of the Aiakidai by the Aiginetans. Oikonomides’ scenario implies the desuetude of old familial rites connected with Aiakos that were to be revived by the foundation of an Aiakeion by the polis, a sequence lacking congruence with the Herodotean evidence.
οἰκῆσ[α]ι Θό[λο]ς δ(ὲ) ὅπου δει[.]… ἡ πρυτα
νεου[σ]α φυλή [.2–3..] τῷ Αἰακίω δίκ(αι) ἀ(να)γράφονται
The phrase ἡ πρυτανεου[σ]α φυλή is supported by its appearance in another lexical attestation, Pollux Onomasticon 8.155. Stroud’s restoration of δει[πν]<ε>ῖ then seems almost inevitable. It is not to fault this scrupulous examination to note that the state of the papyrus makes these conclusions most tenuous in the final clause: the presence of the iota in Αἰακίω is uncertain; the diacritical mark that yields δίκ(αι) rather than δίκ(ην) is not firmly established; and the presence of the final iota of ἀ(να)γράφονται is unclear. Nonetheless, Stround’s restoration [ἐπὶ δ(ὲ)] or [ἐν δ(ὲ)] τῷ Αἰακίω δίκ(αι) ἀ(νἀ)γράφονται ‘and in the Aiakeion lawsuits are posted (or recorded)’ is attractive.  A reference to the Aiakeion here rather than Aiakos himself would be expected on the basis of the lemma alone.
The Aiakidai as Ritual Allies at Salamis
Although we hear nothing directly of the matter from Herodotus, the Athenians themselves appear to have believed that their invocation of the Aiakidai from Salamis led to an intervention or epiphany. They dedicated a trireme to Aias, presumably in the Aianteion of Salamis (Herodotus 8.121.1). As for the Aiginetans, their dedication at Delphi aroused the displeasure of Apollo, as communicated by an oracle, who sought something expressly for their aristeia (Herodotus 8.122). The Aiginetans then dedicated three gold stars on a bronze mast. They have been traditionally interpreted to connote the Dioskouroi and Apollo Delphinios.  Despite the absence of invocation or manifestation of these deities, this might represent the coronal discharge (St. Elmo’s Fire) associated with the Dioskouroi, although the third star appears much less decipherable. I would offer the main trio of the Aiakidai: Aiakos—Peleus—Achilles, especially appropriate inasmuch as Telamon and Aias were explicitly conceded to the Athenians.